What values and conflicts are created when a law prevents a landowner from doing what he wants with his land?The original question was: kansas a...

I have tried to edit your question to make it clearer.  I
suggest that when you have long questions you should put the full question in the second
box with a short summary in the main question box.

The
major conflict at play in this scenario is between an individual's right to do as they
wish with their own property and the state's right to make laws that will benefit the
whole of society.  The state believes that it is important to maintain some amount of
natural environment.  Perhaps this is for purposes of maintaining native species or
perhaps it is for something more pragmatic like controlling erosion.  Either way, it is
something that the democratically elected state government believes is in the public
interest.

On the other hand, you have the right of the
landowner to do as he wishes with his property.  This is a fundamental right that is
protected by such things as the 5th Amendment ban on uncompensated "takings" by the
government.  There is a strong feeling among many conservative Americans that government
policies about land use constitute illegal "takings."

This
scenario presents one of the fundamental conflicts that arise in US society--the
conflict between governmental attempts to protect the public interest on the one hand
and individual rights on the other.