ALC works to put public land in the states control

SUPERIOR – At a December 12 meeting, the County Commissioners and members of the public learned about the issues, which surround federal versus state public land and how it affects Montana residents.

Senator Jennifer Fielder, R – District 7 told the commissioners and gathered community members about a federal land study in Montana, which she sponsored. She said there were problems with the way federal land is managed. This in turn has affected everything from residents to the state economy. SJ-15 is a study to identify the problems and outline the concerns in areas with an abundance of federally owned land.

“There’s been some very strong trends of what the issues are,” said Fielder. “One of the biggest ones is the amount of fuel loads in the forest where the lands are not managed.”

In lands where management is not done regularly, underbrush piles up and begins to choke nearby plants. When a fire starts, this dry, excess growth causes the fire to quickly spread out of control and become too hot to easily extinguish.

The group has looked into various solutions to some of these problems. These include allowances for volunteers to do some management of the federal lands, rally the communities to take action and give more power to county commissioners over the lands in question. A special guest speaker addressed more possible solutions.

Senator Fielder introduced Utah Representative Ken Ivory, president of the American Lands Council – a group, which works to address the problems of federally controlled land. ALC has devised a plan to get federal public lands transferred into the state’s control. Under this plan, the legislature in Washington D.C. would have no say in how the lands were managed.

“Then the lands are managed under state law and you cut out the federal bureaucracy,” Fielder said. “We can manage the public lands in a way that suits the state and people of Montana.”

Ivory started with a video where Governor Steve Bullock put the problems into perspective at a meeting of the Western Governor’s Association. Bullock explained how Montana only manages five percent of the land in the state, but does so well in a way to protect endangered species and the environment.

However, the video continued and Bullock said the federally owned lands were not in the same condition. Wildfire risk was high with the watershed devastated for decades after other fires had gone through. Wildlife habitats have also degraded and problems have arisen within fisheries. When groups went to the federal government to request solutions be found, the representatives were reportedly dismissed.

“The groups learned the hard truth,” said Bullock, in the video. “That Washington D.C. wasn’t really interested in finding solutions to these problems. Congress was too polarized to get anything done.”

According to Ivory, with the federal legislature in control of the land, the proper management of land cannot be arranged because of the political disputes. Also, with so many decision makers, most of who have likely never been to Montana, it is next to impossible for an informed, beneficial decision to come about.

Bullock gave a call to action and said it was up to the residents of these states to find solutions to the problems. After the video finished, Ivory reiterated the need for Montanans to look for the solutions and get the federal government to release the lands for management by the state. He said it was a universal problem and one where everyone had an interest in a solution.

“It’s not about Republicans or Democrats, liberals or conservatives,” said Ivory. “It’s about the land and the jobs and the tax base.”

To demonstrate the severity of the issue, Ivory showed a map of the United States where federal land was marked in red. On the map, the eastern states and Midwest had only patchy sections marked, but was predominately state controlled public land. However, in an almost perfect line from the Dakotas to Texas, the map suddenly exploded in red. Almost a full third of the western states were marked as federally controlled land.

Ivory then showed comparison maps, which showed the annual rainfall – the maps were nearly identical. He said the more arid lands were federally controlled, presumably because it was not as useful for farms or other agriculture. However, Ivory also pointed out how flawed he felt this argument was, as many of the states with a majority of federally controlled land were far from arid.

“Washington, arid,” said Bullock. “Oregon, arid? How do you get there?”

Another map was shown, which detailed the natural resource distribution of the country. Again, the map was nearly identical to the one of federally controlled land. Ivory explained how the federal lands hurt state economies because most of the natural resources could not be touched by residents. Another aspect of the problem was in how the money from the timber or minerals available on the land went straight to the federal government with very little left to the state itself.

According to Ivory, the reason for the presence of so much federally controlled land lies in the state’s agreement for statehood. The contract, which allowed Montana into the union says the public “forever disclaims all rights and title” to the land and essentially gives it up. However, a problem lies within the justification.

Nearly every state in the union has the same words in its statehood contract and the eastern states are mostly state-controlled pubic land. Ivory explained how a closer look at the contract shows it actually says the disclaimer is in effect until the states demand the land back.

“When you read the rest of the sentence, it says ‘until title shall be extinguished,’” said Bullock. “That means dispose of the title, you’re not supposed to keep the title.”

Should the land become controlled by the state, the lands would be open to more regular management to clear underbrush and prevent disasters like the West Mullan Fire. It would also help the state’s economy after timber, natural gas and minerals were freed up to be harvested.

The American Lands Council has begun work to get states to demand the contract be honored and put the land under the control of the state government. According to the organization, not only would this help the state economy, but also education and the environment as a whole. Ivory said the benefits of this have already been seen in other states.

“North Dakota today, they get to control 100 percent of the access to their land,” said Ivory. “They get to govern themselves…they keep 100 percent of the mineral royalties from what they put out, they’re putting billions of dollars into their schools… and roads. They’ve got tens of thousands of jobs, just looking for people, because they get to govern themselves and control their own resources.”

More information on the American Lands Council can be found at www.americanlandscouncil.org.