NOTES FROM PRAIRIE INVERTEBRATE SESSION OF FRIDAY MORNING.

Private Landowners

Participants included people from NRCS, DNR Forests and Prairies, National Parks Service, Nature Conservancy (TNC), FWS, private landowners, Iowa Prairie Network

Discussion points:

More and more landowners want help with fire management, and agencies that work with private landowners are also increasingly interested in getting fire on the land.

Agencies don’t have the staff, time, or resources to meet the demand for fire help on private lands

Prioritization is needed. For example, some agencies could focus more on helping landowners who have native prairie remnants and/or plantings/remnants next to existing public areas

In the Loess Hills, TNC idea that there could be a fire cache of equipment for each county. Could try to focus on remnant prairies and areas with conservation easements. It would be nice to help private landowners hire private burn help, but it’s expensive.

There could be fire training for public and private participants, perhaps basic fire courses such as federal suppression and fire behavior courses (S-130 and S-190) (how to use tools and basic fire behavior and fuel models) -- would take two or three days, and could be done without too much trouble.

In Lee County, CRP land is being burned (by county roadside folks) but there must b a fire plan or the fire won’t happen. Usually the landowner can do it the next time, having learned how.

Planning is vital for private land fires. The consultant developes a prescription and then the landowner usually does it from then on. There are three important concepts for private burns: education, planning and prescription, and product (successful burn so people can learn from it). In the case of the consultant, the landowner signs a disclaimer to assume his/her own liability, and the consultant only works on "safe" burns. If the preparation hasn’t been done in terms of fire lanes and water available, the burn doesn’t happen. He charges $50/hr for field time and $40/hr for off-field time. If he had to have a higher level of liability insurance it "could kill him."

We must be concerned about fire quality (i.e., fire plans that protect invertebrates and biodiversity)

In some other states, there is a tax credit for money spent for natural areas management -- could look into that for Iowa

In Nebraska, there are burn consultants who charge $6/acre plus a basic fee -- not sure what all that covers. Nebraska also has burn workshops through the Extension Service and NRCS, though it is more geared to pasture management than natural areas management.

Some landowners don’t want to accept any liability even when they are having a fire done by a knowledgeable group like TNC. Unfortunately, there can be an occasional fire escape no matter who is doing the burn, so liability and public perception are problems.

The state of Florida has done burns for a long time. They have a state certification program, which involves passing an examination, and then the burner gets a certification number, like a driver’s license. Don’t know how much expertise is required to pass the exam.

Another problem is landowners who burn irresponsibly. More promotion of controlled burning probably will lead to more irresponsible as well as responsible burning. Public education about controlled burning (such as a half-hour TV program on burning put on by IPTV?) would help.

We might need different levels of certification for different objectives (woodlands, prairies?)

Hawkeye CC has a class on prescribed burning as part of their roadside program

Could County Conservation Boards (CCBs) help private landowners? They are often asked and consulted, but don’t have the staff to do lots of private burning. NRCS encourage prairie plantings, but doesn’t have funds to help with management.

In the 1950’s, most timber owners had agricultural backgrounds. Today, more than half the woodland owners don’t have ag backgrounds, and many are buying woodlands with discretionary income for recreation and other goals. That change in ownership patterns will affect how burning is done.

Local fire departments offer both opportunities and challenges. They can be encouraged to become involved in public relations efforts by educating them and having them help with some controlled burns. However, receptivity and interest varies greatly from place to place, and it’s necessary for them to know different techniques than standard structural fire suppression. Also, some departments are having troubles finding sufficient numbers of volunteers to fill their community needs – does this present natural resource folks with an opportunity?

The NRCS has contacts in local communities through the soil conservation districts. Perhaps there could be, through some arrangement/agency(s), a Master fire and/or prairies course, like a Master Woodlands or conservationist-type course, for landowners.

The woodland management professionals are now, by and large, doing a better job of woodland management than most private woodland owners. Woodland management prices went down as more consultants became involved. What would it take for more fire (and prairie) consultants to become available in Iowa? There could be a very good opportunity here for private enterprise.

Many older landowners, including farmers, can’t get help with burns, and they really need it. Some don’t even have younger people in their immediate areas to help them. They need help and advice. Could Extension provide some?

Some landowners who want/need help with burning are adjacent to public land, and if they don’t get the help and advice they need, they could accidentally cause problems.

Could Pheasants Forever and/or similar groups provide a little funding if they took more interest in land management as well as planting? Some PF chapters are already giving some burning help.

With the help of a little education and demonstration, more landowners are burning their own ditches in Lee County.

Some other states have roving burn crews that work on public and private land. It would be helpful to learn how those programs work and are funded.

Help with burns could be used as an incentive to encourage landowners to provide long-term protection such as conservation easements on their land.

In Wisconsin, there is a program which trains private landowners to do controlled burns so they can help each other do controlled burns on each other’s land. After a landowner passes the training course, he/she is entitled to help with burning on his/her own land in return for helping others burn their lands. Not sure how it is arranged and/or funded.

We should be planning ahead for management needs, including fire, when we plant prairies. (That often doesn’t happen now with programs like the CRP, which often encourages trees in or next to prairie plantings.)

Burning on private lands must deal with county and state requirements in terms of air quality and safety, as well as groups like "Smoke-Free America." That can make it especially hard to burn in or near cities.

The government can’t handle all the demands for private burn help. Encouraging private burning consultants is essential. One problem is that it is easier to get government money to help protect and manage woodlands than to protect and manage prairie plantings and remnants, especially remnants. Maybe we could try to get state cost-share help for managing prairies, and also possibly improve state and county tax breaks for prairie remnants so they are more comparable to the state and county tax breaks for woodlands.

Training and certification could help to manage public relations problems resulting from fire escapes, and could help the public distinguish between responsible controlled ecological burns and irresponsible uncontrolled burning (trash, etc.)

One summary -- we need classes on burning, roving burn crews under an agency or agencies to deal with liability issues, and landowner education and requirements (prepare site for burn before you can get help with a burn?)

The reason that current agency programs are structured the way they are (CRP, etc), is because they were supported by sufficient political mass to get them enacted. If we want support for fire/prairie/savanna programs, we must create the needed people and political force/will to get it done.

(recorded and interpreted by Cindy Hildebrand, who hopes this is fairly accurate!)