Montana counties gain voice in federal land management via growth plans

An old political joke holds that where you stand depends on where you sit. In the debate over who should control federal lands in Montana, some observers have noted a corollary: If you want a seat at the table, it helps to bring a chair. “If you want the federal government to understand about your local customs, your schools, your weeds, your hunting, your industry, you have to have a plan documenting those things,” said Wally Congdon, a Powell County rancher and frequent consultant to county governments around the West. “Federal law states that federal land management must be consistent with local plans to the greatest extent possible. If you want to play the game, bring a team.” The effort is neither simple nor cheap, according to Beaverhead County Commissioner Michael McGinley, who worked with Congdon a decade ago to develop his county’s growth planning resources. And it hasn’t given the county control over issues proposed by the U.S. Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management. But it has kept the county a player rather than a spectator in those federal decisions, he said. “A lot of people think a federal land transfer is the best thing since sliced bread – just take the land from the Forest Service and all your problems are solved," McGinley said. “I don’t think that’s the best thing. I don’t think Montana has enough money. It’s better to ask for cooperating agency status.” In June, the Montana Republican Party passed a platform resolution calling for state takeover of 25 million acres of federally controlled land. But the Legislature’s Environmental Quality Council recently considered a report on problems with federal land management in Montana that contained numerous “risks and concerns” about federal oversight, and recommendations for speeding up decisions on issues like logging, mining permits and road construction on public lands. The federal government owns about 70 percent of Beaverhead County. That puts huge pressure on the county government, McGinley said, when federal programs like Payment In Lieu of Taxes and Secure Rural Schools don’t contribute their expected payments. In the case of the Red Rocks National Wildlife Refuge, McGinley said Beaverhead County has only received $40,000 of $180,000 it’s owed this year. “They’ve got 25 days left before the federal year’s over,” McGinley said. “Congress has got to appropriate money for SRS and PILT before the end of September. In Beaverhead, it totals up to about $2 million.” Money problems like that are common justification for proponents of federal land takeover. But more tangible issues, like whether a forest road gets maintained or how energy exploration and wilderness designations get decided, are what residents really care about, McGinley said. “We have the resource use plan – that’s where it starts,” McGinley said. “That’s the document you use when you start talking with the federal agencies. And Beaverhead and Madison counties hired a resource use planner together. That way, when you have the meeting, somebody has to be there.”...more

Cogdon is right about the consistency provisions in the planning reg's.  McGinley is wrong about the transfer of lands.  McGinley wants to be a "player" and have a chair at the table.  Problem is, the Forest Service owns the table and the cards, sets the rules of the game and decides when the game will be played.  The player sits there while the Forest Service spits in his face and tells him its raining.

The odds for local players would rise exponentially if the state, rather than the feds, owned the table.