Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Forest Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montana lawmakers hear resolution urging federal review of Forest Service management, more active timber work
Summary
HJ 35 asks federal leaders to review Forest Service forest-management and wildfire strategies; supporters urged more timber harvest, road access and active treatments while critics and some committee members urged attention to habitat, historical fire regimes and timber-sale economics.
Representative Jedidiah Hinkle presented House Joint Resolution 35 seeking to bring Montana’s congressional delegation and federal officials’ attention to concerns about wildland fire and Forest Service management. Hinkle, who has 18 seasons with the Forest Service, framed the resolution around restoring more active forest management and timber harvest as tools for reducing catastrophic crown fires.
Jason Todhunter of the Montana Logging Association testified in favor, saying the resolution supports active forest management, road maintenance and timber sales that can help slow wildfires. Retired Forest Service Ranger Chuck Henkel told the committee he believes the Forest Service has been lighting large areas to avoid NEPA requirements for controlled burns and cited past fires as examples.
Committee members questioned whether the resolution adequately recognizes the ecological role of fire, the costs and feasibility of reopening or maintaining roads long decommissioned for habitat protection, and whether timber economics (deficit timber sales and road costs) were considered. Representative France asked whether the sponsor would accept an amendment addressing cost-effective maintenance; Hinkle said he could not commit to a late amendment without seeing specifics, but argued timber receipts historically paid for roads and that more attention is needed to how roads are being managed.
Several members emphasized the role of historical fire regimes and indigenous use of fire in shaping landscapes; members asked whether the resolution should call out returning to historical regimes or explicitly address prescribed burning. Hinkle said the resolution is a high-level request to draw attention and that precedent already allows fires to burn under some management objectives.
What happens next: The hearing closed after Q&A and the sponsor’s closing remarks. The resolution is intended as a statement to federal leaders rather than a binding state policy; the committee will decide whether to pass the resolution or adopt amendments before sending it on.
