Daines says Senate Farm Bill helps timber industry

U.S. Sen. Steve Daines is looking to help stimulate Montana’s timber industry with several proposed amendments to the Senate Farm Bill. The bill, which passed out of the Senate Agriculture Committee (on which Daines sits) on a 20 to 1 vote, passed the Senate.

The Montana Republican touted his work on timber issues during a teleconference with reporters last week. While the senator said he is proposing 8-10 amendments to the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 at this time, he said he will need help if the amendments are to reach the Senate floor.

“I’ve got some additional amendments that I working to move forward on the Senate floor that will address other priorities regarding forest management, combating red tape, combating litigation and empowering states to do more management on our National Forests as well,” Daines said. “I have strong support of the Republican side, I just think we need to get some support across the aisle and I think we can get some of these amendments into the bill.”

Chief among those proposed amendments is one that is aimed to help reduce litigation against proposed timber projects on Federal lands.

“In Region 1, which is Montana and Idaho in terms of National Forests, we have 29 timber sales under litigation as we speak. There are 20 injunctions in place against timber sales across Montana and Idaho, Daines explained. “One of our ideas is to pilot a program for arbitration in Region 1. Litigation is expensive. It’s very time consuming and our idea here is to pilot – limit it to just a handful of cases – so that we can demonstrate the ability to do this more quickly to settle the dispute and more cost effectively.”

The goal of the program would be to settle disputes before they reach the courthouse. Arbitration is generally conducted with a panel of multiple arbitrators who take on a role like that of a judge, make decisions about evidence and give written opinions. Although arbitration is sometimes conducted with one arbitrator, the most common procedure is for each side to select an arbitrator. Then, those two arbitrators select a third arbitrator, at which point the dispute is presented to the three chosen arbitrators. Decisions are made by majority vote.

“The idea here is to recognize there may be disputes about the law. Let’s look at a pilot program to test this idea of arbitration instead of litigation. The trial lawyers are winning right now, the people of Montana are losing because of this litigious nature of some of these extreme environmental groups,” Daines said.

In another amendment, Daines hopes to secure additional relief from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ “Cottonwood Decision,” which forced the Forest Service to update their management plans if they did not take into account protections for the habitats of endangered species (specifically Canada Lynx). The Cottonwood Decision required extensive consultation between the Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on changes to Endangered Species Act critical habitat, which led to mountains of red tape for timber projects, trail maintenance, and conservation efforts

While Daines and fellow Montana Sen. Jon Tester recently championed an effort that overturned the Cottonwood Decision, the proposed amendment would strengthen that reversal to limit consultations only when “significant new information” demands additional review of an endangered species.

Another proposed amendment would expand the use of the Good Neighbor Authority to allow National Forests and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to enter into cooperative agreements or contracts with individual counties and tribes to perform watershed restoration and forest management services on National Forest System (NFS) lands. The program currently only applies to states and Puerto Rico.

“That’s an important step, getting the counties and tribes involved in the Good Neighbor Authority, even taking it down to a more granular level than just the states. That’s a good win for forest management for states like Montana.”

Tester also voted in favor of the Farm Bill. The House passed a Farm Bill earlier this year, now the two have to hash out differences in the legislation, which could be difficult, as the House bill has a work provision in order for people to receive food assistance, while the Senate version does not.