Bison Range transfer proposal not adequate

In late August, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes released the second draft of the National Bison Range Transfer and Restoration Act of 2016. The Tribe also released a summary of key changes that had been made to the original draft. The revisions that were made came in response to suggestions made during a five-week-long public comment period solicited by the Tribes according to CSKT spokesman Rob McDonald.

There were some other key changes made to the original draft that were not contained in the summary. The original bill draft contained the word “transfer,” or a form of the word “transfer,” 20 times; the final draft has deleted the word “transfer” and replaced it with the word “restore” or “restoration.” Removal of the word “transfer” from the legislation does not alter the process that would need to be followed before the tribes could assume ownership and management of the National Bison Range. The land is now owned by the federal government and administered as public land by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Ownership of the land, bison, equipment, buildings, etc., would have to be transferred to the tribes, who could then apply to have the land put in federal trust status. The original title of the act, the “National Bison Range Transfer and Restoration Act of 2016” accurately described the legislation. The revised title, the “National Bison Range Restoration Act,” came about because Montanans are overwhelming opposed to the transfer of public lands to private individuals or other entities. The semantics change is clearly an attempt to quiet the argument that the proposed transfer is a giveaway of public land.

There is also a fundamental change in the funding arrangement for management of the Bison Range. The original draft contained language describing the two-year transition period from management by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and how the secretary of the interior was to “cooperate with the tribes in transition activities regarding the management of lands, bison and resources under this Act including, but not limited to transfers to the Tribes of funds….” The re-write states that the secretary shall cooperate by providing funds to the tribes for the first two years of tribal management. In the original funding narrative for the Bison Range put forth by the tribes in February when the transfer proposal was first floated, McDonald stated to the Missoulian that, “The Fish and Wildlife Service made clear that, once it (the National Bison Range) leaves the National Refuge System, there would be no funding coming to operate it; all operating costs would fall upon the tribes.” Providing federal funding for operation was not part of the original bill, but is clearly inserted into the new proposal. The current funding level for Bison Range operation is about $750,000 yearly.

One of the key changes noted in the summary produced by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes was that the revised bill had addressed the management of noxious weeds on the Bison Range if a transfer was to occur. Apparently, the tribes feel they have adequately addressed the problem by inserting language that they will have a publicly available management plan that will include actions to address management and control of invasive weeds. A management plan is not enough, there must be a clear, quantifiable pledge of money dedicated to noxious weed management. The tribes have released a document that shows they have spent about $110,000 a year for the past five years to combat noxious weeds on the entire reservation. That amount alone could easily be spent on just the Bison Range. A plan has no credibility without a delegation of resources to carry out the plan.

The new, final bill is still unacceptable and should not be introduced into the Congress.

Decker, of Ronan, is a Lake County commissioner.