2004 Legislative Voter Guide

House District 48
Sweetwater & Fremont counties

Dist.

Candidate

HD48

Marty Martin*

(+) Supports the Conservation Voters position
(-)Opposes the Conservation Voters position
(~) Depends (?) Don’t Know (N) Not answered (*) Denotes Incumbent

1. In recent legislative sessions, various bills have been considered to increase public access and recreational use of public lands. In general, would you support each of the following types of legislation:
(a) Allowing overnight camping on state land, where not in conflict with the lessee’s operations?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

(b) Requiring those who lease state land for grazing (not for crop production) to provide walk-in access for hunting, fishing and other recreational activities, where not in conflict with the lessee’s operations?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

(c) Allowing boaters to disembark and recreate streamside up to the high-water mark on all navigable water of the state?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

2. Do you support the U.S. Forest Service’s initiative to protect remaining unroaded areas in national forests from new road construction and commercial logging?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

3. In the 2002 and 2004 Legislative sessions, bills were considered to establish a permanent wildlife trust fund, which would set aside a fixed sum to generate interest which would pay to conserve and improve wildlife habitat; address human-wildlife conflicts; support non-consumptive use of wildlife; and generate income for endangered species management, which is currently paid for with hunter and angler license fees. In general, would you support a similar bill?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

4. Wyoming lawmakers have so far decided not to set aside a permanent trust fund for wildlife-related costs, such as the one described in the previous question. This has led Gov. Dave Freudenthal to instead propose devoting a fraction of existing state general fund revenue (not a new tax) to pay for some of the costs of preserving habitat affected by natural resource development. In general, would you support this approach?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

5. With the current boom in coalbed methane and other types of natural gas development, conflicts are emerging between surface landowners, and the owners and developers of subsurface minerals. Current state law does not require developers to negotiate a surface-use agreement in such cases. In general, would you support requiring extractive mineral producers to negotiate such an agreement, or else provide appropriate financial guarantees to clean up potential damage?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

6. Would you support legislation that would reduceWyoming’s environmental standards for air, land or water quality?
Marty Martin (D): No.

7. Unregulated use of outdoor lighting causes increased light pollution and light trespass, and is considered by some to be a nuisance that diminishes their quality of life. Poorly designed lighting can also cause glare that distracts drivers and wastes energy by illuminating the night sky rather than the ground-level landscape. Municipalities’ right to adopt ordinances regulating the use of outdoor lighting is unclear under state law, while counties have no such authority at all. In general, would you support legislation to clearly authorize municipalities and counties to adopt ordinances that regulate the use of outdoor lighting?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

8. In 1986, the Wyoming Legislature passed the In-Stream Flow Law, which allowed the state to hold a water right to use for natural water flow in a stream channel for the benefit of fisheries, while simultaneously maintaining other users’ pre-existing water rights. Unfortunately, the law created an unnecessarily lengthy, contentious and time-consuming process for protecting such water flows, to the point that the law is little-used and provides very minimal legal protections that apply in only a few real-world situations. In general, would you support legislation to streamline this process, so that actual in-stream flows could be preserved or enhanced for uses such as recreation, water-quality enhancement or municipal purposes?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

9. Wyoming’s wolf management plan and the underlying legislation classifies wolves as predators to be shot on sight in most of the state without regulations. In January 2004, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service declared the plan inadequate to ensure sustainable wolf populations, and specifically unlikely to withstand the legal challenges expected both from staunch anti-wolf activists and from out-of-state environmental groups. Meanwhile, without federal approval for a Wyoming plan, the wolf will remain under strict federal protections. These federal regulations hamper the ability of ranchers or game wardens to manage this controversial species, either to protect property and people, or to prevent more territory being inhabited by wolves. Legislators this year considered a measure to modestly increase wolf protection while still limiting where new packs can establish themselves. However, the bill failed and the state instead sued the federal government to try to salvage its “predator status” plan. In general, do you feel the state is justified in pursuing this lawsuit rather than correcting deficiencies in the wolf management plan?

Marty Martin (D): No.

10. Gov. Freudenthal has overturned a policy of his predecessor called the “One Voice Policy.” Under this past policy, the governor’s office commented on behalf of the entire state government on various planning processes, which often involved large new development plans for energy extraction which include significant impacts on our wildlife and natural resources. When final comments would go out, state wildlife managers and environmental authorities often saw their concerns marginalized by pro-development voices from elsewhere in state government. In general, do you agree with Gov. Freudenthal’s decision to let different state agencies comment freely on their own areas of expertise without political involvement from the governor’s office?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

11. Current state bonding for oil and gas wells requires $25,000 per well and $150,000 for a collection of wells. This leaves many multiple-well fields without adequate reclamation funds if the operator is unable to pay for cleanup work. In such cases, the state must use oil and gas tax revenue to pay for this work. In general, would you support increasing the bond totals for oil, gas and coalbed methane reclamation?

Marty Martin (D): Yes.

*****

Wyoming Conservation Voters is an independent nonpartisan, nonprofit organization under chapter 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. Founded in 2001 by prominent hunters, anglers and conservationists, WCV serves to educate concerned voters about candidates’ positions on issues affecting our wildlife and other natural resources.

For more information, visit our Web site at www.wyovoters.org, call (307) 265–0870, fax us at (307) 265–0893, or stop by at 1915 Oxford Lane, Suite 201, in Casper.