Principles of the Sandhills Task Force
On June 30, 1999 the Sandhills Task Force drafted a list of principles to guide their organization in its actions. They are listed below.
The Board will act on the lines of a policy-making board which defines limitations for the staff and addresses the short-term and long-term financial needs of the organization. The board will review reports and ratify the recommendations of an executive committee or staff.
Underlying principles influencing management
The STF will act as a land-based group, focusing the majority of its effort on enhancing the grassland wetland ecosystem in a way that sustains private profitable ranching, wildlife and water supplies.
All actions and decisions will be based on sound or best applied holistic management.
Focus will be on building traditional and non-traditional partnerships to improve education, funding, and technical assistance.
Encourage other groups to adopt the philosophies of the STF.
Maintain the reputation that the STF decisions are based on sound environmental and social decisions.
These principles are in response to trends and threats to the Sandhills’ ecosystem and ranching economy. They include:
Making a living without primary production base,
Increasing infrastructure costs,
Increasing taxes caused by land valuation increasing faster than agricultural value of property,
Increase dependence on outside income to subsidize ranching income,
Increase in recreational demands on resources,
Expansion of second home development in scenic areas,
Increase in number of large ranches and decline in number of medium-size ranches,
Outside [Sandhills] resource-changing decisions affecting private property,
Change in demographics (decline in population) decreasing the region’s political influence,
Increase in average age of ranchers with more becoming absentee landowners,
Changes in land ethics with changes in demographics,
Down-cutting of streams associated with changes in climate and water management,
More conversion of grassland to cropland,
Increase in spread of volunteer trees, and other non-native plant species
Increase in large confined feeding operations, and
Increase groundwater contamination Top
The vision of the STF is:
More economic diversity for individuals and communities,
Support taxes based on agricultural production,
Maintain family ranching operations,
Lower the average age of ranchers,
Support transfer of lands back to private ownership,
Preserve open space,
Emphasize native plant communities,
Support well-managed development,
Support no net loss of resources, and
Clean groundwater Top
The STF is not a research organization. It recognizes that research plays a valuable role in implementing and evaluating land management and land use decisions. The STF’s role in research will primarily be directed toward leveraging funds to obtain outside funding for research directed toward STF’s goal and philosophies.
Outreach would focus on encouraging managing resources in a holistic manner and toward economic diversity, and promote the philosophies of the STF.
As a non-profit organization (501(c)3), the STF chooses to be non-political on sensitive issues.
It is the organization’s philosophy that maintaining strong credibility as a resource-minded organization will go further in influencing legislation than can be done through lobbying efforts.
The extent of involvement in legislation will be primarily letter-writing to provide information. Top
Affecting economic viability of operations
It is the belief of the STF that economic conditions associated with ranching is reducing opportunities for young family ranching operations.
Further, the STF believes that sound land stewardship often suffers when poor markets and high operating costs exist.
The STF has identified as a long-term objective to develop a program to assist young ranchers with start-up costs.
Options could include:
Buying down interest rates for young ranchers,
Loans for start-up cost for diversified income sources,
Providing source networking,
Connecting absentee landowners with young ranchers,
Education and technical assistance in business, agricultural economics, and land management,
Conservation easements,
Funding under such a program would not be in the form of a subsidy, but rather, trading up-front capital for specific land management practices or conservation easements. Top
Many conservation agencies have developed incentive programs to affect changes in land use or improve production and economics of ranching. These programs are in the form of cost share where the landowner provides a percent of the costs, either in the form of money or in-kind services. Cost-share programs are developed at a national or state level and may not meet the full needs of the rancher. It is often the case that during low markets, land resources are stressed the most and rancher are not able to afford their share of the cost.
It is the philosophy of the STF to "fill the gap" in agency cost-share programs. Decisions on cost-sharing would reflect established philosophies:
Funding would not be in the form of a subsidy but be based on trading up-front capital for environmental benefits realized by such a project.
The amount and priority of cost-share would be based on the merits of the project and would give added consideration for new ranching operations.
Cost share will open opportunities to improved range and water conditions beyond the specific project. Top
Deciding funding priorities for projects
Priority criteria for cost share would focus on supporting sound land management and benefit to the environment.
Projects would be reviewed and recommended by a committee. If any member of the committee casts a descending vote it would be brought before the whole Board. Larger projects would be reviewed by the whole Board.
Easements (both permanent and less than permanent) would be reviewed and approved by the whole Board.
Easement would be based on protecting environmentally sensitive or threatened resources (e.g. prevent subdivision or development of scenic areas.)
New ranching operations would being given special considerations. Top
Budgeting and funding of projects would be based on a budget guideline (Table below) and the recognized needs and opportunities associated with each project.
|
Approximate percentage |
Activity |
|
45 |
Land Conservation |
|
10 |
Research |
|
15 |
Education |
|
10 |
Financial support for start up |
|
10 |
Staff/operations |
|
10 |
Cash reserves/emergencies |
The number of Board meetings will be targeted for six per year.
The Board would prefer more short meetings over few long meetings.
Agendas would be sent out in advance and each Board member would help identify items for the agenda.
That responsibility of establishing the agenda is not solely that of the Secretary.
The agenda should contain background information in order to bring members up to date.
Written reports in advance will be done to increase the efficiency of meetings.
