Wilderness study area resolution raises questions of local control

Laura Lundquist

(Missoula Current) Some Montanans want to have more local control over the management of wilderness study areas. But some don’t agree on what that local control looks like.

On Tuesday afternoon in the Senate Energy, Technology and Federal Relations committee, Sen. Tony Tezak, R-Ennis, introduced a resolution asking the U.S. Congress to remove protections from all wilderness study areas in Montana to allow more uses to occur, including natural resource extraction, grazing and motorized recreation.

Seven of the wilderness study areas on Forest Service land were created in 1977 by Congressional legislation and another 35 fall under the Bureau of Land Management as National Conservation Lands. In addition, Senate Joint Resolution 14 is asking to open up 60,000 acres of designated roadless areas in Montana.

“I have provided the committee with hundreds of signatures on petitions to release these study areas and petitions in support of legislation to release them,” Tezak said.

The nine proponents included the Montana Stockgrowers Association, Montana Association of Counties and Citizens for Balanced Use. Citizens for Balanced Use spokesman E. J. Redding gave the committee a September 2017 Forest Service briefing paper that was sent to Sen. Steve Daines regarding the seven Forest Service wilderness areas, five of which weren’t recommended for wilderness. The Forest Service gave partial approval for the Ten Lakes and Blue Joint study areas.

“Our timing on this resolution is fabulous with the discussion of forest management happening in Washington, D.C., right now,” Redding said.

In December 2017, Daines introduced Congressional legislation to remove protections from the five Forest Service wilderness study areas. Four months later, Rep. Greg Gianforte introduced additional legislation to release 24 additional study areas on BLM land. Both bills failed to get traction in Congress. However, Daines has continued to introduce legislation to eliminate three study areas - the Middle Fork Judith, Hoodoo Mountain and Wales Creek - most recently as part of the Montana Sportsmen Conservation Act.

Beaverhead County rancher Francis Strodtman said she wanted the West Pioneer study area west of the Big Hole Valley to be returned to general forest management.

“Ultimately, I believe in local control of our federal lands,” Strodtman said. “Let’s move out of limbo and get all listed WSA’s released and move toward more responsive local needs, as local federal offices have a better ability to manage and control these lands in a more better beneficial way.”

However, several of the 35 opponents of the resolution said local input was already occurring in the form of groups that have been finding collaborative solutions for wilderness study areas. Jack Kirkley of Dillon reminded the committee that one of the conclusions of the Legislative Environmental Quality Council’s 2019 study of Montana’s wilderness study areas was that local citizens craft the best solutions. To that end, he has participated in the Beaverhead County Collaborative for the past four years, which has produced recommendations for five wilderness study areas.

“None of our recommendations will make any difference if Congress does not decide to act upon them,” Kirkley said. “Sen. Tezak’s resolution amounts to nothing more than a top-down release-everything-with-no-public-conversation approach.”

Ciara Pares-Kempf said her Beaverhead County ranch, a Forest Service inholding, had the West Pioneers wilderness study area on one side, general forest on the other, and the difference between the condition of the land on the two sides is stark. The roads on the general forest side allowed in a lot of motorized recreation, which brought in more people, more weeds, more social trails, more riparian and creek damage and her cows, like the wildlife, were more stressed.

“The most likely result of taking away the WSA designation is road-building within those areas,” Pares-Kempf said. “You put roads through the West Pioneers and you’re going to overrun that ground with toxic weeds, you’re going to reduce the quality of forage for my cattle and the elk and deer in that area. This one-size-fits-all bill is not the right fit.”

Former Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest Supervisor Bill Avey said the politicians should follow the recommendations of the various federal land and resource management plans, which all go through lengthy public comment periods. The 2021 Helena-Lewis and Clark Forest Plan addressed two of the wilderness study areas and recommended keeping one.

“That is the kind of balanced public-supported approach that this committee and the House and Senate of Montana should be focused on,” Avey said.

Wild Montana spokesman Noah Marion said starting with HJ 9 in 2017, the past five Legislatures have introduced similar resolutions to get rid of wilderness study areas to no effect. He suggested that the committee instead pass a resolution developed by Wild Montana called the People’s Resolution, signed by more than 3,200 Montanans. It calls on Congress to support land agency recommendations and collaborative agreements regarding wilderness study areas.

“The problem with creating lasting solutions for WSA’s is not with the locally developed collaboratives or the balanced proposals they’ve developed. The problem is with Washington, D.C. and their inability to pass bills in a timely manner,” Marion said.

Montana Conservation Elders spokesman Wayne Chamberlain said polls have shown that there’s broad consensus across Montana that wilderness study areas are important, although there may be different opinions on their management. But the areas are also part of the national public trust.

“There have been some comments about local control. I understand the appeal of local control,” Chamberlain said. “But sometimes, local control is not the best answer in all circumstances.”