Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation Easements topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife presents six perpetual easements; commissioners debate public access
Summary
U.S. Fish and Wildlife presented six wetland and habitat easements purchased with duck‑stamp funds and asked the board to certify them; commissioners questioned the perpetual nature and whether publics funds should support privately controlled land; the board certified the easements after debate.
Blair Mace of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service told the Douglas County Board that six wetland and habitat easements funded through the Migratory Bird Conservation (duck‑stamp) program were ready for county certification. The easements protect wetlands and habitat across multiple townships and remain on private land, Mace said, noting the funding source: “the duck stamp that every duck hunter has to buy…99¢ out of every dollar goes towards purchasing land for duck habitat.”
Mace listed the parcels and basic protections, including wetland easements at several sections and a habitat easement allowing limited haying or grazing after July 15. He told the board these easements are perpetual and that the landowners continue to pay property taxes and retain access rights.
Several commissioners pressed staff on the implications of perpetual easements. One commissioner said making decisions “that our great‑great‑great grandchildren…can never change because of some perpetual rule” was concerning and asked whether easements could be renewed on a periodic basis. Mace and staff replied the program and statute require perpetual easements: “It’s a law that has to stay perpetual.”
Commissioners also raised public‑access concerns because the easements were funded with public money. A commissioner argued that duck‑stamp funds are public and questioned why land purchased with those funds might not be open for public hunting. Mace responded that participation is voluntary and landowners decide whether to open their property.
After discussion, a motion to approve the certification of the six easements passed on a roll‑call vote. Two commissioners voted no; the record shows at least two dissenting votes on the motion.
What’s next: The easements will be forwarded for land‑exchange board approval and remain subject to the program’s statutory terms. The county’s certification moves the parcels along the federal process; the easements themselves remain permanent per the funding statute.
