..

Appendix A for Scoping Comments by NEC/A WR for the Smith-Shields Forest Health Project on the Yellowstone Ranger District of the Custer­Gallatin National Forest.

Appendix C contains copies of a Montana Outdoors article dated November­December, 2015, as well as news articles on the economics of elk hunting in areas of Montana published on 9/22/16. It also contains a news article on a legal decision requiring a new analysis regarding the designation of lynx critical habitat. It contains a 7 /15/16 news article that the timber industry provides 7000 jobs in Montana. It then contains 7 news articles )published 8/27116, 8/30/16, 9/10/16, 9/13/16, 9/16/16, and 9/23116) about the closure of the Yellowstone River to recreation use in late 'summer of 2016 due to degraded river conditions for fish. They also discuss the economic costs to the local community and trends due to climate change.

l

i. f

i. I '

I I 1.

r

~ ..

k~'\;_, ,~ase-Hib~ard.is ne~ing the end of hi~' rope. r~ ... 1 - We don t nnnd being hosts to elk, says ~ .• rm.1 '':-·'#- J!7! ,, Hibbard, whose family owns a large ranch in

·:VJ Cascade County. "But we now have a herd of 300 to ~00 coming down in late summer feeding on our irrigated alfalfa fields. We've run out of control options, and it's come to a point where elk are taking money ci~t ~four pocket." The Hibbards aren't the only landowners frustrated by fast-growing elk herds. In areas acr-0ss Montana, the over­abundant .ungulates are knocking down fences and consuming haystacks and pasture

· ·meant for livestock. Elk populations have grown too high in 80 of Montana's 138 elk management areas that have population ob­jectives, say state wildlife officials. In some areas, elk numbers are now five to even ten times greater than what the land can support and landowners will tolerate.

Feeling pressure from landowners and la~akers to increase elk harvest in some hunting districts, FWP has proposed a new option that adds additional seasons to Mon­tana's regular firearms elk season. The de­partment would use these "shoulder seasons" to pare down overabundant elk herds by giv­ing hunters additional days afield. "We heard loud and dear from the legislature that get­ting these populations down to objectives is a top priority, and this proposal is meant to do that," says McDonald. Concentrated elk also increase the risk of

brucellosis spreading to c::ittle in areas where the disease is present, like the Paradise Val- NOT WORKING

ley. More than half the elk in a portion of the For years Montana has struggled to lower valley last year tested positive for exposure to elk numbers in many areas to reach popula­the disease. "It's a huge concern in these areas whenever elk come into contact with cattle,'' says Quentin Kujala, a senior wildlife _official with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks.

tion "objectives," levels determined through a public process and based on the biological carrying capacity of the land, landowner tolerance, and hunter interests. During the 1990s and 2000s, Montana held a five-week regular firearms elk season plus, in areas where that wasn't sufficient to reduce elk numbers, "late-season" cow elk hunts in December or January. FWP also offered special "game damage" hunts to disperse herds on individual properties that allowed general season public hunting but were still having severe depredation problems.

Unfortunately, those management tools didn't always control populations, and elk numbers kept climbing. What's more, some public hunters complained that landowners who leased their property for paid bull elk hunts were profiting from the public's trophy elk during the regular season, then using nonpaying hunters for population "clean­up" during the late-season cow, or antler­less, hunts. (Harvesting female elk is a more effective way to lower populations because they produce new calves each year.)

In 2006, hoping to encourage more landowners to allow public hunting, FWP went to a five-week-only season statewide and ended late-season hunts (while main­tainjng game damage hunts and "manage-

Why don't landowners with elk problems simply allow more public hunting? Many, like the Hibbards, do. But sometimes relatively few elk stay on ranches open to hunting dur­ing the genera.I five-week firearms season. The mobile animals find refuge on nearby properties with little or no public hunting to disturb them. Then, come December, they move elsewher~ and compete with livestock for food. "Successful elk management re­quires neighbors working with neighbors to ensure numbers can be managed, versus elk finding refuge during the hunting season, then spreading out afterwards and growing in number," says Ken McDonald, head of the FWP Wildlife Division.

Tom Dickson is editor ofMontana Outdoors.

FROM ONE RANCH TO ANOTHER Elk are smart. During the regular five-week firearms season they

often congregate on land with no public hunting access. Once the season ends, they head next door lo feed on haystacks and pasture. FWP's new shoulder seasons proposal aims to move elk around more during the regular season and increase hunting pressure before and afterward.

MONTANAOUTDOORS i 27

ment seasons"-similar to game damage hunts but larger in scale). If the late-season option no longer existed, went the reasoning, landowners would be more likely to let public hunters on their land during the regular five­week season to reduce herd size.

That didn't work either. Landowners bris­tled at what they considered an attempt to strong-arm theni into offering more hunting access. Some who had allowed public hunt­ing during late seasons closed their gates in protest. And elk populations in many hunting districts continued to increase as hunters who had been happy to shoot a cow elk lost addi­tional late-season hunting opportunities.

With landowner dissatisfaction and leg­islative pressure growing, FWP wildlife managers needed to find a better way to connect elk hunters with the state's grow­ing number of elk.

A NEW. PROPOSAL One way to boost elk harvest would be for more landowners to open their property to pubiiC hunting. That continues to be a major challenge. "We respect the absolute rights of landowners to say who does or doesn't hunt on their land," says Kujala. "At the same time, Montana has consis­tently resisted giving landowners elk per­mits they can then give or sell to others, as some other Western states have done."

Another way to harvest more elk is to increase hunter success. That's what FWP believes could happen with it~ new proposed shoulder seasons. In certain hunting dis­tricts, the additional seasons of a few days to a few months would take place before or after the existing five-week firearms elk sea­son. "By using more of the calendar, shoul­der seasons would create more time for harvest to happen, basically giving hunte;-s more times at bat," Kujala says.

McDonald says that this past summer FWP biologists studied a range of options to reduce elk numbers and make harvest as fair

More elk opportunities Under FWP's new proposal, firearms elk hunting in some hunting districts could begin as early as mid-August and run as late as mid-February.

and equitable as possible. The shoulder seasons proposal came out on top. The sea­sons would also help the agency comply with state statutes requiring it to manage elk pop­ulations to objective, as well as meet a man­date by Governor Steve Bullock for FWP to improve relationships among the depart­ment, landowners, and hunters.

Even with shoulder seasons, hunting dis~ tricts would also need to increase elk harvc,st during the regular firearms seasons. "We can't rely solely on the shoulder seasons to reduce elk populations to objective," says McDonald. "We have to see more harv!'!st during the five-week season, too."

To nudge that outcome, FWP has made the shoulder seasons "performance based."

By using more of the calendar, shoulder seasons would basically give hunters more times at bat."

The department will require that a certain .number of cow and bull eik are harvest~d during the regular archery and firearms sea­sons over a period of three years before agreeing to continue shoulder seasons. "Landowners who restrict access during the general season and want to use the shoulder sea~ons to reduce elk numbers may need to allow rifore public access during the general season," says McDonald.

Unlike game damage hunts and manage­ment seasons, for which hunters on rosters are notified when they can hunt, shoulder

Range for early firearms shoulder seasons* (private land only)

Montana's curre~f elk archery si

SEPTEMBER ,~EJ'icMBER '~.EPTEMBm

DlllililBIBllDBiill!DDllBI.

seasons would be listed in the printed.hunt- elk nwnbers. Ifwe could have more firearms ing regulations, allowing hunters to plan their hunters on our land before and after the gen­outings far in advance. The seasons could be eral season, like in September, when COW elk offered from mid-August to mid-February. are bunched up on our irrigated meadows,

FWP would still have the option of con- that would do a lot." tinuing game damage and management The shoulder seasons might even result in seasons to allevialc severe elk problems on more pwblic hunters getting a shot at bull elk individual properties, McDonald says. "But on currently closed properties. A landowner in theory we wouldn't need those as often currently unwilling to allow public hunting because the shoulder seasons and increased for bulls during the regular season might feel general season harvest would bring elk added pressure from neighbors concerned numbers down to objective." Shoulder sea- · about brucellosis and game damage. "It's no sons would not affect early backcountry guarantee, but we hope the structure of the hunts or primitive weapon hunts. shoulder seasons results in more

NOT EVERYWHERE ·-· Shoulder seasons would not be applied in all or even most hunting districts, says Kujala, but only those 15 to 20 areas with signifi­cantly overabundant elk numbers. "As the most liberal tool we'd have for population management, they would be used only when other tools-like allowing more B licenses or cow elk harvest during the regular five-week season-haven't worked to lower overabun­dant populations," he says.

In addition to giving hunters more days to find and harvest elk, the shoulder seasons could move elk herds around the landscape, making them more vulnerable to hunters. "For various reasons, some ranches that allow public hunting don't see many elk dur­ing November, but then in December and January the elk move in,'' says Kujala. "Or elk are there in September but not during the regular season. Now those elk would be more available to firearms hunters."

That's what Hibbard is counting on. "We're 31readyat capacity with public hunters during the five-week season, and we also allow archery hunting and hold a late-season game damage hunt," says the rancher, a member with other local landowners of the long-standing Devil's Kitchen elk manage­ment work group, "We're using all the tools available to us but still can't g~t a handle on

cooperation among landowners," says.McDonald. "The landowner community has told us they want elk objectives to be met, so this is also an experiment to see how committed they are to helping make that happen."

PUBLIC WEIGHS IN

As this issue of Montana Out­doors went to press, public opin­ion was split on the shoulder seasons proposal. "l think the shoulder seasons are a positive step in helping manage elk herds," wrote one Montanan to FWP's public comment web­site page. Commented another: "More needs to be done for those [of us] who rely solely on big game meat for our family."

But many hunters are still unsure FWP's proposal would work. In a letter published in the Billings Gazette, Joe Perry of the Montana Sportsmen's Alliance and J.W. Westman of the Laurel Rod and Gun Club argued.that elk overabundance is caused by landowners who harbor elk. The shoulder seasons won't change that, they wrote; and thus will "further erode the public ownership of public wildlife and significantly increase commer­cialization and privatization of public trust

resources." Their solution? Impose cow­only elk seasons on hunting districts where populations greatly exceed objectives.

McDonald says that because FWP manages wildlife in entire hunting districts and not on individual properties, imposing cow-only seasons "would, by not allowing bull elk hunting, end up punishing landown­ers in those districts who are providing access-not to mention the hunters who hunt on their property and on public land." McDonald won't rule out future antlerless­only seasons in some areas. "But right now,"

·-

he says, "we believe that the shoulder sea­sons option we're proposing is the best effort to get those elk numbers down, which is our main objective, while also giving more hunters a chance to shoot a cow elk." "A

On November 12, the Fish and Wildlife Com­mission will decide whether to test shoulder seasons in a few hunting districts this winter. Details would be announced in the neivs media and on the FWPwebsite.

Montana's current 5-week elk firearms season

Range for late firearms shoulder seasons*

(public and private land)

*Both early and late shoulder seasons could be anywhere from a few days to a few months added before or alter the regular firearms season. In no cases would the combined shoulder and regular seasons in a hunting district last an entire six months.

I

I I --

MONTANA OUTDOORS i 29

1 Report: Elk hunting boosts CeIJ.}fal Montana economy FOR THE MONTANA STANDARD tions of Fergus and Petro- the s,tate.

BILLINGS ~ Elk hunt- leum counties. The plan will In 20 o 6 Montana Fish, ing generates a large chunk guide how the BLM manages Wildlife and Parks esti­of revenue for a couple of more than 650,000 acres in mated that elk hunters Central Montana counties, the region for the next 20 to "spent $98.5 million on

!. according to a recently re- 30 years. The agency plans transportation, lodging,

leased report. to have the document final- food t guide fees and other Last y~ar nearly $4 mil- izedbyJanuary2017. purchases, excluding li­

lion in eco.n~Q!!c eX!£!. ~mJi- , : It'slong been .lµJ..qwn. thjit ~ep~e f~E}s." . r ·~ .tr .. ~;. ,; . wJ., .. 1<. t~e_wa~generatedqyp~t-· r:cr~a~on i~ a ~iR~ fma_i:i,-. _The .four hunting di~-

1 e~~;ft>i.li'..~W~~f~? ctal. $r.1f~r~fOI' Mo~t~·~ · tncts' mclude the Oha.1?'. disfifdfsiNPet~s. arl'd Pe- s~ey een~ucted by the Buttes, Ho.rse Camp Trail

•.

troleum co\mtle~ 1 accord- Outdoor 1n_dustry Associ- and Dovetail Creek areas, as ing to a reseiµ-ch brief con- ation in 2011 and 2012 said well as Blood Creek, Arrow ducted by Ben Alexander recreation generated $5.8 Creek, and.Carter Coulee. of Headwatet Economics, billion in direct spending "These areas represent a Bozeman-based research and created 64,000 jobs in some of the most prod.uc­group. The majority of the expenditure - an estimated $3.8 million - came just from ell< µunting, ~ccording to the report.

The analysis was released this week bythe Montana Wilderness Association, which is lobbying for gre;iter protection of large blocks of Bureau of Land Manage­ment property in the region.

The BLM is working on a Resoufc~Management Plan for its "'LeWistown Field Of­fice, -which- includes por-

//?OV? ~11Ct- .::SW/f-?cJt?rc/

Cf/~~//(p

tive ungulate habitat any­where in North America, and that's because these areas are largely roadless and undeveloped:' said Bill Berg, a former dep­uty project leader of the Charles M. Russell Na -

tional Wildlife Refuge, in a press release. "lf we want to continue having big game populations that are this healthy, we need intact ecosystems !1

The Heasand Parks re­corded more than 2s,ooo

elk hunter days in 2015 on the four Fergus County bunting districts. Of those days, 7 percent overall were represented by nonresi­dents, but (:lXJ)enditures by out-of-state hunters com­prised about half the total.

r'" • '

/J?o11@'7ec 57!/~6/L/.-· THE MONTANA STANDARD ~/g//~

Lynx decis~on violates law Ruling states U.S. failed to fully analyze potential habitat TOllKUGLIN for The Montana standard

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service violated the Endangered Spe;tjes Ac.t wh~nit failed to tully ana1yze potential habitat for the threatened Canada lynx in Mon­tana, Idaho and Colorado, a fed­eral judge ruled in Missoula on Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Dana Chris- . ASSOCIATED PRESS

ten~en sided with a coalition of FILE-This Feb. 3, 1999·file photo shows a female Canadian lynx heading environmental groups in agreeing for the woods after being released near South Fork, Colo. A federal that in 2014 the agency did not judge says the U.S. government was wrong to exclude portions of five meet its burden under a previous western states when it designated critical habitat for the imperiled court ntlfug to analyze potential Canada lynx. lynx habitat for several Montana and Idaho national forests as well as range in Colorado.

Christensen ruled against the groups' claimthat USFWS erred in excludiqg the Kettle Range of Washington and the state of Or­egon.

Wildlife advocates argued that the Beaverhead...:Deerlodge, B.it­terroot, Nez Perce, Clea.rWater and Idaho Panhandle national forests, as well as portions o.f the Helena and Lolo national forests, were wrongly excluded from agency analysis in its 2014 lynx critical habitat decision. They contend that the 2014 de­cision violated a 2009 court order to consider whether the national forests contamed the physical and biological features for 'inclu -sion as critical habitat.

USFWS identifies criteria im­portant to lynx such as boreal forests with varying tree ages, presence of snowshoe hares, deep

fluffy snow available for extended periods and downed trees and woody debris for denning_habitat.

Christensen ruled that USFWS failed to satisfy the :Z009 ruling except in the Clearwater. The agency relied on occupancy rather than looking at factors such as-for­est and habitat cype, and it must do .the fatter to comply with the ESA, according to the decision.

"In Montana lynx have been declining more than any other state and .it's mainly because of logging:• said Michael Garrity, executive director,of Alliance for the Wild Rockies and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. "It is re­ally important to get this critical habitat designated so that we can start working on recovery.

"They do not have a good track record of following the law. This is the second time the court has ordered them to look at these ar­eas where we know lynx are!'

Garrity pointed to the national forest south of MacDonald ·Pass west of Helena where lynx have been documented but the agency did not include as critical habi -tat. He noted frustration with USFWS and 16 years oflitigation to see lynx listed as threatened, designating critical habitat with

.an eventual goal of developing a lynx recovery plan. He believes the latest court ruling will push the agency to begin recovering the species.

For ColOrado, Christensen ruled USFWS 's conclusion that habitat is marginal and will not support lynx populations over time is undercut by data show­ing the cat naturally reproducing.

While many lynx did die fol­lowing transplants beginning in the late '90s, approximately 100 persist and are reproducing, said Mathew Bishop, attorney for sev­eral of the groups.

~o_~emt111-_ <IJct 1/y {!(,-i t!OIJtltf e_ ?/15//~

~IQ uf · - ~iiE;eiiic;::=::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;::;;;;;:;;::::::=====~"f=:::=~;;;;~~~·l~~e~zllllllliliiiillliiiiii;-~ ~-l~--.. " .. .:.. ''·i:n· .

· · Jnlt:1ll -support of firearms :\-':at ·R~pub.lican convention · ' ·' · A short tim~ ago, several prominen

Republicans took the position that there should be no restriction on firearms in the hall in Cleveland, Ohio, where the national convention is being held.

I think that is a great idea and roundly support it.

Jim Goetz Bozeman

as proclaimed by Gov. Steve :Bullock, Gianforte actually worked to provide the public with better access. .

The recent ad rw1 by the Democrat Governor's Association is really an at­tack on Montana values, disguised as a fishing story. Even though Bullock may have been born in Montana, he's the one out-of-touch with Montana values relating to public .access and private property rights. "!

The record on this issue is clear: Gianforte best reflects Montana values relating to public access and property rights.

raw logs is constrained bylay;from buying National Forest timber for ex:­port or to replace logs sold overseas.

Market forces are the;real reason for the mill closings and ongoing declines in the tinlbet industry. '.Timber prices are low. NAFTA grants Canada ac­cess to American markets and many believe an unfair advantage in tinlber sales. That advantage was reduced by the U.S.-Canada softwood agreement that expired last fall. Subsequently Canadian softwood flooded into U.S. markets concurrent with declines in international demand for logs and lag-

Ads are misrepresenting Gianforte's stance on access

ging domestic home building. _-Hertha Lund Impacts of enyironµi-en~ litigation

Bozeman on timber sales are exaggerated'. The · · Often, the first casualty in politics is current Farm Bill cuts the public out

. . •the truth. Currently, Democrats are us- Market forces the ' r.ea I of tinlber sales and allows the Forest : ing out-of-st~te dark money to bastard- Ca U Se beh .

1 n· d m 'i I I cl.OSU re Service to log unlimited timber sales

· ize the trnth relating to Greg Oianf~he on over 5-million acres of National · and ~tream access ~s~ues. . . : . . Why is Weyerhaeuser closing, two Forest in M?ntana exclude.d fro_m .

~ . I~ ~s c:orreq th::i~ m•2009 µ1anf~rte '. """""' mills in Co~llfllblil Falls that t~wy,. . , " "'·n ri~~ req~1r~~~~!s· B~~?~e ~at ~ill • · ; 1t -t ' · · - . Rnt~D!\~. -~- murchased:1~t.J:ft Ma" from .1?.lwn 1 oassed envir'9rum:~ntal hq~a.tiQn usually ~ . r•'" · · ;1~1 • ·1;~"""" .1. 1m,. T • r ~rlui,,.u :J;{J• " ~~ L!IJI</ d . • JJJ.V,Ali- • .. · 11.,5f i:Jh'V. ,\l llt· !i\1 r . r .. . ,_:. ~-. ._ • , · • ., .· - -.. .. .. r.1.J·":· ·'l!·6l ~.;_, r.uee.K?'Neiili. _ ~fa rte policies!. ".N~~c;>na.L · ~eswre m nuugafing ne_ ga~~f_ fllRacts ;i[l f ·: -~~-~ factual .. . . . tscrepan<i'Y; of . forest iq_an~gei:n~t nor enVJr~~ental to other resource.s an~ only 4 per_cent ' · .- ·. w~e~e th~ public access ~h?tild·_be on. . protections ·caus.ed the dosing~. of all Forest Service timber sales 10

G1a!lfortes p~oper~. This ~s a ~om!U'On . Weyerhaeuser,will inlprov.e.their ( Montana were not logged because ~ , . .. to9l,f.orJai:idow.'n~fS. to .use to allow t;'he bouom µne .'bY ~bedding jobs, ai;id oflitlgation. The timber industry in

. col.iits to sort ou~ these.types of factual consolidating a<lµlinistratiqn ·and mill- Montana suppor\s a~out 7,000 jobs. andlegal issues. Instead of serving the ing in Kalispell Both Plum ¢~eek. and Outdoor recreation in Montana sup-suit, Gianfortes attorney sent letters.and Weyerhaeuser relied on private lands ports over 64,000 jobs, Should we be emails. FWP corrected their mistake, for their timber and neither have bid forcing the Forest Service to increase moved the access point, and worked on timber sales on National Forests in timber production at the expense of with Gianforte to improve public access, Montana since 2007. Weyerhaeuser's other resources? and protect private property rights. "lack of trees" was partly due to unsus-

Instead of being against public ac- ·tainable logging by Plum Creek. Also Nike Stevens cess, as the Democrats are alleging, and Weyerhaeuser as a major ex.porter of Bozeman

bozpff?t?V-0

{_}/; f?JIJ I I_( </7

. -FW~~··reOt>'l~ -­

more sectio·ns . . . . "\

of Velle>w-stone~ i; ~ i '. ~$1Jt'lJl~i(-~. : : . : ...

Bf MICHAELWRIGHT -ChronicleStaffWiiter

. '

State officials will reopen two sec-lfll~-iii·ll· -- . ~,,..:.- -,;..-.·

· · - ' entire· - --· on·" ~

PP.day. though a _sf · cantstrekb in the heart of the Paradise .Vailey will u:~mahi closed

Montana Fish, W:tl~ and~;u-ks announced in a ne~s.ref~e Tbtµ"Sday that it was reoperupg'.the.Yellowstone · River-from Point pf~Cks__fishin_g..-ac-c~ tQ _Emigrantfi~g;-~~ssan.d the sttetcli Irqm~me. Gre¢k -f;ishfug,access .t];Lrough ·LM.ngs!<?.D;io ~'lii_gliway-89 . · . Bridge."Aieas on the-down,s~&_m-and · . upstr~_siqes 9f those sget~:es .were

· · re~peifed:earliet tbis;:pi9ntli:. ,.. . 'fliis. come-& about a:inonth after . .

FWR confumed thelfirst of.thou­.sa:nds-of mountain whitefish tliat died · · . . beCaUse ofa micros<::epic pafasite:that . -can.eause proliferative)qdhey,'tli.sease. . In -res pons~ .. the. ag~cy· c.\o~ed the- · river and:i.ts tributaries-t all.re.ere- ·: - · ationtfiomthe bord:er-~t,>re1Iewstone . · National.PatlC t<ftb~diy;cif:Lamcl.

The. ~ge~cy has been reopel,l.ipg the river sectioµ P.y s~ction as.river t~­peratures, cool and' Sl:jlffet fmdJewer dea:<HiSh. · · _,,

A 17.2-mile.stretchf :fnve1Jr-0m .Emlgoint :to.'.Pme. Cr~1:Will' r~ . closed until furthernoti_ce: P.Wl? said · in.the release tbat.it.iS .still.con·cemed . that.the diseaSe "has not ·run its : · · course'? there. That·area wa.S .the most··· · ~y--affected by tlie-.fisb._kill, and . FWP spQkeswoman Andrea Jon_es said the agency didn't want to v.ut .added : .: stress on the fish there. . .

Jones;said'FWP"st.aff woilld·Iil'Qni- ·· to.r tbe;JJewiy openedsections to see : if r~uming activ.ity.there...Qas adverse ; impacts on the fish. -•·

- -~-----

I

YELLOWSTONE RIVER

Stat~ offers help to those hurt bJ c;.losure due ~sit-

; • . By MICHAEL .~RIGHT - Chronicle Staffwriter

State labor offi~iaJs will go to Livingston next week to try to help people who have lost their Jobs or have taken a significant financiathit because of the The parasite can closure of the be exacerbated Yellowstone . River to all rec- by poor river reation a week conditions like agTho. ·R .d low flows and

e ap1 . , Response unit high water from the Mon- temperatures, tana Depart- Which are rnent of Labor and Industry's dislocated workci-progrrun will be hosting a public'training

conditions the Yellowstone has seen this summer

at the Ycllows~pae Pio~-eer Lodge in T.ivings­ton on Monaa.}r from tmoo a.rn; to 2 p.m. The ~meaJ!t.:te~oll11 people of resourcesthey·cattu.Seat. this time, like job-retr~gpr~pther emplo~ent opportuni.tie& and'iµiemp.loyment.insurance.

"T.his .provid~ a< Q.t'lltj.l·f~r peopJe to talk with ~fit~ and~~erts·onwhat tlt~ycan do while ili'e:f.IV'eris in the,midstof ~_closure;' said Jake Jl'Oyer, a spokesman for_ the Montana-Department· of Labor.

'M:ontalia Fish, Wildlife and Parks dosed theYelloWSto_ndt.iV'imand its tributaries fro,rp. !}idioJd~ with Yellowstone National Par.le tb'tbe;.ro:Wn~o£Uure1 to all recreation after thoutind,c; o}idead whitefish were found in tlfe sfi;eam .Tissue samples showed that thefisllwe):e qyfu'g because of a mi­crqsecipic;B~ite tl}afral,lSes Proliferative KidneyD~east;which>islknown to be one of e nioSt devastating.oonditions-affecting ~,µt·<Uld'W~efisb. .

The Baraslte-aan 'Qe e-xa~qbated by poo,r x;iver Gonilliions like low flows and high water temperatures, which are conditions the Yellowstone.has seen th.is.swnmer. Clos­ing the river is meant to eliminate stress on the fish caused by fishing· and to allow fish to talce refuge in partS of the riVer where they might best be able to fight off the disease. It is also meant to prevent the spread of the disease, since it can be easily transported on boats, wadei:s; people and dogs.

~e><=Pmt?n <L1a-l4./ (!__~,I' tVJ I{! I 'r! 8/ 30 / /~

Climate change threatening our rivers, economy By DAN VERMILLION guest columnist

On Aug. 19, Montana's Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (FWP) took the unprec­edented step of closing 183 miles of the Yellowstone River to all forms of recre­ation. FWP's decision came in response to a parasitic and highly contagious fish kill largely centered in the Paradise Valley south of Livingston.

While it looks likely that the trout will not be as severely affected as their native cousins, the Rocky Mountain whitefish; it's concerning that the para­site thrives in low, warm water. This summer's long, sustained period of arid heat has created the perfect conditions for this disease to proliferate and damage one of Montana's most popular ·

·i ,,.

rivers. This parasite is the clearest example yet of the increasing effects of climate change that threaten the Yellowstone's health and its economic engine.

Whether it is the Pro­liferative Kidney Disease (PKD) parasite killing the whitefish or the upstream migration of smallmouth bass, the warming of our rivers is impacting all of us. At one point this summer, every major river in south­western Montana had fish­ing restrictions due to high water temperatures and low water flows.

It is very difficult to overstate the economic importance of the Yellow­stone River to Montanans. Whether a rancher, a farmer, a fishing guide, or a hotel owner, we all depend upon the Yellowstone and have built a vibrant economy that depends upon its environ-

mental health. Our company has had to cancel trips, delay hiring shuttle drivers, stop eating at local restaurants, and stop buying groceries for our customers' trips.

Montanans are most ef­fective at solving problem.~ when we work together. Climate change is real, and it is a problem facing all Montanans. And now it is affecting Montana's $6 bi J. lion outdoor economy and the 64,000 jobs it supporls

Montana's agricultural community did not causl' this fish kill. Around Livingston, family ra11d1 ers with water rights daling back to 1882 do not haVl' enough water to turn 011 theU- irrigation equ ip111rnL I would urge sportsm.·11 ;111d

women to look to fo111ily farmers and ranchers ;1s

partners, not advcrsaril's. in solvin.g this crisis.

This fall, when politi1 i;111s

are debating the virtues of Montana's recreational op­portunities and economy, I urge Montanans to ask about climate change. Ask l hem why there are now smallmouth bass all the way 11p lo Livingston and why 1 lw11sands of Rocky Moun­t a i 11 Whitefish are floating belly-up down the Yellow­slonc?

11 is our changing climate ;11111; unless we act quickly, our ranching and tourism n D1wmy will suffer even 1.;rl'alcr losses in the future. II will take all of us - Re­p11hlirans, Democrats, and independents to solve this problem. Future generations •it Montanans are counting <Ill ,iJ] of us.

I >1111 Vcnnil/ion is chair-111111111/ 1f11' Montana Fish 1111d \~!i/iJ/ifi~ Commission 1111d 1111 1111i/itter. He lives in l.il'lllg.11011 .

I I

·.

.:

: · ;

1 &J2PP1?C/IL a//Y ....... 0 ~-,tJc;/J /tz /.,P V/~,# 0

. ~.~}

Yellowstone closuf~' forces conversation 0 \ni$Jl~ _

" '.rt!~ . • ' ~ ;~

Climate chailge The recent reopening

of stretches of the Yel­lowstone River comes as a great relief to Montanans, to our small businesses, and to the people whose livelihoods depend on its waters. However, the dosing of the 183-miles of the Yellowstone between Gardiner and Laurel in mid-August also serves as a powerful reminder of how fragile our resources are, and how our econo­mies and ecosystems exist · in a delicate balance.

Tens of thousands of whitefish killed by a contagious, microscopic · parasite forced the state of Montana to shut down a significant section of one of Montana's pre­mier and pristine rivers.

Hundreds of outfitters in both the fly-fishing and river access business were sidelined during the last few months of the most lucrative season of their year. Fishing trips were cancelled, recreational boaters had to look else­where, and anglers from near and far felt the im­pacts of this little-know.n fish disease.

Uncertainty over the duration of the closure, the cause of the fish kill, and the impact to our outdoor industries forced conversations that super­seded the here-and-now of immediate threats. Un­usually warm water levels brought on this disastrous situation, making it nearly impossible for Montanans

to ignore the fact tbat climate change is a real threat to our economy and our fragile ecology.

Even as some of the closures have been lifted,

County alone sees $70 million in direct spend­ing from the fishing industry. Fishing jobs and related industries are booming. Expenditures

the dialogue over MARNE HAYES by river and 'Stream anglers on the Upper

how to simu!ta­·neously protect Guest columnist

and promote our landscapes continues. Thousands of dead fish washing up on the banks of the Yellowstone is in-your-face evidence of climate change, no matter how you slice it.

According to a recent study by University of Montana's O'Connor Center for the Rocky Mountain West, Park

Yellowstone total nearly $62 million a year by both residents and non-residents. There is no way to cloud the .issue of what a closure on this river does to Montana business.

The fact is that a signifi­cant sector of the outdoor recreation industry was unequivocally impacted by a closure of the Ye!-

lowstone River. The threat a vibrant economy that to our lucrative outdoor depends on these waters, indl}St,ry-opens the debate and a delicate ·ecosystem

· on M?:ere and how we as that can't survive a com-Mont~nans ·manage and promised environmental baland~ the health of our health. Climate change natural resources - and is not imagined, nor is the demand for access to the $6 billion outdoor one of the world's great economy and the 64,000 fisheries. The Yellowstone jobs that depend on our River provides critical landscapes. The caallenge habitat, sustains thou- is how we - as Montana sands of jobs, and meets businesses and recreation-an i·~ipg demand for ists - strike a balanced re~aJlnal opportuni- path forward that respects ties~ · · both at the same time.

Taking care of our resources is paramount to our future, and ac- -knowledging the layers of impact both natural and man-made is just half of the battle. We cannot ignore this bigger conver­sation of how we balance

t;

Marne Hayes is an in­dependent consultant, and the·director for Business for Montana's Outdoors, which r:epresents 125 busi­nesses across the state. She lives and works from her home in Big Sky.

m CJ 11 7?1114' .;$'~ /?c/Ci rd

'7//3/lt;,

:u.11~1r~t(;.. ~~~-~a1.1~~:~1 ·c:atc1.1~_

$tate's outdoOf.lietitage .· · · ~.~erhasb,eena:sum.-~~ ., __ . _. ofMont.ana.Witho.il.t~ct:iO'J!'-01'.t'cli-l -w,f of.ertremes. ma~ ehang~. . . • , ...

. T..., . 'f)ie coiij1~1:t~·-ctosureof ,- The_~~~P.ac~.:_~eq'X.i~·::~'i-": · the-J:ellpwsfoneR.iv;gi::beca,0serof .tl)rea~g:o.m:·~tdoorheij~~;.£ii a-·paras!t~.t:liatleft·~ted ~ey-also,~ap:e,eon:onijC:~~,~- "" : 10,000,mountain..w~fish dead M~J;ltana's . .f~;l>illibn oa~ao<;>r - ., ·is·ii.nprecedented, b~noJ:slioc~ recreati0n eMn9.1:11..Y .is.:the ·s~_c-)ng c,Qnslq~gthe:Ce~tions, qn4Jlttgesteconqmy_m,the S!At~, faell!gqµpliv~ ~1S1!l1?.~~f· ; and:it:~pportS.;~,ooo:job§. 'lPie FWP:has-aQlaio.wledgelf tilat . ,_ happ:ei;iS.eat;lier. Moutaiµ Wildlife Fe!i.er;afio.ri, . rec6rd-loWW'Ater fl.0ws;aif(IJ:jjgu: , -But;i~ nofjust ourrivers'tha:t releruied a1:eporl 1astyear thlit

w,aterrtei;nperafures· .are bemg·atre.cted. Wildfire sea- conservatively e8timated·#iitif. exa,cei;ti~teql~e sg~be~-¥l:tll:(ottle-w:}.th .tM climat~$:Wge is l~~Q!l'feg.,

·.parasitic 1'1b0m. ·Roaring .Eioi+:Flre".soqtth:ofHamil- there will be· a, total loss of·~.8'1 UJlf~~tbis· 't0B;;~sfire··b~ed thoilsand~;.of mi'llionm eai:nings, mQ.ii;;oc'io. ·. V~'o/.:-~eiWma- acresfc:Qst-milli~o'(d~; and ~ ·'fol;)s-ov.erth~!llert~Qy~,_ru

J.. -~' ~.:r{ . . ~.._, •- t • ,...,_ ' ~ "t.1 L., ., ..,..., ~, ~. -·,-~On.·~o~p5 d';f:i"\ii.q~.Iq1ho~~lb~ ) ~ ... ~er:-hafa'~W.c;>.qstitalf;.~:fo "·~h,;c~g_the~ ilie..~eghinirig: Higp;t,epf~~ . . · mtha.tthi:S'.@ifin;ib&_:ai;~t- .

' ,,.~pe@tistoriJlQP'i;:;,,. ·itm'~~~ and>1:ftlle:meIBtarev . Sfrnply·ii;:r~oFt: fuci([e~~-like.· KMitV' ~ iq_hr!w~r.'lif:{ta:~qf~ i-;~,\th3ff~~con~~~fo b~ ~eYello~oil~~Q.~;~~~~f! ~

·lfAD~ ,· n,~r· ··e~,·-r ~- -~<?!?~~ont.$la;~~~y, widespr~~~a0t'.~l~~~t __ • _ c closure Q\tti:!Ol:¥,i . ·, ;SiliOlcy. • .µr-b~,&:!~om!}<4li~noan hav~ been_nneffectfqFthe'ma: or-- - - .. . .. fefSumm

, .. _ -:. ~.;... ...,. , .:...- ~z

~?th~~~~L~.-i;il~on ·ara·ncoh'iw .-~·: .. ~ ttle fip[ie"'B'Glatkf.:or'J{;River \lalle'v~ . is,a41fe~on~g~f~i1,d'.js,_p(~jd~nt . of;thj~-~~Wj@}jfe:F.~erati~~. _ bo.9.-r;it'P,~iflr~ctf>f?~., ..• · _ ;;ti: _f/F

.. ,_ ~ . ;j ;.Y* . . ·· .. ~~·:... ... ·

-

L ~.:~ '·~. • t - ._..,, __ .... ~ .. t: ~.,..

V"J SECTION C I FR1DAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2016

·. . . -: ~

B. ,o·· 0¥. B·tt··c··· ~~ · ,. ' :' •. ~ ~- {f1·1_>"' ' .. ··, ~--· ~ '" ' I • '- I I~\ ' • ' .~~·- 1\1' J " . - ~ '· ~·

. A caller reported seeing a garbage bag that , 1

• l<>C>k~d like it contained a body; specifically a h~ad: and shoulder, ,lyirig on the side of the lnterstati,:!. Officers responded and

found it was not a body, ju.st a large piece • . of rubber. POLICE REPORTS, Cl

UM· ~e.por.t ·•$~hnates .. costo of Y~.l lowstoQe:·River .c:lo·s.:Hie By MICHAEL WRIGHT Chronlde Staff Writer

·A new report says Park County lost hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the state's closure of the Yellowstone River in response to a massive die-off of mountain whitefish in the river.

Preliminary figureS'in the report, which cam~ from the University of Montana's Institute for Tourism and

. Recreatiqn, say the, c}Qsure of the popu­lar stream cost Park County between

. $360,000 and $524,000, based on past spending data from non-resident visitors. The report said that was the equivalent of

Preliminary figures estimate the.closure of tt:)e popular river cost Park County between $360,000 and $524,000

bet.Ween five and eig~t full-time Jobs. · Jeremy Sage, the author of the report,

'$3.id the· impact to the state as a whole pught be mlpimal, but the impact to the counfy over that short ful?.e perioq is signifi~(,

''It coµJd be hitting some busine~es ve'.X hard:' Sage said.

Montana Fish, Wt1dlife and Parks decided to close the river on Aug; 19, after confirming that a p.~site outbreak killed thousands of whitefish. The initial closure spanned 183 miles of river from the border with Yellowstqpe Nation.al Park to the town of Laurel and included

every tributary stream that entered the rJver: through there. ·

l?oor•tiv'er oondltions were blamed for the kill; as river temperatures hovered nean 70 degrees and flows neared historic lows.· Io early September as river condi­tions improved and as fish mo$ility slowed, FWP began.lifting parts of the

. ot;ginal' c~o.siue: The final reopening aame oii ·Pi;iday, as state officials de'cid~d to reopen the river from Emigrant to Pine Clteek, the last section that was closed.

But the initial closure t~ok a toll on tlie businesses that rely on the stream for

their income. The ~port says that about 31 percent ofj~bs in Park Counfy depend on tourism? a large pbi:tion relafed to the Yellowstone Rive·r. ,

Sage estimated the futal loss by looking at what visitors had spent in th~ past ;md guessing wqether they would sti.l) Visit the state or not He~ ctame up v.i~t!l two , e'stima:tes - one h,~ t~IQ~d "~igh irqpact''. .

· that assumed most p~ople c~celed their · trips, and one called '1ow iirlP.act" that assumed that peopkstil,1 ~api~ but foupd other thipgs to <;Jo. 'ijle low~r imp_~c:f estimate neared ~360:.090 ~d,th~ higher : impact one was dose to $524,000.

More R~POR'r I C2