Sparked by the standoff at the
Bundy ranch in Nevada, many western states have been calling for the federal
government to release the millions of acres of federal land to the ownership of
the states. The potential ramifications
for Montanans are extensive. Everyone
has an opinion and wonders how their particular interest would be served or not
served by this change. I did quite a bit
of research on the subject and came to a few conclusions:
In
general I favor states’ rights and less federal control, but in this case, I believe a full scale transfer of
federal land in Montana to the state is impractical at this time. Everyone connected with the state forests
sights the huge burden to Montana tax payers because of fire suppression. The lack of infrastructure within the current
DNRC also is a concern. The state agency
currently cares for 600,000 acres and if all the land were transferred at once,
they would find themselves with close to 18 million. It would simply be too much too quickly. I do not think that the state would sell off
all their new land to private individuals as many opponents think. Historically (at least in the last hundred
years), this has not been the pattern for western states. I also think the same environmental groups
and politicians that currently scrutinize federal land management agencies
would also keep state agencies in check from an environmental standpoint.
While many political pundits are
insisting that federal land should be transferred from legal standpoint, this
too seems unlikely. Most legal scholars agree that no federal court will uphold the view
that the land should, by law, be transferred to the states, unless congress
passes legislation allowing for it.
All that aside, there has to be
more logging on federal land, both from an economic point of view and a fire
suppression point of view. Montana state
land timber sales revenue is nearly six times that of Federal timber sales,
despite the fact that Montana state land is only one thirtieth the size of
Federal land! Perhaps, state land is
over-logged, but the disparity is absurd. In addition, logging is thought by many as a
practical means of preventative fire suppression. This is especially true near Helena, where a
fire on the beetle kill trees could jeopardize the city’s water supply.
I do think there is a better system for managing public lands in
Montana. A report by a bipartisan
panel called “Evaluation Federal Land Management in Montana” has outlined a
plan to make federal management more efficient and collaborative. They suggest transfer to state ownership as a
last resort. Another article I read
talked about creating Federal Trusts to manage the land. These would essentially be more nimble than
the current bureaucracies and they would also be required to pay for themselves
through access and use fees. Federal
agencies currently do not get to keep most fees they collect and typically
lease land below market value, making them far from profitable. I also think it could be feasible to conduct
a gradual transfer from the feds to the states.
If anything good is to come of
this situation, I hope federal agencies feel pressure to perform more
efficiently and in a way that benefits the states they serve. I also hope Montanans take a good hard look
at what owning 17.1 million acres of federal land would look like. More in our control, yes, but more taxes,
higher use and access fees too. Let’s not be like the North Dakotan who shot a
spike moose 25 miles back and had no friends to help him pack it out. Count the cost. Is it worth it? That’s True Montana.
No comments:
Post a Comment