It's no wonder that Jack Mauer brought his 310 Permit complaint to a county meeting concerning the establishment of a Streamside Setback Committee. A streamside setback regulation might be the best answer to his kind of complaint. His complaint has to do with the placement of a new home near the bank of the Bitterroot River, south of Hamilton. Too close to the river bank, if you ask the veteran floater and fishing guide. Too close for too many good reasons, says Mauer. Mauer also believes that the landowner's efforts to fortify the new structure's precarious position by cutting trees elsewhere along the bank and cabling them to the bank in front of his house to prevent erosion was done without the proper permits. So was the cutting of the large Ponderosa pine tree on the bank directly in front of the new home site to provide a view of the peaks called the Como Sisters, according to Mauer.

Mauer lodged a formal complaint with the Bitterroot Conservation District (BCD) that was heard on February 13, 2007. The BCD issues free but legally required permits for working on the bed and banks of natural, perennially flowing streams. He accused landowner Jim Cote of removing the vegetation from the banks of the river and cabling logs to the banks in front of his house without acquiring the necessary 310 Permit. As a result several officials ended up visiting the site, including Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) fisheries biologist Chris Clancy and Ravalli County Flood Plain Administrator Laura Hendrix. Clancy routinely participates in the site visits associated with the 310 Permitting process as an advisor and the process has been more closely coordinated with the county flood plain permitting process in recent years.

At the February 13 meeting, according to official minutes, Cote said that FWP official Chris Clancy advised him a few years ago to haul in and anchor some logs in the event the river changed directions. Cote claimed that he did what was discussed with Clancy and that it was done outside 310 Permit jurisdiction at the time. Since then, he said, the river has changed course, especially following the November flood of 2006, washing out all the anchored logs and sending them downstream.

Mauer said at the time that he had photos to prove that Cote cut down the trees on the river bank.

The matter was tabled to allow Mauer time to produce the photos.

Clancy, of FWP, who was not present at the meeting, denies that he ever gave Cote permission or advice to cut down trees along the river and cable them to the bank in front of his house.

At the same February 13 meeting, a request from Cote for a 310 Permit to repair that washed out log stabilization project was heard. The request was tabled for field review.

In order to cable trees to the river bank Cote would need a 310 Permit, a Flood Plain Permit, and a 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE).

BCD Supervisor Jim Lindquist, Clancy and Hendrix visited the site in late February. Lindquist decided from his observations that no 310 Law violation had occurred. Hendrix thought there was evidence of a potential Flood Plain Permitting violation. Clancy thought a 310 violation had been committed.

At their February 27 meeting, the BCD board decided to deny Mauer's complaint.

"I didn't see a 310 Law violation," said Lindquist.

Lindquist said that Cote had claimed that the original log stabilization was done four years ago under FWP Chris Clancy's direction. That puts it outside the one year statute of limitations. Lindquist said that it was hard to tell what the true case was because the river has moved recently and changed everything, but he felt like it was out of the district's jurisdiction at the time. He did say, however, that it appeared that Cote did cut some "bug killed" trees along the bank. But if the stump and roots are left, according to Lindquist, it is not a matter controlled by 310 Law.

"If they leave the roots, it's not a violation," he said. He said that the BCD jurisdiction extends only to the high water mark.

He said that Mauer and Cote had contradicting stories about what happened and he made the best decision that he could.

As far as where the house was placed, Lindquist said, "I can see where that river's going. It's not a good spot for a house."

He said that Cote had also recently applied for a 310 Permit to do some work on an overflow channel just upriver from his house.

"I know what he wanted to do was block it off," said Lindquist. "But we don't allow that. It looks like high water goes down there regularly."

FWP's Chris Clancy said that based upon his view of the site, a 310 Law violation had occurred. He said that there was evidence left, although most had been washed away, that logs had been cabled onto the river bank. He said a 310 Permit was required for that. He said that he never gave Cote advice to do any such work and after seeing the house site he asked Cote if he would consider moving the house. He said Cote rejected the suggestion.

What Ravalli County Flood Plain Administrator Laura Hendrix saw at the site was a possible Flood Plain Permit violation. As a result of her observations and report, Cote applied for an "After the Fact" Flood Plain Permit and paid $1,000, twice the normal cost, to permit his new restoration project.

Hendrix said that in the course of her investigation she determined that no 310 Permit or 404 Permit had been issued for the work.

Jean Ramer of the Army Corps of Engineers said that a 404 Permit would be required to cable logs to the river bank. She said that no 404 application had been received from Cote until recently. A 404 Permit was approved out of the Omaha office on March 8, 2007, for some restoration work on a bank stabilization project that had failed.

The proposed solution to the bank erosion problem is to place vertical timber posts with stone boulders for reinforcement. The original proposal involved simply placing the posts upon the bottom of the river bed. Following review by BCD and FWP officials, the proposal was modified to involve burying the vertical posts and other anchoring modifications. The BCD has approved this project.

Mauer remains dissatisfied with the BCD response to his complaint. Mauer feels that after denying his deeds at the BCD meeting, Cote is now being rewarded with a 310 Permit to justify the house and the view created for it. Mauer said that he is considering an appeal of the BCD decision and that the Bitterroot Chapter of Trout Unlimited was willing to support him in his actions. He called Cote greedy for cutting down the large old Ponderosa pine on the river bank to create his personal view. He said that Cote's unpermitted actions actually served to accelerate the erosion on the bank and removed a valuable shade tree from the river bank. He said those trees serve to keep the river water cool and enhance trout habitat.

Landowner Jim Cote called Mauer's complaint a "nuisance complaint." He said that he had no option for placing his house anywhere other than where the existing septic permit had been issued in 1990 due to state law. He said that where he put his house on his property was no one's business but his own. He said that everything he had done on his property was legal.

Cote's house is situated at least a foot above the 100-year flood plain, according to Flood Plain Administrator Laura Hendrix. She also checked the distance from the established flood plain line to the septic and determined that it still met the 100-foot setback distance.

But that distance, by all accounts, is changing. The river, after washing out the cabled logs, has moved within about 40 feet of the house. If it continues to move in the same direction, and turns the overflow channel just upstream into a major channel, the house will be left on an island.

Will the proposed vertical post barricade work? It's an untested innovation, according to Clancy. Only time will tell. Although he believes the 310 Law was violated, Clancy said, "Now that there is a structure there, there will need to be some sort of protection." He said the 310 Law doesn't prohibit anything, it simply tries to mitigate the negative effects of what is done.

"The real loser, in this case," said Clancy, "is the Bitterroot River."

Groundbreaking held at Victor School

It was a day some thought would never come in Victor on Monday. Ground was broken for the new Arts and Science Complex as well as additional new classrooms for the Victor School. A little more than six years ago, the Victor Schools Foundation took on the daunting task of raising $1 million to match a grant from the Mary Stuart Rogers Foundation of $1 million. The funds were to be used for a new complex which would house an auditorium, band room, science room and lab. Through many generous donations, golf tournaments and looking under almost every rock in the valley, the Victor Schools Foundation reached their goal on December 31, 2005.

Then the Victor School Board went to work, looking to see what else the school district would need to aid its students. Last fall, the school district passed a bond which is to be used for new classrooms, renovations and upgrading of the current school. The school board and the foundation have worked hand in hand to make every dollar stretch as far as possible.

The groundbreaking on Monday was a celebration of the collaboration between the board and the foundation. Speeches were given by Superintendent Orville Getz and Kay Clevidence, president of the Victor Schools Foundation. The School Board was introduced, as were special guests Jeff Rogers of the Mary Stuart Rogers Foundation, Jane Heman of the Jane Heman Foundation and Phyllis Groff. The Victor School Band played and a couple of students spoke.

Commissioners hear from state about new air quality standards

By Michael Howell

State officials from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) spoke to the Ravalli County Commissioners last week about the 1997 Ambient Air Quality Standards that have reduced the allowable quantity of fine particulate matter in the atmosphere. Newly reduced ambient air quality standards for fine particulates have placed Ravalli County in violation of the state standards. The county needs to address these violations before the new standards take effect in the year 2010, according to state officials.

DEQ officials Bob Haveck, Bob Jeffrey and Deb Wolfe told the commissioners that the primary aim of the regulations was to protect human health, including sensitive populations with health issues such as children and senior citizens. Secondarily, to protect the public welfare through effects on crops, buildings, and visibility.

They told the commissioners that Ravalli County is in violation of the new standards on certain days. The ambient air quality violations had to do with small diameter (2.5 microns per cubic meter of air) particulates. Sources for such pollution generally include wood burning stoves, power plants, heavy duty diesel engines, cars and trucks, natural sources, non-road issues, forest fires and industrial sources. Generally, road dust pollution is of larger diameter (about 10 microns per cubic meter of air) and is heavier and thus does not travel as far as the finer particulates. During air inversions in the valley, they said, the finer particulate is uniformly distributed throughout the air in the valley.

According to unofficial minutes of the meeting, Commissioner Greg Chilcott asked about the science behind the increased strictness in the standard. Haveck stated that there have been thousands of studies on pollution and mortality and numerous scientists suggested the 2.5 micron per cubic meter limit for any given 24-hour period. He said that the scientists actually recommended a lower limit than what the government adopted.

Wolfe explained that the U.S. Clean Air Act deals with national ambient air quality standards, the air pollution permit programs, the toxic air pollutants, visibility protections, and compliance and enforcement issues. She said that Montana Senators Lee Metcalf and Max Baucus have both added amendments to the Act, putting Montana on the leading edge of clean air issues.

The State of Montana Clean Air Act was passed in 1967 and established the Board of Environmental Review (a panel of people appointed by the Governor who set the rules); the DEQ which implements the rules; the Montana Ambient Air Quality Standards; Emission Standards; local air pollution control programs, and compliance and enforcement.

Congress also directed the states to research, plan and monitor air pollution and enforce rules. The Board of Environmental Review allows counties then to adopt programs for addressing pollution problems and meeting standards.

Options for local implementation include open burning regulations and techniques; woodstove regulations; paving, sanding, street sweeping requirements; stationary source permits (asphalt batch plants); vehicle maintenance requirements; and emergency episode rules.

Although wildfires represent a significant component in Ravalli County's violation spikes, there are also significant violations in winter, especially during inversions.

The county currently has only one certified air monitoring station and that is located in Hamilton.

The effective date of the new standards is 2010. Before then, state officials hope to have more specific data about the actual source of the finer particulate pollution in Ravalli County skies to help enable the county to come up with appropriate programs to address the problems. Those plans are due at the EPA by April, 2013.

Page One •	Valley News •	Op/Ed •	Sports •	Calendar •	Classifieds •	Links •	About Us •	Back Issues •	Email Us •	Home
©2006 Bitterroot Star This site was Done By Dooney