19 Nov 2013
by truthfarmer
in Agenda 21, Control, food safety, food shortage, No Food Rights
As delineated in the article below, this kind of thing is happening all over. Fines for producing. If you want good food, you have to grow it or buy it directly from someone who grows it for you. You must avoid the anonymous centralized, consolidated food supply chain….IF you want real stuff anyway. We have some very interesting ties ahead with the Food Safety Modernization Act’s rules being under consideration.
At any rate, the following article covers some of the gardening atrocities occurring around the country, but there are many more not being mentioned. This is a good primer for what is coming under the International Property Maintenance Codes along with the FSMA.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Few things in life are as benign as a home vegetable garden.
But for the residents of Miami Shores, Fla., growing veggies can land you a fine — the type you eventually can’t afford.
That’s what happened to Hermine Ricketts and her husband, Tom Carroll. For the past 17 years they’ve grown a garden in the front yard of their modest South Florida home. The backyard, they say, doesn’t get enough sunlight.
But in May, the city put the couple’s garden, and any others like it, in their legal crosshairs.
A new zoning ordinance designed to “protect the distinctive character of the Miami Shores Village,” was enacted and specifically prohibited vegetables – not fruit, trees or even plastic flamingos – from appearing in front yards.
Shortly after, the couple received a visit from their local code enforcement officer. They were given two choices: Uproot the garden or pay a $50 per day fine to keep it.
After twice appearing before the Miami Shores Code Enforcement Board and being denied an exemption, the couple decided to dig up the garden rather than fork over $1,500 a month to the city.
Now they’re taking their case to court.
In an effort to reinstate the couple’s right to grow a few vegetables on their own property, the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit libertarian leaning legal aid group, filed a lawsuit Tuesday on their behalf.
ARI BARGIL, Institute for Justice
“We’re not suing for money,” IJ attorney Ari Bargil told Florida Watchdog. “We’re asking the court to rule that this law is unconstitutional so Hermine and Tom can plant their garden again.”
According to Bargil, the ordinance infringes on the couple’s basic right to privacy – a right the Florida Constitution recognizes more broadly than the U.S. Constitution.
“Miami Shores will have to prove that its ban promotes a compelling governmental interest and is narrowly tailored to advance that interest,” wrote Bargil in a litigation backgrounder.
For its part, the city has yet to explain any interest beyond the language of the law itself.
Similar bans have taken root in other parts of the country. Ron Finely of South Los Angeles and Adam Guerro of Memphis were found in violation of city gardening ordinances, though they eventually prevailed.
But Denise Morrison of Tulsa, Okla., wasn’t so lucky. Her edible garden was largely destroyed by local authorities while she waited for her day in court. Julie Bass of Oak Park, Mich,. faced 90-days in jail for her home-grown veggies. The charges were eventually dropped.
Such rules are usually rooted in maintaining the aesthetic value of a neighborhood. Other residents have every right to complain — though that was not the case in Miami Shores — or local authorities can make a determination themselves.
The problem, however, is when a homeowner reasonably disagrees with city officials on what is considered visually “suitable.” Throw in the productive use of growing food on one’s own property, and such restrictions can come across as arbitrary and subjective.
While the Florida case may seem to be small-potatoes to those that don’t grow and eat their own food, Bargil offers a simple warning.
“If the government can tell you what you can and can’t do in your front yard, what else can they decide is off-limits?”
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Truth Farmer 
Nov 20, 2013 @ 08:52:11
This is The U.N.Agenda 21 folks its in every local government in this country , may just have a slightly different name. most of the local politicians don’t even realise what they are doing!!
Fight them every step of the way!!!
Nov 20, 2013 @ 19:41:28
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/02/welcome-to-agenda-21-private-property-rights-meeting-clinton-ar-on-wed-feb-22-at-6pm-1792741.html
Welcome To Agenda 21: Private Property Rights Meeting Clinton, AR On Wed, Feb 22 At 6PM
Tuesday, February 21, 2012 12:00
0
(Before It’s News)
Last Munite Reminder:We will be car pooling from the Wing Shack in Mountain View on Wed, Feb 22 to Clinton, Arkansas for the meeting listed below. The car pool will leave the Wing Shack at 4:15 PM for Clinton. If you live in Cleburne, Pope, Searcy, Stone or Van Buren county your property rights are at stake.
Nature has taken priority over humans. Welcome to UN Agenda 21
Private Property Rights Meeting at Clinton, AR on February 22, from 6 to 8 PM concerning the Yellowcheek Darter
Your Private Property Rights are at Risk When you sign onto any government program YOU GIVE UP YOUR PROPERTY RIGHTS.
The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service will have a pubic meeting in Clinton, Arkansas on Wednesday, February 22 from 6 to 8 PM for their proposed designation of the Yellowcheek Darter to the endanger spices list. This meeting will be held at the Petit Jean Electric Cooperative, 270 Quality Drive in Clinton, Arkansas. This covers the following five counties in Arkansas; Cleburne, Pope, Searcy, Stone and Van Buren. (covers aprox. 87,000 acres directly adjacent to the habitat streams of the
Yellowcheek Darter).
The following document below covers the details that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife would like for all the property owners to sign
up for.
You must protect your property rights at all costs and not sign up for ANY GOVERNMENT PROGRAM.
Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement and Programmatic Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances
The 63 public submissions listed for the Yellowcheek Darter
http://www.regulations.gov/#!searchResults;dct=PS;rpp=10;po=0;s=yellowcheek%252Bdarter
All the listings of the proposed rule, rule, notice, supporting & related material, other, and public submission for theYellowcheek Darter
http://www.regulations.gov/#!searchResults;rpp=10;po=40;s=yellowcheek%252Bdarter
In the Federal Register it lists the Proposed rule change for adding Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the Cumberland Darter, Rush Darter, Yellowcheek Darter, Chucky Madtom, and Laurel Dace. For Arkansas it is only the Yellowcheek Darter.
Click to access 2011-25655.pdf
Here is the document that shows that the government caused that problem with the Yellowcheek Darter when they constructed the Greer’s Ferry Reservoir.
From PDF document http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2011-0074-0001
In 1962, the construction of a dam on the Little Red River to create Greers Ferry Reservoir impounded much of the range of this species, including the
lower reaches of Devil’s Fork, Middle Fork, South Fork, and portions of the main stem Little Red River, thus extirpating the species from these
reaches. Cold tailwater releases below the dam preclude the yellowcheek darter from inhabiting the main stem Little Red River.
In 1962, the construction of Little Red River Dam to create Greers Ferry Reservoir impounded much of the range of the yellowcheek darter,
including the lower reaches of Devil’s Fork, Middle Fork, South Fork, and portions of the main stem Little Red River, thus extirpating the
species from these reaches. The yellowcheek darter was also extirpated from the Little Red River downstream of Greers Ferry Reservoir due to
cold tailwater releases. The lake flooded optimal habitat for the species, and caused genetic isolation of populations (McDaniel 1984, p.
1), with only the South and Archey forks of the Little Red River maintaining a non-inundated confluence.
Additional site show the government caused the problem with the Yellowcheek Darter when they constructed Geer’s Ferry Reservoir.
Click to access Yellowcheek%20Darter%20restoration%20Little%20Red%20River.pdf
The historic range has been impacted by the construction of Greer’s Ferry Reservoir and channel alterations in the Archey and South Forks.
Further, the construction of Greer’s Ferry Reservoir has resulted in the permanent loss of habitat due to inundation and cold-water releases from the dam
Additional information on the Yellowcheek Darter
http://www.arkive.org/yellowcheek-darter/etheostoma-moorei/#text=Conservation
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2006/09/08/E6-14867/proposed-joint-programmatic-candidate-conservation-agreement-with-assurances-and-safe-harbor
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2011-0074-0001
The following web links and article will expose the fraud being done within the Endangered Species Act (ESA) against private property owners.
Endangered Species Act Fraud
A lot of the the items that have been put on the Endangered Species list has been done by fraud and with NO checks and balances.
In doing some research on the Endangered Species Act I came across some of the following alarming reports that confirm fraud is being used to get a species listed as an Endangered Species. These are only of few of many examples found.
Forest Service and Washington state caught in the act: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=7242
Using Endangered Species As An Anti-Development Ploy http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=8422
Scientist Expose Inside Job Behind Endangered Species Scam http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2763790/posts
The Problem With The Endangered Species Act http://www.discerningtoday.org/problem_esa_full.htm