Firestorm debate erupts over transfer of public lands

An update from Senator Fielder

It’s a big idea and it’s rightfully reaping big debate on national level. From swimming pools in Florida, to classrooms in New York, to coffee shops in small town Montana -- people are talking about transfer of public lands.

The challenge now is to get the facts on the table. Valid questions and concerns must be carefully examined. That’s why it is so imperative that elected officials, experts, and other interested persons actively pursue meaningful analysis.

We cannot rely on misinformation coming from those who do not understand the issue or simply oppose improving access, use, and health of our public lands. The primary arguments I have heard against transferring federally controlled public lands to state based management are coming mainly from those with ties to the very obstructionists and bureaucracies that placed our nation’s federal land management system into near utter failure.

The big question is, can and should states assume control of federally held public lands with their states? In order to really answer that question we need to look at the facts. Many colleagues and I have been studying the issue intensively, and so far I see no reason why we can’t.

From the legal, economic, recreational, and environmental perspectives the advantages of state based management are quite favorable. States are better able to deliver positive results when it comes to public land management, economic production, and firefighting capabilities than our perpetually gridlocked federal partners.

Economically, we are seeing a multitude of studies reveal drastic differences in efficiencies between state and federal management. Nevada’s recently released economic analysis shows a net revenue gain of up to $1.6 billion per year for their state if they take over management of federal public lands with their border. That model leaves Wilderness, Indian Reservations, Military installations, National Parks, and Dept. of Energy facilities under federal jurisdiction. On the other public lands they would transfer all existing rights and uses so those with grazing, mineral, or other use rights would maintain those rights under state management.

On May 14th the Montana legislature’s Environmental Quality Council will hear from other state committees who are actively pursuing means to correct problems with federal land management. This meeting is open to the public and will take place in the State Capitol at 3:30 p.m. As the Chair of Montana’s study of federal land management, I welcome your comments and questions. You can reach me at sen.jfielder@legmt.gov or 406 210 5944.

After a degree of initial skepticism and much deliberation, I now favor the transfer of public lands to the state. In Montana, our state public land management is far better than the federal system in many regards, but probably not perfect. If there’s something we need to fix at the state level, Montanans have a lot better chance of getting it done here than we do under the current regime of centralized national control.

One of the primary advantages of shifting to state based ownership would be the placement of decision making authority and responsibility into the hands of elected officials who are directly accountable to the people in a particular state. In our case Montanans would decide how much access, use, protection, and production we would want to see.

Here in Northwest Montana we have a world class silver deposit and the most productive potential of all the forests in the state. Yet under federal control we consistently experience the highest unemployment and poverty levels in Montana. Decay rates and disease on national forest lands now outpace growth, which leads to catastrophic wildfire conditions. Those extreme fire events burn up millions of animals and put billions of pounds of toxins into our air and water, and jeopardizing the safety of our communities.

I cannot imagine any collection of people who could possibly care more about Montana’s land, water, air, citizens, wildlife, and economy more than Montanans do. There is no question the 27 million acres of federally controlled public lands in Montana have a direct impact on every aspect of our lives. That cannot be said of the people in states like New York, New Jersey, or Florida where they have little to no understanding of the values so dear to Montanans.