Fincher, "The will of the people prevailed over big government"

Press Release

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS) yesterday announced they have decided to table their proposal to expand the acquisition boundaries of Chickasaw and Lower Hatchie National Wildlife Refuges into each refuge's neighboring bottomlands. Their decision comes on the heels of yearlong, ongoing discussions with Congressman Fincher's office and constituents, including a Congressional oversight hearing.

"It's a great relief that the Fish and Wildlife Services have backed away from the Chickasaw and Lower Hatchie National Wildlife Refuges," said Congressman Fincher. "This is a major victory not only for West Tennessee, but for those fighting big government power-grabs across the country, proving that the will of the people comes before the federal government."

Fincher continued, "I had significant concerns that FWS would not be able to keep their promise that folks would be appropriately compensated for the loss of profitable, privately owned farmland. Now private landowners in Dyer, Lauderdale, Tipton and Haywood counties can rest easy and continue to care for their land as they have for generations."

BACKGROUND

In December 2012, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service proposed expanding the Chickasaw and Lower Hatchie National Wildlife Refuges into each refuge's neighboring bottomlands. This expansion would result in the federal government purchasing 120,000 acres -- over 1,000 privately owned parcels along 49 miles of the Mississippi River and 106 miles of the Hatchie River, making this the largest refuge west of the Mississippi, impacting our crop production, tax base, freedom of land use and people's way of life.

Specifically, the purchase program would have a negative impact on the tax rolls of already economically depressed counties, and cause a checkerboard of federal and privately owned lands. Currently, FWS is paying counties in the expansion area 24% of what they have been promised as compensation for loss of tax revenue.

Additionally, this would cause citizens who own "holdout parcels" to be subject to possible wildlife protection enforcement actions, or compelled to significantly alter agricultural business practices on their land. Private landowners who cannot afford to comply may find themselves passively forced into selling their land to the federal government.

Source