Public Comment. Volume III - Montana Legislature

per landowner and a price that they would be willing to pay for core holes and excavated test pits. In a
series of meetings and an exchange of letters with various agents and principals of the TRR we pointed
out that a flat fee of $1000 for accesss neglected to consider the varying amounts of land that the railroad
wished to access. and that it seemed that the access fee should be variable. dependent upon how much
access and for how long a period of time should be t'aken into account. We were informed that the TRR
would not even consider moving away from their "one size (or payment) fits all" position. The TRR was
also adamant that it would be "unfair to all landowners" if they negotiated the core hole or test pit price
that they had offered. There was always the constant and almost gleeful threat of condemnation lurking
in the background in any dealings with railroad agents.
There are other areas in which the landowners have been rebuffed. Those of us who own, lease,
and work the lands that mill be affected by the TRR have a special insight into some areas of concern that
are admittedly, in some cases, nonprofessional but on the other hand, likely to be overlooked in the
preparation of mitigation requirements. We have not been consulted, or interviewed on areas of historic,
or cultural concern. Our attempts to explain and therefore ease animal-both domestic and wildmovements
across the ROW have been ignored in the name of "economic considerations" for the railroad
Let me give you an example of this: Rosebud County had a road that crosses a state section that we lease.
The road was situated above a high cut bank along Tongue River that was constantly eroding and
threatened the road. There were a couple of options available to the county. One was to riprap the bank
of the river to prevent further erosion; the second, and the one chosen, was to relocate the road further
away from the river. There was a road bridge on the road to handle the moff from floods on a side creek,
Roe and Cooper. The county commissioners were aware that a flood in July of 1958 washed out a smaller
bridge, so that they increased the size of the replacement bridge. Our ranch also used the bridge for a
cattle pass from our swnmer pasture to the river, and the commissioners replaced the bridge with another
even larger one. The configuration of the TRR ROW will require that the road be moved once again
placing the road closer to the river. The county or the Department of Transportation will be expected to
bear the cost of moving the mad, I assume, and I will be forced to negotiate with the DOT, or some state
agency that the existing bridge be replaced with another new bridge. I have less faith in a culvert
handling the amount of water that has historically come down Roe & Cooper Creek; I doubt that our
cattle, or deer, or antelope or any other wild animals will as willingly enter a long, dark culvert to get
access to the river for water. I have no way to negotiate with the TRR for the bridge especially since I
don't even own the land where one is required. But is the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks aware
of how important that bridge is to the operation of this ranch, or to the safe movement of the public's
wildlife? A plea for sterilized ballast on the entire route to prevent weed invasions has fallen on deaf ears.
Even if'individual ranchers were successful in somehow getting a concession for sterile ballast on their
properties, the effort would be futile if their neighbors were unconcerned, or unsuccessll in the
negotiation process.
This letter has been much longer than I intended, but I hope that it has illustrated the frustration
that one affected landowner along the proposed TRR ROW has experienced over the twenty years. We
landowners are not only powerless, but have been ignored during this whole sorry process. I would plead
with the State Legislators or State Departments that have any influence in getting stringent, consistent and
meaningful legislation and mitigation measures as a requirement for the construction and operation of the
Tongue River Railroad.
Sincerely,
EQC Eminent Domain Study -145-