Conservation group buys Montana’s South Ranch

 Resize text        

A conservation group’s efforts to establish a large prairie-based wildlife reserve in northeast Montana took a giant step forward this week. The American Prairie Reserve (APR) announced the purchase of the 150,000-acre South Ranch near Glasgow, which more than doubles the group’s holdings in the area.

APR’s goals are to “assemble a multi-million acre wildlife park that will conserve the species-rich grasslands of Montana’s legendary Great Plains for the enjoyment of future generations.”

Many local ranchers are critical of APR’s plans and believe the trend of outside money buying Montana ranch land is a detriment to the community and endangers a way of life.

 

The Bozeman-based APR has raised $48 million through contributions and pledges, and says it hopes to spend $500 million on land acquisition over the next 20 to 30 years. The group targets land adjacent to Montana’s C.M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge for acquisition in an effort to maximize the scope of a large grasslands wildlife preserve. Prior to the purchase of the South Ranch, APR claimed to own or lease 123,000 acres in the area.

Specifically, APR’s mission is to “create and manage a prairie-based wildlife reserve that, when combined with public lands already devoted to wildlife, will protect a unique natural habitat, provide lasting economic benefits and improve public access to and enjoyment of the prairie landscape.”

Eventually, American Prairie Reserve envisions a herd of 10,000 buffalo roaming its land and adjacent federal and state lands.

The Montana Stockgrowers Association is skeptical of the idea of a free-roaming herd of buffalo. “Have Montanans expressed a true desire to see more bison, or is the pressure coming from outside our state?” asks Stockgrowers president Watty Taylor. “We do not know of any area in Montana where the local community is clamoring for a truly free roaming bison herd.”

Indeed, Taylor and others note there are already several bison herds in Montana, and a large free-roaming herd is unlikely to provide benefits for the animals or Montanans.

Major donors to the American Prairie Reserve include candy industry billionaires John and Adrienne Mars, who have provided at least $5 million, and brother Forrest Mars Jr. who has given at least $500,000. A California venture capitalist has also donated at least $2.5 million.

“They keep saying they’re saving it,” Vicki Olson, a reserve opponent and third-generation Phillips County rancher told the Associated Press. “If they get their way, they’re going to sell it back to the government and they’re going to take it off the tax rolls. It’s going to kill the community economically.”


Sponsored Links


Comments (7) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Craig A. Moore    
Billings, MT  |  August, 22, 2012 at 08:33 AM

Another brick in the wall to make the Great State Park of Montana.

Mark Evans    
Lemmon, SD  |  August, 22, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Chip, chip, chip. Before a farmer can participate in any Governmental conservation program they must prove they receive at least 50% of their income from agriculture. I would think selling it (or giving it) to the government is a gov. program. I know it's not apples to apples but when you consider the harm it does to the local economy I believe there should be some kind of restriction imposed concerning removal from tax roles.

Myra Neal Morrison    
Rockwell, NC  |  August, 23, 2012 at 12:31 PM

What about bangs? That is an ongoing concern with Buffalo and that large a herd cannot be tested, thus
leaving the surrounding cattle and sheep at risk. Removing the land from the tax roles is not the only problem with this purchase. (Working buffalo is a nightmare and I cannot even picture testing that many).

Kansas Meat Guy    
August, 23, 2012 at 02:10 PM

As I understand it, at least Nature Conservancy pays local taxes on lands they purchase for some kind of preservation. How do these folks get around paying taxes on this land? Form a non-profit? Perhaps some of that needs more attention.

maxine    
SD  |  August, 26, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Isn't it it that UNTIL that land is sold or 'given' to the government, taxes ARE paid just as any other ranch land?

It appears that the family selling that land is doing what they have to do to stay in ranching as long as possible, given the fact that so much of MT land already has been sold to people not really interested in anything but the scenery?

Doesn't Ted Turner already own huge amounts of land there? As he does in SD and NE? We have heard that his plan is to acquire as much land as possible and then 'fill it in' to help achieve the old "Buffalo Commons" scheme?

Mark    
Malta, MT  |  August, 27, 2012 at 07:43 AM

These organizations must pay property taxes to the state. The exclusion is small (160 acres) even if they request it. The NGO APR has been working with federal officials to see if they could get the federal land (and I would assume the 15,000 acres of private land) removed from the grazing permitting system and into a US Fish and Wildlife management type system.

Kinda funny, the Gov is $16 Trillion dollars in the red and the National Fiscal Commission identified that one of our problems is the lack of revenue. The current ranch operation will be compensated. I can appreciate their frustration with the gov grazing system, but I think APR type people are betting that if they offer enough, anyone will sell. Surrounding ranchers can not compete.

Jeremy    
Montana  |  August, 27, 2012 at 03:18 PM

The government is in debt, and what they could get from this taxable ag land is nothing compared to what they could be getting from the oil and gas industry that consistently---through a recession, mind you---breaks billion dollar profit records every single year, yet pays next to ZERO in taxes. How American is that!?


Feedback Form
Leads to Insight