Recently, Montanans have seen a debate develop regarding Congressman Ryan Zinke’s vote for a proposal that would create a pilot program for states to manage portions of U.S. Forest Service (USFS) land. As a nationally certified professional forester and current state senator who represents a district surrounded by USFS land, I am completely frustrated by the tone, tenor, and scare tactics being promulgated by fringe environmental groups.
As the senator for the southern Bitterroot, I sat in Zinke’s address to the Montana Legislature when he promised that he would not support the sale or transfer of public land. This promise has often ruffled the feathers of some within Republican ranks, but he has remained consistent. However, he has simultaneously advocated for management proposals that give Montanans expanded authority to make decisions affecting the land within our communities. That is why he helped coauthor and pass the bipartisan Resilient Federal Forests Act last year, which would incentivize local collaboration to manage USFS land.
I find it ironic that the same groups who griped about Zinke’s bill last year are regurgitating the same failed talking points today. The reality is that these groups have no interest in any management solutions. They would rather issue scare tactics to maintain the status quo and promote their own political agenda and fundraising abilities. They’d rather try and convince you that the forest will be clearcut, your access will be cut off, and environmental law will be skirted, even though those claims are false. The reality is that the status quo has created some of the worst forest fires in our state’s history. Last year’s forest fires cut everyone’s public access, burnt down countless trees, dirtied everyone’s air and water, and most importantly put Montanan’s life and property at severe risk.
I can guarantee you that with proper management, much of this could have been avoided. The federal government is failing us, and Montanans should be part of the solution. The idea of state management is not extreme, it’s common sense. Imagine a landowner’s home building project. The federal government as the landowner, the USFS the contractor. The blueprint for the house is the forest management plan. The plans have all been created and approved by the federal government, but the USFS can’t get the job done so they hire a subcontractor: the state. The state can’t change the rules or blueprints, but they don’t have the same backlog or bureaucracy so they finish the job more efficiently. The state doesn’t bypass the rules, they simply have the ability to put people with the skills on the ground to get the job done!
There is a fundamental flaw in the opposition’s argument. They believe that the federal government is the savior in this scenario, saying Washington bureaucrats can manage Montana’s interests better than actual Montanans. The inference is that the only thing saving Montana from itself is the federal government, as if we all want to clear cut our forests, lose precious wildlife, and dirty our air and water. The reality is that Washington didn’t make Montana the “Last Best Place,” we did. Our state is special because we value the true intent of multiple uses. We understand that responsible resource development and a clean environment are not mutually exclusive goals.
As a Montanan, a forester who worked in Montana’s Forest Industry over four decades, and current state senator, I hate seeing our timber mills shuttered and pink slips issued. Federal timber is available, yet under the status quo it continues to decay as Montana is turned into a giant tinder box. This is unacceptable. We only have to remember the constant cloud of smoke we lived through in past years to know that something must change. I applaud Zinke for advocating for common sense management reforms. It will protect our jobs, our forests, and our environment.
Pat Connell, state senator
Hamilton