sion of others. 



And the result has been increasingly bitter conflicts over resoiirce 

 development. We've seen struggles over whether an area should be devoted 

 to timber production or used as wilderness. We've seen controversies and 

 lawsuits over whether water should be used for irrigation or energy. 



We have also witnessed a growing realization that environmental problems 

 involve more than cutting a few trees or saving prairie dogs, but can have 

 significant consequences for human health and the overall quality of life. 



These concerns and conflicts, together with a somewhat justified dis- 

 trust of government, have led to laws, the intent of which is to expose 

 governmental decision-making to public view and ensure that resource deci- 

 sions are considered from more than one vantage point or disciplined on a 

 long-term basis. 



In my opinion, these are, in brief, some of the reasons why some of the 

 laws and programs I'm here to discuss today are in existence. 



Though both damned and praised, the most significant environmental law 

 passed to date is the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; and it is 

 important to a consideration of state agency actions primarily for two reasons: 



1) The Montana Environmental Policy Act of 1971 was modeled after NEPA 

 and like NEPA, is an umbrella law binding on all agency decisions with re- 

 gard to environmental matters; and 



2) Through a growing number of court decisions, it has become clear 

 that the law has teeth, that an agency ignores environmental considerations 

 at its own peril, that decisions will be reversed and projects stopped if 

 the law is ignored, and that state courts are looking to federal coiirts for 

 precedence in interpretation. 



With these considerations in mind, I believe that an \anderstanding of 

 the major provisions of MEIPA, whether you agree or disagree with that law, 

 is important if you are to understand the framework within which state gov- 

 ernment operates in dealing with rangeland or any other resource. 



The major requirement of MEPA is that an environmental impact statement 

 (EIS) be prepared on all "proposals for projects, programs, legislation, and 

 other actions of state government significantly affecting the quality of the 



38 



