Policy not politics should fuel public land debate
As avid sportsmen, we recognize the value of our public land in Montana. But we also recognize our responsibility as citizens to see that our public lands are properly managed. It’s simply not enough to just “keep it public.”
Unfortunately, many on the political left have decided they aren’t interested in improving the management of public land in Montana. They would rather perpetuate a bogeyman argument that claims our public lands are somehow “for sale.” It’s politicking at its best, policy at its worst.
The argument against re-assigning federal land management responsibilities to the state is riddled with false claims intended purely as scare tactics to advance a political agenda.
“They want to sell the land off to out-of-state billionaires.”
“The state would go bankrupt if we had to manage all that land.”
“The federal government manages the land just fine, so why burden the state?”
These are just a few of the patently false statements perpetuated by the environmental groups who would prefer that we manage Montana’s public land from Washington, D.C. instead of at the state level. But the real reason for their opposition? They know that once the public realizes that their argument is purely about politics and not about policy, these groups lose the fear factor that they depend on.
If you look at our national forests dead from beetle kill and hillsides blanketed red and white from knapweed, it’s evident that federal land management can be improved. And there is no doubt we would improve the management of our federal land by re-assigning management responsibility to the state.
But unfortunately, those who have little interest in improving land management would rather raise red-herring arguments than defend why they believe the federal government is better suited to manage public lands than our state land management agencies are.
The resources to manage federal land in Montana already exist and are funneled from the federal coffer in D.C. to various agencies within the U.S. Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture. As the resources are already there to manage these lands, it would be simple to work out a deal with the federal government to funnel those resources to state-based agencies, such as the Montana Department of Natural Resource Conservation.
It may take some time to build up the state agencies to the point were they could adequately address the management needs of Montana’s federal land, so the changes would have to be incremental. But this level of management reassignment would allow the state of Montana much more control in how we care for our federal land. And that will mean improved economic opportunity and improved public access.
And on the concern of privatization, the Montana Senate is considering a bill to prevent the state of Montana from selling off public land to private landowners. And guess who testified against it? That’s right, the very same groups who use the threat of privatization to raise money. If that’s not hypocritical, we don’t know what is.
We are thoroughly convinced that the vast majority of Montanans want to “keep it public.” And if you are paying even half attention to this debate, it’s pretty obvious that those leading the opposition to land management re-assignment are just using the issue for fundraising and political cheap shots.
It’s wrong to vilify fellow Montanans for trying to improve our state just for a few quick political points. And the hypocrites who are profiting from preventing better management of Montana’s public land are standing in the way of progress that will benefit all Montanans. So, if you’re a person who really cares about our public land in Montana, let’s have an open and honest discussion about how we can all be better stewards of our federally-owned lands.
Sen. Eric Moore, R-Miles City, is a rancher and feedlot operator and is the Senate President Pro Tempore. Rep. Kerry White, R-Bozeman, is a small business owner and serves is the House Natural Resources Committee chairman.