Congressman Gianforte, GOP vote to gut the Wilderness Act
One
thing most Montanans agree on is we love our nationally acclaimed
wildernesses and don’t want to see them harmed. Whether we hike, fish,
hunt, ride horsepack or just stand in awe of these wild gems, Montana’s
designated wildernesses are the pride of our state. We might fight like
hell over whether to designate this area or that one as new wilderness,
but the Bob Marshall, Scapegoat, Selway-Bitterroot, Absaroka-Beartooths
and our other protected wildernesses are sacred to Montanans of all
stripes.
That is,
apparently, all stripes except U.S. Congressmen Greg Gianforte, who just
voted to effectively repeal the Wilderness Act and open places like
“the Bob” to endless forms of habitat manipulation, predator control,
road-building and anything else that might be construed as benefiting
“hunting, angling, recreational, shooting, or wildlife conservation.”
This
stealth attack on the Wilderness Act comes in the form of H.R. 3668,
the Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act,
introduced by Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina. It would affect every
wilderness in the nation, including all of Montana’s wilderness gems.
By
nearly unanimous vote, Congress passed the 1964 Wilderness Act in order
to protect America’s wildest landscapes. The law describes wilderness
as “an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by
man... retaining its primeval character and influence, without
permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and
managed so as to preserve its natural conditions.” The Wilderness Act is
essentially nature’s Bill of Rights, places where we humans, out of a
sense of respect, humility and foresight, have agreed to let nature be.
Since passage of the Wilderness Act, the National Wilderness
Preservation System has grown to include 110 million acres in more than
760 units.
The SHARE Act would turn the
Wilderness Act on its head, allowing endless habitat manipulation and
modification, including logging, chaining, herbicide spraying or myriad
other offenses done under the guise of “wildlife conservation” or for
providing hunting, fishing and recreational shooting experiences. While
such management might be fine for a Texas game farm, they represent a
dramatic change for the Wilderness Act, which for over 50 years has
required the preservation of wilderness character as the top priority
for public wildernesses.
The
SHARE Act would also allow the construction of “temporary” roads, dams
or other structures in wilderness, again if done under the guise of
benefiting hunting, angling, recreational shooting or wildlife
conservation. And all such projects would be exempt from any
environmental review or public scrutiny under the National Environmental
Policy Act — in essence making wildernesses some of the least protected
of all public lands.
The
bill is being pushed at the behest of the Safari Club International and
a few like-minded groups that are upset that wildernesses around the
country aren’t managed like game farms, something Montanans roundly
rejected at the ballot box not long ago. Not satisfied with the rich
diversity of life our wildernesses hold or with the special experiences
that wilderness provides, these groups want wilderness managed solely to
benefit their idea of hunting and to favor the animal species they want
to shoot. Even if it means building a road or a dam, clearcutting a
forest or wiping out native predators to meet their hunting or angling
goals.
Montanans who love our
wildest, best places and don’t want them degraded for a selfish few
should contact Rep. Gianforte and urge him to remove the wilderness
gutting provisions from the SHARE Act. Before it’s too late.
George Nickas of Missoula is the conservation director for Wilderness Watch, a national wilderness conservation organization.
No comments:
Post a Comment