View Single Post
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2012, 02:21 PM
dhayden's Avatar
dhayden dhayden is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 406
Posts: 765
dhayden is a splendid one to beholddhayden is a splendid one to beholddhayden is a splendid one to beholddhayden is a splendid one to beholddhayden is a splendid one to beholddhayden is a splendid one to beholddhayden is a splendid one to beholddhayden is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: Montana Stream Access Law - HB 309 - Help!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaevans View Post
Right you are Dean, right you are:

"Montana - Population


Montana ranked 44th in population in the US with an estimated total of 909,453 in 2002, an increase of 0.8% since 2000. Between 1990 and 2000, Montana's population grew from 799,065 to 902,195, an increase of 12.9%. The population is projected to reach 1,006,000 by 2005 and 1.1 million by 2025. The population density in 2000 was 6.2 persons per sq mi, the 3rd-lowest in the country.

In 2000, the median age of all Montana residents was 37.5. In the same year, 25.5% of the populace were under the age of 18 while 13.4% were age 65 or older.

Montana had no cities with populations exceeding 100,000 in 2002. The largest cities and their estimated populations are Billings, 89,847, and Great Falls, 56,690."

If you subtract out the 'city populations' the 'per square mile population' drops to about .1 per square mile. Your point about killing the tourist industry is well on point. No disrespect intended to Montana, but other than hunting (which I don't do) or fishing, why would you drive 1,000 or more miles round trip? Well access to Yellowstone, but beyond that .... ?
This cracks me up.. I for one can't see any reason at all to go to oregon - lol
__________________
Dave
406
Reply With Quote