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

[bigskyblueman]

Spoke with Sen. Testers' office on Mon. on this matter. They indicated more fact gathering still ongoing, some of which requires warmer spring weather. This time issue may also affect when the subject matter appears in the Federal Register.

 

[81hntn]

I'm just curious if this fencing issue is common across the West or more of an isolated incidence?

 

[wdkrings]

I promise this will be the last time I post this (As it is the last day to give the BLM your comment on the New Bullwhacker Road EA)

The sportsmen of Central Montana are encouraging the BLM to build a new route on the East side of the existing Bullwhacker Road which is currently locked by the Wilks.

Please send a comment to: : [email protected]

Tell them to build a new road on the East side please. This land belongs to all of America. A new road would re-establish vehicle access to 50,000 acres of BLM that we can all use!

 

[katqanna]

I just had a woman email about my comment in my newsletter against HB 557 and the potential abuses. She stated they had 3 smooth wire electric fence and it is not a problem for wildlife. I realized that with this damn brain injury and memory gaps that I forgot to show an example of this from the Paradise Valley.

The bill as written states for the electric wire 3 or more.

At the Dec. Elk brucellosis Paradise Valley working group meeting, I took audio, at 42:20 - Fencing Question - Rep. Alan Redfield mentions he has 160 acres of hay meadow, all fenced off, about $5,000 a mile, 6 ft. high, 5 wire electric fence, 9,000 volts because of the hollow hair on them (elk). Before the meeting they had a map on the wall FWP had created with the known elk populations of the area for 3 years, (unfortunately Loveless didnt average the colored dots but put all three years in the same color making it look like there is 3x the amount of elk there are, hence the need for the big circles specifying how many were there on average). The area to the right in red with 35 circled is Redfields place. He came over before the meeting started and explained that was his area, his type of fence and the fact that it keeps the elk out around his place, he lets them in or out by his choosing, keeps his resident herd small. He said his neighbors might not like it though because it pushes the elk to their properties. Redfield brought this fence up at two meetings.

Unfortunately, with my brain injury damage, composition sucks, so it is hard to write out points and get all my thoughts out coherently or even remember much of what I already knew and recalled immediately, I have huge gaps of memory I am trying to restore, cognitive therapy, so I forgot to include this information with the links when I sent out or mentioned here before.

Not everyone who ranches or has land would install more than 3 electric wires, not everyone has objectives against our wildlife but for those that do and for those with the money to do so or have already exhibited their intentions, this is a problem as the bill is written, in my opinion.

Now, just to play worst case scenario with this Wilks fence, what if they decided to change the perimeter fence to 5 wire electric, if they dont get this land trade going again that they want?

 

[Eric Albus]

buzz...no stock in companies like that.....just a differing point of view from your liberal bias, and like all libs you resort to petty tactics.

 

[Bulldog0156]

buzz...no stock in companies like that.....just a differing point of view from your liberal bias, and like all libs you resort to petty tactics.

Dude, quit trying to make this a political debate.

 

[starvingoutdoorsman]

http://billingsgazette.com/lifestyl...cle_cee64598-452a-5fa4-ae18-f91db844ab60.html

 

[noharleyyet]

Props to Kat for tenacity....and ink.

 

[thecrittergitter]

kat, I know Rob personally. And what does he or Ted Turner have to do w/ the N Bar?

I do not know the Wilks, nor do I hunt the area that was fenced. If the fence was not done legal, it should be moved to actual boundary, and a hefty fine as well as restoration costs paid. But my guess is that folks w/ the brains to amass a fortune large enough to buy a good portion of Montana most likely did not build where they were not supposed to. I would be willing to bet if there was an error the contractor made it.... are any of you really that stupid to think they(Wilks) would not think there would be controversy and this would be examined w/ a microscope?

This might be the dumbest thing you have said so far.......Let me explain an unfortunate but true situation with the world we live in. Money talks, and the more of it some people have, the more power and illegal activities they get away with, a lot due to the mentality of comments like yours. I own a small business here in Montana. I have two giant companies that I compete with here in Montana that literally break the rules and regulations on a regular basis to get bigger and more powerful. The arrogance and extra money paid to the permitting agencies to look the other way, only gets worse with people and companies with a lot of money. I have watched it first hand and its disturbing our state agencies get so scared when dealing with these guys with a pile of money, yet when it is an every day Joe, they have no problem putting the hammer down! So to say that just because they have the brains to amass millions of dollars, means they do everything legal, is ........as you say, Ludacris. Now I don't know if it is in the right place or it isn't. What I'm telling you is that whether it is or it isn't, just because they have an azzpile of money doesn't mean anything. In fact, from what I've witnessed first hand in this state, the more money and power you have, the more bullchit you get away with, and that BS needs to stop!
You can argue all you want for the Wilks brothers, they absolutely have a right to fence their property, but when you start acting like rules and regulations don't apply to you just because you feel you own the world, that is the definition of arrogance. They were trying to make an obvious statement here, nobody can argue that. There were 10 ways they could have done the fencing and clearing that would have been normal practice......but they chose the one way that they knew would show people just how badazz they are.

I'm all for protecting both public and private land. But I'm extremely opposed to anyone thinking they are above the law on either side of the coin.........

 

[Big Fin]

Glad to see this starting to get more traction and the timing of it couldn't be any better.

Here is a huge encroachment on the north side, on the best elk travel corridor along the north public-private boundary. The exact location of these signs were provided to the BLM. I sent them an email with exact details of everything, upon our return from the hunt in October. The BLM asked if they could share my email with the Wilks Brothers. I told them to provide anything they want to the Wilks. In addition to the pic of this sign, I have screen shots of the GPS showing how far off it is at this critical point.




How funny that the most important crossing on the north property boundary now has encroachment by 260-450', depending upon which corner you measure from. Just enough to influence the travel patterns of the elk coming from the private to the public at this key spot in their travels. Every other place on the north boundary looks to be +/- 20 feet of the boundary. To be so far off in this one place the elk use to get to the public is not accidental. I know it, the fence guy knows it, and the BLM knows it.

There is no doubt the BLM knows of this encroachment and its impact on elk hunting on the public lands. Had the Wilks followed the boundary lines here, as they did in the other places I looked at, the elk hunting on the Durfee BLM pieces would have been close to what it had always been. Yet, the Wilks now have it fenced in a way that when the elk come to the fence they put way over on BLM, the elk are then funneled west along the encroaching fence and over to the Wilk's property.

The Wilks can call it what they want. If the BLM does not investigate this and change it, things need to be looked at within the BLM. The fact that it has taken them this long and has required this much diligence from Kat is a bad sign. If the BLM had encroached and the landowner complained, I could envision Secretary Jewell making a personal to apologize and fix it immediately. Yet, when it is the reverse, somehow it is pretty low down the priority list.

I suggest anyone who wants to defend the Wilks and their actions take their GPS and go in there to see what has happened. Odds are, you will realize defending those actions is a lost cause.

And now I hear, the Wilks are pumping up some big round table in Helena next week. This is perfect evidence of how they play the game. Personally, the odd of them convincing me to support any land exchange with people who operate like they do, is very low. They think it is cute to pull some fifth grade playground BS of "I'll show them" and do all they could to mess up the elk hunting on public land. Knock yourself out boys, 'cause it is having the opposite affect with people like me.

I originally was hoping some solution could be worked out that would make sense for everyone and give the public better access to some great elk hunting opportunity, as not everyone is as crazy as I am and willing to fly in there. Had they come forward with something that made sense, rather than bending the public over the rail with the lame proposals they've thrown out there, I think they had a chance to get something accomplished.

But, they chose to go the other route. When they did not get their way and the public was not willing to sign on to a terrible exchange they proposed, they decided to kick dirt in the public's face and pull the crap of the tall fences, the encroachment, and all the other adolescent pranks. And now, they expect the public to kiss their feet and view them as some great folks with altruistic intentions. I ain't buying what they're selling.

The BLM needs to walk a very fine line on this one. If the BLM continues to delay and somehow this just gets swept under the rug, it will be a huge credibility crisis for the BLM. At least with MT folks. I doubt that will happen, given the profile of the case. A few days in DC showed me that we peasants out here in the hinter lands don't have a fraction of the input the slick-dressed lobbyists of big money have back in DC, so I am relying on the BLM folks to stand up and represent the public for whom they work.

 

[katqanna]

Ron called French and spoke to him about doing an article on the investigation. Then last week French called, so I hoped something would be written. But I am disappointed with some statements like, " transient population of elk, which spends much of its time grazing on the Wilkses’ surrounding N Bar Ranch." Public wildlife come with the landscape. And this is a wildlife the Wilks wanted, so it is not like the elk are a problem the Wilks didnt want or factor for.

I spoke to him of the Unlawful Inclosures of Public Lands Act, no mention of that. No mention that the fence began to be erected AFTER the 1600+ petition to not trade the Durfees for Bullwhacker access. That points to motive for the fence erection.

And French, or whoever set the webpage version up, misspelled my last name ( QannaYahu, not Kathryn Qanna Yahu ). But I just took care of that (adding coding for the misspelled name, added it here since this PHP forum searches quickly) so that anyone looking into my name, since French did not list EMWH as previously in other articles, trying to find the Wilks fencing information, housed at the Wilks Interactive Map page, will now be able to find it and people will see this is not about me, but our public lands, the public hunters here that contributed and spoke out and our Federal public land regulations.

There is a much broader picture of this issue very much missing from that article. This forum and other public hunters were not mentioned, because it would have revealed the broader public interest, other hunters from across Montana that enjoy the Durfees, the web links to the documentation for people to see what is really going on. Cant have that.

BTW, I still have not received any of my BLM FOIA request that I placed November 13, 2014 - 5 months ago.

Edit: lol, that was fast. By putting the name misspelling here, within a couple minutes, search bots picked it up here and anyone searching my misspelled name from the article will now see this thread over the Billings Gazette article and be able to see the real story. Gotta love the way the internet works at times.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

I hope this situation doesn't drag on for 20 years like the Bundy matter in NV that still has no resolution, but this stonewalling of the FOIA request by KAT is not a good sign IMHO! Did you see that Bundy threw a big party to commemorate the first anniversary of his armed standoff with the BLM that he says showed he won the war with the Feds?

 

[The Hedgehog]

Problems solved?

 

[katqanna]

I hope this situation doesn't drag on for 20 years like the Bundy matter in NV that still has no resolution, but this stonewalling of the FOIA request by KAT is not a good sign IMHO!

This reminds me, now that I have short term memory back , that I need to get back in touch with the public trust attorney that contacted me a wee bit ago. They asked me to let them know if I had not received anything by a certain date.

 

[RobG]

I was ready to fire off a letter to the Gazette complaining about what a crappy reporting job has been done on this issue - this article is months late. It doesn't even mention the BLM coverup/press release that only found fault with the pilots landing off-road with no mention of the documented dozer tracks, etc. But in the end French is the only one reporting on it so I guess we shouldn't be too critical.

Thanks to the pressure by you folks the fence will be fixed and they might be fined, but this will just be a minor nuisance to the Wilks. It wouldn't even surprise me if they net positive from their stunt. I'll say it again though, in my opinion the real problem is how the BLM tried to cover for the Wilks. Something isn't right in that office. Don't you think? I wish I had enough time to pursue this, but unfortunately I don't.

 

[MTbowhunter84]

http://m.billingsgazette.com/lifest...5fa4-ae18-f91db844ab60.html?mobile_touch=true

Looks like things might be headed in the right direction but may also be a ways down the road for any result.

 

[katqanna]

I spoke with the attorney this morning and sent the suggested letter to BLM, requesting the status and letting them know that I may begin filing an appeal if I dont receive my request soon, as it has been 5 months from the original request. I also reminded them that I have stated in email and on phone a number of times, that I did not want to have to go this route, as I wanted the public process to work, wanted that to inspire others that BLM was interested and working for us, but they have not even sent me the already released records sent to a previous requester of some of the same information on the land exchange. We'll see.

After the Wilks article ran, with the posts here, MT reddit and comments on the online article, I had 515 downloads of the BLM Fencing Handbook and 393 of the BLM Trespass Handbook yesterday. Hopefully, this will translate to a more informed public and active public in these matters, not just here, but in other locations.

 

[MN Public Hunter]

Glad to see this starting to get more traction and the timing of it couldn't be any better.

Here is a huge encroachment on the north side, on the best elk travel corridor along the north public-private boundary. The exact location of these signs were provided to the BLM. I sent them an email with exact details of everything, upon our return from the hunt in October. The BLM asked if they could share my email with the Wilks Brothers. I told them to provide anything they want to the Wilks. In addition to the pic of this sign, I have screen shots of the GPS showing how far off it is at this critical point.

View attachment 46896


How funny that the most important crossing on the north property boundary now has encroachment by 260-450', depending upon which corner you measure from. Just enough to influence the travel patterns of the elk coming from the private to the public at this key spot in their travels. Every other place on the north boundary looks to be +/- 20 feet of the boundary. To be so far off in this one place the elk use to get to the public is not accidental. I know it, the fence guy knows it, and the BLM knows it.

There is no doubt the BLM knows of this encroachment and its impact on elk hunting on the public lands. Had the Wilks followed the boundary lines here, as they did in the other places I looked at, the elk hunting on the Durfee BLM pieces would have been close to what it had always been. Yet, the Wilks now have it fenced in a way that when the elk come to the fence they put way over on BLM, the elk are then funneled west along the encroaching fence and over to the Wilk's property.

The Wilks can call it what they want. If the BLM does not investigate this and change it, things need to be looked at within the BLM. The fact that it has taken them this long and has required this much diligence from Kat is a bad sign. If the BLM had encroached and the landowner complained, I could envision Secretary Jewell making a personal to apologize and fix it immediately. Yet, when it is the reverse, somehow it is pretty low down the priority list.

I suggest anyone who wants to defend the Wilks and their actions take their GPS and go in there to see what has happened. Odds are, you will realize defending those actions is a lost cause.

And now I hear, the Wilks are pumping up some big round table in Helena next week. This is perfect evidence of how they play the game. Personally, the odd of them convincing me to support any land exchange with people who operate like they do, is very low. They think it is cute to pull some fifth grade playground BS of "I'll show them" and do all they could to mess up the elk hunting on public land. Knock yourself out boys, 'cause it is having the opposite affect with people like me.

I originally was hoping some solution could be worked out that would make sense for everyone and give the public better access to some great elk hunting opportunity, as not everyone is as crazy as I am and willing to fly in there. Had they come forward with something that made sense, rather than bending the public over the rail with the lame proposals they've thrown out there, I think they had a chance to get something accomplished.

But, they chose to go the other route. When they did not get their way and the public was not willing to sign on to a terrible exchange they proposed, they decided to kick dirt in the public's face and pull the crap of the tall fences, the encroachment, and all the other adolescent pranks. And now, they expect the public to kiss their feet and view them as some great folks with altruistic intentions. I ain't buying what they're selling.

The BLM needs to walk a very fine line on this one. If the BLM continues to delay and somehow this just gets swept under the rug, it will be a huge credibility crisis for the BLM. At least with MT folks. I doubt that will happen, given the profile of the case. A few days in DC showed me that we peasants out here in the hinter lands don't have a fraction of the input the slick-dressed lobbyists of big money have back in DC, so I am relying on the BLM folks to stand up and represent the public for whom they work.

Randy,

If the fence is off that much WTH is the BLM taking this sh!t at all? If I were you, I would just cut the damn thing down when you go hunt there this year ! At night of course

 

[James Riley]

Randy,

If the fence is off that much WTH is the BLM taking this sh!t at all? If I were you, I would just cut the damn thing down when you go hunt there this year ! At night of course

I wonder what the law is on self-help? If someone litters, there is no foul in packing it out. I'm sure if an outfitter has a designated camp he can leave it un-attended for whatever period the law/regulations allow (during season or whatever). But what about after that? At what point is something "abandoned"? I'm sure it's not cool to pack someone else's camp out just because they aren't around. But when you flat-out leave some illegal crap on the public land, what right do you have to expect the public to leave it there? If your cows are illegal, are they like feral dogs that can be shot (Bundy)? Just wondering out loud. Comments?

 

[300stw]

maybe theres a guy in the Lewistown office of blm that needs a new job,,,,Williston nd walmart is always hiring,,,