Keeping the 'trust' on state lands

Whitefish area residents should be respected for their work on uses of state lands

A measure of respect is due to the 15-20 Whitefish area residents who have worked for more than a year in trying to decide best management uses for state lands around the city.

The group, working with Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation officials, came up with credible recommendations that provide defensible compromises between competing demands for those lands.

State officials have said they are obligated to consider uses for state lands that provide higher financial returns for school trust funds than have been available from traditional uses such as logging.

At the same time, many in the community place a high value on the recreational opportunities provided on 13,000 acres in six areas surrounding Whitefish: the Stillwater, Haskill Basin, Spencer Lake, Swift Creek, Beaver Lake/Skyles and Happy Valley/KM areas.

The committee decided that only 611 acres, or about 4.7 percent of the entire area, should be available for various types of development that would presumably provide more revenue to trust funds.

The group confined that development to certain areas. For instance, any light industrial development would mostly be limited to about 60 acres of the Stillwater State Forest adjacent to U.S. 93.

Some acreage would be available for leasing, and some for purchases with restrictions, such as requiring buyers to engage in conservation easements or provide continued public access.

It would be inappropriate to dismiss outright any of the committee's conclusions, largely because citizen interests were well-represented. But there are some questions and concerns.

We are pleased, for instance, to see that the committee has agreed to limit state land sales, apparently as much as possible, because outright sales undermine the purpose of providing trust revenue in perpetuity. And one series of sales, we fear, could easily lead to more state lands being sold in decades to come.

Leasing state lands puts the state in a landlord's role, which may be a less-than-perfect job for the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, but it is one that they will need to adjust to.

In the meantime, the committee and state lands managers should be commended for their work, which will very likely be imitated across the state.