The Big Hole Watershed Committee is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to conservation of the Big Hole River watershed (SW Montana) and its resources. Our diverse stakeholders find consensus to foster sustainability through education, management, and restoration of our Big Hole River Valley. BHWC was formed in 1995 to address community concerns related to water supply and Arctic grayling; we published the State's first voluntary Drought Management Plan in 1997.
Our river flows free for its entire 156 miles, surrounded by high, craggy Rocky Mountain peaks of the Continental Divide. It’s a stronghold of traditional cattle ranching, rural communities, and expansive public lands. Montana is wild and remote here. Nearly 2,000 residents call the Big Hole valley home, spread among its 2 million acres.
We created this channel to share some of our breathtaking scenery, innovative restoration techniques, and fun community events. For more information, visit our website: bhwc.org.
Chief Joseph. Joseph Stalin? Investing to preserving water is everywhere an issue it seems. Even the Dutch don't invest in water storage while it could be necessary in certain areas. The Germans had towns destroyed by floods and dam removal. They realize the Rhine is getting ruined by reducing side rivers. England seems to understand certain things much better by reshaping dead rivers. By the way. Aquifers. Cisterns.
Ranchers get a lot of blame for resource degradation and some of it is well-deserved depending on specific land management practices. But taking ranchers off the landscape, they'll likely be replaced by subdivision, septic systems and kentucky bluegrass. Cattle ceased using the area we restored because of how overstocked the forest is. Downed trees from a pine beetle outbreak make it really hard to access. The private ground downstream pastures cow/calf pairs and yes, pretty hammered. We installed over 100 beaver mimicry structures on their place to help charge up the groundwater. We attribute much of the depletion of water in the area to the overstocked forest that has not been managed well for decades. Its complicated.
I applaud the efforts being featured here in the Big Hole, but the comment made at 04:05 asserting that all the beaver had been removed from these waterways by the time Lewis and Clark got there is ludicrous. Lewis and Clark returned to the east in 1806. In 1805 Francois Antoine Larocque a French Canadian working for the North West Company explored the Yellowstone River drainage mostly trying to establish relations with the local tribes in SE Montana. Not until David Thompson and others of the North West Company established posts west of the Divide near Libby and Thompson Falls in 1808 and 1809 respectively did fur trapping take off. Then from 1810 - 1840, additional fur companies like the Hudson's Bay Company, the American Fur Company and the Rocky Mountain Fur Company were instrumental in taking most of the beaver.
You are totally correct! Its the one regret we have about this film. that was an overstatement. Hope you liked the rest of film and our attempts to reintroduce the function of the beaver to the landscape!
Exactly! The beaver had left the area decades ago. Likely elk moved into their area and depleted their food supplies (willow, aspen) along with the forest encroaching on the aspen stands and shading them out. We simply plugged up the existing beaver dams in hopes to re-grow the riparian shrubs they need for food, and hopefully, one day, will bring them into the area to take over!
Time to pop in a bunch of willow, birch, aspen, etc cuttings and whips, then introduce beavers eventually. I suppose maybe they're still there and will move into these improved areas?
That's the hope. We're trying to get the habitat set for beaver to want to move in. Or, when MT allows beaver relocation, we take some nuisance beaver up there to a new home!
I was looking forward to this video, but I have to say that I was quite disappointed. You missed the chance to provide narration that would have explained what we’re seeing and how it represents the improvement, and provide a vision of what the whole thing will look like in a few years (I know it’ll look better with time). For someone like me who is not familiar with the area or the way it looked pre-project, it may be difficult to visualize how what we’re seeing here consists of improvement. 1. Was the wiggly stream on the right previously straight and incised, but now slowed down with meanders? 2. Are the thin strips of water going right to left just the first stage of spreading water over the previous desolation? 3. Another commenter has already asked about what’s going on with all the matchstick trees. I applaud all the work and planning that went into this project, and concur with other commenters that a follow up would be great. I just think that by not providing history and context via narration, you diminished the impact of your video. Please keep up the good work.
You're totally right! This was one of our first videos from when we were just starting our RU-vid channel. Definitely a missed opportunity here. We will look into adding some narration and/or doing a follow up video. Thank you for your comment. (If you are interested in our work, check out some of our other videos. Some of them DO have narration.)
Get the Beavers back on the land. Anything else is a huge waste of manpower and cash. They're just farting around if they're not bringing Beavers in to do the work.
@@BigHoleWatershedCommittee Can beavers walk over the border into Montana? Or do they have to check in with the DNR. I'm surprised the environmentalists don't have bigger balls out there. Bring them in and don't mess with the B.S. The destruction was quick. The restoration should also go quickly. Are you planting several thousand trees a year? B/C that's how many the beavers will need.
It seems Non-Profits have been crippled by regulations. Why? Is this fearful state agencies that want job security, a monopoly? If they can stop restoration on private lands, private property rights are being violated. Is the fundamental problem political, e.g., authoritarianism? It is internationally. Is America infected? If so, I say stop it by "Striking at the Root of the Problem".
For years drainage in Calif was get the water into concrete and rid of eat. What a disaster. Now every project hss to hold some water... the more the better. Making progress
Talk about holding back the water for later in the year, yet "environmentalist" want to remove the 4 lower dams on the Snake river that hold back FAR more water than all the beaver dams in Montana!
Plant ancient grasses with long tap roots, this will fill the natural wells within the hillsides BENEATH the soils, halting drying out and draining-out of the topsoils. Re-introduce Beaver and stop playing God with all the tech and machinery. Its cheaper to let nature back-in, than use the digggers etc
Have you added beavers back into the mix yet? They are the masters of holding back water all we have to do is plant what they like to eat. and that's not just trees.
"Im a Rancher and it took 4 generations to realize I shouldn't have shot those beaver" why do farmers always know so much about farming and care so so little for nature?
Herbicides and pesticides, Fertilizer in rivers, cattle trampling forests, Shooting all local wildlife, Mono cultures, rarely changing crop,GMO , Enclosure of nature. While i get that all these things are required for modern agriculture, I hardly even see farmers attempting to use them sustainability.
Wetlands are a significant source of methane pollution, a potent greenhouse gas with a global warming potential twenty-five times that of carbon dioxide. The average time it takes for methane to be naturally oxidized into carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is about 9 years. Maybe change the logo to Big Hole heating the planet by 25x normal for 25 years.
Ecology is not zero sum. Yes, more organics are broken down in wetlands, thereby releasing more methane than a parallel system without wetlands. But wetlands also are visited by 80% of the species in the West-- so they are vital for most wildlife in the West. What would you have us do, then? Destroy all wetlands to save on methane? Simplifying complex ecological processes and inter-related biophysical factors does not help anything.
Thanks!!!! Our small staff of 3 and all the contractors we use take great pride in this work. It is making a difference, albeit small in site-specific, but a positive difference nonetheless!
Thank you for this video. It's amazing how beautyfull it is out there! 😍 It was also very interesting to see (from a far away - Poland ) how social interactions work there. Lots of wise words in this video. A lot to learn from. P.S. Even from that grain of hipocricy that could be sensed at some moments. 😉
@@tyronewashington230 That wouldn't work 9.3 billion people on the planet the law of cause and effect is absolute in the past 50 years 73% of all plant and animal life has gone extinct the law of reincarnation will see to it that we do reap what we sow. ... well good times ahead I guess.
