By BEN GARRETT
TnHunting.Com Publisher

A lawsuit filed by an Oregon-based environmentalist group seeks to forever change the face of the Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area in northwest Tennessee.

The lawsuit, filed June 12 in Paducah, Kentucky, lists the U.S. Forest Service and Land Between the Lakes as co-defendants. It was filed by Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics (FSEEE), an environmentalist group based in Eugene, Oregon.

In brief, the lawsuit contends that the more than 7,000 acres of land on the 170,000 LBL that are used for farming be eradicated, and the fields allowed to be reclaimed by nature.

The land in question totals 7,464 acres and is used for combined agricultural uses, including the planting of crops, hayfields, and supplemental food plots that are designed specifically to benefit wildlife. In addition to the foodplots, LBL mandates that all outlying crops harvested by private farmers who contract to farm within LBL be left to feed wildlife throughout the winter months.

FSEEE's lawsuit maintains that the agricultural activities on LBL are detrimental to the wellbeing of the natural habitation of wildlife.

The LBL lawsuit is one of several similar lawsuits being attempted on USFS lands across the country, which seek to see all croplands naturally reclaimed. Wildlife biologists argue that the USFS practice of creating open lands, and the LBL land management program in particular, are beneficial to wildlife. On LBL, the land management program has been credited with successfully managing herds of whitetail deer, flocks of wild turkey and coveys of bobwhite quail. Additionally, prarie lands on the recreation area are used to house herds of bison and elk.

Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that the "bottomland acreage" of LBL, "which possesses the most productive soils," has been "heavily degraded through years of intensive use."

The suit maintains that "the soil in the LBL bottomland areas is better suited for forestlands than cultivation . . . Severe damage has resulted to the soil from continued cultivation, such as severely reduced rates of water infiltration and perculation capacities."

The suit goes on to state that if the land were allowed to revert to forestland, "the soil's ability to handle storm event would increase considerably . . . the reforestation of the LBL bottomlands would help the ecological damage caused by centures of cultivation that has adversely affected, among other things, the structure, pH, and density of the area's soil."

In addition to allowing open areas to revert to forested areas, the lawsuit seeks to stop prescribed burning on LBL, as well as the future clearing of any land.

Kerry and Denise Underhill, residents of Cadiz, Kentucky, who farm LBL, said in a statement they are circulating by e-mail that the lawsuit is "yet another step by environmentalists to completely obliterate the farmer." They requested that LBL users email their comments to comments-southern-land-between-lakes@fs.fed.us by July 5.

Were the court to rule in favor of FSEEE, the end result would likely be a short-term improved soil quality on LBL, but would likely also be detrimental to deer, turkey and small game wildlife populations that inhabit the recreation area. It would all but make impossible maintaining bison and elk herds in the area.

RELATED: LBL featured in TN HUNTING ISSUES

Email the author | Discuss it on our forums | More hunting news