Response from Ryan Zinke

[Poke 'Em]

I sent off a canned email stating my opposition to public land transfer. Here's the response I got from Representative Ryan Zinke:

Dear Mr. S,

Thank you for contacting me about public lands. I appreciate having your thoughts on this issue, as your input is valuable to me.

As a fifth generation Montanan, I understand how important our public lands are to our local economies, communities, and, more importantly, our very way of life. Our wealth of natural resources creates jobs, supports families, and promotes recreation. It is of utmost importance to me that we preserve the public’s access to these lands.

In a joint address to the Montana State Legislature in January 2015, I made it clear that I will not tolerate selling our public lands. However, the amount of red tape surrounding the federal government’s management of lands directly hurts Montana. Many sections of our forests are so poorly tended to that a single lit match will completely wipe out decades of timber growth and habitat preservation. We need to find a way to cut through the bureaucracy to ensure our parks, forests, and other public areas are properly managed.

The House Committee on Natural Resources held a legislative hearing on February 25, 2016, to discuss several pieces of legislation that impact federal lands. These bills include H.R.2316 (Self-Sufficient Community Lands Act), H.R.3650 (State National Forest Management Act of 2015), and H.R.4579 (Utah Test and Training Range Encroachment Prevention and Temporary Closure Act). Each piece of legislation deals with transferring certain areas of National Forest Service land back to states to manage, thereby removing federal control. I have consistently supported keeping our public lands public. With each vote, I have taken on leadership for the sake of Montana’s values. Though these bills have not come before Natural Resources or the House for a vote, please know that I will keep your thoughts firmly in mind as we discuss how to best manage and preserve our natural heritage.

It is an honor to represent the people of Montana. Understanding the views of my constituents is very important to me as I continue to serve you. I will never forget who my real boss is.

If I can be of further assistance to you or your family, please do not hesitate to contact me.

In God We Trust,

Ryan K. Zinke
Member of Congress

Note, he doesn't say he supports keeping federal lands federal, but simply "public." If you read between the lines, he seems to be supporting transfer to the states, which is in line with his vote on the Labrador bill. Here's the response I sent back:

Representative Zinke,
Thanks for the response. While I agree that there is room for improvement in the management of federal lands, I feel that transferring them to the state is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. I would strongly prefer to see the "red tape," as you put it, cleaned up to allow federal land managers at a district or regional level to manage lands with an appropriate toolbox at their disposal. Transfer to the states, in my opinion, doesn't solve the problem of improper land management, and starts a slippery slope that can eventually lead to loss of access.

Thank you for your time,
Patrick S
Sidney, Montana

Hopefully others will send a similar message that keeping land "public" isn't enough if it starts it down a path that makes disposal easier and/or more likely down the line.

 

[Nemont]

The biggest open secret of all is that Zinke is part of the institution which could "cut the red tape" by funding the public lands agency adequately to do a better job. When Congress holds the purse strings and complains about poor management it is like farting and blaming the dog.

Nemont

 

[RobG]

The biggest open secret of all is that Zinke is part of the institution which could "cut the red tape" by funding the public lands agency adequately to do a better job. When Congress holds the purse strings and complains about poor management it is like farting and blaming the dog.

Nemont

If we could be as loud about funding as we are about transferring public lands we might be able to make a difference. It's bad enough they are forced to divert all their money to firefighting, but the sportsmen bill (SHARE) wants to divert more money into cleaning up the messes created by recreational shooters.

 

[Schaaf]

The biggest open secret of all is that Zinke is part of the institution which could "cut the red tape" by funding the public lands agency adequately to do a better job. When Congress holds the purse strings and complains about poor management it is like farting and blaming the dog.

Nemont

100%

Zinke has done a good job among the PR front about splitting the lines but he hasn't done us one damn favor about squashing the transfer movement.

 

[IlliniFIre]

Apparently the non-answer is the party line right now. I received this from my Congressman today after reaching out to him following the bills moving out of the sub committee that he sits on.

Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding America’s public lands. Your views are important to me as I work to effectively represent you and Illinois’ 18th Congressional District.

As you may know, the federal government owns roughly 640 million acres, about 28% of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Located primarily in the West and Alaska, this land is administered by the Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service in the Department of the Interior, the Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Defense. Specifically, 61.2% of Alaska is federally owned as is 46.9% of the 11 coterminous western states. Lands management is related to preservation, recreation, development of natural resources, or military purposes.

Like you, I understand the important role our federal lands play in our nation’s heritage. Federal land management decisions should and do take into account use of taxpayer dollars, access to and use of federal lands, and state and local interests. As a member of the House Natural Resources Committee, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind as related legislation is introduced and considered in Congress.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please stay in touch and share your views as we discuss these issues in Congress. Call one of our offices and visit our website at: http://lahood.house.gov/, where you may find additional information and sign up for my regular E-newsletter updates. I also encourage you to like our Facebook page at: http://www.facebook.com/replahood or follow us on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/RepLaHood where we can continue our conversation.

 

[JMG]

You guys are spot on regarding the lack of proper funding. The government employees have been ask to do more with less for the last several years. Basically, what the public is getting is less with less and it's not the government employee's fault, though they often are viewed as the problem. It's amazing to me the real issue is Congress and their inability to get anything done, time after time. Too busy voting party lines instead of what is best for this country (as a whole).

 

[406elkhunter]

"Keeping lands public" transcends state v. federal ownership. I took a quick second to read this bill and it looks like its not really a sale of public lands but just gives states more management of the lands while keeping them open to sportsmen. I think that its probably tricky for reps from western states to increase funding for public lands due to the small number of reps from states with large amounts of public lands. I was happy that Zinke has always championed LWCF which has been great for Montana.

 

[Ben Lamb]

"Keeping lands public" transcends state v. federal ownership. I took a quick second to read this bill and it looks like its not really a sale of public lands but just gives states more management of the lands while keeping them open to sportsmen. I think that its probably tricky for reps from western states to increase funding for public lands due to the small number of reps from states with large amounts of public lands. I was happy that Zinke has always championed LWCF which has been great for Montana.

The bill hands 4 million acres of land owned by every American to a few, politically appointed people who will then make decisions about how that land should be managed. No more public processes, no more ability for citizens to influence management and no more assurances that elk security standards, road densities, clean water provisions remain. I think that, as a piece of policy, the bill is just as bad as a straight up transfer.

 

[Hunting Wife]

You guys are spot on regarding the lack of proper funding. The government employees have been ask to do more with less for the last several years. Basically, what the public is getting is less with less and it's not the government employee's fault, though they often are viewed as the problem. It's amazing to me the real issue is Congress and their inability to get anything done, time after time. Too busy voting party lines instead of what is best for this country (as a whole).

"Do more with less" is officially out the window. Right now, the motto is "do less, period and start identifying the things we can't afford to continue." Turns out, that's mostly biological stuff.

I want more local input in management as much as anyone else. But for that to really work, there need to be locals in both sides of the equation. The more budgets are cut, the more centralized management becomes and the less responsive it is to local needs. Incredibly frustrating that those most responsible for causing the problem are the most vocal in blaming those who have absolutely no power to fix the problem.

 

[MTGomer]

Government (all levels) need to invest in some technology and pink slip a hoard of unperforming parasites and free up the good ones to actually do their jobs.
Our St gov't still keeps paper files, filed by clerks by hand, won't scan, but still faxes, can't accept credit card payments etc...