"We believe every human being is endowed by our Creator with inherent rights to life, liberty and property," the Alabama Republican Party platform states.
Defending property rights is a distinctly conservative pillar. Property ownership separates free citizens from the oppression of totalitarian regimes – whether socialist, fascist or technocratic.
Yet, in the great state of Alabama – predominantly Republican – we face a direct denial of property rights. This despite the declaration in Article I, Section 35 of the Alabama Constitution:
"That the sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression."
Unfortunately, property rights remain under attack.
On May 20, 2025, the Institute for Justice filed a lawsuit against the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR), challenging the constitutionality of the "Open Fields Doctrine." The ADCNR uses this doctrine to justify warrantless trespass by game wardens onto private land.
These warrantless invasions allow state agents to enter private property – whenever and wherever they choose – without any judicial oversight. This is a clear violation of the foundational principle of property rights.
The ADCNR’s overreach doesn't stop there. During the most recent legislative session, it vehemently opposed HB509, which was designed to protect the rights of deer and elk farmers. In an official statement, the agency claimed the bill would harm hunting traditions. In truth, what they aimed to protect was their funding. Fortunately, common sense prevailed, and HB509 was passed and signed into law.
Dr. Chris Seabury’s research shows that breeding for genetic resistance of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) is a more effective and sustainable approach. The ADCNR’s actions – killing privately owned deer and attacking deer farmers – will only prolong the CWD problem while securing ongoing funding for the agency.
So why is the ADCNR consistently hostile to private property rights?
Because the legal foundation they stand on is flimsy. Agencies like ADCNR and their allies in the conservation lobby cite the Public Trust Doctrine (PTD) as justification. Under this doctrine, wildlife is declared res communes – a common resource held in trust by the government. This concept stems from Roman law.
However, historically, Roman law originally categorized wildlife as res nullius – belonging to no one until captured. It wasn’t until the late 20th century that progressives like Gary Meyers argued that the PTD should expand to include wildlife.
With the PTD’s historical grounding in question, advocates turn to Geer v. Connecticut, a 1896 Supreme Court case that supported state control of wildlife. But Geer was explicitly overruled in 1979 by Hughes v. Oklahoma, undermining the legal foundation conservationists rely upon.
“It really goes against the heart of the Public Trust Doctrine,” opponents of HB509, like Daniel Greene of The Wildlife Society, argue. “In our system of wildlife management, individuals or corporations can’t own wildlife.”
But is the PTD consistent with Alabamian values?
The roots of modern conservation trace back to President Theodore Roosevelt, who created 230 million acres of public land, including 150 national forests. Roosevelt also openly opposed unrestricted private property rights. “[E]very man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require it,” he infamously said in a 1910 speech.
This philosophy is progressive at best, socialist at worst – and its legacy is alive in Alabama’s current conservation policies.
Legally, the Public Trust Doctrine is shaky. Historically, it was promoted by progressives who distrusted private ownership. Is there not a better approach – one consistent with Alabama’s constitutional mandate to protect life, liberty and property?
If we value a free society, the ADCNR must change course. The Open Fields Doctrine must be struck down. The overregulation of deer and elk farmers must stop.
Farmers raising wildlife should be regulated by the Department of Agriculture, not by a conservation agency operating like a policing force. And most importantly, these animals should be considered private property – not state assets.
With the 2026 gubernatorial election approaching, change is possible. The next governor must appoint a liberty-minded director to lead ADCNR – someone committed to property rights and individual freedom – because property rights are not negotiable. Without them, liberty is an illusion.
And we must go further. Property rights and property taxes cannot coexist. You cannot claim to own your land while the state holds a lien on it year after year.
To secure our liberty and ensure the survival of a free society, we must abolish property tax – and reclaim the God-given rights our Constitution promises to protect.
Dr. James Kring is a homeschool father, homesteader, farmer, and resident of Tallapoosa County.
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of 1819 News. To comment, please send an email with your name and contact information to [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
