The Gadfly is a series of letters offering commentary on local issues and published in the Warrensburg Gazette.

I’ve been following with interest the controversy over the wetland at the proposed Lowe’s site at the old sale barn. It seems that there’s a small spot that the law defines as a “wetland” there, and the law requires the developer to “mitigate” the destruction of that “wetland” by constructing a new one elsewhere. Lowe’s proposes to do so in Culp Park, along Southwest Drive just above Lion’s Lake. And that’s what creates the controversy.

Local preservationists say the proposed site is already an established “wetland” with a fairly stable ecosystem in place. I’m inclined to agree with them on this point. They further object to the types and design of the mitigation plantings, in which they may or may not have a valid point. They certainly could have picked a dryer area to create the new artificial swamp and bring mosquitoes to another area of town, but I expect any other choice would have involved considerably more expense to Lowe’s, and there’s the rub.

What we have here is a taking of private property for public use, without compensation. Think about it - when government fiat limits how you can the use your property when the proposed use does not threaten its neighbors or the community, shouldn’t the government pay compensation as required by the 5th Amendment?

Wetlands serve multiple purposes. One is to absorb excess runoff – kind of a natural flood-reduction scheme. In all the discussions, I’ve read nothing on how the development will protect the property of those located downstream. These people had problems once already when a field was replaced by the Applebee’s development, and Lowe’s large parking lot will speed runoff even more. But, I guess that’s not relevant; wetlands are more important than people.