Delwin Delwin:
So, I am going to assume that this will be opposed by all the conservatives on the issue ? Or does this only work for freeloaders with armed militias?
Montana farmers, ranchers continue fight against Keystone XL pipeline"I don't believe my land should be taken and my rights infringed for somebody else's gain," Garoutte says. "But, you know, they can outspend us a zillion to one. We are ranchers and farmers, we work for a living, we neither have time nor an excess of money."
http://tarsandssolutions.org/in-the-med ... l-pipelineHmmm. This is a tough one.
In US law pipelines are legally akin to railroads and they have special rights under Federal law because they are a form of interstate transportation. The government is within its rights to allow a pipeline to transit private property but in concert with just compensation for loss of use and etc.
Because after the pipeline is installed the rancher will enjoy the full prior use of their land and (if they're shrewd) they'll have negotiated ongoing compensation for the use of their land.
Were I a rancher I'd have far less objection to a pipeline than a 765KV high-tension electrical transmission grid transiting my land.
In any case, the environmental arguments are the only thing in the arsenal to stop an interstate pipeline because of the special rights that pipelines enjoy.
And the reason they're legally similar to railroads is because most pipelines are operated by railroads alongside railroad right-of-way.
This is also different from the BLM trying to harass a rancher out of their lawful and vested rights to a property. Similar topics, granted, but this one is within the law and the other is turning out to be a violation of many laws.