Thank you to John Farrell, President of O’Brien County Sportsmen’s Club (OCSC) for his contribution to an ongoing debate about public land use. Mr. Farrell has a deep passion about limiting the use of public land, particularly the Hannibal Waterman Prairie, which remains the main focus of this debate. While an opinion cannot be wrong facts are often presented in an incomplete or incorrect way. This response is to correct those errors.
In the opening paragraph of the OCSC letter, Mr. Farrell describes the contribution of OCSC as “a good portion” of the funding to purchase Hannibal Waterman Prairie. There is no exact record that I have found that identifies an exact amount of dollars from which entity. What is verifiable is that OCSC contributed approximately 16% of the overall project cost. Another known contribution for the purchase of the 160 pristine acres in 1989 and left out of OCSC letter to the editor is the approximately 8% contributed by O’Brien County Historical Society. The nation’s “Wildlife Habitat Stamp Fund” (WHSF) provided the remaining dollars up to 75% of the project costs. According to count records the final sale price was $71,000.
Toward the end of that second paragraph Mr. Farrell states, “Even though Ms. Radtke’s editorial would have you believe that horse trails were “never the issue when questions started getting asked” the next sentence attempts to turn my statement into a reference to “last month’s meeting” (I assume January 2022). Here is the history.
For purposes of “when questions started getting asked” my reference to a meeting in “Betrayal on the Trail” was the Tuesday, September 8, 2020 regular meeting of the O’Brien County Board of Supervisors. Conflating the real beginning on that date with a meeting held in January 2022 is twisting and conflating facts to turn fantasy into false history. The exact conduct I railed about in “Betrayal on the Trail.” I stand by my statement in “Betrayal on the Trail.”
At that September 8, 2020 meeting Ms. Denise Steffen READ a prepared statement to the board. That statement can be viewed in its entirety on our websites, www.belltimescourier.com or www.thesanbornpioneer.com.
Later that Tuesday, a then O’Brien County Conservation Board member personally invited me to the Conservation meeting on Wednesday September 9, 2020. I attended. Ms. Steffen also attended. As did several other members of the public including Mr. Farrell.
It was September 9, 2020 when Mr. Farrell stood and claimed ownership of that property for OCSC. He went on to declare that horses would never be allowed on that property. In the letter to the editor by OCSC printed this week, Mr. Farrell recognizes, finally, that Hannibal Waterman Prairie is public land.
The only sentence about horses, up until Mr. Farrell’s outburst, (publicly documented) was said at the supervisors meeting on September 8 and it was this, “With a new Ranger position added, there seems to be more emphasis on hunting, and hunting properties and hunting opportunities while not one foot of the 942 acres can be used by the citizens for 4 wheeling, bike trails or horseback riding.” O’Brien County or O’Brien County Conservation own all of the referenced 942 acres.
That was it. That is the sentence that brought all of us to where we are today about public land use in O’Brien County. In my opinion and having been in each of the rooms during the discussions, I believe it was that outburst by Mr. Farrell that turned the conversation to be about horses.
A subsequent regular OCCB meeting brought members of the public out. The room at PHC was filled. Most of those people were horse enthusiasts and interested in pursuing opportunities in their resident county for the activity. I am remembering one or two people interested in 4 wheeling. That is all. Since then some interest in biking activities has been introduced and received good cooperation with Conservation.
OCCB responded to the large crowd and shortly following that meeting 1 employee and 2 board members invited one of the enthusiasts to Hannibal Waterman Prairie and began marking trails and/or obstacles.
Then DNR entered the picture to stop the process. A letter was sent by DNR to the Conservation Board. As stated in “Betrayal on the Trail” The purpose of the letter was to “nip it in the bud.” Suddenly regulations and use restrictions that stopped the development of equestrian use existed. It was this letter that first introduced “incompatibility” to everyone following the development of horse trails. DNR only says horseback riding is incompatible because that is what Fish and Wildlife Service says.
That is not good enough. And that is the problem. That reason alone for the denial is opaque, vague and unsubstantiated. Even the so-called effects of horses’ presence on wildlife are suspect. The denial letter does not give any citation to support their claims. So far away from the ordinary that the position is at best, suspect. The DNR denial letter can also be found on our websites.
Incompatible. Define it. Measure it. Give it meaning and then it could be much more palatable. But oh, the inconsistency and politics of it all. Iowa has a minimum of 2 WHSF funded areas where horseback riding is a compatible use. So yes, incompatibility must be defined and supported with facts and environmental science if the word is to have any credibility here.
McCormack Area. Let’s talk about that place for horseback riding. It is listed on the O’Brien County Conservation website as 21 acres. It is gorgeous! I walked it during the spring of 2021. I was with Ms. Steffen and former director Brian Schimmer. We spent about an hour – WALKING it. I also was invited by a group of riders to come out there as they ventured to it on their horses back in the summer. There were 5 or 6 of them. They parked their 3 trailers at the “Burned Bridge” parking lot about a mile and a half away. The 3 trailers pretty well filled the parking space. Maneuvering the vehicles on the parking was a challenge.
So about 40 minutes down the first gravel road and on the railroad bed took the riders to their turn, Wilson Avenue. It is a level “B” road where the horse trail entrance is accessible. The riders signed in and went on up the grassy hill and disappeared into the wooded area where just a few weeks before I personally tromped on the same deer trails they were about to ride on just a few weeks earlier.
The trail area is gorgeous, as I said. Much of the trail is along the ridge of a bluff overlooking the wide Waterman Creek. The creek meanders right through the middle of the 21 acres limiting the useful, accessible trails of McCormack area to more like 7 or 8 acres. I should have waited outside the gate. It took the riders 12 minutes to ride those trails.
The OCSC letter quotes the potential consequences of allowing an activity outside DNR regulations. One of the stiffest consequences is the eligibility of future federal funding to Iowa “to help local entities acquire land for the development and enhancement of wildlife habitat.” Maybe that would be a good consequence. Right now this nation is enduring a period of rapid inflation. Inflation is caused by too many dollars chasing too few goods. There is a lot of federal money in the system right now. There is just not enough aimed at increasing supply. I am old enough to remember what happened the last time high agricultural land prices touched the point of a pin.
Perhaps the time is right to cease accepting federal funds for the purchase of more unneeded public land and to rebuild this nation’s private productive capacity. Those federal dollars are too many for the available supply of land. Those federal dollars are hindering a new generation of food producers and other private investment by creating high bubble prices. And lets be honest, one of this nation’s hallmark features is the sanctity of private property ownership. So maybe the time is right to get the federal dollars for land purchases out of the current economic environment.
I do not doubt OCSC’s passion about hunting and/or fishing. I do not begrudge anyone their enthusiasm about their hobby. I applaud loving life like that. I do not suffer dishonesty. That is what I am finding throughout this drama. And the OCSC letter to the editor serves as a hardcopy example of exactly the kind of distortion of facts that really gets me riled up. This can all be settled maturely by simply getting to the substance and meaning of “incompatibility.” Let’s do that.