# Dakota Grassland Conservation Area/Act Now



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Dakota Grassland Conservation Area Public Hearings and Comments

If you hunt in the Dakotas, you know how important wildlife habitat is to your experience and way of life. Today, you can stand up for this region you love and ensure the upland hunters and waterfowlers of tomorrow will enjoy the Dakotas as they should be - full of pheasants and ducks. Hunters and conservationists have a unique opportunity to help channel funding toward conserving wildlife habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region of North and South Dakota and eastern Montana. The Dakota Grassland Conservation Area initiative would increase funding for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conservation easements. This would help conserve critical upland and wetland habitat, including:
1.7 million grassland acres 
240,000 wetland acres 
How you can help!
Show support by coming and offering testimony at a public hearing:

Tuesday, June 28, 2011 
7-9PM 
Best Western-Doublewood Inn
1400 East Interchange Avenue
Bismarck, North Dakota

Wednesday, June 29, 2011 
7-9PM
Miller High School Lunch Room
623 East 4th Street
Miller, South Dakota

or

Email your comments about the proposed Dakota Grassland Conservation Area. [email protected] Example emails:

I am a hunter and understand the value of critical wildlife habitat. I am in full support of the Dakota Grasslands Conservation project. - John Q. Sample

I support accelerating conservation in the endangered ecosystem known as the Prairie Pothole Region. - John Q. Sample

For more information about this initiative:
Dakota Grassland Conservation Area Land Protection Plan


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Dick,

I was at the meeting in Bismarck. Didn't see you there. Lloyd Jones, Mike Donahue and Craig Larson were. I spoke out against this boondoggle of government waste. So did most people present. I brought up the $900 million that dingy Harry Reid got in the lame duck session for the Land, Water and Conservation Fund. The USFWS wants $588 million dollars of that money to fund the Dakota Grasslands Proposal. The money is coming from the US General Fund.

Think about it, the federal government spends a dollar forty for every dollar it takes in. The 40 cents is borrowed from China at interest. Everybody wants clean water clean air and to leave the land to the next generation in better shape then we found it. However, we have a fiscal responsibilty to them also. Saddleing our children with trillions of dollars of debt is wrong.

Anyway, the freshman representatives defunded dingy harrys bill in February 2011 with HR 1. It was one of the very first cuts. All this begs the question Dick,

If the LWCF has been defunded, then why is the USFWS going forward with public forums and comments when they don't have the money?

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/pressrel/11-46.html

On that webpage I thought this link below was of interest.

(http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/pla ... g/dkg.html).

Check out this paragragh.



> Conservation easement contracts would specify perpetual protection of habitat for trust species and limits on residential, industrial, or commercial development. Contracts would prohibit alteration of the natural topography, conversion of native grassland to cropland, drainage of wetland, and establishment of game farms.


GEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZ

.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

It would be some of the best money spent that I can think of.

Farm Bureau opposes the concept of course: http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id ... sher_ID/1/

" But due to the "perpetual" nature of the easements, the Farm Bureau doesn't support the proposal, said Sandy Clark, the group's public policy director.

"They are simply too long," she said. "We think (the easements) should be just one generation (20 years). * Perpetual easements tie the hands of future generations - you can't use the property as you see fit."* "

Now you just can't beat reasoning like that. They are saying they want to block current owners from using the land as they see fit so it won't block future owners from using the land as they see fit. :rollin:

Email your comments about the proposed Dakota Grassland Conservation Area. [email protected]


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Dick wrote,



> It would be some of the best money spent that I can think of.


Perpetual Easements vs. Perpetual Debt

Right now the mood of the public is ??????????????????????????????


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

The debt arguement might have a good home on the political forum; spending versus taxes, etc.

The deadline for comments is July 25th. Email your comments about the proposed Dakota Grassland Conservation Area. [email protected]


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

Goehring critical of studies for grassland conservation area
BISMARCK, N.D. - Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring says a draft environmental assessment (EA) and draft land protection plan (LPP) for the proposed Dakota Grassland Conservation Area (DGCA) show a marked bias against agriculture and rely on outdated information.

Bismarck, N.D. - Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring says a draft environmental assessment (EA) and draft land protection plan (LPP) for the proposed Dakota Grassland Conservation Area (DGCA) show a marked bias against agriculture and rely on outdated information.

"The statements made against agriculture are troublesome," Goehring said in a letter to the Division of Refuge Planning of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). "I believe these statements are biased, and the documents fail to recognize agriculture's many benefits to wildlife."

Goehring pointed to a statement in the EA draft that claimed "grassland conversion rates will undoubtedly accelerate with increasing prices for cereal grains and low cattle numbers."

"Crop prices have risen in the recent past, however, farmers and ranchers make a living based on profit margins," Goehring said. "Input costs for agriculture have risen at a similar rate as commodity prices, squeezing out any large profit margin."

Goehring said the draft EA recognizes that the beef cowherd declined 11.3 percent from 1996 to 2010, but failed to mention that beef cow carcass weight has increased by 8.6 percent in that period, consequently requiring more pasture to produce a cow-calf pair.

Goehring said the research and studies used in the drafts are outdated and should be ignored.

"For example, the draft EA relies on 1985 and 1988 studies that claim some duck species avoid nesting in cropland, and nesting success in cropland is not sufficient to sustain population," he said. "Production practices have changed greatly since then. We now use conservation production practices like no-till and minimum-till which leave more residue on the land."

Goehring also pointed to the use of a 20-year-old study on the effects of pesticides on wildlife.

"That study mentions the impact of carbofuran on ducks and geese, but the EPA virtually banned the use of carbofuran in most crop production in 2009," he said. "It is a non-issue."

Goehring said USFWS's own 2011 Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat Survey showing the second highest number of ducks since 1955 completely refutes the federal agency's argument that agriculture has had a negative impact to waterfowl production.

The commissioner said USFWS should look at short-term agreements with landowners for wildlife conservations purposes.

"We are borrowing this land from future generations, our children, and we should not tie their hands through perpetual easements," he said. "Perpetual easements emplace barriers and restrictions that do not allow the agriculture community to adapt to the needs of society when it comes to the production of food, feed, and fiber."

The Dakota Grasslands Conservation Area would take $588 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to buy easements on more than 240,000 acres of wetlands and 1.7 million acres of privately-owned grasslands in North Dakota, South Dakota, and eastern Montana.


----------

