Bridge access bill near compromise
ByBy Charles S. Johnson, State Bureau
Opponents of a bridge access bill raised some concerns at a Senate hearing Thursday, but the bill’s sponsor said he’s confident these differences can be ironed out.
Twenty-five people representing groups ranging from the Montana Wildlife Federation and Trout Unlimited to the Montana Farm Bureau Federation and Farmers Union lined up for House Bill 190, by Rep. Kendall Van Dyk, D-Billings, before the Senate Fish and Game Committee. Attorney General Steve Bullock also endorsed it.
The bill seeks to end a dispute that arose in 2000 when landowners in Madison County, including billionaire absentee landowner James Cox Kennedy, put fences on county bridges. Sportsmen contended these fences denied them their right to access to public streams and rivers
“This is the first time where I think we’ve clearly struck a balance between our unique access in Montana and the needs of farmers and ranchers,” Van Dyk said.
HB190 backers have deliberately removed partisan politics from the debate, he said, pointing to the House’s 97-3 final vote for the bill.
After a similar attempt failed in 2007, at the urging of Rep. Mike Milburn, R-Cascade, groups representing sportsmen, agriculture, counties and others began working out their differences and crafted what is now HB190. The Montana Stockgrowers Association was part of the effort but pulled out before it was completed to await a district court decision. ”At every step of the way, we made sure the landowners would have every possible say,” said Mark Aagenes of Montana Trout Unlimited. “We were able to take care of almost all of their concerns in the House.”
John Youngberg of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation said the group had opposed these access bills for years but, at Milburn’s suggestion, participated in the two-year collaborative effort.
“We appreciate this bill,” Youngberg said. “It’s time to put this emotional issue behind us.”
A dozen people, led by an attorney for the Stockgrowers Association, opposed the bill, mostly over two issues. One was to limit the legal liability of landowners in those areas where they put fences on bridges.
Stockgrowers’ attorney John Bloomquist said HB190 seeks to open access at county roads and bridges, which creates two potential legal liabilities for landowners. One is when sportsmen go from the road to the stream or river and the other involves the construction of the fence.
“Our suggestion is if you’re really serious about protecting landowners, be very express about it,” Bloomquist said.
Afterward, Van Dyk said, “I made it clear all along that any way we can exempt landowners from liability, I’m all for it.”
Bloomquist urged these changes, saying, “This Legislature is on the cusp of passing a bill that is really a win-win for sportsmen and landowners.”
The other issue raised by Bloomquist and others was that of prescriptive easements. These are easements that counties acquire after years of traditional use without ever paying for them.
Chuck Denowh, representing United Property Owners of Montana, said the bill, if not amended, could be used “to create access where it doesn’t exist on prescriptive easements.”
Van Dyk said the bill does not cover prescriptive easements.
“No matter what language we land on to clarify we’re not dealing with prescriptive easements, we’re not dealing with prescriptive easements,” he said.
If there is a way to further make that even more clear, Van Dyk said he’s open to doing it.
Cory Swanson, speaking for Citizens for Balanced Use, said his group won’t support the bill without those two changes.
“This is the moment,” he said. “You have the solution before you.”
Later, Van Dyk said, “I think it’s clear that we’re just about there.”
“My main concern is to make sure we can keep the cattle in the pasture and provide access to sportsmen and women to the river,” he said. “It’s really quite simple the message it sends: landowners can build fences to bridges. Sportsmen will have access under the law to rivers and stream, and access isn’t for sale in Montana.”
The committee took no action on the bill Thursday.
Published by Helena Independent Record, 3-20-09
"I think that it’s going to all work out, with the changes that we have agreed to. It’s not as much (spending for some programs) as I would’ve hoped, but apparently it’s more than other people wanted. As usual, we are trying to find the middle.” 
"[On term limits:] You empower the executive, you empower the lobbyists and that's not good for the system because then we lose what the citizen Legislature brings.” 