Wilderness
Montana Conservationists Urge Congress to Pass a Montana Wilderness Bill
Montana conservation leaders say 26 years is long enough without new Wilderness in the state.
By Peter Metcalf, 3-09-09
A group of Montana conservationists mailed a letter last week to Montana’s U.S. Congressional delegation encouraging them to make Wilderness designation in the state a top priority.
“There are some areas in Montana that deserve consideration for wilderness and its time to do a statewide wilderness bill,” said Dale Bosworth, retired chief of the U.S. Forest Service and one of fourteen signatories. The signatories included retired U.S. and local lawmakers, former Forest Service employees, and representatives from the ranching, faith, business and outfitting communities.
The letter did not specifically designate lands the signatories would like to see protected or indicate legislation they would like to see pass. Rather it expressed a strong general support for Wilderness designation within the state. And it urged Sens. Max Baucus, D-Mont., Jon Tester, D-Mont., and Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont. to provide leadership and support for existing citizen Wilderness campaigns.
“I think it is important to remind ourselves that there are a lot of lands out there that are vulnerable,” Jim Posewitz of Orion—The Hunter’s Institute said. The group wanted to generate public conversation around this topic, not just advocate for specific lands.
Nationally, momentum for new Wilderness areas is picking up. In January, the U.S. Senate passed the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 which contained over two million acres of new Wilderness designation nationwide, including over 500,000 acres in Idaho’s Owyhee Canyonlands. The bill however, contained no new Wilderness in Montana. Montana last saw the creation of a new Wilderness area in 1983.
Yet Montana has millions of acres of public land classified as wilderness study areas—lands deemed suitable for Wilderness designation.
“That implies that we are going to study them and make some recommendation on them one way or the other,” Bosworth said. For over thirty years the long-term management status of these lands has been in limbo. A clear designation would benefit both the Forest Service and the public by clarifying allowable present and future uses, Bosworth said.
Some of these WSA’s should be designated wilderness and some should be released to be managed for other purposes, like active timber management or motorized vehicles access. “Let’s not study them for another 25 years,” Bosworth said.
The group chose not to endorse specific Wilderness campaigns because not everyone was of the same mind as to how much land should be protected. But they were uniform in their belief that some new protections are warranted and that the time to act is now, Bosworth said.
He also said that the group formed kind of word of mouth as various signatories approached people for their support. He agreed to sign after some negotiations over the language.
The letter argues that new wilderness designations will help protect Montana’s exceptional wild heritage. Many of the areas suitable for Wilderness designation provide prime fish and wildlife habitat as well as important recreational opportunities. Montana owes much of its top-notch hunting and fishing to its protected wild areas.
Without additional protections, Montana could lose out on economic opportunities to other states and future generations could lose the chance to enjoy what many Montanans enjoy today, the letter warns.
“There are wild lands in Montana today that deserve Wilderness protection every bit as much as the Bob Marshall deserved it 45 years ago,” retired Representative Pat Williams said in a statement.
hate to be picky, peter, but where it the link to the letter so we can evaluate it for what it says? until then, it is kind of hard to comment.
Comment By Matthew Koehler, 3-10-09Problembear, I had the same problem locating the actual letter. I had heard through the grapevine that The Wilderness Society had something to do with the letter. So I emailed them for a copy of it and someone at TWS simply forwarded this link to an article in the Clark Fork Chronicle. Looks like the letter is at the bottom of the link:
http://www.clarkforkchronicle.com/article.php/20090306064428195
Dear Senator Baucus, Senator Tester, and Representative Rehberg:
As Montanans we often find ourselves proudly boasting to our friends that we hail from “The Last Best Place.” We hold our head high and say that we’ve got some of the best elk hunting in the West, some of the prettiest trout in the coldest, clearest streams found anywhere, and jaw-dropping hiking trails that create memories of a lifetime.
Whether we find our elk, our fish, and even our views in the backcountry or along the road, we know we have them in large part thanks to our designated Wilderness Areas.
We owe much to the Montanans before us that were willing to be bold in creating a vision for Montana where the grizzly bear could always find refuge, where mountain streams could flow unchecked, and where the freedom to escape into wild country was never any farther than just over the next ridge.
But as longtime Montanans we also know how some of these things can change. Threats to our wilderness heritage remind us that Montana might not always be like it is today.
So when we see nine other states, many of them our western neighbors, poised to take a big step forward toward permanently protecting their wilderness heritage in the Omnibus Public Lands Act of 2009, we start to wonder if we’re falling behind.
It has been 26 years since Montana has permanently protected a single acre of wild country. Since our last wilderness area was added in 1983, the nation has seen 439 new wilderness Areas created, none of them in Montana.
We support a balanced spectrum of land uses, including active management, roadless areas and new wilderness designations. We know we have areas as worthy of protection as our neighboring states do, and we believe there are wilderness proposals around the state that are ready to be introduced and passed by Congress this year. The citizen involvement and support for a wide array of wilderness campaigns in the state is significant. But these efforts need your leadership. Without it, these efforts cannot succeed and our wilderness heritage will remain in doubt.
We believe that what Montana’s wildlands need now, more than ever, is leadership in Washington from Montana’s delegation. With that in mind we ask that you make new Wilderness designation for Montana a top priority in Congress this year.
Respectfully yours,
Dale Bosworth, Missoula (Retired Chief of the Forest Service)
Doug Chadwick, Whitefish (Author)
Orville Daniels, Missoula (Retired Forest Supervisor USFS)
David James Duncan, Lolo (Author)
Smoke Elser, Missoula (Outfitter Guide)
Rick Graetz, Missoula (U of M Professor of Geography)
Randy Gray, Great Falls (Former Mayor of Great Falls)
Dale Harris, Missoula (Co-founder, Great Burn Study Group)
Al Luebeck, Butte (Sportsman)
John Mumma, Missoula (Retired Regional Forester USFS)
Jim Posewitz, Helena (Orion -The Hunter’s Institute)
Pam Sheldon, Helena (Montana Association of Churches)
Hugo Turek, Coffee Creek (Rancher)
Pat Williams, Missoula (Former Montana Congressman)
###
It's always good to see people get involved and it's always good to keep the topic in focus and the conversation going; but, beyond that, I believe that it would have been better for these esteemed and influential community leaders to have mustered the courage to be a little more specific about what they want to see.
They "support a balanced spectrum of land uses, including active management, roadless areas and new wilderness designations" and who could argue with that, especially when nobody can know for sure what it means; but, the real issue is where the point of balance in that spectrum is to be? Is the balance point supposed to be closer to NREPA or closer to some of the worst of the "collaborative" proposals out there? They "believe there are wilderness proposals around the state that are ready to be introduced and passed by Congress this year" and, again, we can all agree with that; but, this is a bit too serious for parlor games. Which proposals do they support?
Yes, yes, I understand that the intent of the letter was to get Montana's delegation to crawl out from under their desks and show some leadership; but, this kind of call to just pass some wilderness proposal, any old wilderness proposal, carries perhaps as much recklessness as it does courage. If the Montana delegation, especially Rehberg, uses this kind of input as an excuse to try to pass some paltry, impoverished, hodge-podge of the worst of the current "collaborative" proposals, it could poison the well for a decent wilderness bill for years to come, perhaps long enough to lose some precious areas forever.
not much to go on here, but it is encouraging that some pretty knowledgeable folks are stepping forward on this issue. for that i am grateful. montana needs to find a way to become montana again. wilderness is something montana does best. it would be nice to see some folks in public office gather the courage and the fortitude to lead with some vision.
couldn't help noticing the conspicuous absence of anyone from the Montana Wilderness Association. just what in the hell are those people doing in that office over there in Helena?
...spending donation and dues money, demonstrating their ability to do PR, and developing social contacts for future jobs that will pay more.
Comment By problembear, 3-11-09what PR? you mean hiding under a rock type of PR?
Comment By Nancy Pitblado, 3-11-09More power to these forward-thinking individuals who signed the letter. It is very sad that Montana has no new wilderness designations in the last 25 years, but even sadder that the Omnibus Public Lands Bill 0f 2009 just want down to defeat in Congress. The good news is that this bill has wide congressional support (though not from our representative) and it very narrowly missed a required 2/3 vote to pass. Yes, we can, on wilderness!
Comment By Rodney Noone, 3-11-09Montana is wilderness and designating everything as such is ridiculous. We end up with a bunch more unusable land, there are already millions of acres designated. How about leaving something open for recreation, logging, mineral exploration, etc.... Most Montanan's recreate with campers and 4 wheelers. Making land only accesible by hiking is ridiculous.
Comment By joe dirt, 3-17-09Montana has enough wilderness already, they are constantly taking away areas from the sportsman and the recreationist. They complain about too many Elk, but then close down all the roads so they are not accessable, and the wolves are thriving, soon we will not be able to hunt Elk because the herds will be needed to sustain the wolves. I say go to sleep on the wilderness bills. Open up hunting of the wolves. Open up more land for the sportman and recreationist of Montana, this is, by the way "OUR" land.
Comment By mtmuledeerhntr, 3-17-09Amen to Joe Dirt!!! Lets forget about closing off yet more "public" land, and let us enjoy what we have. If the people pushing these wilderness bills were true conservationists, they would realize that the people who spend time in these accessible areas, i.e. hunters, fishermen, sportsmen, snowmobile and atv riders, are the ones who make sure that the areas are left clean and healthy. Let's face it, much of the area in this state is now privately owned by out of staters who won't let anyone use it at all. Creating more wilderness area is in effect doing the exact same thing!
Comment By WLDFYR, 3-17-09I am amazed at the short sightedness of the so called experts writing in support of the new wilderness areas. I find this to be much like building a new government building with lots of stairs and no elevators then trying to get all taxpayers support to pay for this building, yes, even those that have physical handicaps. It is not our problem they cannot access the upper floors we built it for everyone right. How is this any different then banning recreationalist that can't walk the ten or twenty miles to get back into the areas they can currently access and enjoy with either horseback, atv's, snowmobiles, or bicycles. Only horses will know be allowed in the new improved areas. As for wintertime recreation I have never seen a single person more than ten miles from the trail head on skis or snowshoes, and horses sink like rocks in the snow. Multi-use is good for the economy of most Montana communities and out of state views should not superceed locals views. I also hope Montanan's are ready for the huge wildland fires this will help promote by severly limiting the suppression tactics that are currently being deployed. Montana currently has the best most beautiful wildernesses found however, with the exception of National Parks I feel increasing the wildnerness designatins is just a way limit use to all who pay for these resources.
This article was printed from www.newwest.net at the following URL: http://www.newwest.net/city/article/montana_conservationists_urge_congress_to_pass_a_montana_wilderness_bill/C8/L8/