Montana
Three powerful conservation groups have forgotten their histories and roots • Daily Montanan
Many of us remember when the conservation groups in Bozeman actually supported conservation.
Many of us worked hand-in-hand with these groups to address the broad array of impacts on the wild lands, water and wildlife of the public lands of the northern part of the Yellowstone Ecosystem.
I and others in the Madison Gallatin Alliance worked hand in hand with The Wilderness Society and the Montana Wilderness Association on promoting the wilderness designation for the all roadless lands in the Gallatin and Madison Ranges. We secured a politically pared back Lee Metcalf Wilderness in the early ’80s.
I seriously doubt if anyone working for TWS or the group formerly known as the “Montana Wilderness Association (Wild Montana)” remembers those groups’ former strong support for wilderness designation for the roadless lands in the Gallatin Range. The Greater Yellowstone Coalition was formed by many individuals who had supported, at a minimum, the 155,000 acre Wilderness Study Area created by Sen. Lee Metcalf’s Montana Wilderness Study Act as his last, great gift to protect the natural values of Montana’s pristine wild lands. The Gallatin Range was half of the original Lee Metcalf Wilderness Proposal.
About 15 years ago, TWS, MWA and GYC made a mockery of the legacy of Lee Metcalf with their “Summer of Lee” functions full of hollow talk hiding the fact that they were actually working to gut, not support, that legacy Metcalf gave the people of Montana, and all people, by the interim protection of the Gallatin Range (and a number of other areas) until a formal study of the wilderness values of the range were assessed and Congress acted, one way or the other. The actions of these groups no longer support – as they darned well should – our nation’s bedrock environmental laws. These groups’ use of collaboration goes against the very basis of these laws and goes against the basic concepts of sound conservation.
These groups now put the short-term, me-now special interests of mechanized recreation first, which is incompatible with not just Metcalf’s Montana Wilderness Study Act, which protected the core of the Gallatin Range, but threatened and endangered species of wildlife which are the indicator species for the natural health of the ecosystem. How can the actions of these three groups be justified given the basis of premise upon which they were founded. Let me count the ways.
How many of those who support these three groups actually know that their actions may not be what they think the groups are doing. One friend recently dropped his membership in Wild Montana when he learned just that — that the organization’s actions were not what he understood they were doing.
On July 10, I received a few emails from friends in Montana expressing the shock that one or more staff person(s) of GYC – at a supposed open, public meeting about the Gallatin Forest Partnership – told my old friend Dorothy Bradley to sit down and be quiet. When she continued to question their information, another staffer turned the music up so high no one could hear Dorothy.
This is more than shocking. This is the disappointing reflection of the demise of three organizations with which many of us worked on issues for about 25 years. This bodes ill for conservation in Montana and the Yellowstone Ecosystem.
GYC’s vision stated, “Our vision is a healthy and intact Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem where critical lands and waters are adequately protected, wildlife is managed in a thoughtful, sustainable manner and a strong, diverse base of support is working to conserve this special place as part of a larger, connected Northern Rocky Mountain Region.”
It is obvious from their actions of the last 15 or more years, they either changed the stated vision for the group or are simply ignoring it for short-term gain.
The Yellowstone Ecosystem is one of the largest nearly intact temperate ecosystems on Earth. Why would groups that bill themselves as “conservation” groups not recognize the importance of protecting the ecosystem? We can already see how climate change is impacting humans, wildlife and the land itself. It is critical to take steps to protect and preserve the Yellowstone Ecosystem, not promote it for uses that degrade the critical natural values.
Montana
Montana Lottery Powerball, Lotto America results for March 4, 2026
The Montana Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.
Here’s a look at March 4, 2026, results for each game:
Winning Powerball numbers from March 4 drawing
07-14-42-47-56, Powerball: 06, Power Play: 4
Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Lotto America numbers from March 4 drawing
33-38-39-47-51, Star Ball: 07, ASB: 02
Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Big Sky Bonus numbers from March 4 drawing
01-07-08-27, Bonus: 12
Check Big Sky Bonus payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Powerball Double Play numbers from March 4 drawing
05-10-26-53-59, Powerball: 06
Check Powerball Double Play payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Montana Cash numbers from March 4 drawing
03-04-06-08-10
Check Montana Cash payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from March 4 drawing
12-13-36-39-58, Bonus: 03
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.
Montana
University of Montana president job draws high interest • Daily Montanan
The search for a new University of Montana president has drawn more than 60 applicants, according to a spokesperson for the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education.
“We do not have an exact count at this time, as several applications are still being completed and additional submissions are expected,” said spokesperson and Deputy Commissioner Galen Hollenbaugh in an email earlier this week.
In January, then-UM-President Seth Bodnar announced his resignation to pursue other public service. Wednesday, the final day of filing, he announced he was running as an independent for the U.S. Senate to try to unseat Republican incumbent Steve Daines.
Commissioner of Higher Education Clayton Christian earlier said that with the advice of AGB Search, a firm that’s helped the Montana University System conduct other executive searches, he would undertake an expedited process to appoint a new president.
Christian has been providing brief updates on a website dedicated to the search. Last week, he said he and AGB Search are reviewing applications, and the pool of candidates was “strong and diverse.”
The commissioner also announced he was convening a small working group to assist in the search, members who “represent a variety of perspectives to assist in vetting and narrowing this field of exceptional candidates.”
In an email this week, Hollenbaugh identified the members of the working group who are assisting Christian with application review as:
- Community member and former Regent Joyce Dombrouski
- Faculty Senate Chairperson Valerie Moody
- Staff Senate President Dominic Beccari
- Administration Representative John DeBoer (Vice President of Academic Affairs)
- ASUM (Associated Students of the University of Montana) President Buddy Wilson
Hollenbaugh declined to comment on the way the rest of the process would unfold or the role the working group members would play.
Christian earlier said he anticipated an appointment within one to three months, or as soon as early this month.
Montana
Montana Supreme Court allows ballot measure on initiative process to move forward
HELENA — The Montana Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a proposed ballot measure intended to simplify the process for introducing ballot measures in the future.
Justices ruled 5-2 that the measure, currently called Ballot Issue #8, did not violate state requirements that a single constitutional amendment can’t make multiple separate changes to the Montana Constitution.
“We’re very grateful to the Montana Supreme Court for agreeing with us that the attorney general’s finding of legal insufficiency for Ballot Issue #8 was incorrect,” said SK Rossi, a spokesperson for Montanans Decide, the group sponsoring the measure.
Montanans Decide argues the Montana Legislature has passed laws making it harder for the public to propose and pass ballot issues. The Montana Constitution already guarantees the people the right to pass laws and amendments through ballot measures, but Ballot Issue #8 would expand that to include a right to “impartial, predictable, transparent, and expeditious processes” for proposing those measures. It would seek to prevent “interference from the government or the use of government resources to support or oppose the ballot issue.”
Attorney General Austin Knudsen’s office argued the measure “implicitly amended” multiple provisions in the state constitution, including by limiting the “power and authority of public officials to speak officially on ballot issues that affect those officials’ public duties” and by putting restrictions on judges and on the Legislature. Montanans Decide, the group sponsoring Ballot Issue #8, disagreed – and the majority of justices sided with them.
“Its provisions operate together to define and protect a single constitutional right—the people’s exercise of initiative and referendum,” wrote Justice Katherine Bidegaray in the majority opinion. “They are closely related components of one constitutional design.”
Bidegaray’s majority opinion was joined by Justices Jim Shea, Laurie McKinnon, Beth Baker and Ingrid Gustafson.
Chief Justice Cory Swanson and Justice Jim Rice each wrote dissenting opinions, saying they would have upheld Knudsen’s decision to disallow Ballot Issue #8. Rice said the language restricting government interference with a ballot issue was not closely related and should have been a separate vote. Swanson agreed with Rice and said the measure’s attempt to fix a timeline for legal cases surrounding ballot measures was also a separate substantial change.
In a statement, Chase Scheuer, a spokesperson for Knudsen’s office, reacted to the decision.
“This decision only further muddies the courts’ jurisprudence on ballot issue questions,” he said. “This initiative would violate the separate vote requirement by amending multiple parts of the Montana Constitution, but the court contradicted its prior rulings. Attorney General Knudsen will continue to neutrally apply the separate vote requirement in his review of ballot initiatives.”
The court’s decision means that Knudsen’s office will now need to approve ballot language for Ballot Issue #8. Once that language is finalized, Montanans Decide could begin gathering signatures to qualify the measure for the November ballot.
However, last year, sponsors of another initiative went to the Supreme Court to argue that the ballot statements Knudsen prepared were misleading. If Montanans Decide object to their ballot statements, that could further delay signature gathering while the case plays out in court.
“Regardless, we’re going to push as hard as we can to get those petitions into the hands of voters and let them sign and support if they so choose,” said Rossi.
Rossi said the legal battle this measure has gone through – and the possibility of more to come – shows why Ballot Issue #8 is needed.
“The state Legislature, and also statewide elected officials, have taken every opportunity to create burdens and hurdles and rigamarole for campaigns to get through in order to just get to the signature gathering phase, and then to get through the signature gathering phase onto the ballot, and then get through the election phase,” said Rossi. “The reason we filed this initiative is just to make sure that the process is simple, that the timeline is clear, and that Montanans can have their will heard when they want to propose and pass laws that they deem worthy.”
-
World1 week agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Wisconsin3 days agoSetting sail on iceboats across a frozen lake in Wisconsin
-
Maryland4 days agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Denver, CO1 week ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Florida4 days agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMassachusetts man awaits word from family in Iran after attacks
-
Oregon6 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling