It’s a wilderness bill. It’s a logging bill. It’s a jobs bill. It’s enlightened natural resource policy. It’s an environmental train wreck.
That’s a brief summary of the wide reaction to the Forest Jobs and Recreation Act officially unveiled a week or so ago by Montana Sen. Jon Tester.
While trying to accurately label Tester’s bill is probably pointless, it is clear that the proposal is a step in the right direction in terms of managing Montana’s forests and wild lands.
Here are some of the highlights of the 84-page proposal from the Montana Democrat: It adds about 680,000 acres of wilderness in three western and southwest Montana forests. It requires the Forest Service to harvest at least 100,000 acres of timber over the next 10 years. It releases 76,000 acres of land under consideration for wilderness to more active management, which could include timber harvest and recreational use. It allows for added ATV and snowmobile access in several areas.
But the real highlight of the proposal is that it represents a lot of work by very diverse groups to come up with a plan to end the stalemate over wilderness and management of big chunks of forest in Montana. Along with the usual suspects in such legislation, groups like the Montana Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited and the Montana Wildlife Federation, the
proposal has gained the backing of a number of lumber mill and logging operators, ATV groups and others not usually found at the wilderness table.
The proposal is really the result of Montana people talking to Montana people about coming up with ideas that work in the complicated world we live in. It is encouraging that we are still able to sit down and seek common ground and solutions to complex challenges.
Of course, there is already plenty of debate taking place about Tester’s proposal. Hard-core wilderness advocates complain that not nearly enough land will receive protection and too many concessions are made to timber interests.
On the other side of the fence, a “multiple-use” advocate has claimed the bill is only about wilderness and “is nothing but a slap in the face to the logging industry.”
The most curious comments have come from environmentalist types who claimed that the proposal’s mandates for timber harvest would take management decisions out of the hands of the trained professionals with the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. Apparently, endless lawsuits and appeals over management plans and timber sales don’t tie the hands
of those trained professionals.
There will be plenty of time for debate about the details in Tester’s proposal. It must pass the Senate and House of Representatives and gain the signature of President Obama. As we all are aware, the potential for significant tinkering is quite high in any measure that lands before Congress.
By no means is the Tester bill a perfect proposal. There is a shortage of detail about how the measure will actually create jobs, for instance. And it doesn’t address forest management questions in several key areas, including the Rocky Mountain Front.
And it would be nice to hear some meaningful comment on this proposal from Sen. Max Baucus and Rep. Denny Rehberg. They each have an obligation to share their views on this important topic and have yet to do so in any substantial manner.
As smoke from forest fires begins to fill our summer air and talk about red, beetle-killed trees dominates many conversations, a proposal that brings the management of our forests to the forefront is welcome.
The fact that that proposal draws on the views of a wide range of Montanans makes it worthy of serious discussion, both in Montana and in Washington, D.C.