Those lucky enough to have land on Apostle Islands treasure the limited time left

  • Article by: MEG JONES , Associated Press
  • Updated: August 24, 2013 - 12:05 AM

BAYFIELD, Wis. — Julian Nelson had much to lose.

  • 4
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 4 of 4
redqidAug. 24, 13 8:16 PM

"Those lucky enough to have land on Apostle Islands treasure the limited time left" --- I do not think the writer understands that Madeline Island is one of the 22 apostle islands. There are many homes and cabins on Madeline Island that are not going away. The other 21 apostle islands were made into a national park.

1
4
mayadoggieAug. 25, 1310:26 AM

Although I have always treasured the parks we have, I have always been uncomfortable with the methods used to create them and the absurdly small compensation given to it's inhabitants. I live near the Boundary Waters and Isle Royal and know some of the displaced families personally and have heard their stories. Most have anger, and their anger will never go away- even though they support the creation of parks. It is important to build awareness of the faulty compensation method called "fair market value". There is nothing fair about it. If a piece of land is so treasured that the government sees fit to create a "forever" place that extends on to the end of our times as a country, then the compensation should be similar in some way, not something that evaporates in a few years. We really need to take better care of these displaced families who also may have been there "forever". The compensation simply does not reflect what we the people are taking from them and we should stand up for them stop being such cheapskates.

7
5
heckyousayAug. 25, 1310:47 PM

re: "It is important to build awareness of the faulty compensation method called "fair market value". There is nothing fair about it." Unfortunately there is only one way to determine fair market value; an atual sale of the land. Barring that, public agencies must estimate what a willing buyer would pay a willing selling, in a "arm's length" transaction. Future use or frustrated plans for the real estate can't be considered. If that were the case, few roads or airports, or parks for that matter, ever could have been developed. Think of it this way: if you went to buy a house tomorrow, would you want to pay the price it may be worth 50 years from now?

4
0
davehougAug. 27, 1311:23 AM

If I bought land for $3,500 shortly before it was taken by eminent domain, I'd expect the taxpayers to force me to sell at $3,500. The fact I DON'T want to sell or the country will use it forever doesn't apply. THAT is why the power of eminent domain should not be used for anything beyond a "public purpose".

0
0
  • 1 - 4 of 4

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT