Mandate against our state’s values
To the editor:
In his recent article on conservation easements Jason Reimers pointed out the two customary ways in which conservation easements are transferred – either by sale or donation.
A third means of transfer that he did not mention is by unfunded government mandate as in the current land subdivision regulation changes proposed by the Town of Peterborough.
If the proposed changes are approved by the voters in May, the town could end up with a patchwork of small noncontiguous easements on land having no noteworthy conservation values.
This proposed involuntary taking would be contrary to our long-held New England heritage of private property rights and private property ownership. In fact, it could prohibit the creation of small family farms – one of the benefits mentioned in Mr. Reimers article.