The Middle River Group, LLC

fly fishing, conservation and politics.

habitat

Tax incentives for land conservation

By

For all the bad news coming out of our nation’s capital, sometimes our elected officials actually introduce legislation that makes good sense for conservation.

There are a couple of pieces of legislation that would, if they become law, be a great help to conservation not only here in the Valley but across the country.

The first bill is the Conservation Easement Incentive Act. It was introduced on April 1, in the U.S. House of Representatives, by Representatives Mike Thompson, D-Calif. and seventh district representative Eric I. Cantor, R-Va.

A similar bill, known as the Rural Heritage Conservation Extension Act, was introduced in the U.S. Senate by Senators Max Baucus, D-Mont. and Charles Grassely, R-Iowa.

These bills would make permanent the enhanced tax deduction for landowners who donate the fair market value of their land under a qualified conservation easement.

The deduction allows farmers and ranchers to claim a charitable deduction for up to 100 percent of the donated value of the land they place under an easement. Other landowners can deduct up to 50 percent of the value, an increase from 30 percent under the previous law.

These enhanced tax incentives became law in 2006 and were extended in 2008. Unfortunately, this enhanced deduction expires at the end of the year.

“I have seen firsthand how conservation easements are being used by family farms in my district,” said Cantor. “Providing a permanent tax incentive for conservation easements is a great way to encourage conservation efforts while also reducing the tax burden on these hard working families.”

Easements are an important conservation tool. According to the Valley Conservation Council, on whose Board of Directors I sit, easements have helped protect more than 48,000 acres here in the valley.

A conservation easement is a legal agreement, usually between the landowner and a land conservation organization or a public entity. The landowner continues to own the property but gives some rights to the easement holder.

Landowners often put some or all of their land under a conservation easement because they want to protect the important natural, historic or scenic qualities or their land.

Besides the charitable deduction, there can be other important tax benefits to landowners who place a conservation easement on their property.

Because of the way land is taxed, state and local taxes may be reduced.

Conservation easements could also mean lower estate and inheritance taxes. Heirs might be able to retain land they otherwise would have been forced to sell in order to pay those taxes.

Now the tax code is a tricky thing, so I won’t offer any advice on whether a donated easement makes tax sense for you. You will need to talk to the tax professionals about your specific situation.

You can also contact the Valley Conservation Council for more information as well.

What I will tell you is conservation easements are a good thing.

They help keep farmers and ranchers on their land.

Easements are also an important tool for protecting water and air quality, scenic vistas, open space and important fish and wildlife habitat. Benefits we often take for granted because they originate on private land.

The enhanced tax incentives favor working farms and ranches. By doing so, it creates an incentive to keep working lands working – less likely to become strip malls and subdivisions.

Here in the Valley that is a good thing.

You can read more of my columns at News Virginian.com

Teaching our kids to fish

By

Two weeks ago, I had a chance to spend some time at the Western Virginia Sports Show. Mark Hanger, the producer and owner of the show impressed me with his commitment to conservation and getting families interested in the great outdoors.

When I caught up with Hanger at the show I asked him how the attendance was. He told me it was better than they expected given the economy, then he made an interesting observation.

“The only thing we can point to is they want to be happy for a while, they don’t want to hear any bad news. They want to be enlightened, entertained and come out and spend some time with their family at a reasonable cost and have some good entertainment,” he said.

In his show brochure Hanger said “on your next trip, take a young person with you and teach them to love, respect and enjoy God’s great outdoors.”

I asked him about getting kids into the outdoors.

“There is no doubt about it that that is the most important because it is our future. If we don’t get children in the outdoors, then our sports are going to diminish and be gone forever,” he said.

Hanger pointed out a number of educational elements at the show including the Bucks, Bows and Does, Outdoor Adventure archery education trailer and the show’s wild game display.

A great example of getting kids engaged in the outdoors was the Orange County High School Anglers Club. They are a 4-H and Junior B.A.S.S. Federation Nation club.

The club is made up of students ages 11 to 19 who love to bass fish competitively.

I spoke with Becky Gore, the club’s advisor. Gore is a teacher and a former coach. She is the power house behind the club and a joy to talk with. If every school in the Valley can find a Becky Gore, then fishing will have a very bright future.

Gore told me how she got the club started.

“In 1999, about ten years after my husband had died, I had just gotten my kids in college. I decided I wanted to start fishing again, so I went to the high school principal and said I would like to start a fishing club and she said ‘sure, go for it,’ ” Gore said. “We have three entities, we were first 4-H and the high school together, and then the B.A.S.S. Federation found out about me and they were trying to implement a youth program in Virginia. They called me up and asked me if would I be interested. I asked what they could do for my kids. They said they could advance to a world level. I said ‘Sure, let’s do it.’ Plus, they mentioned the word scholarship and I jumped on it.”

Gore told me what other high schools could do to get do to get the program started. She ticked these items.

“You’ve got to have someone who loves kids and loves being with kids and is willing to do it without getting compensated,” she said. “You’ve got to have some kids that are interested. Once those kids approach that principal and say ‘We want a bass club,’ then that principal may go out or tell those kids, ‘Well, you find a sponsor and then we will do it.’ ”

Gore told me the kids can receive their high school letter if they meet the criteria. She has developed that criteria and told me that all another coach or teacher needs to do is contact her and she would be happy to share it with them.

“And that is the other cool thing about this, it’s parents and kids working together,” she said. “And the other thing I have tried to do is give the kids an opportunity to be with their parents. Be with their dads or moms out on the water on a Saturday or Sunday.”

Gore credits the parents, students and her volunteers for making the program a success. She considers them all family.

Nothing is more important for the future of hunting and fishing than helping the next generation learn about the sports we love. Let’s all do a little more where we can.

Wildlife should benefit from stimulus

By

We are all reading or hearing about the economic stimulus package that President-elect Barack Obama and Congress will be working on. Whether you think it is a good idea or not, the likelihood that some form of stimulus package will become law is pretty much a certainty.

Last month, 31 hunting, fishing, conservation and environmental organizations jointly sent a letter to the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, supporting additional funding for habitat conservation and green infrastructure projects.

What I found very interesting and frankly refreshing about who had signed the letter was that these 31 groups have not always been willing to work together.

Environmental groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Environmental Defense Fund, National Audubon Society and the Wilderness Society joined with the American Sportfishing Association, the Boone and Crockett Club, Ducks Unlimited, the National Wild Turkey Federation and the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership in support of specific conservation funding.

The letter stated, “The attached recommendations represent a unique consensus among a wide range of organizations specifically aimed at habitat-oriented projects that benefit fish and wildlife while stimulating local economies, particularly through job creation.”

This is a remarkable turn of events. Hopefully one that will become a pattern and not an exception.

Like many, I am not sure the answer to our nation’s economic woes is more government spending. But, if taxpayer funds are going to be used to stimulate the economy then using that money for habitat conservation, public access and recreational opportunity makes sense.

Investments in our natural resources offer a variety of economic benefits. Hunting, fishing and other recreational activities are economic engines that provide tax revenue, conservation dollars and jobs for local economies.

These organizations point out that investments in conservation projects provide job-creation opportunities in engineering, landscaping, hydrology and other biological fields. These types of projects need specialized equipment operators, construction crews and many other skilled laborers.

The group noted, “Our estimates indicate that over 160,000 jobs would be created through this funding request. This figure represents direct job creation as a result of the proposed stimulus investments and does not include secondary job creation. Most of these programs and projects would be initiated and jobs created within 3-6 months, with the goal of completing obligations within one year.”

When you add it all up, these groups are recommending an investment of nearly $9 billion. Seems like a lot of money doesn’t it? Sure does to me.

But if you look at it as part of the whole and if the current $700 billion being discussed is close to the final amount, then these programs will only get a bit more than one and a quarter percent of the total.

I think our natural resources, fish and wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities deserve that and more.

Let’s take a look at some of the specific recommendations.

For the U.S. Department of Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service, they recommend increased funding for Habitat Restoration Programs like the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, the National Fish Habitat Action Plan, the Fish Passage Program and the Coastal Program. Because of the project backlog in each of these programs increased funding would immediately lead to more jobs.

Another U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service program that could use more money is the North American Wetland Conservation Act grants program. NAWCA has a great track record of success. Demand for these grants is growing and exceeds current funding levels.

New funding would mean engineering and construction related jobs. Given the importance of wetlands and the continued projected losses of this critical habitat, more NAWCA grants make sense.

The National Park Service is another important agency in desperate need of funding. Estimates of the operations and maintenance backlog are somewhere north of $8 billion, more than half of that amount is needed just for road and trail repair.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has a number of important conservation programs at the U.S. Forest Service and Natural Resources Conservation Service.

The groups making the recommendations point out that U.S. Forest Service could use funding assistance for sustainable forests. Funds would be used to improve water quality and wildlife habitat while ensuring a supply of wood and forest products.

Programs like Legacy Roads and Trails Remediation with a backlog of more than $400 million, would use the funding to improve recreational access and enhance fish and wildlife habitat.

Wildfire is a growing worry. More than 100 million acres of state, private and national forests are at risk across the nation. Funding for hazardous fuels reduction and post-fire restoration would help make our rural communities safer, provide jobs, support local economies and enhance fish and wildlife habitat.

Valley residents and visitors know what an asset our National Parks and National Forests are. Using new funding to improve these important recreational venues is a smart investment.

Hunting, Fishing and Outdoor recreations are important contributors to our national economy. Hunters and anglers spend $76 billion each year to enjoy their sports. They are an economic engine with a “ripple effect” of $192 billion.

That ripple effect means people have jobs and local economies thrive. Besides the direct hunting and fishing jobs, other businesses benefit – businesses like gas stations, retail, restaurants and hotels in every state and congressional district.

As taxpayers we have a right and duty to express our views on how the government spends our money. If we are going to spend the money, then these programs and projects are worthwhile investments.

Take the time to tell our elected officials that hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation are important to our economy and deserve financial support.

You can read more of my columns in the News Virginian.

Learning from the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture

By

As a fisherman and hunter I have learned to appreciate the interconnectivity of the natural world.

Like many, I have come to see the wisdom in the quote often attributed to John Muir, “When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.”

By the way, what he really said was, “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.”

But the point remains.

One of the prime examples of this interconnectivity is the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture.

The Joint Venture began in 2002 when a small group of us got together to see if we could take advantage of the emerging interest in fish habitat conservation by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Service had launched the National Fish Habitat Initiative and a few of us were interested in seeing if there might be some common interest to do something for the Brook Trout habitat.

The original group of fish heads included the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries’ Larry Mohn and Steve Reeser, Hannibal Bolton from the USFWS, Dave Cross from the U.S. Forest Service, Steve Moyer from Trout Unlimited and Gordon Robertson from the American Sportfishing Association.

We all felt that the National Fish Habitat Initiative, later known as the National Fish Habitat Action Plan, was a good idea. Using regional partnerships modeled after the North American Wetlands Conservation Act, joint ventures made good sense to us.

What we worried about was the spectra of “process” getting in the way of progress. The folks managing the Action Plan wanted to build a program first. We wanted to put our time, money and energy into “on the ground” projects.

Over the next few months we reached out to the fish and game departments in the 17 states that encompassed the Eastern Brook Trout’s native range from Maine to Georgia.

Most of the states contacted agreed with our enthusiasm for protecting, restoring and enhancing Brook Trout habitat. Many agreed to participate in an initial planning meeting the following year.

At that meeting the participants formed a steering committee (I currently serve as the vice-chair) to manage the effort. The participating organizations then divided the work among five working committees; Conservation Strategy, Data, Outreach and Education, Science and Research and Grants and Development.

Over the next two years the EBTJV did a range-wide assessment of Brook Trout populations and threats to Brook Trout and Brook Trout habitat in the Eastern United States.

Each state drafted conservation strategies to improve water quality and restore Brook Trout habitat and populations using local, incentive-based, non-regulatory programs.

“Once the partnership recognized the threats facing Brook Trout within its historic eastern range, we developed regional and range-wide strategies to take swift and deliberate steps to conserve strong populations and restore weaker ones,” said Steve Perry, Inland Fisheries Division Chief for the NH Fish and Game Department and Chair of the Joint Venture. “We created a model for fish conservation — a large-scale habitat-focused conservation strategy for a species at risk. This strategy provides us with a roadmap to significantly improve Brook Trout populations by 2025.”

Last year, the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture was recognized as one of the first partnerships under the National Fish Habitat Action Plan. The list of partners supporting the joint venture now includes fish and wildlife agencies from all 17 states, federal agencies, conservation organizations and academic institutions.

Brook Trout are state fish. They are the only trout native to the streams and rivers of the eastern United States.

Once abundant throughout their historical range, Brook Trout populations are declining as land use changes alter their habitat. “Brookies” need cold, clean water to survive. They also serve as excellent indicators of the health of the watersheds they inhabit.

Virginia has received funding for two projects, both of them here in the Shenandoah Valley, one on the North River and another on Smith Creek.

The North River Brook Trout Habitat Restoration project was one of the first to receive funds set aside by the USFWS for the EBTJV.

The North River project is restoring the original stream contour to a five-mile section above the Elkhorn Dam. VDGIF is working with the U.S. Forest Service to restore this historic Brook Trout habitat.

Larry Mohn at VDGIF told me that the project has tremendous potential for Brook Trout restoration. He also said because of the size of project it would take a while to get it completed.

Mohn is a pretty laid-back guy but he was visibly excited about the potential to restore this low in-stream flow habitat for Brook Trout.

The Smith Creek project is in Rockingham County. Working cooperatively with ten diverse partners, the project is helping restore riparian habitat at the headwaters of Smith Creek.

This project connects to Mountain Run in the George Washington National Forest as well, providing additional spawning habitat for those Brook Trout.

The connection the EBTJV has to our everyday life is not hard to see. Clean water is important in so many ways here in the Valley, in Virginia and across the country.

As part of the EBTJV we all benefit from the work to protect our watersheds and aquatic habitat. Whether you fish or not, when we tug at a single thing in nature, we indeed find it attached to the rest of the world.

You can read more of my columns in the News Virginian here.

Seat at the table

By

This is a follow up to my column on 12/04/08.

Hunters and anglers now have even more reason to offer their ideas to the incoming Obama administration.

On Friday (12/05/08) the President-elect Barack Obama’s Transition Project announced that documents from official meetings with outside organizations will be available for review on Change.gov.

Now you can see what various groups have given to the transition team at meetings and offer comments about those meetings and the materials.

Sportsmen and -women need to be engaged now more than ever. This is another easy opportunity to do.