Blame It On The Wolves!

Ravalli Republic -- Wolves, Constitution Hot Topics at Forum

... hosted by the Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association, Monday night.

"Not one had a good thing to say about wolves, but they were all in favor of the Constitution," summarized Ravalli Republic reporter Perry Backus.

A comical observation, but what did you expect from a dog and pony show hosted by an organization that has forgotten that wolves fall under the heading Wildlife and deserve as much respect and conservation effort as elk and deer.

"We are totally losing everything we have in this state simply because we have this protected animal," says Bob Lake, republican running for the senate in district 44.

Everything... really, Bob.  Every Republican needs a boogieman to campaign against, whether it be the liberal elite, pinkos, the feds, biased media, taxing Dems, etc.  In the Bitterroot Valley, it's a four legged predator that comes out of the mountains to raise taxes, stymie capitalism and teach evolution in the classroom.

"We need to get the wolves out," said Dan Cox, Libertarian candidate running against Lake. "The best way to maintain the estimated $11.3 million that hunting brings into Ravalli County is to get as far away from the federal government as possible."

As business is practiced now, wolves may present a hit to the pocketbook to business owners and outfitters that directly profit from the hunting industry in the valley.  But to most members of the Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association and other hunters in the valley, the only thing they suffer from is a little penis envy.  The wolf is a great predator, one that perhaps rivals man in the ability to take down an elk.  Hunters don't like the fact that their annual migration into the mountains in search of big game and tall tales has become a little more difficult.  They use money as justification for not giving wolves equal status as elk in the wild. They have forgotten that taking an animal is not a right, but a privilege.  They have forgotten that competition is at the heart of what it is to be a sportsman.  They have forgotten that WE nearly removed them from the lower 48.  And they are looking for something or someone to blame for their fears and are letting their emotions get the best of them.

... but what else is new.

After looking at websites of candidates seeking election in Ravalli County, it appears that the only platform necessary is "Wolf bad.  Constitution good."  Jeff Burrows writes on his website that "we are faced with a number of issues from non-native wolves destroying big game in the forest to outrageous taxes... We must return to a government that works for the people and not the other way around."  He also writes that "up until about a year and a half ago, I had never even read the US or Montana constitution.  Since then I have been diligently studying and trying to learn what these 'rights' were that have been slowly taken away from us."

I applaud that Burrows is taking an interest in his federal and state constitutions, but the fact that he states that he never read either constitution up until this past year makes me wonder what he was doing in school, because federal and state constitutions are covered in most civic and U.S. history classes.  His lack of attention in school may also explain why he considers wolves non-native.  I wish him luck in his paranoid search for these rights that are being "slowly taken away from us."

Burrows is a Republican anti-establishment candidate running for MT HD 87 and is committed to the abolishment of the IRS and federal reserve, the return to a commodity backed currency with an emphasis on local barter and credit clearing system, and is seven kinds of crazy.

But the title of head loon for the evening went to Richard Stamey, Republican candidate for MT HD 89, with his comments:

"They should be killed.  All of them.  You should be able to shoot, poison, kill any predator that comes on your property, period."

I hate that varmint!

A Response to a "Valley Viewpoint" by Tony Jones, President of Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association

Ravalli Republic -- Hunters Need to Get Involved to Save Wildlife

Tony Jones, President of Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association, writes a call to action in today's Ravalli Republic, to motivate hunters and fisherman* to get organized to save the valley's big game animals... so that hunters can kill them later.

As Mr. Jones states, hunting is a boon to the economy of Ravalli County. It brings in approximately $11.2 million annually. Unfortunately, this much needed revenue could shrink with the decreasing elk numbers brought on in part by an increasing number of wolves in the valley over the last few years. The fear by hunting groups and local businesses is that fewer hunters will fill their tags, and with a lower success rate, that fewer future hunters will head into the field.

Mr. Jones writes a fairly even handed letter. He informs people how they can get involved to support wildlife habitat improvements, organize to influence legislation, and highlights the positive work done by wildlife biologist Craig Jourdonnais in managing big game in the valley. He even accepts that changes (meaning "wolves") are here to stay even if "we won't like most of them." I applaud his efforts, because from his motivation, as head of a community hunting and fishing organization, he wrote a decent, non-inflammatory letter (and for the Bitterroot, that is saying a lot).

I do take exception to a few statements.

Mr. Jones states that "predators in the valley are at [an] all time high." I respond that in the case of wolves (which he IS referring to), yes, predators are at an all time high... because of the fact that wolves are coming from a population of zero. We nearly eliminated them from every corner of the lower 48 states nearly a century ago. So it would make sense that "predators in the valley are at [an] all time high."

Mr. Jones calls for "aggressive predator management" and the "need to increase lion and bear harvest" in order insure viable numbers of big game for hunters. While I agree that it is necessary to have predator quotas (wolf, bear, lion) included in the hunt, I disagree that an increase over the bar in which the Montana FWP sets is called for. In the absence of wolves, the valley's balance of predator and prey has been off kilter for some time. It's necessary to rediscover what that balance is and I have more faith in quotas set by the MT FWP based on game counts than those called for by hunters based on emotion.

I understand that big game hunting means big money and that hunters like to supplement their grocery list with wild game in the freezer. But hunters need to understand how easy we had it in the absence of wolves. We need to accept that we are to blame for the near extermination of the wolf from the lower 48, for no reason other than wolves affecting our livelihoods and competed for a food source. This was wrong. We need to accept that wolves are as worthy of conservation efforts as are elk, moose, deer, sheep, and, uh, yes... even fish. I also call any hunter that considers himself a sportsman to reexamine the definition of sport, because as is the case with all sports, competition is one of the goals and success is not always guaranteed.

For more information on wolves in the West and comments by Craig Jourdonnais, check out "Wolf Wars" in the March issue of National Geographic.

* - Anyone who has attended meetings of the Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association or attended its annual banquette knows that fish and fisherman are a minor part of their focus

Silliness in the Bitterroot

There is always an ample supply of silly (and slightly scary) rhetoric coming from the Root that provides me with hours of free entertainment, without tuning in to FauxNews. A couple of recent articles have been especially interesting (and alarming).

From 1/12/2010:

In a guest editorial, Dan Tomlinson asserts that global warming must be a hoax because... Ya, I could not determine how he came to this conclusion. The letter is an attack on scientists and the manufactured "hysteria surrounding 'human caused global warming.'" He finishes by throwing his hands up, citing scripture, and blaming human sin for the world's problems.

In a follow up...

Ornithologists harvest Mr. Tomlinson's brain, so that we can further our understanding of the crazed conservative religious loon. Family members consented because, quote: "He was finished with it anyway."

From 1/15/2010

In an article that must be read to appreciate the complete lunacy of an anarchical conservative group in the Root, a group of "extremely concerned Ravalli County citizens" presented a petition and questionnaire to county officials.

A couple of highlights from the questionnaire:

• To “absolutely prohibit” any governmental effort to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, including restrictions on the kinds of weapons a person can possess, including fully automatic or silenced weapons.

• Prohibiting mandatory vaccinations.

• Prohibiting entrance into the county by all employees of the federal Environmental Protection Agency., which the group says is not a Constitutional arm of the federal government. “Much of the so-called support for environmental regulations is based upon the dubious assumption that there is such a phenomenon as global warming, when, in fact, the majority of scientists globally agree that we are not experiencing global warming,” the questionnaire read.

• Requiring the sheriff to form and command a county militia composed of able-bodied citizens 18 and older. “Women must serve, but not in a combat capacity unless the men are in danger of being overrun. It is understood that it is the sheriff’s duty to supervise the training of the militia for a minimum of three weeks every year,” the questionnaire stated.

Members of the group are easily identifiable. Look for sickly men accessorized in holstered shotguns with optional silencer, railing against the EPA and the "manufactured global warming hoax", and trailed closely by meek women carrying extra loads of ammunition.

In a startling follow up...

Liberals and conservatives unite (see comments) in an impromptu gathering in downtown Hamilton, condemning the fringe conservative group, breaking into a spontaneous rendition of Kumbaya, and wishing death upon the Bitterrooter's common enemy: the wolf.

Vet Aiding Vet

Ravalli Republic -- Helping Each Other

From the Ravalli Republic article by Will Moss:

"For as long as soldiers have fought and died for their country, the idea of war has been romanticized.

We see it in movies, on the television and in the video games that our children play for hours on end.

The concepts of patriotism, sacrifice, honor and bravery are heralded, and for good reason - the men and women of all races and creeds who have fought for the ideals and convictions of their people are indeed deserving of every honor bestowed.

But, perhaps, one of the problems with this idealization is that it often extends only to the borders of the theater in which our soldiers fight; what honors pass beyond those borders are many times reserved for those who have given the ultimate sacrifice in exchanging their lives for liberty.

But what about those who remain?

The effects of war never fully recede from those who have experienced it and the wounds, both physical and mental, can remain tender to the touch for a lifetime.

Through government agencies like the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, there are resources that vets can utilize to help deal with the difficult effects of war. But, like any bureaucracy, those channels can often be difficult to navigate and strewn with red tape and piles of paperwork. It can be enough to discourage even the most deserving soldier from pursuing the health benefits and services which are owed to them.

That’s where local organizations like the Valley Veterans Service Center in Hamilton work to pick up the reigns in helping veterans navigate the government gauntlet." (cont.)

Letter to the Editor: Floodplain Fiasco

In an interesting letter to the editor printed in the Bitterroot Star (12-10-2008), a Hamilton geologist discusses disaster flood insurance, county oversight, and the Robak and Fox properties where two homes are going up just feet from the banks of the Bitterroot River.

Floodplain fiasco

Dear Editor,

I wanted to talk about the building in the Floodplains of the Bitterroot River in Ravalli County. Prior to our general election this month, a reader described how our access to flood insurance would be repealed with the growth policy. As correct as this contributor was regarding flood insurance, floodplains, and the benefits we receive as a member community, the protections are still in tact due to having a state, county, and most likely a city mitigation plan. A mitigation plan protects the designated floodplain from building, so when regular flood events occur, loss of property and life is reduced.

A problem we are facing in Ravalli County is that city and county environmental health departments are issuing permits to whoever comes in the door with money. The arguments these landowners have is that they have the right to build due to having permits. This is clearly showing the problems we all know are occurring within our local government units.

Mr. Robak of the West Fork, and Mr. Fox on the main branch of the Bitterroot River both own properties which would be classified as being in the floodplain. Here is why: if any portion of a property lies below the established floodplain elevation, the entire property is considered in the floodplain for insurance purposes. Building is allowed on a property as long as it is above what is known as the base flood elevation or BFE. I know this due to being a former officer in the Mitigation Division for FEMA, which administers the National Floodplain Insurance Program (NFIP). Floodplain maps can be found online; they include base elevations, or elevations of the water within the floodplain. Any enclosed floor in Ravalli County needs to be 2 feet above this base elevation; they can be found at HYPERLINK "http://www.mapcenter.fema.gov" www.mapcenter.fema.gov. There are maps for Ravalli County, or anywhere else in the US at that site.

In an article about Robak, whose case is currently in District (or state) court in Hamilton, the article describes our County Attorney, George Corn as the hero to this situation; he is not. It was the tens of residents who brought this information to the county floodplain administrator for review. The article further quoted Angela Wetzstone, also of the RCAO, who graduated from UM Law last year as an expert on floodplain issues; again, she is not. The county attorney office is a facilitator for the public, and the laws are national, created in US congress in the mid-sixties.

The real message is this: where the city and county governments fail, the floodplain personnel, county, state, and federal are doing their jobs well. The city had no business issuing permits to Mr. Fox whose property sits adjacent to the West Main St. Bridge on the south side. Regardless of the outcome of the district court case, or the findings (to be determined) for Mr. Fox and Mr. Robak, these landowners unknowingly have put our community in danger of losing our status as a protected community for flood events, and protective flood insurance.

FEMA is an emergency financing entity that provides very basic, and as most flood victims attest, non-sufficient repair monies at times of disaster. Without flood insurance, the majority of repairs are on the owner. The federal SBA (Small Business Administration) offers low interest loans to disaster victims, so being a member community with an approved mitigation plan to provide flood insurance and disaster assistance is critical. After working several flood disasters, and seeing the bottom line of the federal and state share of the expenses, neither Mr. Fox nor Mr. Robak could come up with this sum for their decisions to build in a floodplain. These decisions which some are confusing as "property rights" would exclude us as a member community by building in a designated 100 year floodplain (or Zone A or AE). While I believe in property rights, I also believe in a community's choice to have an approved mitigation plan (which protects the 100 year floodplain from building) and thereby gain federal protections to property and life via flood insurance and disaster assistance.

After seeing a photograph of the Robak property, and observing the Fox construction, these buildings will eventually be underwater, no matter what type of external mitigation, if any is erected. Water finds its bottom, and the return interval in 2005 estimates for a 100 year event is now 27 years. Since our last major event was reportedly in the 1970’s (when the Bitterroot River topped West Main St.) we are due for historic flooding within 5 years, or at the outset 25 years. Within one generation, Mr. Robak’s house, and Mr. Fox’s construction project at riverbank level, are both within 100 yards of the natural channel and will be inundated. The next question is: what will be the impact of the septic, and the structure itself when it will be destroyed? Let’s hope Mr. Fox and Mr. Robak will consider demolishing their projects for the betterment of the community. As an example, the only allowed structure in a floodplain is a non-residential pavilion, or a hay barn type structure with no septic capabilities.

Unfortunately, these forays into the floodplain are examples of a county government that has problems communicating between departments. We lack the leadership of a county commission which refuses to hire a county planning director since June of this year. We have a county attorney who wishes to get the positive spin of helping the community, when in fact he has hurt it, and developed its reputation in the state that we now are labeled with. The real heroes are the state flood administrator, who has opened up investigations into these building situations, and once again, a county flood administrator, a true professional we are lucky to have working for us in Ravalli County.

We all love the river, and enjoy playing on it. If you have a million dollars to build a home on the river, hire a competent engineer or geologist to give you good advice on safe and legal building sites on your property. The days should be gone where money and property rights will get you what you want. Less land is available for building, let’s not jeopardize our protections like flood insurance and disaster relief to our community because we have wealthy individuals who have no idea what they are jeopardizing by building their dream homes within the floodplain. This is a community education issue, not a judicial one, or an individual one.

Michael Spreadbury, geologist

Hamilton

The timber frame of the Fox house can be seen in the center of the above photograph taken in Hamilton River Park in November.

West Fork Home Owner in Trouble with the County

Ravalli Republic -- Robaks Fight County Over Floodway

Any fisherman who has waded or floated the section of the West Fork of the Bitterroot River just upstream from the Nez Perce bridge is familiar with the Robak house. The 4600 square foot log home sits just a few yards from the West edge of the river and only a few feet above the river-rock lined bank. I remember wading this section the day the footings were going in and thinking to myself, "You've got to be kidding me? It's going to be awful cold headed to the outhouse in the dead of winter, because there is no way they should have a septic permit." Of course, I was wrong about that, but it is unclear whether Tom Robak didn't break other rules in the construction of his streamside mansion.

In December of 2007, Ravalli County issued a stop-work order "because of a concern they may have illegally brought in a large amount of fill to raise the building site out of the floodway." Construction within the floodplain and adding fill is prohibited by local, state, and federal regulations. If he is found culpable, Mr. Robak will be forced to move or dismantle the house.

Tom Robak denies any wrong doing and claims he's "the victim of a concerted effort by public and private land-use planning advocates."

I am not familiar with any groups conspiring against Mr. Robak, but I can understand why some angst would be directed at him. Mr. Robak is outspoken against proposed streamside setbacks, zoning, and a county growth policy, all of which were dealt a major blow when the Ravalli County Growth Policy was repealed in a ballot initiative on November 4th. He is also the founder of the Big Sky Coalition, a group that advocates more logging on national forests. As Mr. Robak is a retired millionaire from California whose log home mansion is surrounded by forest and sits a few feet from the Bitterroot River, it is hard to argue that his political leanings aren't simply self-serving.

No one can fault Mr. Robak for retiring to the Bitterroot. He chose to live here for the same reasons most of us do, for the ice-cold trout filled streams out are front door, the snow capped mountain peaks out are back door, the abundance of wildlife, and the sense of community and solitude. He is lucky and wealthy enough to build the home of his dreams. I'm not sure that the county will succeed in proving its claim against Mr. Robak, but I am sure of this: It is environmentally irresponsible for Mr. Robak to build a house on the bank of a mountain stream, thumb his nose at Mother Nature, and instigate the inevitable battle between man and the annual spring run-off.

It's this kind of "I'll do what I want!" attitude directed at our beautiful places like the West Fork of the Bitterroot River that gave this site its name.

Check out 4&20 for another take on the Ravalli Republic article on the Robak house.

Montana Supreme Court Rules on Mitchell Slough

Ravalli Republic -- Mitchell Slough Ruled Open to Recreation

The Montana Supreme Court overturned two earlier rulings by state district courts that found Mitchell Slough to not be a "natural, perennial-flowing stream". The supreme court's ruling is a win for local sportsmen's groups and recreationists because it makes Mitchell Slough subject to Montana's stream access law and thus open to the public.

For those readers not familiar with Montana's stream access law, Montana's rivers, streams, and river beds are public domain, thus open to any person wishing to use the waterways for recreational purposes. People are able to access Montana rivers and streams at public boat launches, through public land, and at public bridges. People are allowed to move up and down the river through private land without trespassing as long as they stay within the high water mark, a line usually distinguishable by its lower elevation, plentiful river rock, and lack of vegetation.

Public Access, the Environment, and Mitchell Slough

Montana's stream access law makes it possible for anyone to access and enjoy some of the best trout fisheries in the lower 48. Less restrictive stream access laws are a win for the average Joe and a win for the public over private moneyed interests.

That being said... I must admit that though I support the Montana Supreme Court's ruling and champion stream access laws, I understand the benefits of limiting human access to waterways. There is no arguing that ecosystems where human pressure is minimal fare better than those where man is persistently present. Humans have a way, whether intentional or not, of throwing ecosystems out of wack. The question we should always ask is how many people can a river ecosystem support before it is adversely affected? At this point in time, Montana's stream access law works in Montana because its rivers benefit by existing in a place sparsely populated by humans. Imagine setting the Madison, Gallatin, or Yellowstone River down in the middle of southern California. Less restrictive stream access laws would allow the massive population to love the river to death.

Applying this reasoning to Mitchell Slough... I am troubled because I don't know what affect the Supreme Court's ruling may have on the waterway. Much of Mitchell Slough's length is modeled like a spring creek, a slow moving meandering creek lined with grassy banks. Spring creeks are more susceptible to human pressure because the riparian vegetation that supports the banks are more sensitive to foot-traffic. A handful of fisherman along its edges may do no harm, but a steady stream of fisherman pounding the stream banks daily could do long term damage.

The fight over Mitchell Slough may have been avoided if the private property owners along the slough, Montana FWP, and local sportsmen's groups had come together on a set of guidelines to regulate the Mitchell Slough like a spring creek fishery and restricted the number of fishermen allowed to access the creek to a daily quota in exchange for a "rod fee". The fee could have been small and the money garnered set aside to maintain the slough. Alas, that window of opportunity passed. The private property owners swung for the fences and ultimately struck-out. Private interest's loss is a win for the public, but let's see how the slough handles increased public pressure. Because if the slough suffers long term effects, everyone loses.

Post-Election A Mixed Bag in Ravalli County

Missoulian -- Ravalli Growth Policy Appears Headed For Repeal

The morning after a historic Presidential election that filled many millions of Americans with a new hope for the future, some Ravalli County residents are left with a mixed bag of feelings. The Growth Policy, a necessary component to protect the land, rivers, and streams of the Bitterroot from developers and other private interests and a stepping stone to Streamside Setbacks and Zoning, went down in defeat. This result was aided by the State of Montana and the ruling of the county attorney who again excluded county residents living inside a municipality from voting - a slightly skewed example of 'taxation without representation' (think Boston Tea Party). Pete Talbot from 4&20 blackbirds sums up the feeling correctly when he writes: "Bitterrooters continue their quest for Paradise Lost".

Insult was added to injury in the Ravalli County Commissioner's race where the two Democratic candidates, Roger DeHaan and John Meakin, running on a Pro-Growth Policy platform went down in defeat to their anti-zoning Republican counterparts, J.R. Iman and Greg Chilcott.

So, who wins with the defeat of the growth policy and the election of a set of commissioners that will more than certainly stand in the way of any structured land use regulations? Developers, the wealthy, and the "land rich". Of course, they couldn't defeat the Growth Policy on their own. They did it with the help (or, on the backs) of valley residents who believe that helping out wealthy neighbors is part of their civic duty. Which reminds of me of this little rant from The Onion. ...Back to square-one.

Here we go again...

Ravalli Republic -- Incorporated Areas Left Out of Growth Policy Vote

x

I was dumbfounded to read this headline in today's paper (actually my initial response was "What the F__k!"). It was just a couple of years ago, in a similar ruling by the county attorney, that city residents of Ravalli County were kept from casting a vote on an initiative to restrict the size of big box stores in the valley (Wal-mart was the focus). The county attorney's ruling undoubtedly swung the narrow decision in favor of the anti-zoning crowd, a big win for Wal-mart. This time around voters inside city limits will not get a chance to voice their opinion on an initiative to repeal the Growth Policy on Tuesday. Proponents for repealing the Growth Policy will say it's a zoning policy, which it is not. The Growth Policy is a set of guidelines to deal with growth issues and a platform to base county-wide zoning on at a later date. This a major win for the anti-zoning/anti-streamside setback crowd. Although the repeal could yet fail, the county attorney's decision has made it much more difficult. I can already hear the death knells of the Ravalli County Growth Policy in the distance.

Conversations at the Ravalli County Fair (cont.)

Continuing where I left off yesterday,...

Zoning Information Booth

Three booths were set up concerning the growth policy in Ravalli County (zoning/streamside setbacks). The first booth was there to answer questions on the zoning plans provided for public comment. I found the guy manning the booth informative if not engaging (he was reading a book). But, he wasn’t trying to sell me or convince me of anything, and he was probably getting paid to just field questions. It made me wonder, "Where can I get a job like this?"

I asked the man if city residents would have the opportunity to vote on the petition to repeal Ravalli County’s Growth Policy placed on the November ballot, unlike the box store size cap in 2006. He responded simply, “Yes.”

Good deal! I know I could have gotten the same information online or by reading the local paper, but it was nice to be able to use the booth in view of the hostiles (anti-zoning booths).

Anti-Zoning Ladies

The first of the two anti-zoning booths was manned by an older woman who was a little too emotionally attached to the zoning issue and didn’t seem to like the look of me at first glance (was it the sandals?). I asked her what she thought of the zoning options put forth by the county commissioners. I could sense the hostility in the mid 70 year old woman as she pleaded her case. She said she did not like the three Democrat commissioners that were elected last year and that she wanted the whole zoning issue to be voted on and voted down in November. I’m not sure what that had to do with my question, but I responded to her statement. I said that elected officials are elected to serve their constituency and if the voters don’t like the job their representatives are doing they have the ability to vote them out in the next election. She replied with a simple, “Hmph” of disapproval (the three commissioners the lady was referring to were elected on a pro-growth policy platform).

She continued pleading her case, but I found that her argument basically boiled down to “intrusive rules” and land value. A little tired of the nonsensical tirade, I responded that I didn’t care for some of the anti-zoning crowd’s lack of participation in the growth policy process and that if she didn’t like the options being presented to the public for comment, perhaps she should provide some alternatives she would agree with (that is how you compromise, right?). The little old woman gave no reply, but at this point I didn’t expect to gain any ground. She averted her eyes and said we’d have to agree to disagree. So, I nodded and moved on.

I respect the loyalty to her cause, but her stubbornness and lack of reason in her “arguments” were not worthy of an audience. She is the kind of person you want on your side when going into political battle, but you wouldn’t trust to lead the operation.

The second booth was adorned with a mural that had an anti-zoning theme. I’m not an art expert, but I found the mural visually pleasing and would have characterized it as “progressive” for our conservative valley, despite its theme. The artist, as it turns out, was not as progressively minded politically as her art (for whatever that means). But I found her engaging and much more even keel than the woman manning the previous booth. She went through a list of grievances she had with the zoning regulations, most having to do with the increased bureaucracy. I even agreed with some of her arguments. She pointed out an alternative option to county mandated zoning in which neighbors could institute voluntary zoning. She claimed that she proposed this to the county commissioners, but the commissioners tabled it until they were finished dealing with their zoning regs. This obviously upset her.

Although I like the idea of voluntary zoning, it lacks teeth. There is no legal recourse if someone decides to opt out. I can understand why the county commissioners would not be willing to comment on voluntary zoning because they don’t want the county’s authority superseded by voluntary zoning. The feds wouldn’t allow states to usurp its authority, one shouldn’t expect any less from the county.

The turning point in the conversation came when the artist shared too much personal information. She claimed that she owned 1000 acres in the valley and that zoning was killing “us” (private land owners). The statement supports my assumption that the anti-growth policy movement is driven by a few wealthy (including land rich) individuals that use unfounded threats that zoning will decrease land values and slow the rate of construction to gain support from contractors, builders, and realtors.

The problem with the anti-zoning crowd is their lack of interest in addressing the issue of growth in the county. I told the woman at the first booth that Montana was a step behind many states (even other counties in MT) in growth policy issues. She responded that that’s why people move to the valley, because of the lack of rules. I don’t agree with her statement. People move here for the same reason I like living here. They like having the mountains out their back door, a river out their front, and room to stretch their arms. A lack of regulations has nothing to do with it. It is true, you can not stop growth (no one expects to), but a forward thinking growth policy can direct growth, keep the population centralized, and protect open spaces. No zoning and no streamside setbacks continue to allow the wealthy and large land owners the ability to carve up the valley and degrade the things that brought us here in the first place. It’s fairly simple. Do it now, or pay for it later.

With that I was done with my conversations for the day. I left the fair a little more informed but worried for the county.

Conversations at the Ravalli County Fair

It was an eventful day at the Ravalli County Fair again this year (as eventful as a county fair ever is). My wife, daughter, and I made the usual stops. We visited the animals and got some nice video of the young one meeting goats, sheep, and cows. We made a stop by the petting zoo and witnessed a toddler nearly drown a chicken in a water trough. I guess chickens don't float (perhaps she felt this one needed to learn how to swim)! No worries though, the chicken was saved by the mindful attendant and the child received some animal justice as only a goat can dispense. After being released following the chicken incident, the toddler ran over and slapped the goat in the face, and doe, needing no assistance, turned and head butted the young child in the middle of the chest nearly knocking her off her feet. Again, no worries, all three, chicken, goat, and toddler suffered no physical or psychological trauma and no tears were shed. I just wish I had gotten the entire event on camera.

Next, we met some friends and had a sampling of fair food. We shared steak kabobs, fries, and a reuben. To put a cap on the evening, for dessert, my wife and daughter gorged on a funnel cake until they were both sick to their stomachs (deep fried dough has a way of doing that).

My wife volunteered to man a booth at the fair this year. So, while she worked I checked out the commercial building. The commercial building houses salesmen, local political groups, and activists. I took a quick swing through to see which booths required closer inspection and then made my return trip. My first stop was the Right to Life booth.

Right to Life

For those who don’t know, I have been participating in a conversation over at The Great Abortion Debate and wanted to get a first hand impression of some Pro-Life supporters. The booth was manned by three sweet soft spoken ladies. They were so soft spoken that I was forced to lean far over their table to hear them over the noise of the building. I asked them where the money went that their organization raised. They answered that the majority went to pay for cribs and supplies for new mothers that were financially strapped. “Good deal!” I thought. I asked what percentage of their money went to lobbying efforts and they said that none of the money raised locally went directly for lobbying, but that they did contribute to organizations at the state and federal level that did support efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade. “Not so hot,” I said to myself. I asked if any of the raised funds went towards education and preventive methods such as birth control. They declined to answer that question which I can only assume meant, “No.” By not doing this, the group is not fully addressing the issue of reducing unwanted pregnancies.

Whilst talking, I scanned the brochures and information in their booth. I took exception to the way in which the booth was adorned. Let me explain. I expected the pictures of aborted fetuses, plastic fetuses representing the different stages of development, and the Pro-Life propaganda displayed merely to inspire an emotional reaction, but I think it misrepresented the woman I was speaking to. The booth broadcast a message of single-minded non compromising ideals, none of the qualities I found in these three women during our brief meeting. I found the ladies’ conversation and non confrontational approach very agreeable despite our obvious differences on legalized abortion. I felt if we talked longer we would have discovered more common ground. So, I left with a mixed message,… as well as with a “Life is Precious” balloon, though that might have had something to do with the outspoken little girl standing next to me pointing and crying “ba-oon, ba-oon.”

The Right to Life booth was overall a positive experience despite our differences over abortion rights. I can't say as much about my discussions with the ladies manning the anti-zoning booths, but that conversation will have to wait until tomorrow.

Reflections on the Ravalli County Fair Parade

I attended the Ravalli County Fair Parade this year for the first time with my young daughter. Watching a parade with your child definitely puts the annual spectacle in a different light. The same ol’ thing takes on new life when you witness the excitement in her eyes as she points out the balloons, horses, costumed people, floats, and yummy candy being handed out by generous strangers. She grips a little tighter in response to the blaring horns from the emergency response vehicles and cuts loose on the concrete doing her best imitation of the county cloggers. You feel her excitement and it brings a smile to your face.

Then it fades at the sight of the local politicians working the rope lines. But it isn’t the people themselves that suck all the fun out of the air, it’s the message some of them carry and the conversations I overhear coming from my neighbors on either side. You’ve seen the signs I’m talking about, any resident of the valley has viewed them before – “Vote No on Zoning” or “No Streamside Setbacks” – messages associated with the local chapter of the GOP. An older gent to my right in a cowboy hat and sporting a black T with the initials NRA emblazoned on his chest leans over to what must be his grandkids and says, “Now, these are the good guys,” pointing to the local Republican candidates as they stroll past. Brainwashing the next generation starts early, I guess.

The number one issue facing Ravalli County is how to deal with growth. It’s a well understood and widely accepted problem because Ravalli is one of the fastest growing counties in Montana. Three Democrat commissioners even road a message of “responsible land use regulations” to power in the elections of 2007. I thought it was well understood that they were talking about zoning. Now, two years later, county-wide zoning (the dirty “z”-word), something that is not even in place yet, is facing a vote for its survival. Two years worth of work may be for not because a vocal group has uttered a simple response – “You can’t tell me what to do with my land!” It stinks of a few wealthy, land-rich individuals who have motivated contractors, builders, realtors, and the anti-establishment crowd, people who are easily persuaded, to join ranks against common sense.

Now, I’m an equal opportunity person. I’m willing to listen to opinions or ideas that I may not agree with as long as they are based in fact and solid reasoning. But unfortunately, the “Vote No on Zoning” and “No Streamside Setbacks” crowd don’t believe they have to be held up to the same standards. You can compare them to children. A child my not understand it, but “No… Because I don’t want to!” is not a good enough reason to get out of responsibility. If they don’t like the options presented to them, the anti-zoning group should suggest other options to address the valley’s growing pains. “No!” is not an option.

Zoning is necessary not to curb growth, but to control what type and where development occurs. It is important to protect the distinct communities already present in the valley and to allow time to continually upgrade and extend infrastructure to new residents. Mega-developments as large as a small town, miles outside city limits, are not examples of responsible growth.

Streamside setbacks are important to maintain the life-blood of our valley. Setbacks allow a freedom of movement for the Bitterroot River and its tributaries, something that is restricted if a land owner builds his mega-mansion a foot from the riverbank. This kind of development leads to streambank stabilization projects, such as rip-rap, and permanently throws off kilter the native ecology of the river. The person who does this is pointing a big middle finger in the air and saying screw my neighbor and screw Mother Nature.

So to those who oppose responsible land use regulations, I suggest you come up with some smart alternatives and contribute constructively to the process because I don’t want a view of the 'Root from on top of a mountain to be a sea of lights from Missoula to Sula, from the Bitterroots to the Sapphire Mountains. “No!” is simply not good enough.

A Food Movement for Everyone

The September issue of National Geographic ran a small section entitled “Eco-Living: Food” describing 4 food movements. As I could not find links online, I took excerpts and listed them below. The food movements listed are not completely distinct and some are more restrictive than others, but for someone interested in reducing America’s dependence on oil, eating healthier, reducing the unnecessary chemicals introduced to our foods, or simply to appreciate food better, there is a movement or combination of movements for everyone (and it's not just for city slickers).

Eating Green
"What does eating green mean? It’s choosing organics when possible, emphasizing vegetables, fruits, and grains over meats, and striving to find locally produced foods that travel fewer miles from field to market to kitchen. These can help cut down a meal’s carbon footprint, or 'foodprint,' according to Cornell University nutrition researcher Jennifer Wilkins. Shoppers who walk, bicycle, or take public transportation to nearby farmers markets will reduce it even further. Maintaining a small foodprint minimizes the amount of natural resources used, but it doesn’t have to mean depriving the palate. Consumers, Wilkins says, can eat a seasonal selection that 'celebrates what your local farmers grow, week by week.' Such flavorful ingredients might be reward enough for saving the world – one meal at a time." –Diane Cole

Slow Food
Because it takes time to savor each of the courses that make up a traditional Italian meal, it seems fitting that the Slow Food movement – fast food’s antithesis – was founded in Italy. Created by gastronome Carlo Petrini in the late 1980s, the now international organization does not advocate spending endless hours in the kitchen, however. It promotes a style of eating and cooking based on taste, freshness, and quality of local ingredients. Equally important to its mission is the preservation of individual regional specialties, the cultivation of local plants, and the rediscovery of artisanal food-production techniques.

Organic Farming
More than 76.6 million acres of land around the world now carry organic certification, a boom fueled by a $40 billion international demand for organic foods. As a 2007 study from the University of Michigan challenges old assumptions that yields from organic farms can’t compete with those from conventional agriculture, an even greener map appears likely.

The Fife Diet
Food’s a subject close to home for Mike Small. In November 2007 the Fife, Scotland, man convinced local people to dine for a year solely on foods produced in their 40-by-30 mile area. Air-freighted goods – not from Scotland – are off-limits. Permitted in the Fife Diet are produce, eggs, and meat from nearby farms, as well as home-brewed beer. “It’s liberating, discovering what your region can and can’t produce,” says Small. Even for those outside Fife, eating what’s grown close by has benefits. Buying local food just three times a week “would make an enormous impact,” says New York University food studies professor Marion Nestle, by increasing demand and supporting farmers.

The major thread through three of these movements is "local," but don't think it's just a big city fad. There are many places in Western Montana to buy produce and meat grown and harvested locally. For example, farmers markets in Hamilton (Saturdays 9-12:30), Stevensville (Saturdays 9-1:00), and Darby (Tuesdays 4-8pm) offer a good selection of local goods throughout the summer and fall. And the Missoula farmers market just a few miles farther North, offers a slightly larger selection and runs Saturday 9-noon. If you want beef, Maki Farms, located outside of Corvallis, specializes in "beef bred, born, raised, fed, and finished... with homegrown food supply." And if it's organic dairy products you crave, check out the Lifeline Farm in Victor. So whatever your food movement, whatever your reasoning, there are local options available to meet your needs (and save the world - one meal at a time).

Other informative links: Our Good Earth – the future rests on the soil beneath our feet (pic above); Green Guide – learn more about green living

Everyone Needs a Little Drama

'Rooters are not immune from a little drama. We have zoning and streamside setback issues and, of course, the never ending "'negative' influence of new money coming into the valley" to complain about. These issues alone have kept the local papers busy for the last few years. Some recent drama caught my eye, though. It took place in print in the Ravalli Republic in a Valley Viewpoint entitled "Questioning Our Leader's Morality." Take a few minutes to read it here.

It is quite humorous. Humorous, because the author, Larry Blocker, fell hook, line, and sinker for misinformation spread via the internet and email that many of us heard about and dismissed months ago. I received that email this winter from a family member who was all too ready to jump on the smear bandwagon (manure spreader is a more apt term). You've heard the lies before: Obama does not pledge allegiance to the flag, Obama was sworn into the Senate using the Koran, not the Bible, Obama's wife says, "I have never been proud of anything that has happened in this country", and on and on... Luckily, not everyone in the valley is so naive. Read the comments that follow the article.

Mr. Blocker's article is humorous because it gives testament to his ignorance and others like him, but it is also disturbing for three reasons.

First, it is disturbing that there are people out there that hear and want to believe this misinformation. They have forgotten the adage, 'If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.' A little common sense would help. For example, there is nothing wrong with a public servant being sworn into office using a text other than the Bible (say the constitution or the Koran), but do you think Obama would have survived the primaries if the false claim that he used the Koran was true? Also, America has known about these smear emails for some time. Where was Mr. Blocker when it was covered on the evening news or in print? Or a more apt question, what was Mr. Blocker listening to or reading? Obama's staff has gone to the extent of creating a webpage called "Fight the Smears" to dispel such rumors, but a little common sense and fact checking would have done the same.

Second, it is disturbing that the Ravalli Republic would print blatant lies. Yes, readers caught it and shared their comments, but aren't journalists supposed to double check sources? What was Perry Backus, the editor of the Ravalli Republic, thinking when he sent this off to print? Or if he was not there when the decision was made to print the article, why wasn't he in the loop? It is one thing to print opinions, but quite another to allow the printing of lies. Mr. Backus could have saved the paper from some criticism and stopped Mr. Blocker from making an ass of himself in front of the entire county.

Third, it is a lot easier to say something you don't mean or is untrue, than it is to write it. Putting something down on paper adds an extra couple steps to the process of sharing your thoughts and usually allows time to cool down. Think about it. You generate in your mind what you want to say. Then, you put it down on paper, which gives you a second opportunity to hear what your message sounds like. You then re-read it to check facts or check for spelling. Finally, you have to put it in the mail or hit [Return] to send it. At some point in this process you'd think the idea would've come to Mr. Blocker that some of this stuff sounded far-fetched and possibly just wrong. Sadly, now everyone knows what and how Mr. Blocker thinks. And, it's set in stone.

To his credit, Mr. Blocker was man enough to admit that he got his facts wrong and addressed this in a letter to the editor. The editor of the Ravalli Republic even included an apology for printing Mr. Blocker's Valley Viewpoint. It appears, though, that Mr. Blocker still has a lot of fight in him as is evident in his comments following this Valley Viewpoint. Take my advice Larry: take a couple deep breaths, relax,... and don't be an ass.

I hope that from this bit of drama a few more 'Rooters will think long and hard before believing crap that shows up in their inbox. Then, maybe, we can talk about real issues such as the economy, energy, the environment, zoning, streamside setbacks, and The War. You know, things that are actually important.

Schweitzer Reaffirms His Support of Streamside Setbacks

Ravalli Republic--Gov. Schweitzer Supports Streamside Setbacks (8/6/2008)

At a mixer at the Daly Mansion in Hamilton, Gov. Brian Schweitzer fielded a question about streamside setbacks that Joel Gallob reported on in the local paper. The article is not found on the Ravalli Republic website.

Regarding Montana's rivers and streams, Schweitzer said, "The most precious resource in Montana is not the gold in the mountains, or platinum, or palladium, or coal, or oil, or gas. It's our water." He continued, "Snow from our own winter helps the entire country. Fifty percent of the water in the Columbia is ours and seventy percent in the Missouri Basin is Montana snow."

He emphasized that it is important "to maintain our water quality for future generations," and that it includes "minimum standards of streamside setbacks."

Howard Hill Archery

Ravalli Republic--Building a Better Long Bow

Some of the finest longbows in the world are hand crafted at Howard Hill Archery right outside Hamilton in the foothills of the Bitterroot Mountains. I by no means am skilled in the sport of archery, but being an avid fly-fisherman I know that a Howard Hill longbow is akin to a Payne or Hardy split cane bamboo fly rod. It is the most pure and organic evolution of the sport, one that an enthusiast arrives at only after years of experience. The name speaks of quality, craftsmanship, history, and love of the sport.

Howard Hill Archery is a family business. Craig Ekin is owner and oversees the bow production, his wife, Evie, is the bookkeeper, and his son, Jason, operates customer service and keeps customers well stocked with arrows.

The location of the business might surprise some, but it makes perfect sense if you are an avid hunter and you know the Ekin family. Montana offers some of the best big game hunting (elk, moose, bighorn, mule deer, whitetail) in the lower 48 states and it's right out Hamilton's back door. Also, Hamilton is a friendly town that moves at a slower pace, the perfect setting to raise a family and probably a major reason why the close knit Ekins settled here.

And... if you know the Ekins, you know that they can play a little ball. Craig, Jason, and Chad, I'll see you at the State Slow-Pitch Tournament this weekend in Kalispell. Good Luck!

Revisiting "Common Sense..." (2 of 5)

Public Transportation

This is not an option for my family.

Public transportation is a tough sell in a rural area. The valley has the Bitterroot Bus that covers the Hamilton/Corvallis/Granstsdale area, but my pie in the sky idea is a light rail running from the valley to Missoula. It would be nice to be able to leave the family car at home, jump on a train, and ride it up Reserve St., across Broadway, circle through downtown Missoula., and back down the Bitterroot. A train would take some commuter traffic off Highway 93 during the week and provide an easy way to travel to Missoula for the occasional shopping trip on the weekend. But it takes money, a steady ridership, and it would have to be less expensive and/or more convenient than driving. I understand that the Bitterroot doesn’t have a centralized enough population to make it easily feasible, but the track is already there and there is only one way in and out of the valley heading North. But… I won’t hold my breath.

Carpooling

The incentive to carpool is simple. Fewer drivers and more passengers equals fewer fill-ups and more money in the bank. We carpool often during the summer on weekend trips to softball tournaments. I remember in the past I’d ask the fellas, “Who wants to carpool?” I’d often receive a less than enthusiastic mumbled response that was meant to imply that most would rather drive themselves. Now, I don’t even have to suggest it. Everyone is trying to figure out how to fit the maximum number of guys into as few automobiles as possible. It’s funny how pricey gasoline changes attitudes.

Walking and Biking

My daughter and I put a few miles on our shoes in the course of a week. We hit the bank, the library, the book store, the church, and take multiple trips to the grocery store, all under the power of our own legs. Again, where we live makes it convenient, but there are enough incentives to walking that we’d do it regardless. The biggest advantage being after a morning of running errands the little one is ready for her daily nap which leaves time for Dad to catch up on the news, sports, bills, laundry, dishes, writing, reading,… everything a little girl won’t let Dad do when she’s awake.

If we need to travel a little farther, faster, my wife and I bike. She rides her bike to work five days a week and I ride to the park in the evenings to catch a softball game. I have extra motivation to bike, also. I loathe getting into a broiling car on a hot summer day. It brings back too many bad memories of sitting in traffic on a sweltering day in a certain midwestern city's sprawl trying to get home from work.

Walking, biking, and carpooling keeps our fuel bill small. We fill up the car about once a month. Not bad! And by not driving, we're being rewarded twice. The wife, ‘lil Grettlebug, and I get daily exercise and it costs us and the environment nada, zero, zilch, nothing!

Next time…
Make Your Home Energy Sufficient, Green Your Dream Home

First Draft of Ravalli County (MT) Streamside Protection Regulations is Out for Public Review

Streamside protection regulations are an important water related issue in Western states. As opposed to Midwestern states and states East of the Mississippi River, Rocky Mountain states experience an annual life giving flood in the late spring when temperatures rise and the mountain snow packs begins to melt. The snowmelt sustains this arid land by refilling reservoirs which supply water for drinking and irrigation purposes. The annual flood also cleans and reshapes the river valleys, an important part of maintaining a healthy mountain river ecosystem. It is the natural movement of the river that streamside regulations aim to protect by setting back new structures from the banks of Western rivers.

Before streamside protection regulations are enacted in Ravalli County, Montana, property owners are within their rights to build homes and other structures right on the Bitterroot River. They also have the right to protect their property by stabilizing the streambank. Sections of the river lined with large, jagged edged stones (see photo below) is an example of streambank stabilization known as rip-rap. Rip-rap presents an unnatural impediment to a healthy mountain river ecosystem. Rip-rap forces the momentum of the river down which creates deep stagnant pools, or turns the entire force of the river downstream which increases the erosion of neighboring land (and that doesn't make for happy neighbors). Streambank stabilization practices can be avoided if structures are setback from the banks of the Bitterroot River.

Here are a few of the main points from the first draft of Ravalli County's Streamside Protection Regulation.

1. Any structure planning to be built within 250 feet of a regulated stream must apply for a permit.



2. The regulation calls for a buffer and a setback. For the West Fork of the Bitterroot River below Painted Rocks Dam, the entire East Fork of the Bitterroot, and the main stem of the Bitterroot River, the buffer region is all land within the 100 year floodplain as designated by FEMA. The setback is 100 feet beyond the outer boundary of the floodplain on either side of the river.



3. For main tributaries to the Bitterroot River (those mountain streams as designated by the regulation): The buffer of tributaries is 100 feet as measured from the high water mark on either side of the stream. The setback is 50 feet from the buffer zone.



4. Structures that pre-date the enacting of streamside setbacks will be grandfathered.



5. Violation of any approved variance will be subject to criminal prosecution.

This is the first step in what probably will be a long contentious battle between the county and private land owners. Hopefully the final version will be in the best interest of everyone who calls Ravalli County home. The county commissioners would like your input on the proposal. See the Ravalli Republic for the story, address, and email contacts to submit comments.

The picture above is of the Bitterroot River just upstream from the Main Street bridge in Hamilton. You can see an example of rip-rap on the right bank of the river.