Badger/Two Medicine Travel Plan

Troads... (2.20 / 5)

I took both my daughter and son on their first packtrips, when they were six, into the South Fork Two Medicine over into Badger Creek.  They're 22 and 20 now, and even then, most of those trails were "troads".  I haven't been in there lately, but I'm sure the situation hasn't improved.

But now the tribe is contesting the new travel plan?!

That is some remarkable country, and somehow I doubt even Napi would be down with motorized use in that area.

This past Saturday evening I backpacked into an elk hidey hole (or nearly so), and surely you understand why long-standing policy prevents me from saying exactly where.  About an hour before daylight, I plainly heard a couple of ATV's in a private section, about a mile and a half away.  How anyone thinks they're going to sneak up on anything that way...
But at least I got into elk, although alas not Mr. Big, but it was big fun anyway!
Lest anyone think I'm opposed to internal combustion engines, though, my son got a nice elk (5X5) yesterday morning, on a ranch where he'd done some haying last summer.  In fact, the rancher loaded it into our truck with his tractor!!  Literally the first one we've ever brought home in one piece...
Up in the Badger, though... that's different.

---

by: Rimrock @ Tue Oct 27, 2009 at 18:37:57 PM UTC

The Blackfeet Tribe SUPPORTS the plan (2.20 / 5)

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear about the Blackfeet Tribe's position - they support the current travel plan with the ban on motorized access and, as I understand it, the tribe's work on the proposal was a big influence on the plan that has been enacted. This property holds cultural significance for the tribe. Not that every Blackfeet tribal member is behind the ban, of course, at least one is a named person in the suit.

The tribe has a stake, because the reservation abuts the National Forest here, and because tribal members enjoy (and depend upon) fishing and hunting rights on reservation lands next to the NF - and because the region is culturally significant.  

 

ars longa - vita brevis

---

by: NorthernFlicker @ Tue Oct 27, 2009 at 21:17:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oops (4.00 / 1)

Sorry 'bout that.
I saw that they supported it, but must have gone off the curve about the violating tribal treaties part.
So who is suing?  Surely not those two guys I glassed Sunday?
 

---

by: Rimrock @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 01:57:58 AM UTC

It is confusing... (4.00 / 1)

To answer your question:

Presenting the suit as plaintiffs: Jim Fortune and his wife Julie, Dewayne Blackman, Montana Trail Vehicle Riders Association, Capital Trail Vehicle Riders, Association, Montanans for Multiple Use and Citizens for Balanced Use (financial support).  

Here's the link to the story about the suit:

http://shelbypromoter.com/arti...

Here's a response to the suit by people in favor of the ban:

http://www.earthjustice.org/ne...

Whoever you saw on Sunday was probably operating in violation of the current ban - next time, get a description, and if possible license plate numbers to the forest service office in Choteau.  They have law enforcement in the area on foot and on horseback, but can use the help of concerned citizens.

Thanks.

ars longa - vita brevis

---

by: NorthernFlicker @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 05:28:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]