 The Columbus Dispatch
Michael Hawthorne Richard Cooper stood out last night among his fellow Madison County farm owners. Most who were willing to express an opinion about the proposed federal wildlife refuge along the Little Darby Creek made it clear they want the government to forget about the idea. People wearing "No Darby Refuge" stickers lined up to decry the proposal during the first of two meetings to discuss the latest federal study of the project. Some even parked tractors outside festooned with banners featuring anti-refuge slogans such as "Hug a Farmer, Not a Tree." Barely audible amid the din of others debating the issue in a cavernous conference room at the Made From Scratch catering company, Cooper said he resents attempts by other farmers to block the federal government from buying land for the refuge. "I want my land available for agriculture and conservation in the future," said Cooper, who owns 325 acres on both sides of the creek. "If I sell to my neighbor, I don't know if two weeks later he's gonna turn around and sell it to some developer." Other questions about who would control development rights in the refuge area dominated last night's discussion. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wants to buy 23,000 acres along the Darby in Madison and Union counties. Development rights would be purchased for an additional 26,000 acres of farmland surrounding the refuge. Backers see the refuge as a way to curb suburban sprawl, preserve wildlife habitat and protect the water quality of the Little Darby, a national and state scenic river about 25 miles west of Downtown. Citizens Against the Refuge Proposal has persuaded some landowners to sign covenants intended to prohibit sales to the government. The group wants land-use decisions left to local leaders and citizens. At issue for some opponents is what price they could command for their land. Federal officials say they would pay fair-market value. "If you want to give us what Franklin County farmers are getting, then maybe we can talk," said Dale King, who farms 400 acres around London, including some within the proposed refuge boundaries. Landowners just outside the boundaries could broker more lucrative deals with developers interested in building homes near the refuge, King said. "What incentive is there for us to sell, then?" he asked. Bill Hegge, project leader for the Fish and Wildlife Service, said a draft version of the study his agency is conducting will include a definition of what the government considers fair-market value. Federal officials had been expected to seek congressional approval this spring for money to start buying land in the refuge area. Faced with opposition from farm groups and key members of Congress, they opted to conduct a more detailed study. Federal officials tried to keep the discussion civil last night by breaking participants into small groups, but emotions were boiling just below the surface. At one point, farmer Bob Higgins angrily demanded that Hegge disavow a pro-refuge TV spot financed by the Nature Conservancy, the Darby Creek Association and the Ohio Parks and Recreation Association. "That's not why we're here," Hegge said. "We've worked hard for these farms," Higgins said. "We don't like TV commercials where we're made out to be villains." The ad doesn't mention farmers but features actors portraying developers staking out forested land for development. It ends with one of the men stomping a purple wildflower as he says, "We'll put the parking lot right here." David Weekes, Ohio director of the Nature Conservancy, said he thinks that the refuge will be created despite political opposition. "There has been so much misinformation out there," Weekes said. "But we see this as an important place to preserve for future generations. I think people, even those in the farm community, want that to happen." Back to Ohio state page
|
|