Sunday, December 28, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Smith River Management Plan
I love a Smith float and hopefully Autumn, Ed Jr. and I will be able to float it for years to come. Anyway FWP has posted the new management plan, which has some good ideas and they are looking for public comment...anyway, here are my comments and if you agree or disagree, please at least voice your opinion www.fwp.mt.gov
In Article IX, Section 3, Part 3 of the Montana Constitution, it is identified that all surface, underground, flood, and atmospheric waters within the boundaries of the state are the property of the state for the use of its people. Being that there is restricted use on the Smith, it is unconstitutional for FWP to allocate outfitters 15% of launches, since that allocation provides an unfair advantage to a non-resident who is wealthy enough to afford an outfitter over your average Montanan. Shouldn't the people who live and pay taxes in Montana have at least an equal opportunity to float the Smith River? One outfitter’s price for a Smith trip is $4,100 per person. I have been able to put together a private Smith trip for less than $100/person including shuttle.
My recommendation to remain compliant with the intent of Section 23-2-402, MCA, of the Smith River Management Act is to restrict outfitter use the same as public use. Let the outfitters, their guides, and potential clients enter the permit lottery. If a member of the public receives a Smith River Permit and wants to hire an outfitter, then let the outfitters compete for their clients. This type of unbiased and equal opportunity lottery system would level the playing field between commercial and private use.
The current system gurantees a wealthy non-resident a trip down the Smith with an outfitter, whereas an average Montanan statistically may never receive a permit in their lifetime, which I believe is wrong
My second comment is that the continued allowance of unlined pit toilets in a fee based use system constitutes FWP operating a solid waste management system without a license in violation of 75-10-221, MCA, of the Montana Solid Waste Management Act. These pit-toilets are attractants to disease vectors, and are a huge waste of FWP human resources digging them and maintaining them every year. The Salmon River system in Idaho has required that human waste be packed out for years, and it has been a very successful program. The bottom line is that there are only so many holes that FWP can dig before there is a significant public health issue at the camp sites.
Thanks
My recommendation to remain compliant with the intent of Section 23-2-402, MCA, of the Smith River Management Act is to restrict outfitter use the same as public use. Let the outfitters, their guides, and potential clients enter the permit lottery. If a member of the public receives a Smith River Permit and wants to hire an outfitter, then let the outfitters compete for their clients. This type of unbiased and equal opportunity lottery system would level the playing field between commercial and private use.
The current system gurantees a wealthy non-resident a trip down the Smith with an outfitter, whereas an average Montanan statistically may never receive a permit in their lifetime, which I believe is wrong
My second comment is that the continued allowance of unlined pit toilets in a fee based use system constitutes FWP operating a solid waste management system without a license in violation of 75-10-221, MCA, of the Montana Solid Waste Management Act. These pit-toilets are attractants to disease vectors, and are a huge waste of FWP human resources digging them and maintaining them every year. The Salmon River system in Idaho has required that human waste be packed out for years, and it has been a very successful program. The bottom line is that there are only so many holes that FWP can dig before there is a significant public health issue at the camp sites.
Thanks
Groover
Friday, December 05, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
Saturday
Armed big fat bearded guy on a four wheeler, "what about that fuckin sign don't you boy's understand?"
Mikey,"I liked the sign, I wanted to see who lived up here".
Armed big fat bearded guy on a four wheeler, "a big asshole!"
Friday, November 21, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Yet Another Stream Access Victory
Becky is the FWP attorney that kicked Huey Lewis in the arse...Way to go Bex!
High court: Slough a public waterway
By LEN IWANSKI - Associated Press - 11/19/08
The Montana Supreme Court says a slough that runs through the Bitterroot Valley property of rock musician Huey Lewis and others is a public waterway and open to recreational use under the state stream access law.The court overturned a lower court decision that blocked anglers and others from using the Mitchell Slough near Stevensville. The high court’s ruling Monday said the slough is a natural waterway subject to the stream access law.The law says that even where they flow through private land, Montana rivers and streams are open to all if reached from public property. The waterway between the normal high-water marks belongs to the public.The 16-mile-long Mitchell Slough splits from the Bitterroot River at Corvallis and rejoins it about 13 miles downstream, near Stevensville. It has been in dispute for years and was the scene in 1990 of the trespassing arrests of two residents who had for years fished in the slough. They were acquitted by a jury.Lewis and other landowners argued the slough was a private ditch they have transformed over the years and they wanted to keep fishermen away. They said the slough was essentially a canal.Others, including the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, argued the slough is a channel of the Bitterroot River that, although modified, remains part of the river system. They say it has historically been used for recreation and was first identified as a channel of the river in the 1800s.
A state District Court sided with the landowners in 2006, declaring that the slough was not a “natural” body of water and thus not subject to the stream access law.A lawyer for FWP argued that, if the lower court decision were to stand, landowners could manipulate waterways, get them declared “not natural”, and declare them private property.The state Supreme Court said the District Court’s definition of a “natural” waterway was too narrow and that it could easily be applied to bar public access to most of Montana’s rivers and streams.“The District Court’s dictionary-based definition, which essentially requires a pristine river unaffected by humans in order to be deemed natural, results in an absurdity: For many Montana waters, the (stream access law) would prohibit the very access it was enacted to provide” Justice Jim Rice wrote for the court.The court’s decision was unanimous, with Helena District Judge Dorothy McCarter sitting in place of Justice W. William Leaphart.
High court: Slough a public waterway
By LEN IWANSKI - Associated Press - 11/19/08
The Montana Supreme Court says a slough that runs through the Bitterroot Valley property of rock musician Huey Lewis and others is a public waterway and open to recreational use under the state stream access law.The court overturned a lower court decision that blocked anglers and others from using the Mitchell Slough near Stevensville. The high court’s ruling Monday said the slough is a natural waterway subject to the stream access law.The law says that even where they flow through private land, Montana rivers and streams are open to all if reached from public property. The waterway between the normal high-water marks belongs to the public.The 16-mile-long Mitchell Slough splits from the Bitterroot River at Corvallis and rejoins it about 13 miles downstream, near Stevensville. It has been in dispute for years and was the scene in 1990 of the trespassing arrests of two residents who had for years fished in the slough. They were acquitted by a jury.Lewis and other landowners argued the slough was a private ditch they have transformed over the years and they wanted to keep fishermen away. They said the slough was essentially a canal.Others, including the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, argued the slough is a channel of the Bitterroot River that, although modified, remains part of the river system. They say it has historically been used for recreation and was first identified as a channel of the river in the 1800s.
A state District Court sided with the landowners in 2006, declaring that the slough was not a “natural” body of water and thus not subject to the stream access law.A lawyer for FWP argued that, if the lower court decision were to stand, landowners could manipulate waterways, get them declared “not natural”, and declare them private property.The state Supreme Court said the District Court’s definition of a “natural” waterway was too narrow and that it could easily be applied to bar public access to most of Montana’s rivers and streams.“The District Court’s dictionary-based definition, which essentially requires a pristine river unaffected by humans in order to be deemed natural, results in an absurdity: For many Montana waters, the (stream access law) would prohibit the very access it was enacted to provide” Justice Jim Rice wrote for the court.The court’s decision was unanimous, with Helena District Judge Dorothy McCarter sitting in place of Justice W. William Leaphart.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Moose
Ryan had success this weekend with a nice bull moose. There were a couple issues though...the first being that the moose shed his rack when he died in the pond in the middle of a swamp, and the second issue was that the moose was dead and in a pond in the middle of a swamp. It took Ryan and I a couple hours to wrestle the moose to a dry enough spot so Ryan could gut him. Of course our waders were back at camp. To give you some perspective, in the bottom picture, we drug the moose from where the blaze is hanging in the brush to where Ryan is gutting him...it hurt!
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Monday...
was a good day to go hunting. I filled my doe tag, Mikey got a nice 5x5 whitey, Hilvert shot a doe and a 4x4 buck and Willcocks shot a nice 5x5.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Tender Vittles
Neither of us had a camera in the field, so the best I coud do was a couple garage shots. A couple whitetail (Neil's first deer) and an antelope. It was a great weekend! Going to be good eats...and with a bunch of meat in the freezer, I'm going bird hunting
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Ideeho
Elk camp '08 was a sucess...
Josh and I tracked this one down in the fresh snow. Got to within thiry yards and saw his antlers sticking up out of a pile of blowdown....thought he was bedded. I tried to get Josh in for the shot while I circled to cow call and hopefully stand him up. He was already up and wound up walking downhill towards me. Josh started gesturing frantically that he was going downhill and I had about a second and a half to shoot before he winded me. 
The packout was extemely fun. Not too awful far, but uphill through my beloved Idaho brush...a little wet snow on the brush really added to the experience.
All in all a great week. Got into more elk but never did find a bull for Josh despite many miles of ridgerunning and brush busting. Thursday, October 16, 2008
Friday, October 03, 2008
VICTORY FOR STREAM ACCESS
Judge rules public can access rivers from county bridges
By Nick Gevock - Montana Standard - 10/03/08
BUTTE — A judge ruled this week that the public has the right to get to rivers from county bridges, but also determined landowners can attach fences to bridges in a split decision on a 4-year-old case out of Madison County.District Judge Loren Tucker said in a case filed by the nonprofit Public Lands Access Association against Madison County that county road rights of way remain 60 feet wide across rivers. That means the public can use bridges to get to public waters under Montana’s stream access law.James Kennedy, a Ruby Valley landowner and billionaire heir to a media fortune from Atlanta, Ga., an intervener in the case, and whose fences prompted the lawsuit, had argued that county rights of way narrow down to the actual bridge surface. He contended the land below the bridges was private property and therefore the public was trespassing when it crossed fences built up to a bridge.Tucker soundly rejected that.“His implicit argument is that a county road may not be utilized in the vicinity of water,” Tucker said. “That argument is unsupported by authority or by logic.”John Gibson, PLAA president, called the decision a major victory for Montanans.
= 1209358800) && (nAdsysTime = 1221109200) && (nAdsysTime
“It destroys some of the arguments that these people have made regarding the width of the right of way,” he said. “The judge has definitely proven that access to the stream is a legal activity.”The ruling is the latest salvo in a legal fight that has dragged on for longer than four years.PLAA filed the lawsuit against Madison County in May 2004. The group blamed officials for allowing Kennedy to attach fences to bridges that were clearly meant to keep people from getting to the river.Kennedy sued the county as well after it passed a policy allowing the fences in return for an access at each bridge. He later dropped that suit and the county rescinded its policy.But Kennedy, Hamilton Ranches, Inc. and the Montana Stockgrowers’ Association intervened in defense of the county in the PLAA case.Kennedy argued that not every bridge is safe for the public to access and landowners could be held liable if someone was injured while trying to get to a stream. His lawyer in the case, Lance Lovell of Billings, could not be reached for comment Thursday, nor could a representative from the stockgrowers.Madison County Commissioner Dave Schulz said he had only briefly read the ruling. But he added Tucker’s compromise sounded familiar to county officials.“The result of Judge Tucker’s findings remind me an awful lot of Madison County’s initial proposal to guarantee access from bridges and still allow fences in the right of way,” he said.Tucker rejected PLAA’s assertion that a fence is an encroachment. In doing so, Tucker cited a deposition from Tony Schoonen, a group member from Butte, who said that new wooden fences put up by Kennedy did not impede access to the river.His ruling applied to Duncan District Road and Lewis Lane, two county roads historically established by prescriptive easement, but left out Seyler Lane because it hasn’t been established how it was created.Devlan Geddes, a Bozeman lawyer representing PLAA, said the issue with Seyler Lane still needs to be decided in court. Yet, he said the decision on the other two roads is an important precedent that reaffirms and clarifies a 2000 Montana attorney general’s opinion that said rivers could be accessed from public bridges.Allen Chronister, a Helena lawyer representing Madison County, argued in the case that if fences were encroachments, every driveway, railroad and utility pole would be as well. He said from the county’s perspective it was a good decision.“My goal for the county was to try to preserve their right to be able to allow fencing if that was deemed in the public’s interest,” he said. “It was a good result for the issues that the county was facing.”
By Nick Gevock - Montana Standard - 10/03/08
BUTTE — A judge ruled this week that the public has the right to get to rivers from county bridges, but also determined landowners can attach fences to bridges in a split decision on a 4-year-old case out of Madison County.District Judge Loren Tucker said in a case filed by the nonprofit Public Lands Access Association against Madison County that county road rights of way remain 60 feet wide across rivers. That means the public can use bridges to get to public waters under Montana’s stream access law.James Kennedy, a Ruby Valley landowner and billionaire heir to a media fortune from Atlanta, Ga., an intervener in the case, and whose fences prompted the lawsuit, had argued that county rights of way narrow down to the actual bridge surface. He contended the land below the bridges was private property and therefore the public was trespassing when it crossed fences built up to a bridge.Tucker soundly rejected that.“His implicit argument is that a county road may not be utilized in the vicinity of water,” Tucker said. “That argument is unsupported by authority or by logic.”John Gibson, PLAA president, called the decision a major victory for Montanans.
= 1209358800) && (nAdsysTime = 1221109200) && (nAdsysTime
“It destroys some of the arguments that these people have made regarding the width of the right of way,” he said. “The judge has definitely proven that access to the stream is a legal activity.”The ruling is the latest salvo in a legal fight that has dragged on for longer than four years.PLAA filed the lawsuit against Madison County in May 2004. The group blamed officials for allowing Kennedy to attach fences to bridges that were clearly meant to keep people from getting to the river.Kennedy sued the county as well after it passed a policy allowing the fences in return for an access at each bridge. He later dropped that suit and the county rescinded its policy.But Kennedy, Hamilton Ranches, Inc. and the Montana Stockgrowers’ Association intervened in defense of the county in the PLAA case.Kennedy argued that not every bridge is safe for the public to access and landowners could be held liable if someone was injured while trying to get to a stream. His lawyer in the case, Lance Lovell of Billings, could not be reached for comment Thursday, nor could a representative from the stockgrowers.Madison County Commissioner Dave Schulz said he had only briefly read the ruling. But he added Tucker’s compromise sounded familiar to county officials.“The result of Judge Tucker’s findings remind me an awful lot of Madison County’s initial proposal to guarantee access from bridges and still allow fences in the right of way,” he said.Tucker rejected PLAA’s assertion that a fence is an encroachment. In doing so, Tucker cited a deposition from Tony Schoonen, a group member from Butte, who said that new wooden fences put up by Kennedy did not impede access to the river.His ruling applied to Duncan District Road and Lewis Lane, two county roads historically established by prescriptive easement, but left out Seyler Lane because it hasn’t been established how it was created.Devlan Geddes, a Bozeman lawyer representing PLAA, said the issue with Seyler Lane still needs to be decided in court. Yet, he said the decision on the other two roads is an important precedent that reaffirms and clarifies a 2000 Montana attorney general’s opinion that said rivers could be accessed from public bridges.Allen Chronister, a Helena lawyer representing Madison County, argued in the case that if fences were encroachments, every driveway, railroad and utility pole would be as well. He said from the county’s perspective it was a good decision.“My goal for the county was to try to preserve their right to be able to allow fencing if that was deemed in the public’s interest,” he said. “It was a good result for the issues that the county was facing.”
Sunday, September 28, 2008
More carnage
Once again, the fun didn't last long. 40 minutes into the first evening on my stand here comes this doe. Didn't see much point in passing up a shot at ten yards! All that kitchen window scouting really paid off....
Becky wasn't overly enthused about the whole operation but Evelyn sure loved it! She was laughing and screaming the while time!Sunday, September 21, 2008
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Whammy!
Once again the opening-day-riverbottom-yippee-yeeehaw yeilded results. This year there were six pokey men and 3 canoes. On the second island push Zach and Aaron jumped about 6 or 7 deer, and this was the last one. He jumped from the bushes you see around me, stopped facing me and looked over his shoulder at Aaron. I zipped him in the chest with a full pass through the heart and lungs. Didn't go 20 feet. I didn't even fall out of a tree this year. Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Taking Camping to the Next Level
Yep, we did it. We broke down and bought a camper. It will be very nice on those lovely spring Lochsa weekends to have a warm, dry, and comfortable place to sleep, feed and change Jr., and make coffee if it is that nasty out. I might also be able to find a use or two for it during hunting season.... Speaking of which, shouldn't some of you archery hunters out there be posting some photos soon.
Being that I don't bow hunt, I'm going fishing!
Sunday, August 24, 2008
HAPPY 98TH
Miles Davis Coleman turned 14 years old today....that would be 98 in dog years. He's had 6 months to live for the last ten years. Somehow this dog has survived and retreived more birds, and squeaked more in a blind than any other dog that I have known. Anyone that ever hunted over him would say that he was OK, but that was when he could see and hear. No matter what the conditions, he was a hunter, a great companion, and a friend.
He's survived forestry, pipelining, and everything else. A good dog is hard to find, and Miles has set a high bar. Cheers to you Miles!!!!
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Selway
The ramp looks a little different hey Ed?
It's a whole different river at 5ft.
About to launch...
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
The usual suspects
I find it very intresting that there is 1000 acre fire started from a campsite on the Selway. Do we know anyone on the river??? Hmmmmmm... Makes a good argument for baby wipes
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Angry River
The river was angry that day my friends. Boiling and seething like a serpant looking for an unwilling victim. I started the voyage giving Jessie shit for flipping his raft the prior weekend. Cracking beer, and facing the onslaught of the afternoon headwind on the canyon we made our course. Just before the intimidating shadows of triple bridges, I instruct Robs girlfriend to quit putting empty beer cans back in the cooler. My river experience instructs her, "its too hard to find the full ones, throw them in the raft, it's not like we're going the flip." We continue on through the bridges, like gods watching us from the heavens, we passed underneath.
Tumbleweed looked boily and frothy from around the bend. Just upon coming into the monster, Doc's boat cuts in front of us and we bump off line. I know my level of skill would get us through just fine as I reflect, you'd have to be way off to flip in this. Next is Fang. 5 to 6 miller lites into the trip, worries of carnage were farthest from my thoughts. I yell to Jessie, " have you ever taken the middle? this is the last rapid and I'm feeling brave." Robs girlfriend asks, please don't take the chance, "I don't want to get wet". I throttle back, and drift into the easy, predictable right line then flush center into one big wave. I maintain some ego and catch some froth outside the green tounge for fun. No problem, perfectly center I push forward into the one big wave. We crest the wave with perfect timing, not a drop comes over the bow. I must admit I was disappointed about the ease of that run. Just behind the big wave is a smaller slightly right lateral. I let off the oars with no fear, notice the boat quickly turn right, and decided for a split second to not push or straighten out knowing we're through and...WAMMO.
No highside, no "holy shit", just bam we're in the river. 1st flip ever.
No highside, no "holy shit", just bam we're in the river. 1st flip ever.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Trip of a life time...take two.
The crew. Which one of you guys is next so we can do this trip again?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
