National Heritage Areas: the good, the bad & the ugly

I must admit that when Dana Darlington came into "The Mountaineer" asking if we had heard anything about National Heritage Areas, I had not. Darlington went on to say that there is a group of mostly Great Falls people that want to make all of Chouteau County, all of Cascade, part of Fergus County and some of Lewis and Clark County into a National Heritage area.

"The idea of a National Heritage area comes across as good at first," said Darlington. The idea is to promote tourism. The problem is that after these areas get up and running, the National Park Service takes over the running of the areas.

Darlington went on to say that in the Wild and Scenic areas of the Missouri River and the National Monument, this is just another way that government can take control of private land.

There are some 49 National Heritage Areas spread across the United States. Depending on who you ask, you will get differing opinions of whether or not they are good for the areas they are in.

Most agree, though, that wherever they are, another level of Government control is probably not ideal.

National Heritage Areas have been around for a long time, leading one to think they must not be all that bad or we would have heard more about them before.

President Ronald Reagan signed into law the first National Heritage Area, the Illinois and Michigan Canal National Corridor on August 24, 1984.

National Heritage proponents say of the areas that they are designated by Congress, managed regionally by the communities, a driver for tourism and economic development, a way to highlight nationally significant features in a region and a bridge to federal funding.

Those same proponents here in Montana say that the National Heritage Area is not a government land grab, nor is it an impact on private property rights. It is not managed by the federal government and getting one started is not an easy task.

The tentative boundary of the Montana National Area would be all of Cascade and Chouteau Counties and the river corridor from the Gates of the Mountains to the White Cliffs.

If all that sounds sort of like a combination of pie in the sky and the best thing that ever happened to our country, look at what Tom DeWeese had to say about National Heritage areas in general.

"I have been studying them, (National Areas) for about a decade and have grave reservations. In fact my organization, the American Policy Center, has been one of the only groups in the nation to testify in Congress concerning Heritage Areas.

Here is what I know about them. Heritage areas are sold as a means to honor historic or cultural events that took place in a specific locale. We are told that they will preserve our culture and honor the past. They they will preserve battlefields where our forefathers fought and died for freedom. That will preserve birth places, homes, buildings and hallowed grounds for posterity. And we are assured they will help build tourism and boost local economies.

Is all of this true? Is that what the National Heritage areas are all about? Well, let's take a look.

Specifically what is a National Heritage Area? To put it bluntly it is a pork barrel earmark that harms property rights and local governance. Let me explain why that is. Heritage Areas have boundaries. These are very definite boundaries and they have very definite consequences for folks who reside within them. National historic sign fence obviously is a very arbitrary term, so anyone's property can end up falling under those guidelines.

Here are the details as to how a Heritage Area operates. Specifically, funding and technical assistance for Heritage Areas is administered through the National Park Service, a federal agency with a long history of hostility toward private landowners.

In the mix of special interest groups you are going to find all of the usual suspects: Environmental groups, planning groups, historic preservation groups, all with their own private agendas, and all working behind the scenes creating policy and hovering over the members of the non-elected boards (perhaps even assuring their own people make up the boards), and all collecting the Park Service funds to pressure local governments to install their agenda. In many cases these groups actually form a compact with the Interior Department to determine the guidelines that make up the land use management plan and the boundaries of the Heritage Area itself.

Now, after the boundaries are drawn and after the management plan has been approved by the Park Service, the management entity and its special interest groups are given the federal funds, typically a million dollars a year or more and are told to spend that money getting the management plan enacted at the local level."

Well, if Tom DeWeese, whoever he is, is right, that doesn't look good for Chouteau County if the whole county is going to be in the National Heritage Area.

One more quote from Mr. DeWeese:

"This sweeping mandate ensures that virtually every square inch of land within the boundaries is subject to the scrutiny of Park Service Bureaucrats and their managing partners. That is the way it works. It is done behind the scenes and out of the way of public input."

If just part of all that is true on both sides, there should be many large public meetings in Chouteau County before ever considering joining the Area if Chouteau County even has that choice.

We at "The Mountaineer" know there are plenty of sides to this subject. If you have knowledge of this subject, let "The Mountaineer" know. We want to present both sides. We will interview you and print your ideas.