Little Rocky Moutains giveaway

[Straight Arrow]

'Don't know how that came about, but I am very grateful that you had the opportunity to spend that meaningful time with Sen Tester. It appears to have gone very well. Thank-you, Randy.

My next wish is for a similar interface between you and Congressman Steve Daines. With that opportunity, I am confident you would make significant strides in informing and convincing Daines of the importance of the hunter interest in not only promoting hunting, wildlife, and access, but also promoting related protections of the many natural treasures of the Treasure State.

 

[RobG]

Where we were standing, we were looking over the Gallatin and Madison Ranges, which if not for the use of a few million dollars of LWCF money in the mid to late 1990's about 300,000 acres of public access would have been lost. Hard to imagine living in SW MT; being an elk, deer, or bear hunter, and having huge tracts of the Gallatin and Madison Ranges be off limits. That is what would have happened without LWCF money and the hard work of many groups.

Can you or someone elaborate? I know Daines is still on the fence with LWCF.

rg

 

[pointingdogsrule]

Sounds like the land swap is "still" part of the "possible deal". Time to keep the pressure on and see if Sen. Tester listens. Like the saying goes "action speaks louder then words".... which is often the case with politicians...... let's hope Sen. Tester is different.

Thanks for the input Randy.

good luck to all
the dog

 

[sweetnectar]

I would be inclined to give them federal or state lands within the reservation boundaries. Hell give it all and write that portion off the bill.

Maybe we should get rid of other state lands that are land locked? Not sure how the people of Montana are at fault here to the tune of loosing 18560 acres (29 sections).
OK I'm ranting now: Can anyone add anything that would make punishing the people of Montana for the wrongs of the federal governement make sense? If we are going to give away the states land should it be replaced with federal land or state land again? Don't the schools get payed for the grazing leases on this land?

And why was/is the federal government managing the tribes water in the first place? I'm sure there are plenty of native americans that have the talent to manage water or that would rise to the challenge if someone wasn't doing it for them. There we go robbing incentive again. If the government would please wipe my butt all the time then if I ever had to wipe my own I can get it done but it may not be squeaky clean because I didn't have any incentive to learn how to wipe my own....I got to stop.

More governement.......AHHHHHHAHAHAH

 

[sweetnectar]

OK, I'm settled down a bit.

Sen. Tester, If you are reading this....thank you for taking the time to listen to some of montana sportsmans concerns. It is a step in the right direction. I hope your vote proves well for all the people of Montana.

Randy, those photos sure make it look like your best buds with Tester. If that doesn't make any republicans gun shy of you I'd be supprised.

 

[Big Fin]

Can you or someone elaborate? I know Daines is still on the fence with LWCF.

rg

A worthwhile history recital of land conservation in the norther Yellowstone ecosystem and evidence of the influence hunters have in these kind of discussions.

Burlington Northern, being originally a railroad company was granted millions of acres of land in the 1800's to put in the railroads. In many places, they were given every other section of land where the railroad was installed.

Roll forward 100 years and B-N formed a subsidiary called Plumb Creek to hold and manage all of its lands. Plumb Creek was charged with managing these lands for profits and to maximize shareholder returns. Hunters loved Plumb Creek, as they allowed free public hunting access.

Along comes a guy called Tim Blixeth and Big Sky Lumber. Yeah, the same Tim Blixeth who founded the billionaire neighborhood called the Yellowstone Club. Blixeth and his company buy most the Plumb Creek lands in the Madison and Gallatin Ranges. If you could have seen a map at the time, the lower elevation of the northern ends of these two mountain ranges were a big checkerboard pattern.

In short order, Mr. Blixeth notifies people that they will start closing these former Plumb Creek lands. That is a lot of land. I think close to 80,000 acres.

Even worse, he is going to close access across those lands that will get us to the public lands in the heart of the hunting grounds. That public land to be closed to access is probably three times the amount of deeded acreage.

Panic time. Blixeth leaves some lands open for a while, but to get the Forest Service and politicians to move, he says he will start closing all lands and access across all lands.

In two phases, we complete the Gallatin Land Exchanges. Baucus uses his position in the Senate to fund the first exchange. That is paid for with LWCF money and some timber receipts. The first exchange, around 1995, takes care of about 100,000 acres of access.

Blixeth is now really putting the pressure on us. He wants the public lands that sit on the SW side of Lone Peak. His plan is an exclusive development/ski area there. Since he holds a lot of access cards, so as part of the Gallatin II exchange in 1997, he gets that land.

In exchange, he gives up most of the rest of his holdings in the Madison Range, most of Swan Creek, and most of Squaw Creek. He also gets some of the Bangtails, as we do not have enough values to balance out the exchange values.

R-Y Timber wants in on the deal to unload some of their landlocked parcels, so they exchange some of their lands for some timber receipts. Yanke of R-Y sees more value in timber than landlocked parcels he will have a difficult time accessing/logging. The big cuts you see in the north Bridgers and the Bangtails are remnants of this deal.

When all is said and done, access in the Gallatin and Madison Ranges are consolidated into public ownership. Hundreds of thousands of acres of land are now kept accessible, even though we had to give up the lands now in the Yellowstone Club and some of the north Bridgers and much of the Bangtails. All in all, a great deal for hunters.

It was all funded with LWCF money, some FWP money, and timber receipts. Many in the environmental community are upset that some of the lands we got had been logged and that some lands would get logged in the future to pay for the balancing of values. The hunters really didn't care about the logging, as we had saved the access for future generations and trees grow back, land doesn't.

Baucus and Senator Conrad Burns, "Mr. No Net Gain," worked together in a way you would never see opposing parties work today, and as a result, they got the LWCF funding for both of these exchanges. Again, without hunters working on this deal and getting face-to-face time with those two senators, I doubt the Gallatin exchanges would have accomplished much, if anything at all.

The hunters were lead by two local rod and gun clubs - Gallatin Wildlife Association and Headwaters Sportsmens Association. RMEF was critical to the effort,using their national presence to speak on our behalf.

After that, the last remaining parcel in the Madison Range was Taylor's Fork, a property held by David Brask. He did not agree to sell/trade until 2004, at which time, the Trust For Public Lands put together an option to by out Brask and his approved subdivision in the middle of Taylor's Fork. TPL and RMEF lead the charge to raise money that could close the deal that was struck with Brask. Again, hunters brought Baucus and Burns, into the mix. Both those guys did great work to get LWCF funding for that deal also.

The two national groups who did the heavy lifting were TPL and RMEF. It was sad to see the environmental groups climbing all over each other to try take credit for the deal and clamoring for a place at the podium when the ceremony for Taylor's Fork was held. None of them would give Burns the slightest bit of credit for the deal, even though he really pushed back on some of his own party critics to make sure that the funding stayed in the USFS budget. I had lunch with him that day and it was one of the most entertaining lunches in a long time. I had drawn a Breaks elk tag and found out the day before, so much of the visit was about my preference for elk and his for beef. You could tell he was truly interested in my passion for hunting, even if it wasn't part of his life experience.

I feel like the old gray-beard telling this story, but it is worthwhile. These two, along with Taylor's Fork, OTO/Dome Mountain, and Royal Teton, were amazing access and habitat projects where hunters made a huge difference. And in all those instances, both MT Senators delivered, caring not about their political divisions, rather wanting to continue the legacy of MT delegates showing national leadership on land conservation issues, the same as did Mansfield, Metcalf, etc.

Summary - Without LWCF and Senators listening to hunters, many of the elk and bears posted on this site would have been off limits without a big checkbook. Which to me, is all good.

 

[Big Fin]

Randy, those photos sure make it look like your best buds with Tester. If that doesn't make any republicans gun shy of you I'd be supprised.

If any of the Republicans want to have the same discussion, of the same issues, on the same landscapes, I will get my camera crew there, also. I am an equal opportunity provider when it comes to politicians who want to talk hunting and access issues.

Unfortunately, the R's never ask to have these discussions, with the exception of Rick Hill and Conrad Burns. To his credit, Rick Hill came and met with me twice during his Governor bid. I also would meet with him and his staff when he was our lone Congressional Representative in DC. Many of us hunters used to have lunch with Conrad and we always laughed and had a good time. I really like Conrad, even with his off-color humor the DC crowd liked to make fun of. Conrad would have made a great guest hunter on a TV show. He was that likable.

During the Rocky Mountain Front Heritage Act meeting in Choteau, there were pics of me visiting with our one Congressional Representative, Steve Daines, and his staff. Should those pics scare away the Dems? I think Daines is a good guy who has been saying some good things about the importance of public access. I would gladly meet with him and do the same. If you can get the topic on his radar screen, let me know. Since he and I live in the same town and we sat next to each other while our kids attended the same hunter education class, maybe he will feel comfortable doing so.

If, as you say, those "R"s are gun shy, then that is their decision. This platform could serve as a very valuable tool for them to get across their messages and positions on access and hunting issues. If I was in their shoes, I would take advantage of this platform and have some pictures and video taken where we look like "best buds." Unless, of course, their position on those issues is something that is not going to be well received by those who watch/read these platforms.

 

[RobG]

Randy - I can't believe the details you hold in your head! I knew roughly about the land exchange, but didn't know all the background.

 

[shoots-straight]

Randy - I can't believe the details you hold in your head! I knew roughly about the land exchange, but didn't know all the background.

Evidence that he didn't drink enough as a younger man.

Thanks for all that your doing for us Randy.

 

[howler]

getting back to the topic at hand: Randy you say Tester asked if the sportsmen and the tribe could meet and come to an agreement, It has been made very clear the tribe gets 100% of the water they need and deserve, they get ownership of all 29 sections of state lands 18.415 acres with in the boarder, the tribe gets all that with our blessing, We want to retain the BLM ground known as the Grinnell Notch all 15K acres. that is not with in the Fort Belknap Reservation boundary's.. This information has been public info made public at the Zortman BLM fire station meeting last year. Everyone knows what everyone wants, there really is no need for anymore barging sessions, The tribe is getting everything they asked for in the lawsuit and a bit more. the actual cash settlement is the question, should we give them the 5 million in dollars or should we give them a large piece of BLM land that is used extensively by sportsmen (hunters,,hikers,,sightseers) seems simple to me

 

[Big Fin]

getting back to the topic at hand: Randy you say Tester asked if the sportsmen and the tribe could meet and come to an agreement, It has been made very clear the tribe gets 100% of the water they need and deserve, they get ownership of all 29 sections of state lands 18.415 acres with in the boarder, the tribe gets all that with our blessing, We want to retain the BLM ground known as the Grinnell Notch all 15K acres. that is not with in the Fort Belknap Reservation boundary's.. This information has been public info made public at the Zortman BLM fire station meeting last year. Everyone knows what everyone wants, there really is no need for anymore barging sessions, The tribe is getting everything they asked for in the lawsuit and a bit more. the actual cash settlement is the question, should we give them the 5 million in dollars or should we give them a large piece of BLM land that is used extensively by sportsmen (hunters,,hikers,,sightseers) seems simple to me

To get some changes, it will require negotiation from what is currently there. I gave him some of my ideas as ways to keep the land, rather than use land as part of the settlement. I told him I am very willing to meet with the any parties that want to have some say in this. Some of those parties are not necessarily from MT. There are groups that surely want to have the land traded, versus cash paid.

I suggest you contact him via the email link or call his staff people. Let him/them know exactly what you are stating here. And let them know as often as you feel compelled to contact them.

You are right about the actual cash settlement being the question. Since one side wants land and one wants to pay cash, to solve that issue is going to need some "bargaining sessions." You willing to meet with other groups if the opportunity comes up?

 

[howler]

I have discussed this with testers folks in Helena, Bill Lombardi hopefully wean make it work. everyday this drags on is a day longer the tribe goes with out what due them, WATER

 

[greatwhitebuffalo]

Anybody know what the tribe plans to use it for in the future?

 

[3wisemen]

A answer to a few questions. The Fort Belknap Tribe was over paid on the original sale in the 1890's, because the lands were over surveyed and included thousands of more acres than should have been in the sale. The tribe kept this overpayment. Tester's office claims the tribe did not receive the monies from the original sale ????? I believe that Docket No. 250 in 1962 of the Indian Claims Commission addresses this claim The Blackfeet and Fort Belknap Tribe filed suit in 1981 and were compensated 4 million dollars plus and were to finally dispose of all claims and demands which were asserted or could have been asserted provisions of the Indian Claims Commission Act in Docket Nos. 250-A and 279-C before the Court of Claims. I believe that yes, I still know a lot more than some of you think I do and yes, the Tribe should be compensated, but not many times over, as they have on the Grinnell Lands? I've done my homework and have my degree. Tester on the other hand has failed in his homework.

 

[howler]

very good 3wisemen, keep us posted,,

 

[whitetail185]

I don't know what we owe the indians, my grandparents came from norway in 1915, so my family didn't ever take anything from the indians, the federal government has mismanaged the majority of taxes that i have sent them, I don't think i can get any of it back based on their perfromance. so why the indian, i thought we just had a multy billion dollar settlement because the gov mismanged indian assets, Before we give them any more money ect, lets have an accounting of what we give each tribe federally on a monthly basis, I believe it would shock you, how about the 9.6 million dollars the blackfeet just embezzeled and mismanaged that was suppose to be to help the youth on the res, when is enough enough.,

 

[jryoung]

A answer to a few questions. The Fort Belknap Tribe was over paid on the original sale in the 1890's, because the lands were over surveyed and included thousands of more acres than should have been in the sale. The tribe kept this overpayment. Tester's office claims the tribe did not receive the monies from the original sale ????? I believe that Docket No. 250 in 1962 of the Indian Claims Commission addresses this claim The Blackfeet and Fort Belknap Tribe filed suit in 1981 and were compensated 4 million dollars plus and were to finally dispose of all claims and demands which were asserted or could have been asserted provisions of the Indian Claims Commission Act in Docket Nos. 250-A and 279-C before the Court of Claims. I believe that yes, I still know a lot more than some of you think I do and yes, the Tribe should be compensated, but not many times over, as they have on the Grinnell Lands? I've done my homework and have my degree. Tester on the other hand has failed in his homework.

Just as an aside, you show up and start a thread and let it go for four pages, then drop back in for a second time several weeks later after it is dead. If you want to open the topic for discussion and claim you know a lot then you should stick around, share what you know and foster a conversation.

I don't know jack and would love to learn more. Kind of hard grow a tree when you plant a seed and forget to water it or give it sunshine.

 

[3wisemen]

Not dead yet

The Fort Belknap water settlement bill has been sent to Tester's Indian Affairs Committee. It is sitting idle has has a 13% +- chance of passing Congress. I have not been posting because it is a game, you make a move and then wait and see what move the other side makes. Not that i haven't been fighting this rotten water bill. I will continue to oppose this bill in any way possible because of how poorly it is written, and not that the Fort Belknap tribe does not deserve to have water rights, it's the pork that comes with it. (and the B.S.)

 

[howler]

I have written many letters against this, I only oppose loosing the 15K acres of BLM lands, I hope it goes down in flames, Tester has been good for sportsmen but if this goes thru I will oppose Tester forever !!!!!

 

[3wisemen]

Still ALIVE

I have also written and called Tester until i was past blue in the face and will continue until and after i am dead! I can talk to his staffers, but when i ask to talk to him, i am told he won't because he was and is not treated nice in our part of the State. I still continue to oppose the Fort Belknap water settlement just because of the Grinnell Lands giveaway and how wrong that part of Bill really are. Sorry that i have been quiet on this forum lately, but so has most others on this subject. Cat and Mouse. Please write and e-mail US Senate Indian Affair Committee with your view.