Wolves off the list

Wolves come off the endangered species list today, but for how long?

Great news for stream access

There have been two important developments on the stream access front in Montana in the last six months. First, the Montana Supreme Court ruled unanimously last November that the landowners who had kicked the public off a section of the Bitterroot River known as Mitchell Slough were in obvious violation of the Stream Access Law. Secondly, Gov. Brian Schweitzer yesterday signed House Bill 190 which ensures access to rivers from the bridge crossings of public roadways.

Many were slow to realize the importance of the Mitchell Slough case, which the Supremes made clear in their strongly worded opinion (authored by a conservative appointee of Judy Martz no less) was a direct assault on the SAL. Fortunately, a ragtag band of Bitterrooters led by the likes of Sen. Jim Shockley, newspaper publisher Michael Howell and former Justice of the Peace Ed Sperry, took on the wealthy landowners who for 15 years successfully denied Montanans their right to access a Montana river between the high-water marks. Eventually Trout Unlimited and the established angling community came on board, but if it hadn't been for the efforts of the Bitterroot River Protection Association, the "No Trespassing" signs would still be up.

Another access-focused organization — the Public Land/Water Access Association — led the battle to ensure the public's right to use a public right of way to access rivers and streams. Remarkably, landowners on the Ruby River argued that a public right of way narrows from 60 feet down to the width of the river when it became convienent for access deniers. The Montana Attorney General shot down that "logic" in an opinion authored in 2000. But it wasn't until this legislative session that a bill codifying what is really just common sense finally made it out of the legislature to be signed by the governor.

Hopefully, the events of the past year will serve as a wake-up call to some of the mainstream organizations which sat on the sidelines for too long, especially in the Mitchell Slough case. Access has become the most important issue for hunting and angling conservationists in Montana and much of the West. It is our central front in the battle to conserve and protect the open spaces where we play and commune with the natural world. Some have argued that conservation is a value that is somehow independent from access. We here at www.mthookandbullet.com find this line of thinking delusional. If the public is denied access, the public's dedication to conservation will crumble. Organizations such as national Trout Unlimited that want to argue they are conservation organizations, not access organizations, are facing a jump-the-shark moment. Stick with that delusion and you'll lose all credibility in the hunting/angling community.

Even though we won these two rounds you can bet the access deniers will be back. When the original Stream Access Law was passed few would have thought someone would have the audacity to go ahead and post "No Trespassing" signs on a major Montana river such as the Bitterroot. Yet that's exactly what happened, and it stood for more than a decade soley because the access deniers had the money to tie up the issue in the courts. Don't fool yourself into believing these recent victories are the final chapter in the saga of the SAL. I'm confident that as I write this, someone, somewhere in Montana with money to burn is planning the next outrage to our state's constitution.

I just hope that next time we're all on the right side from the get-go.

Skwala hatch cools for now

The Bitterroot skwala hatch came on last week just in time for spring break (this is why the staff at www.mthookandbullet.com is so fond of the education profession. But by the weekend things had gotten a little too warm and the river came up. This morning the Bitterroot was measured at 1,130 cfs at the Darby gauge. That's a great level for fast scenic floats, but too high for good fishing. If the the river comes down this week in response to predicted lower temperatures, the hatch could be back on next weekend when the weather is supposed to be nice again.

Geno does good

Cam (right, in the Huck Finn headgear) led Geno to one of his well-trained cuttbows Thursday at an undisclosed location on the Bitterroot River. The 20-plus inch fish fell to a Larkin special as the skwala hatch begins to kick into high gear.

Skwala time

Spring finally arrived in western Montana, and with it came some good skwala action on the Bitterroot River. Temperatures in the 60s warmed the river to the low 40s, which was enough to get the bugs moving. But the sunshine is also cutting lose some lower elevation snow, and the river has come up from about 450 cfs at Darby on Monday to 680 cfs and climbing Wednesday morning. Those rising flows could put off the fishing somewhat, but this is no time to be choosy about which day to launch. This is a great time to be on the Bitterroot.

Bridge access bill awaits gov's signature

The House approved the amended Bridge Access Bill approved by the Senate. With the governor's signature Montanan's right to access rivers at bridge crossings will now be ensured through statute as well as common sense.

Bridge bill clears committee

Could this be the year? The bill clarifying river access at bridge crossings cleared committee and is headed to the full Senate.

Dubious 'honor'

The Canadian Flathead reclaimed the top spot in the Outdoor Recreation Council of British Columbia's list of the 10 most threatened rivers in the province. The Canadian Flathead was just the second-most threatened river in the Council's 2008 list, after taking the top spot in 2007.

Cline Mining's proposal for a coal mine immediately adjacent to the richest bull trout spawning site in the entire North Fork Flathead River (what we call it south of the border), and BP's on-again, off-again coalbed methane plans in the drainage could destroy what is considered by many to be the wildest river in the lower 48.

No action in Senate on bridge access bill

The usual characters, or should we say character, spoke out against the bridge access bill in a Senate hearing on Thursday. Attorney John Bloomquist, who always seems to find a reason to oppose public access, led the opposition. But this bill passed by a 97-3 vote in the House, and should finally find its way to Gov. Schweitzer's desk for a signature this year.

Dam good news

The final pieces of the Milltown Dam are being removed. This spring the Clark Fork may behave like a free-flowing river again.

Setback law dies in committee

Not a big surprise, but a disappointment. The streamside setback bill has been killed on a party-line tie vote in committee.

Bridge access bill goes to Senate

Thursday the Senate Fish and Game Committee will hear public comment on the bridge access bill that sailed through the House. The Public Land and Water Access Association is urging hunters and anglers to let their legislators know they support the bill

Obama admin backs delisting

Wolves are biologically recovered in Montana. Now it's time for social and political recovery to commence. Delisting is an essential part of that process.

Wolf protest misses the mark

Hunters gathered in Kalispell over the weekend to protest continued delays in the delisting of wolves in Montana. If that was as far as it went, we'd have no problem here at mthookandbullet.com. But as is too often the case, hunters decrying the lack of wolf management (known in impolite but honest society as killing them) do as much harm to their cause as good.

Yes 2008 was a tough year for hunting, and elk and deer numbers are down in some cases. And yes, we've exceeded the wolf recovery targets for a number of years now. But when I see a bunch of hunter-orange clad nimrods waiving signs that read "No More Wolves" I worry about the the message that sends to the vast middle, the 80 percent or so of citizens that are neither hunters, nor anti-hunters. These are the folks we need to have a conversation with, to keep on our side so that they remain passive supporters of hunting rights. And we're convinced the message on display this weekend: "Kill more wolves so we can kill more deer" is a losing message.

Now you could argue that "No More Wolves" just means don't let the population get any larger, rather than re-exterminate the critters. But I don't think that's the message non-hunters hear. And that's especially the case when hunters wave signs with silly statements such as "Elk — The next endangered species" or post comments on newspaper message boards about how they kill every wolf they see.

There are complex interactions between game and predators species, and their are complex interactions between those animals and the landscapes they inhabit. As wolves have reestablished themselves in northwest Montana, they have changed the elk and deer humans are found of hunting. Elk will always be a tougher target for human hunters if those elk live in the presence of wolves. It's the difference between hunting a truly wild animal (an elk in wolf country) versus a semi-tame animal (elk that only have too look out for predators in the fall).

Yes, let's manage, I mean kill, more wolves to keep that population in check and avoid the kind of boom-and-bust ungulate population cycles more common in unmanaged systems. But hunters need to remember wolf reintroduction is popular with the public, and necessary to restore our ecosystems to a more wild state. And if that wasn't our goal, we'd spend our falls pursuing trophy elk in enclosed game parks where we could count on success. Oh yeah, Montanans rightfully ended that dreadful practice in our state years ago.

Streamside setbacks

A column on the Big Sky Rivers Act, which would control development along rivers in western Montana.

Idaho moves on wolf kill in Lolo

Idaho Fish and Game is proposing to kill about 100 wolves in the lands that border Montana on the Lolo National Forest. While removing the wolves won't fix all of the problems with declining elk numbers in the Idaho panhandle, it will help. Elk and wolves can coexist when the habitat is in good shape, but the quality of the elk habitat in this country is on the decline.

Reducing the burgeoning wolf population here should be part of an overall landscape restoration effort. Depress the wolf population, reintroduce fire to improve elk grazing conditions, and keep a lid on elk permits until the population rebounds.

By the way, there's nothing wrong with a state wildlife agency trying to boost ungulate populations and with it, hunter success rates. Hunters and anglers remain the primary funding source for game and fish departments across the West. Happy hunters pay for wildlife conservation in western states.

Streamside setbacks get state hearing

The House Local Government Committee will consider a bill that would establish streamside setbacks on 10 rivers in Montana. Setbacks will happen, eventually. But I'm not sure there's enough wind behind the idea this legislative session.

The bill has rekindled the predictable debate about property rights in the Bitterroot Valley, where there has been vocal opposition to setbacks, as well as some of the most damaging examples of streamside development in the state.

Let's not forget, if you build along rivers and streams, you eventually need to armor the bank in some way to protect your dream home. When you do so, often with rip rap, you simply shove the erosion problem off on your downstream neighbor. And you usually intensify the probelm in the process. This, of course, is where your right to swing your fist colides with my right not to be punched. Property rights are not absolute. There is a balence to be reached between the absolute right to build where ever and what ever you want with the rights of neighbors not to have their property harmed in the process.

Amazing

So the Supreme Court hands the landowners along the Bitterroot River who blocked rightful recreational access for 15 years a complete rebuke and what do they do? Why they find a screw-his-constituents-first legislator to introduce a bill that undoes what the court just ruled.

While the bill has no, repeat NO chance of becoming law, it may help end once and for all all the whining about how the Mitchell Slough case was so complicated and the the poor landowners were just misunderstood. How they're just a bunch of noble ecological restorationists suffering at the envy of all those coveting what they've created. Well no, they're not. The Mitchell Slough case is what it has always been, just the latest round in the battle by the wealthy few to deny the constitutionally protected right for all Montanans to recreate in our public water ways.

The Governor will never sign this legislation, which has little chance to make it through the legislature anyway. But rest assured, these folks won't quit trying to deny Montanans their rights until the succeed.

It's time to decide: Are we with them, or against them?

UPDATE

Sen. Rick Laible now says he's sorry and is rewriting his bill, but he won't tell the truth about who wrote the first draft, which was essentially the argument recently made by landowners in the courts.

Wilderness Bill equals economic stimulus?

I'd like to see a Northern Rockies Wilderness Bill because it's well past time we settle the wilderness debate. Providing full wilderness protection for areas that have been managed as such for years just makes sense.

But I also like the jobs creation elements of ecological restoration mentioned in the bill. Lets put folks to work removing poorly designed forest roads and the damages of clear cuts. Connecting jobs with restoration is a good thing.

Property rights versus wildlife management

The good thing about creating economic activity around hunting and fishing is that it expands the advocate base for wildlife resources. The bad thing is that often the folks who make a living based on that activity begin to expect management decisions based on economics rather than biology.

UPDATE

SB162 was defeated in the Senate.