The bill, known as the Greater Yellowstone Conservation and Recreation Act, would create 102,000 acres of Wilderness in the Gallatin Range, much of it within the 155,000-acre Hyalite Porcupine Buffalo Horn Wilderness Study Area. Additionally, it would tack 22,000 acres onto existing units of the Lee Metcalf Wilderness and codify certain recreational activities that have languished in legal limbo for decades.
It’s not the first time Wilderness has been proposed for the Gallatin Range. In 1988, the dream of a Gallatin Wilderness nearly became reality when a public lands bill made it to Ronald Reagan’s desk, but the President “pocket vetoed” the bill, neglecting to sign it before the Congressional session ended. That bill included 62,100 acres of Wilderness in the Gallatins, about 60 percent of what is being considered in the GFP proposal.
“There’s a long history of the Gallatin Range being included in various Wilderness proposals since the 1970s,” Barb Cestero, Greater Yellowstone-High Divide landscape director for The Wilderness Society explained to Mountain Journal. “This proposal has effectively secured what we have never had before: a solid Wilderness recommendation for the heart of the Gallatin Range.”
In the latest Forest Plan finalized in 2022, the Custer Gallatin recommended 78,071 acres of Wilderness along the Gallatin Crest within the WSA, and another 14,461 acres in the Sawtooth area, based largely on GFP efforts, Forest Supervisor Mary Erickson acknowledged in her Record of Decision.
This endorsement from the Forest Service was a first for the landscape. “Previously, the Forest Service had recommended zero acres of Wilderness for that landscape, so that’s a really important first step in going to Congress with a proposal,” Cestero said.
In addition to the new Wilderness, the act includes 126,000 acres with development and recreation limitations that GFP members believe also benefit wildlife and ecosystem health. “Folks think that capital-W Wilderness is the only way to protect wildlife habitat. I think that’s wrong,” Wild Montana federal legislative director Zach Angstead said in an interview with Mountain Journal. “There are other avenues. We’ve explored those avenues and included the ones we see as realistic while keeping the existing recreation access intact.”
Because certain recreational uses within the Gallatin Range predate the 1977 Montana Wilderness Study Act, any new Wilderness bill concerning this landscape is unlikely to include the trails where these activities took place historically, bill proponents suggest. Lawsuits in 1996 and 2007 sought clarity around these issues of motorized and mechanized uses within the WSA, and determinations were made that allowed for continued use while prohibiting expansion.
“The idea that there might be a Wilderness connection through the Greater Yellowstone, that’s really what we need in the face of climate change.”
Cathy Whitlock, Regents Professor Emerita, Montana State University
Due to the lawsuits, the Custer Gallatin issued interim summer and winter access orders and closed specific trails to motorized and mechanized use where it had previously been allowed. The Greater Yellowstone Conservation and Recreation Act would codify these interim orders, forever legalizing the non-Wilderness-conforming historic uses and releasing the relevant lands from the WSA, although not removing them from consideration in future Wilderness bills.
“The Wilderness Society thinks this is the best proposal we can bring forward given the longstanding uses in the landscape,” Cestero added. “We’ve built on what they did in the Lee Metcalf designation to protect those areas that have recreation that is not compatible with Wilderness. We can still conserve them from future development so that they provide the wildlife habitat that they currently provide.”
When Congress established the Lee Metcalf Wilderness in 1983, it also set aside the Cabin Creek Wildlife Management Area, over 100,000 acres of prime wildlife habitat between the Taylor-Hilgard and Monument Mountain units of the Lee Metcalf. At the time, motorized use had already been established in Cabin Creek, leading policymakers to preclude the Wildlife
Management Area from the Wilderness designation.
While the Greater Yellowstone Conservation and Recreation Act may set a new highwater mark for agency-recommended Wilderness and new Wilderness acreage, some long-time advocates believe the GFP proposal falls short of what’s needed to protect wildlife and their habitats.
“I could not have been more dismayed at what careful research of the content of the proposed legislation has revealed,” former Montana state legislator Dorothy Bradley said. “The centerpiece of wilderness in this area is the 155,000-acre WSA. They indicate the majority will become permanent Wilderness, but if you look under the carpet, 92,000 [acres] will become Wilderness. That’s a bare majority. It’s fair to call that a postage stamp.”
Clint Nagel, president of the Gallatin Wildlife Association, agrees. “The Forest Service is proposing 78,000 acres, and most of that is rock and ice,” Nagel said in discussing the legislation with Mountain Journal. “There’s hardly any advantage to wildlife to preserve that as Wilderness. The GFP came out with 92,000 acres. Both of those are totally inadequate.”
According to a 2015 study by Dr. Frank Lance Craighead, species migrate out of Yellowstone National Park and through the Gallatin and Madison ranges seasonally in search of food and shelter. “The WSA, along with the northwest corner of Yellowstone National Park, to which it is connected physically and ecologically, has long been a refuge for beleaguered wildlife populations,” Craighead writes.
However, an increasing human presence threatens to overrun this refuge. “Fragmenting the HPBH WSA into smaller pieces of protected habitat would greatly diminish its value for wildlife habitat and the provision of ecosystems services, and could nullify its ability to function as a refuge from climate change,” he continues.
The uncertainty climate change presents is reason enough to push for maximum Wilderness, Cathy Whitlock, Montana State University Regents Professor Emerita, told Mountain Journal.
“The climate information isn’t very specific, but the spirit of maximum protection in this time of rapid change just makes sense,” she said. “What’s the exact number acreage? Who can say, but wildlife is only going to be under more stress as we go into the future.”
For Whitlock, connected Wilderness could protect wildlife from some of that additional stress. “The idea that there might be a Wilderness connection through the Greater Yellowstone, that’s really what we need in the face of climate change,” said Whitlock, who was lead author for both Montana’s and Greater Yellowstone’s climate assessments. “I’m skeptical about some of the backcountry recreation impacts not affecting wildlife, especially given the growing recreation economy in the Greater Yellowstone.”
Former state legislator Bradley says restraint is a small price to pay. “We’re talking about species that are in danger of going extinct, and all of this is a trade-off so more people can have fun,” she said. “This has become a referral about recreation. It has so little to do with true Wilderness.”
For GWA’s Nagel, it’s a zero-sum game. “Is a little bit better than nothing at all? I would say no. The hope is that the fight continues and we get as much Wilderness as we can. Not so we can go hiking or backpacking, but to protect habitat that is there.”
That habitat includes much of the Wilderness-eligible acreage left out of the GFP’s proposal. “When you consider the total inventoried roadless [acreage] that is in the Gallatin Range, to say you’re only going to come up with half of what’s potential, that’s a heck of a compromise, that’s already based on a compromise. The only group that hurts is wildlife,” Nagel added.
From the GFP’s perspective, perfect should not be the enemy of good. “The biggest threat is inaction,” said Cestero of The Wilderness Society. “Given that neither the Forest Plan protections nor the WSA designation are permanent, now is the time to create some certainty when we need it most.”
With the legislation proposed, the Gallatin Forest Partnership is in the process of securing a sponsor for introduction, and members believe the bill’s collaborative foundations are politically appealing. “This bill will take care of one of the biggest WSAs in the state,” said Wild Montana’s Angstead. “It’s very balanced, and delegation members like Senator [Steve] Daines see that as a very important step.”
While the legislative wheels are in motion, the timeline for introduction, not to mention passage, is anyone’s guess. The Blackfoot Clearwater Stewardship Act, which includes 80,000 acres of new Wilderness and was reintroduced by Senator Jon Tester in 2023, has been in the works for well over a decade.
“Given that neither the Forest Plan protections nor the WSA designation are permanent, now is the time to create some certainty when we need it most.”
Barb Cestero, Greater Yellowstone-High Divide Landscape Director, The Wilderness Society
“Who knows what the next 10 years brings in Montana politics?” Angstead added. “We’ve created something durable that can be passed by Congress. I believe we can get it done in the next six months to five years.”
This political reality is not lost on Whitlock. “If you said ‘would you take this package or have no wilderness at all,’ that would be a hard one for me to walk away from. Saving something now and waiting for the next opportunity is probably the right thing to do, but we need to always be thinking about maximizing wilderness because it’s such a rare commodity. There are a lot of places people can recreate.”
In the meantime, Clint Nagel is preparing to circle the wagons. “The fight probably means litigation at some point,” he said.
Mountain Journal is a nonprofit, public-interest journalism organization dedicated to covering the wildlife and wild lands of Greater Yellowstone. We take pride in our work, yet to keep bold, independent journalism free, we need your support. Please donate here. Thank you.
