Circ activation contest

Poll finds strong support for public land conservation across political spectrum

Election season | 48 percent of Montanans cite conservation issues as a primary factor in who they will support for office
2014-07-08T06:00:00Z Poll finds strong support for public land conservation across political spectrumBy TOM KUGLIN Independent Record Helena Independent Record
July 08, 2014 6:00 am  • 

In a new poll of a selection of Montana’s registered voters, 86 percent said conservation issues play an important factor in supporting political candidates, and more than two-thirds support the North Fork Watershed Protection Act and the Rocky Mountain Front Heritage Act.

The University of Montana’s Crown of the Continent and Greater Yellowstone Initiative surveyed 500 voters to gauge opinions on public land debates in the Crown of the Continent. Of those polled, Republicans accounted for 36 percent, Democrats accounted for 27 percent, and 35 percent were identified as independents or belonging to other parties. Topics included wilderness designation, the sale of public lands and the importance of public lands in the state’s economy.

Pollsters did not ask about the transfer of federal lands to state ownership.

The bipartisan poll was conducted from June 17-19 by Republican pollster Lori Weigel of Public Opinion Strategies and Democratic pollster Dave Metz of Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates. The survey used both landline and cellphones and was balanced statistically by county, Weigel said. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.38 percent.

“It’s election season and Montana voters are looking at some of these issues with conservation in the same frame as other important issues like the economy and health care,” she said.

Of those polled, 48 percent listed conservation issues as the primary factor and 38 percent as somewhat important in supporting elected officials. Conservation issues were less important for 9 percent and not important to 4 percent.

When asked if protecting public lands in Montana has generally been more of a good or bad thing, 78 percent responded “good” and 15 percent “bad.”

Support for protected lands came from urban and rural voters across regions. More than three-quarters of both eastern and western Montanans saw protecting public lands as a good thing. Protected lands were supported by 82 percent of city residents, 77 percent of rural residents and 75 percent of town residents.

A slim majority of 51 percent of voters favored protecting more lands as wilderness.

“There is remarkable support for the conservation of public lands,” Metz said, noting that support comes both in policy and a personal connection to public lands.

Federal legislation protecting public lands saw majority support across political lines, although it was greater among Democrats than Republicans. The North Fork Watershed Protection Act received votes of support from 53 percent of Republicans, 89 percent of Democrats and 67 percent of independents. An equal percentage of Republicans supported the Rocky Mountain Front Heritage Act, while 91 percent of Democrats and 68 percent of independents supported the legislation.

When it comes to the economy, 86 percent of those polled saw conserving public lands as positive for the state by attracting tourists and by supporting jobs in recreation and on farms and ranches. Nearly two-thirds agreed that public lands such as national parks and wilderness attract high-quality employers and good jobs to Montana, and 52 percent believe Montana is in a better position than other states because of public lands and outdoor recreation to attract employers and jobs.

When asked about private development on public lands, 70 percent agreed that private companies should not be allowed to develop if it would limit the public’s enjoyment or access, while 25 percent disagreed.

The job of the university is to provide information and science to the public, and the poll would have been published regardless of the results, said Rick Graetz, co-director of the Crown of the Continent and Greater Yellowstone Initiative.

When asked how the poll could impact politics in the state, Graetz said he could not speak for the university, but he believed it probably will not affect how state legislators vote because politics is way too local. But it may shape the dialogue surrounding public land management, he said.

“I’m not surprised by the results, but we needed to validate our feelings,” he said. “Conservation with Montanans goes back more than 100 years and continues today.”

Copyright 2015 Helena Independent Record. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(4) Comments

  1. skooter
    Report Abuse
    skooter - July 08, 2014 9:41 pm
    Denial isn't just a river in Egypt
  2. hereorthere
    Report Abuse
    hereorthere - July 08, 2014 1:47 pm
    This "poll" is practically worthless. Of course most people contacted by a pollster are going to say that conservation and protecting the environment is important. It is like supporting motherhood and apple pie.

    But that doesn't mean that most voters will pick a candidate based on their environmental advocacy, as this "poll" and the story seem to suggest. Voters usually consider a range of issues in picking a candidate, and every poll I've ever seen has shown that jobs and the economy are by far the biggest consideration. Taxes are often a big issue, and sometimes foreign affairs are an influence when the country's engulfed in war. Sorry, but environmental issues are usually way down the list.

    These AP stories on exit polls of voters confirm what I'm saying:

    http://helenair.com/news/state-and-regional/exit-polls-show-economy-weighs-on-montanans-minds/article_c38798d1-384d-5aed-99ff-69244a53d339.html
    http://helenair.com/news/local/half-of-montana-voters-say-economy-is-top-issue/article_59d56a14-287d-11e2-a821-0019bb2963f4.html

    They don't even mention environmental matters.

    To have much validity as a gauge of what voters are thinking, the UM survey would need to compare how environmental issues stack up against jobs, the economy, etc. But obviously the UM folks didn't want to do that.

    That would hurt their cause.



  3. GreatWhite
    Report Abuse
    GreatWhite - July 08, 2014 11:53 am
    I'm with ya' on that skooter!

    It's time for the stagnant ways of the old days to be left in our dust, then we can hopefully realize finally that once we've destroyed something, it's either destroyed forever or takes a long time to recover. If we'd have been more proactive in the past, we wouldn't have to be so reactive today.

    Montana should not now, nor should it ever have a price tag attached to it's beautiful landscape. Not one that's larger than what it can reasonably maintain.
  4. skooter
    Report Abuse
    skooter - July 08, 2014 9:40 am
    I hope the wingers remember this little poll when they pretend that all of Montana cares NOT for conservation and taking care of this great state versus making it a free for all for anything that can be dug out of the groups, shipped god knows where and sold to make a few bucks for some out of state conglomeration.

    We need to have balance. Use & develop our resources but do so in a way that still protects this great place, our health and the future.

Civil Dialogue

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters. If you receive an error after submitting a comment, please contact us.

If your comment was not approved, perhaps:

    1. You called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).

    2. You rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.

    3. YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.

    4. You have issues with a business. Have a bad meal? Feel you were overcharged at the store? New car is a lemon? Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns.

    5. You believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write the editor at editor@helenair.com. This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.

    6. You included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.

    7. You accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.

    8. Your comment is in really poor taste.

    9. Don't write a novel. If your comment is longer than the article you're commenting on, you might want to cut it down a bit. Lengthy comments will likely be removed.
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

Activate subscription button gif
Subscribe to HelenaIR.com Email Newsletters

Breaking news, contests, morning headlines and more. Sign up for updates from the Independent Record

Follow the Independent Record

Deals, Offers and Events

We can repair the glass for your Motorcycle! Call Clear Choice Auto Glass at 406-495-8000

Clear Choice Auto Glass offers FREE estimates!

Is your RV glass cracked? Call Clear Choice Auto Glass at 406-495-8000

Clear Choice Auto Glass offers FREE estimates!

Let us replace your windshield! Call Clear Choice Auto Glass at 406-495-8000

Clear Choice Auto Glass offers FREE estimates!

Great Helena Businesses

Clipped From The Newspaper