Threat of development in Jones State Park passes — for now
Birdsong filled my ears as I walked through Jones State Forest on a cool, breezy morning. But the sounds of the traffic behind me never quite faded, a reminder that these 1,722 acres of pine trees, meadows, trails and ponds remain vulnerable.
The forest provides a cherished refuge from the frantic human activity surrounding it in fastgrowing Montgomery County. The people who live and work nearby are determined to keep it that way.
“If we lose our last environmental buffer, we’ll be a concrete jungle just like every other overdeveloped area,” said Gordy Bunch, the board chairman of The Woodlands Township, which sits about seven miles to the south of the forest.
Against this backdrop, SB 1964 landed like a bomb.
Republican state Sen. Brandon Creighton, who represents the area, filed the bill on March 10. It would have authorized Texas A&M University to use or lease land in Jones State Forest “for the construction of buildings or improvements for multipurpose uses, including academic, research, and private commercial uses.”
Creighton might as well have suggested turning the forest into the world’s largest water park. The opposition — a website, an online petition signed by more than 8,600 people, angry letters and emails, the works — was swift, intense and entirely predictable.
In response, Creighton revised his bill to have the opposite effect of the original version. The substitute language, Creighton explained at a Senate Higher Education Committee hearing last week, would explicitly protect the entire forest from development. Its wildlife, including the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker, would be safe from habitat-destroying bulldozers. Problem solved, right? Not quite. The committee took no immediate action on the bill, but the episode left uncertainty and suspicion among Montgomery County residents fearful of losing a precious resource.
Speakers at last week’s committee hearing, who had seen the revised bill only days or hours earlier, seemed to be turning it over and poking at it to make sure it was real.
“We’re still concerned with some of the wording and possible loopholes,” said Amy Coffman-Welton, a leader of the “Save Jones State Forest” organization.
Creighton explained that he had filed the bill at the request of Texas A&M leaders to start a public conversation about possible development in the forest, which was deeded to the state in 1926 and is managed by the A&M Forest Service.
Testimony in the hearing did little to clarify the university’s end game.
Sen. Kel Seliger, the committee chairman, asked Dr. James Hallmark, the A&M system’s vice chancellor for academic affairs, for an assurance that the university had no plans for “yet another degree-granting university from A&M on this site.”
Hallmark replied with a classic non-denial denial: “I want to distinguish between discussions and plans.”
Another A&M leader, former state Sen. Tommy Williams, offered a bit more detail in a letter to a community member that the university provided to me. Williams, vice chancellor for federal and state relations, wrote that A&M wanted to generate public discussion of “finding a higher and better use for a small tract that is overshadowed by urban growth.” The remainder of the forest would remain untouched, he wrote.
It doesn’t take a great leap of imagination to see why this assurance might be unsatisfying to the community. Pick your cliche: It’s a slippery slope; the camel gets its nose under the tent. The point is, a precedent would be set.
Asking a legislator to file a bill authorizing development in a state forest seems to be a curious way to launch a trial balloon. Speakers at the committee hearing said community leaders were not consulted prior to the filing of SB 1964. And Bunch said no one from A&M showed up when the board invited a representative to explain.
Creighton and Williams, in emails responding to my inquiries, said the legislative process was the best way to discuss the issue. Creighton wrote that establishing a “permanent, public record” of community opposition was the best way to protect the forest.
Some tension between man and nature is inevitable in a growing metropolitan area, but a treasure like Jones State Forest should be inviolable. This particular threat seems to have passed. But we must all remain vigilant, ready to respond to the next one.