Tulloch Rule (Wetlands)

Don Baccus dhogaza at pacifier.com
Wed Jan 20 15:15:32 EST 1999

In article <7811nc$2e8$1 at nnrp1.dejanews.com>,  <Langrrr at aol.com> wrote:
>In article <36a3d885.0 at news.pacifier.com>,
>  dhogaza at pacifier.com (Don Baccus) wrote:

>> And it was not ruled on as a 5th Amendments takings issue (which is
>> what I meant by describing it as not being a Constitutional property
>> rights case).

Is there something about my clarification above that Andrew doesn't


>But only someone with a limited knowlege (and thus view of the situation)
>would say that a challenge to a land-use regulation arising out of a
>situation such as this is not a Constitutional Property Rights case.

Because in my clarification I thought I was clear that I didn't
precisely define what I meant.   

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, at http://donb.photo.net

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list