FWP will move forward on Stoltze easements, but bike paths out

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks is recommending the completion of the South Whitefish Range Conservation Project, which includes conservation easements that would preserve more than 10,000 acres of F.H. Stoltze Land and Lumber Co. property from development. 

FWP will recommend the project to both the Fish and Wildlife Commission and the State Land Board for their approval. One conservation easement would protect 3,020 acres in Haskill Basin north of Whitefish and the other would protect 7,150 acres of land along Trumbull Creek just to the northwest of Columbia Falls. 

“FWP believes the completion of this project is in the best interest of providing clean water for the City of Whitefish, while also balancing the needs of working forests, fish and wildlife habitat, and public recreation opportunity,” Region One supervisor Jim Williams wrote in the decision. 

Both easements allow Stoltze to continue to manage and harvest trees from the forests under the American Tree Farm System Program standards of sustainability, while maintaining public access and prohibiting residential development. 

FWP released a draft environmental assessment of the project in October. FWP received 56 comments on the project, with 29 of those in support, none opposed and the remaining comments coming from those with questions or concerns they wanted addressed. At a public hearing and in written comments, the easements brought praise from residents, but also concerns from users of the bike single-track trail network on the property, concerns over public access points to the lands, and clarification over “dispersed recreation” on the property. 

Bike riders said the environmental assessment failed to acknowledge the off-road trail network that currently exists on the property and the level of public use it receives. They pointed out that the conservation easement only guarantees dispersed recreation and the management plan allows mountain biking, but doesn’t assure trail use continuing into the future. 

FWP, in its decision, said it was aware of the use, but not the extent of the use on the property. 

“Public comment clearly demonstrated that the single-track, off-road trail on the property is extensive and heavily utilized by a wide variety of recreational users,” the decision says. “However, the Stoltze Open Lands Policy that has covered this property for the last 20-plus years clearly states that construction of trails on their property is not allowed. In addition, some comments identified that such trail use can cause erosion, impacts to fish and wildlife habitat, and social conflicts if not properly managed.”

FWP acknowledges that the trail system exists, but notes that the construction of the trail system was never authorized by Stoltze. 

“The management plan will be modified to secure mechanized travel, both motorized and nonmotorized, only on the existing road network,” FWP writes. “Stoltze will retain the exclusive right to manage and limit public use on the existing single-track, off-road trails and any off-road trails proposed or created in the future.”

FWP said that while intensive public use may be allowed on the property in the future, it must be balanced with the other purposes of the easement, namely protecting the city’s water supply, sustainable forest management, and fish and wildlife habitat. 

The next most common issue was regarding legal public access points to the property. People expressed concern about parking on private property around the Stoltze property and that the establishment of the easements would increase the levels of public use. 

“FWP is concerned that development of additional parking may promote increased recreational use, which is not the intent of this proposal. However, we recognize that these conflicts exist and are committed to working with the landowner and local community to find solutions that work for all parties and are consistent with the proposed conservation easement and management plan,” FWP notes. 

One of the questions raised during public comments included clarification of the term “dispersed recreation,” which is secured by the conservation easement and used to limit the types of recreation that can occur on the property under the management plan. 

In their recommendation, FWP says single-track, off-road trails do not fit under the definition because they need to be managed to keep the trail free of brush and debris, but other uses such as hiking and horseback riding may use the existing trail network because they do not require a managed trail system. 

“We view dispersed recreation as all the activities that may take place on the land that are not developed or managed to concentrated use,” FWP notes. 

The easements come with significant costs. The Haskill Basin easement will draw on a $7 million grant from the federal Forest Legacy Program, $2 million from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Habitat Conservation Plan land acquisition program and $7.7 million from the city of Whitefish. 

In addition, Stoltze has agreed to sell the easement at 75 percent of market value, a donation of $3.9 million. The total cost is $16.7 million.

The Trumbull Creek easement is a $9.5 million deal, with $6.5 million from the Forest Legacy program, $2 million from the Habitat Conservation Plan program and $1 million from private donations.

The draft environmental assessment along with the decision of no significant impact will become the final environmental assessment for the project.