(page 5) 



When I met with you briefly on Saturday morning, I indicated that I would expedite review and consideration of the 

 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and that the formal comments would be prepared and submitted to you by 

 the end of business today. Notwithstanding the equivocation now evidenced and without waiving our express 

 objection to the lack of notice afforded of these proceedings, I have nevertheless proceeded to review the Draft 

 Environmental Impact Statement under severe time constraints. The following comments have also been reviewed 

 by my client, Monroe Property Company, and represent its position regarding the proposed exchange as it relates to 

 the property which it leases, based upon the time which it has had to review the DEIS. The property is referred to in 

 the Draft Environmental Impact Statement as the "Woodchuck Tract". The physical features of the property are 

 described in general terms in Appendix D-1 of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 



The DEIS sets forth in detail the land exchange criteria adopted by the State Board of Land Commissioners in 

 March, 1994 (DEIS §1.3.2, "Land Exchange Criteria"). We submit that the standards articulated in the Land Board 

 policy have not been met in a number of respects with regard to the property proposed to be exchanged in Section 

 18, TI4N, RI4W (Missoula County, Woodchuck Parcel) which is currently subject to the terms of Monroe 

 Property's lease. 



1 . Criteria no. 7 adopted by the Land Board (§ 1 .3.2, "Land Exchange Criteria, page 1-7) provides 

 that accessible state land that is proposed for exchange should be replaced with acquired lands that offer similar 

 accessible recreational opportunities. Furthermore, the Land Board expressly acknowledges that state land with 

 public access has greater income generatmg potential. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement expressly 

 acknowledges that "The greatest potential for a direct future decrease in opportunity as a result of alternative B 

 would be in Section 18 (T14N, R14W) which is legally accessible from State Route 200. . . " and one other parcel 

 (§4.3.3, page 4-15). The DEIS also concludes that because this parcel has good road access now, that it is likely that 

 it is readily used by the public (page 4 -15). The general description of the tract also notes that "There is road access 

 through the tract from Plum Creek property and Highway 200 skirts the cast boundary " (Appendix D-1). Albeit 

 that the initial discussion of road access to the tract was in the context of alternative B, Monroe Property Company 

 respectfully submits that the State of Montana cannot replicate the direct access now afforded to the Woodchuck 

 Parcel in the implementation of any of the alternatives proposed in this exchange. Consequently, the parcel should 

 be dropped out of the exchange. Furthermore, accessibility is also a major factor which has not been adequately 

 considered in the DEIS with respect to this parcel as it relates to the potential of this property to benefit from long 

 term appreciation. This issue 



(page 6) 



is amplified in the discussion of long term appreciation potential for the property which follows. 



2. The sixth criteria established by the Land Board expressly notes that the Department and the 

 Board must protect long term interests of the trust as relates to rapidly appreciating recreational property in the 

 absence of outstanding public benefits and satisfaction of all other criteria. It is obvious that the Land Board expects 

 great care to be exercised in exchanging parcels of this nature. The DEIS expressly acknowledges that "A qualified 

 appraisal of current land values identified the potential for recreational development (such as cabin sites) as an 

 important component of land value of certain parcels, including Section 18, T14N, R14W." There should be no 

 question that direct access, coupled with the close proximity of the property to the Blackfoot River, makes this a 

 rapidly appreciating recreational property which should be maintained as is, as comparable access seems to be 

 enjoyed by only one other parcel involved in the exchange. The DEIS, while acknowledging the potential of this 

 property to appreciate in value by virtue of its recreational attributes to enhance the long term interest of the trust, 

 provides no direct analysis to justify a conclusion that there are outstanding public benefits in this exchange which 

 will offset and outweigh its inherent value as a stand-alone parcel. Consequently, the parcel should be left alone and 

 excluded from the exchange. 



3. Monroe Property respectfiilly submits that the location of the property, its accessibility and its 

 significant and appreciating value for recreational purposes, are also factors which justify exclusion of this property 

 from the exchange based on the income potential for the property. Criteria no. 3 adopted by the Land Board 

 mandates that a land exchange must result in the trust receiving equal or greater income. As previously noted, the 

 property appears to be one of two tracts which are leased or licensed for grazing. Monroe Property does hold lease 



BCWMA Land Exchanges Final Environmental Impact Statement 32 



