The
Governance Committee of the Platte River Cooperative Agreement
Land
Issues
Under
the Cooperative Agreement, a proposed basin-wide Program to benefit
endangered species is being developed and refined. If adopted as
proposed, the Program will be implemented in phases and will include
development of land for habitat (see "Program
Components: How the Agreement and Program Work").
Q: How much more land is needed for the proposed Program?
A:
The first increment (first 10 to 13 years of the proposed Program)
goal is 10,000 acres of suitable habitat between Lexington and Chapman,
Nebraska. Nebraska Public Power District owns 2,650 acres as required
in its new hydro license, and several other smaller parcels have
been acquired by others to satisfy regulatory requirements, so about
7,000 more acres will be needed during the first increment.
The
current long-term goal is 29,000 acres of habitat land between Lexington
and Chapman. That goal is subject to change because of new research
and management techniques developed in the first increment. The
10,000 acres from the first increment and 10,000 acres or more now
managed by environmental organizations and state or federal agencies
may count toward the 29,000 total acres. At least 3,000 acres of
the Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District’s
recent acquisition of Jeffrey Island near Lexington will likely
count toward the second increment goal as well. So after the first
increment, about 6,000 additional acres will likely be needed to
meet the long-term goal.
Q:
How would existing habitat lands be credited toward Program goals?
A:
Land that the Program does not buy, lease or have an easement to
protect will be credited if it meets the Program’s definition
of suitable habitat and if it is “rededicated” to the
Program (managed by or in coordination with the Program). Within
the Lexington-to-Chapman reach of the Platte River, environmental
groups such as the Nature Conservancy, the Audubon Society and the
Platte River Whooping Crane Critical Habitat Maintenance Trust,
and the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission currently own about 13,000
acres. At least three-quarters of these acres, and perhaps more,
are likely to be considered suitable for the Program. The environmental
groups are committed to offering their lands for rededication to
the Program at the end of the first increment.
Q:
What kind of land is wanted?
A:
The Program as proposed will generally be interested in land with
wide, shallow river channel below Lexington and above Chapman. Other
related selection criteria are still in development, but the focus
is on larger parcels or combinations of parcels, those with land
on both sides of the river channel, lands which are or could be
managed as wet meadows, or lands adjacent to lands managed by the
Nebraska Game and Parks Commission or environmental organizations.
Other factors include price, features that make the parcel relatively
easy to develop as suitable habitat and a goal of distributing habitat
from Lexington to Chapman. The starting point -- subject to adaptive
management -- is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS)
current definition of an ideal “habitat complex,” i.e.,
at least 2,000 acres, including at least two miles of river channel.
Q:
Will condemnation be used to acquire habitat lands?
A:
No. The participants in the Cooperative Agreement have agreed that
condemnation will NEVER be used. Habitat lands will be acquired
ONLY from WILLING sellers or lessors.
Q:
Will participation in a lease or easement lead to condemnation of
lands at some time in the future?
A:
No. The signatories agreed that condemning land was unacceptable.
A change in that position is essentially impossible because it would
take a nine to one vote in the Governance Committee and the State
of Nebraska could veto the change. If the Governance Committee decided
it wanted to own lands it had been leasing or using under an easement,
the underlying owners of Program lands could not be forced to sell.
If that meant some lands were no longer Program lands, the Program
would have to find other lands. That means that the Governance Committee
would be taking on some risk if it decides to use leases or easements
in the first place -- the risk of spending money developing habitat
land that would later leave the Program.
Q:
How would habitat lands be developed?
A:
The current concept -- subject to revision through the Program as
experience grows -- is designed to fit the FWS’s current definition
of an ideal habitat complex. Actual parcels of land rarely match
an ideal and complex development plans will vary according to individual
geographic features. Generally, trees and other large vegetation
would be cleared from near the channel and some areas would be constructed
with bare sand nesting habitat for terns and plovers. Around the
closely managed channel area would be quarter-mile-wide protected
areas on each side where human activities would be controlled to
avoid disturbing endangered species roosting or nesting in the channel
area. All acres in such a habitat complex would count toward the
habitat acquisition goals of the Program, but only a small portion
would be closely managed as bare sand habitat.
Q:
Would recreational and other use of the habitat lands be permitted?
A:
The proposed Program would not require that habitat lands become
full-time bird or wildlife refuges, but some human activities are
clearly not compatible with Program use of the lands, such as driving
all-terrain vehicles through the channel when endangered species
may be present. Others, such as grazing cattle, maintaining blinds
for bird watchers and hunting when endangered species are not in
the area, may be acceptable, at least to some extent, when coordinated
with the habitat manager. Details will be developed as part of determining
whether to buy or lease new parcels of land and how to manage lands
acquired or rededicated to the Program.
Q:
Who would manage the habitat lands for the Program?
A:
The answer to this question is still being discussed. A subcommittee
of the Land Committee is exploring options to hold land acquired
by the Program and to manage or coordinate management of all lands
counting toward Program goals. (Habitat lands “rededicated”
to the Program by conservation groups and others will possibly stay
in the hands of current owners, but be developed and managed in
coordination with the Program. For example, land owned by the Nebraska
Public Power District and the Central Nebraska Public Power and
Irrigation District must remain in their control to satisfy their
hydroelectric licenses.)
Local
representation is a key issue. The task is complicated because Program
funds originating in state or federal agencies are subject to stringent
regulations on accountability which require them to retain some
degree of control. In addition, Nebraska state law places restrictions
on the types of entities that may own farmland. This is a very complex
question to resolve. The land entity sub-committee commissioned
a study to examine the pros and cons of various kinds of land trusts
and independent management enterprises. A workshop with Governance
Committee representatives is planned on these issues in the near
future.
Q:
Would property taxes be paid on Program lands?
A:
The proposed Program states that, as it acquires interests in land,
it is to avoid shifting tax burdens to adjacent landowners or communities.
The Governance Committee adopted a policy stating that taxes or
equivalent amounts will be paid on land acquired for Program purposes.
The questions of whether a Program might affect land classifications
and values and consequent tax assessments are being examined in
a third-party impact study.
Q:
How will the proposed Program consider the impacts on nearby private
property owners and the surrounding communities?
A:
The Governance Committee has ordered an independent study of the
third-party impacts of the proposed Program’s land component.
The Department of the Interior is also required to evaluate third-party
impacts (negative and positive) as part of its required environmental
reviews. The Land Committee and the Department of the Interior have
defined the “scope of work” and a consultant has been
hired to conduct the study.
Q:
When would the Program start acquiring land?
A:
Probably in 2001. The Cooperative Agreement period was created so
that the Department of the Interior could carry out environmental
reviews which are required before taking a federal action such as
signing a long-term Program agreement. Land will not be acquired
using Program funds until those reviews are complete, any adjustments
are made and the Program document is signed by the Secretary of
the Interior and the three states’ governors. These actions
are expected to be complete around the end of 2000.
Q:
What happens to Program land if a state leaves the Program?
A:
The Cooperative Agreement and the Proposed Program call for the
governors and the Secretary of the Interior to meet to try to avert
any party’s leaving the Program. If these talks fail, and
a state leaves the Program, the Program is over.
Because
of the Endangered Species Act, the end of the Program is not the
end of a need for habitat lands. Under the Proposed Program, if
the other states keep doing what they have been doing, it will be
taken into account in the FWS’s determination of how to satisfy
the Act without a Program. So, coordinated land management may continue
even if the Program ends. The questions of how “credit”
or ownership interests would be distributed back to those contributing
to the Program (the three states and federal government) have not
yet been answered.
Q:
Where can the general public make its views known and obtain information
on the latest developments?
A:
The general public can make its views known and obtain information
on the Cooperative Agreement and Program by contacting Governance
Committee members, Land Committee chairs and subcommittee chairs,
attending committee meetings, contacting Dale Strickland, the Governance
Committee’s Executive Director (toll-free phone number: (877)
634-1773), or checking the Governance Committee’s web site
at http://www.platteriver.org
Other
Related Articles:
|
