Two big points.
Wilks Bros Proposed Exchange
- Thread starter MThuntr
- Start date
Two big points.
wingman1
New member
What a crock! I will be calling ASAP to get the 40 acre thing corrected. It is more like only 40 acres of all proposed land is inaccessible by aircraft.
bigskyblueman
Member
I concur, I suspect the fix may be in as far as the BLM is concerned. Their glowing, cheery quotes seem misplaced at this early stage of the discussion and leave one to qestion this trade even more.
wheelieking
New member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2012
- Messages
- 22
09-18-2012, 12:42 PM
Like I was saying 2 years ago! BLM is going to do what they want and once its done the BLM will close more roads on the Monument. Part of the land that gives more access to coalmine wont even be able to be used except for game retrieval!!
Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 19
Default Land Swap
Land in Little Snowys which has to be flown into and other BLM land will be swapped for all Private south Cow Island Trail, and east three mile. It is a great trade for them and it cannot be stopped. It also is a good trade for someone that would like access to thousands of acres of hunting that is like a desert with few Deer and Elk. You will not have to fly into this BLM after the land swap. NET WORTH does matter. Land swap will open up land for thousands of hunters while taking away land that is hunted by few!!!
Like I was saying 2 years ago! BLM is going to do what they want and once its done the BLM will close more roads on the Monument. Part of the land that gives more access to coalmine wont even be able to be used except for game retrieval!!
Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 19
Default Land Swap
Land in Little Snowys which has to be flown into and other BLM land will be swapped for all Private south Cow Island Trail, and east three mile. It is a great trade for them and it cannot be stopped. It also is a good trade for someone that would like access to thousands of acres of hunting that is like a desert with few Deer and Elk. You will not have to fly into this BLM after the land swap. NET WORTH does matter. Land swap will open up land for thousands of hunters while taking away land that is hunted by few!!!
wingman1
New member
BLM has made a correction on the news release!!
Public_Access, BLM_MT <[email protected]> Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:06 PM
To: Mark Liedtka <[email protected]>
Mr. Liedtka,
I wanted to let you know that we've provided a correction on our website regarding access via aircraft. Thanks for
bringing it to my attention.
http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/info/newsroom/2014/march/blm_confirms_exchange.html
http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/info/access/bullwhackerlandexchange.html
Melodie A. Lloyd
Chief of Com m unications
BLM-Montana/Dakotas
406.896.5260
Your Land. Your Treasure.http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/info/newsroom/2014/march/blm_confirms_exchange.html
Public_Access, BLM_MT <[email protected]> Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:06 PM
To: Mark Liedtka <[email protected]>
Mr. Liedtka,
I wanted to let you know that we've provided a correction on our website regarding access via aircraft. Thanks for
bringing it to my attention.
http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/info/newsroom/2014/march/blm_confirms_exchange.html
http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/info/access/bullwhackerlandexchange.html
Melodie A. Lloyd
Chief of Com m unications
BLM-Montana/Dakotas
406.896.5260
Your Land. Your Treasure.http://www.blm.gov/mt/st/en/info/newsroom/2014/march/blm_confirms_exchange.html
MThuntr
Well-known member
Hmm I like how that they put in the qualifier "...This area is accessed by a limited number of user's each year." as if to diminish the air access value of the Durfee Hills. 
Wheel, what are your thoughts on other options that would provide motorized access into the Monument and keep the Durfee as well? Do you think the private land offered is quality habitat? Is any of the FS/BLM truely inaccessible if nothing changed?
The Wilks bros. are likely very motivated to make this happen. I agree with others that have suggested an exchange of similar elk habitat. The land to the west of red hill road is decent for a very short distance, then becomes almost devoid of feed, water and elk. Any elk that were using the the lower country near red hill can easily cross the road into existing Wilks land and again be inaccessable to public.
I would suggest that in addition to the proposed lands the Wilks sweeten the deal with land further south on red hill, almost on the flats (lower Janet Lewis portion). At least three miles border the red hill road here as well and touch some existing BLM. The elk move to this area later in the year and could provide some decent opportunity. A second option would be along cameron creek, south and adjacent to an existing state section. If they are really despirate maybe they will concede Sahara hill!!! If they really want Apples for Apples I think the BLM needs to push for these more comparable parcels.
I would suggest that in addition to the proposed lands the Wilks sweeten the deal with land further south on red hill, almost on the flats (lower Janet Lewis portion). At least three miles border the red hill road here as well and touch some existing BLM. The elk move to this area later in the year and could provide some decent opportunity. A second option would be along cameron creek, south and adjacent to an existing state section. If they are really despirate maybe they will concede Sahara hill!!! If they really want Apples for Apples I think the BLM needs to push for these more comparable parcels.
Having been involved in a lot of land swaps, I guess I am not as firm of a believer in what you have mentioned and your feelings of futility in trying to be an element of influence to the process. Legally, there is a lot of "process" that must happen. It begins with public input, which is what is happening right now.
The best thing at this time is to tell the BLM that you do not agree with the proposal, if that is your opinion. The more comments the BLM hears against what the Wilks Brothers have proposed, the more they have to resist that proposal. And, the more it puts pressure on the party who made the proposal to come back with a much better proposal.
If I had to predict this outcome, here is what it would be.
--> The Bullwhacker access is solved in the next year or so, via a purchased easement or via the BLM finding a way to gain access to the area by alternate routes. To maintain the road levels at current status, some existing spur roads might have to be closed to offset the impacts of new roads developed. When that happens, the largest part of the Wilks' proposal is negated; the Bullwhacker access is sovled, making the exchange very lopsided and not at all favorable to the public.
--> The Wilks realize that the current proposal is not going to fly and they have to withdraw the existing proposal and replace it with a new/better proposal.
--> The new proposal comes forth in the next two years, with no mention of the Bullwhacker lands, and includes some lands that are more comparable to the Durfees, in terms of quality and quantity of elk, though still not the best deal the public could get from the process.
--> Given the demonstrated desire by the Wilks to gain the Durfees, their proposal eventually gets so sweet that the public cannot deny that a good deal can be made on their behalf. Eventually the Durfees are traded, but it will be in exchange for lands that provide as good/better hunting than the Durfees (at least until it gets heavy hunting pressure and moves the animals to other lands).
It will be interesting to look back in four or five years, to see what direction this land exchange eventually goes. I don't think it is going down the path of pre-destiny that is my interpretation of what wheelieking has posted.
Land exchanges take an Act of Congress. It is a long process Nothing is going to happen immediately. But when it does happen, such as public comment, the public better comment, or if not, be willing to accept something they may not like.
The most important effort at this time is to let the BLM know where you stand on the exchange. If people are strongly against the proposal the Wilks Brothers have presented, the BLM needs to know that and be put on notice that the public feels that way.
Remember, this is a proposal from the Wilks, not a proposal by the BLM. The BLM is under no obligation to accept this proposal, rather they are under obligation to do what the public tells the BLM they want to see happen.
Now, make sure the BLM hears your opinion on this topic.
BullMooseGazette
New member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2014
- Messages
- 17
Central Montana Hunters For Public Access has posted this YouTube video showing what we stand to lose by trading away the Durfee Hills.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdJ1IytnyT8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdJ1IytnyT8
I just watched this You Tube ad and I think it is very well done and effective.
BullMooseGazette
New member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2014
- Messages
- 17
Video of elk in Durfee Hills - just try to count them
Central Montana Hunters For Public Access has posted this brief YouTube video showing what we stand to lose by trading away the Durfee Hills.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdJ1IytnyT8
We are challenged to think of these isolated public parcels in a new way. In the future they may be the only public hunting available inside huge private estates 20 or 30 miles across - as the Wilks consolidated holding in Fergus County already is about 27 miles by 29 miles in size.
Just like in Alaska, airplanes may become important vehicles for Montana hunters in the future.
Central Montana Hunters For Public Access has posted this brief YouTube video showing what we stand to lose by trading away the Durfee Hills.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdJ1IytnyT8
We are challenged to think of these isolated public parcels in a new way. In the future they may be the only public hunting available inside huge private estates 20 or 30 miles across - as the Wilks consolidated holding in Fergus County already is about 27 miles by 29 miles in size.
Just like in Alaska, airplanes may become important vehicles for Montana hunters in the future.
MThuntr
Well-known member
I stole this from Facebook as the Lewistown Newspaper website hasn't been updated
"Published in the Lewistown News Argus, Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Slippery words mislead
people on proposed
BLM-Wilks land trade
By JASON BIRDWELL
My role as a member of the BLM Central Resource Advisory Council is to report to the Bureau of Land Management the concerns and desires of the people who use our public land for their personal desires.
For more than a year now, I repeatedly told BLM that the Durfee Hills are too valuable to trade away – unless, of course, BLM can trade for something of very high value that we don’t already have use of. My words made no difference.
I also told them the Durfees are publicly accessible. Again, nothing changed in their push to do a trade with the Wilks.
Over the last few weeks several news articles have been printed with untrue “facts,” and with slippery language aimed, maybe, to sway the opinions of the people without them knowing the truth.This has been disturbing to me. I ask myself, is this a sales ploy with false facts?
The Durfee Hills
The BLM states “there is one 40-acre parcel that airplanes can land on.” This is true as far as it goes, but they fail to inform the public that multiple other safe and legal landing sites are commonly used in the Durfee Hills. There is not a single acre of public land in the Durfee Hills that is not publicly accessible.
The two larger portions of our land in these hills, when combined with two 640-acre state sections (also our land), equal plus-or-minus 4,055 acres of the best public land for hunting or hiking I have witnessed.
The Friends of the Monument and the BLM state that “only the few financially privileged can afford to access this land.” I am proof that this is a false statement. Yesterday my father and I flew out to the Durfee Hills for a quick hike at the cost of $46 for fuel, about
the same as if I had driven my truck.
Safe, capable airplanes are available for sale at about 2/3 the cost of a new pickup. It is not uncommon for fishing boats to be in this same price range. Nobody says you have to be rich to fish.
Bullwhacker area
As told to me by Stan Benes of the BLM, “The (new) road already exists.” I would like to remind everyone that every acre of our land in the Bullwhacker area is already legally accessible via the river and the air. With small improvements to the existing alternative road, you can go there in your Subaru.
Knowing the Bullwhacker country, I asked a biologist if he considers the area as “prime elk habitat” as stated by Beth Kampschror, spokesperson for the Friends of the Monument. His
answer was “No!” Very slippery, I say.
It has been stated that re-opening the old road by the Wilks would “be a sign of good faith.” Is this not the same as earnest money given in a done deal? Why then do we need public scoping? Again, very slippery.
Red Hill Road
The BLM says the exchange would provide new access to 10,472 acres of BLM land in the Big Snowy Mountains. This is false. This land is already accessible in four different locations along the county road.
A sales pitch stating that this would link us to an existing forest road is partly true, but what they fail to tell us is this forest road is closed by the Forest Service. You will not be
able to drive on it.
Again, it said that this is “prime elk habitat.” I know this country quite well and there are elk there from time to time, but “prime” it is not. We can already hunt the elk that are there with the access that we already have.
In a meeting with the BLM they agreed with me that, as far as value to the people, the quality of this property is not great. But for unknown reasons the BLM is trying to sell the idea that the Red Hill property is fair trade for the Durfees. Slippery, slippery,
slippery.
Please remember, this is our land and our wildlife and the BLM works for us. Should we trade away our property in the name of access that we already have? Should we allow private individuals to custom build their empire using our lands to do so?
To the people I represent on the Resource Advisory Counsel I ask, please don’t let them trade away our land. To the BLM I say, don’t sell us down the river.
With all due respect, this is my opinion from a local worker, local recreationalist and federal taxpayer.
---
Jason Birdwell of Lewistown is a member of Central Montana Hunters For Public Access and a member of the BLM Central Montana Resource Council where he represents dispersed recreationists."
"Published in the Lewistown News Argus, Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Slippery words mislead
people on proposed
BLM-Wilks land trade
By JASON BIRDWELL
My role as a member of the BLM Central Resource Advisory Council is to report to the Bureau of Land Management the concerns and desires of the people who use our public land for their personal desires.
For more than a year now, I repeatedly told BLM that the Durfee Hills are too valuable to trade away – unless, of course, BLM can trade for something of very high value that we don’t already have use of. My words made no difference.
I also told them the Durfees are publicly accessible. Again, nothing changed in their push to do a trade with the Wilks.
Over the last few weeks several news articles have been printed with untrue “facts,” and with slippery language aimed, maybe, to sway the opinions of the people without them knowing the truth.This has been disturbing to me. I ask myself, is this a sales ploy with false facts?
The Durfee Hills
The BLM states “there is one 40-acre parcel that airplanes can land on.” This is true as far as it goes, but they fail to inform the public that multiple other safe and legal landing sites are commonly used in the Durfee Hills. There is not a single acre of public land in the Durfee Hills that is not publicly accessible.
The two larger portions of our land in these hills, when combined with two 640-acre state sections (also our land), equal plus-or-minus 4,055 acres of the best public land for hunting or hiking I have witnessed.
The Friends of the Monument and the BLM state that “only the few financially privileged can afford to access this land.” I am proof that this is a false statement. Yesterday my father and I flew out to the Durfee Hills for a quick hike at the cost of $46 for fuel, about
the same as if I had driven my truck.
Safe, capable airplanes are available for sale at about 2/3 the cost of a new pickup. It is not uncommon for fishing boats to be in this same price range. Nobody says you have to be rich to fish.
Bullwhacker area
As told to me by Stan Benes of the BLM, “The (new) road already exists.” I would like to remind everyone that every acre of our land in the Bullwhacker area is already legally accessible via the river and the air. With small improvements to the existing alternative road, you can go there in your Subaru.
Knowing the Bullwhacker country, I asked a biologist if he considers the area as “prime elk habitat” as stated by Beth Kampschror, spokesperson for the Friends of the Monument. His
answer was “No!” Very slippery, I say.
It has been stated that re-opening the old road by the Wilks would “be a sign of good faith.” Is this not the same as earnest money given in a done deal? Why then do we need public scoping? Again, very slippery.
Red Hill Road
The BLM says the exchange would provide new access to 10,472 acres of BLM land in the Big Snowy Mountains. This is false. This land is already accessible in four different locations along the county road.
A sales pitch stating that this would link us to an existing forest road is partly true, but what they fail to tell us is this forest road is closed by the Forest Service. You will not be
able to drive on it.
Again, it said that this is “prime elk habitat.” I know this country quite well and there are elk there from time to time, but “prime” it is not. We can already hunt the elk that are there with the access that we already have.
In a meeting with the BLM they agreed with me that, as far as value to the people, the quality of this property is not great. But for unknown reasons the BLM is trying to sell the idea that the Red Hill property is fair trade for the Durfees. Slippery, slippery,
slippery.
Please remember, this is our land and our wildlife and the BLM works for us. Should we trade away our property in the name of access that we already have? Should we allow private individuals to custom build their empire using our lands to do so?
To the people I represent on the Resource Advisory Counsel I ask, please don’t let them trade away our land. To the BLM I say, don’t sell us down the river.
With all due respect, this is my opinion from a local worker, local recreationalist and federal taxpayer.
---
Jason Birdwell of Lewistown is a member of Central Montana Hunters For Public Access and a member of the BLM Central Montana Resource Council where he represents dispersed recreationists."
bigskyblueman
Member
As I noted previously, the fix is in , as comments from the Lewistown BLM office would seem to indicate, with the motives, as yet, undisclosed. In opposition , I have begun to contact the Montana congressional delegation. The Durfee Hills should remain in the hands of we , the people.
I'm firmly against this trade and will send in my comments to that effect.
I'm not one to call folks out, but the people that hunt these areas better come with the goods (photos, videos, maps, stories) if they want to get the general public fired up against this trade. If nobody knows what's at stake, they're not going to care if your favorite spot is gone.
I'm not one to call folks out, but the people that hunt these areas better come with the goods (photos, videos, maps, stories) if they want to get the general public fired up against this trade. If nobody knows what's at stake, they're not going to care if your favorite spot is gone.
Here you go.
Lots of pics here.
http://billingsgazette.com/lifestyl...cle_739c1572-dad0-5d9c-923e-6cddebfe0a82.html
Maps here.
http://billingsgazette.com/lifestyl...cle_9cc8c775-e7dc-5ff6-a891-9be4f7314c91.html
Stories and more pics here.
http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=252739
http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=247936
http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=244220
I don't think anyone is doing this because it is their "favorite spot." I think most are involved because they realize how great the elk hunting can be in these places and as such. we can get a much, much, better deal in exchange for these parcels. It's not like we need to rush into a lopsided trade of these parcels.
Voicing opinions about this helps the BLM understand how valued the Durfees are and how much corresponding value must be received in exchange for such. Right now, that corresponding exchange value is lacking and lacking in a big way.
Thanks for letting the BLM know your thoughts.
bigskyblueman
Member
While I have yet to hunt the Durfee Hills , I want those of you who do, to always have that unique opportunity , along with your family and friends. Your success rewards us all.
@ Big Fin
Good to see RMEF put out a statement on this: http://www.rmef.org/NewsandMedia/Pr...andExchangeFallsShortforElkandElkHunters.aspx
Good to see RMEF put out a statement on this: http://www.rmef.org/NewsandMedia/Pr...andExchangeFallsShortforElkandElkHunters.aspx
