More Notes from the Conserving Working Landscapes Forum of May 29th
Part 4 Ecological Good and Services
Dave Zehnder, Director with the BC Cattleman’s Association spoke of the program being put in place in more northern part of our valley where farmers will be compensated for conserving riparian areas. These important areas can be quickly degraded by poor grazing practises. A landowner tax has been in practice in the northern part of our valley for a few years now and provides income for many different conservation projects including some small potential compensation for best management practise by farmers. Protecting riparian areas we have learned is one of the most important things that can affect, quality of water supply, preserve diversity of plant and animal species and keep fish stocks healthy – all essential for a healthy environment.
This land tax practice has been in place for many years in various parts of the world including cities such a Boulder, Colorado where it has been used since the seventies and it is disappointing that our local government does not recognise or wish to discuss the value both for our farming economy and for conservation of land on which the health of food, farming and environment and therefore our livelihood depend.
If you copy the following link into your browser, you will find the information about Boulder's Conservation Easement Program.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2985&Itemid=3640
You will notice that the article states that no public money is spent and that each unique contract is between the local government and individual land owner. It is not a broadly collected tax imposed on all property owners without regard for a person's right to choose the causes that he or she supports. Other posts that are referenced are provincial, state and federal government programs. They do not mention municipalities, whose sources of revenue are more limited.
Mr. Stetski's proposed parcel tax is a regressive tax that would bestow a special status on a specific non-profit organization. While conservation efforts are important, who is to say that conservation is more deserving of a $20 property tax than a hot breakfast program service for children, a cultural service tax for preserving arts and culture, an after-school program service, a hospice service tax, or an economic development service tax. We might eventually be paying quite a lot in parcel taxes to support non-profit services. This is a slippery slope of taxation for non-essential community services.
Mr. Stetski's argument is that our environment is a jewel that should be protected and he is correct. Our children, seniors, businesses, arts, culture, literacy, etc. are all worthy of protection and right now we are all free to make that choice. You are suggesting that that choice be taken away, or worse, be imposed on us all.
Where can I find out more information about the Land Tax because it seems a good idea to compensate farmers who conserve their riparian area?
ReplyDeleteThis tax does not exist in the lower half of our valley but you may wish to contact:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ekcp.ca/
East Kootenay Conservation Program to find out more about how it is working in the northern part of the Rocky Mountain Trench. Dave Zehnder from Invermere would also be able to tell you more.
If you copy the following link into your browser, you will find the information about Boulder's Conservation Easement Program.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2985&Itemid=3640
You will notice that the article states that no public money is spent and that each unique contract is between the local government and individual land owner. It is not a broadly collected tax imposed on all property owners without regard for a person's right to choose the causes that he or she supports. Other posts that are referenced are provincial, state and federal government programs. They do not mention municipalities, whose sources of revenue are more limited.
Mr. Stetski's proposed parcel tax is a regressive tax that would bestow a special status on a specific non-profit organization. While conservation efforts are important, who is to say that conservation is more deserving of a $20 property tax than a hot breakfast program service for children, a cultural service tax for preserving arts and culture, an after-school program service, a hospice service tax, or an economic development service tax. We might eventually be paying quite a lot in parcel taxes to support non-profit services. This is a slippery slope of taxation for non-essential community services.
Mr. Stetski's argument is that our environment is a jewel that should be protected and he is correct. Our children, seniors, businesses, arts, culture, literacy, etc. are all worthy of protection and right now we are all free to make that choice. You are suggesting that that choice be taken away, or worse, be imposed on us all.
Sounds like anonymous of June 15 7:47 pm lacks creative solutions or is stuck in an old paradigm.
ReplyDelete