By SNN Newsroom | October 15, 2026
U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall, a Kansas Republican, requested $4.2 million in congressionally directed spending for water management in the Rattlesnake Creek watershed near Quivira National Wildlife Refuge, according to a funding request published on the senator’s own website. New reporting has raised questions about whether a ranch in which Marshall holds an ownership interest could indirectly benefit from the project.
Marshall’s official fiscal year 2025 spending-request page lists the Rattlesnake Creek Watershed as the recipient, the project location as Stafford, Kansas, and the amount as $4.2 million. The stated purpose is sustainable agricultural water management in the subbasin.
Why the request has drawn scrutiny
An October 15 Associated Press investigation reported that Marshall holds a 20% stake in Rattlesnake Ranch, a commercial property adjoining the refuge. AP reported that the proposal would transport water from another watershed into Rattlesnake Creek to help replenish the refuge, which has faced shortages affecting wildlife and agriculture.
The potential conflict is not an established finding of wrongdoing. The concern raised by outside observers is whether a more reliable water supply for the refuge could increase the value of nearby land, including the property in which the senator holds a financial interest. The AP quoted a government ethics advocate who questioned Marshall’s involvement but said the facts did not appear to meet the Senate rule’s standard for an impermissible earmark whose principal purpose is a lawmaker’s financial benefit.
Marshall’s response
Marshall’s office rejected the suggestion that his property would benefit. Spokeswoman Payton Fuller told AP that the water would go to Quivira and that Rattlesnake Ranch would not benefit. She characterized the infrastructure effort as a way to help sustain farms and provide water during droughts.
Marshall previously publicly welcomed conservation agreements that reduced the threat of mandatory water-use cuts for farmers in the creek basin. Farmers, state officials and federal wildlife managers have spent years attempting to reconcile agricultural irrigation with Quivira’s water rights and habitat needs.
AP also noted that the senator has publicly opposed earmarks in the past. The publication reported that although the original legislation carrying his request did not become law, funding was subsequently approved through other spending legislation. The separate questions—whether the project serves a public need, whether the ranch gains any measurable benefit and whether Senate ethics rules were implicated—should not be treated as interchangeable.
What remains unresolved: SNN has not independently quantified any change in the ranch’s property value, identified a finding of an ethics violation, or established how much of the appropriated funding has been spent. These questions would require additional financial, real-estate and project-implementation records.
Sources: Sen. Marshall’s public spending request; Marshall’s 2024 public statement; Associated Press original investigation, October 15, 2026.
