Fishing - Montana republicans want to auction off Montana's national parks and forests

MT GOP still wants all federal land; bad idea, say Schweitzer and
access group

http://bozemandailychronicle.com/art...landbzbigs.txt

By SCOTT McMILLION, Chronicle Staff Writer
The Montana Republican Party still wants the state to take over all
the federal land in Montana, with the exception of military bases.

"Be it resolved that the Montana Republican Party supports the
transfer of administration of all federal lands, excluding military
installations, in Montana to the State of Montana," says a resolution
posted on the party's Web site.

The plank is there even though former Gov. Marc. Racicot, a
Republican, decided years ago that the state didn't have the money or
manpower to manage an extra 30 million acres.

Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat running for governor, in a speech to an
environmental group in Bozeman last weekend, criticized Republicans
for adhering to a position he maintains would bankrupt the state and
deny the public access to its own land.

"It's a budget buster," Schweitzer said Wednesday in a telephone
interview.

The issue has been around for a while. Back in the early 1990s,
several Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont.,
offered national legislation that would have transferred federal
property to the states.

Montana lawmakers also sponsored a bill that would have let the state
sell the land, raising the specter of locked gates blocking access to
popular hunting and fishing areas.

Both measures caused an uproar and neither traveled far, but the idea
still appeals to a lot of Montana Republicans, according to Chuck
Denowh, the party's executive director.

"That's a concept that certainly falls in line with our states' rights
philosophy," Denowh said Wednesday. "I do think it's something a lot
of Montana Republicans agree with."

If the resolution were to somehow come true, all the national forests,
Bureau of Land Management land, a passel of wildlife refuges, part of
Yellowstone National Park and all of Glacier National Park would
become the state's responsibility.

"I don't think the state of Montana has the resources to manage
Glacier," Schweitzer said.

Park entrance fees don't even cover employee salaries and most of the
operating funds come from Washington, D.C. Other federal land agencies
also bring in more money than they generate.

Access to public land would decrease if the state took over, predicted
Bill Fairhurst, a founder of the Public Lands Access Association, Inc.

Too much federal land has no practical recreational access, Fairhurst
noted, but officials are trying to correct that.

"The sportsmen and recreationists are much better off the way things
are," he said. "At least the federal government is working on it. I
don't think the state ever would."

Although he supported giving up federal lands 10 years ago, Burns has
since thrown his weight behind a number of projects that increased
federal holdings in the state, including land swaps and purchases on
the Gallatin National Forest.

"Since then, he's taken a different look at it," said Fairhurst, a
Democrat. "He's done a great deal of good in many areas."

Denowh said giving federal lands to Montana is "merely a concept idea"
and there is no legislation pending.

Fairhurst agreed any change is unlikely.

"It will be on their wish list for a long long time," he said. "But I
don't see it happening. But then again, you never know."