 |
|
Isn't that the Court of Appeals ruling?
Posted on: November 27, 2018 at 20:38:38 CT
ScottsdaleTiger MU
Posts:
12749
Member For:
26.24 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
Essentially, the Court of Appeals ruled the land became habitat and that limited what the owners could do on it, both the land inhabited by the frogs at the time of the ruling (the LA land) and the land which the frogs might migrate to over time (the Miss. land).
What's the point of designating land habitat if that designation doesn't restrict the owner's ability to use the land in some fashion?
What's the point of designating land habitat if that designation doesn't restrict the owner's ability to use the land in some fashion?
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Isn't that the Court of Appeals ruling? - ScottsdaleTiger MU - 11/27 20:38:38
-