Some testimony from yesterdays House resources committee meeting from the view of those in the crosshairs...... Mt. Rep Denny Rehberg
Rehberg 1
Testimony of Congressman Denny Rehberg (MT-At Large)
Opposing the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Committee on Natural Resources
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands
Chairman Grijalva, Ranking Member Bishop, thanks for allowing me to return to
the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands to testify again on behalf
of the people of Montana.
I’m here representing county commissioners, state representatives, ranchers,
timber workers, sportsmen and women and recreationalists who have expressed their
opposition to the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act in letters, faxes, emails,
survey responses and even a rapidly growing Facebook group. All told, I’ve heard from
almost 10,000 folks who live in the Northern Rockies – who consider the land at issue in
the legislation we are discussing today to be their home. It’s where they live, work and
raise a family.
I’m here to report that more than 96% of us who live in these areas oppose this
bill. In my years of public service – beginning in the state legislature, then as Montana’s
Lieutenant Governor and now as the sole Representative in the House, I can think of few
subjects that have evoked such a unified opposition.
If Congress wants to, it can ignore these concerns and pass NREPA without their
consent and without a single vote from any of their Congressional Representatives. The
land NREPA federalizes is represented by only 7 Members of Congress including myself;
far fewer than the 72 current cosponsors of the bill. Congress can just say it’s
inconvenient that none of those 72 cosponsors are from the districts that NREPA impacts.
Recently, Congress passed the Omnibus Lands Act, which created over 2 million
acres of new wilderness, this bill carves out more than 24 million acres of new
wilderness. That area is larger than any of the districts represented by the 72 cosponsors
of the bill. In fact, out of 435 Congressional Districts, only 18 are larger. Representative
Carolyn Maloney – who is the lead sponsor of this bill – could fit her New York district
into the new wilderness created by NREPA almost 3,000 times.
And while you may have the votes to force your will on the people who live in the
Northern Rockies, I’m here to tell you that doing so isn’t in anyone’s best interest. Not
the folks who live on this land, and not the people you were elected to represent. It’s not
even in the best interest of the ecosystems we all want to protect.
Let me be absolutely clear about something. The folks I represent support
responsible land conservation. Currently, there are more than 30 million acres of state
and federal land in Montana alone - that’s nearly one acre in every three. As a state
where lifestyles and livelihoods depend on the land we live upon, it’s one of our top
priorities. And we do an outstanding job.
To manage these lands, stake-holders come to the table and formulate consensusdriven
solutions at the local level. The federal government could learn a lot from
examples in my state that center around three words: cooperation, trust and consensus.
For example, the Undaunted Stewardship approach demonstrates the ability of farm and
ranch families to contribute to the preservation of open space and scenic beauty while
continuing to use the land for productive purposes.
Rehberg 2
For the Montanans who work, till, graze, hunt, fish, hike, camp and enjoy this
land, conservation is not only a daily personal choice; it’s our way of life. Real
conservation isn’t about making tough decisions for someone else who lives thousands of
miles away, yet that’s exactly what NREPA does.
The workable solutions we need won’t come from Washington, D.C.; we need to
reach a balance that truly reflects Montana not the ideals of powerful special interests.
From Washington, D.C., it’s impossible to smell the toxic smoke from hundreds
of raging wildfires that will be harder to fight if NREPA passes.
From Washington, D.C., it’s impossible to see the 1.6 million-plus acres of dead
and dying trees that result from pine beetle infestations that will be more difficult to
manage if NREPA passes.
From Washington, D.C., you can’t watch a hillside change colors as indigenous
plants are slowly strangled out of existence by toxic weeds that are impossible to fight
once NREPA passes.
From Washington, D.C., you can’t hear the frustration in the voice of a hunter or
angler who can no longer get to the secluded mountain ridge where his family has gone
for generations once NREPA passes.
From Washington, D.C., you can’t walk on the overgrazed lands once managed
by ranchers who can no longer take their open range livestock to new pastures once
NREPA passes.
From Washington, D.C., Congress pushes for alternative energy from wind and
the sun. But how can we get that power, and create green jobs in the process, if we can’t
build transmission grids across our lands once NREPA passes?
And there’s a new concern looming in the minds of the folks around Montana and
the country. There aren’t many things folks in the Northern Rockies care more about
than their Second Amendment rights. Bills like NREPA create more federally controlled
land, but they don’t guarantee Second Amendment rights on that land. The recent
decision to eliminate Second Amendment Rights on some federal lands is nothing more
than back-door gun control, and it’s not hard to imagine wilderness as the next target for
restricted gun access. I’m concerned that NREPA has no guarantees that the federal
government won’t someday ban guns on other federal lands the way it just did in
National Parks.
At the end of the day, this is about Washington, D.C. thinking it knows how to
manage the Northern Rockies better than the people who live there. I’m here to say this
isn’t the case.
Many of Representative Maloney’s constituents in New York’s 14th District
undoubtedly find Central Park a welcome refuge from the urban surroundings of
America’s most crowded city. A Montanan who visited Central Park recently shared an
observation with me: Although Central Park was free of buildings and streets, many of
the open spaces were cordoned off by fences. Visitors could walk or run on centrally
planned pathways, but the fields of grass around them were off limits. NREPA models
its philosophy for 24 million acres of land after the approach taken in the 843 acres of
Central Park. Look, but don’t touch.
This approach may work in Manhattan, New York, but it doesn’t work in
Manhattan, Montana. I can’t stress how crucial that distinction is, and that’s why I
oppose this bill.
For more on yesterdays hearing....go here.................
If you click on the panel members name in this link you can read their testimony.
http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/...view&extid=250
