Download Presentation by Ron Klataske, Executive Director, Audubon of

Presentation by Ron Klataske,
Executive Director, Audubon of Kansas
to the Kansas House of Representatives, Committee on
Agriculture and Natural Resources
Regarding Senate Bill 276
March 12, 2014
Madam Chair and members of the Committee, I thank you for the opportunity to
share the perspective of Audubon of Kansas and approximately 5,000 members
statewide involved in eight local Audubon chapters and in other capacities.
Audubon of Kansas is an independent membership organization devoted to
promoting the enjoyment, understanding, protection and restoration of natural
ecosystems. We seek to establish a culture of conservation and an
environmental ethic. In this capacity we work in partnership with other
organizations and individuals representing many additional thousands of
conservation partners throughout the state and country.
We strongly oppose Senate Bill 276 for a number of reasons. Most concerning,
SB 276 is a poison pill that would accomplish nothing positive for conservation of
Lesser Prairie-chickens or other wildlife, while destroying the many conservation
partnerships between federal agencies working with the State of Kansas,
landowners and other stakeholders. The federal government actually invests far
more in on-the-ground conservation programs in Kansas than do agencies of the
State of Kansas—making it obvious that the state cannot do the job alone.
Federal investments include approximately $12 million annually in funds
administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) provided to the
Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism. In addition, USFWS
manages four national wildlife refuges in Kansas (including Quivira NWR which is
the state’s flagship destination for nature-based tourism), assists in law
enforcement and with many other programs. The financial investment in
conservation and environmental incentives gets much larger with the U.S.D.A.,
including $95 million in annual payments to landowners and operators for the 2.3
million acres enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program. CRP applications in
the areas of the state where Prairie-chicken conservation is a mutual
conservation concern have received priority for environmental index points for
general field signup, and in recent years tens of thousands of special CRP
acreage has been funded in Kansas designed to assist with recovery of Lesser
Prairie-chickens. Unfortunately, the benefit of that habitat took a double hit in
recent years with the drought followed by emergency haying and grazing.
Other programs, the Wetlands Reserve Program, Grassland Reserve Program,
Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program, along with the Environmental Quality
Incentive Program (EQIP), are financed with general revenue funds at the federal
level. Approximately $26 million in EQIP funding was expended in Kansas in
2013. KDWPT received $3 million in 2011-2012 from a federal grant program to
finance agreements with landowners who provide Walk-In Hunting opportunities
and for fishing access.
Individuals, special interest groups, and politicians who are suggesting that
Senate Bill 276 would be helpful in any way to the State of Kansas are mistaken.
Their strategy is simply destructive.
It would undermine the ongoing work of state agencies in implementation of the
five-state regional recovery plan for the Lesser Prairie-chicken. It would
undermine the initiative of private companies in five states that have now enrolled
more than 2.5 million acres in the Lesser Prairie-Chicken Range Wide
Conservation Plan. They represent companies involved in oil and gas operations,
pipelines, electric transmission and wind energy, and they have pledged nearly
$15 million for habitat conservation over the next three years.
Ironically, Senate Bill 276 would make it more likely that the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service would conclude, or even be required by the courts, to list the
Lesser Prairie-chicken as a federally threatened species. Additionally, it is
obvious to legal scholars that Senate Bill 276 would never survive a legal
challenge. Thus, in all respects it is a lose-lose proposition.
Our focus should be on working together to provide suitable habitat with the
many programs available to recover Lesser Prairie-chicken populations so they
will not remain a threatened species. Regardless of whether the species is
federally listed or not, it is in reality currently a biologically threatened species.
Opposition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s work to recovery threatened
and endangered species has been “organized” and facilitated by an out-of-state
entity that has made this into a for-profit enterprise. The worst aspect about it is
that the tactics used are designed to convince county commissioners,
landowners and others that the sky will fall if the Lesser Prairie-chicken is listed
as a threatened species. The sky won’t fall, but those opponents will get funding
from counties and others, and work to simply tie the agencies up in endless
harassing challenges. I am enclosing a news article that represents the tip of the
iceberg of the misleading claims.
While simply getting rid of all the imperiled species may be the conclusion of one
person quoted, it is not a suitable approach for the Kansas Legislature or the
State of Kansas.