Tax Incentives and Social Equity – Texas Senate Bill 449, 2011 legislative session

In the 2011 legislative session the Texas Senate passed SB 449, which allowed a continuation of agricultural tax appraisal values to open land which benefits both water quality and quantity.  Essentially, this is a continuation of HB 1358 (1995) which allowed land managed for wildlife to receive the same agricultural appraisal value as cropland. 

I’m sure environmentalists and conservations consider this a legislative victory.  I have to admit, I do too.  But this blog post is interested in assuming an entirely different perspective: that of social equity. 

Increasingly landowners in Texas are wealthy individuals who no longer rely on the land to earn a living.  Many are absentee landowners who possess weekend “ranches” or hunting property.  Others are land speculators who are buying rural property as an investment.  I do not have the evidence at this time, but I hypothesize that as a whole, this is the group largely benefitting from both of these tax code adjustments.  Again, in regards to biodiversity conservation, this is a boon.  These landholders no longer have the incentive to ranch cattle simply to receive an ag exemption.  Is this not a good thing?  And what does it have to do with social equity?

The tax breaks that these already wealthy landowners are receiving are coming directly from county tax revenues.  Generally, these revenues are used to pay for maintenance of the commons ie roads, infrastructure, etc.  If less tax revenue is coming in to benefit the commons and instead is being retained by wealthy landowners, are non-landholding county citizens and small-holders not left indirectly subsidizing the wealthy?   Is this really the most equitable way to conserve biodiversity? 

Taking a broad-view, this argument sounds awfully similar to those voiced by the Occupy Wall-street protesters:  essentially, it can be argued that the public is subsidizing the wealthy, for the benefit of the wealthy alone, in this case too.   

Bottom-up Conservation Management, Even in Texas -- (TPWD 2004)

In struggling to find an example of biodiversity conservation techniques on private property here in Texas (as opposed to Europe, which is arguably much farther along in this matter), I ran across this little revelation of a report from Texas Parks and Wildlife. 

According to the report, Texas currently has Wildlife Management Associations (WMAs) established throughout the state.  These WMAs are categorized into 5 separate zones, with the zones being loosely based upon distinct Texas Ecoregions.  Organized, maintained and expanded almost entirely by citizens interested in wildlife management, essentially, WMAs are self-organized networks established to sustain a commonly valued natural resource. 

In other words, what I stumbled upon was a “community” of concerned private landholders who have organized to a foster the progression of a common goal; a true bottom-up governance entity with both established formal and informal mechanisms of control.

In terms of my research, incorporating aspects and local knowledge of WMA members could provide tremendous insights into local conservation networks.

Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of all, this all occurred in Texas! 

TPWD. 2004. A Guide for Wildlife Management Associations and Co-ops. edited by Texas Parks and Wildlife.