[Senate Hearing 110-216]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-216
MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC LANDS AND
FORESTS BILLS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND FORESTS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
S. 1143 S. 1377
S. 1433 S. 1608
S. 1740 S 1802
S. 1939 S. 1940
S. 2034 H.R. 815
__________
SEPTEMBER 20, 2007
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
39-600 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
RON WYDEN, Oregon LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington BOB CORKER, Tennessee
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
JON TESTER, Montana MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
Robert M. Simon, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
Frank Macchiarola, Republican Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Republican Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests
RON WYDEN, Oregon, Chairman
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
Jeff Bingaman and Pete V. Domenici are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Auborn, Jim, Mayor, Port Orford, OR.............................. 23
Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator From Wyoming................... 4
Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator From New Mexico................ 6
Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator From New Mexico............. 3
Ensign, Hon. John, U.S. Senator From Nevada...................... 8
Holtrop, Joel, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, Forest
Service, Department of Agriculture............................. 9
Martinez, Hon. Mel, U.S. Senator From Florida.................... 3
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska................... 5
Nedd, Michael, Assistant Director, Minerals, Realty and Resource
Protection, Bureau of Land Management, Department of the
Interior....................................................... 12
Reid, Hon. Harry, U.S............................................ 7
Rogers, Jim, Consulting Forester, Friends of Elk River, Port
Orford, OR..................................................... 26
Smith, Hon. Gordon, U.S. Senator From Oregon..................... 4
Wyden, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator From Oregon........................ 1
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 33
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 35
Miscellaneous Public Lands and Forests Bills
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2007
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Wyden
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON
Senator Wyden [presiding]: The subcommittee will come to
order. I especially want to thank both Chairman Bingaman and
our ranking minority member and friend from New Mexico, Senator
Domenici for his thoughtfulness, my colleague who has come.
We're going to hear testimony today on several land use
bills: S. 1377 to direct the Secretary of the Interior to
convey to the city of Henderson certain Federal land located in
the City; S. 1433 to amend the Alaskan National Lands
Conservation Act to provide competitive status to certain
Federal employees; S. 1608 and H.R. 815 to provide for the
conveyance of certain land in Clark County, Nevada for use by
the Nevada National Guard; S. 1740 to amend the North Dakota
Statement Act and the Morrill Act to provide for the management
of public land trust in the State of North Dakota; S. 1802 to
adjust the boundaries of the Frank Church River of No Return
Wilderness in the State of Idaho; S. 1939 to provide for the
conveyance of certain land in the Santa Fe National Forest in
New Mexico; S. 1940 to reauthorize the Rio Puerco Watershed
Management Program; S. 1143 to designate the Jupiter Inlet
Lighthouse and the surrounding Federal land in the State of
Florida as an Outstanding Natural Area and as a unit of the
National Landscape System and S. 2034 the Copper Salmon
Wilderness Act, a bill I introduced to increase the existing
wilderness and a natural treasure near the southern Oregon
coast.
We anticipate these bills being non-controversial so hope
to move very quickly. I'm going to recognize my friend in just
a moment, but would just like to make a couple of quick
comments about the Copper Salmon Wilderness Area which is on
the beautiful Oregon coast. I am joined in this effort by my
colleague, Congressman DeFazio and we are seeking protection
for the lush rain forests of the Siskiyou River National Forest
at the head waters of the North Fork of the Elk River which is
a special gem known as the Copper Salmon area.
Our legislation would designate Copper Salmon as wilderness
and provide permanent protection to 13,700 acres of new
wilderness. It would also designate 9.3 miles of wild and
scenic rivers. The designations, in particular, would protect
the watershed and ensure that hunting and fishing opportunities
are protected for all time in the Copper Salmon area.
Over the last decade and in particular, during town hall
meetings that I've held on the Oregon coast I've been struck by
the fact that so many local leaders have been working
regardless of political philosophies and parties and different
views on scores of subjects to protect Copper Salmon. Again and
again they have urged me to introduce this legislation. When
you make a trip to beautiful Curry County in Oregon what you
will invariably see is supporters all through the community
carrying buttons and banners and badges urging the Congress to
protect their Copper Salmon. So I say to them, particularly the
folks who have journeyed across the land from Curry County and
this afternoon to be with the U.S. Senate, I have heard your
plea.
I thank you for all of your involvement. It's time that we
come together regardless of political philosophy and political
party to permanently protect this special place. I'm very
pleased that there has been strong support for this measure
from the Port Orford Chamber of Commerce, the Mayor of Port
Orford and the Curry County Commissioners, certainly the
majority of the guides, lodges and local citizens are already
on record of supporting the proposal. It is a renowned area for
fishing families.
It is one of the last intact watersheds on the Southwest
Oregon coast, 80 percent of the watershed still being intact.
The Elk has healthy wild runs of winter steelhead and Chinook.
It's also home to Coho salmon and sea run cut-throat trout as
well as resident cut-throats and rainbow trout.
Oregon State University researchers, some of the best in
the country, believe it is one of the healthiest fish streams
in the lower 48. We think there's a reason for it and that is
intact habitat. This habitat also supports healthy populations
of black tailed deer, elk, black bear and mountain lion.
As our population grows we are going to have to make sure
that we match this growth with protection of our natural
heritage. Protection of these areas is going to ensure that
Oregonians and visitors will continually enjoy opportunities to
hike and hunt healthy populations of elk, black tailed deer,
black bear and catch trophy size Chinook and steelhead.
I want to thank the witnesses who have made the trek across
the land. We have only one non-stop to Washington DC and I know
what it is like for them to make the journey, Jim Auborn, the
Mayor of Port Orford and Jim Rogers with Friends of Elk River.
I'm going to ask all of our witnesses to try to summarize their
remarks in about 5 minutes.
Several of my colleagues have joined us. I'm very pleased
that Senator Barrasso is here. He's going to be the ranking
member for today's hearing. In addition to great expertise on
natural resources, he brings similar expertise on health care
so if we sit through these hearings we can take care of natural
resources, health care and show the Congress the way to work in
a bi-partisan fashion. I thank my colleague for coming. We'll
recognize you next. Then we have Senator Smith, my friend and
colleague from Oregon who I know has strong feelings about the
matter as well.
[The prepared statements of Senators Domenici and Martinez
follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Pete V. Domenici, U.S. Senator From New
Mexico, on S. 1939 and S. 1940
Chairman Wyden, thank you for holding this hearing today. I have
asked Senator Barrasso to fill in as the Ranking Member of the Public
Lands and Forests Subcommittee for today's hearing.
I want to spend just a moment on the two bills that Senator
Bingaman and I have introduced.
s. 1939
In 2003, the Interior Board of Land Appeals ruled that a homestead
patent for a tract of land in the upper Pecos River Canyon issued in
1888 to Ramona Lawson's grandfather, Cristino Rivera, erroneously
failed to include the main house, cabin, and various outbuildings,
corrals, etc., as part of the homestead entry.
This bill will authorize the Forest Service to resolve a
longstanding land claim by conveying a small parcel of land (6.2 acres)
directly to Ms. Ramona Lawson in return for a scenic easement over the
property.
s. 1940
The second is S. 1940, to reauthorize the Rio Puerco Watershed
Management Program. The Rio Puerco watershed is the primary source of
undesirable fine sediment delivered to the Rio Grande River system. To
help address this problem, in 1996, Congress directed the Bureau of
Land Management, working with a committee of Federal and State
agencies, to establish a clearinghouse for research and information on
management within the area.
They have established an inventory of best management practices and
related monitoring activities. They continue to identify objectives,
monitor results of ongoing projects, and develop alternative watershed
management plans for the Rio Puerco Drainage Basin, based on best
management practices. That initial authorization expired in November
2006.
S. 1940 extends that authorization for an additional ten year
period at the same funding level it was authorized for in the past. I
believe this legislation has been helpful and is working well.
Thank you Chairman Wyden, I look forward to this hearing.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mel Martinez, U.S. Senator From Florida, on
S. 1143
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for including S.1143 in today's
hearing before the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. I am a
proud cosponsor of this legislation with my colleague Senator Bill
Nelson, and it is my hope that today is the first step in the process
in getting the Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse and its surrounding federal
lands designated as an Outstanding Natural Area in the National
Landscape System.
The Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse has a very interesting and important
cultural history in south Florida. The design plans for the lighthouse
were drawn up by the Civil War hero, George Mead, years before his
service at the Battle of Gettysburg in Pennsylvania. The government was
very concerned that as American trade and ship traffic increased with
the Caribbean, that a beacon was needed to warn mariners of the
dangerous reefs off Jupiter Inlet that would also serve as guide for
ships to travel through the inlet and reach the Atlantic gulf stream.
The US Army also used the surrounding land around the lighthouse as a
stockade and garrison during the Second Seminole War.
The Outstanding Natural Area designation was established by
Congress primarily to protect unique scenic, scientific, educational,
and recreational resources for the enjoyment of current and future
generations. The designation has been used for conservation sites of
approximately 100 acres in size that feature a lighthouse. Jupiter
Inlet would be the second Outstanding National Area in the nation and
the first east of the Mississippi River.
This designation is critical to help preserve an area around the
Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse for its cultural and biological resources, in
what is now a very urbanized part of Florida. Ironically, when the
lighthouse was first completed in 1860, the nearest town or outpost was
120 miles away in Titusville. The lighthouse and the surrounding
grounds were placed on the National Register of Historic Places in
1967. The site is also home to a myriad of special status species and
provides critical habitat for endangered species like scrub jays and
gopher tortoises.
S. 1143 has the support of the City of Jupiter and a dynamic
preservation partnership with the Loxahatchee River Historical Society
and several federal agencies in south Florida. It is my hope that this
legislation will be swiftly considered and passed out of Committee so
that future generations of young Floridians will be able to enjoy this
unique cultural gem.
Senator Barrasso.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you for holding this hearing today. Senator Domenici has asked
that I fill in at this meeting today as the ranking member of
the Public Lands and Forests Subcommittee for the hearing. I
look forward to working with other members of the subcommittee.
As you know, in Wyoming, as with you, the Forest Service
and Bureau of Land Management are very important. Exchange
processes are important to the people of Wyoming as well. When
we look at legislative proposals to undertake exchanges, we
say, should these have been able to be done administratively? I
wonder about what we can do to do a better job in facilitating
those exchanges. I may have a question or two about that.
I'm going to welcome the witnesses who are here today
especially those who traveled such a great distance. I just
spent the lunch hour with Senator Gordon Smith talking about
the beauty of Oregon. I tried to get in a little bit about the
beauties of Wyoming. But mostly we got to hear about the
beauties of Oregon, which are many.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, thank you. I look forward to
the hearing.
Senator Wyden. I look forward to working with you.
Senator Smith.
STATEMENT OF HON. GORDON SMITH, U.S. SENATOR
FROM OREGON
Senator Smith. We were especially tasting Oregon peas and
I'm sure you had your share.
Thank you, Senator Wyden, our subcommittee chairman and my
colleague from Oregon for holding today's hearing. Of
particular note is the bill we're focusing on, S. 2034, to
designate wilderness and wild and scenic rivers in the Copper
Salmon area of Southwestern Oregon. Wilderness is not a
designation that I take lightly, nor is it something that I
categorically oppose.
In my 10 years in the U.S. Senate, we've created Oregon's
fourth largest wilderness at Steen's Mountain and are working
on designating over 128,000 acres of wilderness on Mt. Hood. In
both cases cooperation, support from local communities and user
groups have been critical. With respect to the Copper Mountain
proposal there's been tremendous if not a remarkable level of
support from local elected officials, sportsmen and
conservationists. This would not be possible if we were not
discussing a very special resource, unique both in its forests
and its fisheries, or in more Oregonian terms, big trees and
big fish.
There are only two sets of issues that I'd like to see
addressed by the committee. The first being raised by the
Forest Service. This has to do with a few miles of closed roads
and plantation tree stands within the wilderness boundaries.
The second set of issues related to tribal access. The
Copper Salmon area is of strong ancestral and historic interest
to the Coquille Indian tribe. I want to be sure that the
cultural gathering activities that they have historically
practiced are not impeded by wilderness designation.
I believe that both sets of issues can easily be resolved
in good faith between the committee, the Forest Service and the
Coquille Indian tribe. That being the case, and I'm confident
of that, Mr. Chairman, I ask you to add me as a co-sponsor to
this legislation.
Senator Wyden. Without objection and with considerable
pleasure it is done.
Senator Smith. I look forward to working with you on this
issue. I'd also like to comment that while wilderness is indeed
warranted in many areas, that we cannot lose sight of the need
for active management in other areas of the Federal forest.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. I thank my colleague and we will work hard
and together on Mt. Hood and Copper Salmon as well. I'm joined
by a friend from Alaska, Senator Murkowski.
Would the Senator care to make a statement?
STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR
FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. I would, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
I appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to just address
very briefly one of the measures that we will have before us
this afternoon. The Alaskan National Interest Lands
Conservation Act, ANILCA, in 1980 set aside 100 million acres
of Alaska's land to remain in Federal ownership for national
interest. It doubled the size of our country's national park
and refuge system, and tripled the amount of land designated as
wilderness. It expanded our National Park System in Alaska by
over 43 million acres, creating ten new national parks and
increasing the acreage of three existing units.
At the time that ANILCA was passed, Alaskans had a lot of
concerns. One of those concerns was that the Federal Land
Management Agencies would bring in employees from the lower 48
to Alaska to manage these resources. We were concerned that the
jobs in the parks and the forests and the refuges would be
beyond the reach of the communities there.
So many of our lands are located in Bush Alaska, where
opportunities for year round employment are scarce. So in
response to these concerns Congress provided the Land
Management Agencies with authority to hire locally. Local hire
authority was limited to individuals who have special knowledge
and expertise of the conservation systems that were established
by ANILCA.
Now since ANILCA was enacted the Federal Land Management
Agencies have sought to implement the local hire authority. But
they have been hampered in finding individuals who want to work
as local hires because the local hire program doesn't allow for
any career mobility. So for the past 25 years, the Federal Land
Management Agencies have concluded and perhaps incorrectly,
that an ANILCA local hire can only work in the Alaska Federal
land unit in which he or she has special expertise or another
Alaska Federal land unit with respect to which he or she can
demonstrate their special expertise. This is in contrast with
those with career status, who enjoy the opportunity to
promotion within their agencies and not often have to move to
other units for career mobility.
The present limitations are also inequitable for the 150 or
so Alaskans who presently hold ANILCA local position. Many have
performed in exemplary fashion but have been deemed ineligible
to grow their careers through transfer or promotion. So that
legislation that we have introduced, S. 1433, would address
this problem by granting career status to ANILCA local hires
who serve satisfactorily for a period of 2 years.
Now I understand that the Administration supports the
concept of providing career status to ANILCA local hires but
perhaps has a different idea of how to make that happen. I look
forward to working with them on the proposed amendments that
they plan to submit to committee.
I will note for the committee that this legislation is
named after an individual by the name of Tom O'Hara. Tom was an
Alaska Native who came from a very distinguished family in the
Bristol Bay region. He lived in Napakiak and King Salmon. He
worked for the National Park Service as a protection ranger and
a pilot. He did so for 5 years before he was killed in the line
of duty in a fatal airplane crash. His name appears on the
National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial.
He was an ANILCA local hire. So we have named this Act in
recognition of Tom. We know it's not going to make a difference
for him, but we know that there are others who are similarly
situated to Tom when he was alive and we would like to provide
for these career advancements.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to present
this.
Senator Wyden. Thank the Senator. We will work very closely
with you on the legislation.
We're also going to enter into the record now statements
from Chairman Bingaman, Senator Reid, and Senator Ensign. I
will hold the record open for colleagues on both sides who'd
like to make statements.
[The prepared statements of Senators Bingaman, Reid, and
Ensign follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jeff Bingaman, U.S. Senator From New Mexico,
on S. 1939 and S. 1940
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing today. I have two
bills that are of particular interest in my State of New Mexico:
S.1939, the Santa Fe National Forest Title Claim Resolution Act, and
S.1940, Rio Puerco Watershed Management Program Reauthorization Act.
S.1939 would resolve an ongoing dispute between a New Mexico
family, Ramona and Boyd Lawson, and the Forest Service regarding a land
title claim within the boundaries of the Pecos Wild and Scenic River in
the Santa Fe National Forest. In accordance with an IBLA order and
subsequent compromise between the Forest Service and the Lawsons, S.
1939 authorizes a small land exchange to the resolve the title issue. I
believe this bill is non-controversial and is supported by the
Administration.
The second bill, S. 1940 is of particular importance to me. It
reauthorizes the Rio Puerco Watershed Act, which became law in 1996 and
expired last year. That Act formalized the Rio Puerco Management
Committee, which over the past ten years has helped facilitate a
collaborative approach for the restoration of the highly degraded Rio
Puerco Watershed, which is the largest tributary to the Rio Grande in
terms of area and sediment.
Over time, the Rio Puerco watershed has experienced extensive
ecological damage. According to the BLM, while the Rio Puerco
contributes less than 10 percent of the total water to the Rio Grande,
it represents the primary source of sedimentation entering the Upper
Rio Grande with far reaching effects throughout the lower portions of
the river.
In my opinion, the Rio Puerco Management Committee, despite being
consistently underfunded, has become one of the most effective
collaborative land management efforts in the Southwest. Much work
remains to be done within this watershed, which is why I believe the
committee should be reauthorized. I understand that a technical
amendment may be needed, and I will work with the BLM to address this
issue.
Senator Domenici is a cosponsor of both of these bills and with his
support I hope to have both bills approved as quickly as possible.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Harry Reid, U.S. Senator From Nevada, S.
1377
Thank you for allowing a hearing on this important legislation. The
City of Henderson is now the second most populous city in Nevada and,
like much of the southwest, is experiencing tremendous growth. The U.S.
Census Bureau recently ranked Henderson in the top 20 growth cities in
the nation. This legislation would allow Henderson to move forward with
a smart growth plan and to diversify their local economy.
Specifically, this bill would direct the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) to convey approximately 502 acres near the Henderson airport to
the City of Henderson for development as a business center, and for
urban green spaces. Henderson would then do what cities do best--plan,
zone, subdivide, and then sell the land for fair market value. The
final use of the land would be restricted to nonresidential and
recreational purposes. All proceeds from the sale of the land would go
into the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act (SNPLMA) Special
Account since the land sits within the disposal boundary for the Las
Vegas Valley.
This legislation has garnered wide support from the City of
Henderson, the Henderson Chamber of Commerce, the Henderson Development
Association, and the National Association of Industrial and Office
Properties, among others. This coalition has come together to support
Henderson in its effort to diversify its economy, create space for
important small businesses, and encourage appropriate development
around an urban airport.
Finally, I have appreciated the input of the Bureau of Land
Management on this legislation. Since the last hearing on this measure,
I believe we have settled all of the outstanding concerns. I sincerely
hope the Committee will see fit to move this bill expeditiously during
the current session.
I would also like to express my support of Senator Ensign's
Southern Nevada Readiness Center Act, of which I am a cosponsor. That
bill would allow Clark County to transfer roughly 50 acres to the State
of Nevada at no cost, for use by the Nevada National Guard. I am proud
to have appropriated $12.8 million for the construction of the new
state-of-the-art military training center that now sits on the site in
question.
This legislation is now necessary because Clark County, under
SNPLMA, is required to charge fair market value for any lease or sale
of the land. Because of the broad public benefit that would come from
the conveyance of this parcel to the Nevada National Guard, this bill
would waive those requirements and allow Clark County to transfer the
land to the State without consideration. In sum, this legislation is an
important final step toward providing Nevada's National Guard a first
class facility needed to ensure proper training and troop readiness.
I greatly appreciate the distinguished Chairman and Ranking Member
making time for this hearing and I look forward to working with the
Committee to advance these bills.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. John Ensign, U.S. Senator From Nevada, S.
1608
Chairman and Members of the Sub-Committee: Thank you very much for
scheduling this hearing to discuss this important piece of legislation.
Mr. Chairman, this bill, which is co-sponsored by Senator Harry
Reid and has already been approved by the House of Representatives
thanks to Representative Jon Porter, is simple and technical in its
form but profound in its implication. Simply stated, this bill would
allow Clark County, Nevada, to convey land to the Nevada Division of
State Lands for use by the Nevada National Guard. Broadly speaking,
this bill would allow land that is already being occupied by the Nevada
National Guard to be transferred to the Guard for important national
defense and security purposes.
The purpose of the Nevada National Guard's new facility--the Las
Vegas Readiness Center (LVRC)--is to prepare our soldiers, both
physically and technically, to respond to the missions of the Governor
of Nevada and the President of the United States. In addition to this
facility, the National Guard will utilize the surrounding land for
facility growth in vehicular maintenance and for emergency response
support to first responders in weapons of mass destruction situations.
Notwithstanding the various natural disasters that the National
Guardsmen respond to, current conflicts abroad demand increased
reliance upon the men and women who serve in the National Guard. It is
only right that we do all we can to enable the National Guard to do its
job.
Mr. Chairman, the LVRC has been a work in progress for a long time.
It took seven years to acquire the land and funding and construct this
80,000 sq ft building. Now that the Armory is finished, between 300-400
Guardsmen are able to train and drill on the weekends. These Guardsmen
include a Signal Battalion, and a Medical detachment. It is also the
planned location for the 92 Civil Support Team.
Concerning the land in question, all rights, title, and interest to
these lands were conveyed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to
Clark County, Nevada, in 1999, as directed by Section 4(g) of the
Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998 (SNPLMA), for
inclusion in the McCarran Airport Cooperative Management Act (CMA).
The CMA was established in 1992 through an agreement between Clark
County and the BLM to manage development around McCarran Airport, which
services the greater Las Vegas area. As directed by SNPLMA,
approximately 5,000 acres of public land was conveyed by the BLM to
Clark County for inclusion in the CMA boundary. SNPLMA requires that
Clark County manage the lands in the CMA in accordance with 49 U.S.C.
47504, relating to airport noise compatibility planning, so that
development in the CMA is compatible with the nature of airport
operations. Further, section (4)(g) of SNPLMA requires that any
conveyance of CMA lands by Clark County be for fair market value, and
the revenue distributed according to the formula outlined in Section
(4)(g) of SNPLMA. SNPLMA unintentionally made no provision for
conveying lands at less than fair market value in cases such as the
LVRC. This bill corrects that oversight.
The BLM understands that S. 1608 conveys land from one public
entity to another for national defense purposes. In balancing these
considerations against the provisions of SNPLMA that require the sale
of CMA lands for fair market value, the BLM supports the bill and the
conveyance of the CMA lands for no consideration.
Thank you Chairman and Committee Members for your time today. I
hope you will join me in supporting this bill that will serve to
support the men and women who stand in harms way to protect and defend
our great nation.
Senator Wyden. Let's bring forward our first panel members:
Administration witness, Joel Holtrop, Deputy Chief of the
National Forest System of the United States Forest Service. Mr.
Michael Nedd, Assistant Director of Minerals, Realty and
Resources Protection at the Bureau of Land Management which is
part of the Department of Interior.
Gentlemen, we'll make your statements a part of the hearing
record in their entirety and why don't, if you would beginning
with you, Mr. Holtrop, if you could just summarize your
comments.
STATEMENT OF JOEL HOLTROP, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
SYSTEM, FOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. Holtrop. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to provide the
Department's views on the bills which are on the agenda today.
S. 1802 Idaho Wilderness Boundary Modification Act. This
bill would adjust the boundaries of the Frank Church River of
No Return Wilderness and provide authorization for a land
ownership adjustment to resolve conflicts related to
unauthorized improvements. The Department would support the
bill if amended to correct the survey description and provide
for a more appropriate manner in which to resolve the
associated land issues.
The Diamond D Ranch is located in the Challis National
Forest and surrounded by the Frank Church River of No Return
Wilderness. In 2001 a boundary survey identified several
unauthorized improvements associated with the ranch on National
Forest System lands including a portion of a water diversion
and transmission pipeline in the designated wilderness. The
ranch owner has offered to enter into negotiations with the
Forest Service to affect an exchange of the lands containing
unauthorized improvements for other interests that could be
more desirable for National Forest management. The bill would
retract the wilderness boundary to exclude 10.2 acres in the
area of the unauthorized improvements and add approximately the
same acreage to the wilderness in a nearby location.
The Department supports the bill's goals of improving
wilderness characteristics while resolving long standing land
management issues. We would like to work with the bill's
sponsor and the committee to make technical corrections to the
survey description and provide for a more appropriate land
adjustment authority. We will support the bill with these
amendments, and appreciate the opportunity to enhance the Frank
Church River of No Return Wilderness.
S. 1939 Santa Fe National Forest Title Claim Resolution Act
would authorize and direct the Forest Service to quit claim
approximately 6.2 acres of Federal land to Ramona and Boyd
Lawson in satisfaction of a long standing land title claim. The
Department supports the enactment of this bill. The land in
question is in the Santa Fe National Forest and within the
boundaries of the Pecos Wild and Scenic River.
The Lawsons are successors to a land patent issued in 1888
and they claimed that a government survey of the patented land
had erroneously excluded about 12 acres where their house and
outbuildings were located. There were significant legal and
factual issues in dispute between the government and the
Lawsons that this matter could have ended up in court.
However the parties worked out a solution that is simple
and equitable saving considerable time and expense for all. The
Lawsons and the Forest Service agreed to limit the area of the
claim to 6.2 acres which covers the land the Lawsons are
actually occupying and using. In turn the Lawsons have agreed
to convey to the Forest Service a conservation easement on the
property to protect wild and scenic river values and to release
the government from future claims. S. 1939 will authorize the
Forest Service to implement this agreement and thereby allow
the Lawsons the quiet enjoyment of their home while at the same
time preserving the scenic and natural environs of the Pecos
Wild and Scenic River.
S. 2034 the Copper Salmon Wilderness Act. This bill would
designate approximately 13,700 acres of the Rogue River-
Siskiyou National Forest as wilderness and designate segments
of the North and South Forks of the Elk River as additions to
the existing Elk Wild and Scenic River. The Department supports
this bill but requests some important adjustments to the
wilderness boundary. These adjustments would allow for road
maintenance activities within road clearing limits and
accommodate treatments of plantations that would improve forest
health and habitat diversity while increasing fire fighter
safety.
The wilderness proposal comprises rugged forested land
containing vast stands of Douglas fir and relatively rare Port
Orford cedar trees. Most of the lands within the proposed
wilderness are allocated as late successional reserves under
the Northwest Forest Plan designed to serve as habitat for old
growth related species. This allocation includes 2,267 acres of
previously managed overstocked plantations.
Most of the plantations adjacent to forest roads that
comprise a portion of the wilderness boundary, about 1,000
acres, were included in the Coastal Healthy Forest
Environmental Analysis signed in 2007. Treatment of these
stands would improve habitat conditions for fish and wildlife,
reduce effects from insect and disease and provide defensible
space for fire fighters in the event of a wildfire consistent
with their allocation as late successional reserves. Wilderness
designation would preclude this treatment.
The Department would like to work with the bill's sponsor
and the committee to offset the wilderness boundary inward
along perimeter roads to implement planned treatments within a
reasonable distance of the road while providing for routine
road maintenance and to decrease the likelihood of incompatible
motorized use in wilderness.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this concludes
my testimony and I'm happy to answer any questions you may
have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Holtrop follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joel Holtrop, Deputy Chief, National Forest
System, Forest Service, Department of Agriculture
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you to provide the Department's views on
the bills which are on the agenda today.
s. 1802, idaho wilderness boundary modification act of 2007
This bill would adjust the boundaries of the Frank Church River of
No Return Wilderness and provide authorization for a land ownership
adjustment to resolve conflicts related to unauthorized improvements.
The Department would support the bill if amended to correct the
survey description and provide for a more appropriate manner in which
to resolve the associated land issues.
The Diamond D Ranch consists of three separate parcels of private
land located in the Challis National Forest and surrounded by the Frank
Church River of No Return Wilderness near Stanley, Idaho. In 2001, a
boundary survey identified several unauthorized improvements associated
with the ranch on National Forest System lands, including a portion of
a water diversion and transmission pipeline in the designated
wilderness area. Most of the unauthorized improvements, which also
include fences, roads, and borrow pits, predate wilderness designation.
The ranch owner has offered to enter into negotiations with the Forest
Service to effect an exchange of the lands containing unauthorized
improvements for other interests that could be more desirable for
National Forest management.
The wilderness configuration in this vicinity is an approximately
10.2 acre triangular shaped area between two private parcels. Due to
the adjacency of private lands and the unauthorized improvements, this
area lacks the characteristics normally associated with designated
wilderness. The bill would retract the wilderness boundary to exclude
the 10.2 acres and expand the wilderness boundary to add approximately
the same acreage to the wilderness in a nearby location. This would
adjust the Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness with no net loss
of designated wilderness, while improving its overall wilderness
characteristics.
In addition, through a waiver of qualifying criteria, the bill
would give the Secretary the discretion to use the Small Tracts Act
(P.L. 97-465) in order for the Forest Service to address the
unauthorized improvements.
The Department supports the bill's goals of improving wilderness
characteristics while resolving long standing land management issues.
However, as written, the bill contains technical errors in the survey
description of the lands proposed to be excluded and included in the
wilderness. It also contains a technical error in the description of
the lands that would be subject to the waiver of the Small Tracts Act
acreage requirement. In addition, the Department would prefer to use a
different land adjustment authority than the Small Tracts Act, which is
not appropriate to this situation.
The Department would like to work with the bill's sponsor and the
committee to make these technical corrections and provide for a more
appropriate land adjustment authority. We will support the bill with
these amendments and appreciate the opportunity to enhance the Frank
Church River of No Return Wilderness.
s. 1939, santa fe national forest title claim resolution act
S. 1939 would authorize and direct the Forest Service to quitclaim
approximately 6.20 acres of Federal land to Ramona and Boyd Lawson in
satisfaction of a longstanding land title claim.
The Department supports the enactment of this bill.
The land in question is in the Santa Fe National Forest and within
the boundaries of the Pecos Wild and Scenic River. The Lawsons are
successors to a land patent issued in 1888 and they claimed that a
government survey of the patented land had erroneously excluded about
12 acres where their house and outbuildings were located.
There were sufficient legal and factual issues in dispute between
the government and the Lawsons that this matter could have ended up in
court. However, the parties worked out a solution that is simple and
equitable, saving considerable time and expense for all. The Lawsons
and the Forest Service agreed to limit the area of the claim to 6.2
acres which covers the land the Lawsons are actually occupying and
using. In turn, the Lawsons have agreed to convey to the Forest Service
a conservation easement on the property to protect wild and scenic
river values, and to release the government from future claims. S. 1939
will authorize the Forest Service to implement this agreement and
thereby allow the Lawsons the quiet enjoyment of their home while, at
the same time, preserving the scenic and natural environs of the Pecos
Wild & Scenic River.
s. 2034, copper salmon wilderness act
This bill would designate approximately 13,700 acres of the Rogue
River-Siskiyou National Forest as wilderness and designate segments of
the North and South Forks of the Elk River as additions to the existing
Elk Wild and Scenic River.
The Department supports this bill, but requests some important
adjustments to the wilderness boundary. These adjustments would provide
for better separation of motorized use from the wilderness, allow for
road maintenance activities within road clearing limits (such as ditch
cleaning and culvert and bridge maintenance), as well as to accommodate
treatments of plantations that would improve forest health and habitat
diversity while increasing firefighter safety.
The wilderness proposal comprises 13,700 acres of rugged forested
land surrounding Copper Mountain, Barklow Mountain, and Salmon Mountain
adjacent to the Grassy Knob Wilderness. It contains vast stands of
Douglas fir and relatively rare native Port Orford cedar trees. About
ten percent of the proposed wilderness area is designated in the
Siskiyou National Forest Plan as a ``Supplemental Resource Area'',
considered highly productive habitat for wildlife and fish, critical
for the maintenance of watershed condition, and with special recreation
values. Lands within the proposed wilderness are primarily allocated as
Late Successional Reserves (LSR) under the Northwest Forest Plan. LSRs
are designed to serve as habitat for old growth-related species. This
LSR allocation includes 2,267 acres of previously managed overstocked
Douglas fir plantations.
Using perimeter forest roads as the boundary designation would
likely lead to unintended incursions of motorized vehicles and
mechanized equipment into the wilderness. In addition most of the
plantations adjacent to forest roads that comprise a portion of the
wilderness boundary (about 1,000 acres) were included in the Coastal
Healthy Forest Environmental Analysis signed in 2007. Treatment of
these stands would improve habitat conditions for fish and wildlife,
reduce effects from insects and disease, and provide defensible space
for firefighters in the event of a wildfire, consistent with their
allocation as Late Successional Reserve (LSRs). Wilderness designation
would preclude this treatment.
The proposed wilderness includes about nine miles of designated
roads. All but two of those road miles are currently closed to
vehicular traffic; however, these roads are highly engineered up steep
slopes, with significant cuts and fills, culverts, and other
constructed features. If the area is designated as wilderness, the
forest would consider converting some of these roads into hiking and
equestrian trails to improve access, but most would require
decommissioning to protect water quality and fisheries resource values.
This would require heavy equipment to remove culverts and contour the
land to reduce erosion, as well as significant investment.
The Department would like to work with the bill's sponsor and the
committee to offset the wilderness boundary inward along perimeter
roads to implement planned treatments within a reasonable distance of
the road, provide for routine road maintenance, and to decrease the
likelihood of incompatible motorized use in wilderness. We also request
that the bill include the date of the map referencing the intended
wilderness configuration.
The bill would designate segments of the North and South Forks of
the Elk River as additions to the existing Elk Wild and Scenic River.
The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest completed an extensive wild
and scenic river inventory and, while both tributaries are free-
flowing, neither was judged to have an outstandingly remarkable value.
Nevertheless, in recognition of the value of managing the Elk River as
a system that contributes to one of the most important and valuable
runs of anadromous fish in coastal Oregon, the Department does not
oppose the proposed additions in this bill.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this concludes my
testimony. I am happy to answer any questions you may have at this
time.
Senator Wyden. Very good. Mr. Nedd, welcome.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL NEDD, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, MINERALS, REALTY
AND RESOURCE PROTECTION, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT
OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Nedd. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Thank
you for inviting me to testify today on a number of bills of
interest to the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of
Interior. Because I am presenting testimony on six bills I will
very briefly summarize each and ask that my entire testimony be
included in the record.
Senator Wyden. Without objection, it's so ordered.
Mr. Nedd. The Department supports S. 1143 the Jupiter Inlet
Lighthouse Outstanding Natural Area Act which would designate
126 acre, including Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse and the
surrounding areas as an outstanding natural area within the
Bureau of Land Management National Landscape Conservation
System. This bill seeks to build onto many successful
partnerships and the collaboration already in place for the
Jupiter working group.
S. 1377, the Southern Nevada Limited Transition Area Act,
would convey without consideration approximately 502 acres of
BLM public land to the city of Henderson, Nevada by economic
development adjacent to the Henderson Executive Airport. The
bill permits the city of Henderson to sell any portion of the
conveyed land for non-residential development to a competitive
bidding process. Eighty-five percent of the revenues generated
from the sales would be deposited into this special account
established by the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act
and used by the Secretary of Interior for the use specified in
the Act.
During consideration of similar legislation in the 109th
Congress we raised several concerns. We greatly appreciated the
work of the sponsor of the bill to address those concerns as
reflected in S. 1377. The BLM supports S. 1377.
S. 1433 the Thomas P. O'Hara Public Land Career Opportunity
Act amends the Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act
to provide competitive status to local hire Federal employees
in Alaska. In discussing this program with the Office of
Personnel Management during the course of reviewing S. 1433,
the Department of Interior and Agriculture learned that local
hire employees have been mistakenly classified as being outside
of the competitive service. According to OPM because ANILCA
specifically provides the Veteran's preference applied to these
positions, the positions are by their nature competitive and
local hire employees should have been classified as being
eligible for competitive status.
Therefore we suggest that S. 1433 be amended to de-reg the
secretaries to reclassify as part of the competitive service
those employees who are hired into permanent position under the
local hire provision of ANILCA and are currently employed in
those positions. In addition provisions should be made for
former local hire employees who were competitively hired and
who served the requisite amount of time in their position to
apply to the Secretary for competitive status. We would be
happy to work with the sponsor and the subcommittee to resolve
these issues.
S. 1608 the Southern Nevada Readiness Center Act would
convey without consideration land from Clark County, Nevada to
the Nevada division of State lands for use by the Nevada
National Guard. All rights, title and interest in these lands
was conveyed by the Bureau of Land Management to Clark County,
Nevada in 1999 as directed by the Southern Nevada Public Land
Management Act of 1998 for inclusion in the McCarran Airport
cooperative management area. The BLM is mindful that S. 1608
conveys these lands from one public entity to another for
important national defense and security purposes. The BLM
supports the legislation and we recommend some technical
modification.
S. 1740 amends the North Dakota Enabling Act and related
laws to provide for changes in the management and distribution
of certain North Dakota trust funds. The Administration has no
comments on or any objection to this legislation.
S. 1940 the Rio Puerco Watershed Management Program
Reauthorization Act provides a 10-year reauthorization for the
Rio Puerco Management Committee, a collaborative watershed
organization established in 1996. Under this program the BLM
has partnered with State, Federal and tribal entities, soil and
water conservation district representatives of country
government, residents from the rural communities within the
watershed, environmental and conservation groups and the public
to restore and protect the long term sustainability of the
watershed. The BLM strongly supports enactment of S. 1940.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to testify. I will be happy to answer any
questions.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Nedd follow:]
Prepared Statement of Michael Nedd, Assistant Director, Mineral, Realty
and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, Department of the
Interior
Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 1143, the Jupiter Inlet
Lighthouse Outstanding Natural Area Act. The Act would designate the
126 acres, including Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse and the surrounding area,
as an Outstanding Natural Area (ONA) within the Bureau of Land
Management's (BLM) National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS). The
Department supports S. 1143.
background
The 126-acre site proposed for designation as the Jupiter Inlet
Lighthouse Outstanding Natural Area is an oasis of green in highly
urbanized Palm Beach County, Florida and straddles the borders of the
Village of Tequesta and the Town of Jupiter. The lighthouse, which
stands 156 feet above the surrounding coastline, is the oldest existing
structure in Palm Beach County, dating from 1860. The lighthouse
continues as an active United States Coast Guard aid to maritime
navigation. The Loxahatchee River Historical Society manages portions
of the site through a license and conducts popular tours of the
lighthouse. On the remaining southern portion of the tract, the Town of
Jupiter manages intensive recreation on an 18-acre public park.
Aside from the natural significance of this site, the dynamic
partnerships of the Jupiter Working Group and collaborative
relationships make this site quite unique. The management of the 126
acres rests with six separate entities, BLM, U.S. Coast Guard, Palm
Beach County, Town of Jupiter, Village of Tequesta, and Loxahatchee
River Historical Society. These entities currently work cooperatively
through BLM's Jupiter Inlet Coordinated Resource Management Plan (CRMP)
and the Jupiter Inlet Working Group (working group) to manage the area
as a harmonized unit. For example, Palm Beach County's Department of
Environmental Resources Management has partnered directly with BLM on
habitat improvements, providing matching funds and labor for virtually
all habitat-related projects. One activity was the restoration of
significant scrub and wetland communities within the area. Emphasis was
placed on habitat improvements for the 18 special status species found
within the area, including the removal of thousands of exotic trees and
shrubs along with replanting of native vegetation. This work has
significantly improved the habitat for scrub jays, gopher tortoises and
federally endangered plant species. The working group combined
resources to build an award-winning tidal lagoon and wetland connected
to the Indian River Lagoon, which is one of the most diverse estuaries
in the country. Among the many tools used to improve the habitat are
successful prescribed burns, which reduced fuel loads on this urban
tract.
The community involvement at Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse goes beyond
the governmental agencies. For example, the Loxahatchee River
Historical Society actively manages the Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse and
grounds, and provides interpretive tours to tens of thousands of
visitors each year. They have procured grants and worked with the Town
of Jupiter to complete nearly one million dollars in restoration of the
Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse, as well as complete the renovation of a WWII
vintage building that now houses the museum. Additionally, the Jupiter
High School Environmental Resources and Field Studies Academy has
donated thousands of hours of hands-on restoration work within the
proposed ONA.
s. 1143
S. 1143 seeks to build on the many successful partnerships already
in place by designating the 126-acre site as the Jupiter Inlet
Lighthouse Outstanding Natural Area within the BLM's NLCS. The bill
follows in the footsteps of the Yaquina Head Outstanding Natural Area
along the Oregon coast established by Congress in 1980. In order to
safeguard the buildings and public lands surrounding the Jupiter Inlet
Lighthouse, the bill provides protections for the area while
encouraging and enabling active community support and involvement.
The Department would like the opportunity to work with Senator
Nelson and the committee on some technical amendments including a
correct map reference and other minor issues.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of S. 1143. I
will be happy to answer any questions.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael Nedd, Assistant Director, Minerals,
Realty and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, Department
of Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify on S. 1377, the Southern Nevada Limited
Transition Area Act. S. 1377 would convey without consideration
approximately 502 acres of BLM public lands, defined in the bill as the
``transition area,'' to the City of Henderson, Nevada, for economic
development adjacent to the Henderson Executive Airport. The BLM
recognizes the extensive residential growth occurring in the City of
Henderson and understands the need for the City to plan land use in
such a way that development around the Henderson Executive Airport is
compatible with the nature of airport operations. During consideration
of similar legislation in the 109th Congress (S. 1056), we raised
several concerns. The BLM greatly appreciates the work of the sponsors
of the bill to address those concerns, as reflected in the text of S.
1377. We support S. 1377 as introduced.
S. 1377 establishes development areas around the Henderson
Executive Airport similar to the Airport Environs Overlay District--
otherwise known as the McCarran Airport Cooperative Management Area
(CMA)--established by the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act
(SNPLMA), Public Law 105-263, that ensures compatible development
around McCarran Airport. The public lands proposed for conveyance in S.
1377 are directly west and south of the Henderson Executive Airport,
which is east of Interstate-15 and north of the Sloan Canyon National
Conservation Area. These lands are within the disposal boundary
established in SNPLMA and have been identified for disposal by the BLM
as part of SNPLMA's land disposal process.
S. 1377 directs the City of Henderson to plan and manage the lands
for nonresidential development, and requires that any development
comport with noise compatibility requirements defined in section 47504
of title 49, United States Code. The bill permits the City of Henderson
to sell any portions of the conveyed lands for nonresidential
development through a competitive bidding process, but for not less
than fair market value, and subject to the noise compatibility
requirements. The City of Henderson may also elect to retain parcels
for recreation or other public purposes consistent with the Recreation
and Public Purposes Act.
The revenue generated from any sales of the lands by the City of
Henderson would be distributed consistent with the provisions of
Section 4(e)(1) of SNPLMA, which allow for the deposit of 85 percent of
the proceeds from land sales into the Special Account; 10 percent paid
directly to the Southern Nevada Water Authority; and 5 percent paid
directly to the State of Nevada for use in the general education
program of the State.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to work with the sponsors of
this bill in addressing our various concerns, including modifications
relative to the terms and conditions of future land sales by the City
of Henderson; the reversionary language; and the revised map. We
support S. 1377 and efforts to appropriately plan for development
around the Henderson Executive Airport.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael Nedd, Assistant Director, Mineral, Realty
and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, Department of
Interior
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of
the Department of the Interior on S. 1433, a bill to amend the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act to provide competitive status
to certain federal employees in Alaska.
S. 1433 is named after Thomas P. O'Hara, a National Park Service
employee who was a pilot at Katmai National Park and Preserve. Tom and
an employee of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were on a mission in
the Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge on December 19, 2002,
when their plane went down. Unfortunately, Tom did not survive the
crash.
Tom O'Hara was an experienced pilot with thousands of hours of
service, whose skills benefited the residents of Bristol Bay
communities--an area where Tom grew up and lived. Tom was hired because
of a special local hire program for conservation units in Alaska, which
was authorized by Section 1308 of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (ANILCA). This program allows bureaus in the
Department of the Interior and the Forest Service in the Department of
Agriculture to hire ``any individual who, by reason of having lived or
worked in or near a conservation system unit, has special knowledge or
expertise concerning the natural or cultural resources of such unit . .
. .'' These local individuals may be selected without regard to normal
civil service rules requiring formal training or experience.
The program has been used with great success across Alaska. The
Departments have been administering this program as an excepted service
program meaning that local hire employees are at a disadvantage when
applying for other jobs within Alaska or elsewhere in the country. Some
employees have overcome this disadvantage because of additional formal
education, training or experience. But for others, particularly in
small, remote locations, this transition to competitive status is
difficult.
In discussing this program with the Office of Personnel Management
during the course of the review of S. 1433, the Departments learned
that local hire employees have been mistakenly classified as being
outside of the competitive service. Because ANILCA specifically
provides that veterans preference applies to these positions the
positions are by their nature competitive and local hire employees
should have been classified as being eligible for competitive status.
S. 1433 provides that local hire employees, after two years of
satisfactory service, will be converted to competitive status. There
are many excepted services and positions within the Federal government.
The Office of Personnel Management is rightly concerned about providing
a group of excepted status employees with this benefit which many
others have sought and been denied. However, in this case, it appears
these local hire employees were mistakenly placed into excepted service
status. Therefore we suggest that S. 1433 be amended to direct the
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to
reclassify as part of the competitive service those employees hired
into permanent positions pursuant to the local hire provisions of
ANILCA and currently serving in those positions. In addition,
provisions should be made for former local hire employees who were
competitively hired and who served the requisite amount of time in
their positions to apply to the Secretary for competitive status.
This legislation will provide a lasting memorial to the excellent
work of Tom O'Hara and other employees who serve the public with their
expertise and knowledge of Alaska and help preserve our public lands
for others to enjoy. We would be happy to work with the Committee on
bill language that would accomplish our suggested amendments.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of S. 1433. I
will be happy to answer any questions.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael Nedd, Assistant Director, Minerals,
Realty and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, Department
of Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify on S. 1608, the Southern Nevada Readiness Center
Act. S. 1608 would convey without consideration between 35 and 50 acres
of land from Clark County, Nevada, to the Nevada Division of State
Lands for use by the Nevada National Guard for defense and security
training. All right, title, and interest to these lands was conveyed by
the BLM to Clark County, Nevada, in 1999, as directed by Section 4(g)
of the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998 (SNPLMA), for
inclusion in the McCarran Airport Cooperative Management Area (CMA).
The CMA was established in 1992 through an agreement between Clark
County and BLM to manage development around McCarran Airport, which
services the greater Las Vegas area. As directed by SNPLMA,
approximately 5,000 acres of public lands was conveyed by the BLM to
Clark County for inclusion in the CMA boundary. SNPLMA requires that
Clark County manage the lands in the CMA in accordance with 49 U.S.C.
47504, relating to airport noise compatibility planning, so that
development in the CMA is compatible with the nature of airport
operations. Further, section (4)(g) of SNPLMA requires that any
conveyance of CMA lands by Clark County be for fair market value, and
the revenue distributed according to the formula outlined in Section
(4)(g) of SNPLMA.
The BLM is mindful that S. 1608 conveys the CMA lands from one
public entity to another for important national defense and security
purposes. In balancing these considerations against the provisions of
SNPLMA that require the sale of CMA lands for fair market value, the
BLM supports the bill and the conveyance of the CMA lands for no
consideration. However, we suggest that the bill be amended to include
a provision that if the State of Nevada ceases to use the lands for the
purpose intended in S. 1608, the lands revert to the County to be
managed consistent with the provisions of SNPLMA. We also recommend an
amendment to correct the acreage identified in S. 1608 from ``between
35 and 50 acres'' to ``approximately 51 acres.''
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 1608. We look
forward to working with the sponsor and the Committee on this important
piece of legislation.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael Nedd, Assistant Director, Mineral, Realty
and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, Department of
Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify on S. 1740, the North Dakota Enabling Act and
First Morrill Act Amendments Act of 2007.
S. 1740 would amend the Act of February 22, 1889 and the Act of
July 2, 1862 to provide for changes to the management and distribution
of North Dakota trust funds into which proceeds from the sale of public
land are deposited. It also includes language providing for Congress'
consent to amendments to the Constitution of North Dakota proposed by
House Concurrent Resolution No. 3037 of the 59th Legislature of the
State of North Dakota and approved by the voters on November 7, 2006.
This resolution requires permanent trust funds to be managed to
preserve their purchasing power, to provide stable distributions to
fund beneficiaries and to benefit fund beneficiaries.
The Office of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice has
advised us that Congress may amend State enabling acts. As S. 1740
relates to North Dakota's use of its trust funds, the Administration
has no comments on or objections to the bill.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
______
Prepared Statement of Michael Nedd, Assistant Director, Mineral, Realty
and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, Department of
Interior
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S.1940, the Rio Puerco
Watershed Management Program Reauthorization Act. The legislation
provides a 10-year reauthorization for the Rio Puerco Management
Committee (RPMC), a collaborative watershed organization established by
Section 401 of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of
1996 (P.L. 104-333). Through the collaborative processes of the RPMC,
the BLM has partnered with Federal, state, and Tribal governments,
private individuals, and environmental organizations, to improve
management practices and protect the long-term sustainability of the
watershed. The legislation also adds the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) as a member of the RPMC, formalizing the cooperative role
it has played in these efforts. The BLM strongly supports enactment of
S.1940.
The Rio Puerco Watershed, located in west-central New Mexico,
contributes less than 10 percent of the water, but nearly 70 percent of
the silt, to the Rio Grande north of the Elephant Butte Reservoir.
According to the Corps of Engineers, soil erosion within the basin
surpasses that of any other watershed in the country. The New Mexico
Environment Department has classified the Rio Puerco as a Category I
impaired watershed, primarily because of the high levels of
sedimentation.
rpmc accomplishments
The RPMC has effectively built on initiatives begun by a locally
led public-private stakeholders group based in Cuba, New Mexico. The
RPMC is a collaborative watershed organization consisting of state,
Federal, and Tribal entities, soil and water conservation districts,
representatives of county government, residents from the rural
communities within the watershed, environmental and conservation groups
and the public. It is a consensus group charged with compiling data and
developing best management practices to reduce erosion, increase native
vegetation, and improve riparian habitat while supporting the
watershed's rural, agrarian, and cultural traditions.
The RPMC and its partners received grants and awards, in part based
on the diversity of entities participating and on its track record in
showcasing how the watershed approach can yield measurable success. The
EPA Administrator identified the RPMC as one of the winners of the 2003
Watershed Initiative grants, with an award of $700,000. The Rio Puerco
Alliance, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization formed in 2006, received a
grant of $840,000 in August 2007 for the Targeted Watershed Restoration
Initiative in Torreon Wash. Projects on which the RPMC have worked
collaboratively have received 319 grants from the New Mexico
Environment Department and the EPA's Watershed Initiative Program.
Among its accomplishments, the RPMC has:
launched a community involvement initiative that started
with listening sessions held in local communities and developed
into a series of training and demonstration workshops on
conservation practices;
developed a Watershed Restoration Action Strategy, to
address specific water quality problems.
In cooperation with the New Mexico State Highway and Transportation
Department, the RPMC is redirecting the Rio Puerco from an unstable
artificial 1.1 mile channel to its natural 2.2 miles of meandering
channel. This project is funded through a New Mexico Environment
Department Clean Water Act grant and through assistance from Sandoval
County and the New Mexico Highway and Transportation Department. This
project will reduce approximately 21 tons of sediment that have been
lost annually since the river was diverted.
Through another New Mexico Environment Department Clean Water Act
grant, the RPMC worked with private landowners in two degraded
tributaries to the Rio Puerco to create a showcase water quality
improvement project through erosion control, livestock grazing
management, and control of undesirable vegetation.
The 1996 Act that created the RPMC authorized $7.5 million over 10
years. The authority expired on November 12, 2006. Prior to its
expiration, the RPMC used this funding to leverage grants for resource
protection and has accepted in-kind contributions for on-the-ground
project work.
navajo youth projects
In 2007, the BLM, the Navajo Water Resources Department and the
State of New Mexico provided funding for on-the-ground Navajo Youth
Projects in six Chapters of the Eastern Navajo Agency. Through this
collaborative effort, six youth Projects have hired about 100 Navajo
youth to construct erosion control structures on Tribal, BLM, and state
lands within grazing allotments held by the Navajo Nation. The program
also included environmental education training on the concepts of
watershed management. Several leaders of the Navajo Nation have
expressed their conviction that Navajo youth need this important tie
back to the land.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify on S.1940. The
collaborative nature of the Rio Puerco Management Committee has
resulted in successful implementation of activities to restore and
protect the watershed, and the BLM looks forward to continuing this
important work. I would be glad to answer your questions.
Senator Wyden. Gentlemen, thank you both for being here and
for the constructive approaches that the Department of Interior
and the Department of Agriculture have had with respect to
this. Both sides of the aisle and this side of the dais are
anxious to work with you.
Senator Craig has joined us. It's always been our custom to
let our colleagues make any statement they would choose. Then
we'll go straight to questions.
Senator Craig.
Senator Craig. Why don't I just take my round with
questions? I've got a couple of comments I'll make at that
time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. Very good. Gentlemen and maybe I'll start
with you, Mr. Holtrop.
On the Copper Salmon, as you know, there's been broad
support for this in the communities trying to find some person
on the coast who's not just cheering for this legislation
because there is that kind of grassroots support. You all have
reflected some concerns about the boundaries. I think it's fair
to say we'd all consider them fairly minor. Let me just ask a
couple of questions.
Mr. Holtrop, you noted that there were some old roads
included in our proposal. The roads are currently drivable and
what is your sense about decommissioning efforts that you would
think might be necessary given the state of those roads?
Mr. Holtrop. Yes, my understanding is there's about nine
miles of existing roads inside the proposed wilderness and of
those nine miles, seven of them are currently closed to public
use and two are open. There's work that would need to be done
on those roads because several of them are fairly highly
engineered roads because of the steep and rugged terrain that
they're in. It would be necessary to do some work to remove
culverts, restore the roads into a more appropriate status for
use as trails or just completely restore the roads so that
events over time would not cause those roads to become a
problem in terms of water quality and some of those types of
things.
Our sense is--we've got a very rough estimate of maybe
300,000 dollars worth of work in order to accomplish that. If
the legislation passes as we're supportive of that happening,
what we would intend to do would be do a minimum tools
analysis. If that minimum tools analysis required us to do some
mechanized activity in the wilderness after its designation in
order to restore those roads, that's what--that's the approach
we would take.
Senator Wyden. That was really my second question. So you
would think this minimum tools policy that you all have would
be sufficient to essentially address the decommissioning work.
Is that correct?
Mr. Holtrop. That's correct.
Senator Wyden. Ok. One other area you mentioned concerns
with the boundaries selected and a debate about how you go
about, you know, choosing exactly these boundaries. Now,
doesn't the Forest Service Guidance Policy suggest ease of
management as a basis for selecting boundaries?
Mr. Holtrop. Yes, it does.
Senator Wyden. So, from the standpoint of trying and to
address these boundary, you know, issues, we can use the
Wildeness Act, is one way to go about doing it.
Mr. Holtrop. That's correct. I think what--the position
that we're taking on that is, and this is done fairly commonly
in many wilderness designations. Where there's an offset from
the road that's provided of a standard length so that if
there's a situation in which some ditch work needs to be done,
or if a road slides because of a weather event and there needs
to be some reconstruction done on it and the most logical
approach to get that work done is to--moving inside what is
currently designated wilderness if it were right at the road
prism by having some offset. It provides us some opportunity to
accomplish that type of work while not having to seek
Congressional authority to make those types of adjustments.
Senator Wyden. That was exactly what we've been interested
in. We want to make sure that you all can essentially use tools
you've got today. You know, this question of the minimum tools
policy as it relates to decommissioning work. The question of
the Wilderness Act and how you would use that as a tool to deal
with boundaries and address these managing, essentially
manageability issues, that all sounds like something we can
work together on. Do it quickly and cooperatively.
Mr. Nedd, I appreciate your testifying and really don't
have any questions for you because you were so cooperative in
your opening statement. We can kind of spare you the battering
and the punishment that witnesses often get. But seriously, we
thank you for your cooperation.
Both of you have been very helpful and we're going to get
these bills passed. It is a good package and a bipartisan
package of colleagues have noted. Let me let Senators now speak
starting with Senator Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
agree that it is non-controversial, no real objections.
It does raise the question that I mentioned earlier about
some of these land exchange processes. Did this just not become
non-controversial after it came legislatively? Or how is the
best way to do that? That's something that concerns people in
Wyoming. Where do you go legislatively? When do you try to get
an exchange done? I hear that exchanges can take ten to fifteen
years possibly, protracted length of time.
So, No. 1, could you spend a couple of minutes describing
the process. How it works? How long it takes for even a non-
controversial exchange? Then are there additional tools you
need to see if we are able to do some things there so you don't
have to have folks coming legislatively?
Mr. Holtrop. I'd be happy to do that. I want to say that
that's a very good question. One of the reasons I know it's a
very good question is it is one of the questions I asked my own
staff to provide some advice on that just in the last few years
as well. One of the things that I found out, not surprisingly
really, is that those exchanges that arise to my level or even
more so that rise to your levels tend to be the ones that are
very controversial and difficult and have some issues related
with them.
Over the past 10 years or an analysis from 1995 through
2004, the average length of an exchange is around two and a
half years. Now that doesn't mean that there aren't some that
do take many years more than that, but generally those tend to
be the more controversial ones.
In terms of the way this process works is the parties to a
proposed exchange sign an instrument that they both agree that
this is something they want to pursue. That instrument includes
information around who's going to pay the costs of any
environmental analysis and the other, some of the survey
standards or some of the title standards that are going to be
expected. All of that work gets laid out with this instrument.
Then it works its way through all those processes to the final
recording of the deeds.
One--the other question that I heard in your question was
when is it time for--when is it necessary for legislation as
opposed to an Administrative process to carry it out? I think
the two pieces of legislation that I, other than the Copper
Salmon that I testified on just this afternoon are a couple of
examples of those types of situations where legislation is
needed. I would say that legislation is needed when we don't
have the authority to do something administratively.
In the case of the Frank Church River of No Return
Wilderness we don't have the authority to do an exchange that
includes--that's inside the wilderness. So what--the
legislation that was needed in this case was to resolve the
unauthorized improvements inside wilderness. In the case of the
Santa Fe National Forest and the Pecos Wild and Scenic River,
that is a piece of property that required both our authority to
dispose of property which we don't have the authority to do
except if authorized on a case by case basis. Plus it's
property within a Wild and Scenic River designation which also
requires your attention in order to have us have the authority
to do that.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you. That was a very thorough, a
good explanation. Thank you very much. No further questions,
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. I thank my colleague.
Senator Smith.
Senator Smith. Mr. Holtrop, generally does wilderness
designation affect tribal access to Federal land with respect
to gathering of foods and materials for cultural use?
Mr. Holtrop. No, it does not. I appreciated the concern
that you expressed in your statement about a relationship with
the Coquille tribe. The Rogue River and Siskiyou National
Forest has a regular on-going consultation relationship with
that tribe. It is our expectation and I'm convinced that this
piece of legislation, other than the reduction or the
elimination of the use of mechanized equipment in the
wilderness which would apply to all users. The tribe would
continue to enjoy the access that they need for their cultural
activities and that would be our intent.
Senator Smith. That is my understanding as well. I
appreciate your reasserting it. But I wonder if it would be
possible for the Forest Service to go the next step and
memorialize that understanding to increase the comfort level of
the Coquille tribe with some kind of memorandum of
understanding. Would that be acceptable?
Mr. Holtrop. We would be happy to work with you, with the
tribe to pursue whether that would be helpful to them. We could
pursue looking into that.
Senator Smith. I think that is important as a show of
respect and according to dignity to Native Americans that their
sovereign governments deserve. I think that kind of a
memorialization would be appropriate and would allay any
remaining questions. So I would encourage that and will work
with you on that.
Senator Wyden. I thank my colleague.
Senator Craig.
Senator Craig. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
Gentlemen, thank you. I had one piece of legislation and I
think Joel spoke to it in relation to what the Forest Service
can and cannot do and that's 1802 as it relates to some
boundary modification and some element at the edge of the Frank
Church with the Diamond D Ranch.
I understand you support this legislation and it resolves
that question and creates some boundary corrections that are
necessary for the integrity of the wilderness and for the
private property involved. But there was another piece of
legislation that we pulled at the last moment because the
Administration of the Forest Service spoke to it. Some concern
about language and in a negative way.
I say to you, Mr. Chairman, to you, Joel, this is an
interesting situation. It has to do with some land exchanges up
in the Ketchum, Idaho, Sun Valley area consistent with what the
community of Ketchum needs and what Sun Valley Company needs
and not inconsistent with use and the Forest Service. But I was
told, that the language could not be supported because it
didn't provide anything of real benefit to the Forest Service.
However it should be noted that it didn't hurt the Forest
Service either.
The reason I say this is because of the uniqueness of this
summer in Idaho and in other Western States. We burned all
during the month of August. The great community of Ketchum and
the great resort of Sun Valley, the mother of all ski resorts
for our nation, almost burned down. We burned a semi-circle
around it on Federal Forest land. It's very important for me to
say right up front, the U.S. Forest Service did a phenomenal
job. You're to be congratulated, Joel.
You had an incident commander up there by the name of
Jeannie. I believe she's from the Humboldt, who walks on water
in Ketchum, Idaho today because she was a strong leader who
made decisions when decisions had to be made, at a time when we
could have lost 10 billion dollars worth of assets, private and
public. I was telling Secretary Rey last night that you had one
of the finest incident command centers in the nation, a 12
million dollar ski lodge that you fully occupied for the
benefit of fighting the fires.
The community rolled out and fed the fire fighters and
clothed them and gave them things. My wife and I were up there
at an ice show at the lodge in the middle of the fires and here
were fire fighters at the ice show at the courtesy of Sun
Valley Corporation. I get back here thinking, gee, we're going
to get this bill put together and we're going to facilitate all
of this to find out that the Forest Service wasn't happy with
the language, even though they didn't lose anything. They
didn't gain anything. They thought they needed to gain
something from it.
Bottom line is, Joel, we're going to move this legislation.
We want to work with you to resolve the differences. Here is a
community of people and a company that gave to the cause to
save themselves and help you save Federal property and public
resource in a way that I have never seen a community in my
State give before.
We need to get this resolved. The time is short. We want to
move this legislation. So in the next week let's find the
language, get it resolved and move it forward.
I think it's going to be to the benefit of public land
resource up there: a company, Sun Valley Corporation, yes, the
community of Ketchum, yes, public access, yes, all of those
kinds of things that'll be important. So, let's see if we can't
get it solved.
Mr. Holtrop. Senator Craig, I would just like to say a
couple of things. First of all, thank you very much for the
compliments to our incident commander, Jeannie Pincha- Tully
who is one of our fine incident commanders. I certainly concur
with all that you said about what the community of Ketchum has
been through. What the resort has been through.
One of the many fire fighters on that fire was my daughter.
Senator Craig. Really?
Mr. Holtrop. So I was also pleased to hear what you had to
say from that perspective as well.
I'll say that the reason that the Forest Service had
concerns with the piece of legislation was just lack of
information about the parcels. We--I am absolutely convinced
that we can work to reach a resolution that is responsive to
the concerns that Sun Valley Resort has, that is equitable for
the Forest Service and the resort. Maybe even legislation not
being necessary if some of the parcels that are identified are
National Forest land to private land so that a straight
exchange.
The reason this was being legislated was because the BLM
parcel was involved and that requires legislation because of
that complication. I think there are multiple options for us to
get this done. I look forward to working with you.
Senator Craig. Super. Thank you.
I'm glad to hear your daughter had a positive experience up
there.
Mr. Holtrop. Thank you.
Senator Craig. Mr. Chairman, I don't know what our total
acreage is yet. I do know we, collectively, the taxpayers and
the U.S. Forest Service have spent over 130 million dollars
already in Idaho fighting fire this year. We've had phenomenal
fires, nearly lost the great Sun Valley Resort and could have
lost a new resort. The effort was ongoing, is ongoing, but the
effort was outstanding. It is very easy to compliment a job
well done. I thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. I thank my colleague. What we'll do is we'll
have the majority and minority staff get with your folks and
get to work on these issues involving Ketchum as we've done so
often in the past.
Thank you both and look forward to working with you. Thank
you both for your cooperation.
Let's bring forward Mayor Auborn and Jim Rogers.
Gentlemen, while you're sitting down, let me ask you to
ponder. I think with 11 minutes we'd probably better go vote
and come back. We were going to try to see if we can get it all
in, but you all have made a long, long trek across the land. I
think with a leave of Senator Smith and Senator Craig, we'll go
over and vote real quickly and then we'll come back.
We stand in recess for 10 minutes let us say. Thanks.
[Recess]
Senator Wyden. Let us have the subcommittee come to order.
It's a great to have Oregonians back. I know Senator Smith
wants to participate as well. So we'll something of movable
feat this afternoon with the Congressional schedule and Mayor
why don't you take a few minutes to make your comments and Mr.
Rogers, you as well. It's a long journey and I'm sorry for the
hectic nature of the afternoon.
Mayor, please begin.
STATEMENT OF JIM AUBORN, MAYOR, PORT ORFORD, OR
Mr. Auborn. Chairman Wyden and members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Jim
Auborn. I am the Mayor of the city of Port Orford. I'm here
today in strong support of S. 2034, the Copper Salmon
Wilderness Act. I'm a native Oregonian and a long term
Republican, born and raised in the Portland area, who retired
to Port Orford after a career in the U.S. Navy, U.S. Navy
Reserves and Bell Laboratories.
I served as an engineering officer on nuclear submarines
while on active duty and managed research programs for the
Office of Naval Research in the Reserves where I retired at the
rank of Captain. I retired from Bell Laboratories as Director
of the Government Communications Laboratory and served as Vice
President in Research for Terrabeam Corporation for 2 years
before moving to Port Orford in 1999 and becoming involved in
local government.
Port Orford is a small community on the Southern Oregon
coast situated in Northern Curry County along U.S. Highway 101,
truly a blue highway in Oregon. The population of Curry County
was estimated at 21,365 in 2006 with a majority of the
population located in the southern portion of the county. The
population of the city of Port Orford was estimated at 1,225
last year. The percentage living below the poverty level
exceeds the national average.
The principle industry is commercial fishing which directly
or indirectly employs 100 to 150 people. The other significant
portion of our economy is based on tourism which is dependent
to a large extent on recreational fishing. The social and
economic analysis of fisheries resources for Port Orford was
conducted in 2005. I've attached this analysis to my testimony.
This document has also been made part of the comprehensive plan
for the city of Port Orford.
The Copper Salmon Wilderness Act would protect the critical
spawning habitat for Elk River salmon and steelhead. The ocean
fishery at the mouth of the Elk River is important to Port
Orford for both commercial and sports fishing. Recreational
fishing in the Elk River itself is significant for tourism.
The proposed Copper Salmon Wilderness has a large amount of
community support. The Board of Curry County Commissioners
passed a resolution in support of wilderness designation for
this area in 1999. This resolution remains in effect to this
day as our Commissioners have expressed repeatedly.
Subsequent to submitting my written testimony and things,
Curry County Commissioner, Lucy Lubonte, has written a letter
to Senator Wyden thanking him for introducing this bill and in
support of this specific legislation. As Mayor of the city of
Port Orford, I personally visited the capital in April of last
year to meet with our Oregon Congressional delegation in
support of Copper Salmon wilderness. The delegation asked to
get out the position of the local business community.
The Port Orford and North Curry Chamber of Commerce voted
their support in 2003 with a vote of 23 to 3 in favor of Copper
Salmon. The President of our Chamber of Commerce followed up on
my visit to the capital later in the spring last year to
express support of the business community for the Copper Salmon
wilderness. The Chamber Board met again last week and
reiterated their support by voting in favor of the proposed
legislation by Senator Wyden and Representative DeFazio. I've
attached a letter* of support for the Chamber for this specific
legislation to my testimony.
The Port Orford Ocean Resource Team, POORT, an organization
of local fishers and community members concerned with insuring
the long term sustainability of our fishing resources and the
social system depended upon it has written in support of this
specific legislation. I've also attached a copy of their
letter* to my testimony.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* See Appendix II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the city of Port Orford has long supported
the creation of the Copper Salmon Wilderness. Earlier this
week, the Common Council of the city of Port Orford unanimously
passed Resolution 2805 supporting the proposed Copper Salmon
Wilderness bill. A copy of this resolution is also attached. In
Port Orford we don't get unanimous support on very many things.
Senator Wyden. It doesn't happen in the Senate too often
either.
Mr. Auborn. We thank Senator Wyden for introducing this
important legislation and thank Senator Smith for his co-
sponsorship and encourage the subcommittee and the entire U.S.
Senate to enact it as soon as possible. Our community will
benefit from this legislation for generations to come. Again
thank you for the opportunity to testify. I welcome any
questions that you may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Auborn follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jim Auborn, Mayor, Port Orford, OR
Chairman Wyden and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify today. My name is Jim Auborn, and I am the
mayor, City of Port Orford. I am here today in strong support of
S.2034, the Copper Salmon Wilderness Act. I am a native Oregonian and a
long term Republican, born and raised in the Portland area who retired
to Port Orford after a career in the U.S. Navy/U.S. Navy Reserve and
Bell Laboratories. I served as an engineering officer on nuclear
submarines while on active duty and managed research programs for the
Office of Naval Research in the reserves where I retired at the rank of
Captain. I retired from Bell Laboratories as Director of the Government
Communications Laboratory and served as Vice President of Research for
Terrabeam Corporation for two years before moving to Port Orford in
1999 and becoming involved in local government.
Port Orford is a small community on the Southern Oregon Coast,
situated in northern Curry County along U.S. Hwy. 101, truly a ``blue
highway'' in Oregon. The population of Curry County was estimated at
21,365 in 2006 with the majority of the population located in the
southern portion of the county. The population of the City of Port
Orford was estimated at 1,225 last year. The percentage living below
the poverty level exceeds the national average. The principal industry
is commercial fishing which directly or indirectly employs 100-150
people. The other significant portion of our economy is based on
tourism, which is dependent to a large extent on recreational fishing.
A social and economic analysis of fisheries resources for Port Orford
was conducted in 2005. I have attached this analysis to my testimony. .
This document has also been made part of the Comprehensive Plan for the
City of Port Orford.
The Copper Salmon Wilderness Act would protect the critical
spawning habitat for Elk River salmon and steelhead. The ocean fishery
at the mouth of the Elk River is important to Port Orford for both
commercial and sports fishing. Recreational fishing in the Elk River
itself is significant for tourism. The proposed Copper Salmon
Wilderness has a large amount of community support. The Board of Curry
County Commissioners passed a resolution in support of wilderness
designation for this area in 1999. This resolution remains in effect to
this day as our commissioners have expressed repeatedly.
As mayor of the City of Port Orford, I personally visited the
Capitol in April 2006 to meet with our Oregon congressional delegation
in support of Copper Salmon Wilderness. The delegation asked about the
position of the local business community. The Port Orford and North
Curry County Chamber of Commerce voted their support in 2003 with a
vote of 23 to 3. The president of our Chamber of Commerce followed up
on my visit to the Capitol later in the Spring last year to express the
support of the business community for the Copper Salmon Wilderness. The
Chamber board met last week and reiterated their support by voting in
favor of the proposed legislation by Senator Wyden and Representative
DeFazio. I have attached a letter of support from the chamber for this
specific legislation to my testimony.
The Port Orford Ocean Resource Team (POORT), an organization of
local fishers and community members concerned with ensuring the long
term sustainability of our fishing resources and the social system
dependent on it, has written in support of this specific legislation. I
have attached a copy of their letter to my testimony.
Additionally, the City of Port Orford has long supported the
creation of the Copper Salmon Wilderness. Earlier this week, the Common
Council of the City of Port Orford passed Resolution 2008-05 supporting
the proposed Copper Salmon Wilderness Bill. A copy of this resolution
is also attached. We thank Senator Wyden for introducing this important
legislation and encourage the Subcommittee and the entire U.S. Senate
to enact it as soon as possible. Our community will benefit from this
legislation for generations to come.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I welcome any
questions that you may have.
Senator Wyden. Mayor, thank you for an excellent statement
and all your leadership. It's always wonderful to have you at
the Town Hall meetings that I hold in the community and just
really appreciate the way you've gone about this to try and
find common ground. This is not on the Oregon coast, been about
Democrats and Republicans. This has been about putting Oregon
first. You have clearly conveyed that message and we thank you
for it.
Mr. Auborn. We appreciate your coming out each year to Port
Orford or Curry County and thanks for your Town Hall meetings.
Senator Wyden. As long as I have the honor of representing
Oregon in the U.S. Senate, that's the way it's going to be.
Mr. Rogers, welcome. Big bouquets to you for all of the
grassroots efforts you have sure toiled long and hard. I just
was thinking about the Mayor's statement about how the County
Commissioners passed the resolution back in 1999 and here we
are in 2007. You've been prosecuting the case for protecting
this wonderful gem on the coast for a long time. We thank you
for all those efforts and please proceed.
STATEMENT OF JIM ROGERS, CONSULTING FORESTER, FRIENDS OF ELK
RIVER, PORT ORFORD, OR
Mr. Rogers. My name's Jim Rogers. I'm a consulting forester
from Port Orford, Oregon. I'd like to thank Chairman Wyden for
introducing the Copper Salmon Wilderness Act and the Senators
on the subcommittee for the opportunity to testify today.
Port Orford is located along a remote stretch of Highway
101, known as America's wild rivers coast. Our weather is every
bit as wild as our rivers. I'm here from Curry County on behalf
of Friends of Elk River, Trout Unlimited, Campaign for
America's Wilderness, Coalition of Sportsmen and the Who's Who
of National, State and local public officials and environmental
organizations who all ask you to protect Elk River by
designating the 13,700 acres Copper Salmon Wilderness Area.
In our watershed ancient stands of Port Orford cedar,
Douglas fir and Western Hemlock withstand hurricane force winds
and more than 120 inches of annual rainfall. Several endangered
species including marbled murrelets, spotted owls, bald eagles
and Coho salmon find refuge here. Elk River provides spawning
and rearing habitat for winter steelhead and big, 40 to 50
pound Chinook salmon. Black bear, mountain lions and elusive
ring tailed cats still wander the precipitous mountains lush
with mountain rhododendrons and massive old growth trees, trees
that sometimes grow 300 feet tall and ten feet in diameter.
Renowned for its remarkable water clarity the wild and
scenic Elk River is perhaps the healthiest habitat in the lower
48 States for anadromous fish. This watershed is a place like
no other. In my years as a forester I've seen a lot of places.
As timber manager for Western States Plywood Cooperative my
responsibilities were bidding on Siskiyou National Forest
timber sales and then supervising the road construction and
logging activities that followed. One notorious sale was Copper
Mountain in the upper Elk River watershed. Walking among huge
Douglas fir and Port Orford cedar trees in the silence of the
mossy forest along the North Fork of Elk River, I felt a quick
pang of remorse. But my professional training quickly
suppressed it and I began counting how many No. 2 peelers were
there.
Picturing the grins on the faces of the mill workers when
they saw these huge Doug fir logs going through the lathe and
the smiles on the faces of the Japanese log buyers when the
priceless Port Orford cedar was safely in the holds of their
ships, right off things went array. Even before the logging
took place there were landslides. Then a large culvert washed
out sending thousands of cubic yards of mud and debris directly
into the North Fork.
One afternoon when the logging crew was yarding logs in
unit six, a windstorm came in and blew down the entire buffer
we had left along the river. I stood in awe as 18 acres of
enormous old growth trees crashed to the ground like so many
pick up sticks. The following year several more acres of unit
six slid straight down into the North Fork of Elk River.
The reason that Elk River was the last south coast
watershed to be logged became obvious. Not only was it the most
dangerous and the most expensive watershed to work in, more
often than not serious ecological damage resulted from building
roads and logging in this extremely steep, rugged, unstable
country. Indiscriminate incursions notwithstanding, Elk River
remains one of the most intact, low elevation, temperate rain
forests in the world.
Although the entire area has been off limits to logging for
the past 13 years there will inevitably be continued attempts
to go back after the North Fork's timber. Each furtive attempt
further damaging and eventually irreparably destroying her
world class salmon fishery. The only way to really protect this
unique, extremely important area for perpetuity is by awarding
it Congressional protection as wilderness.
The Copper Salmon Wilderness Proposal started locally from
the ground up. Our rural community is united in support of
wilderness designation for the Copper Salmon area. This is why
Mayor Auborn and I traveled across the country from shore to
shore to explain to you in plain words that the ecology and the
economy of our remote fishing community are deeply
interconnected. Our community depends on the health of Elk
River watershed and the world class fishery provided by the
North Fork of Elk River.
From retirees to schoolchildren, all facets of our coastal
community support wilderness designation for the Copper Salmon
area. Church groups, business leaders, fisherman, artists and
thousands of visitors who travel great distances to smell the
sea air and glimpse the areas non-paralleled beauty join me in
directing and urging you to release us from the old boom and
bust cycle of resource extraction and to make our vision of
economic stability a reality by establishing the Copper Salmon
Wilderness Area.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rogers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jim Rogers, Consulting Forester, Friends of Elk
River, Port Orford, OR
My name is Jim Rogers. I'm a Consulting Forester from Port Orford,
Oregon. I would like thank Chairman Wyden for introducing the Copper
Salmon Wilderness Act and the Senators on this Subcommittee for the
opportunity to testify today.
Port Orford is located along a remote stretch of Highway 101 known
as America's Wild Rivers Coast--and our weather is every bit as wild as
our rivers.
I'm here from Curry County on behalf of Friends of Elk River, Trout
Unlimited, Campaign for America's Wilderness, a coalition of sportsmen,
and a Who's Who list of national, State, and local public officials and
environmental organizations, who all ask you to protect Elk River--and
44 miles of crystalline headwater streams--by designating the 13,700
acre Copper Salmon Wilderness Area.
In our watershed, ancient stands of Port-Orford-cedar, Douglas-fir
and Western hemlock withstand hurricane-force winds and more than 120
inches of annual rainfall. Several endangered species including marbled
murrelets, spotted owls, bald eagles and coho salmon find refuge here.
Elk River provides spawning and rearing grounds for winter steelhead
and big 40 to 50 pound Chinook salmon. Black bear, mountain lions, and
elusive ringtail cats still wander the precipitous mountains lush with
wild rhododendrons and massive old-growth trees--trees that sometimes
grow 300 feet tall and 10 feet in diameter.
Renowned for its remarkable water clarity, the Wild & Scenic Elk
River is perhaps the healthiest habitat in the lower 48 states for
anadromous fish. This watershed is a place like no other, and in my
years as a forester I've seen a lot of places.
Graduating from the SUNY College of Forestry at Syracuse, New York,
in 1964, I began my professional forestry career working for
Weyerhaeuser in Aberdeen, Washington. Next I joined the U.S. Forest
Service where my job was to lay out and appraise timber sales. Four
years later I became the Timber Manager for Western States Plywood
Cooperative and moved my family to Port Orford. It's here that my life
started taking unexpected twists and turns.
As timber manager for Western States Plywood Cooperative, my
responsibilities were bidding on Siskiyou National Forest timber sales
and then supervising the road construction and logging activities that
followed. One notorious sale was the Copper Mountain Timber Sale in the
upper Elk River watershed. Walking among huge Douglas-fir and Port-
Orford-cedar trees in the silence of the mossy forest along the North
Fork of Elk River, I felt a quick pang of remorse; but my professional
training quickly suppressed it and I began counting how many #2 Peelers
there were, picturing the grins on the faces of the mill workers when
they saw these huge Doug-fir logs going through the lathe, and the
smiles on the faces of the Japanese log buyers when the priceless Port-
Orford-cedar was safely in the holds of their ships.
Right off, things went awry. Even before the logging took place
there were landslides, and then a large culvert washed out sending
thousands of cubic yards of mud and debris directly into the North
Fork. One afternoon when the logging crew was yarding the logs in Unit
6, a windstorm came in and blew down the entire buffer we'd left along
the river. I stood in awe as 18 acres of enormous old-growth trees
crashed to the ground like so many pick-up sticks. The following year
several more acres of Unit 6 slid straight down into the North Fork of
Elk River.
Today the abandoned spur roads that led to these harvest units and
to other similar clearcuts, haven't been passable in decades, and the
fully re-grown plantations are too steep to walk on, not to mention
manage using conventional methods.
However, as a result of road construction done 40 years ago, deep
holes in the lower reaches of Elk River are still filling in with every
winter storm. Road failures dump literally tons of rocks into the
river; this coarse sediment fills the deep holes where the trophy-size
salmon hide from view in the cold mountain water. Washouts also dump
fine sediment into the streams, smothering salmon eggs and destroying
the low-gradient productive flats that scientists consider barometers
of watershed health.
The reason that Elk River was the last south coast watershed to be
logged became obvious. Not only was it the most dangerous and the most
expensive watershed to work in--more often than not--serious ecological
damage resulted from building roads and logging in this extremely
steep, rough, unstable country.
Finally, after seven years with Western Sates Plywood, I felt I had
no choice but to disagree with my timber industry colleagues. I began
using my on-the-ground experience and professional knowledge to save
the most valuable fishery streams in the Elk River watershed. My new
colleagues turned out to be fish biologists and fishermen. Working from
my cabin in a voluntary capacity, I shaped a broad coalition of diverse
groups including the League of Women Voters, the Longshoremen's Union,
the Independent Troll Fishermen of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of
Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians, and others. This group--the
first of its kind--successfully lobbied for permanent protection of the
fisheries of the middle stretches of the Elk and Sixes Rivers. In 1984,
after 10 years of effort, we saw the 17,000 acre Grassy Knob Wilderness
Area established. Grassy Knob Wilderness was the first Wilderness Area
in our Nation created expressly to protect fish.
The following year, the Forest Service undertook an extensive study
of the entire watershed. Among many things, they discovered that the
most productive fish spawning tributary was the North Fork of Elk
River, an area that was not included in the Grassy Knob Wilderness.
Astonishingly, despite this knowledge, the Siskiyou Forest Plan called
for logging and roading two-thirds of the North Fork drainage.
Friends of Elk River monitored those USFS timber sales and we
challenged in court any sales that were unlawful; but our hands were
tied when the Section 318 Rider and the Salvage Rider exempted all
sales from environmental appeals. There was nothing we could do as
loggers and road builders went back into the North Fork and clearcut
healthy old-growth trees that were holding together the extremely steep
mountainsides in the Elk River watershed. When it came time to cut
those units, even one of the timber buyers tried to find a way out of
logging the resurrected sale.
Indiscriminate incursions notwithstanding, Elk River watershed
remains one of the most intact low-elevation temperate rain forests in
the world. Although the entire area has been off-limits to logging for
the past 13 years, there will inevitably be continued attempts to go
back after the North Fork's timber, each furtive attempt further
damaging and eventually irreparably destroying our world-class salmon
fishery. The only way to really protect this unique, extremely
important area for perpetuity is by awarding it Congressional
protection as Wilderness.
There is no matrix in Copper Salmon. However, as was the case with
the Grassy Knob Wilderness Area, a few old timber plantations--the
legacy of imprudent management that took place several decades ago--
remain inside the Copper Salmon Wilderness. Including these re-grown
plantations and using main roads as the Copper Salmon Wilderness Area
boundary, circumvents high-priced land surveying and mapping expenses.
It's the no-cost, sensible way to go that best safeguards the North
Fork's ecosystem and watershed values. All of the areas within the
proposed Copper-Salmon Wilderness area meet the criteria of the
Wilderness Act.
According to ecologist Dr. Christopher Frissell, ``The Copper
Salmon area is now of high value for regional biodiversity protection
and scientific research due to its recent history of relatively limited
human alteration.'' Dr. Frissell conducted a detailed analysis of the
ecological values of the Copper Salmon area. His report is attached to
this testimony.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Report has been retained in subcommittee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Copper Salmon Wilderness proposal started locally, from the
ground up. Our rural community is united in support of wilderness
designation for the Copper Salmon area. This is why Mayor Auborn and I
traveled across the country--from shore to shore--to explain to you in
plain words, that the ecology and the economy of our remote fishing
community are deeply interconnected. Our community depends on the
health of Elk River watershed and the world-class fishery provided by
the North Fork of Elk River. We also know that just as our economic
wellbeing is bound to our wild rivers and to our forested watersheds,
our wellbeing is also dependant on the clean air and clear water that
these forests provide.
From retirees to schoolchildren, all facets of our coastal
community support wilderness designation for the Copper Salmon area.
Church groups, business leaders, fishermen, artists, and thousands of
visitors who travel great distances to smell the sea air and glimpse
the area's unparalleled beauty, join me in urging you to release us
from the old boom and bust cycle of resource extraction, and to make
our vision of economic stability a reality by establishing the Copper
Salmon Wilderness Area.
Please protect this gem.
Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to speak before your
committee.
Senator Wyden. The firm of Auborn and Rogers has
represented the Oregon coast very well today. We thank you
both, excellent presentations and just have a couple of
questions.
Mayor, this is a unique coalition. You just don't see this
kind of breadth of support very often. Tell me, if you would,
why you think that such a remarkable group that certainly
doesn't agree on everything has come together, has coalesced
this way?
Mr. Auborn. I think it really started with the
environmental groups and things. But it's very unusual and
things for them to get the fishing community to support it and
things. But the fishing community is really the only industry
that we have left. They realize how important the Elk River run
of salmon is to their economy and things and once that happened
and things.
We also see support from the business community because our
business community is becoming more and more dependent upon
tourism. Tourism, hunting and fishing in areas like on the Elk
River and things are again, very attractive and things for our
area. So people have seen the light.
Senator Wyden. I think your comments about the fishing
industry really put your finger on it because I was struck on
my last couple of trips. You know people hear Copper Salmon,
you know, wilderness. So all automatically are weep hitting
wilderness against people who are concerned about economics and
the well being of a community, as you point out, that has been
hard hit economically. The involvement of the fishing industry
I think has been a big factor in pulling together that
coalition.
That's my sense in effect of what's to come because I think
more and more we're going to see, you know, fishing interest,
Chamber of Commerces, environmentalists and others come
together and I think you've laid it out very well. Just thank
you for your support.
Let me ask you a couple of questions, Mr. Rogers, about
what we've heard earlier in terms of the Forest Service. Now
the Forest Service folks have been a little concerned about
some of the old plantations that are included in the proposal.
My sense is you may be one of the people who really knows what
these, you know, plantations look like and if you could give us
a sense of what condition they're in and then as a forester,
your thoughts about what kind of management would be
appropriate for those plantations.
Mr. Rogers. Essentially the Elk River is extremely steep
and as I mentioned before that was really the last place we
went into. I've got a few pictures here to show you what some
of these old plantations look like. This is on Butler Mountain,
large, clear cut. This is a stump. I don't know if you can see
it, the roots of the stump. The soil was here, now it's down
here. About three feet below the stump that whole hillside has
all eroded away.
Here's another picture that shows you how steep this
country is. We used to--us loggers always referred to it as
steeper than the back of God's head. Those who are a little
more reverent called it steeper than a cow's face. But this is
a slope in excess of 100 percent.
I met with the Forest Service about a week ago to look at
some of these plantations to see if we could find some common
ground. So we just parked along the roads about. Let's just
walk down here and see what it looks like. We walked down about
300 feet, came to a landslide that had been there for a number
of years. I said, you know, if you go in here and you start
logging, you're yarding logs through these places again, you're
going to tear the soil loose again and it's going to continue
to erode. The ranger said, oh, well, we would never go back
into a place like this. We would just leave it alone. I said
well, about 80 to 90 percent of what we're talking about is
land like this.
This is land in excess of 80 percent slope. That's pretty
much the line that if you cross it you get significant erosion.
I usually figure you shouldn't log anything steeper than 70
percent and most of this is 80 to 110 percent.
Senator Wyden. Now the Forest Service also noted, Mr.
Rogers that there were some old roads included in the proposal.
What's your sense about how drivable these roads are and how
much decommissioning work do you think would be necessary up
there?
Mr. Rogers. Most of the roads are not drivable any more.
This is one of the roads. I don't know if you can see. This is
a landslide that came off the hill and covered this road about
ten feet deep or so.
Most of the roads, this is pretty typical of what they look
like. They're mostly overgrown with trees and brush. There's
one road that--I've checked them all out in the past year. One
road I was able to drive down a year ago, but I was probably
the last one who drove down it. I only drove it until I came to
trees across the road. But it was totally overgrown with tree
branches from the sides of the road and it just kind of pushed
through them.
So, essentially these roads are closed and there's no
interest in driving out them. What I'm concerned about if they
were to decommission these roads is that they'd have to open
them back up again and go in there and do a lot more soil
disturbance. If you put a barricade of some sort at the
beginning of the road, that makes it a challenge for the ATV
people to try to get around that barricade. Now they don't have
any interest in it because there's no way they can drive down
it and it would take a lot of work to be able to open a road
enough for any kind of vehicle.
Senator Wyden. We will work closely with you and the Forest
Service folks and get this addressed to everybody's
satisfaction.
Now they also cite fire fighter safety the issue of
adjusting boundaries. Give us a sense of what you think is the
fire danger in the coastal rain forest.
Mr. Rogers. This area gets between 120 inches at the low
end to 160 inches of rain at the upper end a year. It's very
wet. It would be hard to a fire to start anywhere inside it,
like a lightning caused fire. The most likely place where fires
would start is right along the edge of the road where somebody
might throw out burning material.
When we talked to the Forest Service last week we discussed
that. We felt that 100 foot strip from the edge of the road
should be left out of the wilderness so that that could be
managed to reduce fire hazard by thinning trees, cutting the
limbs off. So you don't have the ladders and maybe removing
dead material along the edge of the road. As far as hazard to
fire fighters it wouldn't really be different whether it was
wilderness or LSR.
Senator Wyden. Well, gentlemen I don't have any further,
further questions. My sense is you've got a long flight ahead
of you. I know what that trek is like. I just want to leave you
with one thought.
I think what you all have done on the Oregon coast in this
debate about Copper Salmon which certainly has gone on for a
long time, is a textbook case for how a community can come
together on a major natural resources issue. I think we all
know what happens so often on these kinds of issues is people
start often in adversarial way and the decibel level goes up
from there. In other words, having started pretty polarized,
then it gets increasingly worse. Very often ends up in some
sort of Federal courthouse, particularly as it relates to these
issues when you're talking about Federal policy.
What you all said from the very beginning as it related to
this debate is you wanted to do something that made sense for
the whole community. You wanted to do something that made sense
for the environment, something that made sense for fishing.
That the Chamber of Commerce could rally behind. That
environmentalists could rally behind. In the process you've
done an awful lot of good for our State and given us, at least
on this subcommittee, a real model.
So, I want to congratulate you. I know it has been a long,
long journey. We are not done yet, but to have our delegation
united with the involvement of Senator Smith and your
Congressman, Congressman DeFazio and the cooperative attitude
of the Forest Service that we heard demonstrated again this
afternoon. I think we can get this job done.
So, Godspeed. It's a long trip home, but your hard work is
really paying off. It's paying off for the people of the Oregon
coast. I think it's paying off for our country because you're
giving us a good model of how we ought to come together in
terms of natural resources.
So, I always like to let our witnesses have the last word.
If you'd like to add anything further we'll hear that and then
we'll send you on your way.
Mayor, Mr. Rogers, anything you want to add?
Mr. Auborn. I think we really want to thank you for doing
this. It really shows that our political process works and
things. You've visited Port Orford and Curry County on several
times. You've heard the message. It really pleases us to see
some action on it. So thank you again.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mayor.
Mr. Rogers.
Mr. Rogers. I'd like to thank you very much for your kind
words. I'm not sure we're totally deserving of them but I very
much appreciate it. Port Orford is probably the most
cantankerous town in all of Oregon and to find anything that
everyone agrees on is----
Senator Wyden. Your point about verbal inflation tends to
be generally true in the U.S. Senate but not in your case. You
all really do deserve it for all this cooperation. So we thank
you. With that the subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:30 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service,
Washington, DC, October 9, 2007.
Hon. Ron Wyden,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Wyden. Enclosed please find the responses to the
questions for the record submitted by the Subcommittee on Public Lands
and Forests of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
from the September 20, 2007, hearing.
If you have any additional questions, please contact Forest Service
Legislative Affairs specialist Teri Cleeland at 202-205-1036.
Sincerely,
Joel Holtrop,
Deputy Chief.
Responses to Questions From Senator Domenici, on S. 1025
Question 1. I've been told that Senator Craig's staff utilized the
Forest Service for an informal drafting service on this legislation.
Thus, I find it odd that you are now expressing concerns about the
mechanics of the correction to the Wilderness Boundary. Can you help us
understand how or why the Forest Service changed its mind after
providing the drafting service?
Answer. The Small Tracts Act (STA) has a size limitation of 10
acres. The legislation would provide an exception to the STA for
approximately 10.2 acres. However, the current acreage being considered
for direct exchange or sale is approximately 30 acres. The agency
cannot support this large of a variance from the STA size limitation.
Question 2. Mr. Holtrop, in your testimony on S. 1802 you said:
``the Department would prefer to use a different land adjustment
authority than the Small Tracts Act, which is not appropriate to this
situation.'' Can you tell me exactly what the alternative land
adjustment authority it is that you would like to have included in the
legislation and how that authority works?
Answer. The Forest Service has only one suitable administrative
option in this case for resolving the Ranch's unauthorized
improvements, i.e., our general exchange authority, pursuant to the
General Exchange Act of 1922. We would like to work with the committee
and sponsor to discuss what is the best solution under the current
circumstances; e.g., the legislation could provide for a special one-
time sale authority of the encumbered lands.
Question 3. Could you also provide me an estimate of the time it
would take the Forest Service to complete the work under this
alternative process once this bill is signed into law?
Answer. If this bill becomes law, the wilderness boundary
adjustment could proceed immediately. The time necessary to execute an
administrative land exchange would be approximately 1.5 to 3 years, if
no significant issues or obstacles arose. Exchanges are more complex
than sales for a number of reasons, including the requirement for an
exchange that the values of the federal and non-federal lands be
equalized.
Responses to Questions From Senator Domenici, on S. 2034
Question 4. In your testimony on S. 2034, you said: ``The
Department would like to work with the bill's sponsor and the committee
to offset the wilderness boundary inward along perimeter roads to
implement planned treatments within a reasonable distance of the road,
provide for routine road maintenance, and to decrease the likelihood of
incompatible motorized use in wilderness.'' Many wilderness bills
passed by Congress include automatic setbacks of 50, 100 or 200 feet
along roads that abut the proposed wilderness boundary. Are you
suggesting a greater set-back in this instance? If so, how large of set
back are you recommending?
Answer. No. We believe we could accomplish our road maintenance
objectives and protect the public from Danger Trees within a 300 foot
setback from the perimeter roads.
Question 5. I also note your concern about old harvest units that
have been proposed for wilderness that the Agency would like to
continue to manage to improve habitat conditions for fish and wildlife,
reduce effects from insects and disease, and provide defensible space
for firefighters in the event of a wildfire. Given the steep nature of
the area and the sensitive soils, I assume that you will need to
utilize a full-suspension logging system to manage these areas. How
much of an additional buffer beyond the current boundaries of these old
harvest areas will you need to provide adequate tail-holds to
accomplish the management you're talking about?
Answer. Any setback from the roads would have to contain all forest
restoration activities, including any logging system. We are not
contemplating that entire plantations along roadways would be managed,
because we would ask for a uniform setback.
______
[Responses to the following questions were not received at
the time the hearing went to press:]
Question for Michael Nedd From Senator Domenici, on S. 1143
Question 1. Director Nedd, in your testimony on S. 1143 you said:
``The Department would like the opportunity to work with Senator Nelson
and the committee on some technical amendments including a correct map
reference and other minor issues.'' Could you take several minutes to
tell us exactly what your concerns are and how the Department would
propose the legislation be modified to address your areas of concern?
Question for Michael Nedd From Senator Murkowski, on S. 1143
Question 2. Mr. Nedd, you indicated in your testimony that the
Department of the Interior would submit a proposed amendment to S.1433.
If the Department has not already done so, kindly submit the proposed
amendment at this time.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Statement of Gary D. Preszler, Commissioner and Secretary, North Dakota
Board of University and School Lands, on S. 1740
Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the North Dakota Board of University and
School Lands (Board), I appreciate the opportunity to submit written
testimony in support of S. 1740, and I ask that this written testimony
be included in the hearing record.
S. 1740 was introduced by Senators Conrad and Dorgan on behalf of
the Board, the North Dakota State Legislature, and the people of North
Dakota.
As provided by the North Dakota Constitution, the Board is made up
of the Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Superintendent
of Public instruction, and the State Treasurer. The Board is
responsible for managing the lands and financial assets (permanent
trusts) that were granted to the State of North Dakota by the Federal
Government at statehood through the Act of February 22, 1889 (commonly
known as the Enabling Act) and the Act of July 2, 1862 (commonly known
as the ``First Morrill Act''). The primary beneficiary of the permanent
trusts under the Board's control is the common schools (K-12
education); however, these trusts also benefit various institutions of
higher education, the state veteran's home, state hospital and a number
of other governmental entitles.
The purpose of S. 1740 is to:
Update the Enabling Act and First Morrill Act for North
Dakota;
Update those Acts to reflect the wishes of the people of
North Dakota; and,
Give the Land Board the ability to better invest the trust
funds by using recognized modern investment principles.
The Enabling Act and the First Morrill Act currently restrict the
way these trust funds can be managed by limiting distributions to the
``interest and income'' generated by the trusts each year. S. 1740 will
change the way trust distributions are determined. Current methodology
is based on the interest and income earned by the trust funds (terms
which today are sometimes difficult to define due to the types of
investment structures and accounting practices). The new method is
based on the value of the financial assets in the trust funds, and the
growth of those assets over time.
When trust assets were made up of primarily land, bonds, and loans,
it made sense to distribute only the interest and income generated by
these assets. This is the way most trusts and endowments were managed
100 years ago. North Dakota's permanent trusts financial assets are now
approaching $1 billion, with the trust funds consisting of a diverse
portfolio of stocks, bonds, minerals interests, surface lands, and
other assets. Investment practices have changed substantially over the
past 50 years, as have financial markets. S. 1740 recognizes these
changes and provides the Board with the means to manage the trust funds
in a way that meets the best practices for endowments and permanent
funds for the 21st century.
The Board first sought approval for the changes from the North
Dakota Legislature. House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) No. 3037 was
passed by the North Dakota House by a vote of 84-1 and passed by the
North Dakota Senate by a vote of 41-4. On November 7, 2006, the people
of North Dakota approved the constitutional changes (Constitutional
Measure No. 1) by a vote of 67% to 33%. The vote indicates strong
support for this measure from both the government and people of North
Dakota.
It is important to note that S. 1740 only changes the Enabling Act
and First Morrill Act for North Dakota. It does not have any impact on
South Dakota, Montana or Washington, the other three states that
achieved statehood through the Act of February 22, 1889. However, it is
important to also note that at least two other states received
Congressional approval to change similar Acts; New Mexico in 1997, and
Idaho earlier in 2007.
In summary, by bringing the management of the permanent trusts in
line with universally-adopted investment principles and practices of
the largest endowments and trusts in the nation, passage of S. 1740
should help ensure higher and more reliable distributions. It would
allow the Board to manage the trusts more efficiently and effectively,
better serving the people of North Dakota for generations to come.
______
Statement of American Forest Resource Council, on S. 2034
Thank you for the opportunity to submit the American Forest
Resource Council's (AFRC) views on S. 2034, the Copper Salmon
Wilderness Act.
AFRC represents nearly 90 forest product manufacturers and forest
land owners in the west and the majority of the mill capacity in the
Pacific Northwest. These companies generate thousands of quality jobs
across the region and are often among the largest private employers in
rural communities. AFRC members are almost entirely private companies--
many of them family owned--that range from small to very large
operations.
AFRC believes in the multiple use mandate and sustainable
management of our national forests. This includes supporting wilderness
designations where areas meet the original intent of the 1964
Wilderness Act. It also means supporting active management where
appropriate. We are committed to being part of the solution to restore
our public forests while supplying American's with quality wood
products and renewable biomass energy.
During the week of September 24, AFRC staff had the opportunity to
visit the proposed area on the ground, review Forest Service maps and
aerial photos. This testimony and the attached document are based on
what we know about the area, observed on the ground and uncovered by
reviewing information provided by the Forest Service.
The Copper Salmon area is known as a world class fishery, which is
why some support its designation as wilderness to ``preserve'' and
``protect'' the area. Many times forest management--whether it be
thinning, road restoration, soil stabilization, in-stream habitat
improvements, etc.--is needed to ensure high-quality fish and wildlife
habitat.
Wilderness designation, however, would prohibit this type of
restoration and severely limits land managers. This seems contrary to
the idea of ``protecting'' the Copper Salmon. Instead of wilderness,
the more appropriate approach would allow for responsible management
now and in the future to ensure the area remains a world-class fishery.
While AFRC is not advocating for traditional timber management in this
area, the fact of the matter is timber harvests have been conducted on
about one-fifth of the entire proposed wilderness and it remains an
excellent fishery. Furthermore, with roughly 1,000 acres of overstocked
Douglas fir plantations, some active management is needed to address
forest health while maintaining or improving fish and wildlife habitat.
We found that the Copper Salmon wilderness proposal contains 11.8
miles of system roads, 92 culverts, an unknown amount of roads no
longer identified as system roads, old mining claims, approximately
2,600 acres of previously harvested stands (19% of the total acreage)
and about 1,000 acres of overstocked Douglas fir plantations. This
certainly does not conform to the Wilderness Act principles of
``untrammeled by man'' or ``primeval.'' To the contrary, these areas
have been substantially influenced by humans. Proponents of this and
similar legislation generally oppose active management in unroaded
areas while only supporting limited management in already-roaded areas.
Yet with this proposal they are arguing that roaded areas can be
designated as ``wilderness.'' This is an inconsistent position and this
policy should not be accepted by Congress. Roads, like other
significant human structures, should be excluded from wilderness
designations.
The Forest Service has indicated that if this bill became law, the
Agency would likely ``restore'' roads and remove culverts to protect
water quality. Due to numerous culverts and the permanent nature of the
roads, this would cost the Agency an estimated $300,000 to complete
using heavy equipment, such as an excavator. Realistically, the Forest
Service would likely lack the money and resources to completely
decommission roads and return the area to that resembling
``wilderness,'' especially if it has to be accomplished by non-
motorized means. At a time when the Forest Service budget is static or
declining and fire suppression consumes nearly half of the budget, it
is unrealistic to place this financial burden on the already cash-
strapped agency. It is also irresponsible to designate this area as
wilderness--precluding much-needed road or forest restoration in the
future--with the knowledge that this could harm the fishery.
With all of that said, AFRC does recognize certain areas within the
wilderness proposal contain old stands of Port Orford cedar that should
remain intact and that the area as a whole is an excellent fishery that
should be conserved. At the very least, however, we recommend removing
areas containing roads, previously harvested stands and plantations
from the wilderness proposal. This would ensure land managers the
ability to appropriately manage the area today and in the future to
enhance and protect the fishery.
Thank you again for the opportunity to submit testimony on this
legislation.
______
Port Orford Ocean Resource Team,
Port Orford, OR, September 12, 2007.
Mayor James Auborn,
City of Port Orford, OR.
Dear Mayor Auborn: We are pleased to write this letter in support
of the Copper-Salmon Wilderness legislation recently introduced by
Senator Ron Wyden and Representative Peter DeFazio.
Establishing 13.700 acres in the southern Oregon Rogue River-
Siskiyou National Forest as wilderness is an important step to protect
the upper-watershed of the Elk River. This legislation will help
protect critical spawning and rearing habitat for Elk River salmon and
steelhead.
Our organization works closely with the commercial fishermen who
harvest fish each year near the mouth of the Elk River. The fishery
generates dollars that support fishing families and our community.
Keeping the river healthy and productive is important to the people who
live at Port Orford.
Our great appreciation goes out to Senator Wyden and Representative
DeFazio for supporting our community by introducing this important
legislation.
Sincerely,
Aaron Longton,
President.
______
Chamber of Commerce,
Port Orford & North Curry County,
Port Orford, OR, September 17, 2007.
Hon. Ron Wyden,
Chairman, Public Lands & Forests Subcommittee.
The Port Orford & North Curry County Chamber (P.O.N.C.C.C.C.) would
like to thank you and Representative Defazio for your actions and
support leading to the introduction of the Copper Salmon Wilderness
Bill. The P.O.N.C.C.C.C. business community has been in support of this
legislation since 2003 when a vote from the membership was taken with
26 in favor and 3 against. On September 10th, 2007 the P.O.N.C.C.C.C.
Board of Directors met for our regular scheduled meeting and voted in
support of the Copper Salmon Wilderness Bill.
As you know, the Elk River is the only intact watershed on the
Southern Oregon Coast. The Elk River is also one of the most productive
salmon habitats in the lower 48 States according to a 1985 U.S. Forest
Service Biologist and Geologist study. Fishermen from all over the
country come here to fish for salmon in the waters of the Elk River.
This brings a vital economic boost during the lull in our tourism
driven economy. Restaurants, Motels, R.V. Parks, Grocery Stores,
Hardware Stores, Art Galleries, Advertisers and Fishing Guides benefit
from this eco-based winter tourist industry. There is not a business in
the community that does not receive a beneficial dollar during the
hardest months of their economic year.
The Port Orford & North Curry County Chamber of Commerce
understands the economic and eco-tourism aspects that are vital to our
community now and for years to come. The Port Orford & North Curry
County Chamber of Commerce would like to thank you again for your
support of the Copper Salmon Wilderness Bill and hope that you continue
your efforts towards the passing of this legislation that is so
important to our community.
Very Respectfully,
David B. Smith,
President.
______
Curry County,
Gold Beach, OR, September 18, 2007.
Hon. Ron Wyden,
Chair, U.S. Senate Subcommittee,Public Lands and Forests, Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Dear Senator Wyden: Thank you for introducing S. 2034 The Copper
Salmon Wilderness Act. As you know this forest is the headwaters to the
Elk River which is a major fish bearing stream in northern Curry
County, Oregon. Fishing is a very important to the Curry County
economy. This area deserves wilderness consideration to preserve its
beauty and the fish runs for generations to come. I fully support this
designation and S .2034.
Sincerely,
Lucie La Bonte,
Commissioner.
______
Statement of Erik Fernandez, Wilderness Coordinator, Oregon Wild,
on S. 2034
Oregon Wild, formerly Oregon Natural Resources Council, strongly
supports the Copper Salmon Wilderness Act, S 2034. The Wilderness and
Wild and Scenic Rivers protections contained within this legislation
are long overdue for this unique and spectacular area.
Located in Southwest Oregon, the Elk River watershed that is the
focus of the Copper Salmon legislation is home to the healthiest run of
wild salmon for a river of its size in the lower 48 states. With wild
salmon stocks in decline throughout Oregon and the Northwest, it is
critical that we protect those that are still thriving. The proposed
legislation would do just that by designating 13,700 acres of
Wilderness and 9.3 miles of the North and South Fork of the Elk River
as Wild and Scenic Rivers.
Oregon Wild commends Senators Ron Wyden and Senator Smith for their
hard work in developing legislation to protect this critically
important area. The local economy, anglers, recreational users of the
river and wildlife will all benefit from this important legislation.
Copper Salmon is also home to some of the last stands of healthy
Port Orford cedar, Oregon's most endangered tree. Maintaining areas in
their primitive state without vehicular access is the best preventative
medicine to keep these stands of Port Orford cedar intact and healthy.
The disease that infects the trees is a spore that travels on the
wheels of vehicles, and logging roads and other development have
hastened its spread.
Copper Salmon Wilderness legislation also helps address a major
imbalance in protection of pristine lands in the Pacific Northwest.
Currently only 3.7% of Oregon is permanently protected as Wilderness,
an absurdly low number, especially when compared to neighboring states
(WA: 10%, CA: 14%).
culverts
There are culverts on old roads in the area proposed for
Wilderness. The primary concern with culverts is minimizing any
disturbance to water quality. The roads with the culverts in question
are often over-grown with trees growing in the road. Even at the time
of construction these were low-grade logging roads. Based on our
experience with forests of this type, more damage would be done by
going into the area and removing the culverts than by allowing for
natural recovery of the landscape. Due to the climate of this area, the
forest is already reclaiming these roads. Decommissioning the culverts
would actually require more time and money to be spent re-building the
roads in order to reach them. The soil and watershed disturbance that
would result from such development would likely outweigh the potential
benefit of removing the culverts.
If at some point in the future the USFS determines there are
culverts where a more active approach is needed, the minimum tools
analysis under the Wilderness Act allows them a simple and efficient
way to gain authority to use mechanized equipment if necessary and
remove them. We would support report language that clarified the intent
of the Wilderness Act to allow for mechanized machinery if ``necessary
to meet minimum requirements for the Administration of the area'' (as
stated in the Wilderness Act) in accordance with the existing minimum
tools policy. It is our understanding that this is no more than a
clarification of the Wilderness Act, not new policy.
roads
Currently there are 11 miles of classified roads in the Copper
Salmon Wilderness proposal. Of those roads, 9 miles are already closed,
and the remaining 2 miles are only accessible by high clearance
vehicle. While Wilderness designation is intended to protect areas
primarily influenced by nature, in some instances it makes sense to
include roads for management or watershed purposes. Congress has
included roads in countless Wilderness areas where it was deemed
appropriate, and we believe it is appropriate in this case.
plantations
The plantations within the proposed Wilderness are on extremely
steep slopes, in some cases 100% slope (45 degrees). Oregon Wild is
generally supportive of plantation thinning where it can be done in an
ecologically beneficial manner. In the Copper Salmon area the slopes
are steep enough that any thinning operation would cause more harm than
good. Disturbing the soils on the steep slopes would undoubtedly lead
to erosion and siltation of spawning gravel in the area's salmon
bearing streams. As with roads, over time nature will reclaim these
areas, and we therefore support their inclusion in the proposed
Wilderness. Color aerial photos taken in the year 2005 show that this
process is already well under way and the plantations are growing back
on their own now. Including these plantations allows for a more
manageable boundary for the Wilderness area which will in turn make it
easier for the public to know where the boundary is and easier for the
US Forest Service to police illegal activities (such as off road
vehicle use.) There is significant existing precedent for including
plantations in Wilderness areas where appropriate. In fact, the Grassy
Knob Wilderness, just west of Copper Salmon, encompasses a large
plantation for many of the same reasons.
In closing, we fully support the designation of the Copper Salmon
Wilderness and the Wild and Scenic River designation for the North and
South Fork of the Elk River.