the "Public" Back In "Public Trust"
The Fight For
Our Land, Water and Wildlife
Sometimes I am in disbelief (there
is a 3 letter acronym that better represents the feeling) at the
overt disregard for the Public and the public process.
The IBMP (Interagency Bison Management Plan), whose objective
on their main page states, "The Interagency Bison Management
Plan is a cooperative, multi-agency effort that guides the management
of bison and brucellosis in and around Yellowstone National
Park ." One of the following bullet points states,
"Manage bison that leave Yellowstone National Park and enter
the State of Montana." If you look at the meeting
history of the IBMP, for years, you will see that the primary
location of meetings have been in Gardiner, Pray and Bozeman,
which makes perfect sense, since this is 1. in Montana, and 2.
near Yellowstone National Park where bison exit INTO MONTANA.
So why is the important Nov. 20, 2014
meeting of the IBMP - remember, this is all about Montana and
bison exiting the YNP - being held in Lewiston, IDAHO?
Not only is it in Idaho, but just on the border of Washington,
at the Nez Perce Reservation Clearwater River Casino & Lodge.
The Nez Perce are one of the 3 Native
American groups, as advisors, on the IBMP, whose turn it is this
year to host the meetings. The first was held by the ITBC in Bozeman,
the next will be by the CSKT at Polson, MT in July. But why is
the Nez Perce out of the state of Montana altogether? The link
from the IBMP site takes you to Idaho. Why are we having to drive
to Idaho for a public meeting, over 419 miles away from Bozeman,
(over 7 hours), in late November (snow and ice on roads?) for
Montana State business that originates near Yellowstone National
Park and bison entering Montana?????????? Polson is a bit of a
stretch, but Lewiston, Idaho is unacceptable. This needs to be
rescheduled back to an area closer to the business at hand - Montana
and the Yellowstone National Park (Bozeman, Livingston, Pray or
Gardiner). This is the Montana Public's business concerning Public
Please contact MT's Gov. Steve Bullock
and the IBMP members and let them know we need our IBMP meetings
in Montana, near the
Governor Steve Bullock
Toll Free: 855-318-1330
Yellowstone National Park: Dan Wenk - 307-344-2002 email@example.com
Gallatin National Forest: Mary Erickson - 406-587-6701
Fish, Wildlife & Parks: Pat Flowers - 406-994-4042
Department of Livestock Executive Director Christian MacKay
(406) 444-9431 CMacKay@mt.gov
DOL St. Vet. Dr. Marty Zaluski 406-444-2043
APHIS: Dr. Don Herriott - (503) 399-5871
Nez Perce Tribe: Brooklyn Baptiste - NPTEC@nezperce.org
InterTribal Buffalo Council: Ervin Carlson firstname.lastname@example.org
Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes: Leonard Gray email@example.com
the last (May 29th) and next (June 12th) EQC meetings dealing
with the Federal Land Carpetbag Grab were and will be held by
phone. 4 members of the EQC SJ15 Work Group dealing with a Federal
Land transfer to the State participated in the conference call:
Sen. Jennifer Fielder, Sen. Bradley Hamlett, Rep. Ed Lieser and
Rep. Kerry White.
The discussion focused primarily on
creating a draft
report, which will be reviewed at the June 12th meeting, to
be finalized and presented to the full EQC in Aug. The main items
discussed were making this Federal Lands Work Group a permanent
group, options being a stand alone group from the EQC and another
being a separate committee. They decided on 8 members being from
the EQC as voting members and 8 members being advisory, consisting
of members of the Public, but their idea of the "Public"
are County Commissioners. On top of that Sen. Jennifer Fielder
wants the members and advisers chosen, to be from counties that
have 40% or more Federal Public lands to heavily influence the
They also wanted to include compensation
for the members. If this is expanded to a stand alone or separate
committee, this could possibly include a legislative attorney
and assistant, which would add an additional $100,000 to the cost.
The adviser participating on the call stated the Work Group has
cost a fair amount of money already.
Sen. Hamlett stated this this Federal
Land Grab was, "a slow moving freight train, gaining momentum,
in the end, the public is going to push this."
Click To Enlarge
Magpie Postcards From
The "Brink" - Welcome To "North Texas"
column full of misleading information by Jim
"Moreover, Denowh’s column is full of misleading and
false statements. Here, I can address only some, briefly, within
your 300-word limit."
advice still rings true for public lands by
"The words of Theodore Roosevelt ring out as they have every
20 years or so when such a proposal gains political favor with
the government haters."
Thoughts and Observations by Bernard Lea
"One other comment, for those that are in agreement that
the federal lands, BLM and FS, should be in private or State ownership.
Think about this, if those lands ever come up for sale, the way
congress works, by the time the adjacent landowner learns they
are on the market, they will probably already be committed to
a campaign donor. You will not even have the opportunity to bid.
And also, do you think the new owner will let you graze those
lands at the current rate of $1.34 per AUM? This is even if you
get to graze them at all. Think about it."
lawmaker requests brucellosis program audit
by Laura Lundquist
" 'The Audit Division does amazing things. But they may get
into the weeds and find they need more time to complete it,' Phillips
said. 'We don’t want to rush it. But the 2015 Legislative
session would be a great opportunity if the audit revealed that
there was a way for the Legislature to contribute to improvements.'
Concerning Gov. Steve Bullock's issuing
a directive saying DOL could no longer enter private property
to haze bison without landowner permission, "This week, riders
contacted area landowners, some of which refused access, including
the Galanis family, MacKay said. By making a commotion near smaller
lots in Yellowstone Village, riders could get bison to move to
roads or public areas where they could start the haze. 'We’ll
look opportunistically, when they come off the private property,
to pick them up and move them (into the park),' MacKay said. 'If
they stay on that area that we can’t access, they won’t
get into conflict.'
reported on this in their last update, "On
Wednesday we found out it would be business as usual with the
DOL and a cohort from USDA-Animal & Plant Health Inspection
Service. Nearly 100 buffalo with around forty newborn calves were
bedded down, grazing, nursing, and enjoying the day on buffalo-friendly
private property. The hazers asked for permission and were denied.
Just like they do with their helicopter, hazers caused enough
of a disturbance surrounding buffalo on buffalo-friendly private
property, that they scared these buffalo off of buffalo-friendly
land and hazed them for nearly 17 miles into Yellowstone National
Phillips wants to know whether the
cost of this sustained effort is justified by the return or the
In his letter, Phillips requested a
summary of the cost of brucellosis management, the decision-making
process and the scientific literature on brucellosis outbreaks
in Montana and on various prevention actions related not only
to bison but also to elk."
Fight for the Land and Water Conservation Fund
by Rob Drieslein
(Thanks to Bernie Lea for heads up on this article)
"One of America’s great ideas, the Land
and Water Conservation Fund rests on a simple, logical
premise. It takes a portion of the revenues from offshore oil
and gas leasing and reinvests them in onshore conservation. In
other words, companies using public resources for profit must
pay a small portion of their revenues back to the American people.
The LWCF then uses its proceeds to provide funds and matching
grants to federal, state and local governments for land and water
acquisition and easements to benefit all citizens.
Kline said. 'We have to make sure politicians
recognize the importance of this program, and need it to be as
close to full funding as possible.' Sportsmen foot the bill for
a disproportionate amount of conservation work, Kline noted, and
with a backlog in public lands easement and acquisition opportunities,
sportsmen should be first in line insisting that Congress keep
its LWCF funding promises.
A final point: Even if Congress does
reauthorize the LWCF, some state congressional delegations do
a poor job of bringing those dollars back home. Next time your
congressman or woman visits your local habitat banquet, ask if
LWCF dollars are funding habitat in your state.
'(LWCF) is really nothing more than
a savings account to ensure the qualities of a landscape that
we cherish exists for the next generation,' Duggan said. 'These
are our dollars, and our natural heritage will pay the consequences
if we continue to allow Congress to not keep its promises.' "
Scientific Wildlife Management in Helena FWP?
Public Comments are needed before June 23rd email to firstname.lastname@example.org
In a non-scientific wildlife management decision catering to the
special interest ag/livestock, as well as oil and gas industry,
FWP recommends adopting the proposed sage grouse closure. This
is contrary to their own science, USFWS science and statements.
Statewide closure does not address the real issues of Sage
Grouse decline. In their March 2010 listing decision,
the USFWS concluded that the key threats to the continued survival
of sage - grouse are 1) habitat loss, fragmentation, and
modification and 2) inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms,
particularly in relation to energy and other development .
The USFWS also evaluated the 'utilization' (e.g. hunting) of sage
- grouse and concluded that 'the greater sage - grouse is not
threatened by overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific,
or educational purposes now or in the foreseeable future.
Proposed sage grouse options
available for public comment include:
no change from 2013; complete statewide closure; regional closures;
shorter seasons and/or reduced bag and possession limits.
Senate Bill 200 Annual Wolf
Quota – Proposed
Public Comments are needed before June 23rd email to email@example.com
This proposal ignores scientific wildlife management ( I dont
care whether you love, hate or are indifferent to wolves), just
like the elk kill permits and elk kill hunts, permitted to the
special interest ranchers, simply because they want them - which
is part of the reason why they are being sued.
"There is a proposed statewide
100 wolf annual quota for wolves taken under the terms of Senate
Bill 200. Senate Bill 200, passed by Montana’s 63rd Legislature,
provides for landowners or their agents, without a wolf license,
to take wolves that are a potential threat to human safety, livestock
or domestic dogs. This quota and take is separate and in addition
to any quota or general harvest associated with the wolf hunting
and trapping season and in addition to any landowner take outside
of the specific authority identified in Senate Bill 200."
With many of the recent proposals by
Helena FWP and the decisions by the FWP Commission, we might as
well drop the facade of a wildlife agency managing our Public
Trust and honestly name it "Montana DOL & APHIS Wildlife
Coming Soon, a presentation
by Art Canfield of Lewistown on the Federal Land Grab HR 1526.
Thanks to the Public who are keeping an eye out, researching,
and reporting on Public Trust violations.