Ah, but what is a "nuisance," within the meaning of Ohio law? Whose notion of nuisance prevails? The authorities had their perspective, deeming the rodents and snakes "nuisance animals." But:
The un-mowed plants in our yard attract plant-eating bugs and rodents, which in turn attract birds, bats, toads and garter snakes that eat them. Then hawks fly in to eat the snakes. Seeing all this life emerge in just one growing season made me realize just how much nature manicured lawns displace and disrupt....
People should be allowed to live out their values on their own property as long as they are not causing a true nuisance that hinders their neighbors’ use of their own properties....
Society needs to adjust its cultural norms on lawn aesthetics. For the health of the planet, and for our own health, we need to start letting nature dictate how we design our outdoor spaces.... Instead of putting nature in its place, we need to find our place in nature. Local officials have told us countless times that our lawn looks bad and is a nuisance. In one public meeting, a brave young boy, Max Burton, stood up and told our critics, “What you are saying is that life itself is a nuisance.”
Posts
110 comments:
I live in a rural subdivision where wild patches are common in the yards. As a result we have lots of poison ivy, poison oak, and nettle. There are no sidewalks and most people walk on the road and are not impacted.
I can see how in an urban area wild patches could be a nuisance.
“What you are saying is that life itself is a nuisance.”
"You may fool some adults; you can’t fool little boys and girls with such stuff–not for long. They may not know just what is out of line, but they stir uneasily."
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/213298/big-sister-watching-you-whittaker-chambers
1- Woman is a 'complete' wackadoodle.
2- Other examples of 'complete' ecosystems': cesspit, rotting carcass.
3- Neighborhood and community esthetic doesn't end at your property line. Do they in a small plot subdivision, a town village, end of a rural road? She might have a point if she's at the end of a dead end road in the country. I suspect she's one of those types who buy in to the managed community then their new recreational obsession becomes fighting with the HOA.
I did the same out here in Connecticut, not intentionally but because I was broke and broken trying to fix this olde house and my mower had died.
2 native American, aboriginal people took the time to stop by and thank me.
The best way to be a neighbor is to be quiet and to share.
It seems like the author lives out in the country. And county officials are worried about her small patch of non-lawn? That county has too many officials if this is the case.
Perhaps she could move to the country. Naah! Instead she has decided to break the social compact by which her neighbors had been living for decades, if not centuries. She has every right to agitate for change, but what will undoubtedly happen next is that she will use the courts to abrogate her neighbors democratic rights in order to create an infinitesimal addition to the millions of acres of similar habitat that already doubtless exist in Ohio, if flying over it by airliner is any indication.
If everyone can use their property as they choose I am sure she won't mind a meth lab appearing next door. This is why I am a Republican and not a libertarian, sometimes letting people live as they like requires more than acquiring a piece of property, it requires moving to an appropriate place to live as one likes where it won't be a drain on the property values of her neighbors.
I do let the Queen Anne's lace grow in a patch of flower garden I have in my lawn, I agree with her that wildflowers are pretty and that it is nice to support wildlife, except those ^*&#^$*@ deer that are basically wild goats, that's why I live in the country.
" Americans have been deeply conditioned to see their manicured lawns as status symbols."
She should move to Arizona. she'll discover a lawnless paradise.
But I also think it is wrong to vilify all invasive plants
She's cultivating a sanctuary yard.
A mutilated garter snake, a sliced frog and countless slashed grasshoppers.
I used to keep chickens until the neighbor's dogs eventually killed them all, but when I had them, they loved to follow behind the lawnmower.
Americans have been deeply conditioned
Or maybe we share a culture that values the traditional look of a town with picket fences and manicured lawns the way Obama loves the sound of the Islamic call to prayer?
Naah! We have been conditioned by some external and nefarious entity! Liberals are superstitious believers in "intelligent design" as much as any snake handling holler residing Kentucky preacher, they just think that different things are intelligently designed and different "invisible hands" cannot exist.
Here are more photos of the place. Looks like the country to me.
http://maetaylorphotography.com/2015/07/13/grow-life-save-sarahs-garden/
They are legally within a township, however. It is the township inspector who is giving them grief. They don't have a law about mowing lawns, so the inspector has decided to call it a "nuisance." I am no lawyer, but in the absence of complaints by the public, I don't think that a township inspector has the right to decide what is and what is not a nuisance. You can't read the guy's mind.
MadisonMan said...
"The best way to be a neighbor is to be quiet and to share."
Well, okay. But could you please not quietly share your millions of ragweed, bindweed, and Canada thistle seeds with me, good neighbor? Thanks.
The pictures look pretty rural, but you can't really see their neighbors or what the impact is on them. Might be minimal ... or not. If you live in a typical suburban town with neighbors ten to twenty five feet away, and you had this next door while trying to sell your house, you'd be pretty upset.
Displacing animals, especially reptiles, from being close to us is our place in nature.
Lovely little town from the air. You have to turn on "bird's eye"
To me it is up to the people who live in the town, but I am sure she is going to drag judges into it, who will, of course arrogate the power to themselves once again and shatter one more social compact because this lady insists on being a bad neighbor.
I know how she feels. I have a working ecosystem in my refrigerator.
From looking at the photos and reading her letter it looks like she is in the country, in which case its her own damn business whether she wants to cut her lawn or not.
I'm surprised that a township official is persecuting her. My brother-in-law lives in the country and he often complains about people moving there from the city and then trying to make it just like the city with zoning laws.
Having been born and raised in Ohio I suspect that the township official's real grievance is the AA husband.
The place looks like a dump from the front, I bet she could mow just a tiny percentage of it, make it presentable to the neighbors so they are living in the neighborhood they bought into, and everybody would be happy. But then she wouldn't have a cause.
Good point, Lyle. Personally, I like to displace raccoons, chipmunks, rats, rabid bats, Lyme-infested ticks, insane Progressives, and various other nuisance animals from the meadhouse natural habitat.
I've read some of the lady's comments on the stories about her problems with the township. She seems to believe that 'ecosystem' is a magic word.
"These corn fields displace native plants and eco-sytems, degrade the soil, and cause chemical run-off that hurts waterways"
"I am growing a living eco-system"
"But we can only take so much before these complex eco-systems that support all life collapse."
Ironically, she seems to be associated with Bowling Green University.
That said, there is a practical reason to keep the grass mowed around your house. Snakes, rodents, and insects are going to take advantage of the cover to creep into your house in greater numbers than if you don't. Also, vines growing up the side of your house might look attractive, but they are doing serious damage to the wood/brick and are also providing a vector for critters wishing to enter your nice dry domicile.
I consider it to be part of my "biological imperative".
Ten will get you twenty that she is not a libertarian in any other aspect of her life or politics. Everybody is a cafeteria libertarian.
If you mow your lawn and weed your flower beds, that's a working ecosystem too. It's just different from a feral ecosystem.
A house down the block from mine is abandoned. The lady who owns it hasn't lived in it or maintained it for a years after her husband died, and she's stopped making mortgage payments. She's off in upstate New York someplace.
I would love to buy the place, clear the lot, and build another house. However, it's not on the market yet, and in New Jersey, the foreclosure process takes TWO YEARS. (In most other parts of the country it's less than a year -- in some places as little as 90 days.)
In the meantime, the bushes and volunteer trees have encroached the sidewalk so badly that people need to walk in the street to pass her house.
Meh.
("Cafeteria libertarian." Hmmm I gotta write that one down. I've heard of "cafeteria Christian" before.)
Get off my working ecosystem!
I bet she doesn't trim her pubic hair either.
Ecosystems, etc.
I am Laslo.
Crabs and lice
are not so nice
and nits are simply stupid.
Pyronite
gets rid of them
and gets you back to Cupid.
--old magazine ad
Bob Boyd said...
Get off my working ecosystem!
Lol.
A house down the block from mine is abandoned. The lady who owns it hasn't lived in it or maintained it for a years after her husband died, and she's stopped making mortgage payments. She's off in upstate New York someplace.
If you have a HOA they can hire somebody to maintain the lawn and put a lien on the house. If you don't have a HOA I would complain to the local government. They can do the same thing.
Soon there will be deep forest.
For the health of the planet, and for our own health, we need to start letting nature dictate how we design our outdoor spaces..
Bullshit.
Or do you think nature wanted Meade to drag all those Christmas trees around, etc.
"If you have a HOA..."
Nope, freestanding house, corrupt New Jersey municipality that will drain out the escrow account and get the rest of its taxes when the property is sold. No rush.
Well, okay. But could you please not quietly share your millions of ragweed, bindweed, and Canada thistle seeds with me, good neighbor
That wasn't me, that was nature dictating how I design my outdoor space.
Mother Nature as Dictator.
Mother Nature does not shave her pubic hair.
Unless you count brush fires.
Then she sorta does.
I am Laslo.
Nope, freestanding house, corrupt New Jersey municipality that will drain out the escrow account and get the rest of its taxes when the property is sold. No rush.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2013/02/07/the-states-people-are-fleeing-in-2013/
Jersey was number one that year.
There are now photographs on the internet that show that Miley Cyrus has pubic hair.
I would've guessed that she shaved.
I'm usually pretty good at guessing those things.
Proof is proof.
I am Laslo.
I kinda like the idea that Miley Cyrus has pubic hair.
She is an old-fashioned girl at heart, under the hood.
I am Laslo..
Once an authority issues an order, the main thing becomes forcing compliance. Whether the order should have been issued in the first place is not something the authorities want to discuss. They want their orders obeyed and they know if they can isolate an individual they can wear them out. The authorities aren't using their own time and resources in the fight.
We have way to many authorities these days, high and low. Like Meade said, they've become a nuisance. We need to take a mower to the legal lawn, keep the rules and regulations down. Reduce the cover that attracts these critters. They hide in there like snakes and rats. Pretty soon you can't even move on your own property for fear of them.
1 acre is not rural and where they live isn't out in the country. You don't have to let your whole yard go wild to foster insects, snakes, birds, and other wildlife. My yard is 1/3 an acre most of it is mowed regularly in area of homes with similar or smaller yards. We have significant garden space and trees, thus we have seen generous wildlife here or passing thru - vast variety of insects, 13 varieties of birds by my count, chipmunks, squirrels, raccoons, opossums, rabbits, deer, there used to be a fox that showed up from time to time, and even a coyote and a cougar that was reported down the block a number of years ago.
I'll bet this couple insists on eating organic and shopping at Whole Foods.
Laslo Spatula said...
I would've guessed that she shaved.
Helena, MT, while a city, has numerous acres of working ecosystem. I would expect the same from Hanna.
Could it be that there is a racial component to this matter.
"..for the health of the planet.."
Sorry, the only time we hear this is if what you want to do, regardless of whether it is good for the planet, turns out to be good for the planet, in some microscopic, meaningless way.
"But the main point of growing a natural yard is to attract wildlife and build a self-regulating environment."
Delusional. It is not self-regulating since it is impacted by the surrounding environment. Maybe if she contains all the wildlife inside her yard only.
("Cafeteria libertarian." Hmmm I gotta write that one down. I've heard of "cafeteria Christian" before.)
Like it? It's yours. ;)
A few years ago in the San Antonio area, a local gardening expert got cited by the suburb in which he lived. He considered his front yard a meadow, but the muni court said his yard was weedy. The Leviathon does not like meadows.
A thought experiment. Suppose you lived next to Ms. Baker and wanted to, perhaps needed to, sell your house. Could you get as much for your property next to her "meadow" as you could if she tended her yards at least as well as the remainder of the yards in the neighborhood? Probably not, right?
Now I'd be perfectly willing to live next to Ms. Baker and her partner, provided (1) she is willing to pay the difference between what I could sell my house for if she tended her lawn versus what the market will pay given that my house was adjacent to her weed patch, and (2) she was willing to pay the cost of a lawn service to take care of weeds growing in my lawn thanks to the seeds and spores blown from her property.
But somehow I doubt that she would pay that. She doesn't seem the type.
When I was 6 or 7 years old, my Dad talked about putting up a birdhouse for Purple Martins in the back yard. He explained that the bird ate flying insects; but that there were only a certain number of insects flying over our yard at any given time. "I don't think our yard is big enough," he said. Of course, I didn't want to see the Purple Martins starve because of our inadequately-sized property...
A thought experiment. Suppose you lived next to Ms. Baker and wanted to, perhaps needed to, sell your house. Could you get as much for your property next to her "meadow" as you could if she tended her yards at least as well as the remainder of the yards in the neighborhood? Probably not, right?
You also bought it for less.
When I was young I worked in what we called meadow manufacturing.
It's also known as logging.
Every tree is potential stump.
The actual problem is that there's a house on the lot.
My neighborhood was all built at once on an ex-farm, except for a few lots that didn't sell.
Those lots were overgrown with whatever lots get overgrown with, including some small trees.
Nobody thought of them as a nuisance or an eyesore. They were just lots not sold yet.
So it's not really an eyesore in itself but sort of a social eyesore. Say to the golf course lawn club set. Then it's political.
You also bought it for less
Only if he bought it this year, meaning the previous owner took the same damage.
Then it's political.
Right, and she can't win the democratic politics of it, so look for her to bring in the courts.
I still don't understand why two hundred years after seedless oranges we can't engineer grass that naturally grows to the right height and stops.
I love a good meadow as much as the next guy, but you really can't have one going right up against other houses and properties--who wants snakes and rats getting into the house? Keep a buffer! Plus, in a neighborhood where the houses are close together it looks less rustic and more unkempt.
There are other options besides a manicured lawn--you can set up rock gardens and shrubbery, plant lots of trees, even lay out gravel around your plants so there's no mowing and you still have something more interesting than plain grass. Our front yard growing up was basically woods, and we only had to mow the back.
I've known of HOAs that had insanely strict rules (never leave garage doors open, all homes had to be painted the same shade of beige, etc.) but there's certainly a call for basic standards to maintain the property values and limit hazards. I'd like to not catch mosquito plague or get snakebites because my neighbor wants to be one with nature.
insane Progressives
There are sane ones?
Most Americans think they like natural. Most of them don't.
I once did baby-sitting for a seventeen-year-old girl who looked just like Miley Cyrus.
By 'baby-sitting' I mean I hid in the bushes outside her bedroom window to make sure no creeps came along to peep at her, or worse.
A limber girl, she would do stretching exercises before bed in a t-shirt and panties: I'd like to think, on some subliminal level, she felt an inchoate sense of safety because of my unseen protection. Also: she had pert breasts.
I never charged her parents for my services: I preferred keeping my Community Good Will a secret.
I am Laslo.
Hmmm. Cannot locate the property on the Licking County tax rolls
http://www.lcounty.com/taxparcelviewer/default.htm
under the name "Baker, Sa" or her partner "Watson, Da" (from his blog at
https://thelastrevolt.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/dont-mow-your-lawn-part-2/
Perhaps the place is rented. Would be interesting to see what the surrounding land looks like from Google Map.
For the health of the planet, and for our own health, we need to start letting nature dictate how we design our outdoor spaces.
Nature wants you pregnant at 15 and dead at 35 (with most of your children dead too).
You don't have to let your whole yard go wild to foster insects, snakes, birds, and other wildlife.
This needs to be said again.
I would add only that a sufficient density of garden not only fosters wildlife, it also fosters semi-wildlife, which looks an awful lot like housecats on the prowl.
Neighbors like visual orderliness that trimming nature back into manmade boundaries provides. Pagans are honeybadgers that just don't care.
Camille Paglia's Sexual Personae'stheme is big on the unrestrained power of nature procreating in mass abundance for a few to survive. But Jehovah gave Adam a Garden to tend and Eve to help him keep it in female orderliness.
As a landlord who has to deal with my tenants' neighbors, who frequently follow the "let nature reign" approach to landscaping and lawn care, up to and including leaving their old refrigerators and microwaves and diswashers in a corner of their backyards, I have found that asking the city code enforcers to investigate "the rats living in the abandoned appliances" is the fastest way to get a cleanup accomplished via city citations and fines.
Nothing like plagues of rodents to motivate a bureaucratic mind into action, for some reason.
Otherwise I am fine with natural landscaping, as long as the feral cats are eliminated from the ecosystem. Those things are vicious.
Clint wrote:
"I still don't understand why two hundred years after seedless oranges we can't engineer grass that naturally grows to the right height and stops."
Mondo grass. It grows up a few inches and then its growth slows so it's basically wearing its top down at the same rate it's growing upwards.
The problem is that it spreads really slowly. Some people us it in small amounts as an ornamental, or where it is difficult to mow.
I'm surprised that there are so many commenters who don't respect private property.
A house down the block from mine is abandoned. The lady who owns it hasn't lived in it or maintained it for a years after her husband died, and she's stopped making mortgage payments.
Back in my big city days, we called those 'crack dens'.
///
The Godfather said...
I'm surprised that there are so many commenters who don't respect private property.
Your private prop'y is all well-and-good until your crabgrass spreads into my lawn.
It's not private property if the government requires six grand a year for you to have quiet enjoyment. I think the city sees it as something more akin to sharecropping.
You also bought it for less.
@rhhardin, not if I paid full price for your home because Ms. Baker hadn't moved into her house or otherwise started her shenanigans yet.
I echo what furious_a says, but would add clover, dandelions, chickweed and goosegrass.
PS: Meade, perhaps you know the answer. How do I get rid of clover that's spread from my neighbor's lawn? Those little plants laugh at Weed-B-Gone.
PB said...
...You don't have to let your whole yard go wild to foster insects, snakes, birds, and other wildlife.
Purple Martens nesting under porch overhangs front and back, mourning doves in a blind gutter, cardinals in the Crape Myrtle. Constant mockingbird and bluejay presence and on two memorable occasions buzzards (1)roosting on the mailbox and (2)noshing on the sidewalk. Neither of which occassions had I a camera handy.
Constant rabbit and squirrel presence, judging from the beagle racket and pursuits. Some other kind of rodent, too, judging from the rat-tail once seen hanging from the older beagle's mouth, just before he gobbled it. Coyotes and bobcats in rock-throwing distance (droppings seen on the sidewalk), don't need them in yard, thank you.
Copperheads behind storage bins in the garage and geckos climbing the walls, who needs a yard? More wasp and hornet diversity than I've ever seen. I mow/weed/trim every two weeks and I feel like Marty Stouffer.
Its always difficult to transition from indifference into insanity in the middle of a community.
"I'm surprised that there are so many commenters who don't respect private property."
Even the most strident advocates of the rights of property owners acknowledge that the property owner does not have a right to create a nuisance affecting adjoining property owners. For example, storing toxic chemicals, or breeding wasps in close proximity to your neighbor.
There are extremes, of course--like a neighborhood association that will not let you fly a flag, even on a proper flagpole, or let you paint your house a different color. But ultimately your rights on your own property cannot extend to harming your neighbors' property.
Also do not forget the joys of termites and carpenter ants if the trees are too close to the house/garage.
She's a perfectly normal person, isn't she?
http://www.nola.com/west-bank/index.ssf/2011/01/woman_walks_from_ohio_to_plaqu.html
I guess one of her main ways to conserve oil was to not use the lawnmower?
I'm surprised that there are so many commenters who don't respect private property.
She could easily have moved someplace where nobody gave a rat's ass what she did with her property, probably, judging by the map, within a mile of where she does live. We live, however, in these things called communities where norms have developed over the millennia, not to mention social instincts that have developed over millions of years of evolution, that promote peaceful co-existence. I know that libertarians and communists alike deny this basic truth, but it is true nonetheless.
That is why, once again, I say that libertarianism, like its polar opposite, communism, is not a serious proposal for how human beings should live together.
A neighborhood association is a contract, not a denial of rights at all. Just the opposite.
Unincorporated land is the opposite of a neighborhood association.
"That is why, once again, I say that libertarianism, like its polar opposite, communism, is not a serious proposal for how human beings should live together."
Well, it depends on how you define "libertarianism". If taken to an extreme it can be unworkable, but that's true of any political slant. Even under libertarianism a person's rights (regarding their person or property) cannot give them license to interfere with the rights of others.
@tim in vermont:I say that libertarianism, like its polar opposite, communism, is not a serious proposal for how human beings should live together.
Libertarianism accommodates HOAs and even labor unions. There's nothing unlibertarian about community, provided it is not coercive.
Big Mike: Now I'd be perfectly willing to live next to Ms. Baker and her partner, provided (1) she is willing to pay the difference between what I could sell my house for if she tended her lawn versus what the market will pay given that my house was adjacent to her weed patch, and (2) she was willing to pay the cost of a lawn service to take care of weeds growing in my lawn thanks to the seeds and spores blown from her property.
Now, it seems to me, that you'd have all those issues if the property next to yours was unowned. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that when you sell your property, you are obligated to give to your neighbor the difference between what your property would've been worth if their property were unkept and what it is worth as a direct result of their (not your) labors and expenses.
I just pray the good woman doesn't take antibiotics when sick--wouldn't want to interfere with the biological ecosystem of her own bod.
SeanF & Big Mike: Just to formalize things a bit, then two economic concepts at play in your discussion are externalities (positive & negative) and transaction costs. In SeanF's framework an owner would be compensated for any externalities they affecting their property and would in turn compensate others for any externalities they themselves cause (again, positive or negative--you might increase the value of your neighbor's property by keeping yours up or you might harm their value by letting yours go fallow). Such a system might work except for the transaction costs involved--you'd have to determine everyone affected by your actions, agree on the compensation owed, etc. Ideally legal rules and cultural norms (contracts, concepts of neighborhood standards, municipal regulations) serve to reduce transaction costs and obviate the need for formal payment (or lawsuits, etc).
Whether this case is an example of those rules and norms being properly enforced (to reduce negative externalities on others) or is instead an example of the misuse of collective/government power to usurp an individual property owner's right to enjoy their possession in whatever way they see fit((without causing harm to others)...that's the question.
So every community and small town and city must codify all its norms and traditions into a written "yes means yes" kind of contract and make everybody sign it if they want to live the way the residents have clearly chosen to live up to now? Is that libertariansim? "Yes means yes"?
One of the strongest arguments against libertarianism, IMHO, is the disgust that nearly everyone naturally feels for those men who bought their way out of fighting in the Civil War and sent others in their place. A supremely libertarian act.
It was back in the late 1960s, maybe the early 1970s, that my grandfather got caught up in the back-to-nature fad. More specifically, for two weeks he rented half of a duplex down the Jersey Shore and he said he was going to maximize the experience by refusing to shower or brush his teeth or anything like that for the entire time.
I think he made it to maybe the 7th or 8th day.
He must have been a bit of a weirdo, now that I think about it.
@tim in vermont: Is that libertariansim? "Yes means yes"?
No. You are perfectly free as a libertarian to shame, gossip about, or shun your neighbors.
everyone naturally feels for those men who bought their way out of fighting in the Civil War and sent others in their place. A supremely libertarian act.
And using political connections to get deferment would be, what sort of act? And what sort of libertarianism endorses conscription? And it was the government, mind you, that made a law saying $300 would adequately substitute.
"So every community and small town and city must codify all its norms and traditions into a written "yes means yes" kind of contract and make everybody sign it if they want to live the way the residents have clearly chosen to live up to now? Is that libertariansim? "Yes means yes"?"
I don't think it needs to be codified, although to the extent any such rules are nonobvious they should be so the property owner is notified (e.g., if your land is not zoned for commercial use and the neighborhood isn't obviously solely residential). The real question should be whether your use of your land is affecting other property owners' rights.
"One of the strongest arguments against libertarianism, IMHO, is the disgust that nearly everyone naturally feels for those men who bought their way out of fighting in the Civil War and sent others in their place. A supremely libertarian act."
It was, but then it was also win-win--the buyer gets to avoid going to war, and the seller gets to get paid an amount worth it to him to take the other person's place. But the real disgust should be with a government that allows such exemptions from the draft.
Scott said "and nits are simply stupid" I didn't know what a nit was so I googled it. Why when you google anything nasty, some rock band will show up?
Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...
Hmmm. Cannot locate the property on the Licking County tax rolls
**********************
I think it's this property. One of the articles about this had her mentioning that the house belonged to her mother, and that it was about 2 miles from her parents' nursery. This fits both of those criteria:
http://www.lcounty.com/ontrac/frmSummary.aspx?pn=066-321018-00.000
Tim in Vermont said....So every community and small town and city must codify all its norms and traditions into a written "yes means yes" kind of contract and make everybody sign it if they want to live the way the residents have clearly chosen to live up to now?
No, I'm not sure where that reading came from, Tim. The nice thing about culture/norms/traditions is that they don't need to be codified. The idea that it's neighborly to keep your yard tidy to avoid encouraging an infestation that will vex your neighbors is one that (ideally) doesn't require a law to enforce. I'd say the "cultural libertarian" idea would be that the State's power should be as limited as possible and that individuals ought to abide by cultural norms in order to get along absent the force of the State compelling them to do so.
The better criticism of libertarianism from your perspective would be to ask what dispute resolution mechanism there should be within such a framework (ie short of State intervention/laws)--in this case the owner doesn't seem like she'd be persuaded by the social pressure of her neighbors and it's entirely possible she wouldn't take even a large cash payment to change her behavior (this again is a transaction cost, the "holdout problem"). It's fair to ask what the libertarian solution to the problem (of her intransigent violation of the norm) should be. If the only answer is "take her to court for imposing a cost on you and make her pay for that cost" then it's possible you've defined the boundary of libertarianism and/or it's idea of the constraints the State should be under. I suspect almost all libertarians, though, acknowledge such limits (otherwise I guess they'd be anarchists of one flavor or another).
Re private property. Generally, you have a right to do what you want with your own property, whether or not your neighbor approves (subject, of course, to land use regulations, covenants, etc.). But if you are acting within your rights, and your neighbor tries to stop you from doing so, then you have every right to go to court to enforce your rights. I was struck that some commenters seemed to think it was unneighborly to go to court to protect your right to use your own property as you see fit, but it's perfectly all right to get the local government to prevent a neighbor from using his land as he sees fit.
Nuisance is a long-established limit on the right to use property. The classic example from law school in my day was a rendering plant. You couldn't operate a rendering plant on your residential property causing fumes and odors to waft over neighboring properties, because that was a nuisance. But the nuisance doctrine doesn't apply just because I don't like the way my neighbor's property looks. It doesn't apply just because what my neighbor does might adversely affect the price I could get if I try to sell my property. Whether or not nuisance applies to this situation requires more factual development and legal analysis.
"But the nuisance doctrine doesn't apply just because I don't like the way my neighbor's property looks. It doesn't apply just because what my neighbor does might adversely affect the price I could get if I try to sell my property."
I took their objections to be about the wildlife (snakes, etc.) that were flourishing in the neighborhood because of their overgrowth.
But the real disgust should be with a government that allows such exemptions from the draft.
Right, the sort of libertarian government that allowed it.
"Right, the sort of libertarian government that allowed it."
I don't think it's a very libertarian thing to have a draft--it'd be more libertarian to pay people enough money to get them to fight. Then, it is still the soldier's choice to take the money and serve, and the government would have to decide it is worth the cost to fight the war.
The woman's partner argued at the township board meeting last month that as a Christian he felt conscientiously obliged to refrain from cutting the grass etc. The board member replied, we are Christians too but we need to obey the law. He, the partner, held his tongue at the meeting (evincing more sense than I would have given either him or the woman credit for) but will further explain his position in his next blog post.
The Godfather said...But the nuisance doctrine doesn't apply just because I don't like the way my neighbor's property looks. It doesn't apply just because what my neighbor does might adversely affect the price I could get if I try to sell my property. Whether or not nuisance applies to this situation requires more factual development and legal analysis.
Agree, thus my reference to "an infestation" and others' references to rats and insects...the woman in question sees rodents and pests as no problem since they're part of the ecosystem, but since she's not taking any action to contain any pests only to her yard I'd say if it's shown that the way she's using her property is creating/encouraging an infestation of rodents or other pests the municipality (and her neighbors) have a pretty good prima facie case for a nuisance, no?
Her phrasing certainly seems to suggest that she's aware her choice is resulting in more rodents and animals the neighbors see as pests, but that her attitude is the neighbors should change their attitude and opinions such that they'll decide the pests aren't really a nuisance after all. That's a bit like the rendering plant touting the advantages of the humid, fat-rich air they put out (free wall lard!) and claiming that the people who find the smell to be a nuisance should just change their minds.
It's called civilization for a reason. That's why we have Versailles and the Hermitage.
Where I live here in Texas a man or woman's yard is their yard and none if your business, at least outside of the homeowners' associations largely populated by clueless émigrés from California and New York...
The problem is people aiming for natural just let it go. A little organizing hardscape to lend some order to the chaos is all that's needed here. A few straight lines, angles, containment of certain features. Sit down and think about color combos, what is blooming where... Its entirely possible to design a pleasing "wild" landscape.
At least I think....WaPost link won't work.
@SeanF and HoodlumDoodlum, I'll cheerfully pay the neighbors for the work they put into their lawns as long as they pay me for the work I put into my lawn. I'm pretty sure I come out ahead on that deal.
Creeping red fescue is a good compromise
Tari; 12:05 PM
That's the place. Tax rolls have it at 0.964 acre. Google Map overheads match the pics at
http://maetaylorphotography.com/2015/07/13/grow-life-save-sarahs-garden/
Google Street View guy does not go there. About 3/8 mile from center of Alexandria. Neighbor immediately south owns 5 parcels totaling near 7.5 acres, keeps his place well mowed. Can't tell if he raises stock or farms any of it. Folks across the street are on very well kept half acre lots.
I like it.
It would be interesting to find out exactly where this house is and who's complaining. Wanna bet it isn't one of their direct neighbors?
From one article: "The township doesn’t actually have a specific ordinance that the Ohio couple are violating... neighbors have never even complained."
Hmm. Sounds like one person has their undies in a bunch.
Fifteen years ago I looked at a house on a 1/2 acre, narrow lot. The first three feet of the yard was scraggly grass, the rest was a combination of vegetable gardens and nature sanctuary. It was priced a little high for me.
The sister of a friend had 1 to 2 acres and mowed only 100 square feet or so.
BTW, it looks like the house is on Mounts Rd.
Where I live here in Texas a man or woman's yard is their yard and none if your business
That's your social compact. I wouldn't advise you to move to Greenwich, CT, buy a home, and leave disused farm equipment in an un-mowed yard though.
If she were of a mind to compromise, she could do it quickly, maybe replace those weeds right around the house with some hummingbird attracting flowers, or just some tiger lilies that will never need any attention again after planting. A small amount of gravel. Leave the back yard as it is. I am sure it would be all right. As it is, it just looks like they don't care about the house, which is what really drives down the value of the neighborhood.
I don't think it's a very libertarian thing to have a draft--it'd be more libertarian to pay people enough money to get them to fight.
Right, which is why any libertarian country will eventually and inevitably be over-run by non libertarians if they have any resources worth taking.
@HoodlumDoodlum: Thanks for addressing the nuisance issue. It may very well be that a use of property that causes rats and other pests to infest neighboring property could be bad enough to constitute a nuisance. On the other hand, where did the rats and other pests come from? They probably have been in the neighborhood all along, but in a lower concentration. The unkempt yard may be attracting them, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the neighbors are getting more pests -- they may be getting fewer! I live in an area with lots mostly in the 1/2 A to 1+ A range, with a fair amount of small woodlands. None of the lots are "ecosystemed" the way the Ohio folks have done. But we have lots of rabbits, squirrels, and deer, and occasional coyotes and foxes. The deer and rabbits are real pests if you want to have a garden. They are a nuisance.
But we have no one to blame.
Looks pretty unmanicured to me from above: http://tinyurl.com/ofj6d9b
Especially compared to the neighbors.
1) I want the State (and the neighborhood) to not care about long grass and field mice and birds eating them.
2) "For the health of the planet, and for our own health, we need to start letting nature dictate how we design our outdoor spaces" just makes me think that hippies should shut the hell up.
So, I want her to be able to do what she's doing even if I think her personal justifications are ridiculous.
(And contra Tim above, note that the United States currently has an all-volunteer army and a huge amount of resources.
How does that argue re. a libertarian country inevitably being overrun?
Remember that "libertarian" encompasses Hayek's minor welfare state as well as Rothbard's anarchism.)
I know Sarah! A lovely young woman, intelligent, friendly, artistic, hardworking, and sure, idealistic. I count that as one of her "positives".
I know her parents better -- the family owns Bakers Acres, my favorite nursery and garden center for many years. They are a close, hardworking family and are well regarded in their community.
I have not seen Sarah's house, which I understand was once owned by another family member -- but Alexandria is a tiny town, I guess it does boast one stoplight, and this article states she lives OUTSIDE of that town. Natural prairie yard shouldn't be a problem.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/08/05/lawn-fight.html
Post a Comment