[at-l] Trail History Clarification Requested

[jbullar1 at twcny.rr.com (Jim Bullard)]

At 05:17 PM 9/5/2003 -0400, Jim and/or Ginny Owen wrote:
>So - what's your definition of "very often"?  And why do you think even 
>"once" is acceptable?

So what's the solution? Close the AT (not to mention the National Parks) 
and give all the land back? To whom? The last people who owned it prior to 
the AT/Park or the natives it was taken from before that? Which tribe? They 
took land from each other before the Europeans showed up.

Perhaps we should outlaw eminent domain and make the government pay 
whatever the "owner' demands regardless of how unreasonable? Or maybe give 
up on public projects to benefit the larger society every time one 
landowner objects? That would eliminate most highways as well as the AT and 
Park system. Some things are not as simple as they appear. Hmmm...Where 
have I heard that before?

Eminent domain is not unique to the US. Our notion of 'ownership' of land 
is a relatively recent notion though. For centuries kings owned all the 
land in their domain and use of the land was a reward for loyalty. In other 
societies it was held by the tribe. Even in the US 'ownership' (and always 
has been) is subject to loyalty in the sense that if you don't pay your 
taxes you will find out who really owns the land. This has been true from 
the beginning of the country. Just ask the Tory Loyalists who were forced 
out after the Revolution.

My take is that the only things I own are those I can take with me when I 
die. The rest is a trust. I hold may it for a time, but it isn't really 
mine. If I believe otherwise, I'm suffering from delusions.

Saunterer