Your Ad Here!
Call the Star
at 777-3928
|
Your ad here!
Call for web rates
777-3928 |
|
|
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Page One News at a Glance
|
By Michael Howell
Every four years the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks conducts a regular review of its fishing regulations and considers changes. The department is currently conducting such a review and is seeking public comment on the regulations for consideration in the process.
The review process generally begins in March when FWP puts together some general ideas for potential changes into a brochure that is distributed across the state and on the agency’s web site. According to FWP Bitterroot Fisheries Biologist Chris Clancy, a brochure has been produced and will soon be posted on the internet. From May through June each region in the state will collect public comment and submit the results to FWP headquarters in Helena where some tentative changes will be proposed based on the regional input by August 11. Following more public comment on the tentative rules the agency will compose a final draft of proposed changes to be submitted to the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission by September 29. The FWP Commission could then make a final decision at its meeting of October 13, 2011. The changes in regulation would go into effect in 2012.
“We haven’t received a lot of complaints about the current fishing regulations,” said Clancy. But he said the agency is provisionally considering some changes to simplify the regulations and make them more generally applicable across the state rather than the complex set of varying regulations on each river that we currently have.
For instance, within Region 2, locally we have regulations governing Rainbow and Brown Trout that vary from the Bitterroot River where the limit is a total of 3 fish in any combination, but only one greater than 14 inches, while over on Rock Creek the limit is 3 Brown Trout, none over 12 inches and Rainbow are catch and release. If you go up the Blackfoot River the limit is 3 of any combination but no Rainbow over 12 inches.
Clancy said the agency is considering the value of applying similar regulations across the region. He said in some cases it is hard to say why the restrictions were set at the numbers they were. Then there is the question of whether they have had the desired effect.
One thing we lack data on here in the Bitterroot is any comparative study of the effects of our catch and release stretches in comparison to the areas that are open. Although fish counts are being conducted along certain reaches, he said, there has been no focused study on the issue. He said the Bitterroot River is the only river in the region that has catch and release in isolated stretches.
He noted, however, that catch and release of Westslope Cutthroat Trout has applied in every stretch of the river since 1990. He said initially the population trend of the species per mile in the river jumped up. But that spike peaked in 2002 to 2004 and the trend has been a declining population per mile since then to the point that we are back to mid 1990 levels.
Another thing the agency is seeing is a rise in the numbers of Brown Trout per mile statewide and an expansion of their territory in many drainages into areas where they have previously not been observed.
“The trend is up for Brown Trout populations in the Bitterroot,” said Clancy. The number of Brown Trout per mile greater than 12 inches is showing an upward trend in the Bell Crossing and Stevensville stretches while declining a bit in the Hamilton area and a flat line in the Missoula area. The trend is consistently upward in the upper river, showing a rising trend in the Conner, Hannon and Darby areas. He said Brown Trout are also showing up in small numbers in fish tallies in places where they have never shown up before, such as in upper portions of Sleeping Child Creek and Warm Springs Creek and in upper creeks of the West Fork.
Increasing Brown Trout numbers per mile is not a trend isolated to the Bitterroot, however. Clancy said the trend is showing up in other drainages in the state as well. He said it has led the agency to wonder if the regulations need to be adjusted to address this trend.
Numbers of Rainbow Trout per mile over 12 inches are showing an upward trend in the lower Bitterroot River and are stable in the upper river except in the Darby area where they show a slight drop.
Clancy said that the fishing regulations in the Bitterroot have been changed, sometimes substantially, over the years. Significant changes were made in:
• 1982 - Artificial lures only from Stevensville to Florence and from Darby to the Como Bridge
• 1982 - Trout limit was set at 5 fish under 14” or 4 under 14” and 1 over 18”
• 1990 - Bull Trout are limited to 1 and all Cutthroat Trout in Bitterroot River are catch and release
• 1992 - 3 trout limit, one over 14” on river and catch and release in artificial lure sections. The lower catch and release section was extended from Stevensville up to Tucker Crossing.
NEW BOAT PASSAGE PLANNED
Pleased with the outcome of the construction of a boat passage over the dam on the Bitterroot River associated with the Hedge Ditch diversion, which allows boaters to float through/over the dam without portaging, FWP is now in the process of developing a similar boat passage for the dam associated with the Corvallis Canal.
The department has been constructing a gravel ramp for boaters to use at the Corvallis Canal dam to get around it, but the ramp way is washed out annually by high water and requires boaters to portage their boat over the dam. The cost of installing a free float through passageway at the site has been estimated at $77,700.
The Bitterroot Chapter of Trout Unlimited has donated $7,000 towards the project to pay for the survey and design of a boat passage at the dam. FWP has dedicated another $18,000 towards construction. The survey and design have been completed and now FWP biologist Chris Clancy is looking for another $60,000 to complete the project.
“I’m used to looking for money for improvements to fisheries,” said Clancy, “but this is a worthwhile project from the point of view of public safety so I’m hoping to find the funds.”
SKALKAHO FISH SCREENS AND SIPHON WORKING
FWP has been working up Skalkaho Creek to re-establish the connectivity of the creek with the river to help newly spawned Westslope Cuttroat Trout migrate back to the river. The project has included a construction of fish screens to keep fish from swimming into the ditches along the way and a siphon to carry the Hedge and Republican Ditch waters under the creek to keep natural runoff in the creek and not mix it with ditch water that may contain fertilizer and other chemical products from irrigation return flows.
FWP fisheries biologist Chris Clancy said that two studies, the Steve Gale thesis in 2005 and the Ryan Harnisch thesis of 2007, both show some positive results from the efforts. The Gale thesis, which measured the electrical conductivity of the water in the creek and in the ditches, showed that the siphon was helping to keep ditch water out of the creek system. The Harnisch thesis, which measured fish populations at different sections of the creek and in the ditches, showed that the fish screens were working to keep more Westslope Cutthroat Trout in the creek.
The one disappointing outcome to date, according to Clancy, is that the screw trap located in the Bitterroot River downstream from Skalkaho has not shown any increase in the presence of Westslope Cutthroat Trout in the river at the mouth of the creek. But this may simply be a matter of time for the effects to become measurable as well as the limitations involved in a screw trap measuring larger sized fish.
Leave a comment on our blog Back to top
|
|
By Michael Howell
Marwan Sada of the Montana Department of Corrections gave a glowing report to the County Commissioners last Wednesday about conditions at the Ravalli County Juvenile Detention Center, except for one detail. He told the commissioners that having only one person on duty on site at the facility during the night was a violation of state rules. He urged them to consider having a second person at least available on site during the night.
Although there is currently only one employee on duty at the facility from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., a second employee, Cal Robinson, who lives only a few blocks away, is on call if needed. But Sada told the commissioners that this was not sufficient. He said that if something should happen to the one employee on duty, such as a heart attack, and they were unable to notify Robinson, the situation would not be discovered until the next morning. He said that having a second person on site also serves to ameliorate the potential problem of unfounded accusations being made against a lone attendant with no witnesses.
“There is a purpose behind the rules,” said Sada. “It is a question of safety and security for both the youth and the staff.”
Commissioner J.R. Iman noted that running the Juvenile Detention Center was already a borderline situation. He stated that with the current budget restraints it was not possible to hire another employee for the night shift. He said that due to unforeseen circumstances the juvenile detention center was over budget by $40,000 to $50,000.
“The corner we are in right now is a money corner,” said Iman. He said if forced to hire additional personnel at this point the county would more likely simply close down the whole operation and transfer juveniles to the detention center in Missoula instead.
“We just don’t have enough bad kids,” he said. “I can’t hire two officers to watch one kid.”
But even a few kids can become a costly problem as was the case last year when a juvenile detention officer was attacked and seriously injured in an escape attempt by two juveniles. Handling the fallout following that incident is what threw the detention center into its current budget shortfall.
Sada reiterated that the county was out of compliance with state law without a second officer on site.
“I would like to see this fixed,” he said.
Commissioner Iman said that if Sada was going to insist on strict compliance that he should issue a citation and the county could decide whether to continue the operation of the facility or not.
Sada said he was not going to issue a citation and close the facility, but he urged the commissioners to consider the law and do what they could to come into compliance. He said the county should consider it to avoid the potential liability.
Commissioner Greg Chilcott stated that the county could possibly add audio capability to the video that currently is used to monitor activity at the center and that would help address the concerns about unfounded allegations. A medical monitoring device that would send an alarm if the attendant was suddenly incapacitated might also help address some of the concerns, he said.
The Commissioners took Sada’s report under advisement and will address it in the next budget session.
Leave a comment on our blog Back to top
|
|
By Michael Howell
The Ravalli County Commissioners gave their support for a proposed auto wrecking facility along Old Corvallis Road at 36 Angel Lane last Friday. The motor vehicle wrecking facility is being proposed by Clint Nickerson, owner of Bitterroot Auto Removal. Nickerson is applying to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for a license to operate the facility.
State law provides, however, that the governing body of the county may conduct a public hearing “to determine whether the proposed facility will significantly affect the quality of life of the adjoining landowners and the surrounding community.” The law states the county may adopt a resolution in support of or in opposition to the location of the proposed facility and that DEQ “may not grant a license to a facility that a governing body has opposed under this section of the law.”
At an initial meeting on March 11, several homeowners along Angel Lane, the Hamilton City Council and the Ravalli County Council on Aging, which has a facility in the area and plans to develop senior housing, all protested the issuance of the license. At that meeting all the commissioners except Ron Stoltz expressed concerns about the effect of the facility on the quality of life in the neighborhood. Stoltz expressed his unqualified support at the time, saying that the historical use of the property included having old vehicles around and doing machine work and allowing the wrecking facility would not be a significant change. He said if an active business on the site was going to destroy the quality of life in the neighborhood, it would already be destroyed.
Without making a decision, the Commissioners continued the meeting to give Nickerson a chance to work out an agreeable solution with his neighbors. At last Friday’s meeting Nickerson presented his plans for addressing the neighborhood concerns. His plans did not sway all the neighbors, but two of the commissioners, Suzy Foss and Matt Kanenwisher, who both had expressed hesitancy at the first meeting, were now in support of the license application.
Kanenwisher told the Bitterroot Star later that the first hearing had raised more questions for him than answers.
“After some research and further discussion,” he said, “I found that most of the lots on that stretch of Old Corvallis Road are commercial. I also found that the lot had been an automotive or commercial use yard for years. Finally, I found that the neighbors had complained about the different tenants of the lot for years as well. So given the commercial nature of the area, given the automotive and commercial history of the lot, and most importantly, given that the property will now have some regulatory oversight because of the new status, I voted to support the application.”
Commissioner Foss said that she made some site visits, looked at some maps, and investigated the businesses already located in the area. She said it seemed obvious that the development in the area was going commercial and that the proposed business would fit into that development. She said that although some neighbors opposed it, some did not, and it was historically used as an automotive business. She said a lot of worse things could happen on the property and that this business would obviously be under a lot of scrutiny and had legal standards to meet under the DEQ license. She said the support expressed by the county Department of Environmental Health was also a factor.
Commission Chair J.R. Iman said that he couldn’t support the license application for a number of reasons. He had concerns about high ground water in the area. He also had concerns about the owner of the property being different than the owner of the business and how this might complicate enforcement of the regulations on the business, especially with such a weak enforcement system as that at DEQ.
“It’s also a part of the City of Hamilton’s Planning Area and they oppose it,” said Iman.
Chilcott said that the law governing the county’s decision in this case is unique in that the only element to be considered is if there are significant effects on the quality of life in the neighborhood. He said it is the neighbors themselves who are the best judges of the potential effects on their quality of life.
The Board of Commissioners decided to support the license application on a vote of 3 to 2 with Commissioners Chilcott and Iman dissenting.
Lea Guthrie, Director of the county’s Department of Environmental Health, noted that as the licensing application moved forward her office would conduct an environmental analysis of the project on behalf of DEQ as a part of the licensing procedure. Concerns were raised about potential high ground water in the area and the EA would address those concerns, she said.
Leave a comment on our blog Back to top
|
|
By Michael Howell
A year ago the Stevensville Town Council engaged in excruciating negotiations with the Stevensville Civic Club and the Stevensville Main Street Association over how special event permits would be handled for the annual Creamery Picnic, Western Heritage Days, the Honey Fest and other civic sponsored events and whether or not each vendor at those events would be required to obtain a transient business license or not. After a lot of haggling a temporary solution was agreed to that allowed the organizations to hold the events that year and gave the council time to work out a permanent solution for the future.
That didn’t happen, however, and despite having the Creamery Picnic and Western Heritage Days permit requests on their agenda at the last meeting, a full year later the Council was still unprepared to deal with the request and fell into the same quandary of how the town’s Special Event Permit Ordinance might work in conjunction with the town’s Transient Business License Ordinance.
Victoria Howell, board member of the Main Street Association which is seeking a Special Event Permit to sponsor the Western Heritage Days celebration, explained to the council that her organization was only looking for approval of some details concerning the event and that the question of Special Event Permit fees or whether or not vendors need a Transient Business License could be considered at a future date.
She asked the Council to approve the application in general (with fees, if any, to be determined at a later date) for a street closure on Friday on East 3rd Street between Main and Church, for a waiver of the Open Container Ordinance on Saturday from 2 to 10 pm for the beer garden and music performance on East 3rd, for the police chief’s signature on the state application for a special one-day liquor license, a closure of West 3rd Street between Main and Buck Streets on Saturday for vendors, and approval of the MDOT permit to close Main Street for the parade. She said that the Police Chief and Fire Chief had been consulted and approved all the plans.
Councilor Pat Groninger asked Councilors Desera Towle and Robin Holcomb, who have been working on these two ordinances, “Do you feel we are in the position now without having a special meeting as far as having the whole council discuss some things and as far as maybe a meeting of the whole as far as us to understand your interpretations and your decisions on things very soon? Because I look at you both on this thing and, nothing improper about it, but you still have that ‘deer in the headlights look’ when it comes to interpretating this ding dong ordinance that we’ve had for so many years.”
Towle said that a meeting had been scheduled on March 23rd to discuss the transient license ordinance. The question of the Special Event Permit was another consideration, but the problem was when you blended them.
Howell suggested that all this could be considered later but that the council could approve the five action items and address the rest later.
Groninger said, “With (Councilor) Dan (Mullan) being gone and with him not being here because…I look at it this way, we’ve got a pretty good core council with so far as determination and decipherance goes, but I am in favor of tabling this till the 23rd and have a full action meeting. We can handle this including the Creamery Picnic. We handle it all that night and the dust settles and that’s what’s done.”
“I would have to agree,” said Holcomb. She invited the several board members of the Main Street Association and the Stevensville Civic Club who were present to attend the meeting on the 23rd.
“You are taking no action?” queried Howell.
“There’s so much conflicting stuff in this ordinance that it’s not making sense,” said Holcomb.
“But can’t we bracket the question of fees and the transient license and just approve these five action items?” asked Howell.
Groninger said, “We’ve had more meetings than the five years previous and you know what, we are doing a good job.”
The council voted unanimously to table the request until the meeting on the 23rd as well as consideration of the Creamery Picnic permit, which was also listed on the meeting’s agenda.
Mark Anderson, who was there with other members of the Stevensville Civic Club to address the club’s request for a permit for Creamery Picnic, said, “You are delaying the Creamery Picnic (decision) too? So we came down here for nothing?”
Groninger said, “You didn’t come down here for nothing. You came down to find out we we’re going to postpone it ‘til the 23rd.”
BOARD OF APPEALS ESTABLISHED
The Town Council established a Building Department Board of Appeals at the request of Building Inspector Dennis Monroe. Board members include Mark Brushia, Jeff Watkins, Brad Pollman and Tim Netzley.
The Council also agreed to approve Mike Grote as a back-up building inspector in case Monroe should be ill or absent. They also approved a $50 per month cell phone allowance for the building inspector.
In other business the council:
• approved the Mayor’s signature on the Airport Layout Plan, and the signing of close-out documents related to airport contracts and agreed to advertise for a new Airport Board member.
• agreed to accept the donation of a stage for use by the public at Town events as long as it can be securely closed when not in use.
• adopted Resolution 270, the funding package from Rural Development for the water improvement project.
• approved the appointment of Mike Whelehon as project representative for the water project
• agreed to go forward with the subdivision exemption application to establish a utility lot on the Kelley property and agreed to go forward with the installation of a test well on the property.
• adopted the Selway Tax Increment Financing District Preliminary Engineering Report.
• heard an informational presentation by WGM about the pending Main Street Improvement Project being funded with CTEP funds from the County. It is a half million dollar improvement project centered on the three blocks of the core of downtown Main Street.
• accepted a FEMA grant for $110,000 with a 6.5 percent match to purchase a Type 6 wild land fire engine. The Fire Department has the matching funds in its budget.
• approved a request from the county sanitarian’s office to allow county personnel on Town property at the airport to administer a ground water monitoring regime for a proposed septic.
Leave a comment on our blog Back to top
|
|
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has reached an agreement with the majority of plaintiffs, including Defenders of Wildlife, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, and eight other conservation organizations, to settle ongoing litigation over a Federal District Court’s 2010 decision to reinstate Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for gray wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains.
If approved by the court, the settlement offers a path for the Service to return management of the recovered wolf populations in Idaho and Montana to the States while the Service considers options for delisting gray wolves across the Rocky Mountain region, where population levels have returned to biologically recovered levels.
“For too long, management of wolves in this country has been caught up in controversy and litigation instead of rooted in science where it belongs,” said Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes. “This proposed settlement provides a path forward to recognize the successful recovery of the gray wolf in the northern Rocky Mountains and to return its management to States and Tribes.”
“I am pleased that the negotiations resulted in this important agreement,” said Acting Service Director Rowan Gould. “The proposed settlement has the potential to return management of wolves in Montana and Idaho to the states and tribes and will also enable the Fish and Wildlife Service to use our limited resources to address other species in need of recovery actions.”
Under the terms of the settlement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has agreed to address the delisting of wolves in the region in the future as a distinct population segment, rather than on a state-by-state basis. The parties are requesting that the court allow the 2009 delisting to be reinstated in Montana and Idaho on an interim basis, in accordance with approved state management plans, until a full delisting can be completed for the northern Rocky Mountain wolf population. The parties are agreeing that they allow these steps to move forward, up to and including a potential delisting of Rocky Mountain wolves, without resorting to further litigation.
“I want to recognize the great work of Deputy Secretary Hayes, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the entire negotiating team, and all those who worked with us to find a common-sense way forward,” said Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar.
Separate negotiations are ongoing between the Service and the State of Wyoming in an effort to reach agreement on a management plan for wolves in that state. If a mutually acceptable management plan for wolves in Wyoming can be developed, then the Service will be able to proceed with delisting proceedings addressing wolves throughout the northern Rocky Mountains.
The delisting provided for under this agreement does not extend to the small wolf populations in eastern Oregon and Washington, or to Utah, where there are not believed to be any resident wolves. FWS intends to address the longer term status of wolves in Oregon, Washington, and Utah when it issues a new rule addressing status of wolves across the Northern Rocky Mountain region. FWS will work with state officials in Oregon, Washington and Utah in the meantime to address any wolf management issues and retains the option to consider reclassifying wolves from "endangered" to "threatened" in those states in order to provide more management flexibility.
The Service and the plaintiffs have agreed to take other actions that will clarify implementation of the ESA and ensure that a recovered wolf population continues to be sustainably managed under approved state management plans. Additional terms of the proposed agreement are available at http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=238574. Additional background information on the settlement is available at http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=238576.
Leave a comment on our blog Back to top
|
|
By Michael Howell
Mayor Rick Scheele told the Bitterroot Star that the Town of Darby did recently receive a letter stating opposition to the hiring of a new Deputy Marshal. The letter contained over 150 signatures, he said.
The Town recently advertised for a replacement officer following the resignation of Shawn Woods effective March 8. Scheele said that they had received 41 applications for the job.
“We won’t be making a decision until April 12,” said Scheele. “That will give us time to narrow the field and then do some interviewing.”
Scheele said that he wasn’t sure where the people who signed the letter got their information. He said they didn’t contact anyone at the Town. Scheele said that the town could not rely on other departments like the Sheriff’s Office and the Highway Patrol for back up.
“The Town Marshal needs a back up and we just can’t rely on other departments to always do that for us,” he said.
Jim Corbett, who collected signatures for the letter, said that he gathered 155 to 160 signatures in less than 24 hours.
“That’s a strong statement,” he said.
Corbett said that a lot of things get done in Darby without citizens being aware and he felt they should be made aware and get a chance to make their opinion known to the town
“We don’t need a Deputy Marshal,” said Corbett. He said the money could be better spent elsewhere. He said the population was declining and so was enrollment in the school. He said that there was plenty of support from the county and the Highway Patrol.
“I just want public input on this issue,” said Corbett.
Mayor Scheele said that the matter was not on the agenda for their Tuesday, March 22 meeting because no one requested it. But the letter could be brought up as part of the public comment. He said he moved the public comment portion up to the front of the agenda so people won’t have to wait to address the issue if they want.
“It will give us an opportunity to explain what we are doing, why we are hiring an officer,” said Scheele, “and we can answer anybody’s questions at that time.”
“I would rather err on the side of safety,” said Scheele. “I don’t believe it is an error, though. I believe it is the right decision to keep two officers.”
Town Marshal Larry Rose said that he had talked to several people that had signed the letter that were confused about what it meant. He said he knew two that were trying to get their name off the list.
“Quite a few don’t live in the city limits,” said Rose.
Rose said that the Darby Marshal’s office was busier than any other town in the county. He said they serve more people per officer than the city of Hamilton. He said that some people are misinformed about the money. He said his office brings in revenue to the Town through fingerprinting and fines.
“You can’t just take the police budget and put it into water or streets,” he said. He said that working with other agencies works both ways and he is sometimes called to help other agencies on serious cases that are outside the city limits but he is the closest responding officer. Without backup the town would be without an officer. Rose said that in his 27 years as Darby Marshal the Town has always had two officers and he has always had backup.
Leave a comment on our blog Back to top
|
|
