Unsportsmanlike Conduct: Poachers Filch Fauna, Forfeit $14K

Now that was expensive antelope meat... and they didn't even get to keep it!

South Dakota Game Fish and Parks announced Thursday that eight hunters have been fined $14,000 for a string of hunting violations. Conservation Officer Josh Carr stopped a big group of pheasant hunters in Stanley County for a routine license check. Officer Carr found the party had basically poached a whole bunch of antelope out in Butte and Harding counties. The perps and their fines (as listed by GF&P):

• Randy Malterud, 44, of Watertown, S.D. Fraud to obtain a big game license, unlawful possession of big game and failure to tag big game. Fines and court costs of $852, one-year loss of hunting privileges
• Glynn Grantham, 35, of Houston Texas. Misdemeanor violation of the Lacey Act, $525 fine, $8,000 in restitution
• Wesley Grantham, 42, of Hayti, S.D. Five counts of unlawful possession of big game, $500 fine and court costs, 30 days in jail, 30 days suspended, one-year of loss of hunting privileges
• Brian Willard, 42, of West Des Moines, Iowa. Misdemeanor violation of the Lacey Act, $525 fine, $3,000 in restitution and forfeit antelope meat
• Kenneth Willard, 68, of Wray, Colo. Misdemeanor violation of the Lacey Act, $525 fine and forfeit antelope meat
• Michael Schwartz, 39, of Watertown, S.D. Transportation of big game without head or hide, $127 fine and court costs
• Jonathan Fox, 29 of Cypress, Texas. Improper tagging of game, $135 fine and court costs
• Chad Olson, 38, of Watertown, S.D. Lending a big game tag, $300 fine and court costs, five days jail, five days suspended, one-year loss of hunting privileges

Key point from GF&P's Supervisor John Murphy: "Perhaps the most disturbing part of this incident was the number of youth involved in the hunt.... While none of the youth were charged with wildlife crimes, the actions of the adults in the group set a very poor example for the young hunters."

Poor example indeed. Jerks like this who take kids out to hunt and teach them they don't have to follow the rules make it awfully hard for South Dakotans who do follow the rules to maintain the trust of landowners, voters, and elected officials and continue the great tradition of South Dakota hunting. Hunters have an obligation to teach their kids respect: respect for their weapons, respect for the land, and respect for the law. If you can't handle that obligation, you can't handle a rifle or a bow.

p.s.: A genealogically inclined reader notes that Wesley Grantham of Hayti, S.D., is husband of Cindy (Arnold) Grantham, who is a campaign donor to and sister of South Dakota's GOP candidate for U.S. House Kristi (Arnold) Noem. Now we can't hold stupid behavior by a brother-in-law against a person, but uff da—one must hear some wild stories about run-ins with the law (and morals thereto) at Arnold/Noem/Grantham family reunions.

Open Valhalla as Public Landmark, Not Private Playground

The latest Madville Times poll finds a majority of you gentle readers agreeing with me on the use of Peter Norbeck's "Valhalla" cabin in the Black Hills. I asked you "Should Game Fish and Parks open the Peter Norbeck/"Valhalla" cabin for rental to the general public?" The results:

• Yes: 88 (66%)
• No: 46 (34%)

Norbeck's cabin is a remarkable public asset, built by a remarkable South Dakotan. Norbeck was our first Dakota-born governor. He won the federal funds—pork and stimulus!—that allowed Gutzon Borglum to carve four white guys on sacred Lakota ground and bring thousands of tourists to the Black Hills each year (pick your own value judgment; either way, Norbeck made history). Norbeck also pushed for the development of such South Dakota gems as the Needles Highway, Sylvan Lake, and the Custer, Badlands, and Wind Cave parks.

Much of Norbeck's life was dedicated to opening the Black Hills to more public use. That his cabin should become the private playground of "favored guests" of the ruling political regime flies in the face of Norbeck's values.

If we really want to get Norbeckian, we should be looking for ways to make as much money off the cabin as possible. Game Fish and Parks, which manages Valhalla, says the cabin generates maybe $4500 in revenue each year. Let's see... isolated cabin in the woods, six bedrooms, great hiking and biking and horseback riding, near several major attractions... would $100 a night be too low? At that rate, I think we could draw users for at least 180 days a year... $18,000 right there, quadruple the current revenue. And the sitting governor and his political friends could get in line to rent it right along with everyone else.

One of my good Democrat friends, Mr. Kurtz, says the governor needs a secure retreat, but I must differ. Every governor can use a vacation, sure, but can't he buy his own cabin at the lake like the rest of us? Let's not get too big for our britches: South Dakota's governor is not the President with the Secret Service and the nuclear football. Security is obviously not a concern in a state where the only things standing between citizens and the governor at work are a secretary and a wooden door. What's the point of a secure hidden location for the governor when he probably drives himself to Wal-Mart to pick up fishing tackle? The last thing we need to spend state money on is the crazy notion that our governor needs a secret compound to hide in.

The Peter Norbeck cabin in Custer State Park is a great public asset. We should make the most of it. Open it to the public. Rent it out to supplement the Sylvan Lake Lodge and other fancy lodging in our busiest state park.

New Poll: Should Governor Open Valhalla to Public Rental?

Democratic candidate for governor Scott Heidepriem has raised the issue of opening "Valhalla" to the public. No, we're not talking about lowering the number of Normans you have to axe to join your Viking brethren in paradise. We're talking about South Dakota Governor and Senator Peter Norbeck's Black Hills cabin, which the state Game Fish and Parks now tends within Custer State Park. (Learn more of the history in this excellent first-person essay by Kevin Woster.)

Valhalla, Custer State Park. CSP photo featured in Tom Domek, Custer State Park, Arcadia, 2005, p. 76. Click photo to enlarge

The Madville Times poll question: Should Game Fish and Parks open the Peter Norbeck "Valhalla" cabin for rental to the general public?

Heidepriem argues the Rounds Administration has turned Valhalla into a secret compound for the governor and his chosen friends. The citizens of South Dakota have paid for expensive upgrades to the cabin (over $225K in recent years), so citizens ought to be able to use the facility, says Heidepriem. The idea of a Black Hills summer retreat reserved for the governor's use is iconic, says Heidepriem, of the cronyism and secrecy that underlies many of the current administration's bad policies that Heidepriem wants to change. (Worth noting: Black Hills resident and erstwhile GOP almost-candidate for U.S. House Thad Wasson appears to agree!)

The Rapid City Journal has editorialized that the facility should be open to the public to honor Peter Norbeck. RCJ notes the cabin is on the National Register of Historic Places. The editors say Norbeck's historical significance as well as the unique architecture of the cabin justify sharing the site with all South Dakotans.

The state feels otherwise. Game Fish and Parks declines to provide a list of those permitted by Governor Rounds to use the cabin, saying state law exempts guest lists of GF&P facilities from open records laws. The cabin is gated, and a couple years ago GF&P removed road signage to better hide the location.

So what do you think? Should the Norbeck cabin serve more of a public function? Should GF&P rent the facility out to the public like any other camping cabin, open to anyone willing to pay, first come, first served? Or should the site remain restricted by the governor's discretion? Vote in the poll in the right-hand sidebar, then discuss the issue here in the comment section. Poll runs through Saturday breakfast time, so vote now!

GF&P Staff Suggested Free List for SHS

Madville Times Suggests Egg on Face for Curd/GOP Breakfast

Reporter Bob Mercer, who has said from the start the Republicans were twisting his story on Rep. Herseth Sandlin and the South Dakota Game Fish & Parks mailing list, now reports the Republicans are flat wrong. It was GF&P director of administration Chris Petersen, not the Congresswoman's staff, who initially suggested waiving the fees for obtaining lists of South Dakota hunting and fishing license holders.

In his rush to make political hay, Dr. R. Blake Curd has simply stepped in something that rhymes with the name of a prominent candidate (and it's not a telson).

Open Fields? HB 1067 Requires Landowner Permission for Conservation Officers to Do Their Job

Representative Mike Verchio from Hill City has lobbed a handful of bills and resolutions onto the South Dakota state legislature's agenda. Among them, House Bill 1067 seeks to restrict conservation officers' access to private land. Verchio's bill would require the game warden to get landowner or lessee permission to enter private land. The bill does make reasonable suspicion and hot-pursuit exceptions, but it creates a barrier to compliance checks, where the conservation officer approaches hunters and fishers to check licenses and limits.

South Dakota Game Fish & Parks offers this defense of compliance checks:

Since the earliest days of statehood, conservation officers have carried out their enforcement responsibilities through the use of compliance checks here in South Dakota. These informal contacts with hunters and anglers in the field provide the public with assurance that laws and regulations established by the South Dakota Legislature and Game, Fish and Parks Commission are being followed. By Game, Fish and Parks Policy, conservation officers are allowed to go onto private land to conduct compliance checks in “open fields” only when they have visible evidence that hunting or fishing is actually occurring. Compliance checks provide a critically important deterrent to anyone who might consider violating the wildlife laws of the state. Without the ability to make personal contact with a hunter or angler in the field, it would be all but impossible for a conservation officer to know if that person had the proper license, was abiding by the bag limits, or was adhering to the numerous other restrictions enacted to protect and manage wildlife for the citizens of our state [Emmett J. Keyser, Asst. Director, Field Operations, "Compliance Checks Critical to Wildlife Conservation," South Dakota Game Fish & Parks].

So if we require conservation officers to get landowner permission, will we reduce the effectiveness of compliance checks? Some landowners would surely deny game wardens entry, and their land could then become free-fire zones for those (few, I hope) unlicensed, unscrupulous hunters.

I wonder if there's an analogy to sobriety checkpoints. I'm not fond of checkpoints, but I understand the argument that we're on public roads, driving's a privilege, etc. In enforcing hunting laws and protecting wildlife, game wardens have a tougher job than the highway patrol. The activity the HP is monitoring takes place on public roads (if you want to drive drunk and back into a tree in your own yard, well, I guess that's your business). The public resources GF&P is charged to protect are distributed across private land.

HB 1067 will bring up some useful discussion of private property rights and the Open Fields Doctrine. What do you think? Does the need to manage wildlife for the benefit of all who enjoy hunting and fishing outweigh private property rights? Weigh in here and with your legislators!

Drowning Victim's Mother Seeks Stories, Sign on Walkers Point

18-year-old Dylan Nelson drowned at Lake Madison last Saturday, August 8. Now his mother, Kristy Nelson of Madison, is asking for your help in encouraging South Dakota Game Fish & Parks to put up a sign on Walker's Point to warn swimmers and boaters of the potential danger in that area of the lake.

Now we all know that swimming requires caution in any water. We shouldn't have to post danger signs to remind folks of common sense along every stretch of Lake Madison's relatively calm 16 miles of shoreline.

USGS topographic map of Walker's Point and gravel pit area, south side of Lake Madison, SD

But Walker's Point seems to be a special case. The moment my dad heard about the drowning on the police scanner, he noted that Walker's Point sits right by old gravel pits. He said there are old excavations underwater that cause undercurrents. This GF&P map appears to support that observation, showing two anomalous pits, 13 and 15 feet deep, west of Walker's Point, just south of Best Point. It's just a few steps from a shallow sandbar to two deep holes. There are no similar sudden deep spots anywhere else in Lake Madison.

SDGFP underwater topographic map, western half of Lake Madison, SD

Deputy Tim Walburg and rescue divers reported there was a current of some sort present in the drowning area last Saturday. Water moves very slowly from Lake Madison down to Round, Brant, and on to the Big Sioux, so it's more likely any undercurrent comes from wave action and maybe water temperature differences.

Whatever the cause of the unusual hydrodynamics at Walker's Point, Dylan Nelson and the brother and cousin he helped save from drowning aren't the only ones to experience this hazard. Kristy Nelson says that since last Saturday's accident, a number of people have contacted her to say that they or people they know have experienced similar trouble while swimming in that area. Not that Mrs. Nelson needs any convincing... but GF&P might. Mrs. Nelson has asked GF&P to put up a sign warning of the drop-offs and possible undercurrents, and GF&P has said they will look into it.

To help GF&P look into it, Mrs. Nelson is asking anyone else with stories about close calls off Walker's Point to contact her (nelsokr at gmail dot com) or the GF&P.

Some long-time locals may know the topography and history of Lake Madison, but I've been here in Lake County 30-plus years and was surprised to learn about the hazards off Walker's Point. Increasing numbers of out-of-town visitors and new residents could use a heads-up as well. A warning sign at Walker's Point, maybe even a posting of that underwater topo-map, would be a useful, neighborly reminder that could prevent some future bad news.

-----------
p.s.: Game Fish & Parks has underwater topographic maps available for dozens of South Dakota lakes. The maps include data about average depth, surface area, volume, and even the shoreline development index, a ratio that indicates the "bumpiness" of the shoreline. Whether you're a swimmer, boater, fisherman, or just a map nut, the maps are pretty intereesting.

Increased Public Access at Lake Madison Receives Overwhelming Popular Support

The Lake County Commission gave their bosses (hey, that's us!) a chance last night to bat around the idea of opening up the old county poor farm on Lake Madison as a public access area. And once again, the commission heard overwhelming support for the idea of preserving one more piece of Lake Madison for public enjoyment.

I was a little worried that the weather might keep people away: bright sunny spring evening, no wind—who wants to sit inside and jaw when they could be fishing? But when I pulled into the 4-H grounds, I found the lot filled with pickup trucks and other fishing-friendly vehicles. Inside were 50-odd people (go ahead, say it: we're from Lake County, so we're all a little odd) ready to talk about parks, recreation, and even the future of our county.

The meeting was mostly civil (Linda Hilde got some grumbly responses), occasionally off-topic (flush toilets? come on, fellas, we're fishing, not spending the night), and wholly worthwhile. Commission chair Bert Verhey turned the gavel—or, in this case, the superfluous and non-functional microphone—over to Commissioner Scott Pedersen, who laid out the deal he and fellow Commissioner Chris Giles have worked out on the Lake Madison Public Access Committee with the local Game Fish & Parks officials:

• Perpetual easement is out: Lake County will lease the lakeside portion of the poor farm to GF&P for $1 a year.
• The county will evaluate the lease each year. If the county sees folks making good use of the public access area (hint!), they'll renew the lease. If the area isn't getting used or if the county is hard up for cash, they'll nix the lease so they can sell the land for development.
  
• Conservation Officer Brandon Gust will have primary jurisdiction over the site.
• Parks manager Vicky Seger and her crew will handle clean-up.
• GF&P will put in a dock for fishing, but no boat ramp.
  
• The county will upgrade and maintain the access road from County Road 42.
• The county will also add curbstops and fence.
• The access area will be open spring, summer, and fall; the county doesn't plan to clear snow to the shore through the winter.

The 45 minutes of public questions and comments spent a perhaps inordinate amount of time on the issue of toilets. But I suppose the interest in where visitors can relieve themselves demonstrates that folks really don't want to upset the neighbors by having to take a leak in the trees. The county thinks porta-potties are the best solution: move them in and out with the seasons, place them where convenient, let the vendor handle all the cleaning and maintenance, and avoid placing permanent infrastructure until the county knows whether there will be sufficient demand for the public access area to keep it going. The Lake Madison Sanitary District will have to rule on that, though, since current regs prohibit such installations.

The county has no firm plans for other upgrades. "Crawl before we walk, walk before we run" was Pedersen's mantra. The county is leaving the door open for other civic groups like 4-H to suggest and carry out improvements like planting trees and building picnic shelters. One attendee said that if the county opens this access area, local groups will jump at the chance to offer improvements. We'll see—maybe a little volunteerism will build us more park than the county expects!

The county will spend money on this project. Quite appropriately, that funding will come from the $100,000 the county made selling nine acres of the poor farm to Sioux Falls developer Ted Thoms last year. I like that: we get money by selling a portion of the land for private use, and then we use that same money to preserve another portion of the poor farm for everyone to enjoy.

Ron Barthel did a good job of exploring the project from different angles. Folks thought he sounded like an opponent of the public access area, but I think Ron just wanted to bring up possible problems and make sure we'd thought them through. He noted that he had walked down to the shoreline and paced off the length (States Attorney Ken Meyer was present but did not issue an indictment for trespassing). He noted that developers could fit a fair number of houses (844 feet, average lot width 100 feet: that's 8 or 9 lots) along that shoreline and generate a lot of tax dollars. Commissioner Pederson emphasized that, with the one-year lease, that's an option the county will keep open if times get tough. But Pedersen noted that the commission is not hard up for cash now... at least not hard up enough to make the commission give up this public land.

Barthel also mentioned the possibility that fishermen and swimmers might not get along. Ruth Heidelberger (yay, Mom!) responded that in her 30+ years of living by the public access area on the west side of Lake Herman, she's seen fishermen, boaters, swimmers, and dogs all use the boat ramp and dock and get along just fine. We can make this new area work; we just all need to act like good neighbors.

Dick Wiedenman did bike down to the meeting (he's getting more bike miles in than I am—I'm envious!) and suggested that a one-year lease isn't long enough. If we want to see GF&P and local groups really invest in improvements in the area, Wiedenman says the county should issue at least a five-year lease. However, as Steve VanderBeek of GF&P noted, even five years isn't long enough to make a difference in their planning. For instance, a concrete boat ramp has a lifetime of 20 years, so they won't install that concrete if they might lose that investment after just five years.

Deep down, I get the impression a lot of people and maybe even the commission would like to see the public access area made permanent. The one-year lease idea is a fair compromise to get a few more people on board and keep options open... but I hope it works out that we don't need any other option, and that opening the land for public use establishes a foothold for turning the entire poor farm into a free public park.

Not everyone shares that hope. Linda Hilde was present to voice her concerns, motivated by her previously stated desire to see the land developed. (I guess some people just can't have enough neighbors in half-million dollar houses.) Hilde expressed her concern that the current shelterbelt there is a mess and could catch fire at the drop of a match. She also warned the county that they need to study the potential changes to traffic patterns that the public access area may cause. There are already 75 or so homes down that county road, and Hilde says additional traffic turning off the highway could create a safety issue.

I didn't offer this response last night, but if the county really wants to look at traffic patterns, I would encourage the commissioners to come look at the traffic patterns out here at Lake Herman. The turn-off to the lake access road here on the west side lies in a sudden valley with much-too-brief visibility in either direction. If you're bombing south along 451st Avenue, come over the hill by the A-frame house, and see a car slowing down to turn onto the lake access road, you have maybe four seconds to hit your brakes. No wrecks yet. I also have yet to see a traffic jam at the Lake Herman State Park entrance or a major wreck at either the Prairie Village entrance or exit during the height of the Jamboree.

But I gave credit to Ron for exploring all sides of the issue, so I'll give Linda the same credit.

The county did not gather to make a final decision last night, and their plans do hinge to some extent on what the Lake Madison Sanitary District says at its April 14th meeting. But the commission did accede to the call for a show of hands. The commissioners abstained, but of the folks in the audience, four raised their hands in opposition to the plan described by Pedersen. Everyone else raised their hands in favor.

That's not representative sample, but a margin of over 10 to 1 suggests the county commission is heading down the right track in opening our land on Lake Madison for our enjoyment.

And this could happen fast: Commissioner Pedersen made no promises, but he indicated that if this project moves forward, the county could open the access area as early as the end of this month. If they do, I'll bring my bike to the ribbon-cutting.

I am pleased to see that, even in the midst of an economic downturn, a fair number of my neighbors recognize that not everything should be for sale. Yes, we could rake in a bunch of cash from selling the poor farm and taxing another tract of McMansions. But leaving some land open for everyone, for Grandma and Grandpa to sit and fish or the kids to lie on the beach and watch the clouds, has value, too. And fifty years from now, my great-grandkids will be glad we recognized that value and saved one more sunny spot for them to enjoy.

County Poor Farm Public Access to Lake Madison? Meeting Thursday!

Hey, neighbors, clear those calendars: the Lake County Commission is hosting a special meeting Thursday night to discuss opening the old county poor farm to create a new public access area on the west side of Lake Madison, just off Highway 19.


View Larger Map

This little patch of land, one of the last open plots along Lake Madison tucked between fancy-pants houses, has been mined for gravel and leased for farming. It became a point of contention this winter when the county commission considered leasing the shoreline portion of the poor farm's 150-odd acres to the state Game Fish & Parks Department, who wanted to pay the county for the privilege of building and maintaining a public access area. Fishermen and local media loved the idea; neighbors (at least a couple of them) did not.

Now we all get a chance to talk about it, including all those Lake Madison snowbirds who've all flocked back to South Dakota now that winter's done (just ignore that blizzard warning).

Comments are welcome here, but they're even more welcome in person, face-to-face, at the meeting. Come talk to your neighbors about the best use for our public resources. Thursday, April 2, 7 p.m., at the 4-H Grounds on Egan Avenue, south edge of Madison, quarter mile west from the white buffalo, across from the Bethel home.

I've got class that night... but my prof lives on Lake Madison! Maybe we'll both play hooky! :-)

KJAM Poll on Poor Farm: Public Park or Private Profit?

KJAM returns to issues polling this week, asking us what we think should be done with the old Lake County poor farm on the southwest shore of Lake Madison. The three options offered:

• Developed by the County for Lake-Access & run by the SDGFP
• Sold to private enterprise for development for recreation
• Sold to private enterprise for development of real estate

I thought spiking the first option with GF&P management might sour the vote, but so far, 88.2% of respondents favor the public access option.

We've had lots of discussion here on the Madville Times about the benefits of creating a new public access area on our county's wealthiest, most populous lake. Now pop over to KJAM and cast your vote!

Commission Hears Strong Support for More Public Access at Lake Madison

It was standing room only at the Lake County Commission meeting this morning, and not because folks dropped everything to hear Dan Bohl's acceptance speech (although Dan's rhetorical gems are worth the price of admission).

Last week, upon opposition from Linda Hilde and another Lake Madison resident, the old commission tabled indefinitely a proposed deal that would allow Game Fish and Parks to create a public access area at the old poor farm on the southwest shore of Lake Madison, just off Highway 19.

For a terrific argument on why the county should approve this public access area, see Jon Hunter's hearty endorsement of the plan in Monday's Madison Daily Leader

The new commission (Bohl, Chris Giles, and Roger Hagemann took their oaths this morning) quickly took it off the table to give Madison's Jim Thompson and other citizens a chance to voice their thoughts about the Game Fish and Parks plan to install a fishing dock and an outhouse of some sort. There weren't quite the 50 concerned citizens the Leader reported might come, but every seat in the commission room was filled, and latecomers had to stand.

Nearly every resident who spoke up (including yours truly) spoke in favor of creating more public access on Lake Madison. Encouragingly, the commissioners who spoke up seemed to share that sentiment, most particularly Commissioner Bohl, who said unequivocally that "certain things supersede finance" and that increased public recreation opportunities can draw people to Madison as much as housing and jobs.

Whew—looks like I voted for the right Republican this fall.

Here's a sampling of the interesting comments from the half-hour the commission dedicated to the recreation area question:

* * *

Commission chair Bert Verhey opened this portion of the meeting by calling both Jim Thompson and Linda Hilde to sit at the big table to address the commission. No blows were exchanged (see, folks? this doesn't have to be personal).

* * *

Verhey started by offering a conciliatory note to Mrs. Hilde: he said he understood that the main concern brought up last week had been the absence of many Lake Madison seasonal residents who might not be here now to express their views. Verhey emphasized before anyone spoke that the commission was not going to vote today on any public access plan but would plan a public meeting in April on the topic when more Lake Madison snowbirds would be back to participate.

Hilde knocked away that particular gesture, saying what the news coverage last week made pretty clear, that her primary concern was the tax base. Check the minutes, Bert.

* * *

In his opening remarks, Verhey also addressed his concerns that the deal as discussed with GF&P would give the state too much control over the land. Verhey voiced his opposition to giving GF&P a perpetual easement, ;ikening it to state "dictatorship." Oh my. It's a fishing area, not martial law.

* * *

Verhey did challenge the notion that the county faces hard economic times. He said county government is not "cash-strapped" and "can fund this thing on its own." It's nice to hear such fiscal optimism (none of which Linda Hilde was buying: she warned of hard times ahead that we can't even imagine), but I'm still scratching my head on this one: if GF&P is offering to do the improvements and pay the county for the privilege of doing so, why would we even talk about funding it out of the county coffers? When GF&P offers money, take it!

* * *

If I read the audience correctly, they didn't really care whether the county or GF&P or Hugo Chavez controls the land, as long as it's opened up for public recreation. Rod Goeman did remind the commission of a vote several years ago in which the county rejected an offer from GF&P to turn ownership of the Johnson's Point road over to the county and provide state funding for continued maintenance. Goeman said that rejection stemmed from a mistrust of GF&P expressed by the commissioners. Goeman suggested that if that mistrust lingers, the commission should focus on creating a recreation area through county resources.

I'm still wondering where this mistrust of GF&P comes from. I've lived next door to GF&P land on Lake Herman for 30 years, and the only time they've rubbed me the wrong way was when they wouldn't let me build a shorter driveway that connected directly to their access road. Otherwise, they manage the land out here just fine.

* * *

Jim Thompson offered little in the way of verbal fireworks. He said he's fine with the idea of county control of the land, especially if that means GF&P can direct more resources to other access areas like Stratton's on the north shore. Thompson also said he trusted the commission to negotiate a good contract if they do work with GF&P. (With ken Meyer watching, I'm sure the contract will be solid.)

Thompson did offer one poke by proxy at Hilde: Thompson read a letter from Jim Casanova, who wrote that he would have attended the meeting if he weren't in the hospital (get better, Mr. Casanova!). Casanova wrote to urge the commissioners to support sportsmen and not to listen to Linda Hilde. Casanova's exhortation drew chuckles from the crowd.

* * *

Thompson and Hilde engaged in some disagreement about how many people fish. Thompson said lots of people fish. Hilde said not a lot fish. Before that could descend into a rather silly and unevidenced back-and-forth, John Hess spoke up to note that even though he's not a fisherman, he can see the public benefit in having another spot on Lake Madison open to public access. His sentiment was echoed by some old-timers who said they wouldn't be around much longer (boy, January does bring out our pessimism around here) but that they wanted the county to preserve something nice for their kids and grandkids.

* * *

After I rambled for a bit on the merits of establishing a public access area now to perhaps set the stage for reviving John Goeman's and DeWayne Mork's Bicentennial Park idea (see: I'm not the only big dreamer around here), Linda Hilde noted that folks had talked about big plans for the poor farm before (like a golf course!) but those plans always failed. Folks expected the county to pay for it, and taxpayers wouldn't foot that bill. Hilde reminded the commissioners that their primary function is to preserve and develop a stable tax base...

...at which point Dan Bohl said to Linda Hilde three words we don't hear often enough from our local politicians: "I totally disagree." Bohl said that sometimes we have to "sacrifice a little bit" for the sake of protecting our natural resources. How's that for straight talk?

* * *

Bohl gave the best quotes, but the other commissioners had a few things to say. Commissioner Giles expressed his support for a no-fee public access area. (That's two for sure! One more, and we've got it!) He agreed that the county has an obligation to preserve public resources, although he acknolwedged that if things get tight, the county might need to leave the door open for developing the land. Giles also noted that the county isn't in the business of running parks and might do well to work with GF&P on this project. Commissioner Pederson did ask if a contract with GF&P could include provisions for liquidation of the property. States Attorney Ken Meyer said sure. Pederson then said the issue still needs more study. Unless I missed something, Commissioner Hagemann remained silent on this issue.

* * *

Mark Kreutzfeldt* rose from the audience to say he could see both arguments, but he noted that when he went door-to-door raising money to build the Field of Dreams on the south side of town, not one person in this community told him no. Mark said this community will get behind a good project. I just about reached back and handed him the first $20 for the fund drive... but we'll wait to see what happens.

* * *

Lake Herman sent its contingent of radical troublemakers to the meeting. I've mentioned my comments; Charlie Stoneback rose to express his strong support for increasing public access around our lakes. Our neighbor and District 8 Representative Gerry Lange was there too, though though he was satisfied to soak in everyone else's comments (maybe that should have been my headline: "Lange Remains Silent" ;-) ).

* * *

So in the end, no action, but some good public input. We have a pretty clear promise from Chairman Verhey to dedicate a full public meeting to this issue in April, which beats the pants off tabling the issue indefinitely. So sportsmen, for now, enjoy the ice fishing. Lake Madison residents, call your snowbird friends.

And while we wait for that April meeting, maybe some local entrepreneurs would like to revisit the Bicentennial Park plan and start passing the hat?

-----------
*I didn't catch the name at the meeting, but a couple of eager readers filled in my blanks. Thanks!

What Housing Bust? Lake Property Values Rising 15%

Lots of good discussion about leasing county land on Lake Madison to GF&P to create a new public access area—be sure to bring that discussion to the Lake County Commission meeting tomorrow morning (Tuesday, 9:45 a.m., Lake County Courthouse, Madison).

Quick question: opponents of the access area say the county should sell that land for housing to generate tax revenue. But do we need any more housing to raise revenue when Equalization Director Shirley Ebsen tells us evaluations for all lakeside property in the county will go up 15% this year?

Of course, we'll all be able to cover that tax increase with our 15% salary increases. You know how rich we lake folks are.

Guest Column: New Public Access Area on Lake Madison Good for All Residents

Two readers mention it; I'm happy to reprint it. Here's Jim Thompson's letter to the editor on turning the old county poor farm into a public access area on Lake Madison [Madison Daily Leader print edition, 2009.01.02, p. 3]. The best thing Thompson says: he calls on all of us who enjoy using the lakes for something other than tax revenue to attend the Lake County Commission meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 6, 9:45 a.m., when the commissioners will again discuss the proposed deal with the GF&P.

Editor, The Daily Leader:

In response to the front-page article in Wednesday's paper concerning the county-owned land on the south side of Lake madison, I would like to ask Linda Hilde, "Just how many houses do you need around the lake?"

There are currently five public access points to Lake Madison, one of which requires a State Park sticker to use, one has almost no usable shoreline and a large part of the area around Bournes Slough is almost inaccessible. So that really only leaves to areas where someone can drive into free of charge and enjoy the lake.

Now, I understand Linda Hilde's point; the land in question could be sold at a good profit and the proceeds used to pave another road. But then they are gone and the county still has to spend money to maintain that road.

Also, if the land is sold into private hands, Mrs. Hilde can maintain her multimillion-dollar neighborhood and not have to put up with the riff-raff that will use the public land: (you and I), the public.

This area is owned by Lake County. It used to be open to public use until Mrs. Hilde pointed out that there were no toilets there and that someone might "pollute" the lake while using this area; so, with no opposition at the time, the county closed it.

Now the county has an agreement with the state Game Fish & Parks Department to develop this area into a nice lakeside use area that all of us in the county (remember we, the residents of Lake County, currently own it but can't use it) can use for fishing, picnicking, walking and just relaxing.

Mrs. Hilde's main concern was that there were no toilets; now she will get her toilets and we will get our property use back and it won't cost the county anything. This is a win-win situation for everyone in Lake County.

Game Fish & Parks will plant trees as a barrier to the houses on both sides so we won't interfere with the rich people, and they won't bother us either. They will landscape and plant beneficial plants and control the weeds. This can become a beautiful lake area, open to everyone, on a lake surrounded by houses.

The bad news is that Mrs. Hilde still does not think the people who own the land should be able to use it. After all the work the commission has done and all the work that Game Fish & Parks has done to come up with this agreement, giving her the toilets she wanted, she thinks it should be sold and more million-dollar homes should be built.

I disagree!

Therefore, this subject is back on the commission agenda for the meeting on Jan. 6, Tuesday, at 9:45 a.m. I encourage all of you who would ever use this area for fishing or other activities to attend this meeting along with your friends, or to contact the county commissioners and voice your opinion. If enough public support is given, this project will get done. Do not let the view of a few people lock everyone out of land that should already be using.

Come to the commission meeting Tuesday, Jan. 6, 9:45 a.m. at the Lake County Courthouse.

Jim Thompson
Madison, Dec. 31

Land we already own but can't use. Good point.

Jim's got it right: we have a good plan that will serve every resident of the county (and our bait-buying, sales-tax-paying visitors). Let's make this happen!

Lake County Spikes Park Plan

So much for Semiquincentennial Park....

Opposition from landowners and apparent supporters of the Kelo decision has killed a really good idea. The Lake County Commission was considering selling a piece of the old county poor farm to Game Fish & Parks to create a public access area on the southwest side of Lake Madison. Spectacular idea! On a lake already packed cheek by jowl with houses symbolic of our wealthy class's conspicuous consumption, a free public access area would be a welcome and appropriate use for land once dedicated to caring for the poor.

But no. Linda Hilde and a Lake Madison neighbor gave commissioners an earful at the Tuesday meeting. Commissioners responded by tabling the proposal indefinitely. Hilde and friend's reasons for opposing a new public access area:

• GF&P already owns five pieces of land on Lake Madison. That's "quite a lot of access," says Hilde.
• Instead of leasing the land to GF&P for a measly $500 a year, the county should plat the poor farm and sell it for more swanky houses. "Lakeshore property is (selling) for between $200,000 and $300,000 per 100 feet," Hilde said. "That's a lot of money to give away for fishing" [quotes from Elisa Sand, "County Tables Lake Access Agreement," Madison Daily Leader, 2008.12.31].
  
• The county's first priority should be raising tax revenue.
• The commission was acting "suddenly" and should wait until summer, when Lake Madison's seasonal residents would be around to give input.
• The lease agreement leaves the door open for GF&P to develop the land for more than fishing.
  

As a Lake Herman resident who lives right next to a GF&P wildlife and public access area, complete with fishing dock and boat ramp, I have trouble understanding why residents would oppose a public improvement on their lake. One of the first destinations Madville Times Jr. learned to say was "boat ramp!" when we go walking. We go there to skip rocks, talk to the fishermen, and watch them load their boats. We can go walk in the trees and look for rabbits and deer and bluebirds. Why would we trade a small piece of shoreline where everyone can come relax and enjoy the lake for another clump of big fenced-in houses?

Oh yeah, money. Tax revenue. "Hilde said the job of a Lake County commissioner is to determine what makes the best business sense for the county, and giving away a valuable piece of property for public access doesn't make sense" [Sand].

I beg to differ. The job of a Lake County Commissioner is to protect and promote the general welfare. Sometimes that means promoting economic development. Sometimes that means passing on a chance to make money in favor of supporting a worthy public project.

Decades ago, my neighbor Gerry Lange owned the big stretch of land to my north. He platted and sold the land along County Road 41 for housing, but the majority of the land he handed to the state. There was already plenty of public access on Lake Herman—the state park, Territorial Road, much more proportionally than Lake Madison has now. By Hilde's fiscal reasoning, Lange did a great disservice to the county by taking his land off the tax rolls for fishing and boating. The city of Madison committed an even worse travesty when it gave the state the land that became Lake Herman State Park. That land could have had so many houses generating so much tax revenue. Now what are we stuck with? Trees. Fishing spots. Boat ramps. Walking trails. Picnic tables. Campsites.

It's a short step from Hilde's reasoning to the Kelo decision, in which five Supreme Court justices said the county commission could kick me off my land and hand it to a developer who promises to build something that will generate more tax revenue than my measly $100,000 house. Forgive me if I find the reasoning of Hilde and the Court faulty.

Sure, there's already "quite a lot of access" to Lake Madison. There's also already quite a lot more private land with big expensive houses swelling the tax rolls (and sitting idle for a majority of the year). Let's invest in the future by looking beyond the dollars and making the poor farm a park all of us can enjoy all year round.

GF&P, County Consider New Public Use Area on Lake Madison

Yes! Yes yes yes!

For bad ideas, call the Department of Transportation. For good ideas, call Game Fish & Parks. At yesterday's Lake County Commission meeting, Conservation Officer Brandon Gust talked with commissioners about creating a public use area on Lake Madison on the site of the old county poor farm.

Hey, where'd we hear that idea before? Good thinking, Officer Gust and commissioners! Dwayne Mork would be pleased. Now think big—Bicentennial Park... or Semiquincentennial Park, here we come!

Come to Madison -- Learn About Carp!

The wily carp gets a night of its own here in Madison on Thursday. Some really smart guys—Matthew Hennen and Michael Brown of SDSU Wildlife and Fisheries Science, and Todd St. Sauver and Dave Luccheri of South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks—are coming to town to talk about past and current research on our friend the carp and the impact of the big fish in our local lakes. Program begins Thursday, Dec. 11, 7 p.m. at the Ruth Habeger Science Center auditorium at DSU. (If I can knock out my Advanced Database final for Dr. Shan early, I might have to drop by!)

No word on whether snacks (carp d'oeuvres?) will be served, but plenty of food for thought will be available. Come find out whether those flying silver carp will be invading our placid little watershed anytime soon.

p.s.: As I Google carp info, up swims this tasty headline from NPR: "Asian Carp: Can't Beat Them? Eat Them."

GF&P Requests Entrance Fee Increase

Road maintenance is putting the squeeze on governmental agencies up and down the food chain. Our friends at Game Fish and Parks are no exception: KELO reports that GF&P is seeking an increase in annual park entrance fees from $23 to $26. The seven-day entry fee at Custer State Park would go rise from $12 to $15. Other entrance fees would also go up a dollar.

GF&P parks director Doug Hofer says the additional revenue—about $725K—would go mostly toward maintaining the 350 miles of roads and parking lots in the park.

I can live with fixing the roads, though I rankle just a little when Hofer additionally justifies the increases by saying "The majority (of the entrance fees) haven't been adjusted for some time." Camping fees went up last year. The general park entrance fee went up in 2006. Only the entrance fees at Custer State Park have stayed steady through this decade.

But then I see some numbers at the bottom of Wayne Ortman's AP report that make me realize Hofer's claim can be interpreted as accurate:

Last year, the state sold 209,159 seven-day individual permits for Custer State Park, 63,696 annual park entrance stickers, and 51,236 Custer State Park seven-day vehicle permits. [Wayne Ortman, "SD Officials Propose Higher Park Entrance Fees," AP via Yahoo Finance, 2008.10.01].

Dang: Custer State Park does a lot of business!

Oh well—gotta pay for what we love. A suggestion, though: if the increase is needed largely to fund the park roads, how about a wheel-based entrance fee? Maybe keep the fee the same for motorcycles, raise it a dollar for cars, $3 for trucks and SUVs, and $5 for trailers and RVs.

Rural Community in Decline? Can't Blame Game Fish & Parks

Last week I questioned the assertion of South Dakota Cattlemen's Association 1^st Vice-President Todd Mortenson of Hayes, Stanley County, that the state Game Fish & Parks Department is killing rural communities by driving farmers and ranchers away with big land purchases. I suggested that the expansion, consolidation, and industrialization of farms and ranches is much more to blame for the loss of small family farms than any GF&P policy.

Call the source biased, but a friend in the GF&P e-mails to support my contention:

...There is lots of land in Stanley County that is owned by the private sector and the owners don't even live here. They have either moved away, moved to town or the land is being bought up by corperate [sic] farms. Several land owners own over 10,000 acres.

GFP own hardly any land in Stanley County. And the land that we do own is very hard to access, mostly along the river, that was recently transferred to us by the Corp. of Engineers. Aside from the land along the river, which by the way is only a thin strip, not much wider than a couple 100 yards wide in most places, [GFP has] 2 GPA's, one in the center of the county, around 80 acres and another along the river that is 270 acres Antelope Creek [e-mail, 2008.08.18].

If Mr. Mortenson misses having lots of neighbors along the road from Hayes to Fort Pierre, he'll have to find someone other than the GF&P to blame.

Bigger Threat to Rural Community: GF&P or Expanding Farms?

South Dakota Cattlemen's Association 1^st VP Todd Mortenson of Hayes is worried about the fraying of rural community. In a hearing before a legislative committee Monday on the operations of the state Department of Game Fish & Parks Monday, Mortenson expressed his concern that as the state buys up more land for hunting and recreation, it crowds out neighbors:

Government purchases of land make it more difficult for a rural community to survive, a Stanley County rancher testified.

The point was driven home on his trip to Pierre that day, Todd Mortenson said. He stopped to fight a hay-yard fire at a neighbor's ranch and realized that there were few other neighbors for miles around. There was a time, he said, when many ranchers would have rushed to fight the blaze.

"Neighbors are getting farther and farther apart all the time," he said. "When the state starts purchasing land ... it takes away some of the fabric of the rural community" [Terry Woster, "Agency Criticized for Land Policies," that Sioux Falls paper, 2008.08.12].

Fewer neighbors in Stanley County... due to GF&P land purchases? In 2000, the population of the county was 2,772. 1,991 of those folks lived in Fort Pierre. That leaves 781 people spread out over the 1,440 square miles of land in the county, a population density of 0.54 people per square mile, or 19.5 people per 36-mi² township.

George Vandel, assistant director of GF&P's Wildlife Division, says GF&P has purchased 3,100 acres over the past couple years and now has 291,000 acres total of game production and water access land. That's less than 1/100^th of the 44 million acres—over 90% of South Dakota's land area—used for agriculture.

The average size of a farm in South Dakota is about 1400 acres. In Stanley County, the average ag operation is 5,200 acres. Even if GF&P had bought all 3,100 of those new wildlife/water access acres in Stanley County, it wouldn't have entirely bought out one average-size ranch.

If farm and ranch neighbors are getting fewer, the likely culprit is not Game Fish & Parks, which purchases land for the common use of all South Dakotans. The blame lies with the consolidation of bigger and bigger ag land holdings in fewer and fewer hands. When the modern corporate ag-industrial system makes it harder for veteran farmers to hang on and young farmers to get in, we're bound to see the countryside empty out and all the growth concentrate in town. That population pattern appears to be exactly what's happening in Stanley County: the only reason the county population has increased over the last decade has been the growth of Fort Pierre outpacing the decline of the surrounding rural population. GF&P buying a few acres here and there around the state is the least of the causes of that trend.

Short on neighbors? It might give us more solace to blame the government, but GF&P's purchases of land for public use are a flea to the thundering buffalo of our economic system favoring big operators and crushing small farms and ranches and the communities they used to support.