Wilks brothers true colors are shining through.....

[MTBirdhunter]

Should Washington be trusted with Montana lands?

I guess to me this brings up the whole issue of state's rights. Wouldn't Montanans be served better by the state of Montana taking control of BLM lands, thus having local control, instead of pencil pushers in D.C. having control? Lot easier to drive to Helena and stand up for OUR rights, then going to D.C. Just my two cents...

 

[RobG]

I guess to me this brings up the whole issue of state's rights. Wouldn't Montanans be served better by the state of Montana taking control of BLM lands, thus having local control, instead of pencil pushers in D.C. having control? Lot easier to drive to Helena and stand up for OUR rights, then going to D.C. Just my two cents...

No, read what I just posted.

 

[kansasdad]

I guess to me this brings up the whole issue of state's rights. Wouldn't Montanans be served better by the state of Montana taking control of BLM lands, thus having local control, instead of pencil pushers in D.C. having control? Lot easier to drive to Helena and stand up for OUR rights, then going to D.C. Just my two cents...

......and a lot easier for gentlemen ranchers with bank accounts in the ten digits to "influence" local controlling authorities. County commissioners, state representatives and senators, district attorney, and local law enforcement folks are more likely to "look away" for someone they know and see on a regular basis. As a generalization the "good 'ol boy, rub your back, I'll scratch yours" can happen a lot more easily with local folks in charge.

 

[mtmiller]

I guess to me this brings up the whole issue of state's rights. Wouldn't Montanans be served better by the state of Montana taking control of BLM lands, thus having local control, instead of pencil pushers in D.C. having control? Lot easier to drive to Helena and stand up for OUR rights, then going to D.C. Just my two cents...

Start a new thread.

 

[RobG]

Start a new thread.

yup

 

[Straight Arrow]

I guess to me this brings up the whole issue of state's rights. Wouldn't Montanans be served better by the state of Montana taking control of BLM lands, thus having local control, instead of pencil pushers in D.C. having control? Lot easier to drive to Helena and stand up for OUR rights, then going to D.C. Just my two cents...

MTBirdhunter

I think that dead horse is already in the second graders' glue sticks.

 

[chuckyd313]

I hope you are taking the time to do some hardcore hunting in between all this with the Wilks brother and BLM. Id hate to see a great tag go to waste. i seriously respect what youre doing for the public land dont get me wrong.

 

[BigRack]

My bad.

 

[300stw]

an email from Gary Binns said no problems by the Wilkes

 

[shoots-straight]

an email from Gary Binns said no problems by the Wilkes

Guess I don't know who "Gary Binns" is. Elaborate please.

 

[johndeer]

Gary Binns = Stan Benes
Stan Benes is the District Manager of the BLM's Central MT District Office in Lewistown

Could you please post the email he sent?

 

[katqanna]

Here is the Red Rim legal case on pdf.
U.S. EX REL. BERGEN v. LAWRENCE No. 86-1085

Lawrence constructed a twenty-eight mile fence enclosing over twenty thousand acres of private, state and federal lands in an area of south central Wyoming known as the Red Rim.

The land in this area is owned in the familiar "checkerboard" pattern as the result of the federal land grant to the Union Pacific Railroad.

Lawrence has fee title or permission to fence from the title owner of the private sections and has grazing permits on the federal and state sections. The fence enclosed 15 sections, or approximately 9,600 acres of unreserved public domain. However, the fence was constructed entirely on private lands, except where it crosses the common corners of state and federal sections.

Lawrence grazes his cattle on the Red Rim during the spring and summer months for about 60 days. But during the winter, portions of the Red Rim provide critical range for Wyoming pronghorn antelope. The fence Lawrence constructed, however, was antelope-proof, denying antelope access to this critical winter range. The winter of 1983 was unusually severe (even for Wyoming) and the testimony to the district court indicated that antelope collected against the fence and starved in an unsuccessful attempt to reach the Red Rim.

The government brought this action under a statute adopted by Congress in 1885, the Unlawful Inclosures of Public Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. §§ 1061 to 1066 ("UIA"), seeking an order compelling removal of the fence or modification to allow free and unrestricted access by pronghorn antelope to the enclosed public lands.

The Wyoming and National Wildlife Federations were joined as intervenors and moved for a preliminary injunction to have portions of the fence removed before the winter of 1985. At the hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction, the district court consolidated the matter into a full hearing on the merits pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(a)(2). At the conclusion of the hearing, the court orally granted the preliminary injunction, ordering Lawrence to remove certain portions of the fence within 10 days and to remove the entire fence or modify it to conform with Bureau of Land Management ("BLM") standards within 60 days. A few days later, the district court entered a final judgment and order directing that the entire fence be removed or modified. Lawrence appeals from the district court's order.

 

[double_a85]

Any updates Wingman?

 

[RobG]

300stw... what does that email say? Has anyone talked with the BLM?

 

[MThuntr]

This is the most recent reply I have gotten from BLM on 9/11/14

Thank you Grant. We did go out and confirm the trailer is on BLM but does not block the road/landing spot. They were reminded of the 14 day limit and they said it would be moved soon. The dozer appeared to be on BLM and if so may be unauthorized motorized travel on BLM lands....unless it is being used to assist in managing their allotment fences. Fences were fairly typical cattle fences and were usually 15-20 feet within their property boundary. We will fly next week to see if any of their roads may have encroached on public land. Meanwhile, yes, I am getting some pretty regular updates.....

Gary L. "Stan" Benes
Central District Manager
Bureau of Land Management
Lewistown, Montana 59457
Ph: 406-538-1900

 

[300stw]

The fences are similar to all the other fences around cattle allotments across Montana. They are a bit taller and have a full 5 strand, which is not all that wildlife friendly, but FWP says they do not impede wildlife traffic. The ones we checked were generally 15 - 20 feet inside of the private property line. The trailer was not blocking the road but was close enough to be bothersome to some pilots. They were told there was a 14 day limit on BLM land and they said the trailer would be moved soon. The dozer appeared to be on BLM land which could be an unauthorized use of a motorized vehicle cross country on BLM lands....unless it was used to assist in the fencing of their cattle allotments. It is a big area so we could not assess whether any new routes that were built encroached on public land. We will fly the area and make those assessments next week.

What they do on private land is of course of no concern to us as federal land managers. We understand and support private land rights. We will be checking further to see if there are violations on public lands. I


this is what I seen on a buddies email

 

[Big Fin]

Any updates Wingman?

I just got a call from a guy and it did provide me some update.

He is the guy who owns the fifth wheel. He received permission to cross the private and haul his fifth wheel in there. He is pulling it out, as his fourteen day limit is up. He has the rifle tag and he might pull it back in for rifle season, if he is able to get permission to do so.

He did say he talked to the BLM and they told him park it off the road, but no more than 100' off the road due to the travel rules. He parked it off the road 40' to make sure he was not imposing on other's use of the road. He did say there are plenty of hunters in there. He seemed to feel bad about being in the middle of some ongoing controversy that he was previously unaware of.

He seemed like a good guy who just wants to go hunting. I hope he shoots a whopper bull in rifle season.

 

[wingman1]

I just got a call from a guy and it did provide me some update.

He is the guy who owns the fifth wheel. He received permission to cross the private and haul his fifth wheel in there. He is pulling it out, as his fourteen day limit is up. He has the rifle tag and he might pull it back in for rifle season, if he is able to get permission to do so.

He did say he talked to the BLM and they told him park it off the road, but no more than 100' off the road due to the travel rules. He parked it off the road 40' to make sure he was not imposing on other's use of the road. He did say there are plenty of hunters in there. He seemed to feel bad about being in the middle of some ongoing controversy that he was previously unaware of.

He seemed like a good guy who just wants to go hunting. I hope he shoots a whopper bull in rifle season.

It is not a coincidence that the camper is parked half way down the strip. If I was rv camping in there, I would park anywhere but there. BTW they switched campers out to extend the camping limit.

I met this fella. He drove to the top with his truck. I was walking down the saddle when I bumped into him and his two hunting partners. They took one quick glance at me and then went back to glassing. I walked over to say hi. This was 30' off the trail I was walking down. They didn't seem bummed or apologetic in anyway.

 

[wingman1]

BLM knows the travel rules and they would never say 100'. It's actually 300'.

 

[wingman1]

This is the most recent reply I have gotten from BLM on 9/11/14

Thank you Grant. We did go out and confirm the trailer is on BLM but does not block the road/landing spot. They were reminded of the 14 day limit and they said it would be moved soon. The dozer appeared to be on BLM and if so may be unauthorized motorized travel on BLM lands....unless it is being used to assist in managing their allotment fences. Fences were fairly typical cattle fences and were usually 15-20 feet within their property boundary. We will fly next week to see if any of their roads may have encroached on public land. Meanwhile, yes, I am getting some pretty regular updates.....

Gary L. "Stan" Benes
Central District Manager
Bureau of Land Management
Lewistown, Montana 59457
Ph: 406-538-1900

No one from BLM has got out and actually walked any of the property line. They spent a very short time up where the cat was. In fact they told my partner they couldn't find it.