Bison – Page 2 – United Property Owners of Montana

In defense of William Perry Pendley

Written by upom-admin on August 29, 2019. Posted in APR, Bison, Blog.

The hysterical reaction by the left to the appointment of William Perry Pendley to serve as director of the BLM deserves a response.

The chief accusation against Pendley is that he will sell federal public land to “special interest allies.” He can’t. The director of BLM has absolutely no authority to unilaterally sell the land under his jurisdiction. The Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 specifically prohibits the BLM from selling land, with very narrow exceptions.

If William Perry Pendley wanted to sell BLM lands, it would literally take an act of Congress to allow him to do so. The Pendley detractors saying our public lands are in jeopardy are either woefully misinformed or outright liars.

Pendley is also being criticized for holding the apparently-controversial notion that state-based regulators are better suited to manage federal public lands than regulators based in Washington, DC. I think that most Montanans would agree with that position. Montanans absolutely should have a greater say in what happens on the federal land in our state rather than having everything dictated from DC.

Perhaps the most over-the-top attack against Pendley has come from the Montana Conservation Voters’ Whitney Tawney who said, “(Pendley) poses a grave threat to Montana’s economy.” Really? Because he’s friendly to agriculture and the energy industry—two of the biggest sectors of Montana’s economy? The irony, of course, is that Tawney’s group has dedicated itself to killing jobs and undermining Montana’s economy. Pot, meet kettle.

As for grave threats to Montana’s economy, there’s a big one looming that the BLM has a direct role in preventing. The American Prairie Reserve has petitioned for changes in BLM grazing allotments as a first step in their objective of establishing an enormous free-roaming bison herd in Central Montana.

If granted, the APR’s livestock change in use application to BLM would be a radical departure from BLM grazing practices over the last 85 years. The Taylor Grazing Act established grazing allotments throughout the West for the purpose of conserving public resources and reserving them for agricultural production.

The APR wants to effectively eliminate scientifically-backed grazing practices, which would put the health of the range in jeopardy and decimate several local economies. It would also set a precedent that we would surely see replicated in other areas of the West.

This year the Montana legislature came out strongly against the APR’s requested changes to their BLM allotments. We’re now fortunate to have a person like Pendley running BLM who understands the value of these public lands and the importance of agriculture to the economy of Montana.

The truth is that Pendley brings a wealth of expertise on federal land management, and all indications are he will be great benefit to Western states. So when you see wild claims from his detractors—like that he’s going to sell off federal lands—question who those critics truly represent, because odds are they’re drawing a paycheck from an out-of-state environmental group.

Lieutenant Governor candidate Lesley Robinson an advocate for property rights

Written by upom-admin on March 8, 2016. Posted in Bison, Blog.

The addition of Phillips County Commissioner Lesley Robinson to Greg Gianforte’s ticket for governor is a welcome one for Montana ranchers. Robinson has been a lead advocate for property rights and local control in Northeastern Montana where several NGOs have been collaborating with Montana FWP to establish a free-roaming bison herd. Gianforte’s pick could bring more attention to the issue, which would be welcome as the vast majority of Montanans oppose establishing free-roaming bison herds when they learn that private landowners would be forced to host the animals on their property and absorb the cost of any damage they cause.

We want to extend a big Thank You to Greg Gianforte for showing genuine concern for agriculture and property rights. And good luck in the race Lesley.

A heartfelt thank you from one of our members

Written by upom-admin on February 25, 2016. Posted in Bison, Blog.

We received the following thank you note in response to Mark Robbins’ recent opinion piece in the Billings Gazette, shared in its entirety below:

Dear Mark:

I want to offer a big, heart-felt thank you for your well-written article in the Billings Gazette re: “Don’t transport bison out of Yellowstone Park”, Feb. 18, 2016. And of course, in true Billings Gazette/’Pravda’ fashion, it was followed by a Gazette opinion on Feb. 20th, ‘Fort Peck ready to quarantine Yellowstone bison’. Yes, sometimes it seems it never will end, but anyone who can THINK, sees the truth in what you say, and the utter fallacies proposed by the Gazette.

As landowners/farmers in that area of Fort Peck, the bison issue has been a constant presence for more years than I can count. My mother’s homestead sits directly between the two bison herds on the reservation. And yes, there are ranchers beside them also.

Thanks so much to you and your organization Mark. We are proud to be members of UPOM.

Linda Prescott
Billings, MT (and Poplar)

UPOM Oped: Don’t transport bison out of Yellowstone Park

Written by upom-admin on February 19, 2016. Posted in Bison, Blog.

UPOM’s Mark Robbins responds to the Billings Gazette’s call for transferring YNP bison to Eastern Montana. Here’s an excerpt:

The Billings Gazette editorialized in support of creating a brucellosis testing facility on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation. (“An Alternative to Yellowstone Bison slaughter” Feb. 14). Rather than addressing the root problem —poor federal management practices that has led to a severe overpopulation of bison in the park — the Gazette advocates simply moving the problem somewhere else.

It’s a ludicrous proposition. It won’t fix what’s wrong at Yellowstone National Park. And worse, it will create the exact same problem in northeastern Montana.

And let’s correct one big point the Gazette got wrong. These are not animals that have been proven brucellosis free. That’s the whole point of a “quarantine facility;” it’s a place where they’ll be tested to see if they have the disease.

It’s like saying I’m going to take care of my leafy spurge infestation by transferring a few hundred plants over to my neighbor’s pasture. Rule one in preventing disease transfer is to isolate the disease.

…

This proposed transfer is doubly problematic because the bison in question would be classified as wild free-roaming bison, not livestock. That distinction makes all the difference in the world.

A livestock classification means that some entity is responsible for the animals. If they get out onto neighbor’s property then there’s someone to call to come and get them. And moreover, there’s someone liable to pay for any damage they cause.

It’s the opposite for wild bison. If they roam onto your property, then you eat the cost of any damage they cause, which can be substantial. As wildlife, there’s no one to call to come get them. Like any other wildlife, as a landowner you’re expected to tolerate them—but of course, bison are not like other wildlife.

UPOM files protest with BLM over APR grazing permit

Written by upom-admin on February 12, 2016. Posted in Bison, Blog.

UPOM has filed a protest against the BLM’s proposal to adopt an application by the American Prairie Reserve to remove interior fencing and allow year-round grazing on certain allotments. APR’s application also indicates their desire to switch the classification of the bison they own from livestock to wild, free-roaming bison.

UPOM’s protest is the first step in stopping the APR’s grazing permit change. It establishes standing for us in the event BLM goes forward with adopting the proposal even with the strong protest against it. You can download UPOM’s official protest letter by clicking here.

MOU Between FWP and Turner Enterprises, Inc.

Written by upom-admin on April 9, 2014. Posted in Bison, Blog.

Over the past several weeks we have had several members inquire as to the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding between Turner Enterprises, Inc., Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, and the Montana Department of Livestock regarding the quarantine and relocation of Yellowstone National Park Bison. Click here to view the MOU.

Oped: FWP should stop free-roaming bison plan

Written by upom-admin on October 25, 2013. Posted in Bison, Blog.

The Montana Department Fish, Wildlife, and Parks is on a strange mission to impose a free-roaming bison herd in Eastern Montana. It’s puzzling because it’s a plan that few Montanans want, and a large, diverse majority oppose. Yet, inexplicably, Governor Bullocks’ administration and FWP Director Jeff Hagener seem determined to give us a dose of a bitter medicine we don’t want or need.

The opposition to free-roaming couldn’t have been more evident at a recent FWP meeting on the issue in Lewistown. One after another, ranchers, sportsmen, farmers, local business owners, and others voiced their objections to FWP’s proposal to move bison from Yellowstone National Park to an undisclosed location in Eastern Montana.

They spoke loud and clear that free roaming bison would be an economic hardship; lead to the destruction of property, forage, and crops; and put pressure on other native species.

Supreme Court’s bison transfer decision a big win for landowners

Written by upom-admin on June 25, 2013. Posted in Bison, Blog.

The Montana Supreme Court recently decided a lawsuit brought by landowner and multiple-use groups, including UPOM, against FWP for their transfer of Yellowstone Park bison to the Fort Peck Indian Tribe. Our objection wasn’t that the bison were transferred, per se, but that FWP did not follow the law requiring landowner notification and collaborative planning before bison could be transferred. We ultimately lost the case on the grounds that the legislature did not specify that that law applied to transfers to tribal property, in addition to public and private property.

However, we won on a much bigger issue. In the decision, the Court pointed out that the bison in question were placed in captivity, and therefore no longer fit the definition of “wild bison.” Environmental groups have been proposing for years that Yellowstone Park bison that had been quarantined and proven brucellosis free could be used to establish a wild bison herd on public land in Eastern Montana. But now that it is clear that quarantined bison cannot be called wild, then there are no bison available to establish a wild herd outside the Park. We couldn’t have hoped for a better outcome in this case.

Oped: Property rights trump ‘public trust doctrine’ in Turner bison dispute

Written by upom-admin on June 4, 2013. Posted in Bison, Blog.

By Professor James L. Huffman

In her report on Judge Holly Brown’s dismissal of a challenge to the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks agreement with Ted Turner on the management of Yellowstone Park bison (Bozeman Chronicle, May 12, 2013), the Chronicle article states the following: “Under the public trust doctrine, which applies nationwide, the state has the responsibility to manage and maintain resources like water and land for public use and future generations.”

Only in the dreams of the petitioners does that summary of the public trust doctrine have any relation to the law. Even in Montana, where the public trust doctrine was dramatically revised 30 years ago in two Montana Supreme Court cases, the doctrine has never been found to apply to wildlife or beyond the waters of the state.

The public trust doctrine originated in the English common law as a guarantee of the public right to fish and travel for commercial purposes on navigable waters. In England, navigable waters were limited to those affected by the tides. In the United States, in recognition of the extensive network of navigable inland waterways, the public trust doctrine was generally held to include all waters “navigable in fact.”

Glasgow Courier: County Joins Bison Lawsuit

Written by upom-admin on February 1, 2013. Posted in Bison, Blog, UPOM in the news.

The Valley County commissioners voted 2-1 Tuesday to join other plaintiffs in a lawsuit aimed at halting Fish, Wildlife & Parks’ transfer of quarantined Yellowstone Park bison to the Fort Peck and Fort Belknap reservations.

The lawsuit alleges that FWP violated Montana law by enacting a bison translocation plan without a having a management plan and without adequate analysis of the impacts upon the human environment. SB 212, passed by the legislature in 2011, establishes multiple requirements for FWP in the management of bison that the lawsuit alleges are not being observed.

There are 15 plaintiffs, including Jason and Sierra Stoneberg Holt and Rose Stoneberg, who ranch on Timber Creek south of Hinsdale. Also listed are people representing Citizens for Balanced Use, United Property Owners of Montana and Missouri River Stewards, plus some ranchers in Blaine County. The defendants are FWP director Joseph Maurier, Montana FWP and the FWP Commission.