On Friday the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service opened a short public comment period to seek information about wetland easements in the Prairie Pothole Region and drainage locations adjacent to those wetlands.
While there is not currently any proposal on the table — the USFWS says it’s only looking for input on current policies — conservation groups are on high alert. Organizations like Delta Waterfowl and Ducks Unlimited say it’s essential the policies around federal wetland easements in the northern Great Plains — which have stood for almost 70 years — don’t change.
“That’s why this request [for information] is concerning,” says Scott Stephens, senior director of conservation strategy for Ducks Unlimited. “We had counted those [wetlands] as forever going to be there, because of the easement attached to them. They’re part of the National Wildlife Refuge System, bought and paid for by duck hunters. These are really critical. It’s the most important geography on the continent for breeding ducks.”
There are more than 28,000 wetland easements spanning 1.5-million-plus acres in states like North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Montana, as of early 2020, that were purchased with federal duck stamp funds. The wetlands in question are mostly small parcels; about 70 percent of USFWS-purchased easements in the PPR are less than one acre. Unlike other wetland easements, the USFWS considers the easements in question “minimally restrictive” to landowners.
Landowners who sold easements agreed not to drain, burn, level, or fill those wetlands, but are otherwise able to work — farm, hay, and graze — any that dry up or drain naturally.
“One of the things that is really important to know about these easements is there’s no prohibition on growing a crop on these wetlands. They’ve always allowed annual agricultural production,” says John Devney, chief policy officer of Delta Waterfowl. “The smaller and shallower the wetland, the more likely they are to be cropped.”
The current debate focuses on drainage tile setbacks, or the distance from wetlands landowners are allowed to place underground drain pipes. Specific drainage locations on the prairie necessarily vary based on a property’s unique slope, soil composition, and other factors, which can occasionally result in water on property that was not originally included in the easement.
Some farmers and ag groups, as well as politicians like Senator Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota), have pushed for reevaluation of a Biden-era drainage rule that they say infringes on private property outside of the easement.
“There are some in the agricultural community who would favor an approach to tile setbacks that has the potential to starve wetlands — especially small shallow wetlands that are most important for breeding ducks,” says Devney. “So this is essentially draining. Not by digging a ditch, but draining by starving [wetlands] of its water.”
Conservation groups say the 2024 USFWS rule only reaffirmed longstanding wetland easement policy. It simply gives safe harbor to any landowners who followed USFWS drainage protocol and, in doing so, inadvertently impacted wetlands in a nearby easement. (Curiously, Sen. Cramer spoke in support of safe harbor rules during the first Trump administration in 2020.)
“The 2024 rule did not change USFWS setbacks, period,” says Devney. “Hard stop.”
On top of that, says Stephens of DU, the science shows that more permissive drainage distances than those already outlined by USFWS result in a reduction of wetlands.
“The science we have on this — allowing tile closer to the wetland — has impacts on [wetlands], and that’s what these easements that were paid for are there to prevent. You can’t uphold the agreement and allow different setbacks,” says Stephens. “This rule ain’t broke, so don’t fix it.”
Overall the USFWS wetlands easement program is wildly popular, with more demand by landowners for wetland easements than there’s funding to support. While rumors on social media circles that cite specific lost acreage of wetlands in the PPR, there is no clear blueprint for what precisely USFWS might change if these easements are reevaluated.
“It depends how they respond [to comments],” says Devney. “It’s all hypothetical at this point.”
To get ahead of any hypothetical changes, however, DU issued an action alert to its members Monday, urging hunters to submit comments opposing any potential changes to how USFWS regulates its conservation easements.
“Today, the progress we have made to protect these habitats faces an urgent threat,” read DU’s call to action via email. “If these crucial regulations are changed or removed the threat becomes reality.”
Devney says it’s essential to remember that USFWS wetland easements in the PPR were largely acquired with funds from duck stamp dollars.
“These easements were an interest acquired on behalf of generations of U.S. duck hunters. My grandfather, my father, a million-plus duck hunters today. They deserve to have a loud voice in this deliberation,” says Devney, who lives in Bismarck, North Dakota. “Our hope is that we can create enough of a push back [through comments] that anybody [in the government] looks around and says, ‘Woof, we don’t want to touch this with a ten-foot pole.’”
The USFWS comment period is open for 14 days total, with the Aug. 7 deadline already rapidly approaching. As of press time, more than 3,500 comments had already been filed.
“This is an asset base you’ve invested in,” says Stephens. “Please stand up and provide comment in support of that. Say, ‘The rule is working, we want these areas protected.’”
About USFWS Conservation Wetland Easements
In the 1950s Congress “recognized the impact that widespread drainage was having on wetlands and waterfowl populations in the PPR,” according to the USFWS.
Read Next: Trump Cuts 2 Popular Utah National Monuments by 90 Percent — About 3 Million Acres
This led to the creation of the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program in 1958, which leveraged federal duck stamp funds to acquire small wetlands and potholes and designate them as Waterfowl Production Areas.
USFWS purchased what would become the first WPA in South Dakota in 1959, and began to purchase wetland easements shortly after. Today WPAs conserve some 3 million acres of wetlands in the PPR — a critical mission considering wetlands in the region are already critically diminished from historic levels, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. In the last two centuries:
- Montana has lost between 27 and 33 percent of its wetlands
- South Dakota has lost 35 percent of its wetlands
- North Dakota has lost 50 percent of its wetlands
- Minnesota has lost up to 50 percent of its wetlands
- Iowa has lost between 90 and 97 percent of its wetlands
In South Dakota, the agency adds, “agricultural conversions, notably in the prairie pothole region, have accounted for most wetland losses.”
In addition to the immediate dangers to duck populations and production from reduced wetlands in the PPR, draining farmland in the area has literal downstream effects for wildlife and people — including farmers.
“The more drainage we have, the faster the water is coming into our river system,” says Michael Sertle, the central regional director for American Rivers. Sertle is also a waterfowl biologist by training who previously worked at DU.
More water in the continent’s river systems causes problems with diminished sediment filtration and water quality, as well as increased flooding — including in farming communities and the PPR itself.
“While we understand landowners need and want to be able to work their land, we’re concerned about the detriment that’s causing to the health of the waters that people and wildlife depend on,” Sertle says. “We’ve already seen the largest rollback of clean water protections ever … while near term that may seem good to some, history has shown that long-term, the faster we send water down-river, the more problems we’re going to have.”
This story was updated at 3 p.m. CST to include comment from Ducks Unlimited.
Read the full article here
