As the author of nearly a dozen hiking guidebooks for areas all around the American West, I have enjoyed walking tens of thousands of miles through some of the most scenic places in North America. I choose to live in western Montana because there is no better place in the United States to enjoy the outdoors than the Treasure State.
Politically, I am also what many people believe to be an endangered species: a conservative who is also an avid conservationist. I am a lifelong Republican who deeply believes in conservative principles like limited government, free market capitalism, and fiscal responsibility.
This matters because I am writing to express my strong support for the Blackfoot-Clearwater Stewardship Project Proposal, which is conservative conservation at its finest.
Those of us on the political right frequently argue that government is better when brought to the most local level possible. The “top down” approach of bureaucrats in Washington D.C. who “know better” than the people who actually live someplace is inefficient and, frankly, insulting. Whenever possible, government is better when those most directly impacted can work out local solutions. That long-held conservative principle is precisely what makes the Blackfoot-Clearwater Proposal something that all conservatives should applaud.
This was a plan drawn up by a commendably diverse group of people: outfitters, timber industry officials, anglers, ranchers, local businesses, former Forest Service officials, conservation groups, snowmobilers, and many others to work out a local solution to contentious land-use issues in this beautiful part of our state. They aimed to provide areas for popular new types of motorized recreation while preserving the quiet and beauty that all users come to this place to enjoy. They wanted to restore damaged forest lands, while still providing a stable timber supply to keep local lumber companies in business. They strove to provide watershed protections for the Blackfoot River, whose famous trout fishery is enjoyed by thousands of anglers every year and is perhaps the single most important element of the region’s economy. They wanted to protect wildlife, not only to ensure a continued quality hunting experience, but because wildlife is important to people here and to their quality of life. It took several years, but these dedicated people, with wildly diverse opinions, eventually devised a plan on which all parties agreed.
This plan is a model for how conservation should be accomplished. Obviously, the input of officials from Washington D.C. matters, because this is federal land owned by all Americans. But if thoughtful local people, who must actually live with the way these lands are managed, can develop a workable solution that protects that land for all Americans while still preserving their local lifestyles and economy, then that is always the best way to proceed. Significantly, all three of the commissions for the impacted counties – Missoula, Powell, and Lewis and Clark – have endorsed this proposal. These are local officials who clearly represent very different constituencies and who are not exactly famous for sharing the same political views.
I do not live in the Blackfoot-Clearwater watershed, but my home is nearby and I often hike the spectacular trails to places like Grizzly Basin, Pyramid Lake, and the Mission Mountains. I would support the Blackfoot-Clearwater Proposal based solely on the incredible beauty of these lands and the need to set aside the best of it for wildlife, watersheds, and future generations. But I wanted to focus on how this proposal is an outstanding example of a conservation approach that demonstrates why being a political conservative and an ardent conservationist are not mutually exclusive.
As a proud Montanan, and particularly as a Republican, I call upon Sen. Steve Daines and Rep. Ryan Zinke, politicians for whom I voted and with whom I share a political philosophy, to support this proposal. Both men like to refer to themselves as “Teddy Roosevelt conservatives,” and this is a perfect opportunity to demonstrate the accuracy of that label. It is a superb example of a locally driven conservation initiative that people of any political philosophy (but conservatives in particular) can and should support.
Douglas Lorain
Hamilton