Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 3,437
thanks for showing up!
Stafford Ferry CE
- Thread starter BigHornRam
- Start date
Flynarrow
Well-known member
I was involved with acquiring a perpetual CE on a ranch property whose owner was aging and wanted his two sons to have equality when he passed. One son never wanted to see the ranch again and the other wanted to stay and continue to ranch. Buying the CE gave the father the opportunity to give his one son cash and the other son acquired the ranch in its entirety to continue the ranching tradition.
mtnkid85
Well-known member
How'd it go?
mtnkid85
Well-known member
Thank you, listening now. Starts around 6:30
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 3,437
@Fire_9 great job, if that was you pointing reality out.
I cant believe the argument is about traffic on the gravel road - if anything - this IMPROVES that because hunters/recreaters will not have to commute as far to access public land.
This is a masterclass in local advocacy, btw. It's a fantastic example of how a few well informed people can help steer a public debate while staying polite, calm and focused.
Actions like this reverberate at much higher levels.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Thanks, but with difficulty understanding much of the "marble-mouth" reverberation and lack of succinct statements ... I havel little notion of the conclusion(s).
(Aside: with the advances in technology you'd think that audio feed and better acoustics would better communicate public meetings. But my hearing impaired bad I guess!)
RECAP ... please.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 3,437
It sounds like it needs to make it on to the agenda, and will be approved (listen at 47:17). The county wasnt aware they had to grant approval of the CE.
There were some comments about opposition (lack of ability to mine gravel in the future, increased traffic, and concerns of "perpetuity") but it sounds like it will be approved.
Reading the transcript is easier and makes for fairly simple way to navigate the meeting. Though its also imperfect.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Thank-you!
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Talk about a master class on hypocrisy. The County loves private property rights... so long as they agree with them.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Right out of the UPOM manifesto!
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
And can insert themselves into the negotiation.
I can sympathize with the fact that increased visitation does significantly increase impacts to infrastructure, and that county budgets are very tight. I see it constantly here in my Region 6 home county. But I’m not sure granting the county a seat at the table in a willing buyer/willing seller transaction is appropriate.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
This would have been so much easier if they'd have just commented "No objection"
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 3,437
FWP conservation easement in Fergus County stalls amid confusion, miscommunication
The Fergus County commission's discussion highlighted the confusion over changes to FWP’s conservation easements under Gov. Greg Gianforte’s Republican administration.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Can't read BG without subscription!FWP conservation easement in Fergus County stalls amid confusion, miscommunication
The Fergus County commission's discussion highlighted the confusion over changes to FWP’s conservation easements under Gov. Greg Gianforte’s Republican administration.billingsgazette.com
sapperJ24
Well-known member
Courtesy of 12 foot ladder which occasionally still works for smaller publications. https://12ft.io/
The Fergus County Commission approved the Stafford Ferry Conservation Easement at its Jan. 2 meeting, ending months of delay following miscommunication with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks.
“Some of us need to be a little more blunt with, like, ‘This isn’t moving forward because of this,’ right?” Commissioner Ross Butcher told FWP wildlife biologist Sonja Andersen and Region 4 supervisor Jason Rhoten at the commission’s Lewistown meeting. “I don’t think we understood that at all.”
In an interview, Butcher said the commission wasn’t aware of a problem with the 1,080-acre Stafford Ferry CE, located 10 miles north of Winifred, until Fergus County constituents called. They wanted to know why the commissioners were opposed to the easement, picking up the phone after the deal was pulled from the Fish and Wildlife Commission’s October and then December agendas.
After that, Butcher said, “We decided a few weeks back we had to take an affirmative action to move this forward.”
Reading between the lines, some hunters saw the delays as an indirect attack on the 36-year-old Habitat Montana program that has provided public hunting access to more than 339,000 acres of private lands enrolled in permanent conservation easements.
"I don't understand why we would want to take tools away from landowners," said Randy Newberg, of the "Fresh Tracks" public lands hunting program based in Bozeman. "We benefit when working landowners stay on the land, and permanent conservation easements accomplish that at a much lower cost, probably the lowest cost, of any solution we have."
The agreements have been popular with some ranchers and farmers, who use the compensation to pay off debt or make improvements without selling the property. FWP’s field staff does not actively recruit landowners for conservation easements, Andersen told the Billings Gazette, they approach FWP.
“Landowners come to us knowing it will be a long, drawn-out process,” she said.
New process
The Fergus County commission's discussion highlighted the confusion over changes to FWP’s conservation easements under Gov. Greg Gianforte’s Republican administration.Now, FWP must receive county commission approval before starting work on a conservation easement. Fergus County said the commission provided that in 2021.
Then FWP’s lands department could conduct due diligence. Once that was completed, FWP starts its scoping process, seeking questions or comments from the public. That is followed by a draft environmental assessment which, again, provides the public and county commission an opportunity to comment.
After all this, the Fish and Wildlife Commission must sign off on the agreement. Since a bill passed by the 2021 Montana Legislature, the agreements, if costing more than $1 million, must also go before the State Board of Land Commissioners. The board is made up of the governor, secretary of state, schools superintendent, state auditor and attorney general.
Even though the Stafford Ferry CE is below the $1 million threshold, FWP’s Andersen indicated the department may still seek the land board’s approval since it’s so close to that amount.
The Stafford Ferry CE draft EA predicted the Fish and Wildlife Commission would issue its decision by April 2024 with the deal closing by May. Then progress stalled. FWP spokesman Greg Lemon cited “several outstanding issues that need to be addressed” regarding the Stafford Ferry easement, but refused to say what the issues were.
Bill Schenk, FWP’s lands program manager, said there was an “access issue” but wouldn’t elaborate. He also said there hasn’t been similar confusion by other county commissions regarding their role in FWP’s conservation easement process.
In an October meeting, Fergus County commissioners had raised some issues with then-FWP Director Dustin Temple about the perpetual easement, such as wanting to be able to mine gravel for county roads if needed, Butcher said, but didn’t know its remarks were holding up the process.
“We didn’t realize our comments were being used to say we weren’t supportive,” he added, noting the officials often seek terms to benefit the county, without any expectation they might “make or break the deal.”
Turnover at FWP may have also played into the delays. Temple announced his retirement in November, so it was the acting director who followed up asking Fergus County about its concerns, but Butcher said there was no explicit direction indicating the commission needed to take action for the proposal to move forward.
"To me, it was just a response to our comments," he said.
On Jan. 2, the county specifically passed a resolution endorsing the easement, which included a couple of digs at FWP.
GOP opposition
Members of the Montana Republican party have long sought to eliminate FWP’s use of perpetual conservation easements, including a 2023 bill introduced by Sen. Steve Hinebauch, R-Wibaux, that would have mandated all conservation easements be limited to 40 years. Although the bill was tabled in committee, FWP’s direction has noticeably changed.“FWP generally prioritizes short-term lease agreements as they are often more efficient and cost-effective,” said Greg Lemon, FWP spokesman.
With that in mind, in 2022 the agency announced its goal to lease up to 500,000 acres of prairie habitat in five years, emphasizing 30- to 40-year leases. Back then, FWP staff said the new goal didn’t mean land purchases or perpetual easements wouldn’t still be pursued.
However, in FWP’s last two reports to the Legislature — covering the period from January 2020 to June 2024 — only two conservation easements have been signed. That compares to 18 conservation easements completed between January 2017 and December 2020, the two legislative reports prior to the Gianforte administration. In total, FWP’s Habitat Montana program oversees conservation easements on 60 properties.
"I think FWP is well served when we work with these willing landowners who want to do these conservation easements in perpetuity," said Newberg, the public lands hunting advocate.
FWP also had to revamp its process for shorter-term leases after initially receiving little interest. So far, the agency has processed 15 applications for about 131,000 acres. Some hunters have criticized the access component of the shorter leases.
Stafford Ferry details
The Stafford Ferry Conservation Easement would protect and conserve sagebrush-grassland habitat adjoining the Missouri River Breaks in deer and elk Hunting Districts 417 and 426. The easement will also guarantee free public access for a minimum of 100 days of hunting, as well as other recreational pursuits outside the hunting season.The property adjoins an additional 15,400 acres of state and Bureau of Land Management property, including the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument.
The Stafford Ferry CE was appraised at $1.08 million. Northwestern Energy and the Wild Sheep Foundation are partnering on the project and have committed to contribute $50,000 and $10,000, respectively. The landowner, Cliff Henderson, has agreed to donate $85,000 of the easement’s value. Therefore, the total state funding to purchase the easement would be $980,000.
FWP’s portion of its easements are paid for with money from the Habitat Montana program, which is funded largely by nonresident hunting licenses.
In total, as of June 2024, FWP has spent $52.2 million in Habitat Montana funds on conservation easements. Land acquisitions purchased through the program total 141,231 acres (74 transactions involving 34 wildlife management areas or other sites), costing $54.6 million in Habitat Montana funds, according to FWP’s 2025 legislative report.
Next up
Still in the works in Fergus County is the 3,800-acre Hannah Ranch perpetual conservation easement, proposed along the base of the Big Snowy Mountains near Moore. The easement would provide access to public lands in the mountains where none currently exists.“It’s got a little ways to go,” said Schenk, FWP’s lands program manager.
Butcher, the Fergus County commissioner, said the Stafford Ferry easement seems to have slowed the Hannah Ranch project but that a “lot of people were interested in seeing” it succeed.
“These two easements in particular feel like there’s a lot of positives to them,” he said. “We’re trying to be proactive and not be the problem.”
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
It's nice that the Fergus Commission thinks that, but the very fact that the process has set a new precedent of adding a county commission vetting of a CE is unwarranted and a clear infringement on private property rights. After all the ado and discussion by the Fergus Commission, it's clear that nothing in the easement really effects county business.
Sure, if the easement included a new shopping mall, campground, and water park, then there would be substantial impact on roads and other conditions under county responsibility. But the traffic from the public access is not significantly impacting the county. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the county to maintain the roads to certain standards .... regardless of amount of traffic or what causes the traffic.
The statement during the Commission meeting by the chair opposing perpetual easements should have been identified as his opinion and only as opinion, as it's highly doubtful it reflects the Fergus County people's opinion about easements and property rights.
Anyhow, this county "interference" precedent in private property right of CE is bad policy enacted by the present administration and should somehow be overturned!
Similar threads
