Poison talk not kaput By MIKE CORN Hays Daily News OAKLEY -- While looking at a new prairie dog poison, Logan County apparently made an overture to federal officials about renewed efforts to poison areas where black-footed ferrets were released in December. But pending a decision from Shawnee County District Judge Charles Andrews, the county's poisoning efforts -- even with Kaput, the new rodenticide -- will focus on properties other than where the ferrets were released, according to Logan County Commissioner Nick Scott. "We're staying away from the Haverfield-Barnhardt property, at least until we hear something," Scott said, referring to the pending decision from Judge Andrews, who heard the case in November but indicated that it might be January before a decision is rendered. None of the poison has been purchased, he said. New talk of poisoning is just the latest twist in a series of events in the fight over prairie dogs and efforts to reintroduce black-footed ferrets in Kansas. "We've got ferrets," rancher Larry Haverfield said, "but it's not settled." It was Commissioner Carl Uhrich, now chairman and the leading proponent of the war against prairie dogs, who inquired about the possibility of going ahead with poisoning efforts. Audubon of Kansas Executive Director Ron Klataske blasted Uhrich for attempting to "make an end run around the court." "It seems like an insane move on his part because it would certainly violate the spirit of their request to the court," he said of Logan County, which asked the judge to set out a "kill zone" where the county could poison. Exact details of what followed Uhrich's move remains uncertain, but others involved agreed the poisoning likely will not move ahead. In court, Uhrich, on behalf of Logan County, asked for a quarter- to half-mile kill zone, which would entail forcing rancher Larry Haverfield to move cattle from an area so the county could poison prairie dogs. Haverfield countered that efforts were already being made to prevent prairie dogs from going onto adjoining property. Haverfield has constructed a 30-yard vegetative barrier -- fencing off an area from cattle -- around most of the ranch he operates. That ranch includes property owned by Gordon Barnhardt and Utah resident Maxine Blank. Scott said Logan County is looking at Kaput to see how it compares with what had been the county's poison of choice, Rozol. "It is somewhat cheaper," he said. "Not that much, maybe 20 percent." But Environmental Protection Agency assessments suggest that Kaput has a higher secondary poisoning threat than Rozol. Both chemicals have special use permits in Kansas for prairie dogs, and must be used in the same manner and time period. Neither one can be used around cattle or where black-footed ferrets are located. Scott said state officials -- using federal money -- had already poisoned prairie dogs surrounding the Haverfield ranch prior to the release of the ferrets. "They hired us to do some cleanup around the property," Scott said. Scott said that he and the other commissioners have since received a letter from Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Mike LeValley about the ferret reintroduction. That letter notes that FWS cannot halt the county's poisoning, but asked for 30 days notice prior to starting if it decides to do so. That way, LeValley wrote, the area can be reviewed and if necessary, the ferrets can be relocated. "Now we're looking into it to see if anything needs to be done," LeValley said. Because the poison is grain-based, there's not much chance of direct poisoning of ferrets, which almost exclusively eat prairie dogs. But there is a risk of secondary poisoning, should a ferret catch and eat a poisoned prairie dog. Kaput and Rozol are both anticoagulants. Klataske agreed that the secondary poisoning could be most harmful, but not just to ferrets. Instead, he said, there are at least two bald eagles wintering in the area, as well as a juvenile golden eagle and a "reasonably healthy number of ferriguinous hawks," Klataske said. He went on to say that it is time for "the rest of us -- the people in Kansas -- to demonstrate that we don't want Logan County to destroy resources on the Haverfield and Barnhardt property." To do that, Klataske said, the Legislature needs to revisit the state's prairie dog eradication law, revising it and updating it. A bill held over from the 2007 Legislature would do that if it can get enough votes. Klataske said he doubts the county's attempt to force the hand of FWS to remove the ferrets will work. He said such an effort would be detrimental to Logan County and devastating to the ferret recovery effort. "It seems to be a misguided, overzealous attempt to demonstrate that they are going to show landowners that they are in charge, in spite of the fact that landowners should have some property rights," Klataske said. "It's a blatant attempt to undermine property rights as well as threaten the federal government's attempt to recover an endangered animal."