Wilderness bill might work

Inter Lake editorial

We're not certain that Sen. Jon Tester's Forest Jobs and Recreation Bill has all the right stuff, but he is right about one thing: the way it was developed is far superior to past efforts at passing wilderness legislation for Montana.

Former Montana Rep. Pat Williams acknowledged as much, in describing how 16 wilderness bills he sponsored over his 18 years in Congress went down in flames. The problem back then was fierce polarization between wilderness environmentalists and the timber industry and multiple-use advocates.

That is no longer the case, and Tester has used this to his advantage, basically recruiting long-running collaborative negotiations over forest management into his bill.

"It's a new day when motorized users, timber mill owners, backcountry horsemen, hunters, fishermen and conservationists all agree that it's time to put aside differences for the sake of the forest - and for the sake of our communities," Tester said last week.

True enough, some of the same polarization still exists, but it has already been largely marginalized because of the broad spectrum of groups that have endorsed Tester's legislation. When the Montana Wilderness Association, the Montana Wildlife Federation, motorized use groups and a series of lumber mills have developed the provisions that are in the bill, it has already cleared many of the hurdles that tripped up past wilderness bills.

Another potential feature for political success is that Tester's bill is not nearly as sweeping as past proposals that included wilderness designations covering broad swaths of land totaling as much as 1.5 million acres in Montana.

By contrast, Tester's bill outlines 677,000 acres for wilderness through 25 designations. The fact that there are so many designations - many of them covering just a few thousand acres - is testimony to the haggling that has been going on for years among the three collaborative groups that contributed to the bill.

Finally, the legislation is an improvement over past efforts precisely because it is not just about wilderness. It also includes provisions aimed at spurring on active forest management and restoration, with mandates for timber harvesting.

It appears that the days of all-or-nothing support or opposition to wilderness legislation have passed, and that should be a good thing.