Hello friends, it's the Environment Show and welcome.
Land use management on the menu this week in South Carolina, developer David Lucas, was
told by the state he could not build on his beach front property to which he reacted.
They can't do this to me, I'm an American citizen, I'm protected by the Constitution of
the United States.
This goes to the US Supreme Court in a potentially landmark and say environmentalists frightening
case.
Also this time how to cooperate in planning a green way linking 82 communities along
the Hudson River begins to come together.
And this time a report from the trail, date line Georgia, the Sierra Club's Centennial
Expedition continues.
These stories this time on the Environment Show, the Environment Show is a national production
made possible by the J.M.
Kaplan Fund of New York.
And this is Bruce Robertson.
In arguments over environmental protection, opponents increasingly break off discussions
shouting, I'll see you in court.
And with the US Supreme Court now involved, environmentalists fear the argument will
not be settled favorably.
The most recent and potentially pivotal case involves one David Lucas of South Carolina
and the State of South Carolina.
The story takes place on the Isle of Palms on the coast of South Carolina near Charleston.
In 1984 Lucas says he bought wild dunes, a 1900 acre development property there with
2500 approved sites.
However, because of a state coastline protection law, Lucas is prohibited from building on this
beachfront property.
He argues that in so doing, the state is taking his property.
And therefore he should be reimbursed as provided for in the fifth amendment of the US Constitution,
where we read in part, no private property shall be taken for public use without just compensation.
On the surface, the issue is over a boundary line drawn in the sand, so to speak.
The line is delineated by the Beach Front Management Act.
Past in 1988, the BMA prohibits building activity on the ocean side of this line in order
to protect not only the property owner from storm damage, but also the seaside itself
from being damaged by housing construction.
We'll have a closer look at the BMA in a moment.
The State of South Carolina claims that Lucas, whose property lies on the ocean side of the
line, would inflict not only environmental damage, but threaten other property owners
further inland.
Lucas says as a developer, he has been a proud environmentalist.
We spent in 1983 and 1984, we had spent $50,000 with a company to do an erosion study of
our entire beachfront.
We had two and a half miles of beaches.
And we did a study on the erosion prospects of that beach.
And the study came back and told us that this island was an island that had accreted for
the past 1500 years at the rate of over a foot a year.
Okay?
Meaning built up?
Yes, it had been building up steadily for over 1500 years.
That same company is the company that in 1988 was hired by the State to draw these lines.
And 1988, we should point out that that was around the, and as a result of the beachfront
management act, which is...
That's correct.
To implement the beachfront management act, a line had to be drawn based on the 40-year
erosion patterns.
And the same company that gave us a clean bill of health and said that erosion was not a
problem.
Major erosion was not a problem.
They would be from time to time.
Small, short-term erosion could occur, localized erosion.
But the overall prognosis was that the beach would continue to build for the foreseeable
future.
Dr. Wayne Beam is director of the South Carolina Coastal Council, the State Agency, charged
with designing and overseeing the South Carolina Coastal Management Plan.
This essentially is a program intended to provide for the long-term health of the Coast
of South Carolina, ensuring that activities planned by both the State and private concerns
are consistent with the overall plan to safeguard the Coast.
Now, BMA is not principally an environmental law.
The real intent, says Dr. Beam, is to move people off and away from highly unstable areas.
This statue has the intent of dissuading people from building in these high hazard areas
to protect them and themselves, but also people who own properties that are behind them
out of the area that is described as high hazard.
We saw during Hurricane Hugo, and as a result of Hurricane Hugo, several houses on the Coast
were actually propelled landward missiles that were generated from those houses in many
more instances, caused damage to houses that were landward of houses built in these high
hazard areas.
And then also, you know, there's problems that these houses are served by natural gas in
a storm that can be problems with fire after a storm like this, and also senators who
are problems that are crew after a storm like Hurricane Hugo did to Coastal.
As Lucas indicated, his engineers determined his property is sufficiently high and dry.
However, Dr. Beam says, by studying maps of the region over the last 40 years, it is
evident that about half the time since 1949, the Lucas property has actually been underwater.
But all of this is just background now.
The real story is over just compensation.
Lucas, who says he paid nearly a million dollars for his property in 1986, reacted instantly
when told the 1988 Act prohibited him from building over the line.
They can't do this to me.
I'm an American citizen.
I'm protected by the Constitution of the United States, to which they responded.
They responded, well, you know, for this particular expropriation, we're going to suspend
the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution and take your property.
And I said, the wait-a-man, that happens in Russia and Latin America, but it doesn't
happen in the United States, we have a Constitution.
And so that's what we sued him for.
We sued him under the Constitution, the Fifth Amendment, taking his cause.
Lucas, in fact, did sue in South Carolina State Court and was awarded $1.2 million.
However, the state appealed in the State Supreme Court, which overturned the lower court ruling.
The case now before the U.S. Supreme Court turns on whether the state by enforcing the BMA
is, in fact, taking Lucas's property.
And if so, is Lucas owed some money.
Attorney Carolyn Dick, an environmental lawyer in private practice, says these are the issues.
On the one side, environmentalists that are concerned that if for every ordinance, regulation,
or statute that protects the environment, at some private landowner has to be compensated,
that it'll halt the movement of promulgating environmental regulations because it'll
cost too much for the government to run around and implement these regulations, but have
to pay so much for them.
And on the other side of it, you've got the issue of private law, a private landowner,
and in the case of Lucas, potentially a homeowner.
I mean, he intended to, on these two lots, build his own home on one, and an investment home
on the other.
So on the other side, you've got private law, a private landowner who doesn't want to
for the sake of the communal need or the environmental need, give up his or her investment.
So I think that's the concern, and that's really what this case goes to, is the environmental
and the public need versus the need for a private property owner to be compensated, and
not for the burden of the public good, not to fall on one person.
In other words, are we willing to pay for environmental protection, and if so, how much?
Or if we are not willing to pay the price, are we willing to grant the property owner the
right to do as he or she pleases with that property, even if in so doing the owner may
violate protection laws?
Because the case is now before the highest court, the ruling is expected to be precedent
setting, though Dr. Beam of the Coastal Council warns...
However, Lucas sees the case far differently.
You know, several people have commented that this may be one of the most important decisions
of the century, and after much thought and reflection that has come about since this notoriety
in this case, I tend to agree with them.
It really is, which direction is America?
Are we going to continue to become socialists, or are we going to stop and say, this
is what made this country great, was individual initiative, and individual upward mobility that
is open to everyone?
Whether the case, as it stands before the Supreme Court, in fact, will be the case of the
century, at the very least it is being watched closely as an indicator of how the more
conservative bench will rule, compared to the earlier more liberal courts.
It may point to a new direction, which is exactly what John Echevaria, counsel to the National
Autobahn Society, fears.
He puts the case on a global scale.
The critical issue here is that, on the one hand, the property rights advocates are focusing
on the individual, and what the individual can do, and his rights.
At the same time, the world is becoming more populated, more interdependent, we're recognizing
more and more the way in which all right individual actions affect the community and the health
of the globe.
And an interpretation of the Constitution that allows people to do what they wish, regardless
of the economic community, really threatens our ability, as a society, as a whole, to deal
with the emerging environmental problems we're facing.
Can you imagine if the court held that a regulation barring the further production of chlorocarbons
constituted a taking, and therefore we were not able to implement a regulation to protect
the ozone layer, it could go that far.
It is actually unclear whether the Supreme Court will issue a ruling.
A 1990 amendment to the South Carolina Beach Front Management Act gives property owners
a loophole to it.
If your property is on high and dry ground, for now, you may take the chance and build,
with the caveat that in the future, if the beach erodes, the state has the right to come
in and tell you to move your house.
Lucas has not exercised that option, the high court may require him to pursue that route
first.
This is Bruce Robertson.
This was the site of heavy fighting during the Battle of Chancellorsville in May of
1863.
The battle raged back and forth in the fields around this church and was over, Confederate
and Union dead were stacked three deep.
The audience groans as the slide projector flips to a shot of this civil war church, now
surrounded by parking lots and highways.
Speaker Ed McMahon is trying to convince the group that preserving the feeling of a place
is just as important as saving the building itself.
He says each community needs to find its own unique attributes and highlight them.
But if I were to take you up today and air drop you along a typical road outside of
most American cities, you wouldn't have the slightest idea where you were because it
all looks exactly the same.
The audience is drawn together by a common desire to preserve the cherished and unique resource
they have inherited.
The Hudson River, navigated by Dutch explorer Henry Hudson, seeking a northwest passage to
the Orient in the early 1600s.
This famous waterway, 310 miles long from its source on Mount Marcy in the Adirondack
Mountains of Northern New York to New York City's harbor, makes its way through ten counties
in the River Valley, past fertile farmlands and the Catskill Mountains in the southern part
of the state.
McMahon is the director of the American Greenways program part of the Conservation Fund.
He comes to the meeting to support a new environmental plan for the Hudson River Valley, called
the Hudson River Valley Greenway.
He says greenways are quite different from parks.
Whereas a park generally is an oasis of undeveloped land, a greenway is a place where people
can live.
Greenways, the idea really is something that's less expensive but more expansive than traditional
parks and what they are really is long-linear borders that are protected open spaces.
A way to link natural areas, historic sites, cultural areas without spending a lot of
money on buying land.
There are about 500 greenways across the country ranging from short bicycle trails to hundreds
of miles of urban trails in San Francisco, but they differ as much in implementation as
they do in size.
Some impose tougher zoning and land use restrictions to create and preserve a greenway.
Officers like the plan in the Hudson River Valley will depend on voluntary support from
individuals and communities.
New York State Assemblyman Maurice Hinchim, whose district includes part of the Hudson River
Valley, first proposed the greenway in the New York State Legislature in 1988.
At that time, he supported more restrictions on land use.
But after 17 stormy public hearings up and down the Hudson River Valley, Hinchim and
the Council in charge of the plan decided tough restrictions were not going to work.
I think it's as strong as we could reasonably have expected it to be.
There is a history here, particularly with regard to the Hudson Valley because back in the
1960s, there was a commission which was created, the Hudson River Valley Commission.
For one reason or another, and I'm not an expert on the reasons, but for one reason or another,
the commission was not accepted by, particularly by the local governments in the Hudson Valley.
So it ultimately failed.
So we went into this process with that experience in mind.
So it was very clear that we were not going to be able to do anything, nor should you,
really, without having the okay of the communities that are involved.
And that okay or rejection is either expressed most generally through the local governments
that are elected by the individualists in those communities.
Though the present day, Greenway Council will work closely with state agencies while developing
a land use plan, Executive Director of the Council, David Samson says generally fewer restrictions
are a sign of the times.
This is a time now where strong government programs, especially new government programs,
are not looked upon and well received.
So you've got to try to find something that fits the political climate as well as the fiscal climate.
And I think that's what the Greenway tried to do.
And it did listen to the people in the valley and heard that they do want help,
but they don't want it in a way that's going to come down and hit them on the head.
And I think that that's as reflected, not just in the Hudson River Valley,
but I think you see that throughout the country right now.
The Council hopes to recruit schools, service organizations, and local governments
to build and maintain the Greenway in their respective communities.
The Greenway signed into law in December of 1991 does not force communities to participate,
but Executive Director Samson says there are many incentives.
A hotel tax in the region will provide some funding for the projects.
There will also be a conservancy, a group of representatives from state agencies and nonprofit groups
to provide technical and financial help.
A Greenway insurance policy will cover any community or landowner
who allows use of the property for a trail.
Though the new Council with representatives from the 82 communities in the valley
will have no actual regulatory power,
Samson says they will work closely with state and county agencies.
He cites Beacon and Newberg to River Valley cities that have signed on to the plan.
We are going to focus the efforts of various state agencies,
including the Greenway Council, the efforts of not for profit groups
and economic development groups work with the local governments and the county governments
and come up with a plan to try to revitalize, in this case, Newberg and Beacon,
to create more access to the waterfront, to do some riverfront development,
and also to have each community take each other's waterfront into account
when they do their planning so that Newberg is not hopefully will agree
to not build anything that would become an ice or for Beacon and vice versa.
But that close involvement does not please everyone.
Some landowners who do not want to join the Greenway fear the Council will still control their land indirectly.
Sheila Powers is president of the Farm Bureau in Albany County, adjoining the river.
She and other farmers in the Hudson Valley have formed an ad hoc committee
to monitor the actions of the Greenway Council.
She believes local governments will feel pressured by the Council's presence.
I think what you're really saying is that local government is welcome
as long as they play according to our rule.
And they're coming right out and saying that grants will be available to town to cooperate
and not available to towns that don't.
Well, in the course of development of the towns, I think you can see the problem with that.
Power says though she agrees with preserving historical landmarks and the waterfront,
she fears more land regulations will scare industry away.
Like many opponents to such environmental plans, she supports the right of the landowner
to encourage economic development.
But advocates of the plan say the Greenway will actually attract business to the area,
especially tourism.
Whatever happens in the months and years ahead,
planning the future of the Hudson River Valley using a Greenway will either bring people together
in a new way or drive them apart as never before.
And the real winner, or loser, will be the river.
This is Bruce Robertson.
I'm joining us on the line now is Keith Tondrick on trail coordinator for the Sierra Club
Appalachian Trail Centennial Expedition.
Hello, Keith, how you doing?
I'm doing real fine.
Where are you today?
I'm in Neal's, Gap, Georgia.
About 15 miles east of Blair'sville, Georgia.
And you've been on the trail for how long now?
Three days, I had to think about that.
Is it the end of the third day?
And you have to think about it.
Is it seem like longer than three already?
There was so much hike and involve and exertion of energy that just seemed a little bit longer.
How's the weather been?
The weather has been actually good.
The first day out from Amicalola Falls, where we started our hike, was cold but clear.
And then that night, up on Springer Mountain, which is the start of the Appalachian Trail,
I had down about 15 degrees with a biting violent wind.
I don't know what the windshield was, but I was shaken.
It was cold and I slept.
I was in my bag, sleeping bag for 11 hours in a shelter.
I think I slept for eight and shook for three.
So at least I got eight hours of sleep out of it.
We should remind our listeners that you're on the trail as part of a multi-month expedition
along the full length of the Appalachian Trail to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Sierra Club
and we'll be stopping off at a number of key locations along the trail.
So far, are you keeping your eye on the prize?
I mean, are you remembering why you're doing this?
You bet.
We had a big celebration in Amicalola Falls, which was the start of the hike.
We had several hundred people from North Georgia come up from Atlanta and wherever.
We got a good send off.
Our goal is to go ahead and spread the environmental message, celebrate 100 years of the Sierra Club,
and to rally the people to remind them of the importance of the protection of the environment,
get involved in grassroots involvement and protecting our environment.
Let me ask you, Keith.
So far, the trail has it taken you through any heavily populated areas?
Have you been able to see any of the local residents?
We've seen some local residents out hiking, but we've been in a very sparsely populated area.
This Appalachian Trail for North Georgia is just fabulous.
It's a very, very beautiful country.
When we do see houses out in the valley down below, they usually farms and are scattered about.
We have not been in any towns since we started totally in the back country.
When we do meet the people and the local people hiking, they've been very friendly to us.
We've been offering a lot of advice.
Tell them what that would be.
Real supportive.
All right.
And do you all be heading in the next few days?
What kind of territory do you expect to cover?
There will be in Georgia.
I think there's 70-some miles of Appalachian Trail in Georgia.
We'll be leaving from the old gap tomorrow and heading north.
I know we'll be going into a town called Hiawasi, Georgia in order to resupply.
And two days after that, we'll be in Franklin, North Carolina.
We'll be out of Georgia and in North Carolina.
We've already done 31 miles of the Appalachian Trail so far.
All right.
Keith Tondrick on Trail Coordinator of the Sierra Club's Appalachian Trail Centennial Expedition.
Keith will talk to you next week.
Sounds real good, Bruce.
Okay.
Bye-bye now.
All righty.
Keith Tondrick is leading a team of seven on a five-and-a-half-month expedition from South to North.
On the length of the Appalachian Trail, they expect to reach Mount Catadon in Maine,
trails end in September.
Along the way, they will be holding a number of special events we expect to hear from
the expedition on a regular basis.
This is Bruce Robertson.
And that's our report for this week on the Environment Show.
Our piece on the Hudson River Greenway was written and produced by Karen Kelly.
Join us next week for a report on world population and the crisis facing women's education
and health with Jody Jacobson of World Watch.
The Environment Show is a program about the environment, the air, water, soil, wildlife,
and people of our common habitat.
For a cassette copy of the program, call 1-800-767-1929.
This week, ask for the Environment Show number 116-dean.
That's 1-800-767-1929.
Environment Show number 116-dean.
The Environment Show is a presentation of national productions, solely responsible for its
content.
For Alan Shartock, executive producer and this is Bruce Robertson, the Environment
Show is made possible by the JM Kaplan Fund of New York.
