We’ve got a problem folks. As the price of gas increases and supplies dwindle, people drive less and switch to more fuel efficient vehicles. That’s a good thing for the environment and for the economy but the funding for transportation infrastructure is tied to a per-gallon gas tax.  We pay a federal tax of 18 cents on each gallon of gas. On top of that we we are assessed state tax. In Montana we pay an additional 28 cents per gallon. The federal tax has not been increased since 1993. These taxes are used to maintain and improve our roads, highways and bridges. As the taxes collected decrease, so does the condition of our infrastructure. It is hard to increase the gas tax for many reasons, but especially in tough economic times people tend to be resistant to any kind of tax increase.

One of the proposed solutions to this problem is a Vehicle Miles Traveled tax (VMT). The Bugle brought up this subject not long ago. On the surface a VMT sounds like a reasonable solution. You are taxed on the actual miles you drive. There are many problems with any new type of taxation and with the VMT in particular. Robert Gibbs, press secretary to President Obama has said that a VMT  “is not, and will not be, the policy of the Obama administration“. But, somebody forgot to tell the Department of Transportation. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood thinks that we should look at the VMT. An Associated Press article today says that the University of Iowa Public Policy Center is seeking 1,500 people to participate in a $16.5 million study for the DOT. Billings is one of six cities where volunteers are being recruited.

The study would install a small computer in the vehicles of participants to track how much and where they drive. No mileage tax will be assessed during the study. The collected data will be used to test driver’s acceptance, attitudes and driving habits and will be shared with the states. Similar systems have been tested in Oregon, California, Texas, Idaho, North Carolina and other states but have not yet been implemented.

In the opinion of the Bugle editorial staff, testing for a VMT is a huge waste of money. Not going to happen. No matter how logical  the idea sounds, there are just too many reasons why the mileage tax approach just won’t work. The principal objection of course, is one of privacy. There is just no way, citizens are going to agree with having an onboard computer that tracks where their vehicle is at all times. Proponents are quick to give assurances that the data would never be used to track drivers, but of course, the possibility of doing so can’t be avoided. Once in place, it would be a simple matter to use the information to assess traffic law violations, or track movements of criminals or even law abiding citizens. The privacy abuses of the last administration are still too fresh in our memories.

As to fairness, if everyone is taxed the same for a mile of travel, it means that a Prius would be taxed at the same rate as a Hummer and there would be an adverse affect on fuel efficient vehicle sales. Proponents are quick to point out that different tax rates could be assessed based on the type of vehicle, location, time of day, type of road, etc. This very quickly leads to an extremely confusing, costly and opaque system that would become a nightmare to administer. Such a system would surely lead to constant political tinkering. Groups with current political clout could receive lower tax rates with the flick of a microchip.

One of the popular ideas for a VMT would be some sort of congestion pricing. Taxes would increase on certain roads at certain times to reduce overcrowding on highways. This of course would only lead to making it easier for higher-income drivers to get where they are going. Normal folks, like you and me, would just end up driving more miles to avoid higher taxes, a counter-intuitive result.

You could charge a higher mileage tax for large trucks which are harder on the highways. Were does that leave Montana farmers and ranchers who have to travel a lot of miles in large trucks to get supplies and crops to market cities? And of course, how do you charge for fuel use that never sees the highway? Currently you pay tax for gas that is used in your lawnmower, chain saw, tractor, hay baler… And, how do we tax emergency vehicles, fire trucks, ambulances, etc. Can they opt out? Do they get a special rate? In any event this would lead to a lot of tax that is currently collected that would not be under a VMT.

The answer, of course, is to grit your teeth, make your case and raise the gas tax. People will thrash about and scream bloody murder, but it will be much simpler to understand, fairer all around and will not result in a massive new bureaucracy with bewildering rules. Go ahead with the study. The data will be very useful in helping to understand driving habits and can be used in other ways to improve our highways, but drop the VMT.

Whoa, somebody pinch me! Yesterdays article about the Tongue River Railroad easement has been proven incorrect. The Associated Press is reporting that the Montana FWP Commissioners today “declined to grant a 25-acre easement sought by the railroad for now“. I recant everything I ever said about the FWP Commissioners. Even though they promised more negotiations with the Tongue River Railroad Company and could now face federal condemnation proceedings, they took a stand for sturgeon saying, “they were uncomfortable with a tentative deal to let the railroad pass through a state fish hatchery in Miles City where endangered pallid sturgeon are raised“. Just when you think you’ve got ‘em figured out… Give the guys some credit for cajones. As a hopeful sign, Rebecca Jakes Dockter,  attorney for the Commission said, when asked about the condemnation option,  “Unfortunately, this is where it will go, if it goes in at all“. Hopefully this is also a good sign for the other eight easements over state lands needed by the railroad. Maybe they won’t be rubber-stamped.

In other news, the article states that railroad developer Mike Gustafson revealed that the road could cost $600 million instead of the original estimate around $300 million. Independent estimates put the figure at closer to $1 billion for the screwball scheme.

You’ve gotta love these guys. There can’t be a better argument for gun control than crazy Republicans who shoot themselves in the foot every chance they get. The spectacle of conservative nutcases vehemently attacking female Hispanic Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, even though they know it will alienate every Hispanic voter and half of the women’s vote and not make a damn bit of difference, couldn’t have been orchestrated better by Howard Dean. Her nomination has been vetted by nearly every legal organization in the country and dig as they must, Republicans have failed to find even the shadow of a smoking gun. Most of the demented dingbats have seen the writing on the wall and are loath to estrange a future Supreme Court judge before whom they will be litigating. Newtie called her a racist and then backed off. Rush is even making nice in some of his recent remarks. The NRA is staying with toned-down rhetoric so far.

Not to worry though, there are still enough right-wing cuckoos out there who feel that the only way to make their case is by using the Swift Boat / Willie Horton approach, to keep the fun in the process. Christian activist Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue and the Society for Truth and Justice (yes, the Schiavo case Terry) has begun a 12-city tour to smear the next Supreme Court judge. His brochure attacks Sotomayor as a dupe of “arch child-killer President
Obama” and worries about “the babies who will die under Sotomayor’s judicial reign
of terror“.

By gleefully putting the face of Bobby Jindal, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin on their party and using time-honored tactics like this, I think we can depend on the faith, flag and fetus party to continue shrinking into obscurity well into the future.

Another Montana Superstar hits the show circuit. In February, the Bugle covered the coming out party for another International Superstar Ford F-1066 which was headed for the IH Collectors Club convention in Iowa. Now Big Bud 16V-747, the mammoth machine owned by the Williams brothers of Big Sandy is heading heading out and will be on display July 9-12 at Historic Farm Days Penfield, Illinois.

This monster was built in 1977 by Northern Manufacturing in Havre for a cotton operation in California. After leaving the cotton business, Big Bud saw duty at Willowbrook Farms in Indlantic, Florida. In 1997, the Williams brothers were able to purchase the tractor and return it back home to Montana. At 27-feet long, 20-feet wide, 14-feet high and tipping the scales at over 100,000 pounds, Big Bud can lay claim to the title of “World’s Largest Farm Tractor“. Firing up the awsome 16-cylinder, 900 horsepower engine lets everybody know that Big Bud is on the job. Robert Williams says the machine draws crowds to his Big Sandy farm, as well it should.

This sweet ride is truly a Montana celebrity. Today you can buy Big Bud toy tractor replicas, Coffee Mugs, Steins, Coasters, posters, a calendar and its even its own fan book. I even found a Big Bud signature edition polo shirt on Ebay autographed by the Williams brothers. See the video on YouTube. The “Monstrosity of Montana” is off to Illinois to do Montana proud!

Okay so, the Commission doesn’t meet until tomorrow to decide on the easement for the Tongue River Railroad through the Miles City Fish Hatchery, but since it’s all but a foregone conclusion that they will grant the easement, the Bugle just decided to get the headline out of the way.

Here’s what’s going to happen: From the draft Environmental Assessment,

“Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) proposes to grant an easement and right of way on property belonging to the State of Montana that is a portion of the Miles City Fish Hatchery (MCFH) facility, which is operated by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, to the Tongue River Railroad Company, Inc. (TRRC), a Delaware corporation. The easement and right of way is required for the sole purpose of constructing and operating a single track railroad line, together with bridges, culverts, crossings, rails, ties, ballasts, signals, wires, switches, and other materials in, on, over and across land owned by the MCFH. This action will impact 24.85 acres of the total 242.25- acre site located west of Miles City, Montana“.

The Billings Gazette had a short article this morning outlining some of the remaining concerns,

“Hatchery officials have said they’re concerned about possible derailments and vibrations from trains that could disrupt breeding fish. But because the railroad’s developers have federal condemnation authority, the state is considering granting the easement in exchange for a $25 million insurance policy paid for by the railroad“.

You see, the Tongue River Railroad has been declared a national treasure by the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB) even while it is still a pipe dream.  The EA says, “The purpose of the TRRC rail line is to provide for the transport of coal from existing and future mines in the Montana-Wyoming Powder River Basin to markets in the upper Midwest and northeast states“. Well, that’s not exactly true. The rail line would not provide any new transportation for existing Montana mines. There aren’t any mines anywhere near the proposed route. As for future mines, they are talking about the Otter Creek coal tracts which are being pushed hard by Governor “Coal Cowboy” Schweitzer and Great Northern Properties. The decision on leasing those tracts won’t come before the Montana State Land Board until September. Excuse me, do you happen to know who is the chairman of the Land Board? Oh yeah, I forgot…

Extending the rail line from Ashland to Decker wasn’t really necessary for any Montana mines. We don’t have markets served by the southern route and the Otter Creek coal is too high in sodium content for most power plants. The advantage to the company was twofold. First, it was necessary for the TRRC to prove that the line was of national importance, not just to Montana. Second, by extending the line, they were able to get the STB to declare that there is a public demand for the line and since “the interests of shippers are accorded substantial importance in assessing the public interest“, the TRRC could be granted a federal right of eminent domain which could be used as a very large hammer to hold over the head of Montana. They also want to cross other state-owned lands. The shippers in question of course, are Wyoming coal companies who would like to get access to northeastern markets. It’s just a coincidence that Montana wants to sell their Otter Creek coal, which is of much lower quality than Wyoming coal, to those same markets. Who wins?

I hope you have had a chance to visit the Tongue River Valley. It is truly one of the beautiful gems of Montana. If you haven’t been there or, if it’s been a while, take some time and see the valley this summer. I would recommend sooner rather than later. With the impacts from the railroad, the new gas and coal development, methane water flowing up the Tongue River from Wyoming and who knows what’s coming next, if you wait too long you might have to wear a rubber suit and a respirator to visit. And as for the hatchery, don’t worry, it’s insured.

Wyoming wants to send us a surprise.  A hearing is scheduled Thursday before U.S. District Judge Clarence Brimmer in Cheyenne over a case to invalidate water quality rules for southeast Montana rivers. The case, brought by Marathon Oil and Devon Energy against Montana and the EPA, seeks once again, to dismiss numerical water quality standards imposed by the Montana Board of Environmental Review (BER) in 2003. The companies claim that the standards “put a crimp on drilling in Montana and neighboring Wyoming”. Awww…

BLM predicts that Wyoming will see 50,000 to 120,000 new CBM wells in the next 15-20 years. Each well will pump water out of coal seams at a rate of up to 100 gallons per minute and produce 20 tons of salt per year. Gas companies figure that the most economical way to handle that ludicrous amount of salty water is to just pour it into the nearest drainage and let it flow north into Montana. Montana disagrees. The salt water wreaks havoc with irrigated land. Pumping prodigious amounts of water dries up irrigation and stock wells from nearby farmers and ranchers. Along with the wells comes thousands of miles of roads and pipelines, thousands of wastewater ponds, and millions of acres of destroyed wildlife habitat.

Not that we don’t trust our neighbor to the south to protect us from polluted water flowing north but, a recent report by the Wyoming Environmental Quality Council found that the “Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality is an embarrassment to the state…” for ignoring science and continuing to issue “permits that allow too much sodium and salt in coal-bed methane discharge water for agricultural use“.

The courts have consistently upheld Montana’s water quality rules and our right to institute those rules.  In 2007, District Judge Blair Jones upheld Montana standards for electrical conductivity (EC) and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) in a suit by four methane gas companies.

“Jones rejected each of the five claims industry lawyers offered in attempting to overturn the numeric water quality standards. He found that the BER acted properly when it determined enforceable numeric standards were needed to regulate methane development and that the state was warranted in taking proactive measures to protect water quality.“

Industry lawyers argued that Montana should wait until actual damage was done before instituting such strict standards. That’s a bit like waiting until the plane crashes to fix the broken fuel pump.

In 2008 the federal government again approved the Montana standards to protect state rivers from downstream pollution. Gas producers and the state of Wyoming filed suit over the rules after negotions between the two states collapsed last year. The president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming called the Montana standards “ridiculously low“. Something is certainly ridiculous here and it ain’t Montana’s attempt to maintain it’s clean water. These guys will never learn.

While fishing Mitchell Slough in the Bitterroot valley recently, brothers Scott and Patrick Godown, were fined $185 each for trespassing into the Union Ditch. They believed they were on the slough, but as shown by videotape they had strayed. The brothers just wanted to fish the slough to see what all the fuss was about. They were harassed along the way as they tried to fish by security employees of the Tucker Crossing Ranch which is owned by Charles Schwab. The security folks videotaped their every move. They were trying to abide by the Montana Stream Access Law and stay withing the “Ordinary Highwater Marks” but evidently wandered into the Union Ditch which is privately owned.

Last November, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that Mitchell Slough is public water and is open to recreation. That just never sat well with

Image from Montana Wildlife Federation

the wealthy landowners along the slough who thought they had their own private fishing reserve and didn’t take to having the great unwashed fishing in their front yard. The landowners tried, during the legislative session earlier this year, to push changes to the Stream Access Law that would have exempted the Mitchell and many other Montana streams from the the law. Since that didn’t work, they have done everything they can to harass legal fishermen including having their flunkies throw rocks at people.

The brothers Godown said “Most people won’t want to go fishing where they are being videotaped and their every move is being documented”, but then, I’m sure that’s just the point. They noted that the fishing was pretty good, they have learned their lesson, paid their dues and they will be back fishing the slough. I think we can all learn something from those boys. Just make sure that you put on your Sunday best when you go to fish Mitchell Slough, be polite and follow the rules. It can’t be long before the videos show up on YouTube.

June 5th marked the 33rd anniversary of the collapse of the Teton Dam in Idaho. Following the recommendations in a 14-page EIS, the newly-built dam was filling for the first time. When it reached 270 feet in depth and was backing up a 17-mile-long reservoir it began to fail. Eleven people perished, 18,000 head of livestock died and 25,000 were left homeless. The flood caused more than 200 landslides in the downstream canyon and caused more than $2 billion in damage. The federal government paid out over $300 million in claims.

On June 9th, the state of Idaho inked an $800,000 deal with the Bureau of Reclamation to study ways of adding 100,000 acre-feet of storage to the Teton River basin. The study includes the ludicrous idea of rebuilding Teton Dam! The original dam was built on a highly-permeable volcanic ash flow. There’s no way it could not have failed and now they want to put it back in the same place! This idea is part of the legacy of Larry “Wide-Stance” Craig. After some 28 years in Congress, Craig had some lewd-conduct problems and he resigned and then he didn’t resign and then he just faded away. But, before he left he managed to shepard legislation through Congress for a study of how to bring more irrigation water to the Idaho desert.

The Bugle doesn’t believe for a minute that anyone could be so stupid or insensitive as to suggest that we stick a 305-foot-tall death trap back upstream of the same folks who lived through the collapse, but you have to be mentally deficient to even advance the possibility of such a project. It borders on government malfeasance. Sure southern Idaho could use more water. It’s a desert people! If this flood had come during the night, thousands more people would have died. A new dam would cost well over a billion dollars. If we have to build another dam, let’s think about it for a while first and let’s drop the idea of rebuilding the original, no matter what the engineers say.

There’s really no surprise here, but New West is reporting that H.R. 2766, the bill to repeal the exemption for hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in the Safe Drinking Water Act, sponsored by Representative Diana DeGette, D-Colorado “probably won’t see a vote this year, either. She tells New West that fracking will see more studies before it sees more regulation”.

The Bugle has covered this subject before. Hydraulic Fracturing is the process by which oil and gas companies inject prodigious amounts of water and sand, spiked with lots of toxic chemicals, into production wells under extreme pressure to break up a geologic formation to release gases which can then be pumped to the surface along with some of the injected fluid. 40% of the fracturing fluid remains in the ground after the product is removed where it can make it’s way into drinking water supplies. Even though the bill has been introduced before, the oil and gas industry came out this time with all lobbyists blazing to stop the legislation.

In 2005, hydraulic fracturing was exempted from provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act on the basis of a fuzzy study by EPA that concluded that there was no danger to drinking water from the process. The industry contends that there has never been a case of contamination by fracking, which of course is a big fat untruth. See here and here and here, among many other incidents. EPA’s own scientists disagreed with the findings, but oil and gas had powerful advocates in Dubya and Dick Cheney (former CEO of Halliburton, one of the worst offenders). The energy task force headed by Cheney also pushed the benefits of fracking while ignoring the science and recommending the exemption. At hearings on a similar bill in 2008 by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA), Dr. Theo Colborn, a Ph D. in zoology and president of the Endocrine Disruption Exchange, a non-profit group that focuses on health problems from low-dose chemical exposures, said,

“The toxic chemicals are employed for fracturing operations and are added to alter the underground strata to allow methane to escape up the well pipe. We have identified 171 products used in Colorado containing altogether 245 different chemicals, 92 percent of which have adverse health effects.”

Since the ingredients don’t legally have to be revealed by the companies, it is almost impossible to determine where chemical pollutant contamination came from or whether they were the result of drilling operations and that’s the way the companies want to keep it.

Nine of ten oil and gas wells drilled in the U.S. use the fracturing process. Halliburton makes about $1.5 billion a year from fracking. Each company claims that their own witches brew of chemicals is regarded as a trade secret and to reveal the contents would harm their competitiveness. The oil and gas industry lobbyists have come out screaming and hollering that federal regulation would mean the end of the profitible practice and would likely destroy the entire industry. They say that state regulation is sufficient. The truth however is slightly different,

“Currently Alabama is the ONLY state in the US with special provisions to regulate hydraulic fracturing.  The other states do not have specific fracturing rules; they rely on general drilling rules – casing, logs, pressure monitoring, waste disposal, etc. – to indirectly cover hydraulic fracturing.”

The current legislation seeks merely to require companies to reveal the toxic chemicals in their fracturing fluid to regulators so they know what they are dealing with, not the exact recipe, just the specific bad stuff in case there is a problem. The short bill also would require companies to let medical personnel know what kinds of chemicals a patient might have been exposed to when there is a medical emergency. To not do so, might mean that a few people will die, but it’s the industry contention that it’s a small price to pay to save the entire oil and gas industry from embarassment and maybe a few more lawsuits.

As you happily prepare for a fun-filled July 4th weekend the State of Montana, DNRC, The State Land Board and Governor “Coal Cowboy” Schweitzer are busily drawing up plans to utterly destroy the Tongue River valley. Two public meetings were held this week, one in Miles City and another in Lame Deer to seek comments on the appraisal of the Otter Creek coal tracts. You remember Otter Creek. This is the nearly free windfall that would bring the state $1.4 billion over the next four decades. All that is required from us is to ignore a bit of rape and pillage on one of the

Tongue River Valley - Marcin Roguski

most beautiful parts of Montana.  The state owns something like 600 million tons of coal just south of Ashland via a shady deal with the feds in 2002. The other half of the coal reserves are owned by Great Northern Properties, the largest single owner of coal reserves in the U.S. GNP president Chuck Kerr says “Great Northern Properties is in Montana to do one thing and one thing only and that is to get its coal developed. That is all we do.”

There are a couple of minor problems with selling the Otter Creek leases that need to be worked out however. The coal is very high in sodium content (7%-8%) which causes slag problems in conventional coal-fired boilers. The market is only about 20 million tons per year compared to the market for Wyoming coal which is around 400 million tons/year currently. All of that 20 million tons is already provided by other Montana mines. We have found a few power plants in the northeast that we might be able to foist some of our crappy coal off on though. It will cost about $200 million just to get the mine started. The Governor wants to build a coal-to-liquids power plant on the site, but he’s the only proponent so, that’s probably not going to happen. Secretary of State Brad Johnson called the plan for a coal-to-liquids plant a “pipe dream” and GNP doesn’t support the idea.

The Otter Creek tracts are fairly remote and right now there is no way to get the coal to the tenuous market. Got that covered too. The Tongue River Railroad Company has been trying to get a 150-mile rail line built between Miles City and Decker, where they can tie in to the main BN line, for about 30 years but they didn’t have anything to haul. Now they would have Otter Creek coal. There are a couple of problems. Though most of the line has been permitted, the environmental assessments are 20-30 years old. They were done haphazardly in three sections over many years. They don’t consider the recent increase in coal-bed methane development. They don’t consider proposed power plants to burn the coal, proposed pipelines or transmission lines. There is nearly unanimous opposition by all landowners along the route. The railroad will affect tens of thousands of acres of productive ranch land and is almost surely a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). It would be incredibly expensive, coming in at $500-$600 million. Building the Tongue River Railroad may just act to open up new markets for cleaner coal from Wyoming. In fact, there are some worries that Wyoming producers may just buy up the leases to assure that the Montana coal never comes into production. If you build a shorter rail line, say just from Miles City to Otter Creek, or from Otter Creek down to Decker, it doesn’t have the advantages of common carrier status which means no right of eminent domain against those unruly ranchers and probably no easy financing. The railroad will impact many ranches, cross many small streams, imperil endangered species, increase sediment in the Tongue River, impact several prehistoric and historic cultural sites, cross a bunch of public roadways, put out lots of harmful emissions and noise… Oh yeah, they also want to build the railroad through the Miles City fish hatchery. We have a $25 million investment in the hatchery and it has the only population of endangered, disease-free pallid sturgeon in the country. Vibration from the several trains per day will affect the larval and egg stages of the fish in the hatchery. Low level vibration can harm the reproductive viability of developing fish. And then there is that tricky global warming thing. But hey, did I mention $1.4 billion!

DNRC and the State Land Board will be accepting public comment on this stupid proposal through July 31. Written public comment may be submitted to DNRC by letter, fax, or email. Letters should be addressed to: Monte Mason, Minerals Management Bureau Chief, Dept. of Natural Resources and Conservation, PO Box 201601, Helena, MT 59620-1601. Letters by fax should be addressed to Mason and sent to (406) 444-2684; comments may also be emailed to Mason at mmason@mt.gov.

See the MEIC, Montana Conservation Voters and Politics, Peaks and Valleys for more information.

It might also not hurt to contact individual members of the Montana State Land Board:

Brian Schweitzer, Governor  406-444-3111 Contact Web Page
Steve Bullock, Attorney General 406-444-2026 contactdoj@mt.gov
Denise Juneau, Superintendent of Public Instruction  1-888-231-9393  OPISupt@mt.gov
Monica Lindeen, State Auditor 800-332-6148   email Dave at dvannice@mt.gov
Linda McCulloch, Secretary of State 406-444-2034 sos@mt.gov