Prairie Dog Plans Pose Dangers

In October, Ric Frost, policy analyst from the New Mexico State University Cooperative Extension Service, addressed the South Dakota Annual Stockgrower’s Convention. Frost spoke about proposed prairie dog protection plans -- for a species that numbers in the millions -- and the loss of private lands and rights that such plans could occasion. While such ‘protection’ often has dramatic, negative impacts on lands and people, he noted, it seldom helps the targeted species. For instance, out of all the species listed under the Endangered Species Act, only two have been upgraded due to efforts relating to the ESA -- in 25 years! And some listings have very detrimental affects, such as the alarming buildup of timber in New Mexico due to Spotted Owl ‘protection’.
It’s important to ask the right questions, Frost advised. "’What are the impacts to private land owners? What will be the social, cultural, and economic impacts resulting from prairie dog habitat restrictions? Does valid biology justify and support the listing at any level? What is the intended long-range outcome from listing prairie dogs? According to whom?’ Always find out," he warned, "who introduced the law or program, who will gain, and who imparts the information."

"Once conservation easements are in place) we can impose habitat restrictions for wildlife thus ending grazing and other agricultural practices." -New Mexico Wilderness Alliance meeting

Frost added that the government and environmentalists are looking at acquiring Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances (CCAA) to ‘protect’ prairie dog habitat. "Environmentalists keep taking rights away by taking one stick at a time from the bundle of rights -- and then breaking it," he observed. "One of their methods is through Conservation Easements (CEs), which permanently affixes agriculture tax rates, meaning that the county then has to raise other property taxes to provide services. In addition, CEs are the key to the extremist ‘Wildlands Project’, which would place at least 50% of the country off-limits to humans."

"Move out the people and cars. Reclaim the roads and the plowed lands." -Dave Foreman, now Sierra Club board member

Since conservation easements are often given up for financial reasons,, Frost urged attendees to consider other options, such as forming limited liability companies or corporations, to soften tax impacts and limit third-party management. The environmentalists have developed a good line, he added, quoting Dave Foreman (Earth First! founder, now Sierra Club board member): "If we identify a ranch... and we feel it will be necessary as a corridor, we can say to the rancher, ‘We don’t want you to give up your ranch now, but let us put a conservation easement on it. Let’s work out the tax details so you can donate it in your will...’"
Recent studies show that the majority of lands with conservation easements do not remain in agriculture and instead become untaxed ‘open space’ in the hands of government. To expose the radicals’ agenda, Frost quoted Foreman again: "The only hope of the Earth is to withdraw huge areas as inviolate natural sanctuaries from the depredations of modern industry and technology. Move out the people and cars. Reclaim the roads and the plowed lands" (emphasis added); and a New Mexico Wilderness Alliance meeting: "Conservation easements are the key to the corridors. Once the easements are legally in place, we can impose habitat restrictions for wildlife thus ending grazing and other agricultural practices. If the landowner refuses, the easement management loophole will allow us to sue the landowner and impose those restrictions."

CEs Reduce Values, Loans

And sue they do. "The Violation Study" noted that the average cost per case is $35,000, with a range of $5,000 to $100,000, and that only one landowner in 498 ‘violations’ has won in court -- but that landowner still had to pay the land trust expenses.
Conservation easements are very dangerous instruments, Frost warned. The title becomes split with the easement holder, and the landowner gives up control of all easement property perpetually (forever!). The easement holder and future easement holder can change management practices at any time, ranging from forbidding the use of standard agricultural practices to even allowing development. A conservation easement often reduces the property value, and financial institutions often decline to loan money on a split title.
If a state develops prairie dog management plan, its priority should be to protect private property rights, he advised. The plan should specify that all provisions are subject to valid existing rights, that there will be no introductions or reintroductions on private property, and that no private property can be taken without due process and just compensation.

(Posted By: Angie Many | 27th April 2002 | 10:59:06 PM. )