Property rights and kangaroos

This week, we learned there are kangaroos among us.
A Lee County resident said she has permits and required documentation to keep the animals that would likely be considered exotic to Iowa. Theresa Potter is known for having horses and other livestock and animals on her property. She’s also known for bringing complaints to local law enforcement and Lee County Supervisors over the past several years about efforts to endanger those animals.
According to Iowa Code 717F, kangaroos aren’t listed among animals that are considered wild and dangerous in the state. However, permitting requires strict control measures and standards of care.
When Buddy was returned to Potter, a post from the Lee County Sheriff’s office on social media indicated that no citations were issued in the matter. To any outside observer, that would indicate Potter is living up to the standards of care required under the permit.
So that would beg the question of how the animal got out of containment. Potter told me that kangaroo was about a year old and not full grown. She’s hoping to use the animals as comfort animals for youngsters with autism.
Where those plans are at is the purview of Potter as long as she has custody of the exotic animals according to regulations.
Potter said the fence was a 10 foot enclosure and her other animals weren’t able to get out, which could suggest the smaller roo was able to get through a gap that the others weren’t. Potter fears, but stopped short of saying, someone sabotaged the enclosure, but said she has taken steps to gather evidence of wrong doing on and around her property.
Potter said she believes there have been efforts underway to endanger her livestock to include the horses and kangaroos by people in the area and has expressed concerns to the sheriff’s office.
One could certainly see the unorthodox nature of what’s happening on the property, but the only guiding principles are state, local, and federal controls. If Potter is abiding by those controls, then she has the right to engage in whatever commerce or livelihood she chooses.
To that end, she also deserves the right to privacy for those engagements. She said it appeared the damage that caused the gap in the perimeter that allowed the kangaroo to escape was done intentionally. If that’s the case, it deserves investigation, as does the legitimacy of her other complaints of destruction of property.
Throughout time, neighbors have had squabbles. People aren’t without fail or sin, but it’s our inalienable right to be left to peace of property. It’s simply against the law to disrupt someone else’s quality of life by infringing on their property and damaging assets or putting assets in jeopardy.
We had a little fun with the incident because of its unique nature to Lee County. It's no different than when a cow gets out of confinement and shows up in neighborhoods, which happened when I was a reporter in Columbus, Neb. We headlined it "Beef on the lamb". The cow was eventually tranquilized and returned to its owner. But a coordinated response of law enforcement, and ag science people, including veterinarians, worked together to resolve the situation. In that case, it was a damaged fence.
The point here is, despite the levity of the situation, people have an inherent right to privacy and livelihood. When that is infringed upon for whatever reason, it lands in the jurisdiction of law enforcement to whatever degree is required to preserve the peace and secure property.
We dabbled in another property privacy issue earlier this week in reporting on the earth moving that’s taking place on Burlington Hill.
We made a clear point that the property currently owned by Dustin Wolgemuth isn’t in city limits so the has county oversight, but the county currently has no permitting or zoning for the area, so Wolgemuth can do what he wants with that property. We would continue to advocate for that because there is nothing in place to regulate activity. In writing the story, we heard from multiple readers that the situation deserves monitoring, but also Wolgemuth has rights.
That’s right on both counts. Without regulation or zoning specific to whatever is taking place, and at this point it doesn’t matter what the intention is, Wolgemuth can do whatever he wants with the property he rightfully owns. On the other hand, with the portion of property close to other properties that are within city limits, what happens on that property is certainly a legitimate concern of those abutting the property, as well as other property owners who could be impacted by the development.
The county has hinted at a moratorium on any data center construction because of large-scale plans for Green Bay bottoms that have yet to be discussed publicly. Rumors have indicated that Wolgemuth may be looking at a smaller data center or mining center and that would likely be rolled up into any future zoning, but he could have a legal argument that his project was underway prior to any implementation.
Both issues are worth watching as they will give a good picture of the mechanism that is county government.  To these property owners that now are in a fish bowl – that could be Beside the Point.
Chuck Vandenberg is editor and co-owner of Pen City Current and can be reached at Charles.V@PenCityCurrent.com.