Wilks - BLM land swap

[katqanna]

I still had not received any replies about the BLM trespass regulations excluding a Durfee Hills land exchange from Montana, and had spoken with another state which confirmed my understanding of the regs, so I made my call to BLM in Washington D.C.

I just got off the phone with a man that is in BLM Realty Trespass. He had some knowledge of what was going on, he had already been forwarded my Wilks Fencing Durfee Hills Interactive Map from another BLM employee in Montana, so it was easier to discuss since he could visualize what was taking place. He requested my email forwards to the Montana offices and will get back with me.

 

[katqanna]

Another Land Exchange - News Argus

Pg. 1 & 5

Whether or not there is an official land exchange proposal, one thing is certain, Benes said: the BLM will not wait long before moving forward. “If the Wilks brothers or anyone else can come up with a land exchange proposal in the next three months or so, we’ll entertain it,” Benes said, “but if we don’t hear anything we will move forward with a road proposal.” James said he is not concerned with the BLM’s timeline, as he is optimistic a land exchange can be put together before the BLM is ready to proceed with an environmental assessment for a road project. Once the proposed land exchange is ready, James said he plans to hold meetings on it in Central Montana.

 

[300stw]

I don't understand why the public or anyone else would entertain a landswap with the wilks after there fencing expedition and probable trespass problems, does the public get to have a say in the matter of blm continuing courting wilks ideas,,

why cant the forest service, the cmr refuge, blm, state agencies get together for a work party, they have lots of equipment and operators, it would take them no time to build a road,
these agencies have partnered many times to build buildings, small dams,ect,
the government uses government employees to go to these areas and work on the project, no contractors and no millions of dollars,,

common sense should prevail,, it doesn't seem the public gets all the correct information from Mr. Benes office,,,,,

 

[mtmander]

just interestd in following this

 

[katqanna]

BLM Press Release Feb. 3, 2015 - BLM concludes preliminary Public Scoping Meetings to Restore Bullwhacker Access

(LEWISTOWN, Mont.) – The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Central Montana District held a series of four preliminary public scoping meetings in December and January to discuss restoring motorized road access into the Bullwhacker Coulee area of the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument (UMRBNM). Approximately 60 people attended the meeting in Chinook and an average of 30 people attended each of the meetings in Great Falls, Lewistown and Billings.

Historic motorized public access to approximately 50,000 backcountry acres in the Bullwhacker area within Blaine County was lost following a 2011 court decision declaring a portion of the Bullwhacker Road crossing private lands to be a private road. A land exchange proposed in June 2014 to restore motorized access was considered, but was determined to be not in the best interest of the American people.

During the preliminary public scoping meetings UMRBNM Manager Michael Kania presented the two road building alternatives the BLM is considering. Kania also presented a brief description of two route alternatives that were not considered. One eliminated route would have crossed private land and the second crossed terrain unsuitable for road construction.

The preliminary public scoping meetings were held in an effort to gain input from the public on the issue of restoring motorized access. Scoping is the process by which the BLM solicits input on the issues, impacts and potential alternatives that may be addressed in this environmental assessment.

Public participation resulted in several options for the BLM to consider. They include:

-build a road on one of the routes being considered.
-build a hiking trail, possibly with ATV access instead of full motorized vehicular restoration.
-take no action to restore motorized access.
-consider another land exchange option.

The BLM has initiated an open and transparent public process in which the public will have a number of opportunities to participate in a solution for restoring motorized public access to the Bullwhacker area. The BLM is preliminarily considering potential options to find viable access that would garner substantial support and be in the best interest of the public.

The next step would be for a draft environmental assessment to be presented to the public for further comment.

The BLM will also look to the insight offered by the members of the Central Montana Resource Advisory Council throughout this process.

“Public access to public lands continues to be one of BLM Montana/Dakotas’ top priorities,” said Stan Benes, the BLM Central Montana District Manager. “Our charge in this is to restore the motorized access the public historically had for decades.”

“At all four public meetings we heard the public express interest in the BLM revisiting the idea of a land exchange option to restore motorized public access to the Bullwhacker area. We do not have a land exchange proposal at this time, but we would be willing to consider a land exchange proposal that has the support of a working group of interested parties and is broadly favored by the public,” Benes explained.

For more information, contact Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument Manager Mike Kania at (406) 538-1950. Public scoping is open until March 5. If you have comments or an option for the BLM to consider, you may send an email to [email protected]. For the latest BLM news and updates, visit us on the web at www.blm.gov/mt, on Facebook at www.facebook.com/BLMMontana, or follow us on Twitter @BLM_MTDKs.

How about the 1600+ signatures of the PUBLIC that already said NO Durfee Hills land exchange!

Is that not bloody broad enough?

And before anyone says this could be an entirely different land exchange proposal, the Wilks rep., Darryl James already stated at the Jan. 15th Billings meeting this was about the inholdings on the NBar - the chief of which is the Durfee Hills.

 

[mdunc8]

The proposal they posted on their website had nothing to do with the Durfee Hills and it looked like a fair enough trade to me.

 

[mdunc8]

Darryl just confirmed that they've apparently they've changed their mind...Sorry for the confusion.

 

[katqanna]

My BLM FOIA that I placed on Nov. 13th and was finally approved for the content, clarifications and waiver on Dec. 23rd was designated "complex". According to the FOIA page that puts me in the after 20 business days category. Their letter to me stated 21-60 days. I am on 30 business days now.

Part of the FOIA is on communications between BLM and the Wilks concerning the Durfee Hills land exchange. On the general content clarification letter they sent, they asked why I was requesting information on the Durfee Hills land exchange, as the BLM made a decision to not pursue that land trade. I replied back,

Item 5. Yes, I am requesting communications between the BLM and the Wilks (or their representatives) concerning the BLM parcels listed. I am aware of the BLM decision to not pursue that land trade as I was the one to suggest the online change.org petition (March 2nd) and created the cadastral map images used in the petition presented to Jamie Connell by Ron Moody and the Central Montana Hunters on. On April 22, 2014 the Wilks Brothers LLC purchased the web domain of www.montanapublicaccess.com (ironic) to promote their own petition and proposal to the BLM in August. On Aug. 18th the BLM issued a news release stating, "The Bureau of Land Management announced today it is no longer considering a land exchange with Wilks Ranch Montana, Ltd. to restore motorized public access to the Bullwhacker area." But, it did not state that they were no longer pursuing any land trades involving the Durfee Hills, simply addressed the Bullwhacker aspect. As the Durfees keep being mentioned, such as recent public Bullwhacker Access Road scoping meetings, rumors of the Wilks pressuring for the Durfees, I am requesting those communications concerning our public lands.

I had not requested that the FOIA be expedited because the BLM had made no mention of the Durfee Hills land exchange until the Jan. 15th Billings meeting, then the Argus article and now the BLM press release. So I have called the MT FOIA officer today and left a message, checking on status and to see about requesting that at least that portion be expedited since the BLM has brought this subject back up.

 

[Jwill]

Reminder:

Once again, the Wilks are trying to salvage some value out of the white elephant they bought in the form of the Anchor Ranch that controls access to the Bullwhacker. Their only hope of salvaging anything is to try connect the Bullwhacker access to the Durfee Hills they covet so dearly. They want the public to bail them out for a bad business move their advisers talked them into and in the process, leverage that dead horse toward their end goal of acquiring the elk rich grounds of the Durfee Hills. Not that a few million dollars wasted on the Anchor Ranch hurts their portfolio, but the advice to overpay for the Anchor sure makes their advisers look like amateurs in the world of real estate and public land policy.

The Bullwhacker and the Durfees are complete and separate issues. For the BLM to even consider ideas that connect the two would be disappointing.

The BLM knows they have commitments for funding to help build the road that solves the Bullwhacker access issue. That hurdle has been cleared. The Wilks know that funding issue has been solved also, so they have to act fast to salvage what little they can. If the BLM goes forward with any alternative access plan, which they should, the Wilks are sitting on a junk bond that just defaulted.

If the BLM is worried about the cost of maintaining a road, make it an ATV trail, rather than a road. Make it open to foot, horse, or ATVs. Then the maintenance issue goes away and it still provides a high level of access. I say that, given I am probably the only hunter in Montana who does not own an ATV, so I am comfortable that an ATV trail would provide almost the same level of access as an open road, without all the maintenance worries/costs. Problems solved.

As the public, we cannot let these two issues be connected. They have nothing to do with each other. The Wilks are sitting on a dud hand as it relates to the Anchor Ranch and the Bullwhacker access. They are playing it like they hold four aces. The public/BLM has the Royal Flush. Now is not the time for the public/BLM to fold that hand.

When it comes to the Durfees, the Wilks have already demonstrated how badly they covet that property. Given the time, energy, and public capital they have invested to devalue the Durfees, they obviously covet it more than any other piece of Montana land. The public/BLM is sitting on the gold mine. The original offer by the Wilks was a laugher, a non-starter. If they want the public to even consider an exchange, they better be ready to offer up one hell of a big proposal with premium elk hunting. Even if they sweetened the offer, their behavior over the last year makes any proposal hard for the public to accept.

Their advisers gave them some more bad advice by suggesting they throw dirt in the face of public hunters last hunting season. All people want to do is just go hunt the public's elk and these guys have to go out of their way to kick the public hunter in the crotch. Not a good way to gain favor with Montanans, including Montana hunters.

If they want to continue taking advice from such folks, fine. Their money, spend it how they want. Their private land, do as they please. Yet, the public is under no obligation to even consider what they might offer. Right now, I know very few hunters that would even give them the courtesy of a meeting, let alone consider any offer they might present.

With the jackass things they were advised to do last hunting season to disrupt elk movements and the public hunting on the Durfees, all they accomplished was to raise the height of the hurdles they will have to clear to sway the public to even listen to any proposal for the Durfees. If that is how they want to operate, and it seems like the preferred tact, that is their choice. None of this happens in a vacuum, even if their advisers seem to think otherwise.

As you real estate people always say, "Location, location, locations." Well, the location of the Durfee Hills and its juxtaposition among the Wilks properties makes is the most prime location in all of the Rockies. They want it bad, real bad.

The price to acquire the Durfees gets higher with each passing day and with each jackass stunt that gets directed toward the public hunter. Their attempts to make the Durfees void of elk, and devalue the Durfees as public elk ground has had the opposite effect on those who at one time may have considered a trade with the Wilks.

The public needs to keep an eye on this one and not let the BLM be swayed by the Wilks to join the Bullwhacker and Durfees as related topics. Rather, the public should put pressure on the BLM to solve the Bullwhacker access as soon as possible, even if it means just an ATV trail. That eases pressure on the BLM, as one issue is solved. We can then focus on the lands most coveted by the Wilks.