Category: Environment

Who is PERC in Montana?

2/15/2015

Who is PERC?

Depending on who you ask, the organization based out of Bozeman could be the Property and Environment Research Center or the Political Economy Research Center.

With names like that, you know you’re gonna get screwed.

You can see the main PERC website here.

This organization sounds mighty shady. And like I said, PERC has even gone by different names to make things even harder to figure out:

In South Dakota they know PERC is a sham, but here we don’t even know anything about this organization. Or were you reading about them in the media? I sure wasn’t. Why is that?

It’s clear when you look at the money trail that this organization cares not at all about Montana. Here’s some funding for PERC, listed on Wild Wilderness:

Here’s some info on PERC’s founder and how they got started:

You really get a lot of information on PERC’s funding when you head to Wikispooks:

Wikileaks also lets you know that PERC’s board is made up of people from the Hoover Institute, the Reason Foundation, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Institute for Humane Studies, the Heritage Foundation, and some other shady, right-wing and Koch-backed hack-firms. Some of you will remember that the Hoover Institute was directly responsible for those shady political mailers that tried to get carpetbagger Van Dyke elected to Montana’s Supreme Court.

These groups are scum and Montanans need to treat them like that. Democrats need to go to war with them.

Or is destroying our environment and ruining our kids’ future acceptable to you? It’s not to me, and that’s why I go after these groups tooth and nail.

But Montana Democrats don’t, and that’s why the fight is just a waste of time. Honestly, I think Montana Democrats are in bed with these folks, although they try to make it appear they offer some resistance. I’m sure at the top, however, the bigwigs profit just as much as those rightwing nutcases.

How does that make you feel?

Here’s what the outspoken Larry Kralj had to say about PERC:

It’d be nice if Montana was taken out of the dark when it comes to this Koch-backed organization. Let’s talk about them…let’s talk about them a lot.

Where Do We Stand?

1/26/2015

Legislative Accomplishments

Raise Taxes
Lower Taxes
Back to Point A (2:30)
150 Yahoos with Pet Bills (3:40)

Splash Montana (4:55)

$6 to $6.25 for Adult Prices
Needs City Council Approval (6:00)

Yellowstone River (7:50)

Early European Explorers (8:15)
2011 Oil Spill (10:00)
To Missouri (12:00)

Democratic Plan for 2016 (14:00)

Legislature
Take GOP Issues
Jobs, Taxes, Security

Let’s Pat Ourselves on the Back, Montana

12/3/2014

Big Prairie of North Fork (from NPS)

Good news today, and since few like to talk and trumpet about that, I will – it needs to be done and you need to congratulate just as much if not more than you criticize. I’ve had my share of shit bosses that didn’t know that.

We’re talking about the North Fork Watershed Protection Act, which Tristan Scott does a good job writing up on the Flathead Beacon. I’d like to add that this is a package of bills, and that many federal laws and regulations governing the state are affected.

Let’s get right into the good stuff here:

430,000 acres are now protected from mining and drilling;

67,000 new acres are being tacked-onto the Bob Marshall Wilderness;

208,000 acres around the Front are now a conservation management area…whatever the hell that means;

5,000 acres of mineral rights are being returned to the Cheyenne under the Northern Cheyenne Lands Act;

Grazing rights have been extended from 10 to 20 years, something that really helps out our ranchers;

4 Montana irrigation districts can develop hydropower on their canals and ditches, a great win for our energy bills…and sales to out of state consumers.

This is a big win, but there will be some things people complain about, such as mining and timber issues.

That nearly half-million acres is right up against Glacier National Park, and that’s where some of the first oil drilling in the state of Montana started. Hell, maybe it’s all tapped-out now, I dunno. At least it won’t be developed...and that gets us to the 14,000 acres.

That area will get a lot of flak from people like Bob Brigham and Mathew Koehler on Twitter. Why? The fact that 14,000 acres of wilderness can be assessed for oil and gas exploration. I guess those areas aren’t tapped-out yet, huh?

Well, maybe those two are right and in a few years we’ll look back and say so. Of course they won’t be thanked for being right – you never are after the fact…the resentment toward you just grows (I’m sure people like David Ewer knows a little something about that).

All in all, this is good, however, because a lot more people in Montana benefit than suffer. What’s more, we’ve got Tester, Daines and Walsh all working on it. I’m personally happy to see Walsh get some good press and a good photo op like he did today. I don’t know him, but he seems like a good guy that means well and unfortunately had his ass run through the ringer earlier this year. I’m glad to see he’s got an accomplishment.

But then Max Baucus was the one to introduce this legislation before heading off to Red China (Coal-Smoke-White might be more appropriate today).

This is what compromise can look like, too, as Tester makes clear. He was the real leader on this after Baucus, although Daines did do a lot in the House. And that’s something to think about – Daines can do the right thing, and that’s important to remember, because we’ve got him for 6 years…at least. When you can point to him protecting the environment and not doing what coal and oil companies and corporations want, that’s a big deal.

But what about those 14,000 acres that some will be bitching about? I guess that’s why we call it compromise. Hopefully we’ll see more of it, because I’d always rather have something over nothing when the end of the day comes along.

Analyzing Bullock’s 2015 Montana Budget Proposal

11/16/2014

Montana Capitol, 1906

I don’t know a whole lot about Steve Bullock, so I sometimes might sound a little negative about him. Tonight I want to sound positive.

Why the hell would I do such a thing?

While it’s true I often wonder how he got elected in 2012 and how the hell he’ll do the same in 2016, I do feel as though the budget he’s proposing members of the Montana Republicans help him work on is a good idea.

What’s so good about it?

Let’s look at some key points from the Missoulian article on Bullock’s 2015 budget tonight, which was put together by Chuck Johnson in Helena:

$37 million for early childhood education

This is a great idea and I’ve written about Bullock’s early childhood education plans before, when they were first announced, in fact. And something else I’d like you to consider is that this proposal for Montana’s future actually costs less than the $42 million Missoula Parks Bond and a lot less than the $29 million the legislature appropriated for the new Missoula College.

If Missoula can get so much, why can’t the state of Montana. The fact that we’re arguing over this tells you how backward we can be, and how much out of state businessmen looking for new locations view us as. This needs to change, and I’m glad people like Steve Bullock recognize that.

$12 million for community health services

I’m sorry, but I just don’t think this is enough, not if we want to be serious about our long-term prison and county jail problems, as well as the increase we’ll have with substance abuse issues, abuse and neglect issues, and crime-related issues coming from the Bakken. But I also understand that this 2015 Legislature will be recalcitrant. What does that mean? They’ll often act like a rhino.

Yep, they’ll charge into most situations, stamping their feet and huffing and puffing, and even if there were well-laid plans in place, they’ll be trampled upon. And don’t think that rhino will help, no, they’ll just charge right the hell out of their again, leaving you to clean up the mess while of course shouldering a lot of the blame in the public’s eye.

But I’ve gotten off track. $12 million is reasonable, and I’m sure with some negotiation Republicans will get that down. It’s just that doing so will actually hurt them and cost them more money long-term. If you don’t get it either, it’s alright – you’re rational.

Major infrastructure program

Here’s the clincher, the big one, the real bargaining chip. Republicans have been saying ever since the last legislative session that they’re going to get more funding for eastern Montana and the booming oil business over there.

When I was on the doors in February and March I heard a few people say they wanted this. I heard from two parents of sons over there saying they wanted this. And this was in Missoula.

So now we get down to price. And frankly, I’d like to see a lot of the oil companies shoulder that burden, since they’re profiting. And don’t think for a second that the whole area won’t go bust again, like I talked about in my book Hustlers and Homesteaders – it will, and that fancy infrastructure will just be this century’s rotting husks.

Folks, the vast majority of these people are out-of-state oil workers, most rushing to Montana, just like in the 1910s. They’re in many cases being hard-headed assholes, dragging their family along into terrible conditions. And you guessed it: you’ve got to pay for it. And when the bust comes? Well, let’s not talk about that, huh?

See, I’m not too concerned about alienating them because they’ll be voting somewhere else in a few years. Right now they just vote Republican because Democrats have offered them nothing appealing. But don’t tell that to the Republicans in Sidney clamoring for $55 million in infrastructure. And sure the hell don’t tell that to the oil companies that generated $200 million in tax revenue for Montana in 2012.

Of course you could just change the current law so the state wasn’t getting 52% of that ($104 million), the various counties weren’t getting 25% ($50 million), the school districts weren’t getting 20% ($40 million), and the…well, who the hell does get that other 3% ($6 million)? I bet that’s someone’s pet project or retirement slush fund or office party fund or something, so we probably shouldn’t talk about that. I mean, do you want some 8-year-old from Oklahoma to have to stop pissing in some field because he’s got nothing else?

What the hell is the tax rate that’s giving us that $200 million in oil tax revenue? Take a look at this chart from a Montana legislative PDF on oil and gas tax rates:

Fuck, you’re telling me that oil companies in Montana are only paying 12% to 14% on their production? What the hell are they complaining about?

What the hell’s a tax rate for someone that owns a McDonald’s in Montana? Well, the corporate tax rate in Montana is 6.75%. What if you’re a regular voter, someone that doesn’t get a lot of consideration in Helena during the legislative session? You’d pay about 8.6% in taxes.

What’s that oil worth? In 2013 there was $2.6 billion worth of the stuff produced. If you want to apply that 14% tax rate (let’s be liberal, huh?), you’d get $364 million in taxes, leaving the companies $2.2 billion. Now, I don’t want to get into profits and payroll and people.

First, you can do what you want with your profits, who am I to say or even suggest you take care of your workers?

Secondly, I know it costs a lot to do business, and your workers realized this too, and that’s why they sacrifice the health, safety, and sanity of their families for you.

Finally, why invest a lot of those profits back into Montana when you know the boom is going to end? Yeah, it just doesn’t make a lot of sense, from a business standpoint, does it?

Thankfully we’re not splitting counties, adding more government to that booming area, like we did back from around 1910 to 1920. I’d personally like to see more talk about combining counties, and I’d like to see things like that attached to discussions on spending. For anyone that wants to look at what the population’s going to be like in much of that area in 2030 would do well to start devising strategies now. Or do we just want large swaths of red on the map, the kind that eat our tax dollars while giving nothing in return?

But let’s not look to the future too far, let’s just focus on today. And that’s why infrastructure is a good idea – because people are living and working over their now.

Closing oil and gas tax loopholes would be a good way to pay for it. But honestly, why can’t an oil company not pay taxes for 12 to 18 months? I’m not sure of any other businesses in America that can do that, nor am I sure why oil should be special, but again, let’s just not ask those questions.

See, I’m just trying to find as many ways as possible to ensure taxpayers aren’t footing the bill on this. And you can call me crazy, but roads to oilfields and shitters on the side of future EPA cleanup sites aren’t really things I feel I should pay for. I mean, how’s that oil boom in eastern Montana helping me over here in Missoula? My wages and my wife’s wages are shit, and food prices are going up and now my heating bill is too. Why should I care about anyone in eastern Montana?

You start answering that question and I might be interested in sitting down and listening what you have to say. Until then, well gosh boys, I think that pen’ll have to stay in the pocket.

$300 million surplus

What’s wrong with having money in the bank? Most Americans thinks it’s silly. And I do know there are many out there with high and mighty thoughts saying you can’t run your government like you run your household budget, but honestly, they put me to sleep when they try to explain why not.

So that’s why having money in the bank is good. But what interest rate are we earning? If it’s around 0%, hell, I’d rather give that to Montanans so they can put that into their local economy, give it to the power company, give it to Charter, or give it to one of the many out of state retailers they’ll buy from in droves this holiday season.

(Note to future readers: Always give tax rebate checks out before Christmas, not in June or July when it’s convenient for accountants in Helena, who let’s face it, would rather have that check before they’re expected to buy hundreds of dollars in gifts and pay January’s rent).

What if it was earning 1%, or even 2%? That would give us between $3 million and $6 million…I’m sorry, is it each month? Alright, so that’s anywhere from $36 million to $72 million a year in interest.

Or is that not how banking works? Again, maybe I shouldn’t compare my household budgetary ways to what a government does – it might make sense.

To me it makes little sense why the Montana Republicans wouldn’t want an extra $72 million a year…or even $10 million. Why don’t you want more money, especially when it’s already there and you just have to leave it in the bank for a year?

Or do they think the Democrats can’t leave the money in the bank for a year? Because I’ll tell you the truth, if they can’t I’d just assume we say fuck the Democrats and give that money to the people, how’s that sound to you?

I think it sounds alright and if I took that message to the people, what do you think they’d say, to those two choices? I think you know what they’d say, and that’s why having a surplus budget makes sense to most first-graders.

What’s not in the budget?

There are some things that are so far noticeably absent, but which we may know about tomorrow. Those include:

$28.2 million for tuition freezes: This was the number from 2013, and I think we all want college to cost less. Some of those GOP legislators are young enough to have student loan debt, and sure some of the older ones have heard about the monumental problems a whole generation has with making large purchases. Let’s begin addressing that, and holding our current position is a great place to start…a helluva lot better than taking a step back.

$400 rebate checks: This proposal got shot down by the Republicans in 2013 and the reason is that it would have been popular with the people of Montana. That’s a big no-no going into the mid-terms, so Montana Republicans blocked it. They said a business equipment tax cut was better, and this is a common thing. I’d personally like to see some studies on the percentage of Montanans a business equipment tax cut helps and how many that goddamn check in the mail would help…but that’s just me.

Alright, I’ll stop making the paid media in Montana look bad…for tonight.

What Would the Crow Indians Do Without Coal?

10/25/2014

There’s a lot of people feeling sorry for the Crow Indians in Montana right now, but I’m not one of them. As far as I’m concerned, the Crow need to take a hard look at themselves and what they’re doing, and what they plan to do in the future.

Now why would I say something like that? Because they’re complaining to the high heavens to anyone that will listen, and the reason is they want to keep using what I consider to be a dying industry to make profits.

Shit, can’t the Crow Indians do anything that doesn’t rely on coal? And don’t think the state of Montana and the white idiots living here are any better – they’ve got the same addiction and the same lack of ideas on how to solve it.

I mean, yeah, you’re Indians, we get it that you’ve been screwed by the white man for centuries, but now you want to turn around and screw the land that you’ve always used as your main bargaining chip with the white man?

Alright, let’s get to the bottom of this:

First, Indians like the Crow continually shove down my throat that they’ve been screwed, and it all comes down to that land that was taken;

Next, whites have tried again and again to make up for this, but it never can be done – it’s impossible;

Finally, it seems that some Indians are now deciding to say screw it, and they’ll now rape that same land they so adamantly argued for over so many years.

Kinda weird, huh? The reason I got thinking about this was because of a Billings Gazette article the other day on the Crow tribe wanting more carbon tax credits. A few things stood out to me:

First, the tribe said they lost $3 million out of their budget last year because of the loss of those temporary carbon tax credits;

Next, many tribal members are unemployed, with the reservation suffering 47% unemployment;

After that, the 120 tribe members that are working in the coal industry are making $65,000 a year.

Finally, those same 120 workers are now down to just 32 hours a week.

Let’s take a look at this, or as I like to say, tear it apart.

First, 32 hours a week. Damn, that must hurt. At least you have more than 30 hours a week and perhaps even qualify for Obamacare. Hey, maybe you don’t even need two part time jobs to get that 32 hours!

Next, $3 million out of a Crow tribal budget that’s $32.4 million for 2014 is just 10.8%. And the Crow had the same damn problems in 2010 so we know they’ll have the same damn problems once again;

Then, you have to realize these tax credits first came about in 2005 with the Energy Policy Act. So what the hell did the Crow tribe do before then? I don’t know, do they?

Finally, what will the Crow tribe do eventually, or will that coal just last forever and ever? Maybe it will, but demand for it won’t, and that’s because the world is turning against it. What then? What then?

Don’t ask that question, the Crow Tribe doesn’t want to hear it. See, they don’t want to think about the future, and when you realize the mentality of the Plains Indians, you realize this is the way they’ve always thought. It’s the here and now and to hell with tomorrow.

Great, wonderful, I sure hope that attitude works out real damn well in another decade when the State of Washington doesn’t allow coal shipments, or when China just doesn’t need the shit anymore. See, you might have the best product in the world, but if no one wants it, what good is it?

Or is the world not turning against coal? Because every news story I see sure seems to be that way, and if you compare the news cycle of ten years ago to that of today, you’d have to be a damn moron to say otherwise.

We have 119.1 billion tons of coal in Montana and we can dig up 74.9 billion tons of that. We’ve got more coal than any other state of the union, but compared to the world, we’re just a speck on the map – 7.5% is all we account for compared to the coal that’s mined globally.

The industry employed 942 people in 2006, making up 0.22% of the 427,130 jobs we had that year.

In comparison, in 2005 the Montana Highway Patrol had just 206 workers and that same year various local governments around the state had 35,946 workers.

In 2006 there were just 320 mental health counselors in the state, and that same year saw just 700 fire fighters. We did have 1,470 lawyers, however.

The mining industry in 2006 had 460 derrick operators, 270 earth drillers, 250 extraction worker helpers, 80 mining machine operators, and 8 roustabouts.

By 2013 the mining industry had 30 derrick operators, 460 earth drillers, 220 extraction worker helpers, 90 mining machine operators, and 600 roustabouts.

What the hell is a roustabout? Sounds like they do just about every shit job there is. They make $22.16 an hour on average for their efforts, which is about average for many of these mining jobs. Hell, with a little spit and effort you could get an education and make that and more, easily.

Well, just not in Montana. See, because in Montana we choose to support dying industries instead of those that are relevant to the 21st century.

Oh, yeah, I need that car, right? I mean, I’ve mentioned before how fucking hard it is for me to walk across the street to the store, hike a few blocks to the mall, or God forbid, take the bus downtown. And maybe, just maybe, if we didn’t rely on cars so much we’d actually be able to have a sensible public transportation system that people want to use.

But this is Montana, and damn it, when it comes to modernity we stand in the way and stick our foot out – don’t mind us, we’ll trip you up every chance we get and fuck you for getting in the way.

That’s the Montana attitude, or at least that 0.22% that relies on that extraction industry here…you know, the rich Wall Street types that have been screwing us over for more than a century? They’re trying to buy our election right now, and they need those resources so their kids can go to Harvard this fall, so their kids can get that white picket fence, so their kids can live the American dream while you and your family get back into that corner we call squalor, the one where you belong.

The Crow Indians know that mentality well, for that’s what the white men have been telling them since Day 1. That’s why I’m so ashamed to see the tribe fall to its knees and claim it can do nothing else. That’s what entitlement looks like, that’s what dependency looks like.

It’s hard not to think of the Crow Tribe as lacking intelligence, both because they have no idea how to help the 60% of their people that don’t have coal jobs, and because they don’t have a clue what they’ll do with the 100% that eventually won’t have them.

And don’t think the whites are any different. And don’t think you are either. If your job went away tomorrow, what would you do? What fucking skills do you have that are worth one lick to those on Wall Street that pay the peons in this country?

But don’t tell that to the Westmoreland Coal Co. that’s helping the Crow, or perhaps helping themselves. See, they get $2.26 for each ton of coal that comes off those Crow lands. They have to keep that coal coming up, their bottom line depends upon it. To them, the Crow are just a free money machine.

It’s sad that the Crow Indians, a once-proud tribe in Montana, is now letting the white man fool him so. I guess they never learn.

Who is American Lands Council?

10/22/2014

Puck Magazine, Nov 27, 1897

There’s a lot of out-of-state groups, corporations, and individuals that are scraping their forks and knives together and drooling over Montana.

Why? We’ve got public lands and they want to make those private so they can buy them and then sell them or develop them.

It’s that simple, and there will be a lot of fancy-pants politicians and bigshot corporate types that will come in and tell you otherwise. Just ask them how much they get paid – it shuts them the fuck up real quick.

If you’ve got one of the ‘brass balls’ type that won’t be slowed by that kind of talk, just send them my way – I don’t give a fuck about them, just like they don’t give a fuck about Montana, your family, or whatever plans you might have had for the future. This is America, pal – you mean shit.

Well, that’s the attitude I get from the American Lands Council website, which is so full of propaganda that it makes old WWII newsreels look like Saturday morning cartoons. Take a look:

That last one is something, huh? “Will our grandchildren ever know what a healthy forest looks like?”

Jesus. This is the mentality that we’re dealing with here, folks, one that pretty much says this:

First we’ll come in and tell you all kinds of pretty and gussied-up things to make you think we’re helping you and that we’re the good guys;

Then we’ll pretend that we’re solving your forest problems, and we’ll make sure to point out how inefficient the federal government is;

After that we’ll con and bamboozle your legislators and judges and media and whoever else that we’ll just fix things up, nothing more;

Next we’ll ensure our legislation is passed, you know, the ones that take that favorite place of yours and puts a fence up around it and a big ‘keep the fuck out you dumb hick bastard’ sign on it;

Finally we’ll call all of our multi-million- and multi-billionaire friends on the phone and tell them where the best land is to buy up dirt cheap, to do with it what you will (so long as those fences and signs stay up).

That’s about the agenda I can see when I visit the website of these folks, although they try to pretty it up a bit and give it a G-rating, unlike me:

Ken Ivory’s Baby

So who started this outfit? That’d be Ken Ivory, a current state legislator from Utah. It was Ivory that was the main pusher of HB 148 in the Utah Legislature, which allowed federal lands to be transferred back to the state.

There was fierce opposition to the bill, and there still is. On the Sierra Club Utah website you can see what this boils down to, both in Utah and here in Montana:

An attempt to assume state ownership of lands currently owned by all Americans, HB 148 is a thinly veiled attempt to sell Federal public lands to the highest bidder for the purposes of fossil fuel extraction and development while providing a permanent roadblock to all future to wilderness designation, lands preservation and habitat restoration. This bill totally ignores the multi-billion dollar tourism industry in Utah in favor of the fossil fuel extraction industry, who provide significant financial support to Utah’s governor and legislators.

To get a lot of support for that bill, Ken Ivory started up American Lands Council. So…how much money does this guy make, anyways? I was able to get ahold of some financials for the American Lands Council, and this is what they look like:

As you can see, the organization goes through a lot of money, and $40,000 of that is Ken Ivory’s pay:

What’s more, you can see what their legislative mission is:

And finally, here’s what it costs to bring that mission about:

So the American Lands Council spends $19,535 a year talking on the phone. Damn, they must be some interesting people, huh? Or do you think they might be kissing ass and getting their nose brown in it a lot? That’d be my take on it.

And it was enough to get the bill passed…but so far the lands haven’t been transferred from the Department of the Interior, even though a lot of people in Utah support that. That’s not the case in the rest of the West.

There’s a 52-42 margin of residents in “eight intermountain states said they opposed taking over federal lands in their states, despite their frustrations with federal government gridlock,” the Salt Lake Tribune reported just last month.

The thing you have to realize about Utah, however, is that there are a lot of anti-government nuts, and this owes to the dominant religion in the state, Mormonism. Hey, I wasn’t the one that fought a war with the federal government in the 1850s so I could continue to…what, have more than one wife? And I don’t need Mormons coming up here to Montana and telling me to do with the land I’ve been using freely my whole life.

Opposition to Transferring Federal Lands

Thankfully Utah is just screwing up its own state right now, mainly because they passed this bill with more than 50% support. But again, why aren’t those lands being taken and sold? I think it’s because sensible folks in the Utah state government have told Ken Ivory and his corporate buddies to go jump in a lake. It’s clear to many that these ideas just won’t work:

Democratic politicians, such as New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich and Montana Sen. Jon Tester, say the movement is waning among conservatives when they see how land transfers could impact state budgets and public access to places they have long enjoyed. Heinrich contends some states would be forced to sell public lands to cover the cost of managing them and fighting wildfires.

Well, that’s a nice thought, and I like what these people are saying, but…I’m sorry, that just doesn’t do it for me. Why can’t Utah get its act together and take those federal lands like it said it would?

If you look at the Desert News, you begin to find some answers. According to an August 27 article, Utah legislators cannot meet their own self-imposed December 31 deadline to sue the federal government to get those lands.

Whoa, stop the presses…sue?!? WTF?

I thought that we passed this bill and the feds just gave us those lands…is that not the case? Shit, you’re telling me we’ve got to hire a bunch of lawyers, create special committees that meet a couple times a year for five years, and actually sit down and do some work? Damn, I thought this was gonna be as easy as boffing my multiple wives!

Here you see the idiocy of Ken Ivory come full front and center, and I’m not sure you’ll like the view. Here’s what the Desert News had:

Rep. Ken Ivory, R-West Jordan and architect of the movement, said six other states are pursuing the same effort to achieve parity with Eastern states, of which none have the extent of federal land ownership like those west of Colorado.

What an idiot. Doesn’t he know his history? Teddy Roosevelt began creating national forests and national monuments out west around 1906 because it was easier. But that might take some homework, like looking at the Land Revision Act of 1891 to figure out why there are western and eastern departments of the Interior and what the hell they mean.

That’s not as easy as hoodwinking people on how beneficial owning federal lands will be for their states, however, as we’ve seen with Utah. Although, for the life of me, I just can’t therefore figure out what Ken Ivory is getting paid $40,000 a year for…can you?

What you have to realize is that Republican groups aren’t very intelligent. Each day they come to #mtpol, which I consider my playground. There I gather shit on people and later post it up, like this doozy on the clown Ken Ivory and his silly organization, one that Montanans will stand up to and say ‘get the hell off my doorstep.’

In other words, stupid Republicans, please stop giving me easy fodder each day. When you put up your propaganda I’m going to tear it apart, plain and simple. I don’t have a 9 to 5 job like you folks, so I can do this stuff. And no one’s paying me to do it, so it has a lot more validity that what you do. See, people have to pay you, so we know what’s most important to you. In my case, I do this for free because I want to, so you know where my loyalties are…to Montana.

So go pad your pocketbook elsewhere – the state’s closed to you fools.

1896 editorial cartoons shows William McKinley and Mark Hanna about to carve up the presidency at Thanksgiving (2 Nov 1896 Puck Magazine)

You Might Also Like

Article on Utah Land Transfer and History of Lands

Utah’s KSL TV report on Stalled Land Transfer in Utah

Article on Western Land Grab from Frugal Café

Salt Lake Tribune Article on Support and Opposition to Selling Federal Lands

Article showing support for Utah federal land grab

Information on Utah’s HB 148 to Gain Federal Lands

Ryan Zinke’s Environmental Plans are Balderdash

10/13/2014

Uh...environmental plan, what's that?

Ryan Zinke has no environmental plan for Montana, and that’s clear when you check out this Montana PBS video, around 16 minutes into it when they bring up subsidies for green companies.

Now, let’s take a step back here and talk about green companies and also subsidies.

You’re probably already thinking of Solyndra, and that’s great – what the fuck are they? I have no idea, other than some abysmal failure that wasn’t nearly as bad as Big Oil would like to make it out to be.

But you see, if Big Oil couldn’t make the subsidization of green companies look bad, then people might not be so distracted that they’d look and see all the subsidies Big Oil is getting.

Confused? Good.

There’s nothing better than a dumb voter, and that’s what Ryan Zinke is counting on – dumb voters, or if we can’t get any of those, at least uneducated and uniformed…they’re just as good most of the time.

Mainly we just can’t do anything that’ll give those oil companies any kind of competition, because let’s face it, that decision to break up Standard Oil by Republican president William Howard Taft in 1911 was just so damn costly that we’re still trying to fix it.

Imagine for a moment if you will, a level playing field for more than 100 years, one where maybe oil couldn’t become dominant because they weren’t blocking funding and technology and the advancement of mankind.

Well, don’t imagine it – just open the door or look out the window, it’s here already!

We'll grab the land and close it off, that's my plan

Again, I probably shouldn’t talk about this because it just pisses people off. I mean, shit, Exxon Mobile made $32.6 billion in 2013, and that was down 27% from 2012. What’s more, all of the Big 5 Oil Companies – BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell, and Exxon Mobile – had $68 billion in cash reserves just this past May.

But don’t think for one second that having all that money didn’t stop Big Oil from demanding $2.4 billion in tax breaks each and every year.

Oh, getting all that free money from you and I isn’t cheap – they had to dole out $45 million on lobbying in 2013, which might give you an accurate worth or value to assign to Congress.

Overall, for the past few years Exxon has been paying around 17% in taxes, or half what most businesses would pay.

I should just get in my place and shut the fuck up, shouldn’t I? I don’t want to rock that boat…I might stop folks like Ryan Zinke and Steve Daines from profiting off all that lobbying. Sure, they might not get money in their bank account, but I’m sure their getting a lot of ‘perks,’ whatever the hell those might be.

But Big Oil needs that money to survive, and I should be thankful. Because you and I both know how much Big Oil has done for me this past year, oh my oh my!

And the thought, the fucking thought, that I might have to walk across the street to the grocery store, hike a few blocks to the mall, or God forbid, take the bus downtown.

That, my friends, is a world that scares the bejeezus out of Big Oil, and might well cause the donors to Ryan Zinke to wet the bed at night, or at least wake up sucking their thumb and calling for mama.

It’s a horrible thought, and if you’ve pictured it in your mind just now, I’m sorry. But again, this is what Zinke is fighting for…the lack of competition, continued monopolies, and a future where the Big Sky can become the Big Haze.

So do our environment a favor this year – vote for John Lewis.

Did You Need Some Random Montana Political Thoughts Tonight?

9/22/2014

It’s just about 10 PM here in Missoula, the end of the first day of another political week in the state of Montana.

We’ve got just about 5 weeks to go now, give or take.

I don’t really have a lot to complain about, but I do have some old posts I can cobble together, just a mishmash of thoughts if you will.

Let’s just get right into it.

Analyzing the Amanda Curtis Studio

Disclaimer: This post is 100% bullshit…well, that’s what I was going to write when I started this post back on August 14.

On that day I headed over to The Flathead Memo like I often do and I saw a post and it was interesting, as they often are. This particular post had a link to a new Amanda Curtis video, so I went and checked it out.

I’m sad to say the video was very boring, but I will say that the set decorator was magnafique!

I decided to analyze what was going on there that’s causing such magic to happen. To do so I’d like to take you on a whirlwind history of the Amanda Curtis family history…and that’s all I got on this one. I will say that I’m glad we haven’t seen that backdrop since. That gun, I have to shake my head.

I also have to shake my head at the campaign. No advertising, no major campaign logo, not a whole lot on the internet.

I dunno, call me old fashioned, but I thought we had to go out there and beat the shit out of the other guy to get elected. It’s just not feeling like that’s the case anymore. Maybe politics has changed.

Marijuana in Montana

I started writing this post on July 31, shortly after that couple got pulled over on the highway with all that pot, 115 pounds or something. Then they got sentenced and it was decided we get to put these two away for three years. At $96 a day for a man that's $103,680 for the man and at $104 a day that's $112,320.

Is this what you want to be spending money on? They're not doing this foolish nonsense in Washington in Colorado anymore...they have sense there!

Let's stop wasting money on pot, start making money off of it, and solve a lot of this political turmoil we have in the state every two years over our budget in the process.

Some Thoughts on Steve Daines

Steve Daines just is about the worst thing we can have in Montana right now. He made his fortune working for companies that closed American factories so they could reopen those same factories overseas. How is this good for Montana?

We need to bring jobs to this state, not send them to China. I’m glad we have Max Baucus in China, someone that will steer some good business our way and benefit the state – there’s no reason to be ashamed to help others make money.

I think Daines wants to help others make money, just those in New York and California and maybe even in Europe…pretty much anyone but the people that are working hard 9 to 5 each day here.

It’s understandable that the Republicans are scared – when Curtis turns that youth vote out it’ll tip those scales in her favor big time.

Forests in Montana

Is it just me, or is there nearly always someone complaining about forests in Montana? Would it be possible to even go a week without hearing about it?

You hear it a lot – shouting, name-calling, grandstanding and spewing forth nonsense. No, we’re not talking about a Cat-Griz game, we’re talking about our forests, and specifically the debate on what to do about them.

Montana has 20 million acres of national forests and 6.3 million acres of road-less areas. Recently there have been many stories about our national forests in the news and these mainly stem from timber sales and beetle kill. Oh, and global warming, we don’t want to forget that one.

The Bitterroot National Forest's Trapper Peak

There are voices on both sides of the issue, many of them incapable of talking about anything else. Matthew Koehler is a good example of this, as he continuously Tweets about forests nonstop each and every day.

Besides that, however, you’ll also see our senators and representative get in on the tweeting action. Most of this stuff takes places at #mtpol, which is the main social media area for Montana politics to be discussed. It’s a real playground and occasionally you get some useful information from it.

When it comes to our national forests, well…not so much. Typically it’s that shouting that I mentioned above, and when that stuff starts up it’s hard to figure out what’s going on.

It makes you not want to care about forests, quite frankly. Was it like that before 1986? I'm pretty sure when these forests were started around 1906 Roosevelt wanted them left as they were.

Well, what does responsible management mean? After the 1910 fires it was clear they needed something, and we got the exact opposite of what we needed, policy-wise.

So now we sell trees. But this alienates some of the Democrats' base. Well, where else are those environmentalists going to go and vote - Republican?

Could it be more damaging to alienate those Republicans you need to work with to actually get things done that affect a far greater number of people than forests do?

Big Democratic Shindig in Missoula on Saturday

There’s a huge gathering of Democrats in Missoula on Saturday morning around 9 AM. Yep, it’s the homecoming parade and that means they’ll be giving out candy and taking part in the parade.

Maybe I’ll head on down there – I’m a little disappointed I didn’t head down to the City Council tonight, but I’ve got a three-year-old and wife that needs free time in the evenings.

Will I go to the parade on Saturday and take some pictures? We’ll see. Until then, I hope you’ve enjoyed these random political thoughts about Montana.

Who's Behind the Yellowstone Wolf Patrol in Montana?

9/15/2014

Wolves in Montana

Perhaps you’re grabbing your gun and getting ready to go out and shoot a wolf.

Maybe you’re grabbing your camera so you can shoot someone shooting a wolf.

Or maybe you’re just like me, another Montana resident that could give a damn about either side on this issue.

What am I talking about? Today in the Missoulian there was an article entitled “Montana wolf hunt begins; activists shadow hunters.”

Now, before anyone gets all worked up, let me make a few quick points:

I worked for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from 1999 to 2001 and went out into the field with wolf biologists;

I think that if Congress and the USFWS thinks the wolves in Montana are well-off enough to de-list them, so be it – that was the intention;

If wolves are doing so well that we can issue permits so people can hunt them, then that’s fine by me – I just don’t really care.

In Montana you can hunt gray wolves for six months of the year, and one of the critters was already taken down with an arrow in the early-season.

As the article says, Montana has been doing these hunts for 4 years now, since 2011. And that just rubs some people the wrong way, primarily people like Rod Coronado and his group called the Yellowstone Wolf Patrol.

Who is Rod Coronado?

Rod Coronado was born in San Jose, California, on July 3, 1966. He’s a member of the Yaqui Tribe, which is a group of Indians that have historically dwelled around northern Mexico and California, but are now based in Arizona.

I’m not really sure where Coronado gets his extremist views, but there’s no way they can ever go mainstream and there’s never any way his actions will create any kind of meaningful legislation or change. Here’s why:

Terrorism in Iceland

Hvalur 6 & 7

In November 1986 Coronado and David Howitt were working on their conservation ship Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, when then sank the Hvalur 6 and Hvalur 7, two whaling ships from Iceland, while also seriously damaging a processing station.

All in all they did $2 million in damages and hot-footed it out of the country to Luxembourg. So was this justified? After all, in January of that year the International Whaling Commission banned commercial whaling. Iceland skirted that by saying they needed to kill 120 whales to keep their fishing industry alive.

I don’t like the idea of people killing whales but I also don’t like the idea of some international organization telling a country’s fishing industry that it has less than a year to rework itself. Most sane people in 1986 agreed.

Greenpeace called the incident “terrorism” while Coronado said whaling was terrorism. In December The Globe and Mail in Canada called him “a new breed of terrorist.” In 2009 it was even postulated in The New Yorker that it was “an act of sabotage that many conservationists believe helped turn Icelandic public opinion against the cause of saving whales.”

Burning Michigan State

On February 28, 1992, Rod Coronado was in East Lansing, Michigan, to do more good deeds for the Earth. This time it involved burning the offices of two animal science researchers. Yep, these are the people that do tests on defenseless animals in cages. The arson attacks caused $1.2 million and set researchers back a decade, ironically on DNA tests that would have reduced the need for animal test subjects.

Figuring that out might have taken some homework, however, and for the folks of the Animal Liberation Front, thinking isn’t as much fun as destroying.

In 2008 Rod Coronodo was sentenced to a 21-year prison term for his role in the crime. What’s more, he had to pay a total of $2.5 million in restitution and damages.

Rod Coronodo may have been behind bars for a time, but the organization he was a part of continued to work on behalf of the earth and environmentalists everywhere, who they stood for, but who began to run whenever they saw these crazies enter the room.

When Coronodo’s 9.5 years was up he was a free man. So what did he do…head to Disneyland…visit some orphans…plant a tree? Nope, he committed terrorism.

Alright, I hate saying that. I like the environment, I like animals, I worked for the USFWS! But some of the things this guy does, it makes it more difficult for sensible environmental and conservation folks to get anything done. And I mean anything.

Mountain Lion Hunts

On December 2, 2004, Coronado got caught disrupting mountain lion hunting in Arizona. How so? He broke a trap and spread mountain lion urine around. There also may have been plans to hurt some Forest Service workers or something, and it all got him and his co-defendant eight more months behind bars, with 3-years of probation, although for this guy that don’t seem to mean a lot.

My question is, what the hell happened to that $2.5 million that he owes? I’m the last person that wants to bring debtor’s prisons back, but what the hell is going on here?

For the mountain lion nonsense he got $100 in fines on top of that. Kind of reminds me of reparations for Germany after WWI…rather stupid on both sides.

Also, hunting mountain lions, and using traps? Sorry – it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And what’s with the mountain lion piss? Let’s just move on.

Burning Apartments?

fire image

A big one came in 2006 when Coronado decided to get into the incendiary device business. That’s kind of like someone smoking pot going to coke or heroine – it’s just not going to fly anymore.

Coronado should have known better, but if you’re anything like me, you’re noticing a serious trend of stupidity with this guy.

It all came down to a fire that’d started back in August of 2003 in San Diego’s Hillcrest area. An apartment complex went up in smoke, causing $50 million in damages and left a half-burned banner with “ELF” on it, or Earth Liberation First.

The evidence was pretty flimsy and there was no real link to Coronado, but he did mention on TV 15 hours later how to make an incideary bomb, again, not the smartest thing to do.

He was convicted and spent just about 6 months in jail until released in 2007. At that point he’d probably seen enough of federal institutions and decided he wanted to spend more time with his son. He told groups like ELF that they needed to change their ways and become more peaceful.

Friending the Wrong Guy

Mike Roselle

That apartment fire came back to haunt Coronado again and again, or at least the probation did. He had numerous violations and was back in prison in 2007 until Christmas Day, 2008.

To tell you how much the government is on this guy’s ass, in 2010 he wound up behind bars for 4 months, this time in Michigan, for probation violations. The reason? He ‘friended’ the Earth First co-founder.

I could go on, but the thing is, this guy’s out and he’s coming to Montana so he can walk around the woods and film people hunting wolves. It just does not sound like a good thing is going to happen here. What’s more, it sounds like it’ll end up costing the state money in court costs and jail time for this guy or others.

So what can be done? Let’s take a look at it from the wolves’ standpoint.

A History of Wolves in Montana

Current wolf range

The history of wolves in Montana is not a good one. As ranchers began setting up shop in the 1870s and 1880s it was clear that their sheep and cattle were no match for the critters. In 1884 the legislature passed a bounty law that gave people money for the wolf pelts they turned in. That first year saw 5,450 pelts.

By the 1930s the animals were seldom seen anymore and in 1967 the animals were listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a designation that hit Montana in 1973. The Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Team was formed in and in the 80s made great headway in seeing the animals restored. Still, by 1994 there were just 48 animals in Glacier.

But as many people 100 years ago knew quite well, wolves breed fast. By 2004 there were 153 wolves in Montana and more than 800 in the region. At the same time, 190 cattle and 409 sheep were killed by wolves in the state. To combat that loss to livestock, 166 wolves were killed in Montana by the USFWS and Fish, Wildlife and Parks.

Wolfs had rebounded, although maybe not as much as some biologists had liked, wanted or just felt comfortable with. But ranchers were happy, although they could always shoot the things. The wolves were delisted from the Endangered Species List in 2011.

Now the legislature had a new way to make money. Yippy!

Wolf Hunting Begins in Montana

In 2011 the Montana legislature decided to allow the hunting of wolves and began issues permits for it. In 2013 the state had 625 wolves, which was down from the year before. We’re selling a lot more permits than there are wolves, however.

In 2014 we’ve had 370 out of state licenses sold, which at $50 a pop, brings in $18,500. Last year the revenue from wolf hunting in Montana was $13,750, but that’s because the permits were $250, and just 55 of them were sold.

Obviously there’s a demand for wolf hunting, but $50 is far too low, in my opinion. I’d raise that to at least $100 out of state while ramping the in-state licensing fee up to $50 from the present $19.

Currently 6,000 people in Montana have bought wolf hunting licenses, which is about the same as last year. At the current rate of $19 – which it also was last year – that’s bringing in $114,000, but at $50 it’d bring in $300,000. Hell, why not compromise on $30 and make $180,000 each year?

Why raise the price at all? Because we want to show out of state folks, and even some that are here, that we’re not soft on wolf hunting, however silly that may sound. And don’t think for a second that 6,000 hunters in Montana doesn’t sound crazy to a lot of people…not when there’s 625 wolves in the state.

“Judging by the number of permits issued for the number of wolves around,” says a site called Tree Hugger, “it appears as if Montana wants the number of wolves to be zero.” You might not agree with the site’s name, but they make a good point, and it’s a point fringe and extreme environmental groups will make, and they’ll make inroads as well, in thinking and in legislation, that makes it harder for politics to continue in any kind of manageable way.

Thankfully the population isn’t being decimated, as it easily could. In 2013 there were 225 wolves killed by hunters, although 97 of them were trapped. Trapping's one issue that will probably have to go, as long-term it’s just too hot politically.

Overall, I’d say watch this guy Ron Coronado. He seems like trouble to me and I have a feeling someone taping someone somewhere is going to run into trouble. Let’s hope it’s not a nut with a gun thinking stand your ground applies to them.

As far as the wolves, I don’t see how these populations can sustain that level of hunting more than a few years. 225 wolves killed last year, when the population is just about 625 or so this year, and there’s barely any limits on how many can be killed? That’s 36% last year...something I think many wolf biologists I used to work for are probably shaking their head about.

Even raising the out of state license fee to $250 again sounds good. I'd also increase in-state...the wolf populations can't sustain it.

Do we really need the money that bad? Who came up with this law in the 2011 session? Obviously it was a Republican - I'd like to see a story on that one. Anyways, I think this is an issue that needs to be addressed, and some young freshmen legislators could get together and have this legislation drafted by the time the 2015 session starts. What's more, I bet you could get support for increased licensing fees and perhaps limits on kills.

Otherwise you're going to have problems. I can see why people like Coronado and his nutcases are coming here – our current policy is a bit nutty.

Notes

Missoulian report on 2013 Montana Wolf Hunting Season

Mission Wolf Site with good Gray Wolf historic range maps

Fish, Wildlife and Parks Report on Montana Wolves

What’s the Dam Problem in Montana?

9/11/2014

Kerr Dam (photo by Tom Bauer)

The Montana Public Service Commission approved the sale of Montana’s 11 major dams to Northwestern Energy just a week ago.

The deal cost $870 million and that means I’ve got to pay $4.50 more on my bill each month on average.

Is there any way to get my power bill lower now? I’d like to think so, because this month my power bill was $62.67…and I’ve just got a 2-bedroom apartment (and a crappy dryer). In the winter, however, that bill shoots up a lot – we had $182.84 last February, but you’ll have to ask my wife why.

So how does that break down, why does it cost so much? As far as I can tell I get delivery charges and supply charges on my bill. What I’m really interested in are the supply numbers, which cost me $0.005 for residential deferred supply and $0.062 for residential supply.

I have no idea what that means, but it brings the supply end of my monthly Northwestern Energy power bill up to $37.66 based on the 556 kWh I used this past month. Adding up the 5 residential delivery fees plus the standard $5.25 service charge gives me the $25.01 delivery side of my bill…brining me to that $62.67.

If I want to get mathematical I can take that $62.67 and divide it by that 556 I have to get an average power cost of $0.11 per kWh.

Golly, 11 cents doesn’t sound like a whole helluva lot, now does it? I bet if I walked downtown I could find that on the ground in a few minutes, or just ask for it from strangers and get it in seconds. The point is, though, that money adds up big time.

Montana has an estimated 2013 population of 1,015,165…according to Wikipedia. Let’s say that just half of those people are paying a power bill, and let’s say it’s just 50 kWh a month, alright?

That brings total revenue for Northwestern Energy in Montana to $2,791,703.75 for that month, based on a $5.5 power bill for each of those 507,582.5 people.

Not bad for a month’s work, huh, and especially when much of that power that Northwestern Energy is getting is coming to them for free, or pretty close to it.

See, they’re using hydropower – dams. This is free money here – it comes from water that’s already in the mountains and because of another free energy source – gravity – it flows down. It’s that moving that’s the really important part.

How a dam works

So you’re getting a clean and sustainable energy source year after year. So what if the reservoir is a little low or the winter snowfall a little low – if it’s free each year and you can store that electricity to use later, what’s the big deal?

I think the big deal is the same thing my son has – 3-year-old-itis. I can’t help but think that environmental groups just want to act like Dr. Seuess’s The Zax!

And nothing illustrates the problem of clean energy producers running into draconian-environmental thinking and a sticking-to-your-guns-no-matter-what mentality than the Gibson Dam.

Located between Marias Pass and Rogers Pass, the Rocky Mountain Front is as clear of a delineation you can get between the Great Plains and the Rocky Mountains. Trappers coming 200 years ago would have stopped and stared at what lay before them, settlers fifty years after that would have turned south to go around.

The Gibson Dam

There was originally a section of 365,000 acres in the Rocky Mountain Front that’s not protected because it has oil there. That was remedied in 1997 with a 10-year ban on oil drilling and then in 2006 that was extended.

One of the main pushers for that to happen was the Coalition to Protect the Rocky Mountain Front, and you can read all about this in Dave Skinner’s piece in Range Magazine this Fall Issue.

The Montana Rocky Mountain Front

Environmentalists talk a lot about the dangers of coal and oil and gas and all the rest of it…but when given the opportunity to use something else they too often balk.

Take wind. I’d love to see more windmills up and around the state, much like I saw over the fields of Germany when I was taking the train through there in 2009. Unfortunately, a stray windmill might disrupt some bird’s flight path or create an eyesore for…groundhogs. (Who the hell lives in the middle of nowhere)?

That gets you nowhere, and as you can see from the Zax video, the world just moves on. That’s why I scratch my head and wonder what the hell environmentalists are doing.

Here we have the Gibson Dam – a huge thing built nearly 100 years ago, that already has the capability to produce power if we’d just put some money into it or get some companies to or whatever.

Montana has always been a hydro state, even before coal started. The first coal mining didn’t really get going until 1924 when the Northern Pacific started it up large-scale in Colstrip.

Long before that people were building dams, as I wrote about on my Montana blog and in my fourth volume of Montana history. One of those main dams was the 199-foot high and 960-foot long Gibson Dam, with a spillway that could accommodate 30,000 cubic feet of water flowing through it per second.

Building the Gibson Dam, c 1926-9

The Gibson Dam was built 60 miles west of Great Falls between 1926 and 1929 and engineers had originally anticipated the dam creating electricity, and transmission lines were even run out to nearby Augusta. Penstocks were installed to regulate the flow of water to the turbines, but then it was discovered the reservoir just wasn’t going to hold enough water to create electricity when the time for spring release came.

Subsequent studies have suggested the dam could produce 15 MW if a powerhouse making use of the original penstocks were built near the dam.

The Battle over Gibson Dam’s Power Potential

Proposals were put forth in the 1980s to get the Gibson Dam producing power, but in the end they were abandoned, too cost-prohibitive. By 2005 things were moving again.

“We are looking at supplying energy to the market,” Thom Fischer, an engineer for Whitewater Engineering said to the Helena Independent Record that year, “and we think we can help Greenfields by lowering their costs.”

Try telling that to David Letterman, a recent Montanan transplant from back East. First, I like David Letterman, I think he’s a great guy. Next, he’s wildly out of touch with how most of us live. Case in point, he has a ranch management company, one that has an attorney.

David Letterman in Montana in 2008

Letterman and his attorney think that the transmission lines would “mar the view of the Rocky Mountains in places.” That attorney – Bill Massey of Washington D.C. – is leading the charge to halt any kind of eyesore that David Letterman might or might not see from his ranch management company home near Augusta.

Bill Massey, used to work for FERC

In addition to Letterman and his lawyer, the Deep Creek Grazing Association, Teton Prairie, LLC and Sun River Ranch have all said things are a bit iffy on this one…at least way back in 2007 when they raised a ruckus and when public comments were going on.

When that finally subsided in 2008, the Great Falls Development Authority submitted plans to the Federal Energy and Regulatory Commission (FERC) to start making power at Gibson Dam. The plan would cost $25 million and get that 15 MW potential up and running.

Toll House Energy Co. of Bellingham, Washington, was an early supporter and FERC issued a permit to them. What’s more, the Greenfields Irrigation District signed-on, which is really just a rural cooperative of farmers getting a great deal on that irrigation resource.

In the end nothing ever became of the 2008 plans to produce that power, primarily because environmental concerns stood in the way, and probably Letterman again as well. I’m not really sure why that is, mainly because the power-transmission lines only need to run for about 35 miles. Sure, they’re 60 feet high, but again, no one lives there, and the concern isn’t birds – it’s the eyesore potential.

Transmission lines that Northwestern Energy puts up

This really gets me. We’ve got environmentalists that don’t live in Montana complaining about land that no one lives on and that few ever see. If we’d build those lines we could get cheap, clean and renewable energy and virtually a zero-level of environmental impact.

Still, these transmission lines have been in the news in Montana before, when the Missoula Independent reported on Montana transmission lines in 2011, as did High Country News.

Tollhouse Energy had wanted to begin constructing those lines as early as 2009, but it just couldn’t be done.

What really gets me is these rich guys from out of state that come to Montana and then get their high-priced lawyers to push us around. Most of the time it’s so they can rape the land of its resources. In this case, however, it’s so they can stop a dam from fulfilling a function it was designed for when they weren’t even a twinkle in their father’s eye.

The nerve of these folks, let me tell you! I mean, I guess I can understand it – Letterman has to look at those tall skyscrapers most days in New York. Montana is his special place, and when he comes here he wants things his way. Hey, that might mean slightly higher power bills for you, but isn’t Dave’s view worth that to you? Shouldn’t his time on the Network be rewarded? I mean, gosh – Jay Leno stole his job once! If you don’t care about that you must be un-American.

I could go on with this train of thought all day, but I’d probably get a cease and desist order from Massey, Dave Letterman’s lawyer. I don’t need that shit.

Conclusion

Just 10 MW is enough power to run up to 10,000 homes. If you want to go by our earlier figures of a power bill of $5.5 that’d mean an extra $55,000 a month for Northwestern Energy in power they could sell and reduce that massive $870 million blot of red ink on their balance sheets.

Of course we both know it’ll be a whole lot more than that. The final environmental assessment was issued for the project in 2012.

It put the final transmission line at 26-miles long to head to the existing line at Jackson’s Corner. What’s more, a substation would be built 10 miles east of the powerhouse along the line.

So what would this look like if it actually started moving again?

First, the permits are there – FERC approved them years ago.

Next, there’s already local support from farmers that use that existing water.

Then, out of state companies are already set with funding and construction plans.

Finally, the PSC is likely to approve this because it will ensure Northwestern Energy can pay off that massive dam purchase they just made, perhaps sooner than expected, saving Montana ratepayers money.

That’s the Montana PSC’s main job – to save Montana taxpayers money, and this seems like a good idea.

But wait a minute, who’s this Toll House Energy that’s pushing this deal? I mean, they’re in Washington, right?

Yeah, I wonder about that, but it seems most of our power stuff is out of state these days. What is clear is that the State of Washington gets most of its power from clean hydro like the Gibson Dam can produce, and they have a lot of demand over there. Already our energy prices are quite low, and if we can sell some of that it’s good for you as a consumer and it’s good for Northwestern Energy.

I think we need to accept that Northwestern Energy is a big player in Montana and will be for some time. I’d like to think of them as a friend, something that’s pretty easy to do considering that Northwestern Energy employs 1,113 workers in Montana. If they can get rid of their debts sooner, it’ll make my power bill in winter a little more manageable.

Northwestern Energy president ringing the closing bell in December, 2013

Well, that’s the idea anyways, and I think it’s a pretty good one – if those Northwestern Energy company heads can do the right thing and not get swept away by Wall Street greed like their predecessors.

It was a pretty good one back in 1906 when they originally drew up the plans for Gibson Dam, it was pretty good in the ‘80s when firms were thinking about it, and it was pretty good in the 2000s when these most recent firms picked it up again.

Can someone please tell that to David Letterman when he’s in town again from New York?

©2013 BigSkyWords.com