Montana Hunters.....We Need Your Help

[Ben Lamb]

Ben - I agree with you, they are certainly an indicator and the best thing we have to judge a public servant by when they are up for an election. All I was trying to get at is that we shouldn't act like past actions will always determine present day decision making and we should do our best to work with the public servants who are in office.

I think that's right, to a large degree. Jeff Wleborn carried the Ditch Bill in his first term and is now a champion for us on many, many issues. Same with Senator Vincent (with whom there are still several disagreements on policy) leading against the transfer of public lands from his chairmanship of Senate Nat. Resources.

But in this specific instance (Habitat Montana and the three land board members who vote consistently agaisnt sportsmen): It was tried all of last year as people worked with staffers and land board members directly to push them to the right place. We tried that last session when Senate Leadership in conjunction with some land board members kept pushing legislation that would have corrupted Habitat Montana regardless of having 0 support from sporting organizations or landowner groups.

Stapleton has publicly stated that easements are a bad idea because they limit development. His opposition is that easements actually conserve land rather than allow for 40 acre horse ghettos.

Arntzen is blowing in the wind, with no real presence other than to follow Rosendale. Her legislative record on sportsmen's issues was always sub-par, voting to gut programs or set seasons by statute.

Rosendale's past voting record has played out in the Land Board arena. Less access, and more delays while not understanding easement law, despite having a full time staffer who works on these issues.

And all of them have full time staffers who are supposed to be experts on land board issues, yet here we are a year into their terms, watching them claim ignorance on how to do their jobs.

I'm all for trying to work with those who've been elected. AG Fox has been a great land board member, and an honest broker in how to do this work, and is generally a nice guy. He's surrounded himself with competent staff who know their jobs well. Same with the Governor.

How much more of a chance do they need?

 

[Gevock]

MWF petition on Horse Creek project

I think that's right, to a large degree. Jeff Wleborn carried the Ditch Bill in his first term and is now a champion for us on many, many issues. Same with Senator Vincent (with whom there are still several disagreements on policy) leading against the transfer of public lands from his chairmanship of Senate Nat. Resources.

But in this specific instance (Habitat Montana and the three land board members who vote consistently agaisnt sportsmen): It was tried all of last year as people worked with staffers and land board members directly to push them to the right place. We tried that last session when Senate Leadership in conjunction with some land board members kept pushing legislation that would have corrupted Habitat Montana regardless of having 0 support from sporting organizations or landowner groups.

Stapleton has publicly stated that easements are a bad idea because they limit development. His opposition is that easements actually conserve land rather than allow for 40 acre horse ghettos.

Arntzen is blowing in the wind, with no real presence other than to follow Rosendale. Her legislative record on sportsmen's issues was always sub-par, voting to gut programs or set seasons by statute.

Rosendale's past voting record has played out in the Land Board arena. Less access, and more delays while not understanding easement law, despite having a full time staffer who works on these issues.

And all of them have full time staffers who are supposed to be experts on land board issues, yet here we are a year into their terms, watching them claim ignorance on how to do their jobs.

I'm all for trying to work with those who've been elected. AG Fox has been a great land board member, and an honest broker in how to do this work, and is generally a nice guy. He's surrounded himself with competent staff who know their jobs well. Same with the Governor.

How much more of a chance do they need?

Here is one way that hunters can make their voice heard:

http://montanawildlife.org/tell-state-land-board-to-approve-horse-creek-conservation-easement/

 

[Brian in Montana]

Emails sent.

 

[Brian in Montana]

And... I just realized I was too late joining this party. Sorry.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Here is one way that hunters can make their voice heard:

Submitted; thanks Gevock.

 

[Schaaf]

http://billingsgazette.com/opinion/...cle_d1e3c7a2-2696-5431-aa4e-8571c67b7716.html

This guy didn’t beat around the bush.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Billings Gazette Editorial: http://billingsgazette.com/opinion/...cle_6fd57791-1c11-56f4-b344-c62706e2958c.html

A response from Alan Olson of the Montana Petroleum Association (Alan is a former legislator whose voting record on sportsmen's issues was, to be kind, subpar): http://billingsgazette.com/opinion/...cle_5c55a064-1232-52c6-ac61-11fe52bb029b.html

 

[Southern Elk]

Does the land board have to approve all conservation easements?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Does the land board have to approve all conservation easements?

If they use FWP or DNRC funding, yes. This one uses funding from Habitat Montana.

 

[Schaaf]

I would be willing to bet the landowners will be getting an easement one way or another. The other way won’t have public access and that split estate argument won’t hold water in court if The Nature Conservancy buys an easement. Chances are that Easement won’t allow public access.

 

[Southern Elk]

If they use FWP or DNRC funding, yes. This one uses funding from Habitat Montana.

Got ya, that's where I was getting confused.

I emailed the land board earlier today, not that it will do any good.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Got ya, that's where I was getting confused.

I emailed the land board earlier today, not that it will do any good.

Keep after it.

Hearing that they're getting swamped and certain members are not happy about the attention. Ask 5 friends this weekend to do the same!

 

[teamhoyt]

I would be willing to bet the landowners will be getting an easement one way or another. The other way won’t have public access and that split estate argument won’t hold water in court if The Nature Conservancy buys an easement. Chances are that Easement won’t allow public access.

Right on the money, this easement will likely happen, ranchers will win, mineral owners will still have the same rights, sportsman will lose big!

 

[Curt R]

Are comments from out-of-staters helpful, or no?

 

[Schism]

Are comments from out-of-staters helpful, or no?

It can’t hurt. Nonresident hunter fees help fund the MT FWP. If you have an interest in seeing the Horse Creek Conservation Easement pass send them an email and let them know how/why you support it.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Reading through the links some of you had posted. I don’t know how they can place so much emphasis on the split estate aspect as being the holdup for this. You would think it had never happened before. We deal with this constantly on easements in the Bakken, and I have never yet encountered a mineral owner who couldn’t develop their minerals. It has, however, often led to improved dialogue between surface and mineral interest holders during project planning, and a little more help for the surface owner in getting surface releases cleaned up.

Another email sent. Thanks for keeping us updated.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I don’t know how they can place so much emphasis on the split estate aspect as being the holdup for this.

As AG Fox expressed, it's a red herring to be flopped on the table as support for the skewed ideology of the elected-but-how-did-it-happen trio of public access opponents.

 

[rtraverdavis]

Not sure it’ll do a lick of good as an out of stater, but I sent the landboard an email supporting the easement. I hope it happens.

 

[Irrelevant]

I just received this response today.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Got the same form letter last week.