CMR NWR Community Working Group

Meeting Minutes for June 2nd, 2011

Rimrock Plaza Winnett, MT

Attendees:

Steve Wanderaas, Mark Good, Janelle Holden, Nathan Hawkaluk, Jeanne Kirkegard, Don Woerner, Dyrck Van Hyning, Jason Holt, Monte Billing, Damien Austin, Bryce Christianson, Laurie Riley and Carie Hess. (need the rest from the sign in sheet)

The CMR NWR Community Working Group held our 8th meeting on June 2nd, 2011 at the Rimrock Plaza in Winnett, Montana with 24 people in attendance. Coffee and doughnuts were available prior to the start of the meeting.

Facilitator Bill Milton opened the meeting at 10:06 a.m. with introductions and asked. Who you are, where you are from, and how has this spring impacted your life or community? The participants were seated in a circle and each person introduced themselves and answered the question in turn. Once everyone had answered he introduced the speakers for the day.

Mark Good, Montana Wilderness Association (MWA), which is a statewide private nonprofit membership organization with about 5,000 members, founded in 1958 by Ken & Florence Baldwin who lived in and around the Bozeman area and a handful of others. The MWA has formed some unusual alliances over the years such as loggers, sawmill workers and owners, and ranchers their primary focus is on federal public lands but they recognize that they can’t be so narrowly focused as to not also recognize the relationship between surrounding private lands and nearby communities. Mark states that he feels when people hear wilderness or wildlands they associate it with mountainous forested landscapes not prairie landscapes and that people feel that prairie landscapes are boring but he states that they have a long, proud, colorful and sometimes difficult history behind them. Montana and the nation have changed significantly over the past 200 years and continue to change. He notes that in Eastern Montana that most federal lands are managed with by the BLM or the USFWS with a small portion of Forest Service land and that each of these entities manage for different uses. BLM manages almost 8 million acres in Montana but most of those are in the eastern part of the state and are managed of multiple us. But with changing patterns of land use the MWA believes that there is also a need to continue to preserve some of the best of what is left of this once vast prairie landscape by managing some of our public lands more for their wildland and wilderness values. That it is our responsibility and gift to future generations so that they too can appreciate and use these lands as we do. But keeping public lands somewhat like they are requires some type of protective designation whether it be wildlife refuges, wild and scenic rivers, national monuments, wilderness study areas, or state parks. Currently there are 250,000 acres of wilderness study areas over 40 – 50 million acres across the state. These public lands must be managed under a multiple use mandate in order to provide for a variety of uses but the mandate includes conservation values as well as commercial values. He notes that multiple-use has never meant all uses in all places, but rather a balance of uses across the landscape. He then showed the group a few of the wilderness study areas. He notes that people have different reasons for wanting to protect some of our public lands, be it wilderness or some other protective designation. For some it is for recreation like hunting, fishing, hiking, horseback riding, camping and other activities. For others it might be about wildlife, especially non game wildlife, historic preservation threatened and unique vegetation, scenic beauty, or a sense of solitude. And yet still others it is simply a moral or religious imperative: we should be able and willing to limit the extend of our demands on the earth and other forms of life so that at least a tiny portion of God’s creation can remain untrammeled by humanity. He notes if nothing else it serves as a kind of benchmark for us to know whether or not we are improving nature with all our tinkering. As we adapt to climate change these areas may become more important. He states that as a nation we have long recognized that there is value in keeping some places much like they are. But it isn’t just for some of the reasons mentioned but we’ve learned that protect landscapes have economic value too. He gave a few examples such as the CMR and Lewistown. He then talked about the economy trends over the last 30 years and that in the 1990’s western Montana would have been among the top 10 states of the Union in terms of population and job growth while eastern Montana would have been in the bottom 10 by the same measures and actually losing population. He further states that the economic vitality of the western part of the state is partly related to the attraction of undeveloped mountain landscapes. He notes that this has not always been that way and it is relatively new but is also happening in the dessert areas in the southwestern United States. It was gold and the pursuit of mineral wealth that brought people to Montana and when they ran out the people deserted the area leaving behind hundreds of ghost towns. Mark states that the point is that people’s appreciation of landscapes change and develops. It would not take a major reversal of American attitudes toward prairies to begin to stabilize and modestly repopulate the region. In a country of over 300 million people, only a tiny fraction need develop an appreciation for these landscapes to attract people and businesses as in the western part of the state. He notes a few communities that have seen growth due to these areas. Mark continues by asking what is a wilderness. Wilderness is a protective designation, the purpose of which is to keep an area much like it is for future generations. There were no legally designated wilderness areas until the passage of the Wilderness Act in 1964 which was passed with bipartisan support. And further states that only Congress can designate an area as wilderness, making it hard to get but also hard to take away. Under the Wilderness Act public access for a multitude of uses is provided and the wilderness designation allows you to fish, hunt, camp, engage in wildlife viewing, ride horses, go on trips with outfitters, and many other traditional uses while safeguarding wildlife, native plants, and historic sites. It is noted that is also allows for livestock grazing where it exists and cannot be eliminated just because of the wilderness designation. Mark concludes by saying that I think there is potential here for an ongoing dialogue that moves beyond some of the rhetoric that often surrounds public land issues into a more complete understanding of the long run benefits and costs associated with preserving natural landscapes. Ranching and farming operations, oil and gas drilling, will always be a part of this landscape and should be. But we also believe that a variety of the protective measures will help preserve that which is unique and special about central and eastern Montana. And doing so will contribute to the vitality and diversity of local communities and landscapes. Furthermore "they don’t make any more "Wilderness" in a world with more and more people, more development of all types, what exists here is rare. These parks and wilderness areas are, after all, valuable to people across the nation and around the world. Someone has to speak for the land from that broader public perspective too. We need to understand local economic and public access concerns and locals need to understand the larger benefits of permanent landscape protection to them and their communities. The history of how the local attitudes move systematically from opposition to a whole- hearted embrace of those protected landscapes also needs to be kept in mind. There is the potential here for an ongoing productive dialogue that moves beyond the "war of the west" rhetoric into a more complete understanding of the long run benefits and costs associated with preserving natural landscapes for all of us to enjoy for many generations into the future. It is the MWA’s sincere belief that by protecting and reviving our diverse public nature prairie lands we will preserve that which is unique and special about central and eastern Montana while also contributing to the vitality of local communities. And that is can be done in a manner that balances a variety of uses. What I keep hearing is that healthiest economies and communities are those which are most diverse. I think that this applies to diverse landscapes as well where you have livestock and farming operations, maybe some oil and gas drilling, but also some protected public lands such as parks, wildlife refuges, national monuments, and wilderness.

Janelle Holden, The Wilderness Society, The Wilderness Society is a national organization founded by Bob Marshall and currently has about 500,000 members nationwide and a staff of about 200. They differ from the Montana Wilderness Association in the fact they are stationed in D.C. and are D.C. based action. She goes on to say that in the Northern Rockies which covers Montana and Wyoming they have 12 staff members and she is the only staff member working on prairie issues.

Bill then opened up the Q & A with Mark and Janelle

During the Q & A the use of machinery and vehicles to fix fences and repair reservoirs or rescue people in an emergency was questioned. Nathan Hawkaluk with the CMR station in Jordan answered with the following statement. The use of such things on the refuge, proposed or designated wilderness areas would require a minimal tool analysis to be conducted. These can be done either in a blanket for a particular tool or as a specific task or location. Another question was how many acres are you actively studying for wilderness study areas? It was stated that there are 3.7 million acres of designated areas in western Montana and 150,000 acres in the CMR.

Damien Austin, Reserve Forman, American Prairie Foundation, Damien started his presentation by stating that the future of the APF is to create a multimillion acre wildlife reserve with biodiversity, with both public and private lands that would be similar to the park’s system with amenities and would be fully endowed. He states that the reason for being in this area is due to the fact that there is a largely intact landscape with large amounts of public land and that the APF manages for biodiversity. The APF currently runs 40,000 acres of deeded and 84,000 acres of leased land. He notes that they purchase only from willing sellers and pay fair market value and all property taxes on the deeded acres. Currently almost all of the property is leased back to cattle grazing but they would like to have bison graze this eventually. It is the APF’s hope to have the facility completely open to the public and the first phase was started this summer with the installation of the first camp ground with seven r.v. sites, 4 tent sites, and 2 toilet facilities with the first interpretive trail to go in this summer. Damien also notes that 28,000 of the 40,000 deeded acres are enrolled in block management and as the leases are up they will enroll more. They do not take payments for their block management. Their funding is ninety percent individual contributors and ten percent from grants. IT was noted that when it comes to economy and the community the employee 4 people in Phillips County, bank locally, and purchase goods and services locally whenever possible. The issue of bison was the next to be addressed and Damien states that the herd of about 120 is considered livestock by the USDA and that they are held to the same regulations as the cattle producer and pay all of the fees associated with cattle/livestock. This last year they removed almost 100 bison from the facility and noted this was done in the following manner. One animal was killed in regards to the MOU with the Ranchers Stewardship Alliance, one was killed, stuffed and sent to a museum, twenty were shipped to a zoo, twenty were shipped to the Colorado State University, and forty seven were shipped to the tribe. Damien noted the partners and contributors to the APF such as the World Wildlife Federation serves as the science advisor, the U of M and MSU send students to complete studies, and the wildlife conservation society is currently doing a grasslands study on the facility. In conclusion it is stated that the future is to stay in private ownership and that the American Prairie Reserve stationed in Bozeman would take over as the foundation dissolves.

Bill then opened up the Q & A with Damien and Bryce Christensen, Manager of Field Operations.

Lunch was served from 12:35 to 1:15 p.m.

After lunch, meeting facilitator Bill Milton had the group break into smaller working groups of 4 - 5 people each in order to answer 2 questions. The groups were given about 20 – 30 minutes to gather their answers.

Q-1) What is one important thing you have learned?

Q-2) What concerns or questions came about from the presentations?

Group Summaries:

Group 1:

Q1:

There are more wilderness areas then thought, Mt. Wilderness Ass. And Wilderness society are different the Wilderness Society focuses on DC based action, Terry Badlands have interesting rock formations, Wilderness is created by congress which makes it hard to create and hard to get rid of, Grasslands are becoming important to people who don’t live here, and the picture from the past seems to show less grass has we have now. APF pays taxes, APF vision includes BLM & CMR, APF has been giving bison to Fort Peck Tribe, has 40,000 deeded acres, they have an Understanding with Ranchers Stewardship Alliance.

Q2:

What about bison on CMR, who will those, be? What about proposed wilderness areas, where are the people who graze the CMR, why aren’t they here, can wilderness tourism really generate economic activity comparable to agriculture in or communities, APF employees get their salary whether the ranch produces or not, Once agriculture producers are bought out, won’t the county lose its agricultural infrastructure, can we come up with a conservation vision that values the ranchers on the land and preserves their role in the ecosystem. Why are we so polarized, there seems to be a gap in the way we communicate, we need to acknowledge that the people in this room all really care about this place, Ranchers have to treat it like a business or they can’t live on the land, How many people visit the Blackfoot Wilderness Study area each year, we don’t manage public lands for livestock production, we use those lands to make our ranches sustainable.

Group 2:

Q1: Multiple use of land, they have a goal, includes cultural and grazing (historical values), surprised that it started in 1958, small amount of WSA still hanging since 1990, two different organizations, two different wilderness designations, no immediate plans to cross the river, and goals for buffalo, building relationships can contribute to excellent dialogue, have an MOU, transport bison to the Fort Peck Tribe, 1200 hunting days

Q2: Loss of revenue for both county and rancher, added revenue for tourism but loss for the rancher, take land out of production requires putting land back in somewhere else and that could ruin the environment somewhere else ( i.e. rainforests), study WSA now counted in 1990, when does it run out, why would a designation such as a WA/ EIS as opposed to landowner making use of land ( more precise with the words we use), effects on counties and ranches incomes, after moving the name over to a prairie reserve and why changing the name, could CMR work with APF , concerned with answer time will tell, a resource program financed by

Group 3:

Q1: There is a small percentage of land in wilderness, mechanized equipment allowed in wilderness – site specific and based on emergency, from the slides what areas look like, in general learned about the MWA, minimal tool analysis, where wilderness areas are located, TWS has 200 employees & Janelle is the only one on prairies, APF sold or gave away bison and that they don’t keep them all, snow fences and the bison escaped last winter, facts and figures on deeded and leased lands, learned the end game is a private entity, MOU/ RSA

Q2: WSA’s are open ended in time- think that after a designation the clock should start ticking for a time period to final designation or not, fire issue balance and educate and save property, small communities – stabilize economically, 1000’s of bison crossing into private land and the destroying of land, crops, stored hay and pastures, ranches purchased and moving people of the land has a big impact on community and changes the landscape, loss of heritage, loss of community, loss of food and by products. Paranoid concern over bison, think that there are solutions, taking worst case as what would happen ultimately happen. Synonymous with paranoia over Muslims as terrorists.

Group 4:

Q1: Did not know that there was a distinction between WSA and wilderness, amount of proposed wilderness area in Eastern Montana, the Wilderness Society and MWA are friendly with ranchers, APF is more than growing bison, difference between the MWA and the Wilderness Society

Q2: APF is a bison outfit, containment of bison to the property, amount of land in wilderness areas, turning buffalo from livestock to wildlife very unnerving, MWA has no clear set of rules, more designations or get rid of the current proposed areas, progressive loss to access of Wilderness Areas, introducing projects (i.e. the Wolf) and then not taking care of it, getting a toehold then continuing to grab land.

Group 5:

Q1: Equipment used appreciation of the prairie, more about species on the APF. Q2: Economic impact, access to wilderness for the common person, not enough wildlife, Did APF waive the the fee for block management.

The bison poll was brought up and Steve Wanderaas with McCone County CD talked about conducting a local poll using the same questions as the NWF but within the 6 counties. There was a lot of discussion about making sure this poll was not one-sided. Laurie mentioned that there was information in the poll that was not shared at the last meeting and felt that the original poll should be looked at a bit further she stated that it is available and can be obtained wither through the NWF website or by contacting her at the MRCDC Office. The Group addressed the issue of policy related to having statements or questions from non present people at the meeting. At the last meeting it ended up being a focus question to the group in the break outs. From here on out the general rule questions will be from people present and if a big question comes up he will ask the group as a whole if it pertains. It was also noted that Bill Milton and Laurie Riley’s contact information be added to the minutes. The Planning Committee was brought up and there are 2 positions that need to be filled one for Ag and one for recreation. It was thought that nominations could be sent to Laurie with Bill CC’d by email.

It was noted that people need to be players in this group. Names of possible players were mentioned FWP, Tribes, and The Nature Conservancy, permittees and that they could get person invites from people on the group to attend. Presenters were discussed for the next couple of meetings:

August

Mary Sexton- State lands and land trades within the CMR

BLM - both Deb and Stan Benes

October- Mt. Water rights Compact

Janelle mentioned that this was to be her last meeting but that John Todd would be her replacement.

In closing Bill Milton asked everyone to state what worked well and what could be done better.

What worked well?

• Format

• Continued dialogue

• Making progress

• Good flow

• Better mixture of break out groups

What could be improved?

• Permitees to meting

• Encourage people to come that could be impacted

• Better promoting

The next meeting date was announced as August 11th in Lewistown.

The group adjourned at approximately 3:00 pm.