Creating urban commons problems

If you weren't already familiar with the 9th Circuit ruling in City of Boise vs Martin, and you've been aghast at the stories coming out of San Francisco, you might want to read this LA Times piece by the Manhattan Institute's Stephen Eide. 

On Monday, the Supreme Court announced it would not review City of Boise vs. Martin, a 2018 ruling handed down by the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In Martin, the appeals court struck down prohibitions on sleeping and camping in public that the Idaho city had enacted to address homelessness. Boise’s ordinances did not pass constitutional muster, according to the 9th Circuit, because they inflicted “cruel and unusual punishment” on that city’s homeless population.

By allowing Martin to stand, the Supreme Court leaves local officials powerless to stop the expansion of homeless encampments. In many West Coast cities, the burgeoning number of tents have left sidewalks in some neighborhoods awash in trash, human waste and used needles and have led to outbreaks of infectious diseases such as hepatitis A and C and rodent infestations.

But as notorious as the homeless crises of Los Angeles and San Francisco are, the consequences of the Martin ruling are most ominous for cities like Boise.

It's well worth reading the whole thing. I hadn't known that New York is now spending over $3 billion annually on homeless services. 

In praise of exclusive access

One of my favourite Kiwi enviropreneurs is Elm Wildlife Tours down in Dunedin. I always recommend that folks visiting the Department book in with them if heading that way. Elm partnered with a local farmer whose land had Yellow-Eyed Penguin habitat: Elm gets exclusive access for its tour groups and works to improve the habitat. Making the resource excludable encourages conservation.

Now the Kiwi Federation of Freshwater Anglers complains of exclusive access deals on land surrounding some high country rivers with good fly fishing.

Kiwi anglers are being "locked out" of top fishing spots by businesses cutting expensive deals with private landowners, angry fishermen say.

In a growing number of "exclusive capture" deals, mostly in prime backcountry, "large sums" have been paid to landowners for the sole right to fish on their land, the New Zealand Federation of Freshwater Anglers says.

Rich foreigners and celebrities, including former United States president Jimmy Carter, actors Liam Neeson and Timothy Dalton, and former Australian prime minister Malcolm Fraser, pay thousands of dollars for guided helicopter fishing expeditions on New Zealand's most prized trout rivers.

But there are now fears more access will be lost to ordinary Kiwi fly fishermen – thought to number about 100,000.

I love the scaremongering about both rich people and foreigners.

The Government says the deals are the "legitimate right of a property owner" but it has asked the new Walking Access Commission to try to negotiate for open access "where there is access restricted".

Federation president Jim Hale said parts of rivers in the North Island and South Island had been captured by "unscrupulous commercial interests".

"It is practised by those who have captured these trout fishing waters for their own financial profiteering, even though the running water and the fish within them do not belong to them.

"We will fight this scourge wherever we find it, with whoever is involved, with all of the determination and resources at our disposal," Mr Hale said.

Compare the landowner's incentives to maintain and enhance habitat when such work brings greater access fees with those incentives when there's zero excludability.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the Federation to up its membership fees and maybe start paying for member access in deals that could enhance habitat protection?

Update: Also see HomePaddock.