Environmental Land Trust irks Nebraska Cattlemen

Ranchers need land for financing and growth, Environmental Trust is acquiring properties that ranchers may not use; ranchers favor using easements for conservation efforts; bankers wont loan money on nice sunsets and pretty flowers WORLD-HERALD September 6, 2005 The Nebraska Cattlemen have called for an end to the Nebraska Environmental Trust's land-purchasing partnerships with nonprofit groups. Conservationists say doing so would hinder preservation of natural habitat. The cattlemen's group has approved a resolution advocating a change in state law so that Environmental Trust funds for land purchases would be available only to government entities, said Craig Utter, a Sand Hills rancher. Utter heads a cattlemen task force studying the trust's land practices. The Environmental Trust was created in 1992. It uses lottery money to protect natural resources. Public-private partnerships and land conservation are included in its legislative mandate. The other major player using state money to buy land is the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, which spent about $12 million on land from 1994 to 2004, said Rex Amack, director. During its first 10 years, from 1994 to 2004, the trust awarded about 20 percent of its grants, $15.5 million, for land acquisition and easements. About 45,000 acres were set aside. Most of the money was funneled through groups such as the Audubon Society, Ducks Unlimited and the Nature Conservancy. The groups have bought prairie near Lincoln, wetlands in the Rainwater Basin and ranch land in the Sand Hills. Utter said the competition for land worries ranchers. "It's not that we're targeting nonprofits, or that we think they're bad," he said. "There are other alternatives. We want to move away from acquisition as the primary source of land conservation." Scottsbluff banker Hod Kosman said the trust had been essential to conserving land. Kosman heads a Panhandle group that has used about $2 million in trust money to buy habitat along the North Platte River. "Protecting significant areas of wild resources would essentially come to an end without the Environmental Trust," he said. Utter's task force is studying the trust to learn more about it, to improve communication between the groups and to address conflicting Cattlemen policies. The resolution concerning the trust isn't compatible with previous Cattlemen policy opposing the use of government money to buy land. The task force is expected to report its findings at the Cattlemen's annual meeting in December. Whatever it concludes, Utter and Michael Kelsey, executive vice president, said they anticipate the organization will remain opposed to use of trust funds for land purchases by nonprofit groups. Utter said the Cattlemen also want to encourage Game and Parks and groups such as the Nature Conservancy to move away from land purchases. The issue goes beyond whose name is on a deed, he said. Land ownership is the lifeblood of rural communities. Without families on the land, there aren't children in the schools or people to support merchants in small towns. Land ownership also provides the equity ranchers need to borrow money. Utter said competition for land drives up the cost and makes it tougher for young ranchers to get started. So far, he has not found an instance when the Trust has contributed to the problem. Rather, he said, the Cattlemen want to head off problems. "Anytime you have competition in the marketplace, things are more difficult," he said.Conservationists say the purchases are no threat because the amount of land involved is miniscule. Grants from the Environmental Trust have been used to buy less than 0.08 percent of the state's land. Vince Shay of the Nature Conservancy said land acquisition is sometimes the best answer for protecting the biological diversity of a piece of land. "It helps us influence management decisions in key locations," he said. "If we want to protect the ecological integrity of an area such as the Central Platte, we need to do it." Kosman said land should be purchased now for preservation, before encroaching development makes it unaffordable. "Time is of the essence," he said. Utter sees it differently. Because the vast majority of Nebraska land is privately owned, he said, it makes the most sense to partner with landowners. "We're not out to stop conservation. Cattlemen are concerned about conservation and natural resources. It's very much part of our lifeblood," he said. Utter said easements and partnerships are better tools. Through easements, conservation organizations pay a landowner to restrict use of his land, with the restriction attached to the deed. Partnerships also leave land in private hands, while providing public money to rehabilitate the land. Kosman said the cattlemen's group needs to be taken seriously. "If organizations like the Cattlemen perceive that we're doing things that aren't in the best interest of the state, through the Environmental Trust, then that's really important," he said. The trust, too, is evaluating its land policies. In interviews, three members of the 14-person trust board said they believe it's important to partner with private groups to buy land. Amack, Robert Ravenscroft, a former rancher, and Barbara Batie, a farmer, said the state gets more for its money because the groups attract additional grants. They also take responsibility for the land. Ravenscroft and Batie are members of the Cattlemen. Ravenscroft said the two groups can come to a consensus. "I don't see this as something that should evolve into a big fight," he said. "This is something we'll work out