By SALLY MAUK
for the Missoulian | Posted: Friday, July 16, 2010 9:30 pm
In another life, I was a wilderness ranger, and to this day
there's a certain trail in a certain wilderness where I am most at
peace with myself and with the world.
Although the conservation challenges facing others across
Montana vary, the fact remains that grassroots efforts have sprung
up where folks have chosen to set aside their differences and work
together. They say all politics is local and that's certainly the
level where the Forest Jobs and Recreation Act originated. The
compromises and agreements forged by the many folks involved were
done so in an open fashion, through years of hard work, lengthy
debate, and input from many different types of people.
A deal's a deal.
That's the message Montana Sen. Jon Tester has for the U.S. Senate
Energy and Natural Resources Committee. And, in reality, he has
little choice.
Tester's forest bill came out of a delicate compromise among
diverse forest user groups. It would create some 600,000 acres of
wilderness - mostly here in Southwest Montana. But it would also
set aside areas for motorized recreation and require the logging of
10,000 acres of forest in each of the next 10 years.
Recently, a committed group of conservationists came together to
passionately discuss Sen. Jon Tester's Forest Jobs and Recreation
Act. The energy and excitement surrounding this legislation is
nothing short of inspiring.
There are those who believe in the old school way of doing
things and those of us who believe in a new way of doing
things.
Unfortunately for Montana's forests and the people who depend on
them, the old school way of doing things hasn't worked out so well.
Years ago, even mainstream conservation groups like the Montana
Wilderness Association were at war with the timber industry.
Because of years of fighting, neither side got what they wanted.
Nobody won. And everyone paid the price.
The current public wrangling about Senator Jon Tester's jobs and
wilderness legislation heralds the many opinions about land use and
protection policies. Perhaps somewhat disguised at the moment, but in a
very real way, this heated debate represents a celebration of the
passion we Montanans hold for the land and waters.
When Montana Democratic Sen. Jon Tester introduced his Forest Jobs and Recreation Act last July, he did something that is all too uncommon in today’s political world. He kept a promise.
He’d told conservationists, loggers and recreationists that if they could reach agreement on contentious issues involving public lands – including wilderness designation, deciding where logging and habitat restoration is appropriate, and, most importantly, getting popular support for their ideas – he’d introduce a bill to help implement their vision.
The economy might have soured in 2009, but the world’s love of Yellowstone National Park certainly didn’t. Despite thinning pocketbooks and growing anxieties — or perhaps because of both — a record-shattering 3.3 million people visited the world’s first national park. The lesson here is that whether the economy is bullish or bearish, Yellowstone is a magical place where people of all backgrounds can restore their spirit.
In a recent guest opinion (Missoulian, Nov. 9), Paul Edwards calls Sen. Jon Tester’s bill “a federal welfare program for the forest products industry” in the state of Montana. Edwards is far from right. Tester’s bill is not an act to save a few mills but is a necessary step toward better forest management.
Since Sen. Jon Tester introduced his Forest Jobs and Recreation Act in July, it has been praised as the first legislation in two decades to bring Montana wilderness advocates and logging advocates together. It also has been criticized by people on both sides of the public-lands debate who want more or less than the proposal would provide.
The bill, which deals exclusively with portions of national forests in Western Montana, had a Senate Energy Committee hearing earlier this month.