On Thursday the Senate Agriculture Committee finished its two-day mark up of the 2007 Farm Bill, which contains the single-largest source of conservation funding in the U.S. It includes many of the conservation incentive programs that assist landowners in protecting our natural resources such as soil, water and wildlife habitat.

Lacking reform

The Senate Agriculture Committee's Farm Bill includes enough funding to keep important programs open such as the Grasslands Reserve Program, Wetlands Reserve Program and, my own favorite, the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program, open to new enrollments for the next five years. However,  it excludes many reforms of inequitable commodities and direct payments to wealthy farmers earning more than a million dollars a year, and improved funding improvements that that were being called for, such as the Denver Post ("Millionaires don't deserve subsidies," 10/23/07 ) and Rocky Mountain News ("Maybe the worst farm bill ever," 7/10/07)

Senator Salazar Speaks Up

At one point, Colorado's Senator Salazar introduced and then immediately withdrew an amendment that would  have increased funding and enrollment of the Grasslands Reserve Program and Farmland Protection Program. These programs are designed to assist landowners in preserving our fragile shrinking grasslands and farms from urban sprawl. They are also important programs in Colorado. After an eloquent speech, the Senator withdrew his amendment stating lack of necessary funding for them. In order for this to move beyond good politics, the Senator should work with Senate leadership in the coming days before the Farm Bill makes its way to the Senate floor for debate by the full Senate to ensure adequate funding and support for his amendment.

Why the Farm Bill and Landowners are Important to Endangered Species Conservation

• The majority of threatened and endangered species habitat in the U.S. exists on private land;
• More than half of the land in America is managed by ranchers, farmers and foresters; and
  
• Two-thirds of landowners who offer to conserve and protect natural resources like wildlife habitat are turned down due to lack of funding.

Take Action

Email Senator Salazar today and ask him to work with Senate leadership to find adequate funding and support of his Wetlands Reserve Program/Farmland Protection Program amendment. He should introduce his amendment when the 2007 Farm Bill hits the Senate floor for full Senate vote sometime in the next two weeks.

Who would've thought it could start in Kansas?

Last week, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment announced it denied a permit for a massive coal burning power plant to be built in Holcomb, a town made famous by Truman Capote's book, In Cold Blood.

The reason?  It wasn't because of mercury, although coal burning power plants spew large amounts of the potent neurotoxin.  It wasn't because of nitrogen oxide pollution, which forms acid rain and smog.  No, it was because of carbon dioxide.

That's right, carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, the reason our climate is changing.  It also happens to be the most abundant byproduct of fossil fuel combustion.  And the decision by the state of Kansas represents the first time ever that a coal burning power plant has been stopped because of greenhouse gases.

But it's only a start.

Scientists report we need an 80% reduction greenhouse gases by 2050 to effectively combat climate change.  So while stopping a new coal burning power plant is a big step forward, we can't stop there.  We need real reductions if we're going to save the planet.

The good news is, if we can stop a coal burning power plant from being built because of carbon dioxide emissions, we can do anything.  This monumental step forward gives us the momentum we need not just to keep greenhouse gases from increasing, but to reverse the trend of global warming.  The tide is turning and Kansas is leading the charge.

The Denver Post editorial captures well the diverse constellation of voices that are increasingly being raised against the too-much-too-fast oil and gas leasing program on federal lands which the Bureau of Land Management administers.

Not only is Center for Native Ecosystems represented, but a spokesperson for the Colorado Division of Wildlife is also quoted about the state agency's "serious concerns" with the oil and gas leases being offered.  In addition, the mayor of Granby highlights local worries about increased traffic congestion from oil and gas drilling activity in the area.  Even U.S. Representative Mark Udall (D-CO) has asked the BLM to postpone leasing in the area, the Post editorial notes.

For our part, Center for Native Ecosystems was able to highlight the large number of leases being offered in sage grouse "core areas," those places identified by the Colorado Division of Wildlife as most important for greater sage grouse survival.  "From a biological perspective, it is not appropriate to lease in those areas," we offered.

The Post ended its editorial by rightly pointing out that postponing oil and gas leasing in Grand County until the BLM finishes its new management plan for the area would "give local residents and other parties an opportunity to comment on how the land has been used — whether it is recreation or conservation — and be heard on how it may best be used in the future."

Let's hope the BLM hears this message coming from so many different sources.

In writing about the cancellation of the November lease sale in Utah, the Salt Lake Tribune noted that the Bureau of Land Management in that state has grown more cautious about leasing acreage in sensitive wildlife habitat after a ruling by the Interior Board of Land Appeals brought about by Center for Native Ecosystems last year.

Originally, we protested the leasing of land in a white-tailed prairie dog colony where the highly endangered black-footed ferret is being reintroduced.  Black-footed ferrets are North America's most endangered mammal, one that almost went extinct in the wild and is slowly being reintroduced in places like eastern Utah, where there are still prairie dog colonies intact enough to sustain it.  The BLM offered its oil and gas leases without considering what drilling would do to the ferret reintroduction program, and the land board's ruling to that effect has implications for all of the BLM's analysis of drilling impacts to wildlife. 

CNE Staff Biologist Megan Corrigan appears in the Salt Lake Tribune story with this apt assessment of the situation:  "It makes sense for the BLM to take time and do a good, thorough analysis that looks at the impacts on the fragile wildlife of the lands they are considering for leasing... Once that property gets turned over to the energy companies, it is too late."

High Country News also wrote about the ruling and specifically investigated how much of a precedent the Utah lease sale cancellation could set for other BLM offices.  This question was most pointedly raised by other outlets in Colorado, in part because the upcoming Colorado oil and gas lease sale includes many parcels in habitat for at-risk wildlife, such as the greater sage-grouse.

The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel considered quite directly the notion that the BLM in Colorado was subject to the same interpretation of their duty to protect wildlife habitat from drilling impacts.  The opening paragraph notes that the Utah lease sale cancellation "gave conservationists reasons to object to next month’s Bureau of Land Management oil and gas lease sale in Colorado, which promises to auction large swaths of sensitive wildlife habitat statewide." 

A few days later, the Denver Post weighed in as well.  The Post's story highlighted the opposition to leases offered within its borders b Grand County, which is following in the footsteps of San Miguel County, the city of Grand Junction, and other state and municipal entities around Colorado who have been forced to speak out against BLM leases offered in places near and dear to them.  Most importantly, however, the Post highlighted the concerns of the Colorado Division of Wildlife, which has been developing a statewide plan to conserve the greater sage-grouse and is rightfully upset about leases being offered in prime habitat for this and other wildlife species it manages.  Ron Volarde at the Division of Wildlife told the Denver Post, "The Colorado Division of Wildlife has several concerns to the impact on wildlife and habitat within and surrounding the proposed lease area... Fragmentation of the habitat will have a negative impact to many wildlife species."