Connect with us

Montana

Keep ‘roadless rule’ in place, say former Forest Service officials • Daily Montanan

Published

on

Keep ‘roadless rule’ in place, say former Forest Service officials • Daily Montanan


ROCK CREEK — Punch more roads through the forest, and you’ll get more people starting fires, fewer bull trout and an even heftier maintenance bill.

Keep the 2001 Roadless Rule in place, and you’ll ensure elk have a healthy habitat, and you’ll still be able to reduce wildfire risk.

Those were some of the arguments former U.S. Forest Service employees made Friday at the edge of the Silver King Inventoried Roadless Area east of Missoula.

Montana Trout Unlimited and the Montana Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers hosted the event as the Trump administration takes steps to repeal the 2001 Roadless Rule.

Advertisement

The rule prohibits building roads and harvesting timber on 30% of Forest Service land in the country, or 60 million acres. In Montana, that’s 6.4 million acres, or 37% of Forest Service land in the state.

In June, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, parent agency of the Forest Service, announced plans to rescind the rule, enacted at the end of the Clinton administration.

Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said doing so would help protect communities from fires, remove “burdensome” regulations, and help create productive forests.

A comment period in the fall resulted in 223,000 comments, with 99% opposed to repealing the rule, according to Trout Unlimited and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.

Opponents of the rule, including Republican politicians from Montana, have argued it’s outdated and hamstrings forest managers’ abilities to do their jobs in a landscape that’s changed.

Advertisement

Proponents of the rule, including the groups that participated in the media event at Rock Creek, said the “roadless rule” is sometimes misunderstood, and it’s been effective for ensuring land is productive for wildlife and to protect social values.

They also noted it came to pass in 2001 after public meetings across the country.

Jeff Lukas, left, with Montana Trout Unlimited, speaks to the importance of the federal “roadless rule” up Rock Creek in the Lolo National Forest. (Keila Szpaller/The Daily Montanan)

At the time, the Forest Service held more than 600 public meetings, including 34 in Montana, the groups said. This time, it has no public meetings scheduled, so the groups also are putting on seven public meetings in Montana in March.

Jeff Lukas, with Montana Trout Unlimited, said roadless areas are some of the most productive for fish and wildlife habitat, and they support clean water and offer social and economic benefits.

“The rule is vital to protecting the backcountry experiences so many Montanans enjoy,” Lukas said. “It helps ensure good habitat for deer, elk and fish, it protects clean drinking water, and contributes to our quality of life in Montana.”

Advertisement

The rule still allows the Forest Service to plan timber harvests and fuel reductions, but it does so while upholding values Americans have expressed as a priority, such as preserving natural scenery and offering a place to get away, rule proponents said.

Brian Riggers, former Region 1 Roadless Coordinator for the Forest Service, said in his six or seven years working in roadless areas, he ran into few people who didn’t value those unique, untrammeled landscapes.

“Most people have sort of a heartfelt connection to those places,” Riggers said.

But he said those hunters, anglers, backpackers, even people just driving along and enjoying the view, don’t always know much about how the rule works.

And he said it’s important to know because once you develop an area, you can’t go back.

Advertisement

“The rule provides for science-based conservation of the characteristics that make unroaded areas unique — high water quality and wildlife habitat, scenic integrity, remote recreation opportunities and buffers” from more developed areas, Riggers said.

At the same time, Riggers said, the rule is flexible. If a fire is imminent, and a road is needed in an emergency, the rule won’t prohibit it.

“I’ve not seen any fire projects not allowed to move forward due to the rule,” Riggers said.

Montana’s congressional delegation has supported the repeal of the “roadless rule,” as has Gov. Greg Gianforte, all Republicans. They argue it gives the federal agency more tools to manage the forest and helps rural economies.

Riggers said the rule was born out of controversy and was meant to help resolve it.

Advertisement

In the past, Riggers said, every time the Forest Service would propose a project, people would fight about it, and the rule was meant to help eliminate individual fights and provide a framework that would take care of people’s concerns for the long term.

The group spoke near the Tyler’s Kitchen Fuels Reduction and Forest Health Project to point out the “roadless rule” in action, an example of the exceptions the rule offers to actively manage forests.

Finalized by the Lolo National Forest in December, the Tyler’s Kitchen project includes a timber harvest, a prescribed burn and thinning on more than 2,000 acres to reduce wildfire risk and improve the forest.

Speakers noted the benefits of the rule, but they also pointed to problems with roads on Forest Service land and the idea of building more roads.

For one thing, roads cost money, and the Forest Service doesn’t have the dollars to pay for maintenance on the ones already built, said Riggers — the cost of the backlog is $6.4 billion nationally, according to Pew Charitable Trusts.

Advertisement

Roads also hurt fish, said Shane Hendrickson, a fish biologist who formerly worked for the Forest Service. In fact, he said, roadless areas are “imperative” for native fish species, such as bull trout, which need clear cold water to survive.

Cutting roads into forest land “drastically” affects the watershed, taking away its resiliency, he said. He said protected bull trout aren’t present in waterways in roaded areas in a sustainable way.

Some politicians argue roads are needed to increase fire responsiveness, but Julie Shea, a former fire planner for the Forest Service with 39 years and 10 months of service, said she doesn’t wholly buy the argument.

Some places that already have roads aren’t accessible for fire anyway depending on the terrain, she said. Also, especially in the West, more than 75% of fires are caused by humans, so more roads could mean more fires in the places they’re built, she said.

The main thing, though, is the rule represents the will of the people, and people are smart, Shea said.

Advertisement

The recent Conservation in the West poll showed 84% of voters believe the rollback of laws that protect land, water and wildlife is a serious problem.

“It’s about the right of all Montanans and United States citizens to have a voice,” Shea said.

Public meetings

Montana Trout Unlimited and the Montana Chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers are organizing public meetings to hear from the public on the rescission of the “roadless rule.”

The meetings are scheduled as follows:

  • Kalispell: 6-7:30 p.m. Wednesday, March 4, Flathead Valley Community College AT-139 (Arts and Technology Building)
  • Libby: 6-7:30 p.m. Thursday, March 5, K.W. Maki Theatre, 724 Louisiana Ave.
  • Missoula: 6-7:30 p.m. Monday, March 9, Missoula Public Library, Cooper Space A/B
  • Hamilton: 6-7:30 p.m. Tuesday, March 10, Rocky Mountain Grange #116, 1436 South 1st St (Hwy 93)
  • Butte: 6-7:30 p.m. Wednesday, March 11, Butte Archives, 17 W Quartz St
  • Bozeman: 6-7:30 p.m. Thursday, March 12, Gallatin Valley Fairgrounds, Exhibit Building #2, 901 N Black Ave.
  • Helena: 6-7:30 p.m. Friday, March 13, Holter Museum of Art, 12 E Lawrence St
Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Montana

Montana Lottery Powerball, Lotto America results for March 2, 2026

Published

on


The Montana Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at March 2, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Powerball numbers from March 2 drawing

02-17-18-38-62, Powerball: 20, Power Play: 2

Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Lotto America numbers from March 2 drawing

03-08-17-24-34, Star Ball: 06, ASB: 02

Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Big Sky Bonus numbers from March 2 drawing

06-12-19-29, Bonus: 11

Check Big Sky Bonus payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Powerball Double Play numbers from March 2 drawing

21-28-58-65-67, Powerball: 25

Advertisement

Check Powerball Double Play payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from March 2 drawing

28-41-42-50-55, Bonus: 02

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

When are the Montana Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 9 p.m. MT on Tuesday and Friday.
  • Lucky For Life: 8:38 p.m. MT daily.
  • Lotto America: 9 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Big Sky Bonus: 7:30 p.m. MT daily.
  • Powerball Double Play: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Montana Cash: 8 p.m. MT on Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Millionaire for Life: 9:15 p.m. MT daily.

Missed a draw? Peek at the past week’s winning numbers.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Great Falls Tribune editor. You can send feedback using this form.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate

Published

on

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate


Everyone makes mistakes, even experienced professionals; a good reminder for the rest of us to learn from those mistakes. The motion in State v. Stroup starts off well in its initial pages (no case law hallucinations), but is then followed by several pages of two other motions, which I don’t think the lawyer was planning to file, and which appear to have been AI-generated: It begins with the “Below is concise motion language you can drop into …” language quoted above.

Griffen Smith (Missoulian) reported on the story, and included the prosecutor’s motion to strike that filing, on the grounds that it violates a local rule (3(G)) requiring disclosure of the use of generative AI:

The document does not include a generative artificial intelligence disclosure as required. However, page 7 begins as follows: “Below is concise motion language you can drop into a ‘Motion to Admit Mental-Disease Evidence and for Related Instructions’ keyed to 45-6-204, 45-6-201, and 4614-102. Adjust headings/captions to your local practice.” Page 10 states “Below is a full motion you can paste into your pleading, then adjust names, dates, and styles to fit local practice.” These pages also include several apparent hyperlinks to “ppl-ai-file-upload.s3.amazonaws,” “ppl-ai-fileupload.s3.amazonaws+1,” and others. The document includes what appears to be an attempt at a second case caption on page 12. It is not plausible on its face that any source other than generative AI would have created such language for a filed version of a brief….

There’s more in that filing, but here’s one passage:

While generative AI can be a useful tool for some purposes and may have greater application in the future, when used improperly, and without meaningful review, it can ultimately damage both the perception and the reality of the profession. One assumes that Mr. Stroup has had, or will at some point have, an opportunity to review the filing made on his behalf. What impression could a review of pgs. 12-19 leave upon a defendant who struggles with paranoia and delusional thinking? While AI could theoretically one day become a replacement for portions of staff of experienced attorneys, it is readily apparent that this day has not yet arrived.

The Missoulan article includes this response:

Advertisement

In a Wednesday interview, Office of Public Defender Division Administrator Brian Smith told the Missoulian the AI-generated language was inadvertently included in an unrelated filing. And he criticized the county attorney’s office for filing a “four-page diatribe about the dangers of AI” instead of working with the defense to correct her mistake.

“That’s not helping the client or the case,” Smith said, “and all you are doing is trying to throw a professional colleague under the bus.”

As I mentioned, the lawyer involved seems quite experienced, and ran for the Montana Public Service Commission in 2020 (getting nearly 48% of the vote) and for the House of Representatives in Montana’s first district in 2022 (getting over 46% of the vote) and in 2024 (getting over 44%). “Его пример другим наука,” Pushkin wrote in Eugene Onegin—”May his example profit others,” in the Falen translation.

Thanks to Matthew Monforton for the pointer.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Montana

Your guide to local sports events, plus what’s on TV

Published

on

Your guide to local sports events, plus what’s on TV





Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending