UPOM Opinion BLM RMP

[Nemont]

Interesting take on the land management. Toby doesn't have any problem with blocking access to public lands but is concerned about his access to public lands. I can't figure out what exactly he is complaining about but that is just me.

Guest opinion: BLM land proposals threaten rural Montana

By TOBY DAHL1
The Bureau of Land Management is considering several Resource Management Plan proposals in Montana, with one major objective ostensibly aimed at conserving sage grouse habitat to bolster population growth. However, the stated intentions are very different from what the plans would actually accomplish. In reality, these RMPs are one of the biggest threats to private property rights and natural resource development that our state has seen in years.

The RMPs would effectively shut down BLM-managed land, as well as some privately held land, to development by eliminating grazing permits, restricting surface occupancy, as well as the use and development of roads and rail lines.

BLM has conducted a preliminary environmental impact statement in order to analyze management plans where they believe sage grouse is most in need of conservation.

The EIS is rife with vague and ambiguous language, resulting in inaccurate conclusions. For instance, the BLM’s economic modeling leads them to the conclusion that the proposed rules would have no impact on “very small towns dependent on agriculture.” There’s simply no credible way to believe that imposing such a dramatic change of use across hundreds of thousands of acres of land could have no impact on local economies.

The EIS completely ignores the negative effects on property rights and local economies which the new RMP guidelines would create. The aggregate effect of these multiple errors and omissions by BLM points to a much more duplicitous agenda than simply protecting sage grouse.

Modeling future outcomes is highly dependent on the accuracy of the input information used in the forecast. BLM simply has not gathered enough data to make reasonable models. In a short, 21-page passage discussing a modeling system, the words “assumptions, estimates, predictions, potentials, could be, may be, expected, approximately, and about” are used 183 times — clearly indicating the EIS does not contain enough hard data to make a justified decision about closing down thousands of acres of Montana land to existing productive uses.

Montana has a strong sage grouse population; in fact the Montana FWP’s statistics indicate that for the past several years sage grouse populations have been relatively consistent. What’s more, sage grouse from our state are being taken to Canada, where they are conducting reintroduction efforts.

Though aimed at management practices on BLM lands, the proposed RMPs would impact private property as well. The plans are incredibly vague, but it appears that private property near public land could be restricted in the types of activities it could be used for. The provisions to restrict access on public land could leave some landowners cut off from being able to get to their property, not to mention further reducing recreational opportunities and shifting more hunters to private land. curious how the BLM forces hunting access on private lands?

All three BLM RMP proposals significantly restrict surface occupancy, and as a result will directly impact agriculture and energy development. Wonder if UPOM and Toby would rather deal with an endangered species designation for sage grouse?

With one regulatory proposal, BLM could severely stifle Montana’s most important industries. Agriculture remains Montana’s largest economic sector and leads our exports. Oil and gas development has revitalized the Eastern Montana economy and saved Montana from budget deficits. And with the nation’s largest coal reserves, Montana stands to gain mightily from increasing world demand for coal. These considerations are conspicuously absent from BLM’s EIS. are there coal reserves in critical sage grouse habitat? I am asking because I don't know

Nothing is more important to Montana than the use of our land. As this process moves forward, I urge those on the Governor’s Sage Grouse Advisory Council and all public officials, to get the facts on this issue, and encourage the BLM to re-evaluate the proposals that they have put forth so that they portray a clear and accurate picture of exactly what the impacts of the BLM RMPs could be. The work BLM has done so far has been lacking.

Toby Dahl ranches near Roundup. He is a director of United Property Owners of Montana.



Read more: http://billingsgazette.com/news/opi...d1a-5469-80d2-30b642720e75.html#ixzz2adgjac6e

 

[Ben Lamb]

In my experience. UPOM doesn't give two chits about anyone other than themselves and their cronies.

They supported test & slaughter of elk, they support eliminating stream access, they continue to try and fore wildlife management by legislature, they've been very vocal in support of transferable landowner tags and they routinely attack folks who stand up for access & opportunity.

They're deep in bed with SFW too.

 

[Straight Arrow]

UPOM statements and assertions have consistently crowed about the taking of "private property rights" that are seldom specifically spelled out and even if specified then are a far-reaching interpretation of the State and Federal Constitutions.

The paranoia expressed by such phrases as "cut off from being able to get to their property" is designed to evoke emotion. It paints a highly unlikely scenario, with no reference as to any situation where that has occurred or is apt to occur.

I agree, Ben, UPOM is all about what is in it for a few landowners who have historically had free reign over public lands for grazing, hunting, and many other uses and are now afraid of losing what they feel is their right ... but never really was a right ... only a privilege.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I think it's also pretty telling that the guy behind UPOM, Chuch Denowh, is one of the lead political strategists for the MT GOP.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Interesting take on the land management. Toby doesn't have any problem with blocking access to public lands but is concerned about his access to public lands. I can't figure out what exactly he is complaining about but that is just me.

Nemont,"are there coal reserves in critical sage grouse habitat? I am asking because I don't know "

Yes. Some of it overlaps.

 

[MThuntr]

In the Powder River Basin, yes it is critical sage grouse habitat. In Montana it is probably not classified as "critical" but likely general or historic sage grouse habitat.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Is there a difference between critical and core habitat?

 

[1_pointer]

The provisions to restrict access on public land could leave some landowners cut off from being able to get to their property, not to mention further reducing recreational opportunities and shifting more hunters to private land. curious how the BLM forces hunting access on private lands?

I'm pretty sure that is not correct. I have yet to hear of a travel restriction preventing access to private property given that the landowner applies for an travel easement. As far as I am aware, the agency is required to issue that easement. The reverse is not true, a private landowner does not have to issue an easement to allow the public or even in some cases the agency access to the public lands.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I'm pretty sure that is not correct. I have yet to hear of a travel restriction preventing access to private property given that the landowner applies for an travel easement. As far as I am aware, the agency is required to issue that easement. The reverse is not true, a private landowner does not have to issue an easement to allow the public or even in some cases the agency access to the public lands.

That's my understanding as well.

UPOM founding mebers have been at the heart of closing off access to public lands for years now. Their entire model is political misdirection. Several times during the session we caight them misstating data or completely rewriting data to suit their needs.

 

[1_pointer]

Misdirection and half truths often rule when dealing with issues via politics and/or emotion, IMO/E.

 

[shoots-straight]

I'm pretty sure that is not correct. I have yet to hear of a travel restriction preventing access to private property given that the landowner applies for an travel easement. As far as I am aware, the agency is required to issue that easement. The reverse is not true, a private landowner does not have to issue an easement to allow the public or even in some cases the agency access to the public lands.

It doesn't matter what really goes on. It's perception that these people are after. Not unlike Lobo watch, SFW, Big Game forever. These extreme organizations are counting on the fact that none of their constituents will know the truth.

 

[Ben Lamb]

It doesn't matter what really goes on. It's perception that these people are after. Not unlike Lobo watch, SFW, Big Game forever. These extreme organizations are counting on the fact that none of their constituents will know the truth.

To be fair, it's the same tactics that the fringe left uses on gun control, etc. Political operatives bank on the apathy and ignorance of voters & the public in general.

It's crap all around.

 

[1_pointer]

It doesn't matter what really goes on. It's perception that these people are after. Not unlike Lobo watch, SFW, Big Game forever. These extreme organizations are counting on the fact that none of their constituents will know the truth.

I know, I've lived it to some limited extent...

 

[MThuntr]

Is there a difference between critical and core habitat?

I see them used interchangeably...depends on the agency. Essentially core habitat is being used to describe where the majority of the sage grouse are...generally it means the remaining intact habitat that approximately 75% of the birds currently live.

 

[mtmiller]

Core
Sage-grouse core areas are habitats associated with 1) Montana's highest densities of sage-grouse (25% quartile), based on male counts and/or 2) sage-grouse lek complexes and associated habitat important to sage-grouse distribution.

Sorry for the oversize

 

[Ben Lamb]

Craig,

is there an overlay that shows leased or developed leases for O&G that can go along with that map?

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Without having an exact overly, I would say that Spring Creek and Decker mines are very close to the core areas in lower Bighorn County. Spring Creek is the largest producer in Montana and the one with the greatest growth potential for the oversea markets. Other that these two operations I think the overlap is minimal for coal.

 

[mtmiller]

Looks like about 10,625 acres of coal leased in "core".