Barton Commission gives approval to KNRC on pair of ballot issues related to endangered species

By MIKE COURSON
Great Bend Post

A stated goal of the Kansas Natural Resource Coalition (KNRC) is to bring voice and environmental decision-making to local government. Barton is one of many Kansas counties that make up the coalition. KNRC requested that each member county consider two ballot questions relative to the coalition’s proposed participation in federal litigation involving recent Endangered Species Act (ESA) regulatory changes. County Administrator Matt Patnzer presented those questions to the board of commissioners during Tuesday’s weekly meeting.

“Ballot question one is, ‘Should the Kansas Natural Resource Coalition be authorized to participate, at no cost to KNRC or its member counties, in federal litigation defending the repeal of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s regulatory definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act,’” Patzner said.

Commissioners Duane Reif and Donna Zimmerman agreed the new definition of “harm” is too broad. Commissioner Tricia Shlessinger laid out how the new definition could impact local landowners.

“I think we should support this action,” she said. “I think this is just protecting our landowner rights. The broad definition of the word ‘harm’ has included, now, unintentional harm. Grazing cattle in an area that they deemed now has a threatened species in it would be unintentional harm and you could be prosecuted for that."

Schlessiger added that oil production or even county maintenance of a ditch could result in unintentional harm. The board voted 5-0 to support KNRC’s participation in the federal litigation.

Ballot question two was a vote to authorize KNRC’s participation, again at no cost to KNRC or its member counties, in federal litigation defending the repeal of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Blanket Section 4(d) Rule.

“The Endangered Species Act distinguishes between species listed as endangered, and those listed as threatened,” Patzner explained. “However, under the Blanket Section 4(d) rule, the federal government generally applied the same broad prohibitions used for endangered species to newly listed threatened species, unless the service later adopted a species-specific exception.”

“I definitely think we should support this one as well. I think, again, it puts the burden back on the landowner when the burden should really be on the agency that’s trying to enforce a very broad rule.”

The board of commissioners voted 5-0 to support KNRC’s participation in the federal litigation.