slipinonem
New member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2015
- Messages
- 73
Drop in the bucket compared to what will happen if the Feds sell off OUR public lands.
Wilks brothers true colors are shining through.....
- Thread starter wingman1
- Start date
ShootsManyBullets
Well-known member
How come you're tried as a terrorist if you accidentally burn a few acres but if you build illegal fences and drive heavy equipment all over the public's land it's no big deal?
(Again...) The Hammond's were not "tried as terrorists."
bigskyblueman
Member
I've requested an update on the Durfee Hills remediation.
katqanna
Well-known member
Update: Mark Albers announced at the RAC meeting that there was no Wilks Brothers Land Exchange involving the Durfee Hills and no road building at Bullwhacker. This was confirmed by Shane Hershman just now from Jonathan Moor.
I had been hearing in December that BLM District Manager, Mark Albers, was going to make a decision on the Durfee Hills Land Exchange proposal by the end of December, I figured with the holidays it would be more like after the beginning of Jan. Then while up north, was told that he would be making the decision in the next two weeks, which places it about now.
What I heard a week ago was that Albers was leaning to not trade the Durfee Hills, but also not to put a road in at the Bullwhacker.
I was going to call and find out the status now that I am back in Bozeman, today hearing that Albers made an announcement that BLM is not pursuing a land exchange with the Wilks involving the Durfee Hills. I have called and left messages with Albers, Jonathan Moor (their information guy) and Hershman at the Lewistown office. I havent heard anything back yet, nor is there any press release on BLM's site or their facebook page.
I had been hearing in December that BLM District Manager, Mark Albers, was going to make a decision on the Durfee Hills Land Exchange proposal by the end of December, I figured with the holidays it would be more like after the beginning of Jan. Then while up north, was told that he would be making the decision in the next two weeks, which places it about now.
What I heard a week ago was that Albers was leaning to not trade the Durfee Hills, but also not to put a road in at the Bullwhacker.
I was going to call and find out the status now that I am back in Bozeman, today hearing that Albers made an announcement that BLM is not pursuing a land exchange with the Wilks involving the Durfee Hills. I have called and left messages with Albers, Jonathan Moor (their information guy) and Hershman at the Lewistown office. I havent heard anything back yet, nor is there any press release on BLM's site or their facebook page.
Last edited:
MThuntr
Well-known member
I just checked Facebook and saw the Central Montana Outdoors guys shared a basic post about No Trade Deal.
MThuntr
Well-known member
Great Falls Tribune Press Release
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2016/01/26/blm-pursue-land-exchange-wilks-brothers/79362402/
I want action on the destruction they caused building the fences.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2016/01/26/blm-pursue-land-exchange-wilks-brothers/79362402/
I want action on the destruction they caused building the fences.
Last edited:
katqanna
Well-known member
Now we can focus on the trespass violations and damage done to our public lands!
bigskyblueman
Member
The U.S. Attorney has not made any decision yet on any charges. Remediation info may require a FOIA for now. The friends of the monuments folks will continue to push for a trade and the Wilks will be back, so the trade issue is in a temporary respite, not dead by any means. That is what I have been able to glean from recent conversations.
katqanna
Well-known member
Billings Gazette, which also brings up the question of the Anchor Ranch Bullwhacker road access, if the Wilks are going to close that now...
They stated, "After BLM staff conducted a fly-over and ground visits using a survey-grade GPS, no encroachment was found... BLM staff found that in some instances when a personal-use recreational GPS was compared to the more accurate survey-grade GPS, the recreational GPS errantly showed some areas to be on BLM-managed land." I remember the WAAS and GLONASS discussions that resulted here.
One of the pictures in the BLM file, page 52, is of a GPS device, but the glare is so bad you cant read the screen, so I dismissed the picture as a waste, as far as reading the screen. I wondered last night if I could put that through my new graphics program to sharpen the resolution when it hit me, look up the device model he is using!
It is a Garmin GPSmap 60CSx Navigator, WAAS enabled, with an accuracy range of 10 meters (about 33 feet), discontinued by Garmin in early 2011. If that is BLM's "survey grade GPS", then it is not as accurate as what the hunters going into the Durfees used. If that is their recreational use comparison, again, it is not as new or accurate as the models the sportsmen in the Durfees were using of 3-5 meters (10-15 feet). So I amended the PDF into to reflect that.
There is a bit of misconception that is common, about the data source and accuracies of various GPS mapping systems...
The basemapping you have in your GPS that you use to hunt with is from what is called the GCDB.(Geographic Coordinate Database) This does not have the exact coordinate of every section corner and quarter corner. If that were the case, us surveyors would be out of a job, right?
The GCDB is basically a representation of the township plat, derived from survey grade collection of a handful of corners, dispersed throughout the township. The rest of the township is basically rotated and scaled accordingly.
So, it doesn't really matter the precision of your device, if the information in it is only GIS grade. I've seen the GCDB be sub-meter, and I've seen it off 600 feet.
So just be careful when you are near the line, according to your GPS. It can get you in trouble.
I held several meetings about one of my projects last spring with the BLM acting Chief Cadastral surveyor of our region, and at that time, I think it was March or April, he had his crews in the Durfee Hills, doing a full boundary survey of the area. This means finding corner monumentation and looking for corner evidence, ,etc.. and replacing lost or obliterated corners etc... It was my understanding that the entire purpose was to analyze the encroachment by the Wilks. Of course, he was pretty tight lipped about the findings of the whole thing, and I got a sense of frustration (he's a hunter as well) from him about it, as the purpose of the survey is to FIND FACTS and send them up the latter. It seemed like his hands were kind of tied - I cannot imagine the politics and BS involved behind the scenes.
I see the recent news about not doing the transfer, but does anybody know where they stand on the encroachment issue?
I work with various federal agencies daily. If we or one of our contractors violated NEPA in this manner, our professional licenses would be revoked, our company driven to bankruptcy and we would likely be personally fined, if not jailed.
One of the pictures in the BLM file, page 52, is of a GPS device, but the glare is so bad you cant read the screen, so I dismissed the picture as a waste, as far as reading the screen. I wondered last night if I could put that through my new graphics program to sharpen the resolution when it hit me, look up the device model he is using!
It is a Garmin GPSmap 60CSx Navigator, WAAS enabled, with an accuracy range of 10 meters (about 33 feet), discontinued by Garmin in early 2011. If that is BLM's "survey grade GPS", then it is not as accurate as what the hunters going into the Durfees used. If that is their recreational use comparison, again, it is not as new or accurate as the models the sportsmen in the Durfees were using of 3-5 meters (10-15 feet). So I amended the PDF into to reflect that.
There is a bit of misconception that is common, about the data source and accuracies of various GPS mapping systems...
The basemapping you have in your GPS that you use to hunt with is from what is called the GCDB.(Geographic Coordinate Database) This does not have the exact coordinate of every section corner and quarter corner. If that were the case, us surveyors would be out of a job, right?
The GCDB is basically a representation of the township plat, derived from survey grade collection of a handful of corners, dispersed throughout the township. The rest of the township is basically rotated and scaled accordingly.
So, it doesn't really matter the precision of your device, if the information in it is only GIS grade. I've seen the GCDB be sub-meter, and I've seen it off 600 feet.
So just be careful when you are near the line, according to your GPS. It can get you in trouble.
I held several meetings about one of my projects last spring with the BLM acting Chief Cadastral surveyor of our region, and at that time, I think it was March or April, he had his crews in the Durfee Hills, doing a full boundary survey of the area. This means finding corner monumentation and looking for corner evidence, ,etc.. and replacing lost or obliterated corners etc... It was my understanding that the entire purpose was to analyze the encroachment by the Wilks. Of course, he was pretty tight lipped about the findings of the whole thing, and I got a sense of frustration (he's a hunter as well) from him about it, as the purpose of the survey is to FIND FACTS and send them up the latter. It seemed like his hands were kind of tied - I cannot imagine the politics and BS involved behind the scenes.
I see the recent news about not doing the transfer, but does anybody know where they stand on the encroachment issue?
I work with various federal agencies daily. If we or one of our contractors violated NEPA in this manner, our professional licenses would be revoked, our company driven to bankruptcy and we would likely be personally fined, if not jailed.
That is good information for all of us who use consumer grade equipment.
I can assure you that one corner/line, the area elk cross from the north, is off by over 500', maybe more. Maybe my instrument is that inaccurate. Two of us standing there with different GPS units were within a couple feet of each other as far as distance to that corner.
The BLM was provided information of all of this, with maps, coordinates, and pics. If my GPS is that far off, I'm in big trouble.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
This is absolutely true, but I will say that the State Library is putting out GCDB updates quarterly now, and in my experience depending on where you are in the state, things are getting closer to being representative all the time. It is getting very good.
Your GPS likely has the accuracies it claims to have. Meaning it is showing YOUR location to the accuracy it claims. Whether of not the base mapping software is showing boundary lines in their exact location is what I was talking about. This depends on the GCDB's accuracy in your area.
Now that the BLM has surveyed this area, once the plat/survey is approved, the corner locations should go into the GCDB. When you update your OnXMap, or whatever you use, it should be pulling the most current GCDB version. Now you will truly be seeing your position relative to the property line, +/- your device's accuracy.
When you look at gis.mt.gov (Montana Cadastral) you are seeing the GCDB overlayed with property ownership information.
http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/gcdb.html explains the GCDB more in depth.
Last I heard, the BLM was hiring some private survey firms to do some work across the state to tighten it up.
billy banger
New member
- Joined
- May 23, 2012
- Messages
- 24
Montana hunters and sportsmen are the ones losing when the BLM denied this exchange. There are only a few, 40-60, hunters that are accessing the Durfee Hills by aircraft, whereas there are about 1,000 people accessing through the Anchor Ranch into the Bullwhacker area.
Doug Krings stated that he opposed the exchange in the Billings Gazette article; http://billingsgazette.com/lifestyl...cle_02f9886d-3391-5595-ac75-8fee5f80ba83.html I find it very ironic that the one's opposing the exchange the most are the same privileged few hunters that fly into the Durfee Hills to archery hunt elk. They are doing so for very selfish reasons, they simply want the hunting for themselves.
Ron Moody stated in the Great Falls Tribune that the exchange is not in the public interest, which can't be further from the truth. It appears to me, and other Montanans, that access for 1,000 individuals sure out weights access for the privileged 40-60 people who pay to fly into the Durfee Hills.
The Montana Wildlife Federation, Public Land & Water Access, Laurel Rod & Gun Club, Montana Sportsman Alliance and the newly formed Central Montana Sportsmen (made up of members of the above mentioned groups) are the groups that are opposing the exchange. These groups say they represent the Montana hunters, but they don't represent me. We Montana hunters are taking notice of the actions of these so called sportsmen groups.
Doug Krings stated that he opposed the exchange in the Billings Gazette article; http://billingsgazette.com/lifestyl...cle_02f9886d-3391-5595-ac75-8fee5f80ba83.html I find it very ironic that the one's opposing the exchange the most are the same privileged few hunters that fly into the Durfee Hills to archery hunt elk. They are doing so for very selfish reasons, they simply want the hunting for themselves.
Ron Moody stated in the Great Falls Tribune that the exchange is not in the public interest, which can't be further from the truth. It appears to me, and other Montanans, that access for 1,000 individuals sure out weights access for the privileged 40-60 people who pay to fly into the Durfee Hills.
The Montana Wildlife Federation, Public Land & Water Access, Laurel Rod & Gun Club, Montana Sportsman Alliance and the newly formed Central Montana Sportsmen (made up of members of the above mentioned groups) are the groups that are opposing the exchange. These groups say they represent the Montana hunters, but they don't represent me. We Montana hunters are taking notice of the actions of these so called sportsmen groups.
There is nothing stopping the BLM from providing access to the Bullwhacker. Money has been pledged and they have stated they have money internally. Alternatives to full blown vehicle access, such as building something to only accommodate off road vehicles, bikes, etc. have been suggested to eliminate the maintenance issue and allow for a lower cost and lower impact alternative.
Not sure where you get your information of what has been offered as alternative solutions, but whatever the source, it seems incomplete of the entire picture.
I can assure you that the Durfees are one of the most intensely hunted pieces of public land in all of Montana. Your 40-60 number is way low. Not sure where you get that number. I don't see myself ever hunting the Durfees again, but there is no way I am going to let the Durfees be traded for a song and a prayer to folks who have done all they can to compromise a very highly quality public land elk area. They chose to play how they have; their decision, not the public's.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
And through support of such groups as United Property Owners of Montana (UPOM) and Citizens for Balanced Use (CBU) ... (or is it balanced abuse?) we shall overcome and counter the attitude of thousands of other sportsmen and hunters across Montana .(Please read intended sarcasm. SA)
Last edited:
starvingoutdoorsman
Active member
Oddly enough Billy... I opposed it yet have never been there. My dad, who is part of the Laurel Rod and Gun club for numerous years and having held numerous positons in the club opposes, yet has never been there. Same with anyone else I know that is part of that club. Not saying everyone is against it. But seems an overwhelming majority are. But having more than 4 or 5 out of around 350 paying members attending the meetings might help your cause but I imagine the majority of members would still oppose given pros and cons of the matter. Heck my dad would apprecite some added dialog in their meetings so come one come all. Nobody on my social media pages or my personal friends and contacts are for this exchange.
StykbowMT225
New member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2015
- Messages
- 14
Billy Banger pointed out I was privileged, and I want to say thank you.
I am privileged to live in such a great state where decisions like this are made to serve the public's interest. I am privileged enough to work with so many sportsmen that understand where our outdoor heritage would end up if they didn't speak up. I was even privileged enough to make a few friends with airplanes, and spend a few long weekends in the Durfee Hills.
I believe everybody should hunt the Durfees. It takes some organization, planning, good weather, and a few bucks for AV Gas. Make sure you get yourself there before you make outrageous claims that this exchange should have gone anywhere.
Thank you,
Doug Krings
I am privileged to live in such a great state where decisions like this are made to serve the public's interest. I am privileged enough to work with so many sportsmen that understand where our outdoor heritage would end up if they didn't speak up. I was even privileged enough to make a few friends with airplanes, and spend a few long weekends in the Durfee Hills.
I believe everybody should hunt the Durfees. It takes some organization, planning, good weather, and a few bucks for AV Gas. Make sure you get yourself there before you make outrageous claims that this exchange should have gone anywhere.
Thank you,
Doug Krings
MTHunter1321
Well-known member
I am one that has not hunted the Durfees yet, however, it is a bucket list item for me. I am glad that this latest proposal has got shot down and I hope it stays that way. I believe it is a major victory for Montana sportsmen and women and for once, money does not prevail. I do have a question for people who have hunted the area or are more familiar with it than me. It looks like with the new hunting proposals that the FWP commission is considering, this area would go from a permit only to a general tag if it is passed as proposed. Do you think this will drive more people to spend the money to fly in and hunt? I could maybe see it becoming "too popular" and potentially driving the elk back onto the Wilkes land. Hopefully I am wrong though. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Similar threads
