The open lands program was initiated by a voter-approved open lands bond, which county voters passed overwhelming in November 2006. The $10 million bond has the single purpose of preserving open lands in the county.

The commissioners established the Open Lands Board in early 2007. The board is made up of 13 members who represent a broad level of expertise including agriculture, wildlife, land use and conservation. But they come together for one reason: conserving the county's open lands and the benefits they hold. Their official purpose is to advise Ravalli County commissioners on how to issue the bond money.

Walker describes the board's purpose the way: "To help private landowners voluntarily participate in the permanent protection of working farms and ranches, wildlife habitat and water and give them another viable tool in the war chest, rather than just looking at the sale and development option."

The open lands bond initiative was first discussed in 2005. That year, a study was commissioned by the Ravalli County Right to Farm and Ranch Board, in collaboration with the Bitter Root Land Trust and other community groups. Larry Swanson, economist for the Missoula-based O'Conner Center for the Rocky Mountain West, performed the study, which documented critical ways agricultural land and open space contribute to the valley's quality of life and economic prosperity.

Swanson's study established that more than 50,000 acres of agricultural land have been lost to development since 1980 and, if nothing is done, another 40,000 will be lost by 2025. An open lands program, supported by an open lands bond, was identified as a critical tool to protect and preserve productive, undeveloped land as the valley continues to grow.

The main tool for preserving open lands is a conservation easement, or voluntary conservation agreement.

Though a conservation easement may sound complicated, it essentially is a permanent constraint on the land. The specifics of it are unique to the land and the owner. But generally, it prohibits broad development. This restriction devalues the land, which means the landowner pays fewer taxes.

Essentially, the land is appraised with development rights and then without them. The difference in the value of the two appraisals is considered the value of the easement. Typically, the landowner will donate a portion of that value to the land trust, which administers the easement. The rest of the value will be paid to the landowner by a combination of federal grant money, private conservation foundation money and open lands bond funds.

"Our job is to be looking at the projects and to be spending the $10 million as wisely as we can," Walker said.

Ravalli County isn't the only county in Montana with an open lands program. Both Missoula and Gallatin Counties have similar programs that have been wildly successful.

In 2000, Gallatin County voters passed a $10 million open lands bond initiative. With that money, the county was able to help protect nearly 40 square miles of land. In 2004, voters in the Gallatin County were so pleased with the program, they passed another $10 million bond.

In Gallatin County, the open lands bond money has been matched with other funding sources to make the public money go farther, Walker said.

These other funding sources include federal grant money and private foundation money. In Gallatin County a typical open lands project funded by the bond money has a 4 to 1 match, meaning for every dollar of bond money spent, $4 is contributed from other sources.

Walker hopes to be able to do the same in Ravalli County.

"We want to take those dollars in 2008 and leverage them as best we can and get the biggest bang for our buck," he said.

The process of getting the open lands program going has been intense, but speedy, Walker said.

The Open Lands Board first met in last March. Since that time they've prepared board bylaws, project criteria, and a fee schedule. All have been adopted by the county commissioners.

"What the county commissioners have done is brought together an advisory body of a cross-section of interests and what we did is we took the responsibility very seriously," Walker said. "We wanted to move at the speed of business and not politics."

The critical portion of the program is the project criteria. These criteria will allow the Open Lands Board to evaluate each proposed project the same way.

For example, if a farming family wants to place its land under a conservation easement, the first step is contacting a land trust. The land trust is the non-profit organization established to administer the easement.

The land trust will meet with the family and discuss how they want the easement drafted. Each easement is different, said John Ormiston, president of the Bitter Root Land Trust board and ex-officio member of the Open Lands Board.

"The first thing that a landowner has to have is a land or conservation ethic," Ormiston said. "He has to have some kind of attachment to a piece of land."

But that doesn't mean the land can't be developed to a minimal extent. Conservation easements can allow limited development, he said. They also allow farming and ranching practices to continue. However, they don't allow public access, unless that's part of the landowner's wishes.

Once the land trust and landowners have an idea of how the project will look, they can propose it to the Open Lands Board. The board will then evaluate it based on the approved criteria, which look at everything from farming practices, soil quality, wildlife habitat, neighboring development and matching funds.

The board will work with the landowner and land trust to fine-tune the proposal and if it meets board approval, the project will be recommended to the county commissioners for funding.

"From an aspect of trying to keep ag lands functioning as ag lands, this is going to be a real valuable tool to help landowners who want to see their lands continue to be working ag lands," said Jim Rokosch, a Ravalli County commissioner.

In the larger view of land use planning in the county, the open lands program is only one tool, Rokosch said. The county is also working on countywide zoning, which will help dictate how the county continues to grow, he said.

But in the discussion of how the county is going to grow, county citizens have realized that preserving open lands is important.

"I think people are understanding those working lands represent a type of lifestyle and landscape that has value to them," Rokosch said.

Though no open lands projects have been proposed yet, Walker expects a busy year for the open lands board.

"We're going to have some applications in the hopper and get on the ground this summer to look at what we can really do to help local landowners," he said.

Walker is quick to give credit for the programs progress to his fellow board members.

"I really think what we've accomplished is the ability to coalesce and bring people together," he said. "Each individual makes the whole body one of the best boards I've worked with."

For more information on the open lands program, look on the Web at: www.co.ravalli.mt.us/planning/OpenLandsBoard.htm.

Bitterroot Valley aquifers assessed

By Michael Howell

Bitterroot Valley residents got a chance to hear about the state's latest groundwater assessment of the area and examine the relation of ground water quantity and quality issues to the subdivision review process last week at Hamilton City Hall. A panel of state and local officials answered questions from the public following brief presentations by John LaFave of the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology (MBMG) and Eric Regensberger from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).

The MBMG's Groundwater Assessment Program has recently completed groundwater studies in Ravalli, Missoula, and Mineral Counties. According to LaFave, the aquifers of the Bitterroot Valley are currently prolific and full of good quality water for the most part.

After giving a review of the basics of the water cycle, involving a perpetual cycle of water between the atmosphere, the land mass and the oceans, LaFave noted that out of the total amount of precipitation that falls in the watershed over half evaporates or is transpired through the vegetation. Fifteen to twenty percent will run off on the surface. The rest will infiltrate into the ground and become the groundwater recharge for the valley's aquifers. Although only a portion makes it into the ground, groundwater represents 95 percent of the world's fresh water supply.

The Bitterroot Valley contains two basic kinds of aquifers, the somewhat isolated and limited aquifers formed in the fractured bedrock along the valley's edges and the basin aquifers formed in the alluvial sand and gravels of the valley bottom. The basin aquifers fall into two categories, the shallow, unconfined aquifer that emerges onto the surface as wetlands and streams and is more directly connected to surface water flows, and the deep, confined aquifer, separated from the shallow one by an impermeable layer of soil, usually clay, that can produce artesian wells when tapped into as the water, trapped and under pressure, seeks to escape.

Due to their limited recharge rate and relatively limited capacity, the bedrock aquifers are more prone to become polluted and more easily affected by climate and weather changes. More and more of these fractured bedrock aquifers are being tapped as residential development increases along the valley perimeter next to the national forests. According to LaFave, the number of wells iin the valley placed into fractured bedrock aquifers has doubled in the last 10 years.

The only way at present to assess groundwater availability is through well logs and by monitoring the depth to groundwater in the wells over time. MBMG has measured the depth to groundwater in 140 wells that were under 50 feet deep and 260 wells between 50 and 400 feet deep. They are currently monitoring about 30 wells over the longterm in the valley to help assess the rise and fall of the groundwater levels. Some wells reflect the natural rise and fall of the water table while other wells show decided influence by neighboring ditches and irrigation practices.

The Bitterroot Valley has the highest concentration of wells in the state and, as LaFave notes, where there is a well, there is most often an associated septic system. But tests to date, according to LaFave, indicate that the valley's aquifers are producing good quality water. Two hundred and forty-five wells were tested for nitrates, a common form of contamination related to septics, as well as agricultural fertilizers. Although close to two thirds of all the wells tested showed signs of nitrates, they were mostly in very low concentrations, well below the maximums allowed by law for safe drinking water.

One third of the samples also showed signs of arsenic, according to LaFave. The highest contamination was located in the Willow Creek area and some in the Skalkaho area. The source of the contamination was identified as a naturally occurring deposit on the east side of the valley where a volcanic intrusion of igneous rock, containing the arsenic, came to the surface.

LaFave said that in terms of water quantity Bitterrooters have nothing to worry about. The unprecedented number of wells being drilled into the aquifer are barely making a dent in the huge volume stored in the valley's shallow aquifer. He estimated the shallow aquifer along the valley floor alone holds 628 billion gallons with the annual recharge averaging about 180 billion gallons per year. In contrast, the human withdrawals amount to only about 4.6 billion gallons, most of which returns to the aquifer after use. Only about 1.6 billion gallons actually gets consumed annually by humans.

Although the groundwater may not be being depleted on a basin wide scale, he cautioned that locally, clusters of wells into relatively isolated groundwater can and does create local problems.

In summation, LaFave said that climate, not well drilling, was the driving factor in the overall status of the valley's aquifers. The less snow pack, the less recharge, the lower the aquifers, and the lower the stream flows. Although the Bitterroot Valley has been in a drought period with respect to historical records, this year we are showing an average to above average snow pack in the Bitteroot mountains so far this year.

Groundwater and subdivision review

Eric Regensberger from DEQ explained how the department addresses concerns about water quality, water quantity and dependability in the subdivision review process. He said that the department has a handle on the water quality questions concerning most developments but the questions over water quantity and potential effects on adjacent wells is a horse of a different color.

In terms of protecting water quality, Regensberger said that the department typically tests for specific conductance to determine the presence and nature of the minerals and salts, for nitrates and for the presence of coliform bacteria, the most common form of contamination, especially associated with septic contamination. He said that the department was currently considering adding a test for arsenic to the regime. He said that the maximum amount of pollutants permissible is set by state law.

He said that DEQ uses existing well logs in the area as well as any published reports and requires a pump test to examine questions of water quantity and availability. Associated computer modeling may even be required. The tests are meant to determine the draw down on the water level by use and the recovery rate of the well. He said that sometimes in large subdivisions observation wells are required and established to monitor these factors.

No review process for domestic wells

At the beginning of the public comment and question portion of the meeting Chris Linkenhoker noted that good clean water was becoming a valuable commodity. He said that even if water was only worth $1 per gallon, the valley was sitting on a resource worth about $628 billion.

"That's worth protecting," said Linkenhoker.

One of the principal concerns to emerge in the public comment period was the question about the lack of any permitting or regulatory requirements for individual domestic wells when some subdivisions being submitted involve several hundred individual wells. Community water wells, on the other hand, are regulated and monitored. Concern was expressed about the cumulative impact of all the domestic wells and the possible need to permit and regulate them.

Steve Kilbreath from the DEQ's Division of Subdivision Review, agreed that it posed a potential problem in terms of protecting water quality but noted that legislation proposed to require permitting and review of 35 gallon or less domestic wells met a swift death in the last two legislatures, never even emerging from committee. He suggested putting pressure on the legislators.

Bill Shultz, of the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) which issues water rights, agreed that the exemption from the water right permitting system for domestic wells was a problem, but he too said that it was a political problem and the legislature would have to address it.

Local developer Chip Pigman asked if anyone was considering incentives for developers to use community water systems in their subdivisions.

Shultz said that the Interim Water Policy Commission was looking into the possibility.

Kilbreath said that as long as the domestic well was exempted it would remain the easiest and cheapest pathway for development to occur.

Former Ravalli County Sanitarian Teresa Blazecevich said that legislative action was not really required. She said that DEQ had the authority to require residents of multi user complexes to tie their wells together. She wondered why the department could not simply change the regulations to also require, for example, that 10 or more domestic wells proposed for lots less than 10 acres would also have to tie their wells together.

Kilbreath said that something like that might be possible.

Later, County Attorney George Corn asked explicitly if Kilbreath believed that DEQ had the authority to change the regulations as suggested.

"Yes, I think we have the authority to do what she suggested," said Kilbreath.

Another idea that emerged from the public was to identify all the wells that have been deepened for whatever reason and put a picture together of places where depth to groundwater may be falling.

County Commissioner Kathleen Driscoll suggested that the county might consider requiring that subdividers establish a monitoring well that would be accessible in perpetuity to state officials for monitoring purposes. This was in response to LaFave's comment that the current number of wells being continually monitored over time, a little over thirty, was "the bare minimum." He agreed that it would be a help since some monitoring wells are lost when property changes hands and the new owners choose not to allow state monitoring of their well.

Purchase option on Shook property falls short

By Michael Howell

The $5,000 offer for a purchase option on 66 acres south of town by the Hamilton City Council was rejected by property owner Garry Shook last week. The city had hoped to gain an option to buy that would give them 90 days to perform due diligence on the option to purchase the land valued at about $1.7 million.

Shook countered with a proposal for a $40,000 option to purchase, according to City Planner Dennis Stranger.

The City Council balked at the counter offer and the motion to make the purchase option died in a tie vote. Councilors Al Mitchell, Joe Petrusaitis and Jenny West nixed the deal, while Councilors Mike LaSalle, Jerry Steele, and Nancy Jo Hendrickson approved it. Mayor Jessica Randazzo abstained from breaking the tie, expressing concerns about the high price tag involved in merely acquiring time to consider the purchase.

Councilors then unanimously sent the matter to the Parks and Recreation and Finance committees for consideration. A public meeting on possible purchase of the property is scheduled for Thursday, January 24, at 6 p.m.

Lost Horse Quarry mining proposal tabled indefinitely

By Michael Howell

The proposal by the Ravalli County Road and Bridge Department to mine Lost Horse Quarry, which morphed from an original proposal to mine road aggregate into one for stockpiling riprap material, has been indefinitely tabled by the County Commissioners.

Both the original proposal and the revised proposal for extracting riprap material were hotly contested by the public. The latest amended version of the project proposed removing up to 25,000 cubic yards of rock annually to be used for riprap. The riprap would be produced over a five-year period while removal of the stockpiled material would stretch over an additional five years. During that five-year production period it was also proposed to produce an equal amount of road gravel for the U.S. Forest Service to use on the federal road system in the area. The Forest Service was to receive the material free of charge in exchange for the riprap which the county would extract. The Forest Service owns the land on which the quarry sits.

Commission Chairperson Carlotta Grandstaff said that by indefinitely tabling the proposal the county was leaving open the possibility of some agreement with the Forest Service in the future to remove riprap from the quarry on an as needed basis for specific projects. She said that the amount of riprap removal being proposed in the current project was not really justifiable.

Kidney for Katelyn?

Katelyn Atkinson is the 12-year-old Stevensville girl in need of a kidney. One of the most essential bits of information about her needs was inadvertently left out of last week's story about her condition. It became immediately apparent when the newspaper received an inquiry from one prospective donor wondering what blood type was required. The answer is O positive or O negative.

If you have O+ or O- blood type and would consider donating a kidney to Katelyn you should contact the Living Donor Program at 206-598-3627. Or for information about organ donation in general see www.uwmedicalcenter.org.

Katelyn receives dialysis for about 12 hours every night while she awaits a kidney transplant.

If you would like to help her family meet the overwhelming expenses involved in her care, you may sponsor, donate to, or attend the Benefit Auction scheduled for March 1, 2008, at the Holiday Inn Parkside in Missoula. Doors open at 5 p.m. All donations are tax deductible and may be made to MCA Foundation, c/o "Kidney for Katelyn", P.O. Box 906, Fairfield MT 59436.

If you would like to donate or have questions you may contact: Sheryl Huetter, 327-4422; Kim Baker, 741-3680; Aaron & Dara Neeley, 251-0426 or cell 360-5909; Mike & Patti Micheletto, 777-5096; or the Montana Cattleman's Foundation, 259-5433.

Page One •	Valley News •	Op/Ed •	Sports •	Calendar •	Classifieds •	Links •	About Us •	Back Issues •	Email Us •	Home
©2007 Bitterroot Star This site was Done By Dooney