Why I can’t get excited over when the Governor stops wanting to water Hilger’s Gulch.

Remember this press release from a few weeks ago:

Hilger’s Gulch Getting A New Look

PIERRE, S.D. – Gov. Dennis Daugaard is embarking on an initiative to bring back the native landscape of South Dakota to Hilger’s Gulch and save taxpayer money.

“This is a planned transformation and it’s going to save us time and money,” Gov. Daugaard said. “On average the state has spent around $36,000 annually for irrigation and $23,000 annually for mowing, fertilizing and weed treatment. In dry years, the water bills have approached $50,000. We’re taking this project on as an effort to be better stewards of that money.”

For the project, the Governor selected vegetation that can thrive in the natural climate of central South Dakota. The new plant life is expected to save money over time because it will require less maintenance and will not necessitate the use of chemical herbicides. 

The renovation will also serve to restore habitat in the area. Working with the South Dakota Bureau of Administration, Gov. Daugaard has strategically mapped out the placement of the various plants, trees and a meadow with purple, yellow and red wildflowers.

Predictably, there were some who didn’t care for the decision. And some didn’t care for the decision oquite a bit. They found themselves so outraged they called for a private meeting with the state Bureau of Administration…. which on unannounced basis they turned into a public meeting.

Their biggest issue with the Governor’s plan seems to be the fact simply that they’re going to stop watering Hilgers Gulch, which over the years I grew up there has varied from hard scrub prairie, to swampy cattail farm, to it’s present state which resembles a well-groomed golf course.

I suppose if I lived over-looking a well groomed golf course, I might be a bit bent out of shape if the golf course owner decided to turn it back into an arid grassland with little maintenance.

But despite the falderal, it’s still the golf course owners’ property, and absence violating local ordinance, he should be allowed to maintain it as he will. The fact that it is government property, and all this maintenance is paid for by taxpayers should weigh far more heavily on the argument than the local property owners wanting their nice green view.

If we are going to open up the argument to the public, and have a public meeting in Pierre, where are the public meetings in Sioux Falls, Rapid City, Aberdeen, etc. don’t those taxpayers deserve a say in the matter? Or is it only deserving of comment from those who want to maintain a nice green view?

My fondest memories of Hilger’s Gulch are not when it was in green or cattailed splendor, but rather when it was all covered in snow, and used for sledding. And amazingly in the South Dakota winter, it really didn’t matter one bit what state the Gulch was in during the summer.

The state did not groom for sledding trails. They appeared courtesy of the hundreds of children who made it their home during certain winter days.

And maybe that’s the lesson we should take from all of this.

Unless you’re going to pay for it yourself, let it be what it is going to be. And find a way to just simply enjoy it as it is.

17 thoughts on “Why I can’t get excited over when the Governor stops wanting to water Hilger’s Gulch.”

  1. I’m from Pierre, as is Pat. I have many fond memories as a teen and when my daughters were under 5 years old.

    I support the Governor’s decision. Besides the money, some things aren’t meant to be manicured, manufactured beauty but closer to how God made it to be.

  2. I’m from Pierre, and I don’t support the move. If it’s good for the gulch, let’s turn the Capitol and Gov’s mansion into native grass as well. Now, I say that in jest, but this is a nice area that should be kept that way. The City of Pierre should offer to supply the water since it does mainly benefit Pierre residents.

  3. I’m from Pierre. My dad owned property next to the gulch. While there were lots of fun times, I remember mostly my young butt fighting a losing battle every summer against thistles, tumbleweeds and a host other noxious weeds that infested the un-cared-for state land then. Native plants need just as much attention to keep out invasive species as does bluegrass. Hopefully the state won’t let it fall in to neglect again.

  4. It will need either a very hot slow back burn every five years or a bi-annual Mob grazing to keep the native plants in perfect form. Both are what made the Native Grasslands unique and natures way of revitalizing native grass and forbs.

    Personally I love this idea and though we have copious amounts of Missiouri River water close by another 1988 type drought is right around the corner.

  5. I’m from Pierre, grew up playing in the gulch. My best childhood fort was in the wooded part of the gulch. My parents have now moved on he gulch and probably have one of the best views. I and my mother have worked for the state off and on for years. We fully support the Governors’ staff proposal. We sympathize only with the argument of increased critters coming into town as we and our neighbors have been th victim of them. That will always however be a problem that can be addressed in other ways.

  6. If anyone really wants to understand the history of the Gulch, get hold of a copy of my dad’s book “Pierre Since 1910”. I knew the land was previously a golf course and housing lots beginning in the 20’s but didn’t realize the state did not purchase the land until 1957.

    It hasn’t been “natural” prairie for a hundred years, so, the new plan with real native plants should be interesting to see.

  7. I have a unique idea for our government loving “Republicans,” how about selling the property and let someone pay taxes on it and get the state out of dealing with it. That way, instead of costing money.. it would be a tax revenue generator.. Novel idea, I know.. but heck, an actual Republican can dream.

      1. Mr. Jones, Please remind us how many people needed federal aid to rebuild their homes that were damaged several years ago, that were in fact built in flood plains along the Missouri (to include Mike Rounds).

        Maybe if you stopped thinking government was the answer to every question, Republican ideas wouldn’t be so stupid to you?

        1. You are a moron.

          First you say land in a flood zone should be sold and then you condemn development in a flood zone. You don’t even know you blabber on outside two sides of your mouth.

  8. I’ve been watching the debate on this in Pierre. The Gov never said he didn’t want to water or take care of the gulch. His plan calls for different grasses, flowers, and more trees in only parts of the gulch, not the whole thing. The grasses are the type of grasses that use LESS water. The trees require water – so they will have to water, which causes the grass to be green, but with less water. And he never said that he didn’t want to mow – just mow less. I think the people in Pierre should pay for all the water and maintenance if they want a different plan. The City must be in a tizzy because they think they will lose revenue from the State.

  9. Whiners. All the country club whiners that want my tax dollars to pay to water grass they never set foot on and only look at. BAH. Plow it all up and plant beans.

  10. Great thought Grudz. You’re a Rapid City guy, I believe, how about we clearcut all the government land in the Black Hills and sell the timber? No need for all that green stuff you look at there, right?

  11. Indeed, Mr. mhs. We want to cut and cut and cut and that damn government forest service won’t let us and lets the bugs run wild. I say cut it all down, too.

Comments are closed.