By
Daniel Straubel, President, Four Seasons Audubon Society
Alan Journet, conservation Chair, Trail of Tears Group, Ozark Chapter of the Sierra club
Ann Drake, President, Mississippi Valley Chapter of the Ozark Society
Phil Dodson, President Elect, Mississppi Chapter of the Ozark Society
Prior to development of the drainage system in the southeastern Missouri lowlands--the Bootheel--much of the area was frequently flooded. The region supported some two and half million acres of bottomland hardwood and swamp forest habitat. As a result of the success of the drainage program, there now remain but 50,000 acres - some two percent of what was present. The Army Corps of Engineers is developing plans--called the St Johns Bayou--New Madrid Floodway Project--for further draining of those remaining acres.
The New Madrid Floodway is an area of several thousand acres located on the Missouri side of the Mississippi river between just south of Cairo, IL, on the north, to just upstream from New Madrid, MO, on the south. The area is enclosed by the frontline Mississippi River levee on the east and southeast and by a setback levee on the west and northwest. There is an engineered 1,500 foot gap in the frontline levee at the southern--New Madrid--end of the New Madrid Floodway. This gap has two intended effects: (1) it allows the enclosed area to drain and flood more or less naturally; (2) during flooding, it relieves flooding in other parts of the river, especially across the Mississippi in Illinois. St. John's Bayou, which empties into the Mississippi through the gap, is behind the setback levee. This area and the New Madrid Floodway area comprise several thousand acres.
The northern end of the levee--across the river from the Cairo area--was designed decades ago to be blown out in case of severe flooding. That has never been done, but that plan suggests how serious the flooding may be in the general area of the proposed project--or rather across the river from the floodway. The proposed project, designed to relieve flooding in East Prairie, has three main components: (1) closing the gap at New Madrid; (2) installing two pumping stations to provide the drainage that would be needed as a result of closing of the gap, which currently provides natural drainage; (3) channelization within the newly enclosed area, which lies between the frontline levee and the setback levee. The stated purpose of the project, which will drain thousands of acres of seasonally flooded wetlands, is to promote economic development in the East Prairie area, a purpose which the project's design makes unlikely to be achieved.
If we are genuinely concerned about economic development in East Prairie, the wise management of natural resources, and the conservation of wildlife habitat, we must oppose this project. Arguments about private property rights are not relevant to this issue; it's a question of taxpayer welfare designed to benefit a handful of landowners at the expense of our environment: we should not be spending taxpayer funds to promote more destruction. We should oppose this project for the following reasons:
1. It is unlikely to accomplish its stated purpose of decreasing flooding in East Prairie and neighboring communities. According to evidence provided by the Environmental Defense Fund, and not challenged by the Corps of Engineers, flooding in East Prairie is caused to a large extent by seasonal storm run-off. To the extent that Mississippi River backwater is a cause for East Prairie flooding, that community would be better served by a simple (and much less expensive) levee constructed to surround and protect those communities and by improved storm-water handling. The smaller project could involve only St Johns Bayou, which, like East Prairie, lies behind the setback levee.
2. Closing the 1,500 ft. gap in the mainline Mississippi levee and installing pumps to keep the newly enclosed area dry will have severe negative impacts on many wildlife species; these include fish which use the currently seasonally flooded area for spawning and nursery habitat and water fowl which use the area for rest and feeding in their annual migrations. According to the National Fish and Wildlife Service, to make up for this loss of wetlands 36,000 acres of mitigation wetlands would be required, an area difficult or impossible to find and expensive to purchase. Furthermore, given the problematic nature of mitigation projects, there is no guarantee that even this would be adequate to retain the critical wetland services performed currently.
3. The project will increase flood threats from the Mississippi River. The 1,500 ft gap was especially designed decades ago to allow floodwater to flow into the area under discussion. It has served to decrease flooding in the lower Mississippi River floodplain. Implicit in the original levee plan was the principle that severe flooding across the river in southern Illinois could be prevented by blowing a hole in the northern end of the mainline levee thus allowing floodwaters to flow between the levees and lowering the flood threat to our neighbors. Closing the gap at the southern end will make such a plan impossible, and thus heighten potential floodwater threats for residents of other communities adjacent to the river, especially those living downstream from the project area. This will unfairly impact many residents and property owners elsewhere, and potentially cost vast sums of taxpayer money in flood relief.
4. The cost of this project in relation to its benefits doesn't make sense. The avowed purpose--economic development in East Prairie will probably not be realized for the hydrological reasons mentioned in (1) above. The main benefit will be to relatively few landowners farming the presently seasonally flooded area. These landowners will be able to raise more profitable crops on land that would be protected. This doesn't make sense primarily for two reasons: (1) increasing yields in an era of overproduction will depress further the national income farmers gain from their crops, and thus should be considered a national cost of the project NOT a benefit; (2) spending nearly 100 million dollars to benefit a few large landowners while not solving the problem for which the project is supposedly proposed is not reasonable either for East Prairie residents (most of whom seem to have been persuaded to believe that this highly questionable project will be an economic panacea) or for the taxpayers of this state and nation.
5. Because the project does not solve the storm drain problem in East Prairie--the prime cause for the ten year cycle of floods experienced by that community--it fails to address its primary objective, and must be counted a failure even in its own terms of promoting community and economic development. Currently, national flood plain policy quite reasonably discourages investment in areas with the flood risk that East Prairie would experience even after completion of the project.
6. The only criticism that can be leveled at the alternative plan of constructing a much less costly levee system solely to protect the residential and economic communities around East Prairie is that such a plan would not drain agricultural land. Unfortunately, draining agricultural land is not legally permissible as a purpose for such a project as the Corps has proposed.
The opposition to this project voiced by Missouri's Department of Natural Resources, Department of Conservation, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should serve as a strong warning about the havoc that it could cause to the conservation, wildlife and water resources in the region.
We urge citizens to oppose this project as vigorously as possible. By stopping it, we can not only save ourselves tens of million of taxpayer dollars but also conserve wetlands and wildlife while simultaneously maintaining sensible flood control along the Mississippi River.
Rick Thom, Board Member of the River Bluffs Adubon Society, is planning to lead a trip to Costa Rica on February 19-27, 2000. Rick writes:
This trip will emphasize the natural history of the Costa Rican mountain cloud forest and lowland rain forest with a lot of opportunity for birding, botanizing and hiking. It will be somewhat of an "adventure" trip with quite a lot of hiking, a white water rafting trip, swimming in volcanic hot springs, a rain forest skywalk, a river motorboat tour, and a horseback trip to a remote waterfalls. Additionally, I am trying to work out an optional day hike that would give you a choice of hiking from Monteverde to Tabacon Resort, rather than riding in the tour bus. The bus ride takes about 8 hours, and the hike about 6, if weather and conditions are good. (I am trying to find out how long it takes if conditions are bad.) It will be mostly down hill, from near the continental divide to the base of Arenal Volcano.
So this group will be outside a lot. But as you can see from the itinerary, there is also ample free time to explore, lounge, relax, shop or whatever. Lodging is in first rate motels and bed and breakfasts. The trip will be from Feb 19 to Feb 27. We will have a bilingual naturalist guide, a driver, and a bus as part of the package. The naturalist guide adds a lot to the trip, not only for the local knowledge of plants and animals, but also for insights into the culture of Costa Rica.
I set the trip up through Holbrook Travel, a company that specializes in natural history tours and one that is concerned about appropriate development in Costa Rica. I have been on two other Holbrook Costa Rica tours and have organized a third one. I have been impressed with this company and its subcontractors in Costa Rica. The trip will cost $1,380 per person, double occupancy, for the in-country tour as explained in the itinerary. I have reserved tickets for the group from St. Louis to San Jose on Delta Airlines. The flight will cost $591.40, which is utilizing Holbrook's contracted discount. Meals and activities not included in the itinerary, tips, souvenirs, an airport departure tax (around $17), and other incidental expenses are not included.
I have set this trip up for ten people, and the first ten people who sign up will fill the trip. To reserve a spot, you need to make a $200 deposit to Holbrook Travel. This deposit is fully refundable until 60 days prior to departure. At this time, the balance is due in full to Holbrook. You can make the deposit by calling Sandy Schmidt at 1-800-451-7111 and putting it on your charge card.
I have set this trip up to be an exciting, somewhat adventurous introduction to Costa Rica and the rain forest. If you have any questions, give me a call. You might also want to talk with some of the people who have been on previous trips. You could also call Sandy Schmidt about Holbrook travel or how the reservations work. I also have some guide books to Costa Rica that I can loan you, and information is available on the internet. While Missouri is in the depths of winter, you could be in the tropics. Join me in Costa Rica. You can contact me at (573) 893-5376 or E-mail: thom@socket.net
-- Rick ThomOn Saturday, May 8th, many of Roger Pryor's friends gathered at the Meeting House of the Religious Society of Friends at 10th and Park in St. Louis to celebrate his life and the legacy that he left to the rest of us who will have to try ever harder to meet his standards for honesty and his passion for environmental causes.
Roger was senior policy director for the Missouri Coalition for the Environment when he died on March 23. He died at Deaconess Hospital, where he was taken after suffering from heart problems and complications from diabetes. His friends gathered from across the Midwest to mourn his passing. No one in St. Louis can take his place as a spokesman for the environment.
As his friends gathered, they sat on chairs and benches to meditate in silence. From time to time an individual would rise to voice his or her thoughts or recollections on Roger's life, on the myriad of events that make our existence meaningful. The silence that followed each statement allowed his friends to assimilate the meaning of what had been said, or to recall their own experiences with Roger. This was an impressive ceremony, with no leadership from a traditional minister; each individual rose and spoke as the spirit moved him. This seemed to be exactly what was appropriate for Roger, individuals responding as individuals with what was in their hearts and souls.
At the end of the ceremony, Roger's wife, Linda, presented a very touching review of her marriage with Roger; not always easy, but always with a degree of honesty and understanding which each could appreciate.
Roger was the voice for the environment in St. Louis. He was the one who was out in front, always leading the way. When, a year and a half ago, the Missouri Audubon Council was looking for a bill to present to the Missouri General Assembly providing for the regulation of the high capacity chip mills that threaten to fragment Missouri's Ozark forests, we found that Roger had already prepared one, ready to be introduced into the legislative process. He always knew what the issues were, long before the rest of us.
Roger worked tirelessly to create new organizations to promote the causes in which he believed. He was the inspiration for the Missouri Environmental Fund, a plan for payroll giving for environmental causes, as the United Way is for local charities. He was influential in the founding of the Mississippi River Basin Alliance, a group that represents environmental organizations from Minneapolis to New Orleans, with growing influence in setting environmental policy along the Mississippi River. Through organizations such as these and through the Missouri Coalition for the Environment, which was for the most part his own voice, he will long influence environmental policy in the Midwest.
Roger Pryor received the Conservationist of the Year award from St. Louis Audubon in 1995 when he was recognized for his zealous advocacy of environmental causes in Missouri.
Roger will be an inspiration to all of us to be more forceful and effective in our advocacy of what is good in the long run for the people on this earth and for the environment in which we all must live.
Many Audubon members knew Roger Pryor as a strong, articulate and unwavering voice for Missouri's forests, streams and wetlands. Some of us were privileged to enjoy Roger's songs around a campfire. Sadly, that voice is now stilled. Roger died on March 23, 1999 at the age of 53 after a long struggle with several chronic diseases.
For nearly 30 years Roger worked tirelessly as an advocate for the protection of Missouri's natural ecosystems first as part of the Missouri Natural Areas Survey, then with the Ozark Chapter of the Sierra Club and most importantly with the Missouri Coalition for the Environment.
Roger was especially passionate about the protection of the streams and forests of the Missouri Ozarks. For 18 years he led the fight against lead mines on public lands in Missouri. Just last year he became a member of the National Audubon Society's Task Force on High Capacity Chip Mills.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch called Roger "A Force for Nature". I can think of no better epitaph.
In April two bills, both originated by Representative Wayne Crump of Potosi, passed the Missouri House of Representatives and in May were passed out of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Conservation, Parks and Tourism with a "do pass" recommendation. However, both bills died late in the Senate session. These bills could have had major impacts on Missouri's wildlife habitat. The Missouri Audubon Council opposed both of these bills.
HB 133 would have required that the Missouri General Assembly approve any purchases of federal land in Missouri. This bill could have especially impacted the purchase of land along the Missouri River for the new Big Muddy National Fish and Wildlife Refuge which Audubon has strongly supported. This bill would have also interfered with rights of willing sellers who wish to sell their flood-damaged lands to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
HJR 26 would have required a two thirds vote on any initiative petitions relating to the powers of the Missouri Conservation Commission regarding fish, wildlife and forestry. (The Senate Committee on Agriculture, Conservation, Parks and Tourism amended this requirement to four sevenths.) This would have given the Missouri Conservation Department a special status enjoyed by no other agency of state government. This is a particularly bad idea to be made into public policy. No agency should be so isolated from the will of the people.
It is especially disappointing to me that the leadership of the Department of Conservation testified in favor of this bill. We should all remember that the Department of Conservation was created and its liberal funding secured by the citizens of Missouri exercising their right to use the initiative petition. It is very ironic that a department that once trusted Missourians to support its mission now seems to be trying to limit the power of the people to effect policy by means of the initiative petition.
In spite of some last minute manuvering, both bills failed to pass the Senate. Many Audubon members in Missouri, working with members of the Sierra Club and the Missouri Coalition for the Environment helped to defeat these bad bills. How did your Representative and Senator vote on these bills?
The Mizzou Tigers for Tigers are happy to announce our first activity of the Mizzou Tigers for Tigers program. We are co-hosting, with the student chapter of The Wildlife Society, the Dunmire lecture on April 28 at 7:00pm in Conservation Hall (Anheuser-Busch Natural Resource Building) on the UMC campus. The Dunmire family sponsors this prestigious annual event.
This year's speaker will be Dr. John Seidensticker, Curator of Mammals at the National Zoo, and well-known tiger expert. His talk "Saving the Tiger" will reflect his years as an active tiger conservationist.
For more information on the "Mizzou Tigers for Tigers" Program go to: http://www.missouri.edu/~tigers/.
Return to contentsThis is the "magic year" for CARA (the Conservation and Reinvestment Act)! Believe it or not, bi-partisan legislation to fund state-level non-game wildlife conservation (S.25 and HR701) is currently in hearings!
This bi-partisan cooperation is likely to dissipate as we near the 2000 election, so now is the time to achieve permanent, dedicated funds for conservation that do not require annual Congressional appropriation. There are several other similar bills pending, including the Clinton administration's Lands Legacy Initiative, but CARA is far and away the best for our interests.
Unlike the "Teaming with Wildlife" Initiative that River Bluffs Audubon sponsored a few years ago, CARA doesn't create a new tax...which was a sticking point for TWW. Revenues from offshore drilling will be used to fund a variety of parks and wildlife programs. It includes a "Teaming with Wildlife" element that could mean $7 to $10 million for Missouri beginning as early as July 2000...money for things like wildlife viewing and nature appreciation, education, habitat restoration, and endangered non-game species research.
All but TWO members of Kentucky's congressional delegation is sponsoring these bills. Compare that to Missouri's record; just TWO of our legislators are sponsoring: Kit Bond & Karen McCarthy. Kenny Hulshof is "not yet supportive." Richard Gephardt is waiting to see what the Administration does as far as legislation. Ike Skelton has "not been ready to sponsor." John Ashcroft "does not seem to be interested in this issue" but Governor Mel Carnahan's Washington office is supporting this as a legislative priority.
So our Missouri congressional delegation needs to hear from us. At least 40,000 letters are needed from groups like ours, encouraging our Representatives and Senators to sponsor this valuable legislation...and asking the Senate to revise their state-level wildlife conservation funding to match the House version (the Senate dropped it from 10% to 7%...a difference of $148 million).
You can learn more about CARA and the other bills by visiting www.teaming.com. If you decide that you can't support CARA, please write anyway...asking for legislation that assures permanent funding that meets the National Wildlife Federation's 5 principles, which can be found on the website. I've seen the comparison of the legislation...and CARA is the bill for me. I've written my letters. Please write yours today. Thank you.
Dear (Congressional Representative/Senator/Governor)
I am writing to ask for your support of (H.R. 701 or S. 25), which is landmark conservation legislation for the next century. Missouri has been a leader in conservation throughout the years and we should once again take the lead in supporting the Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1999. If passed, Missouri would receive over $17 million annually for vital conservation, recreation and educational programs.
The Conservation and Reinvestment Act is strongly supported by both parties in the House and the Senate. One of its leading sponsors in the House is Rep. Don Young, chairman of the House Resources Committee. To date, there are almost 70 co-sponsors in the House and more sponsors are signing on regularly. In the Senate, Senator Bond is a co-sponsor along with 15 other senators.
(Add your personal comments)
Not only do I personally support (bill), but conservation organizations throughout the state do also. As your constituents, we ask for your sponsorship and positive vote. Help us make this happen for our next generation!
Sincerely,
(Your name and organization)
-- Submitted by Barbara Brueggeman, RBASAn Audubon Society office in Missouri should be established this summer. Three years of effort, planning, and fundraising by the Missouri Audubon Council, other Audubon chapter members, and National Audubon Society staff are about to come to fruition.
The Missouri Audubon Council and National Audubon received more that 50 applications from people interested in serving as the director of the state Audubon office. An interview team, comprised of a few Audubon Council members and two staff from National Audubon, has narrowed the candidate field to six. These six candidates will be interviewed May 14, and we could have a state director hired by July. This would mark the official establishment of the state Audubon office.
Audubon members have contributed or helped raise nearly $100,000 to start the office. National Audubon has matched this amount, which puts us in good shape to get the office established and a director hired.
The state office, to be called Audubon Missouri, will lend a rational, knowledgeable, and important voice to the efforts to protect migratory bird habitat, preserve prairies, protect Missouri's water resources and other conservation and environmental issues.
New York, NY, April 5, 1999 - To coincide with Earth Day (April 22) and the birthday of Naturalist John James Audubon (April 26), the National Audubon Society today announced it will release a special series of state WatchLists. An accounting of birds in jeopardy, the WatchLists will outline priority species in each of the lower 48 U.S. states. The state bird lists will be accessible on April 22 at Audubon Online. Check this link for the Missouri Watchlist: http://www.audubon.org/bird/watch/state2/mo.html.
"It is appropriate that we release this potent conservation tool in conjunction with the dual event of Earthday and Audubon's birthday," says National Audubon President John Flicker. "Audubon himself noted the decline of bird species in his lifetime, and wondered how Americans would keep their natural heritage intact. The WatchList was developed to help achieve that goal."
"The release of state WatchLists will help us help birds more effectively," says Audubon's Director of Science, Dr. Frank Gill. "State lists will serve as an early warning system for management agencies, non-government organizations, landowners and the general public. Designed to help keep common birds common, state WatchLists chart a course for local conservation efforts, identifying species that will benefit from timely preventive action rather than costly, last-minute crisis management."
In 1996, Audubon released the first-ever Partners in Flight WatchList, which has become a centerpiece of the Society's programs in bird conservation. WatchList calls attention to birds at risk before they require Federal listing as threatened or endangered species, stressing preventative action over politically fraught, last-ditch rescue attempts in the future. Compiled by scientists within Partners in Flight (of which Audubon is a member), the WatchList targets bird species with declining populations and limited ranges, which face threats such as habitat loss on their breeding and wintering grounds.
Birds like the striking Red-headed Woodpecker, the zippy little Rufous Hummingbird, and bubbly black-and-white Bobolink _ all WatchList species _ are not only enjoyable to watch and fascinating to listen to but are also economically important. According to a U.S. Forest Service study, approximately 54-million Americans feed and watch birds, spending billions each year on binoculars, field guides, feeders, and birdseed. Areas with high concentrations of birds rely upon tourist dollars generated by these species. In addition to their economic benefits, birds eat harmful insects and pollinate plants.
Perhaps most importantly, birds indicate the health of the environment. They use northern woods, wetlands, and grasslands during the breeding season, Latin American tropical forests in the winter, and stopover locations in between during migration. Decline of these feathered ambassadors indicates a need for action. "Throughout history, declines in bird populations are often the first signal that our environment has been altered or damaged," says Flicker.
WatchList compilers work to ensure that it reflects the most current
information available on at-risk species. A complete list of state
WatchLists (and the National WatchList of 105 species )can be found at
<
Founded in 1905 and supported by members in 518 chapters throughout the Americas, the National Audubon Society conserves and restores natural ecosystems, focusing on birds and other wildlife for the benefit of humanity and the earth's biological diversity.
MEDIA CONTACT:
John Bianchi 212/979-3026
jbianchi@audubon.org
Kara Grobert 212/979-3027
kgrobert@audubon.org
To subscribe to Audubon's online policy newsletter, the Advisory, send a message to: LISTSERV@LIST.AUDUBUON.ORG, leave the subject blank, and in the message, type: SUB ADVISORY
Campaign Communications Coordinator
National Audubon Society
1901 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20006
Ph: 202-861-2242
Fax: 202-861-4290
policy@audubon.org
www.audubon.org
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Memphis District, is proposing to remove drift and sediment deposits and to create a new channel for about 7 miles in the St. Francis River south of the Missouri Highway 84 bridge crossing west of Kennett, Missouri. The purpose of the project is to maintain the structural integrity of the levees forming the St. Francis Floodway north of the bridge. The proposed channel will cut through a cypress-tupelo wetland and terminate just north of the Ben Cash Conservation Area. This channelization could severely impact the river and wetlands but the information provided by the Corps has not been sufficient to evaluate the true impacts to this unique aquatic area.
The change in hydrologic regime would create a change in species from wetland/tupelo to more oak/hickory or willows and significantly alter the character of the area. The change in channel dimensions will simply move the current problems further downstream. Problems are manifest around the bridge, but these problems were caused by upstream manipulations and should be addressed by upstream restoration efforts and the Corps should begin a watershed study to fully characterize and resolve the problem.
The Corps is currently revising its draft Environmental Assessment for this project. If you wish to comment on this project, please contact the Corps at the address below. Ask to be put on the mailing list for the Environmental Assessment for the Corps project, St. Francis River-98-091 FD.
Gregg Williams
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
167 North Main Street, Room B-202
Memphis, Tennessee
Telephone (901)544-3852.
On April 28, 1999, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will sponsor a conference titled "Climate Change: What Does it Mean for the Midwest?" The conference, which will be held in Kansas City, Missouri, will provide a forum for discussion of climate change issues that confront industry in the Midwest and small business owners; community leaders; state, local, and tribal government officials; citizen groups; and teachers. The meeting will explore opportunities for businesses, small and large, and states, tribes, and communities to benefit from voluntary programs to reduce carbon emissions.
The keynote address will be presented by Hunter Lovins, president of the Rocky Mountain Institute, who will discuss "Least-Cost Climate Abatement: Business Profiting from Solving the CO2 Problem."
For questions and/or registration, contact Katherine Stanley at 703-247-2449, or register online at www.epa.gov/globalwarming/conferences/kc
To learn more about climate change, check out EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming
Return to contentsThe Missouri Department of Natural Resources through the Division of State Parks is interested in identifying a qualified individual to do breeding surveys for birds of conservation concern on Missouri State Parks during the 1999 field season. The Natural Resource Management Section has funds to support contracts for special surveys to document the fauna of Missouri State Parks.
For more information contact Mike Currier by phone: (573) 526-2990; or by email: nrcurrm@mail.state.mo.us.
Return to contentsJoin other citizens to make your voice heard in Missouri's General,Assembly. The 4th annual Lobby Day in Jefferson City to talk with legislators about various issues. This will be a good chance to speak with elected officials about Page Avenue as well as clean air, urban growth and other topics. The event starts in the Rotunda of the Capitol Building in Jefferson City at 11:00 am.
Some of the speakers will be:
The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR) invites you to attend the 29th Annual Earth Day celebration on Monday, April 22, 1999 at the Capitol in Jefferson City from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. "Make Each Day Earth Day" is the theme of this year's event. For more information call 1-800-361-4827 or go to "Earth Day Activities in Jefferson City" at : http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/earthday.htm
Want to celebrate Earth Day in your neighborhood? Go to: http://www.allspecies.org/block.htm.
Return to contentsST. LOUIS -- "This is a blatant attempt to restrict Missouri citizens' right to the initiative process to protect the limited interests of a special group," announced R. Roger Pryor, senior policy director for the Missouri Coalition for the Environment. Pryor was referring to the introduction of House Joint Resolution 26, which received its second reading on Monday.
HJR 26 would submit to the voters a proposed constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds majority for voter approval of initiative proposals relating to any powers delegated to the Conservation Commission.
"This resolution, with over 50 cosponsors, is the latest fallout from last fall's voter approval of Proposition A," said Pryor, "and it speaks volumes about the Conservation Department's paranoia about animal rights legislation." Proposition A outlaws such activities as cockfighting and bear-wrestling, but has no effect on sportsmen's right to hunt and fish. Yet, chief instigators of HJR 26 state representatives Chuck Purgason and Wayne Crump wrote their colleagues on February 1:
With the Passage of Proposition A this past year, many hunting and sporting groups were made aware that their rights could be lost through the current ballot referendum process. This proposed legislation would change the State Constitution to require a two-thirds majority to enact any changes to laws currently under the purview of the Missouri Department of Conservation.
"This proposal would grant the Conservation Commission special consideration unavailable to any other state agency or program," said Pryor. "It would further insulate a department that is already too distant from public and/or legislative scrutiny and oversight."
The Missouri Constitution, Article III, § 49-53, guarantees the right to initiative and referendum and provides that such ballot issues require only a simple majority to pass. HJR 26 would amend Article IV, §44, in such a way as to be in conflict with the earlier article.
"Ironically, the Conservation Commission and its chief source of revenue would not exist if it were not for the initiative process," said Pryor. The Commission was created by initiative petition in 1936 and its earmarked one-eight of one percent sales tax was created by initiative petition in 1976. If such a 2/3 majority policy had been in effect earlier, its funding source would never have been approved.
"We urge that HJR 26 be defeated," said Pryor. Unfortunately, among its supporters are much of the House leadership: Speaker Steve Gaw, Majority Leader Crump and Minority Leader Delbert Scott.
FIRST REGULAR SESSION, HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 26, 90TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVES CRUMP, PURGASON, GAW, RANSDALL, HAMPTON, ELLIOTT, PARKER, KOLLER (Co-sponsors), BOATRIGHT, TUDOR, HOHULIN, BARTELSMEYER, GRATZ, SEIGFREID, RICHARDSON, SCOTT, PRYOR, HOWERTON, DAVIS (122), HEGEMAN, MILLER, MERIDETH, SALLEE, KREIDER, NAEGER, BERKSTRESSER, REINHART, CRAWFORD, WRIGHT, TOWNLEY, GASKILL, FROELKER, KING, LUETKEMEYER, LOUDON, SHIELDS, HOLAND, GRAHAM (106), MARBLE, ROBIRDS, SCHWAB, FOSTER, BLUNT, BALLARD, RIDGEWAY, KLINDT, POUCHE, BENNETT, MYERS, BLACK, LEGAN, PATEK, McBRIDE, BARNETT, LUETKENHAUS, ALTER AND HARTZLER (124).
Read 1st time February 4, 1999, and 1000 copies ordered printed. ANNE C. WALKER, Chief Clerk L0832.02I
Submitting to the qualified voters of Missouri, an amendment repealing section 44 of article IV of the Constitution of Missouri, relating to the conservation commission and adopting one new section in lieu thereof relating to the same subject.
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring therein:
That at the next general election to be held in the state of Missouri, on Tuesday next following the first Monday in November, 2000, or at a special election to be called by the governor for that purpose, there is hereby submitted to the qualified voters of this state, for adoption or rejection, the following amendment to article IV of the Constitution of the state of Missouri:
Section A. Section 44, article IV, Constitution of Missouri, is repealed and one new section adopted in lieu thereof, to be known as section 44, to read as follows:
Section 44. 1. Sections 40-43, inclusive, of this article shall be self-enforcing, and laws not inconsistent therewith may be enacted in aid thereof. All existing laws inconsistent with this article shall no longer remain in force or effect.
2. No initiative proposal relating to this section or any other powers delegated to the conservation commission shall take effect unless approved by a two-thirds majority of the votes cast thereon.
R. Roger Pryor
Senior Policy Director
Missouri Coalition for the Environment
6267 Delmar, #2-E, St. Louis, MO 63130
Web Page: http://www.moenviron.org
E-Mail: ozarkroger@moenviron.org
Return to contents
Missouri's largest state park -- Lake of the Ozarks State Park -- is now threatened by expansion of an existing air strip. The 17,210-acre park wraps itself around the Grand Glaize Arm of Lake of the Ozarks. Originally, this property was purchased by the federal government as a recreation demonstration area -- the only public land along the shores of the otherwise heavily developed lake. In 1946, the property was given to the state.
The park is noteworthy for much more than its size. The park has extensive areas of forests, glades, caves and wildlife -- a remnant of the Osage River terrain. Missouri's first state wild area, Patterson Hollow, is located here. There are ample recreational facilities: trails, campgrounds, group camps, boat launch facilities and a swimming beach.
In the late 1960s, in order to accommodate a major conference -- and later regional economic development -- a small air strip was constructed near the very center of the park. Named for former parks director, Lee C. Fine, the air strip has been expanded over the years under pressure from local commercial resorts (Tan-Tar-A, Lodge of the Four Seasons, et al). The air strip has never been very useful to park visitors; instead it creates a noisy and intrusive eyesore. Yet, the air strip is actually maintained in part from the "parks and soils sales tax" revenues.
The Missouri Deptartment of Natural Resources has tried to resolve this conflict by proposing that a new airport be developed for private and commercial use -- OUTSIDE the park. Former DNR director David Shorr had reclassified the air strip downward for general aviation with a proposed 17-year exit (14 years from now) to allow the surrounding area to have time to develop a regional airport. Now, the local communities and business interests want to cancel that proposed phase-out and improve the air strip to allow larger commercial planes and jets to land there.
The town of Osage Beach is seeking a 20-year lease from the state to operate the Lee C. Fine Airport and has applied to the FAA for permission to improve the facility. Some local politicians have threatened to take the matter to the Legislature if DNR does not cooperate. The pressure on state officials is powerful.
Even if this were a good idea on the merits, the air strip is located on a ridgetop in the park that does not really allow for the development of the kind of facility that Osage Beach and the lake resorts need. For their short-term convenience, local officials would create long-term havoc for the park.
This is an important issue that transcends this one park because it could set a precedent for use of other state park lands for commercial purposes. Missouri conservationists should write Governor Carnahan and DNR Director Steve Mahfood and urge that:
Write:
Governor Mel Carnahan
Room 216
State Capitol
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Director Steve Mahfood
Missouri Dept./Natural Resources
P. O. Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102.
Thank you for attention to this matter.
R. Roger Pryor
Senior Policy Director
Missouri Coalition for the Environment
6267 Delmar, #2-E, St. Louis, MO 63130
Web Page: http://www.moenviron.org
E-Mail: ozarkroger@moenviron.org
More news from the National Audubon Society