FISH AGAIN

RESTRICTIONS LIFTED

Madison River Drainage Open

fish there if you must

WITHOUT WADERS FOR NOW - JUMP IN ?

-------

.. The National Park Service has removed the closures on the Madison River, Firehole River and Gibbon River.

READ IT HERE.

-------

A Touch Of Spring

BEARS WAKING UP

Bicycles On Roads

angling fees raised

-------

.. The Public Affairs Office at Yellowstone National Park has been more active, lately, than usual. That's a sure sign that they're waking up along with the bears.
.. The following news releases and information sources may be germane to your early Spring visitation.

1] Bears are awake, hungry, and dangerous, LINK,
2] Seasonal bear closures, LINK,
3] Bicycle travel prior to motorized travel, LINK,
4] Angling fees raised, LINK,
5] General Information page, LINK,
6] Child porn case prosecuted, LINK,
7] Yellowstone tweets, LINK,
8]  News releases, LINK,
9] Current road conditions, LINK.

-----

..  Since the instigation of a fee structure for fishing in 1993, charges for fishing in Yellowstone National Park have continually escalated to keep pace with inflation and caprice as time has passed.
.. The current $5.00 increase is justified as a way to raise additional funds to ". . . help enhance the park's fisheries management program and to begin implementing conservation actions that were outlined in the 2011 Native Fish Conservation Plan."
.. We support the Native Fish Conservation Plan; but, taxing only fisher folk is a terribly inefficient way to raise a bit of cash. How much money will be raised by the $5.00 increase, ($200,000/year?)
.. If the thrust of the plan is ". . . primarily focused on the recovery of the Yellowstone Lake Ecosystem through the restoration of the native Yellowstone cutthroat trout."  then, the burden of ecosystem management should be shared by all visitors.
.. A simple $1.00 tax, (call it surcharge if you like,) on entrance fees, for the duration of the project, would raise a lot more cash and spread the burden to all visitors who enjoy the Yellowstone Lake Ecosystem. How much money would be raised by this method of taxation, ($1,000,000/year - $2,000,000/year?)
.. How about a boating tax? Back country tax? Sales tax increase for the duration of the project? Concessionaire levy? Donation boxes? Just who does benefit from the Yellowstone Lake Ecosystem?
.. We doubt that fishing permit fees will be reduced when the project is completed: what a silly thought! Such duplicity is a standard bit of linguistic legerdemain that is used when justifying  actions detrimental to one group and to the advantage of another group. Such is life!

-------

Scoped Out

STANDING ROOM ONLY

Plethora Of Staff

dyspepsia, eructation, egression.

-------

.. Of the nearly 100 people, (86, by count) in attendance at the Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks scoping meeting last night, we counted 19 staff members from various agencies in attendance.
.. From uniformed and non-uniformed law enforcement personnel to uniformed and non-uniformed researchers, administrators, and employees, it was an overwhelming show of force.
.. The meeting generally followed the form of such events: Introductions, Presentations, Interruptions, Questions, Chaotic Mumblings, Discourteous Inattention, etc. There were a few interesting disjunctions in the verbal brickbats that stood out:

1] "This process started about 1999 when a group of concerned citizens approached the DFWP with their concerns about recreational usage of the Madison River."

vs

   "We are very early in this process. This is the beginning of this action. We want your input"

2] "We have been thinking about this problem for nearly ten years now.

vs

"We have no preconceived ideas how to address this problem and we're going to address the larger picture of the whole river."

3] "We are lucky that we are ahead of the curve in this action and can address problems and areas of conflict before they happen."

vs

" The conflicts between user groups and the conflicts with land owners have brought about this action."

4] "We are just trying to understand what you are saying. You seem to be talking about things that we just don't understand."

vs

"The science is the same and it should be easy to understand."

.. We can only observe that it's interesting that after 10 years of surveys, research, and cogitation that;  "the beginning of the process starts now."
.. It's also enlightening to find out that no ideas were generated by MFWP staff about how to address the perceived problems during that ten years.
.. My, my, how sweet it is that we are ahead of the curve and that the conflicts that originated this process are not really conflicts.
.. It seems that this whole exercise is designed to implement regulations about manners and morals. "Social Fishing Regulations" is an interesting bit of terminology that reflects the concerns of some nebulous group of insiders.
.. For instance, it's acknowledged that, save for the Whitefish population, the other fish populations are not being affected by the kinds of actions of user groups being addressed. Even the Whitefish population concerns, cannot be linked to the social behavior of river users.
.. Please note that the MFWP has a mission that seems to guarantee all of us the perfect recreational experience - or so it would seem - LINK.

.. We are naive in these matters, and certainly need to become better informed, but for now we can't see how regulation of river use can reduce littering - unless there is a removal of all river users - seems to be a public education and law enforcement issue.
.. We applaud the mentality that believes regulation of numbers and types of users will remove the idiot tubers, boaters, and fishing guides that run over your fishing line in a gentle shore-side pool - we just don't believe that it will work.
.. We have a hard time believing that any newly promulgated regulations will enhance the recreational experience of vastly  different individual users - unless it favors some users to the detriments of others.
.. We're going to watch this groundbreaking effort in social engineering through fishing regulations. Of course the anthropologists, sociologists, psychologists, and recreational specialists of this world are also waiting for this breakthrough regulatory plan.
.. Sadly, we had an attack of dyspepsia well into the meeting. Nausea accompanied our belching and farting and we had to leave just as the entertainment was reaching a crescendo. You'll have to read about the results of the meeting in the newspapers, or observations by bloggers who understand this stuff more than we do.
.. Here's the link to the MFWP page: LINK.

-------

D Minus One

WHAT'S THE FUSS ABOUT ?

As If You Don't Know

-------

.. Here are the "official" maps of the Madison River that will be discussed tomorrow evening at 6:00 PM in a plush conference room just 200' from our front door. We'll let you know if anything new crops up.

Speed Bump

RAMIFICATIONS TO FOLLOW

Champagne Flowing In Billings

fast & loose lost

-------

.. Yesterday the Supreme Court of the United states handed down a decision in the case of PPL Montana vs. State of Montana.
.. As of this moment Montana probably owns less river bottom than it thought. As of this moment there is great celebration in the PPL offices in Billings, Montana. As of this moment fly fishers and other recreational users of Montana's waters have some worries. As of this moment the courts in Montana have the herculean task of trying to be a bit more considered in their application of laws and precedents. As of this moment it seems that the law of the land has been changed regarding the definition of navigability. As of this moment there may be fewer rivers where access is legal because of the navigability precedent.
.. You can read all about the concerns:
-- MidCurrent - HERE,
-- Moldy Chum - HERE,
-- Chi Wulff - HERE,
-- FOAM - HERE,
-- LOGARCHISM -  HERE,
-- GOOGLE SEARCH -  HERE.
.. The legal stuff is also available:
-- Legal Planet - HERE,
-- Environmental Law Prof Blog - HERE,
-- Thomas Merrill - HERE,
-- Decision (PDF) - HERE.

.. So, Batman, what's it all mean? Well, as in many Supreme Court cases, the high court has criticized the lower courts for playing fast and loose with the law and remanded the case for correction.
.. Interestingly the test of ownership by navigability seems to have been glossed over by much of the post decision analysis. The test of navigability at the time of statehood could be a genuine ball buster if title and ownership questions arise about current water that was not in existence then. At present there is not a set precedent - YET.
.. Finally it also means that fly fishers have just one more thing to worry about on the river and stream access front. Consensus seems to be that the Montana stream access law is not in immanent danger - we'll see: especially if the state does not have title to currently navigable waters that did not exist at time of statehood, (think Mitchell Slough, think the re-arranged Ruby River, etc.)
.. We believe that the real import of this case will be felt for a long time. It takes no real genius to understand that "navigability," will be a concern in legal cases for several more decades and may really mean: PORTAGE THEN - PORTAGE NOW.  Now there's a can of wigglers for ya!

-------

Two Down

TWO TO GO

The Charade Begins

join in if you choose

Courtesy Photo: THE MOOSE - 96

-------

.. It's apparent that quite a few folks are interested in the possible proposed actions for regulating recreation on the Madison River.
.. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks has already determined that:

"The popularity of the Madison River has affected the quality of the recreation experience for some people. Their concerns include congestion on the river and at access sites, conflicts between user groups, trespass on private property, and littering."

.. Two public meetings have been held, (Ennis & Bozeman.). Two more are scheduled, (February 28, 2012 at 6:00 PM in West Yellowstone, MT at the Holiday Inn ==> 315 Yellowstone Avenue,  AND  March 1, 2012 at 6:00 PM in Whitehall, MT at the Whitehall High School ==> 1 Yellowstone Trail.)
..This is not a surprise move. This has been in the works for at least five years. The action has come to this point after careful preparation and savvy maneuvering by a few influential citizens and the staff of MFWP. You can read the first shots fired across the river:
1.) 2008 Madison River Resident Angler Survey, (PDF.)
2.) 2008 Madison River Landowner Survey, (PDF.)
3.) 2009 Madison River Onsite Survey, (PDF.)
4.) 2010 Madison River Angling Pressure Estimates, (PDF.)
.. While apparently laudable in it's conception and execution to date, one dares not ask about the impetus for the current action.
.. We make the following observations, & bring some questions to the fore:
A,] We are well along in the regulatory decision process. This is near the end not the beginning,
B,] Regulatory agencies stay in business by making and enforcing regulations,
C,] Verbal input at public meetings is interesting and entertaining: if you are serious about having your concerns addressed write them down and give them to the public employees running the meeting. Get their names and contact information. Keep in contact with them about your concerns being included for consideration.
D,] Just what is the meaning of: ". . . affected the quality of recreational experience . . ."? Is this a scientific investigation? Is this a resource impact issue? Are regulations aimed at protecting a resource that is within the province of the MFWP? Is individual recreation a Montana resource?
E,] Informal meetings, closed-door meetings, personal and group lobbying, and continued contact with public employees, (including elected officials,) have always been more effective than the "show-and-tell" gatherings around the region.
E,] Circumvention of regulations and regulatory processes is an American pastime. Folks and groups with the money, time and inclination are far more successful at this than folks without money, or time, or involved commitment.
F,] Regulatory agencies and their regulators have a mind set that leans towards restriction rather than enablement. ((For instance: restricting usage of a boat ramp rather than expanding the facility to satisfy demand.))
G.] Although apparently transparent the decision-making process is a slippery and secretive endeavor. It takes place in the minds of humans - 'nuff said !!
H.] It's well worth reading the MFWP "Administrative Rules for River Recreation Management" (PDF.) It is also well worth your time, (if you choose to participate in any meaningful way in the decision-making process,) to make your concerns address this document. Your case will be far stronger and decisions that are exceptions to these rules will need to be very well justified.
I,] Please be assured that new regulations will be promulgated. Know that the instigators of this action have been working for half a decade on getting their concerns addressed.
J,] If you desire participation in this arena remember that you are playing catch up, and you are out-gunned by money, influence, and connections. You can have your say - - it's just very tough !
K.] If you can't attend a meeting, (more importantly even if you do,) fill out the online questionnaire. Find it HERE.  Everyone interested should fill out the questionnaire. It's not good enough for your fishing buddy to voice both his and your concerns. It's not good enough to attend a meeting and not fill out the questionnaire.
.. The showcase element of this decision-making process is the "MADISON RIVER CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, (MCAC.)" This is an interesting bit of window dressing and as noted by the MFWP:

The MCAC serves in an advisory capacity. While the role of the committee is critically important, there is no guarantee that the Final Plan will follow the committee’s recommendations. The FWP Commission is the final decision-maker and shall consider the recommendations of the MCAC, the best available information, the environmental analysis, and input from the public and staff.

.. Should we add influential and monied interests as well? Do you know who is on the FWP Commission? When was the last time you spoke with them and voiced a concern about the Madison River?
.. Should you be intrigued with the workings of this current process you can apply to be on the MCAC. (Application HERE.) Then, again, how much time are you willing to spend to have your recommendations considered and not followed?

P.S. Don't tell anyone about this post

-------

.

Lighting The Fires

LETTERS AND COMMENTS

Read 'Em & Smile

the statehouse is crackling
*************
RALLY IN HELENA TODAY: 2 PM

-------

.. It's not a firestorm yet but Montanans are coming alive in newspapers and in person.
.. Today is the Montana Senate hearing on HB 309. Shortly news of the results will be in the papers and on the Web. Audio and video will be available by tomorrow or the next day. T.V. will be the first to report it.
.. Live streaming video may be available. Click THIS PAGE now. We'll keep you informed. In the meantime check the following:

*******

===> Flathead Area Representatives for HB 309, read the comments in the FLATHEAD BEACON,
===> LaVerne Sultz Response, FLATHEAD BEACON,
===> T.U. Letter in BOZEMAN CHRONICLE,
===> The Lorax speaks:
..... Chi Wulff,
..... Missoulian, (Senator Barrett - Dillon,)
..... Montana Standard, (Senator Barrett - Dillon,)
===> NBC Montana, (poor summary,)
===> Trout Underground, (good reporting,)
===> Summary & call to arms; Will Fish For Work.
===> Call in the Cavalry !!! at Chi Wulff.

-------

.