[Senate Hearing 110-493]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-493
MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC LANDS 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
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 934 S. 2834
S. 2833 H.R. 1374
__________
APRIL 22, 2008
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
-----
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
44-367 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator From Wyoming................... 12
Bennett, Hon. Robert F., U.S. Senator From Utah.................. 5
Craig, Hon. Larry E., U.S. Senator From Idaho.................... 3
Crapo, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator From Idaho........................ 9
Eardley, James J., Chairman, Washington County Board of
Commissioners, St. George, UT.................................. 26
Gehrke, Craig, Regional Director, The Wilderness Society, Boise,
ID............................................................. 38
Gibson, Chad C., Owyhee Range Service, Wilder, ID................ 34
Holtrop, Joel, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, Forest
Service........................................................ 20
Jacobson, Julie, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals
Management, Department of the Interior......................... 13
Martinez, Hon. Mel, U.S. Senator From Florida.................... 2
Meadows, William H., President, The Wilderness Society........... 29
Wyden, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator From Oregon........................ 1
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 49
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 51
MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC LANDS BILLS
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 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. The subcommittee will come to order. Today
it is Earth Day. All over the country in communities small and
large, many Americans are gathering to talk about how to
protect our treasured land, air and water. So I think it is
very fitting that today the subcommittee is looking at
wilderness legislation.
I'm especially pleased to have two colleagues, Senator
Bennett and Senator Crapo, who are as hard working and as
thoughtful as any people I know. They are very much aware of
what a challenge it is to pull together all of the various
diverse groups that have strong feelings about wilderness
legislation. Having talked with both of them recently about
their legislation, I'm very much aware that both of our
colleagues have put in scores and scores of hours with all of
the people that have an interest in this issue. So I very much
thank them both for coming and just have a couple of remarks to
make before we go to Senator Craig and our colleagues.
S. 934 and H.R. 1374 are going to amend the Florida
National Forest Land Management Act of 2003 to authorize the
conveyance an additional tract of National Forest System Land.
S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008, Senator
Crapo's legislation, will be considered. S. 2834, the
Washington County Growth and Conservation Act of 2008, Senator
Bennett's legislation will be considered as well.
The Wilderness Act, of course, was passed by the
predecessor to this committee, the Interior and Insular Affairs
Committee. One of that committee's long time members, former
Senator Gaylord Nelson, not only was a co-sponsor of the
Wilderness Act, but was also the founder of the day that is
celebrated across the land, Earth Day. So it is, as I stated,
fitting that on Earth Day we hold this hearing to consider
important additions to the National Wilderness Preservation
System.
In my view both of the Wilderness bills that are before us
today have come a long, long way since they were first
introduced in the last Congress. The bills reflect the hard
work of their sponsors and the dedication of their
constituents. We're going to hear from the Department of the
Interior and the Forest Service in a few minutes on specific
concerns of the Administration has indicated they have with the
legislation. It is our intent after this hearing to continue to
work with both of our Senators and the Administration to
address the various issues that have come up.
One last thought as it relates to Earth Day and the
beautiful state of Oregon. Many who are here today know that
Senator Smith and I have worked together to put together
important wilderness legislation for our home state, the Lewis
and Clark Mount Hood Wilderness Act and the Copper Salmon
Wilderness Act. Both bills have had broad support and passed
this committee on a unanimous basis.
If I had my way we would be celebrating Earth Day by
passing those bills on the floor of the Senate. But I am
hopeful that they will pass in the near future. That the people
of Oregon and our various supporters and friends from around
the country can celebrate Earth Day next year with new
wilderness legislation in our wonderful state.
So at this point I want to recognize our colleague Senator
Craig from Idaho who has a great interest in these issues.
Senator Barrasso I think will be joining us at some point.
We'll recognize him for his opening statement, but when Senator
Craig has completed his statement we'll go right to our
witnesses.
[The prepared statement of Senator Martinez follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mel Martinez, U.S. Senator From Florida,
on S. 934
Mr. Chairman: Thank you for holding this important hearing today on
S.934, which will authorize a land conveyance in the Apalachicola
National Forest outside of Tallahassee, Florida to purchase more in-
holdings with the Forest. I have joined my colleague Senator Bill
Nelson in cosponsoring this legislation, and I commend Congressman
Allen Boyd and Congressman Ander Crenshaw for introducing the
bipartisan House companion bill HR 1374.
The legislation modifies the Florida National Forest Land
Management Act to allow the Forest Service to sell 114 acres of land
that has become completely surrounded by development and the expansion
and widening of Capitol Circle/US 319, which is a major transportation
and hurricane evacuation route. According to the Forest Service, this
tract of land has become increasingly expensive and difficult to manage
because of real estate and commercial development. As a result, the
land has lost its National Forest character and has become a burdensome
expense on management efforts for the Apalachicola National Forest. The
proceeds of selling this tract, called W-1979, will allow the Forest
Service to purchase 2,000 acres of sensitive land that will consolidate
holdings within the National Forest.
In addition to providing a large environmental benefit to the
Apalachicola Forest, the legislation will provide the Forest Service
with the authority and flexibility to improve and maintain
administrative facilities essential to the management of Florida's
forest land. By granting the Forest Service the ability to use the
proceeds of land sales from ``non-green'' parcels to be directed
towards basic operations and maintenance work makes common sense.
Considering the continuing funding difficulties we face in addressing
the basic up-keep of our vast public land, we should encourage some
creative thinking to meet these challenges.
It is my hope that we can quickly move this legislation through the
Committee. It is supported by the Forest Service, the City of
Tallahassee, Leon County government officials, as well as environmental
advocacy groups. This bill is a win-win for the Apalachicola National
Forest and the future economic development of Leon County, and I look
forward to working with the Committee to bring this legislation into
fruition.
Senator Craig.
STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY E. CRAIG, U.S. SENATOR
FROM IDAHO
Senator Craig. Ron, thank you for holding this hearing,
especially on the Owyhee initiative in a very timely way
because Senator Crapo has just introduced a re-draft of the
language that he put before the Senate last year. I think we
all appreciate that.
What you're going to hear today, and as you view the
picture, Ron, as you're going to see some of the most marvelous
high desert canyon lands in the Great Basin West. It is a
treasure of our State. We find it not only a phenomenal
resource for how we think of it in a traditional way, as it may
result to wilderness, but it has also been a resource in which
human kind has lived now for well over a century.
Some of the largest public land ranches in Idaho reside in
and around this territory. The air space has produced one of
the most effective training ranges for the U.S. Air Force in
the world which gives us the kind of efficiencies today we see
over Iraq and Afghanistan. So it is without question, a very
unique property, something that Idahoans and now, nationally,
the citizens of our country are obviously very excited and
pleased about.
As you know when it comes to wilderness designation and
because it may in one way or another prevent the kinds of
access that citizens and Idahoans have traditionally approached
their public lands with, I approach these designations with a
good deal of caution as I know my colleague, Senator Crapo has.
As for the last good number of years now he has worked in a
phenomenally diligent way with all of the stakeholders involved
to produce the legislation, S. 2833, that we have before us. I
can only give my colleague high praise because of his
phenomenal dedication to the issue of trying to get the
differences between all of the stakeholders resolved in a
compatible way to assure and sustain the long term, long time
use of our public lands as we have historically known them in
Idaho. That is public land grazing, large open western range
kind of States, not unlike your Eastern Oregon in the Steens
Mountain country and all of that country that you know so well.
This land is comparable and yet different in many ways.
So let's record the hours, but let's also recognize the
collaborative effort that has been underway here because that's
something that you and I are very proud of. The Craig-Wyden
bill over the years have produced literally thousands of
agreements between what once were warring or I should say
disagreeing parties on how we approach our resources and manage
them. You and I were able to resolve that by putting the right
incentives in place. Certainly the right incentive here is to
find common ground, as much common ground as you can for all of
the stakeholders.
Yet we know, I know, personally. Mike Crapo knows because
he's been involved in it from day one, sitting long hours at a
table in discussions where there has been a lot of compromises.
That all parties have given a little and given back a little
more than they might have otherwise wanted on the issue. So,
clearly those are concerns that I think he deserves, I mean
that Senator Crapo deserves an A for in his effort.
As I have approached this issue and stepped back, having my
staff engaged at all times with the Crapo staff and with all
the stakeholders, I've expressed very limited concerns. Ron,
you will not remember, but Idaho long remembers and a good many
out there remember that a few years ago I, along with Mike and
others, and Governor Andress at the time, created what is now
known as a world class training range for our airmen and women.
I, in no way, want to see that impaired, nor do I want its
activities to impair the natural resource base. It is unique.
When you fly this country, you fly Afghanistan. When you
fly this country, you fly Northern Iraq. If you don't believe
me, come to Mountain Home Air Force Base and visit with our
airmen who fly this country in their training and preparation.
As a result have achieved some of the highest delivery rates of
arsenal on the ground, on target, of any air force in the
history of our country. For that, we have another national
asset that adjoins this by property and boundary that I have
made sure and worked very closely to be quite confident we did
not impair now and into the future.
Second, there was an issue of land exchanges and buyouts.
That's key. That's very important in this legislation. I wanted
to make sure that all parties crossed the finish line at the
same time as you know, certainly, chairing this committee.
Oftentimes, when we pass re-designation of public lands,
those who are for the designation immediately win when the bill
is signed. Those who are by action of agreement termed to be
those compensated in the future, sometimes that compensation
never results. Why? Because they stand in line and compete with
other money needs that are critical to our Nation. While they
at the time may have thought of immediate compensation in many
instances, true in your State, and true in my State, in a few
instances that money never came.
A good number of years ago I approached the Appropriations
Committee to resolve an issue that is not unlike the Owyhee
initiative. The great Treasure Valley of Idaho, the Owyhee on
the southern, western border and just to the north up against
the foothills of Boise, other public lands now by the urban
growth in Idaho and in that area are getting, are running the
risk of being overused. We wanted to protect the foothills of
Boise for their scenic value and we did.
The parties came together. I got the money. I want to make
sure that project is completed before we launch a new project.
I've worked with Mike on that. I'm reasonably comfortable that
the language in this bill resolves that issue.
Clarification of land exchanges is a concern. I think that
we can resolve that as we work through the fine points of this.
Once this greets the public eye and once Mike has brought, as
he has, legislation before the committee. I will see if there
are fine tunings that need to be done. I would trust they can
be done in a way that keeps all stakeholders at the table.
I think that is phenomenally important because Mike,
Senator Crapo, and his and his staff's effort have struck a
very important agreement here that in the end, one Senator,
this Senator especially, but I know Senator Crapo more than
that would like to see become public policy. We think it would
be good for that corner of our State, which is bigger than
about half of the Eastern part of the United States. It would
be good for national policy, public land use policy also.
So, I'm pleased it's before the committee. I look forward
to the testimony. Thank you.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Senator Craig. What we'll do at
this point we'll hear from Senator Bennett. We'll hear from
Senator Crapo.
My understanding is our two colleagues would like to sit
with the committee after their testimony and the bipartisan
leadership of this committee is pleased to have both of you
participate. We know that you've put in a lot of time working
with folks at home on this. Please proceed as you wish. Why
don't we start with you Senator Bennett?
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT F. BENNETT, U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH
Senator Bennett. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We
appreciate your taking time out of your busy schedule to hold
this hearing. A lot of work has gone into S. 2834, the
Washington County Growth and Conservation Act.
I'm pleased to share with you the significant progress
that's been made since the last time I appeared before this
subcommittee when Senator Craig was chairing it. I think in the
intervening time period we have successfully struck a balance
between conservation and growth in Washington County. I'm
grateful for the opportunity to discuss this with you here
today. I will point out once again this has been a bipartisan
effort to a companion bill that has been introduced in the
House by the Congressman from Washington County, Congressman
Jim Matheson, a member of the democratic majority.
Wilderness in Utah is the subject that has been discussed
with a great deal of energy, shall we say, for over 30 years.
There's probably not much more to be said about it because in
that 30-year period everyone has made his or her views pretty
firmly known. It's time now to act rather than have a rehearsal
of these positions that have been taken.
I've been concerned with this for the 15 plus years I've
been here in the Senate. This particular process, begun by
Governor Arlene Walker that produces today's bill has been
going on for 5 years. So it's time to get it done.
This bill is the product of good faith collaboration. I say
that, I underscore that, good faith collaboration, with a
diverse group of interests. It has local support as well as
support from a number of national environmental groups.
I could not in all honesty refer to good faith negotiation
through the entire 30-year period I've discussed. There have
been times where people have come to the table and said why
we're here to negotiate in good faith then simply stated their
demands, stated the table, raised the decibel count of the
stating of their demands. Then stalked away saying well, we
were not dealt with in good faith.
In the experience that I have had working on this bill that
phenomenon has disappeared. I'm very grateful to the various
groups that have been willing to recognize that there has to be
some give and take. That has been true in this process. It has
been done in good faith.
Now no one is completely happy with this legislation.
Around here that may be a sign of a good bill. It provides us
with a comprehensive planning tool for public land in
Washington County. It's the Federal counterpart to a local
driven effort called Vision Dixie.
I have to explain that Washington County is in the south of
the State of Utah. Somewhere along its line in its history it
was known as Utah's Dixie. So Vision Dixie is the locally
driven planning effort that we will be hearing more about from
Commissioner Eardley from Washington County. But because of the
amount of public land in Washington County, local and Federal
efforts have to go hand in hand if it's going to work. That's
been the case here.
So as the bill's title indicates we address both growth and
conservation aspects of the land in Washington County. Let me
start with the conservation side. This bill will provide
permanent protection for hundreds of thousands of acres of some
of the Nation's most sensitive landscapes. As part of this
process I have flown over it in helicopter with the
representatives of both sides and it is absolutely spectacular.
We designate more than 264,000 acres of wilderness in
Washington County including more than 94 percent of all of the
existing BLM wilderness study areas. When this bill is enacted
more than 1 out of every 5 acres, or 20.5 percent of the land
in Washington County will be federally designated wilderness.
That compares to 3.5 percent now. So we have increased the
amount of wilderness by something between 6 and 7 times.
We established two national conservation areas in addition
that will permanently protect the desert tortoise and other at
risk and endangered species in the county. I want to stress
that no cross country travel is allowed in these areas. OHVs
cannot drive off road and will be allowed only on the roads
that the BLM identifies in the management plans that they will
prepare for the national conservation areas.
Utah has never had a wild and scenic river designated. In
this bill we designate more than 165 miles of wild and scenic
rivers. I think those things represent significant conservation
gains.
From the growth side, switching now from conservation to
growth, we've taken a small amount of the land in the county
representing only three-tenths of 1 percent of the total area
that existing land managers, that is people who are currently
involved in managing the land right now, have identified as
suitable for disposal. We have created a framework under which
this low priority and non-environmentally sensitive land will
be sold. Then use the vast majority of the proceeds to acquire
high priority biologically significant lands in the county.
Thus reconfiguring land ownership in a way that makes sense for
conservation values and I believe that enhances the Federal
estate.
Now, we do adopt the Nevada precedent in these land sales
of creating a system whereby the local government can benefit
from the land sales. I understand that there are some who are
not as enthusiastic about this portion of the bill as they
might be about others. We authorize the BLM to identify, in
addition to the acres they have already picked, up to an
additional 5,000 acres for disposal under the same framework.
I want to make it very clear. This does not mean the BLM
can't use other means to dispose of other lands in following
proper administrative procedures. It simply says that no more
than 5,000 acres can be disposed of under the framework that we
set up for the existing lands. The BLM will have to follow both
their planning process and conform with Vision Dixie
principles. So this is the way we have the Federal and the
local planning go hand in hand.
I want to make it clear once again. The 5,000 acre figure
is a cap and not a target. I do that because in the previous
bill we had 20,000 acres as a cap and some of the newspaper
stories said that this bill was disposing of 20,000 acres. That
bill was not, and to make it clear, that we do not intend to go
to that level. We put in the limit of 5,000.
There are a number of other provisions in the bill that are
important. But I see I am over my time. I would ask the
chairman to include my written remarks in the hearing record.
[The prepared statement of Senator Bennett follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert F. Bennett, U.S. Senator From Utah,
on S. 2834
CHAIRMAN WYDEN, and members of the subcommittee: I appreciate you
taking the time out of your busy schedules to hold this hearing on S.
2834, the Washington County Growth & Conservation Act of 2008. A lot of
work has gone into this bill, and I am pleased to share with you the
significant progress that we have made since the last time we met
before this subcommittee. I believe that we have successfully struck a
balance between conservation and growth in Washington County, and I am
thankful for the opportunity to discuss this today.
Mr. Chairman, this is the most important natural resources bill I
have introduced in my Senate career, and I am very proud of it. I have
worked for more than 15 years to try to bring all sides to the table to
finally resolve the wilderness question in my home state, and I believe
that this bill will provide the foundation to do that. This bill is the
product of good faith collaboration with a diverse group of interests,
and has local support as well as support within the national
environmental community. We have worked hard to get to this point.
These kinds of comprehensive bills do not work unless the people who
are affected the most--the people who live there--buy into the concept.
This has certainly not been an easy process. We have dealt with
people who threw out their list of demands and then walked away from
the table, only to complain later that they were left out of the
process. We have poured through thousands of public comments and sat in
countless meetings with stakeholders to get additional information. We
have spent hundreds of hours on the ground with local land managers,
city and county leaders, conservation groups, and many others who
believe that the lands in Washington County are special and want to
work toward a resolution. There has been a lot of give-and-take, and no
one is completely happy with everything in this legislation. Around
here, that is often the sign of a good bill. I want to commend the
people who have worked with me throughout this process in good faith,
actually seeking a resolution on this issue rather than a perpetuation
of the problem, and I am confident we can continue these efforts
throughout the state of Utah.
This legislation is necessary to help preserve the unique nature of
Washington County for generations to come. It is the federal
counterpart to Vision Dixie--the locally-driven planning effort that I
am sure Commissioner Eardley will discuss further in his testimony.
Because of the overwhelming amount of public land in Washington County,
local and federal planning must go hand-in-hand. These issues are so
important to Washington County residents that several thousand
participated in developing the Vision Dixie principles. These
principles helped us to set priorities in this legislation that will
guide future growth in Washington County. Vision Dixie never would have
happened without this land bill to begin the discussion.
Congressman Matheson and I have made significant changes to the
previous proposal. We have permanently protected large amounts of
biologically significant public land in Washington County, including
additional wilderness and a new national conservation area. We have
removed the corridor designations for the Lake Powell Pipeline Corridor
and the Northern Corridor that bisected the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve.
We have removed right-of-way authorizations in areas that are
environmentally sensitive, and have significantly limited the amount of
public land that is authorized for disposal. We have also required a
comprehensive, county-wide transportation plan to help reduce conflicts
among competing interests, and include provisions to manage priority
biological areas. I have included a summary at the end of this
testimony to further elaborate on each section of this legislation.
Before I conclude my remarks, I want to clear up any confusion
about certain parts of the bill, especially as it relates to land
disposal. I want the legislative record to show my intent in drafting
these sections.
Unlike the previous proposal, every parcel of land that will be
sold under this legislation must be included in the Bureau of Land
Management's St. George Field Office Resource Management Plan (St.
George RMP) prior to sale. This means that the BLM must give the public
an opportunity to participate and comment on each additional acre that
is identified for disposal. The legislation requires the BLM to only
identify land for sale that meets the stringent qualifications of the
Vision Dixie Principles, which significantly limits the acres eligible
for disposal under this legislation.
We have also lowered the cap on land sale acreage from 20,000 acres
to 5,000 acres. I want this to be very clear: we are not ordering the
BLM to identify an additional 5,000 acres for sale. The 5,000 acres is
not a target. We are simply capping the amount of acreage BLM is
authorized to sell under this legislation's framework. I want to point
out that with or without the bill, BLM still has statutory authority to
dispose of public land in Washington County, and could identify and
dispose of significantly more acreage than what we authorize in the
legislation. For example, the 1999 St. George RMP identified around
18,000 acres in Washington County for disposal.
Another substantive change is the revenue sharing from the land
disposal proceeds. We have directed all but $15 million dollars of the
federal share of the revenue to acquire lands in Washington County.
This will allow the BLM to dispose of low-priority, non-environmentally
sensitive public lands and acquire high-priority, biologically
significant lands, thereby enhancing the federal estate. Additionally,
we have given the local share to the county commission--an elected body
responsible to the people--rather than the Washington County Water
Conservancy District. We have also included a detailed reporting
requirement on any expenditure the BLM makes from the land sale
proceeds.
I also want to clarify our treatment of off-highway vehicles (OHVs)
in Washington County, particularly in the biologically-sensitive
southwest corner. We designate the Beaver Dam Wash National
Conservation Area (NCA), comprising nearly 80,000 acres, to permanently
protect this region. This legislation prohibits cross-country and off-
road travel in the NCA by restricting the use of motorized vehicles to
roads designated in the travel management plan that we direct the BLM
to develop. This legislation also authorizes the BLM to use a portion
of the land sale proceeds for enforcement purposes.
We also deal with OHV travel on public lands throughout the rest of
the county by requiring the BLM to prepare a comprehensive travel
management plan which will identify areas where OHVs are allowed and
not allowed. This plan will help protect sensitive areas that are now
at risk, while providing additional opportunities for the OHV community
by designating a system of trails where riding is permitted. Although
BLM has attempted in the past to develop such a plan, the agency has
never had sufficient funds to complete it. To cure this problem, this
legislation will direct a portion of the land sale proceeds to complete
the comprehensive travel management plan.
In conclusion, I again thank the chairman for his courtesy, and
hope that this hearing will be instructive. We have made significant
changes to this legislation and I hope the committee will act favorably
and quickly to ensure its passage. I appreciate this opportunity to
testify and welcome any questions.
Senator Bennett. I want to close by acknowledging that
while this has been a difficult process. It's been a very
rewarding one for me. I think we can create significant
conservation while balancing growth in the county. I have made
some good friends and had some good experiences as we have gone
through this journey.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Senator Bennett. Without
objection we will put your full remarks into the record. I
would just say at this point that you are well known here in
the Senate as somebody who consistently tries to bring people
together to try to find common ground, that try to address
concerns that come up in debates where people have passionate
feelings. It is evident that you're trying hard to do that here
again. I commend you for it and will welcome your
participation.
Senator Bennett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. Let me welcome my western partner, Senator
Crapo, my neighbor from the Dirksen Building as well. Senator
Crapo, please go ahead with your remarks. Let me also commend
you for, I know, the extraordinary amount of time you've put in
trying to bring all of the stakeholders and the parties
together. Please go ahead as you wish.
STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE CRAPO, U.S. SENATOR
FROM IDAHO
Senator Crapo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to
thank you. It's been several years now since I first sat down
and walked you through the process we've been going through for
years longer than that out in Idaho. You committed then to work
with me to try to help make this a reality. You have stayed
true to your word. I appreciate that.
Senator Wyden. Thank you.
Senator Crapo. I also want to thank Senator Craig. Not only
for his kind comments here today at the hearing, but for
himself working with me consistently to make sure that we can
put together the kind of land management legislation that will
work for Idaho and for our country. I truly appreciate Senator
Craig's efforts as my colleague from Idaho.
Obviously I want to give my thanks as well to Chairman
Bingaman and Senator Domenici who also have worked very closely
with me as I've tried to navigate the paths of the legislative
process that we need to go through here.
I want to also stop for a moment and thank, in particular,
the staff who have worked so hard on this as well. David
Brooks, who has, I think, given up a significant part of his
life to work with us here to help make this a reality. Frank
Gladdox and Darren Parker and others, many others, who have put
in so much time and effort to help us in Idaho as we've tried
to work to a successful conclusion to this important project.
Additionally the BLM has been very helpful to us in working
through legislative language and creating maps and literally
helping to iron out issues as they come up. For that I want to
thank Julie Jacobson and Laurie Sedlemeyer. I truly appreciate
their efforts. You know, now that I've started naming names,
I'm going to be remiss because there are so many, particularly
those in our work group in Idaho, some of whom are here today
and others who have put in so much time to make this a reality.
Frankly there are a number of Idahoans here in the audience
today. I won't try to get them to all stand up or get
recognized, but this is a truly significant step for us in
Idaho. We appreciate the support of the committee members and
the staff in helping to make this happen.
There are a couple of Idahoans who will testify today who I
want to recognize. That is Craig Gehrke of The Wilderness
Society and Dr. Chad Gibson of the Owyhee Range Service. You'll
hear from them later. But these two gentlemen have also given a
significant part of their life to this effort over the last
years. They are to be thanked for that.
The Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008 is the
result, as Senator Craig has indicated, of almost a decade of
collaborative effort between all levels of government, the
tribes, ranchers, users of the public lands and
conservationists to resolve decades of heated land use conflict
in the Owyhee Canyon lands in the southwestern part of my home
State, Idaho. Owyhee County contains some of the most unique
and beautiful canyon lands in the world, a place that offers
the grandeur of untouched western trails, rivers and open sky.
It's imperative that its natural beauty and its traditional
uses are preserved for future generations.
The County is a traditional ranching country with 73
percent of the land base owned by the Federal Government and
located within an hour's drive of one of the fastest growing
areas in the Nation, Boise, Idaho. Community expansion,
development and ever increasing demands on public land are
having a profound effect on Owyhee County. Given this
confluence of circumstances, the County has been at the center
of political and regulatory battles for years.
Diverse land uses coexist in an area of intense beauty and
unique character. The conflict over land management is both
inevitable and understandable. How do we manage for this
diversity and do so in a way that protects and restores the
quality of that fragile environment?
In this context the Owyhee County commissioners and several
others said enough is enough. They decided to focus efforts on
solving these problems rather than wasting resources on an
endless fight. In 2001, the Owyhee County commissioners met
with me and asked for my help.
They asked whether I would support them if they could put
together at one table, the interested parties involved in the
future of the county to try to reach some solutions. I told
them that if they could get together a broad base of interest
who would agree to collaborate in a process committed to
problem solving, that I would dedicate myself to working with
them. If they were successful, I would introduce the resulting
legislation.
They agreed. Together we set out on a journey, really on a
road, that is as challenging as any of the Owyhee Canyon land
roads and some of them are very challenging. David is shaking
his head. He knows. He's been there.
Make no mistake. This has been very difficult work. But the
fruit of that labor, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act of
2008 has made it time well spent.
The commissioners formed the work group which includes,
well, at its first formation, included The Wilderness Society,
the Idaho Conservation League, the Nature Conservancy, Idaho
Outfitters and Guides, the United States Air Force, the Sierra
Club, the County Soil Conservation Districts, Owyhee
Cattleman's Association, the Owyhee Borderland's Trust, the
People for the Owyhee's and the Shoshone Paiute Tribes to join
in their efforts. All accepted and all began work on this bill.
As the collaborative process gained momentum, the County
Commissioners expanded the work group to include the South
Idaho Desert Racing Association, the Idaho Rivers United and
the Owyhee County Farm Bureau, as well as the foundation for
North American Wild Sheep and the Idaho Backcountry Horsemen,
with the help from the Idaho State Department of Lands and the
Bureau of Land Management.
You can see from that group that we've had the diverse
interest at the table working to make sure that we get the
right solutions. For me one of the most gratifying outcomes has
been to see this group transform itself from polarized camps
into an extraordinary force known for its intense effort,
calmity, trust and willingness to work toward a solution. They
operated on a true consensus basis, spent thousands of hours,
drove thousands of miles inspecting roads and trails, listening
to and soliciting ideas from people from all walks of life who
have in common deep roots and a deep interest in the Owyhee
Canyon lands.
While this whole process and its outcomes are indeed
remarkable. One of the more notable developments is the
memorandum of agreement between the Shoshone Paiute Tribes and
the County that establishes government to government
cooperation in several areas of mutual interest. I congratulate
Nancy Eagan, the newly elected chair of the Shoshone Paiute
Tribes on her election and today her swearing in.
The Owyhee Initiative transforms conflict and uncertainty
into conflict resolution and assurance of future activity.
Ranchers can plan for subsequent generations. Off road vehicle
users have access assured. Wilderness is established.
The Shoshone Paiute Tribes know their cultural resources
will be protected. The Air Force will continue to train its
pilots. Local, State and Federal Government agencies will have
a structure to assist their joint management of the region. All
of this will happen within the context of the preservation of
environmental and ecological health.
This is indeed a revolutionary land management structure
that looks ahead to the future. The status quo is unacceptable.
The Owyhee Canyon lands, their inhabitants and cultures are
truly a treasure of Idaho and of the United States. They
deserve to have a process of conflict management and a path
toward sustainability. I hope you'll join with me in ensuring
their future.
Now I want to speak just briefly to the folks back home,
very directly, the folks in Idaho who are rightly concerns
about a few provisions in this bill that are of great
importance. I will continue to work with Senators Bingaman and
Domenici and Wyden and Craig and their staff and others to make
the policies and the funding that were so carefully negotiated
in the Owyhee Initiative Agreement to become a reality. As
promised 8 years ago, I regard the support of the Owyhee
Initiative Workgroup and diverse interest that you represent as
mandatory for my continued advocacy for this bill.
Our hard work will continue after today's hearing. I'm
committed to achieving the objectives that brought us together
many years ago and that keep us together today. Thank you very
much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Senator Crapo. Listening to you
my sense is that it is hard to imagine there's an Idahoan out
there who hasn't been given the opportunity to participate. I
commend you for reaching out in that way. You've obviously made
a great deal of progress.
You don't make all this progress by osmosis. You do it by
working with people. Having worked with you in the past, I know
that's your trademark. I commend you for all your efforts.
I'm not going to have any questions of either Senator
Bennett or Senator Crapo. We do look forward to you all sitting
in, as you've indicated you'd like to do. But let me recognize
Senator Barrasso for his opening statement and then Senator
Craig may have comments or further questions he'd like to make.
Senator Barrasso.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, U.S. SENATOR
FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
don't have any questions for our witnesses either, but I do
want to welcome both Senator Crapo and Senator Bennett. I know
that each of you has a bill that is very important to you.
These two bills have been in Congress a long time and I'm sure
that each of you would be pleased to have them move forward in
a timely manner.
I understand and appreciate the painstaking work that goes
into meeting with stakeholder groups in your home State to
prepare these bills. It's important for me as a Senator to,
when I look at this kind of legislation, that it be tailored to
the specific, local needs. Mr. Chairman, I just show great
deference to the home State Senators who work through those
local issues.
So I welcome both of you here. Also folks who are going to
be visiting with us from the Department of Interior and the
U.S. Forest Service and others from Idaho and Utah who are
going to testify today. So with that, Mr. Chairman, thank you
very much.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
Senator Craig.
Senator Craig. A clarification for Senator Bennett. You are
talking about Washington County, Utah and not Washington
County, Idaho.
Senator Bennett. That is correct.
Senator Craig. Thank you because Dr. Gibson and I grew up
in Washington County, Idaho and we want to make sure that's
clear.
Senator Wyden. There's Washington County, Oregon. It's
almost obligatory for a western State to have Washington
County.
[Laughter.]
Senator Craig. Absolutely.
Senator Bennett. Washington County, Utah is the fastest
growing county in the State, has been for a half dozen years or
more. For a good portion of that of that half dozen years, the
fastest growing county in the country. That's why it's
essential that we get this thing done before it completely gets
out of control.
Senator Craig. Thank you. I want to thank my colleague,
Mike Crapo for recognizing the Shoshone Paiute Valley
Reservation. I did not in my opening comments. They played a
very valuable role as you've mentioned.
Mr. Chairman, they still--this is an unbelievable big chunk
of property if you look at the big map and that it borders the
State of Nevada and Oregon. So it's one of those that has
multiple interests across State lines as a region and an
ecosystem that I think is important. Thank you.
Senator Wyden. Thank you both. We'll excuse you. Please
come on up and sit with us.
Our next panel, the Administration panel, Julie Jacobson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary with the Department of the Interior.
Joel Holtrop, Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
I'm going to repeat the request I made last week. It has
varying degrees of success. We will put your prepared remarks
into the hearing record. Every word of your prepared remarks
will go into the hearing record and if you could perhaps just
summarize some of your key concerns that would be very helpful.
Ms. Jacobson, welcome.
STATEMENT OF JULIE JACOBSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, LAND
AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you for inviting me to testify on S.
2833, the Owyhee Public Lands Management Act and S. 2834, the
Washington County Growth and Conservation Act. These bills seek
to resolve a wide range of public land management issues and
opportunities on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management
in Owyhee County, Idaho and Washington County, Utah. Both bills
are the results of years of intense effort by Utah's and
Colorado's--and Idaho's Congressional delegation, local
governments and public lands to reach consensus on difficult
issues.
The Administration respects these efforts and supports both
bills with modifications to the formula for distributing the
proceeds from any land sale to ensure an appropriate share is
returned to Federal taxpayers. We recommend some other specific
modifications to both bills in our full testimony and look
forward to working with the sponsors and the committee. I'll
briefly summarize the major provisions of both bills.
S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act is the
product of nearly a decade of work to find solutions to resolve
Owyhee County public land issues. Senator Crapo deserves
recognition for his commitment to this effort. S. 2833
designates over a half million acres of wilderness and releases
nearly 200,000 acres of wilderness study. It also designates
more than 315 miles of wild and scenic river segments.
S. 2833 provides for the voluntary relinquishment of
grazing permits to the Secretary for authorized grazing on
lands with any areas designated as wilderness. Under the bill
the Secretary is required to accept the donation of those
permits and is required to permanently retire the allotments.
Grazing is a compatible use within wilderness and there is a
long history of legislation accommodating grazing within
wilderness designation. To address these issues the BLM is
committed to working with the committee and the sponsors within
our existing authority.
Section Six provides for the sale of lands identified for
the disposal within the Boise District and the use of those
proceeds for the acquisition of private lands from willing
sellers within or adjacent to the wilderness designated by this
bill. We note that all such sales and acquisitions will be
undertaken consistent with applicable laws including FLTFA and
will be subject to standard appraisals. We support S. 2833 and
would like the opportunity to work with the sponsors and the
committee to address some specific issues raised in our full
testimony.
S. 2834, the Washington County Growth and Conservation Act
is a result of years of work by the Utah Congressional
delegation, in particular, Senator Bennett. Working with local
governments and the public they have reached consensus on
public land management in Washington County, Utah. The bill
would designate a number of wilderness areas including nearly
124,000 acres of wilderness within Zion National Park and
approximately 138,000 acres to be managed by the BLM.
In addition the bill would release 5,000 acres of BLM
managed lands from wilderness study status and return them to
the full range multiple uses. Titles III and IV establish the
Red Cliff National Conservation Area and the Beaver Dam Wash
National Conservation Area. The first NCA's for the State of
Utah.
Title V designates nearly 170 miles of the Virgin River and
its tributaries within and adjacent to Zion National Park to
the wild and scenic river system. Title VII provides for the
disposal of up to 9,000 acres of public lands through sale at
auction. The Department supports making public lands available
for community growth where it is necessary and appropriate. The
land disposal process in 2834 is consistent with this objective
and we support its inclusion. The majority of these proceeds
from these sales are to be used to acquire lands within
Washington County from willing sellers within the special areas
designated by the bill.
We support S. 2834 and the efforts of Senator Bennett and
so many others in Utah. As with S. 2833 we would like the
opportunity to work with the committee and the sponsors to
address specific concerns. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify.
[The prepared statements of Ms. Jacobson follow:]
Prepared Statement of Julie Jacobson, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land
and Minerals Management, Department of the Interior
s. 2833
Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 2833, the Owyhee Public
Lands Management Act of 2008. This bill seeks to resolve a wide range
of public land management issues and opportunities on lands managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Owyhee County, Idaho. It is the
result of years of intensive efforts by the Idaho delegation, and
particularly Senator Crapo, working with local governments and the
public to reach consensus on difficult issues in the spirit of
cooperative conservation. We respect the resolution of local land use
conflicts in this matter, and support the bill with modification of the
formula for distributing the proceeds from any land sales to ensure
that an appropriate share of the proceeds is returned to the Federal
taxpayers. We would like to work to address this, and other areas of
concern, with the sponsor and the Committee.
Background
Owyhee County encompasses over 7,600 square miles of the
southwestern corner of Idaho. It is the homeland of the Shoshone-Paiute
people and encompasses the Duck Valley Reservation. With a population
of just over 11,000, it is a sparsely-peopled land where magnificent
canyons, rushing rivers, and wide-open skies dominate the landscape.
Ranching is the traditional and predominant economic activity
throughout Owyhee County.
In 2000, the Owyhee County Commissioners invited a number of
interested parties to begin discussions with an eye toward resolving a
wide range of natural resource issues in the County. Innumerable
meetings, conversations, and dialogues ensued. Over time, this effort
included representatives from many interests within the County,
including local government officials, tribal representatives, ranchers,
conservationists, recreationists, and others.
The legislation before this Committee, S. 2833, is an effort to
realize those efforts. Senator Crapo deserves recognition for his
commitment to working toward collaborative solutions in the spirit of
cooperative conservation and proposing this legislation to help resolve
Owyhee County's public land issues.
Owyhee Science Review and Conservation Center
Section 3 of this bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to
establish the Owyhee Science Review and Conservation Center in Owyhee
County, Idaho. The stated intention of the Center is to conduct
research projects to address natural resources management issues as
they affect public and private rangelands in Owyhee County with a goal
of providing information for improved rangeland management.
We do not oppose the establishment of this Center; however we are
concerned about the ongoing costs of establishing and operating such a
Center. We urge the Committee and the sponsor to consider making
section 3 subject to adequate appropriations.
Wilderness and Wild & Scenic Rivers Designations
The Department of the Interior supports the Wilderness and Wild and
Scenic River designations in the bill, subject to adjustments in
boundaries and management language as is routine in such proposed
designations. In general, the Department supports the efforts of
Congressional delegations to resolve wilderness issues in their states.
Congress has the sole authority to designate lands to be managed as
wilderness and we have repeatedly urged that these issues be addressed
legislatively.
Section 4 of S. 2833 designates as wilderness 517,128 acres in six
separate areas and releases approximately 198,073 acres from WSA status
and will return these lands to the full range of multiple public uses
authorized by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). The
Department generally supports the designations and releases proposed by
the legislation and would like the opportunity to work with the sponsor
and the Committee on possible minor boundary adjustments to ensure
efficient manageability.
The areas identified to be designated as wilderness include: Big
Jacks Creek Wilderness, Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, Little
Jacks Creek Wilderness, North Fork Owyhee Wilderness, Owyhee River
Wilderness and Pole Creek Wilderness. These proposed wilderness areas
contain beautiful and remote desert landscapes. The terrain within the
proposed wilderness is diverse, ranging from deep river canyons to vast
sagebrush and grassland plateaus that provide habitat for sage-grouse,
pronghorn antelope, bighorn sheep, songbirds, raptors, and numerous
rare plant species. The river canyons are spectacular. Many are more
than 1,000 feet deep, nearly twice as deep as the Washington Monument
is tall. Rivers meander for hundreds of miles through southwestern
Idaho and form what may be the largest, most unaltered, desert region
remaining in the continental United States.
Section 5 would designate more than 315 miles of waterways as
segments of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. These river segments,
ranging from 3/10 of a mile to over 67 miles, would be established on
16 different rivers and creeks including the Owyhee, Bruneau, and
Jarbidge Rivers. As with wilderness, it is the prerogative of the
Congress to make determinations for additions to the Wild and Scenic
River System and we generally defer to the consensus of individual
congressional delegations while providing input on manageability and
potential conflicts.
The proposed additions to the Wild and Scenic River System are
rugged, isolated, and unique. This region, the Owyhee Uplands, is
unlike any other desert region in the United States because it is
dissected by hundreds of miles of free-flowing rivers. The rivers begin
in the mountains of northern Nevada and, flowing north, radiate like
spokes across southwestern Idaho. Each river has cut a deep,
magnificent canyon through alternating layers of black and red volcanic
rock. Each river is also an oasis for wildlife, including bighorn sheep
and large flocks of waterfowl. There are no paved roads along any of
these rivers and only a few dirt roads provide limited access to these
remote streams. The larger rivers, like the Owyhee and Bruneau, contain
some of the most challenging whitewater in the United States. River
enthusiasts come from around the country to float these rivers and
experience some of the ultimate river adventures in the United States.
Relinquishment and Retirement of Grazing Permits
Section 4(b)(3)(D) of S. 2833 provides for the voluntary
relinquishment of grazing permits or leases by permittees to the
Secretary of the Interior for authorized grazing on BLM-managed lands
within areas designated as wilderness by S. 2833. Under the bill, the
Secretary is required to accept the donation of those permits or leases
and is required to permanently retire the allotments covered by the
permits or leases from grazing. Partial relinquishment and congruent
retirement of allotments is also provided for under this subsection.
The BLM believes that grazing is a compatible use within wilderness
and there is a long history of legislation accommodating grazing within
wilderness designations. The BLM is also concerned about retiring
grazing permits. Were it not for the Congressional acknowledgement of
the choice of individual permittees, and the rigor of the collaborative
process underlying these designations, BLM could only retire grazing
permits through land use planning processes. However, the BLM also
recognizes the value of working cooperatively and collaboratively with
local stakeholders to fulfill its multiple-use mission on BLM lands.
The BLM is committed to working with the Committee, the sponsor, and
stakeholders in the spirit of cooperative conservation within our
existing authority.
Disposal and Acquisition of Land
Section 6 of S. 2833 provides for the sale of lands identified for
disposal within the Boise District of the BLM and the subsequent use of
those proceeds for the acquisition of private lands from willing
sellers, within or adjacent to the wilderness areas designated by this
bill. Specifically, section 6(a) authorizes the sale of lands
identified for disposal prior to the date of enactment of the
legislation. The proceeds from any such sales taking place after
January 1, 2008, would be deposited in a special account and would be
available for the acquisition of private lands identified on the maps
referenced by the legislation or any other private lands within or
adjacent to the wilderness designated by S. 2833. This authority
expires at the end of 10 years or on the date when $8 million has been
expended from the account, whichever happens first. Amounts remaining
in the account upon termination would be transferred to the Federal
Land Deposit Account authorized by the Federal Land Transaction
Facilitation Act (FLTFA) and expended in accordance with FLTFA.
The Department notes that all such sales and acquisitions would be
undertaken consistent with applicable laws, including FLPMA, and would
be subject to appraisals completed in accordance with the Uniform
Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisition and the Uniform
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
In addition, the manner in which the proceeds from land sales are
distributed requires significant modifications. As noted above, we will
work with the sponsors to ensure that this bill returns an appropriate
share of these proceeds to the Federal taxpayer, consistent with the
Administration's proposed changes to the FLTFA. Our proposal would
provide for a consistent approach to the distribution of land sales
proceeds at the National level.
Additional Provisions
Section 7 requires the Secretary to coordinate with the Shoshone
Paiute Tribes in implementation of the Shoshone Paiute Cultural
Resource Protection Plan and seek agreements with the Tribes to
implement the plan in order to protect cultural sites and resources
important to the Tribes. One provision of that plan includes a
federally reimbursable law enforcement agreement with Owyhee County for
services from the Tribes. The BLM and the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes have
an excellent cooperative relationship and work together effectively on
a wide range of public land management issues in southwest Idaho. The
Administration supports and endorses BLM's continuing and expanding
this cooperative relationship.
Finally, section 8 requires the BLM to prepare travel management
plans for public lands within Owyhee County. Providing for the wise
management and balance of all modes of travel and user needs continues
to be a priority for the BLM. The BLM is currently in the process of
developing travel management plans throughout the West. We are
committed to completing those plans with full public participation in
Owyhee County and on all BLM-managed public lands. We would like the
opportunity to work with the sponsor and the Committee to ensure this
section provides for comprehensive travel and transportation management
planning.
We are concerned about the long-term costs of the bill not only to
the Department of the Interior and the BLM but also to the Federal
Treasury. Public expectations for large infusions of Federal funds to
accomplish this bill's authorizations without a clear source of dollars
could result in disappointment and frustrate local working
relationships.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this legislation. S.
2833 is the result of years of intensive efforts by Senator Crapo and
many interested parties. We applaud these efforts and look forward to
working with the Committee and Sponsor to address the issues addressed
above, as well as technical and conforming amendments. I will be happy
to answer any questions that you may have.
s. 2834
Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 2834, the Washington
County Growth and Conservation Act of 2008. This legislation is the
result of years of exhaustive efforts by the Utah Congressional
delegation, in particular Senator Bennett. Working with local
governments and the public in the spirit of cooperative conservation
they have reached consensus on difficult issues on a wide range of
public land management issues in Washington County, Utah. The
Administration commends the resolution of land use conflicts in this
manner, and supports the bill with modifications to the formula for
distributing the proceeds from any land sales to ensure that an
appropriate share of the proceeds is returned to the Federal taxpayers.
While we note several areas of concern below, we are pleased with a
number of significant improvements in this bill relative to the measure
considered last Congress.
Background
Washington County, Utah, located in the southwest corner of the
State bordering Nevada and Arizona, covers nearly 2,500 square miles,
and has been one of the fastest-growing counties in the United States.
With a population of only about 10,000 in the mid-1960s, today
Washington County has over 130,000 residents. At the same time, more
than 75 percent of the County is Federal land, managed by the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and the National
Park Service (NPS). In addition, the County includes lands held in
trust by the Federal government for the Shivwits Indian Tribe and lands
owned by the State of Utah. How those lands are managed is a critical
issue for the people of Washington County.
The Administration recognizes that the Sponsor has included a
number of improvements from the earlier bill in the 109th Congress. In
particular, we appreciate that the bill no longer directs BLM to
dispose of lands, regardless of whether or not they had been identified
for disposal.
Wilderness Designations
The bill would designate a number of wilderness areas within
Washington County, including approximately 123,743 acres of wilderness
to be managed by the NPS within Zion National Park, approximately
138,008 acres of wilderness to be managed by the BLM in 16 individual
areas, and 2,643 acres of USFS wilderness. In addition, the bill would
release 5,074 acres of BLM-managed lands from wilderness study area
(WSA) status and would return them to the full range of multiple public
uses authorized by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA.)
The BLM-managed lands that would be designated wilderness by S.
2834 include areas of rugged beauty, solitude, and important wildlife
habitat. In the northeastern part of the County, the proposed Deep
Creek and Deep Creek North wilderness areas consist of sheer canyon
walls dropping to dramatic year-round rivers. Hanging gardens with
wildflowers compete with a variety of raptors, including bald eagles
and giant California condors, for the hiker's attention. The steep and
rugged Hurricane Cliffs, which soar 2,000 vertical feet in under a
mile, form the most outstanding feature of the proposed Blackridge
Wilderness. The area is a magnet for hikers, hunters and photographers.
In the southeast, Canaan Mountain's rugged topography includes
peaks and colorful vermilion cliffs that form the southern gateway to
Zion National Park. The scenic vistas available from these peaks
increasingly attract recreationists.
Within the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area (NCA) proposed by
Title III of the bill lie the proposed Cottonwood Wilderness on the
east and Red Mountain Wilderness on the west. The Cottonwood Wilderness
and the adjoining Forest Service-managed Cottonwood Forest Wilderness
form the spectacular ``front range'' between the City of St. George to
the south and the Pine Valley Mountains to the north. Within minutes of
downtown St. George, this area is prized for its primitive recreational
opportunities. It lies within the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve, which has
been Federally-designated as habitat to protect the threatened desert
tortoise. It is also home to peregrine falcons and State-listed species
such as the Gila Monster. The aptly named Red Mountain Wilderness
provides a scenic backdrop to the communities of Ivins and Santa Clara
and is a popular destination for local citizens.
The bill also designates the Cougar Canyon and Slaughter Creek
wildernesses located in the northwest corner of Washington County.
Abutting the Nevada State line, these wilderness areas connect with the
Tunnel Spring Wilderness in Lincoln County, Nevada, designated by
Public Law 108-424. The area is dominated by rough terrain of wooded
canyons and low mountain peaks. Just to the south of Cougar Canyon and
Slaughter Creek the bill also designates Docs Pass Wilderness, which
includes five miles of a perennial, free flowing stream within Beaver
Dam Wash providing habitat to a wide range of native fish and large
mammals. The Bull Valley Mountains within the proposed Docs Pass
Wilderness are rugged pinyon-juniper woodlands.
Wilderness resolution has been particularly challenging in the
State of Utah, and we applaud the hard work of the sponsor and other
members of the Utah delegation in reaching consensus on BLM wilderness
designation and WSA release. Congress has the sole authority to
designate lands to be managed permanently as wilderness, and we believe
these areas are manageable as such. We would like the opportunity to
work with the sponsor and the Committee on possible minor boundary
adjustments to ensure efficient manageability.
S. 2834 would also designate 123,743 acres of Zion National Park as
wilderness. The lands proposed for wilderness designation are similar
to those that were included in a proposal to recommend wilderness for
the park that was originally transmitted to the President on June 5,
1974, by then Secretary of the Interior Morton, and in the 2001 General
Management Plan (GMP) for the park. The 1974 proposal recommended
designation of 120,620 acres of the park as wilderness.
Differences in the acreage figures between the 1974 transmittal and
S. 2834 are the result of land acquisition in the park that has taken
place since 1974, acquisition of water and grazing rights, and
termination of non-conforming uses. Additional lands within the park
consisting of approximately 9,000 acres, but located in Kane County,
have also been recommended for wilderness designation and were included
in the 1974 transmittal and the 2001 GMP. Although the Department
supports the wilderness designation for the park included in S. 2834,
we suggest that the bill be amended to include this additional,
previously recommended wilderness so that all the lands proposed for
wilderness designation within the park are designated.
The bill designates as wilderness five small units of BLM-managed
lands surrounding Zion National Park that vary in size from 32 to 663
acres. These are logical extensions of the proposed wilderness areas
within Zion National Park and are appropriate for wilderness
designation. We recommend transferring all five of these small
parcels--Beartrap Canyon Wilderness (40 acres), Goose Creek Wilderness
(98 acres), Laverkin Creek (445 acres), Taylor Creek Wilderness (32
acres) and Watchman Wilderness (663 acres)--to the National Park
Service. Transfer of these lands to the park will improve management,
reduce confusion for the public, and enhance the opportunities for
visitor enjoyment.
National Conservation Areas
Titles III and IV of S. 2834 establish the 44,695 acre Red Cliffs
National Conservation Area (NCA) and the 68,083 acre Beaver Dam Wash
NCA respectively. These would be the first NCAs in the State of Utah.
Each of the NCAs designated by Congress and managed by the BLM is
unique. For the most part, however, they have certain critical
elements, which include withdrawal from the public land, mining and
mineral leasing laws; OHV-use limitations; and language that charges
the Secretary to allow only those uses that further the purposes for
which the NCA is established. Furthermore, NCA proposals do not
diminish the protections that currently apply to the lands. The Red
Cliffs NCA and Beaver Dam Wash NCA proposals honor this spirit and the
Department supports their designation.
The proposed Red Cliffs NCA would overlay the existing Red Cliffs
Desert Reserve which was designed as a part of the Washington County
Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) adopted in 1996. The
HCP protects important desert tortoise habitat while also allowing
continued development in St. George and nearby communities. As
directed, the BLM has acquired nearly 8,000 acres of State and private
inholdings within the Reserve from willing sellers.
In addition to providing important habitat for the recovery of the
desert tortoise and other listed species such as the Shivwits milkvetch
and the Woundfin Minnow and Virgin River Chub, the proposed NCA is a
popular area for recreationists. Over 130 miles of trails provide
excellent opportunities for hikers, mountain bikers and equestrians
while ensuring compatibility with the species' recovery. The boundaries
of the proposed NCA include over 44,000 acres of BLM-managed land.
The proposed Beaver Dam Wash NCA is nestled in the southwestern
corner of Washington County which is a transition zone between three
major ecosystems: the Colorado Plateau, the Great Basin, and the Mojave
Desert. Such zones are characterized by diverse vegetative communities
supporting a rich array of wildlife. Riparian species are found along
the deeply incised channel of Beaver Dam Wash, which traverses the
length of the proposed NCA to its confluence with the Virgin River. At
higher elevations in the Beaver Dam Mountains, pinyon-juniper woodlands
cover the slopes of steep-sided canyons. A forest of Joshua trees, the
signature species of the Mojave Desert, dots the bajadas and valley
floors. The lower elevations provide designated critical habitat for
the threatened Mojave Desert Tortoise and other native species, such as
Desert Bighorn Sheep, Gila Monsters, and Mojave Rattlesnakes. Current
recreational uses within the area include technical rock climbing,
hiking, horseback riding, wildlife viewing, and nature study, all of
which are compatible with the designation.
Wild and Scenic River Designation
The legislation amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by adding
approximately 165 miles of segments of the Virgin River and its
tributaries within and adjacent to Zion National Park to the Wild and
Scenic Rivers system. Seven of the segments are partially or wholly on
BLM-managed lands while the remaining 32 segments are wholly within
Zion National Park. All of the segments of the rivers that are
recommended for designation as wild, scenic, or recreational rivers
were found eligible and suitable for inclusion within the Wild and
Scenic River System through the Zion National Park 2001 GMP and through
the BLM St. George Field Office Resource Management Plan (SGRMP)
completed in March 1999. The Department supports the designation of
these segments.
Washington County Travel Management Plan
Title VI directs the Secretary to develop a comprehensive travel
management plan within three years of enactment of this legislation to
include the designation of an OHV trail (the High Desert Off-Highway
Vehicle Trail) in Washington County. The trail is to be established on
existing roads and trails. This trail has the potential to be a
significant draw for tourism and will allow visitors and residents to
experience and enjoy their public lands while minimizing OHV use
outside of designated trail networks. We support the development of
both the trail and a comprehensive travel and transportation management
plan for the County.
Land Disposal
Title VII of S. 2834 provides for the disposal through sale at
auction of up to 9,052 acres of public lands out of BLM management and
into private ownership. The Department supports the general proposition
of making some public lands available for community growth where it is
necessary and appropriate. The land disposal process in S. 2834 is
consistent with this objective and we support its inclusion.
Under section 702 of S. 2834 the disposal of land would take place
in three tiers. In the first tier, lands are to be disposed of within
the first eighteen months after enactment of the bill, and include 906
acres of BLM-managed land specifically identified on the map in 14
separate, primarily small, parcels. These lands have been preliminarily
identified by the BLM for disposal through the SGRMP. The local BLM had
previously reviewed these lands for cultural and historic issues,
threatened or endangered (T&E) species conflicts and other potential
values that could preclude a conveyance out of Federal ownership, and
believes that sale of these lands can be accomplished.
In the second tier, the lands are to be sold at auction within a
year of the completion of the sale of the tier one lands and completed
by January 1, 2013. The tier two lands include approximately 3,146
acres specifically identified in one small and two larger parcels.
These lands have been preliminarily identified for disposal through the
SGRMP. However, that identification was only preliminary. The local BLM
has been made aware of conflicts on these lands, which include cultural
resources as well as the presence of T&E species. Section 702(h) of the
legislation anticipates these problems by allowing the Secretary of the
Interior to place restrictive covenants on lands sold in order to
protect the interests of the United States, including cultural or T&E
species. It is unclear how this provision would be implemented, and it
has the potential to be an administrative burden requiring the United
States to enforce land restrictions in perpetuity.
Finally, the bill provides for not more than an additional 5,000
acres of BLM-managed land in the county to be sold. These lands must be
identified for disposal by the BLM through its land use planning
process and be in accordance with the Vision Dixie Land and
Transportation plan. The Secretary and the County are to jointly select
lands to be offered for sale and there is no specific timetable for
their sale.
Section 703 directs that 15 percent of the proceeds from the sales
directed in section 702 be distributed to State and County entities,
while 85 percent would be retained by the Federal government and
deposited in a special account. Up to 9 percent of that account (or $15
million whichever is less) is to be used for implementing the many
provisions of the bill including planning and implementation of special
designations as well as costs associated with the directed sales of
lands. The remainder of the account is to be used to acquire from
willing sellers non-Federal lands within Washington County that are
within one of the special areas designated by the bill, or other
environmentally sensitive land within the county.
The manner in which the proceeds from land sales are distributed
requires significant modifications. As noted above, we will work with
the sponsors to ensure that this bill returns an appropriate share of
these proceeds to the Federal taxpayer, consistent with the
Administration's proposed changes to the Federal Land Transaction
Facilitation Act (FLTFA). Our proposal would provide for a consistent
approach to the distribution of land sales proceeds, at the National
level.
The Administration also does not support section 703(b), which
allows the land sales account to earn interest. The Department of the
Treasury strongly opposes such provisions, which effectively require
the Treasury to borrow more funds to pay this interest.
Additional Provisions
Title VIII establishes two parcels totaling 932 acres as aerial
rights-of-way for reservoirs. Both of these parcels have been
identified as potential reservoir sites through the BLM's land use
planning process. Under Title V of FLPMA the BLM has the authority to
grant rights-of-way for a wide variety of uses, including roads,
powerlines, pipelines, communications sites and reservoirs. The
applicants for these rights-of-way pay both administrative cost
recovery fees as well as rentals. In the case of linear rights-of-way,
rent is determined by a published schedule. Rent for aerial rights-of-
way is based on appraised value. Municipal utilities are charged rent
if their principal source of revenue is customer charges.
In general, the legislation appears to allow the BLM to charge
administrative cost recovery for these grants; however it does not
allow the BLM to charge rent. We believe it is appropriate that the
legislation either allow for the payment of rent or provide for the
outright purchase at appraised fair market value of these lands by the
water district. In addition, the grants for use are made in perpetuity.
If the rights-of-way are not provided for outright purchase, we believe
it would be more appropriate to make these easements dependent on their
actual use and approval by any State or Federal agencies and for the
life of the facility so as to not permanently encumber the public lands
for projects in the event they are never developed.
Finally, Title IX of the bill requires the Secretary to carry out
the management of plant and animal species so as to restore native
rangelands within the County in each ``priority biological area.'' The
bill further provides the Secretary with authority to make grants or
enter into cooperative agreements to carry out and develop research
relating to the restoration of these areas. The full intent of this
Title is unclear, as is the definition of ``priority biological
areas.'' We would like the opportunity to work with the sponsor and the
Committee to further define this Title. We also have concerns that this
new grant authority for one county could duplicate or conflict with
existing DOI nationwide programs or activities.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Washington County
Growth and Conservation Act. While there are a few provisions that
cause us concern and that we believe should be modified (as well as
some technical amendments), we support the cooperative conservation
efforts of Senator Bennett and so many others in Utah to arrive at this
point. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much.
Mr. Holtrop.
STATEMENT OF JOEL HOLTROP, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
SYSTEM, FOREST SERVICE
Mr. Holtrop. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department's views
on two bills today. My short comments this afternoon are a
summary of my testimony. Just a few of the key points that I
want to highlight.
The Department supports S. 934 which would amend the
Florida National Forest Land Management Act of 2003 to
authorize the conveyance of 114 acres of land in Leon County,
Florida, known as the Flea Market Tract. The bill also provides
that proceeds from the sale of certain lands in the 2003 act
may be used for Administrative improvements for units of the
National Forest System within the State. The Flea Market Tract
has been on the National Forest and Florida's potential
exchange list for more than 10 years. It is a developed parcel
of land in an urban area that lacks national forest character.
Conveyance of this tract will reduce boundary management
costs and allow for the purchase of high priority endangered
species habitat, critical wetlands and potential recreation
areas for the public. Both Leon County and the local
environmental groups have offered support for the bill.
Additionally the bill has bipartisan Congressional support and
we view it as a win-win for all.
S. 2834, Washington County Growth and Conservation Act of
2008 pertains to various National Forest System, Bureau of Land
Management and National Park Service lands in Washington
County, Utah. My remarks focus on the provisions of the bill
related to the National Forest System lands. The Department
appreciates the Utah Congressional delegations efforts to
resolve a wide range of long standing public land issues in
Washington County. Enactment of this legislation would be a
significant achievement that the people of Utah, their
delegation and Congress could be proud of. We would like to
continue to work with the committee on some of our concerns
with the bill.
S. 2834 would designate new wilderness areas including
2,643 acres of National Forest System land on the Dixie
National Forest as the Cottonwood Forest Wilderness prescribes
certain management objectives in wilderness areas designated in
the bill and would establish the High Desert Off-Highway
Vehicle Trail. It would also direct the conveyance of 112 acres
of land on the Dixie National Forest. The proposed wilderness
area is scenic, rugged and has a rich diversity of narrow
canyons providing excellent opportunity for solitude and
primitive recreational experiences.
It also possesses a special feature by virtue of its
location adjacent to a desert tortoise reserve. The Dixie
National Forest has determined that the area is suitable for
wilderness. The bill includes some provisions regarding
management of the areas designated as wilderness that are
either unnecessary or would change the direction that would
otherwise apply under the Wilderness Act of 1964.
The Department prefers to follow the provisions of the
Wilderness Act which allows for review of proposed uses of
wilderness on a case by case basis. The Department's specific
concerns about the wilderness sections of the bill are
described in detail in my written testimony which I have
submitted for the record. The Department likes the idea of
working cooperatively to carry out wildlife management
activities in wilderness areas.
In fact we already have an agreement with the Association
of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the BLM that guides us in
working cooperatively at the national, regional and local level
to manage wilderness areas on national forest system and public
lands. The Department does not oppose designation of the High
Desert Off-Highway Vehicle Trail. We are concerned however,
about the cost of repair and the reconstruction of existing
trails that the designation could require.
Title Ten of the bill would direct the Secretary of
Agriculture to convey for fair market value 112 acres of land
to a private land owner. While we support selling approximately
21 acres, we do not support conveyance of any additional acres.
We would like to continue to work with the sponsor and the
committee, however, to resolve this concern.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to
discuss both bills. I'm happy to answer any questions that you
may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Holtrop follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joel Holtrop, Deputy Chief, National Forest
System, Forest Service
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee: Thank you for the
opportunity to provide the Department's views on two bills on the
agenda today. My testimony will be regarding S. 934 and S. 2834.
s. 934/h.r. 1374
S. 934/H.R. 1374 would amend the Florida National Forest Land
Management Act of 2003 to authorize the conveyance, for fair market
value, of 114 acres (Tract W-1979; Flea Market Tract) in Leon County,
Florida. Proceeds from the sale of Tract W-1979 are to be used
exclusively for the purchase of inholdings located within the
Apalachicola National Forest. The bill also provides that proceeds from
the sale of any of the other parcels listed in the 2003 Act may be used
for the acquisition, construction, or maintenance of administrative
improvements for units of the National Forest System (NFS) within the
State, except that the bill further directs that only proceeds from the
sale of lands with improved infrastructure may be used for
administrative improvements.
The Department supports this bill but would like to work with the
Committee and the bill's sponsors on amendments that focus the use of
funds derived from sales in a manner that comports with the original
Act. Tract W-1979 (Flea Market Tract) has been on the National Forests
in Florida's potential exchange list for more than 10 years. It is a
developed parcel of land in an urban area which lacks National Forest
character. The conveyance of this tract will reduce boundary management
costs and allow for the purchase of high priority endangered species
habitat, critical wetlands, and potential recreation areas for the
public.
s. 2834
S. 2834 pertains to various NFS, Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
and National Park Service (NPS) lands in Washington County, Utah. I
will limit my remarks to the provisions of the bill related to the NFS
lands and will defer to the Department of the Interior on provisions
relating to the lands managed by the BLM and the NPS.
S. 2834 would designate new wilderness areas, including 2,643 acres
of NFS land on the Dixie National Forest as the ``Cottonwood Forest
Wilderness,'' provide for trail maintenance, travel management
planning, conservation projects, establish the High Desert Off-Highway
Vehicle Trail, and prescribe certain management objectives in
wilderness areas designated in this bill. It would also direct the
conveyance of 112 acres of land on the Dixie National Forest to Mr.
Kirk R. Harrison. The Department does not oppose S. 2834, although we
have concerns regarding some of the bill's provisions.
The proposed wilderness area is scenic, rugged, and has a rich
diversity of narrow canyons providing excellent opportunity for
solitude and primitive recreational experiences. It also possesses a
special feature by virtue of its location adjacent to a desert tortoise
reserve. In addition, the area is contiguous to BLM land that would be
designated by the bill as the ``Cottonwood Canyon Wilderness.'' The
Dixie National Forest has determined that the area is suitable for
wilderness. However, in the revision of its forest plan, the Forest
expects to propose that the area be managed as a ``Backcountry Area.''
This classification is similar to wilderness, but differs because it
would allow a mix of motorized and non-motorized recreation to take
advantage of the unique recreation opportunities that exist in the
area.
The Department requests a technical amendment to the bill in Title
I--Wilderness Areas which is needed for clarification. The bill defines
the term ``Secretary'' as the Secretary of the Interior. Accordingly,
Section 102(a)(2) could be interpreted to mean the Secretary of the
Interior would manage the area of NFS lands designated as the
``Cottonwood Forest Wilderness'' by Section 101(a)(5). We suggest
adding ``Agriculture'' to the language ``shall be considered to be a
reference to the Secretary'' to clarify that NFS lands under the
jurisdiction of Agriculture would continue to be managed by the
Secretary of Agriculture.
Section 102 of the bill includes some provisions regarding the
management of the areas designated as wilderness that are either
unnecessary or would change the direction that would otherwise apply
under the Wilderness Act of 1964. The Department prefers to follow the
provisions of the Act. The Department objects to the provisions in
Section 102(l), which would permanently authorize the State's use of
aircraft in wilderness for wildlife management purposes, and Section
102(m), which would authorize wildlife water development projects. The
Forest Service currently subjects proposed uses of wilderness to review
on a case-by-case basis, allowing for cooperatively working with
partners to balance use in compliance with the Wilderness Act.
Section 102(n) would direct the Secretaries to enter into a
cooperative agreement under which the State or designee of the State
would carry out wildlife management activities in wilderness areas
designated by this title. The Department does not oppose this
provision. The Forest Service has signed a cooperative agreement with
the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the BLM that outlines
policies and guidelines for fish and wildlife management in wilderness
areas, including protocols for managing nonconforming uses (titled
``Policies and Guidelines for Fish and Wildlife Management in National
Forest and Bureau of Land Management Wilderness'' and dated June 2006).
It demonstrates a common understanding between the States and Federal
agencies. The agreement also allows for similar State-specific
agreements if needed. The Department believes that this national
agreement provides a mutually agreed upon method to address management
issues, and it would be our preference to develop any State agreement
in accordance with it to maintain a consistent approach.
Section 603 of the bill would direct the Secretary of the Interior,
in coordination with the Secretary of Agriculture, to designate the
High Desert Off-Highway Vehicle Trail based on existing roads and
trails. The Department does not oppose the trail designation. However,
the Department is concerned about the cost of repair and the
reconstruction of existing trails that the designation could require.
This work has not been a priority trail reconstruction project for the
Forest.
Section 1002 of the bill would direct the Secretary of Agriculture
to convey, for fair market value, 112 acres of land to Mr. Kirk R.
Harrison, a private landowner. The Department is concerned with this
section of the bill. The lands in question are currently the subject of
Small Tracts Act applications by Mr. Harrison. While we support selling
Mr. Harrison approximately 21 acres, which would include his entire
original applications for the Spring Field, Platt Field, and Reservoir
Field land areas, we do not support conveyance of any additional acres.
However, we would like to continue to work with the sponsor and the
Committee to resolve this concern. In addition, we would like to
suggest a technical correction for this section.
Mr. Chairman, again thank you for the opportunity to discuss both
S. 934 and S. 2834. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Wyden. Thank you. Thank you both. I just have a
couple of areas I wanted to explore because I know colleagues
wanted to get into these in greater depth.
Ms. Jacobson, as I understand it on the Owyhee legislation
revenues from the sale of lands the BLM has previously
identified for disposal would be used to buy other lands in and
around the wilderness areas. Now according to your testimony
the Administration has an objection to this because you want
and I quote, ``ensure that the bill returns an appropriate
share of the proceeds to the Federal taxpayer.'' My question is
if all of the proceeds from the sale of the BLM lands are being
used to acquire other public lands wouldn't that be an
appropriate return to the American people?
Ms. Jacobson. Senator, I think that's a very good question.
As you pointed out land sales and land acquisitions are a valid
land management tool just as exchanges are. In this case the
bill is a land sale and land purchase, not an exchange and we
just would like to work with the committee, with your staff and
with Senator Crapo's office to explore the issues surrounding
the land sales and the finances from them.
Senator Wyden. So if the same lands were conveyed as part
of a land exchange would the Department be recommending that a
portion of the value of the land involved be deposited in the
treasury in effect be consistent with the position you lay out
today?
Ms. Jacobson. Senator, I don't know what the Administration
would say on that specific point although your question is a
very valid question.
Senator Wyden. Ok. I'm going to have some questions that
we'll need to have addressed from the Administration on the
Washington County legislation when we have a chance to look at
that further. But my only other one at this time, Mr. Holtrop,
is I understand that the Forest Service proposed to exchange
the tract of Forest Service land that would be sold under S.
934, but that exchange recently was put on hold. Can you tell
me what the challenge is there and why that exchange wouldn't
adequately address the needs of the Forest Service in the
county?
Mr. Holtrop. Yes, that's the Florida National Forest piece
of legislation.
Senator Wyden. Right.
Mr. Holtrop. There never has been an agreement to initiate
a land exchange in that case. This tract of land has been
identified as not having national forest character. It's
surrounded on three sides by the city of Tallahassee and on the
other side by a power line corridor and has difficulty in
management for our purposes. Because of its location and the
cost of managing it and property boundary management and those
types of things, we did enter into some discussions as to
whether an exchange was feasible given the likely high value of
that parcel for urban purposes and the difficulty of
identifying the number of parcels of land in a short period of
time to arrive at an exchange this was the option that was
preferred.
Senator Wyden. Senator Barrasso?
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. To Ms.
Jacobson, if I could, the Owyhee Wilderness bill has reference
to fencing off areas of the wilderness. Could you talk a little
bit about that in terms of the cost, how that's going to born,
if there's going to be appropriations for it in addition to
appropriations currently out there?
Ms. Jacobson. At this time, Senator, we're unable to
anticipate how much fencing would be required. So it's
difficult for us to put a price tag on that.
Senator Barrasso. Can you talk a little bit more about that
just in terms of as you envision this whole project, what's
involved in the process, the amount of time it would take, how
many miles of fencing are you talking about?
Ms. Jacobson. Again, it would depend on the actual acreage
and livestock on or not on. So again it would be very difficult
for us to determine at this time.
Senator Barrasso. Would you expect regardless of the amount
that there would be some cost incurred. How would you view that
being dealt with?
Ms. Jacobson. Yes, sir. Yes, Senator. The bill says the
Secretary may require and what I would anticipate our local
land managers doing is determining what--where a fence would be
appropriate, what the cost were and then we have to make, as
everybody does, decisions on where we allocate funds on the
grounds and where we don't. So priorities would be set. But the
bill says the Secretary may.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. I thank my friend.
Senator Craig.
Senator Craig. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Julie,
you mentioned some concern about land sales and dollars and
sense. One of my concerns about the language we are reviewing
today lies in Section Six, land identified for disposal. It
states proceeds from the sale of public lands under Section A,
shall be deposited in a separate account in the treasury of the
United States to be known as the Owyhee Lands Acquisition
Account.
Should I be concerned and should other Idahoans be
concerned that such language could redirect Federal dollars
away from the Boise Foothills Project?
Ms. Jacobson. My understanding, sir, is that that wouldn't
occur, that the land sales that are authorized in this bill
that are consistent with our land use plans are in the Boise
District and so they would not interfere with the bill--the Act
that you referenced, Senator.
Senator Craig. Trying to look at the location of the
Foothills, but Boise, I guess they're not in that BLM District?
Ms. Jacobson. That's my understanding, Senator.
Senator Craig. I think that's right, ok. We'll look at that
again with you, but thank you. I appreciate that offer.
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. Yes.
Senator Craig. I concluded. Thank you.
Senator Wyden. I thank my friend. My apologies to
colleagues with the schedule now it's a juggle now and I
appreciate my colleagues' indulgence.
Senator Crapo.
Senator Crapo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have no
questions at this point. I just want to again thank Julie
Jacobson for the time she's put into helping us work through
the issues on this legislation. Thank you.
Senator Wyden. Thank you.
Senator Bennett.
Senator Bennett. Thank you. I alike have no questions for
the Administration.
Senator Wyden. You're home free, folks. Thank you. Thank
you for working with us.
Our next panel. The Honorable James J Eardley, Chairman of
the Washington County Commission, St. George, Utah. Bill
Meadows, President of The Wilderness Society, Washington, DC,
Dr. Chad Gibson, Owyhee Range Service, Wilder, Idaho, and Craig
Gehrke, Regional Director of the Wilderness Society, Boise,
Idaho.
Gentlemen, welcome and thank you for coming, in some
instances, long, long distances to be with the subcommittee.
We'll make your prepared remarks a part of the hearing record
in their entirety. Why don't we begin with you, Mr. Eardley?
Welcome.
STATEMENT OF JAMES J. EARDLEY, CHAIRMAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, ST. GEORGE, UT
Mr. Eardley. Ok. Thank you for that. Anyway, I'm grateful
for the opportunity to be able to address this committee. Mr.
Chairman, my name is Jim Eardley. I'm Chairman of the
Washington County Commission. I'm here to express full support
that our commission has for Senate bill 2834, the Washington
County Growth and Conservation Act of 2008.
We are able to be here today because we have engaged in an
extensive planning effort that has involved productive
discussions for a broad base of stakeholders. Compromise has
been necessary because of either ailments of this legislation
that gives us discomfort. But the overall importance of Senate
bill 2834 overrides the firstly important items that many of us
had to give up to create this final bill.
I'd like to thank those stakeholders that have been
involved for their willingness to collaborate. I certainly want
to take a few minutes and thank Senator Bennett and Congressman
Matheson for their help and support through this whole process
over these past few years. It is important that you understand
that Senate bill 2834 is about getting something done.
For the first time in Utah we have managed to get the right
people to the table who possess a significant amount of courage
to address and a grasp of the big picture to finally be
successful. I believe we have finally reached a point we are
making progress. It's far more important for us to move forward
on this than it is to maintain unyielding positions.
As has been stated by Senator Bennett, we are experiencing
tremendous growth in Washington County. It is currently the
fifth fastest growing county in the United States, up from the
year 2006, it was the No. 1 fastest growing county in the
United States. We currently are the fastest growing
metropolitan area in the United States.
Our county is about 1.5 million acres. Eighty-four percent
of that acreage is under either State or Federal ownership with
15 to 16 percent being owned privately. There's really no
practical way for us to separate public land use issues from
private land use issues. One certainly impacts the other and
the effect can be rather dramatic.
This legislation is part of a larger effort to address
these issues. Washington County began several years ago with a
comprehensive land use planning project that involved many
stakeholders in a working group setting, State, Federal, land
managers sat at the table in advisory roles offering valuable
insight and technical advice regarding management challenges
and potential solutions. The county then engaged in a county
wide growth planning process called Vision Dixie.
This project involved over 3,000 of our citizens at a
variety of meetings held throughout the community. Those
findings have been validated through polling activity as well
as online input. We have formed what we refer to as guiding
principles.
Vision Dixie Guiding Principles include maintaining the
quality of air and water, conserving our precious water,
protecting our unique signature landscape, preserving our
agriculture ranching heritage, preserving open space, creating
connectability through systems of roads and trails, creating
improving our transportation infrastructure, focusing on growth
of our first and contiguous next. The objectives of Vision
Dixie, overall objectives of this legislation are very similar
to our land bill. To protect special place, enhance open space,
develop trails, parks and accommodate accelerated growth.
In fact except for legislative effort, Vision Dixie would
never have taken place. The land sales element of S. 2834 not
only provides tools to finally deal with the private in
holdings within the Red Hills Tortoise Preserve. But 10 percent
earmarked for the county allows us to accomplish the very thing
described of to implement Vision Dixie in a very real way.
It is not difficult to conclude that Vision Dixie process
and legislation are separately connected. One cannot work the
full benefit without the other. S. 2834 is an excellent balance
between conservation, growth planning and administrative views
to create an extraordinary blend of stakeholders, citizens,
State and Federal managers, local leaders and Congressional
delegation representatives. As I said we have other concerns
which are outlined in written testimony that we'll continue to
work on with Congress and in our delegation to resolve.
Of utmost importance county wide access for public land
users in the county a large number of RS 2477 assertions which
make up the core of our county, public land transportation
system. We have worked very hard to get to this point. There is
much good that can be accomplished from the passage of S. 2834,
not only for the citizens of Washington County, but for all the
people to enjoy the beauty and diversity of our county. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Eardley follows:]
Prepared Statement of James J. Eardley, Chairman, Washington County
Board of Commissioners, St. George, UT, on S. 2834
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, my name is Jim Eardley,
Chairman of the Washington County Board of Commissioners. I am here in
full support of S. 2834, The Washington County Growth and Conservation
Act of 2008. We are able to be here today because we have been engaged
in an extensive planning effort which has involved productive
discussions with a broad base of stakeholders. Compromise has been
necessary. Because of that, there are elements of this legislation
which give us discomfort. But the overall importance of S. 2834
overrides those personally important items that many of us have given
up in order to create a final bill, and I would like to thank all the
stakeholders involved for their willingness to collaborate.
I also wish to thank the entire Utah Congressional delegation for
their support. I particularly want to thank Senator Bennett and
Congressman Matheson for sharing our vision and then working to advance
it here in the Congress. With their support, it has turned into the
bipartisan effort you see today.
It is very important for you to understand that S. 2834 is all
about getting something done. For the first time in Utah, we have
managed to get the right people at the table who possess a sufficient
amount of courage and a grasp of the bigger picture to finally be
successful. I'm sure you know something of the volatile nature of
public land issues in our state, much of which has played out here in
the halls of Congress like scenes from a Greek tragedy, with few
positive results. But I believe we have finally reached a point where
making progress is more important than holding to some rigid,
unyielding position.
I'm grateful for that. Utah land management issues have too long
been twisting on the winds of rhetoric, contention, senseless
positioning, and fruitless debate. This legislation represents a new
day in Utah public land deliberations. The success of S. 2834 will
usher in a new era of problem solving and resolution--something which
is especially important to those of us who are closest to the public
lands and most impacted by management decisions.
Washington County is experiencing tremendous growth. The U.S.
Census listed us as the fifth fastest growing county, and the fastest
growing metropolitan planning organization, in the country. Each month,
around a thousand new residents arrive in Washington County, along with
tens of thousands of visitors from all over the world, drawn by the
wonderful natural beauty of the land, the warm climate, and the diverse
recreational opportunities.
Washington County is just over 1.5 million acres, more than 29% of
which is currently under some form of special, restrictive management,
including protective habitat for twelve different threatened or
endangered species. Our legislation would add to that number of
specially-designated lands. Over 84% of our land is in Federal or State
ownership, leaving just over 15% of the total land area to accommodate
the heavy demands of growth and expansion.
It is important to note that there is no way to separate public
land issues from private land issues in a county like ours. Decisions
we make in our city and county meetings can seriously increase the
burden carried by federal land managers. And, conversely, decisions
made by you here, and by state and federal land managers can greatly
impact our lives as local citizens and leaders.
If we plan poorly or fail to address growth responsibly, the
impacts on adjacent public lands can be dramatic. On the other hand, we
cannot plan properly without taking into account the continual impacts
created by having large tracts of public lands next to us.
For example, in 2005 and again in 2006, wildfires burned out of
control, eventually covering nearly one-fourth of the County, with
resulting impacts on grazing, watershed damage, erosion, and so forth.
We also experienced devastating floods which left many stranded, some
homeless, and property damage in the tens of millions of dollars. The
origin of all these events was on our public lands.
The citizens of Washington County continue to be affected by these
and other events, and, combined with ever-changing management
strategies and ever-growing proposals for special forms of management,
the impacts on local officials, planners, and land-users can be
terrific.
This legislation is part of a large effort to address these issues
in Washington County. I would like to make you aware of the extensive
planning, collaboration, and citizen involvement that has brought us to
this point. We began several years ago with a Comprehensive Land Use
Planning Project which involved many stakeholders in a working group
setting, examining and discussing the many public land challenges in
Washington County. State and federal land managers sat at the table in
advisory roles, offering invaluable insight and technical advice
regarding management challenges and potential solutions.
As an extension of that first effort, the County then engaged in a
county-wide growth planning process, which we called ``Vision Dixie''.
Vision Dixie is a comprehensive growth planning effort modeled after
the Envision Utah process used in some of the major communities on the
Wasatch Front and in other areas of the of the country with great
success.
This project involved over 3000 of our citizens, as well as
representatives from many stakeholder groups, in creating a county-wide
footprint for growth. Some of the results of this process were quite
predictable, some were a little surprising, but all were guided and
developed by the many citizens and stakeholders who participated. In
the end, a set of visionary ``Guiding Principles'' were created, which
will guide the County and all the municipalities in directing and
controlling the manner in which we grow in the future. I have included
a copy of our ``Dixie Principles'' with my written testimony.
Some of the elements of Vision Dixie include:
Maintaining the quality of our air and water
Conserving our precious water
Protecting our unique ``signature'' landscapes
Preserving our agricultural and ranching heritage
Preserving our open spaces
Creating ``connectability'' through a system of trails
Greatly improving our transportation infrastructure
Focusing growth inward first, contiguous next
The objectives of Vision Dixie and the overall objectives of this
legislation are very similar--to protect our special places, enhance
open space, develop trails and parks, and accommodate accelerated
growth. In fact, except for this legislative effort, Vision Dixie would
never have taken place. The land sales element of S.2834 not only
provides the tools to finally deal with the private in-holdings within
the Red Hills Desert Tortoise preserve, but the 10% earmarked for the
County allows us to accomplish the very things described above, and to
implement the Vision Dixie vision in a very real way.
It is not difficult to conclude, then, that the Vision Dixie
process and this legislation are inseparably connected. The legislation
empowers, the growth planning process directs, and one cannot work to
its fullest benefit without the other. S.2834 is an excellent balance
between conservation and growth planning, and the methods we have used
to create it have been an extraordinary blend of stakeholders,
citizens, state and federal managers, local leaders, and congressional
delegation representatives.
I'm not sure I can adequately define the importance of these two
efforts to the future of Washington County in the five minutes I have
been given. I also believe that I cannot emphasize enough the
possibilities this legislation creates in finally resolving public land
management issues across the state. Clearly, it is very important that
we pass S. 2834.
As I mentioned before, there has been a great deal of compromise on
many levels to reach this point, and Washington County has some
concerns about several elements of the legislation to which I would
like make reference.
First, county-wide access for all public land users is of critical
importance, and the County has a large number of RS 2477 assertions
which make up the core of our county public land transportation system.
Some of these roads may be impacted by this legislation, and the County
would like the opportunity to work with Senator Bennett and Congressman
Matheson to continue to clarify and protect these important
transportation issues and to assure that the County's interests are
protected.
Also, we have concerns regarding the land sales portion of the
bill. There are a large number of private in-holdings, particularly in
the Tortoise reserve, which have not been appropriately dealt with by
the federal government. The proceeds from the land sales are intended
to address this important issue. It is also the County's desire to do
some of the critical conservation projects which have not had adequate
funding. However, the limited number of acres remaining in this
legislation after our negotiations is hardly enough to successfully
resolve all the in-holding problems and accomplish the many
conservation projects which demand attention. The County would like the
opportunity to continue to work with the Delegation members on this
matter as well.
The County is also concerned about some of the language regarding
the establishment of the National Conservation Areas, and would like to
continue to work with the Delegation members to resolve these concerns.
We would like to be sure the NCAs accomplish the purposes for which
they are being created, while protecting historic uses.
Summarily, we have worked very hard to get to this point, and there
is much good to be accomplished with the passage of S. 2834, not only
for the citizens of Washington County, but for all people who enjoy the
beauty and diversity of our public lands. But, just as important, it
establishes a format for resolving these contentious issues on a much
broader scale, and could lead to similar collaborative efforts across
the West. We strongly urge you to support this legislation. Thank you.
Senator Wyden. Mr. Eardley, thank you and thank you for
your presentation.
Mr. Meadows.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. MEADOWS, PRESIDENT, THE WILDERNESS
SOCIETY
Mr. Meadows. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee,
my name is Bill Meadows and I'm President of The Wilderness
Society. I thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf
of the Washington County Growth and Conservation Act of 2008. I
first want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on
wilderness in the Mount Hood Wilderness and Copper Salmon
Wilderness, really great efforts. You know The Wilderness
Society fully supports that work and applaud you for that
leadership.
Senator Wyden. We thank you for your support of Mount Hood
and Copper Salmon and by God, by next wilderness day we're
going to have those law.
Mr. Meadows. We'll celebrate with you. Senator Crapo, it's
a pleasure to be here at a time when we're talking about Owyhee
Canyon legislation, too. So thank you for that.
It's particularly auspicious, as Senator Wyden noted, that
we're together on the anniversary of Earth Day. I was
privileged during most of my working life at The Wilderness
Society to work a few doors down from Senator Gaylord Nelson,
the founder of Earth Day, who spent his last 25 years working
as an esteemed counselor for The Wilderness Society. Senator
Nelson used to say that our public lands in this country are
the greatest gift that every American receives at birth. That
gift to all of us is no where greater seen and envisioned than
the beautiful Red Rock Country in Utah that we discuss today.
I've submitted a written statement for the record that
addresses this legislation in more detail. But I would like to
summarize the views of my organization and then will be happy
to take questions from the committee. As many on this committee
know wilderness protection in Utah has a long and contiguous
history.
Although not the bill The Wilderness Society would write,
this bill is a product of good faith efforts by many diverse
interests. We have some concerns as outlined in our testimony.
But we believe that the legislation represents an opportunity
to finally achieve lasting protection for some spectacular
lands in Utah.
First, I thank Senator Bennett for his diligent efforts on
this bill. He has demonstrated real leadership keeping these
diverse interests focused on what is possible. Many thanks also
to Senators Bingaman and Wyden who have already devoted
personal time and attention to the cause of protecting these
wonderful landscapes. Also my thanks to Representative Matheson
and staff, David Brooks, and Tyler Owens with whom we've worked
closely for their leadership in developing this legislation as
well.
This legislation would designate as wilderness or national
conservation areas about 380,000 acres of public land. This is
a substantial amount of protection for a county that has been
locked in stalemate over wilderness protection for decades. As
part of the protection, 94 percent of the Bureau of Land
Management Wilderness Study Areas in Washington County would
become permanent wilderness.
Included in these designations would be 190,000 acres of
the 300,000 acres contained in inventory of BLM Wilderness
quality lands prepared by the Utah Wilderness Coalition. About
140,000 acres of these lands would be designated wilderness and
50,000 acres of National Conservation Area. Much of this area
has no effective protection to date. So this would be a
significant gain in protecting the county's Federal lands.
Among the outstanding areas that would gain wilderness
protection are Cougar Canyon, Doc's Pass, Canaan Mountain and
the Kolob Unit of Zion National Park. Protection for these
areas would truly be cause for celebration. The National
Conservation Areas would also provide protection for sensitive
tortoise habitat. We know that it is the intent of Senator
Bennett to protect these areas against inappropriate motorized
vehicle use. We believe additional language needs to be
inserted to accomplish that intent.
Our most serious concern is with Title IX--Title VII of the
bill regarding land disposal. We are much appreciative of the
bill's recognition that identification of Federal land for
disposal should only take place in the context of agency
management planning and in accordance with current law. We also
are appreciative that a large percentage of the proceeds from
such sales would be dedicated to acquiring ecologically
important lands within the county. This is a notable
improvement over previous legislation because it would add high
value conservation lands to the Federal estate.
Our concern is with a portion of the proceeds from such
sales that divert 10 percent of the revenues to the county's
local government. Use of these funds is not limited to
conservation purposes. It could be used for a variety of local
projects including transportation infrastructure and water
development. We believe strongly that our Federal public lands
for the property of all taxpayers and are the birthright that
ensures preservation and conservation of our most special
places for generations to come.
In the interest of time I will not detail the other
suggestions we have included in our written testimony, but we
believe that there are some changes in drafting that would
better effectuate the intent of the drafters. I would like to
close by reiterating what may be the most important point of
all that the work that has already occurred on this bill
represents a breakthrough in long polarized debate in Utah over
land protection. While not perfect, I think this bill offers
real and lasting protection for an important part of Southern
Utah's public lands.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I'm happy
to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Meadows follows:]
Prepared Statement of William H. Meadows, President, The Wilderness
Society, on S. 2834
introduction
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am Bill Meadows,
President of The Wilderness Society, a non-profit conservation
organization dedicated to preserving our nation's public land legacy,
and with this bill I believe we have a real opportunity to do exactly
that for the unique wild lands of southwestern Utah.
Let me start by thanking Senator Bennett and his staff for the hard
work that has gone into this legislation. They have spent countless
hours listening to the concerns and recommendations from all interested
parties, including significant time spent on the ground in Washington
County examining a great many of the proposed wilderness areas.
Let me also thank the members of the Subcommittee and Committee,
and particularly Senators Bingaman and Wyden and their talented staff.
Although the bill has only recently been introduced, the Committee has
already shown a willingness to devote resources, including the time of
the Senators themselves, to work on this important legislation in a
productive way, recognizing the importance of America's public lands
legacy to all Americans.
As you know, S. 2834 is a complex public lands bill built upon
years of effort that addresses a variety of issues in Washington
County, Utah. Although not the bill The Wilderness Society would write,
this legislation addresses a number of competing uses on public lands
and is product of an effort carried out in good faith. Although we have
some concerns as outlined in our testimony, we believe this legislation
represents significant gains for America's public lands.
While I will briefly address several titles of the bill, our most
extensive expertise is on the Wilderness titles of the legislation;
therefore, I will focus the majority of my testimony on that title.
wilderness and other protective designations
The legislation would designate as Wilderness or as National
Conservation Areas about 380,000 acres of Bureau of Land Management
(BLM), national forest, or national park lands. This is a substantial
amount of protection for a county that has been locked in a stalemate
over wilderness protection for decades. As part of this protection, 94%
of the BLM Wilderness Study Areas (WSA) in Washington County would
become permanent Wilderness; the areas that are released from WSA
status are boundary adjustments in the Canaan Mountain and Red Mountain
areas and one small study area in the Beaver Dam Wash. We believe this
level of protection for WSA's should set a minimum standard for future
wilderness bills in Utah.
As part of this designation, 190,000 of the 300,000 acres contained
in the inventory of BLM wilderness quality lands prepared by the Utah
Wilderness Coalition and the citizens of Utah would receive an enhanced
level of protection. Although this does not protect as much of this
these lands as we would like, it includes about 140,000 acres that
would be designated wilderness and about 52,000 acres that would be
National Conservation Areas as discussed below. Much of this land
currently has little effective protection, so this is a significant
gain in protecting the federal land of Washington County. With this, a
stalemate could finally be broken, bringing lasting protection to some
of America's most wild and spectacular federal public lands.
Some highlights of the areas and resources that would receive
Wilderness protection:
Cougar Canyon and Doc's Pass: Situated in the very northwest
corner of Washington County, this remote and rugged area offers
outstanding opportunities for hiking, rock climbing, deer
hunting, and trout fishing. As its name suggests, the area is
prime habitat for mountain lions. The Wilderness designation
would ensure that a proposed reservoir and dam for the heart of
the area would not be developed.
Kolob Units: The six units that comprise the Kolob area are
logical extensions of the Kolob Terrace section of Zion
National Park. They are part of the integrated watershed,
wildlife habitat, and scenic terrain of the park, and are among
some of the most pristine, spectacular, and ecologically
significant lands in Utah.
Canaan Mountain: Peregrines, desert bighorn sheep, mountain
lion, coyote, bobcat are among the animals found in this
spectacular mountain unit. Though often overlooked by visitors
to Zion National Park, Canaan Mountain offers superb
opportunities for day hikes and backpack trips through its
sandstone plateau.
As noted, in addition to the Wilderness designations the bill also
would protect a total of about 113,000 acres of sensitive tortoise
habitat as National Conservation Areas (NCAs), 52,000 acres of which
are in the citizens' inventory of BLM wilderness quality lands. Of
these two NCAs, the 68,000-acre Beaver Dam Wash National Conservation
Area would protect the dazzling Joshua Tree forests of the southwest
corner of the county.
In order to realize true protection from inappropriate motorized
use in this area, we understand that Senator Bennett and the County
have agreed and intend that the citizens' inventoried wilderness areas
in the NCA should be closed to motorized public use except for three
roads totaling about three miles. However, there is no statutory
language affording protection against motorized use in the current
version of the bill. We understand that committee staff is exploring
ways in which such protection could be written into the legislation
ensuring that appropriate protection is made permanent. We believe this
protection is important and should be made a part of the legislation.
Finally, the bill would also protect 165 miles of rivers in the
County as Wild and Scenic Rivers. We are most appreciative of the
protections provided for these areas.
federal land disposal
Title VII of the bill requires the sale of about 4,000 acres of
public land that has been identified by the Bureau of Land Management
as appropriate for disposal in the course of its management planning.
It also provides for the sale of up to 5,000 additional acres of public
land should such land be identified for disposal in accordance with
current law at a later date. We are appreciative of the bill's
recognition that identification of public lands for disposal should not
be made outside of the management planning by the relevant agency and
must be done in accordance with current law.
Of most serious concern are the provisions of S. 2834 that earmark
the disposition of the proceeds from these land sales in a manner
inconsistent with current law. Proceeds from Federal land sales covered
by the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA) currently
remain as federal funds and generally go toward buying other land from
willing sellers and making it part of the portfolio of federal land.
Proceeds from the sale of the 4,000 acres that have been identified by
BLM for disposal would be covered by FLTFA.
The Washington County Growth and Conservation Act would depart from
this equation by diverting 10% of sale revenues to the local government
of Washington County. It further provides that 5% would be available to
the state for the support of schools, in accordance with current law.
The remaining 85% of the proceeds would go toward acquiring high
priority ecological and wilderness lands within Washington County, less
an amount earmarked for the administrative costs to BLM to implement
the legislation (9% or up to $15 million).
It is the 10% earmarked for the county that is of concern. Use of
these funds is not limited to conservation purposes and could be used
for a variety of local projects, including transportation
infrastructure and water development. We understand and are sympathetic
to the fact that Washington County, like virtually every county and
state government, has spending needs that may not be fully funded.
However, we believe strongly that our federal public lands are the
property of all taxpayers and are a birthright that ensures the
preservation and conservation of our most special places for
generations to come. When disposal of those lands are appropriate, the
resulting funds should remain the property of all Americans.
At the same time, we are supportive of the provision that would
commit 85% of the proceeds (less the 9% of primarily administrative
costs) to acquiring ecologically important lands within the county.
This is a significant improvement over previous legislation that did
not dedicate this percentage to land acquisition. Adding high value
conservation lands to the Federal estate is a significant benefit.
other provisions on federal land management
We appreciate that this bill no longer mandates that a right-of-way
be granted for a water pipeline from Lake Powell. We do have some
concern about its provision of other rights-of-way because, although we
understand they are unrelated to the pipeline, they are given away in
perpetuity without any compensation to the taxpayers.
S. 2834 requires the BLM to identify one or more options for the
placement of a ``northern transportation'' corridor in the County. We
understand that Senator Bennett has agreed not to require any study of
a transportation route through sensitive desert tortoise habitat. The
current language needs work in order to more clearly effectuate this
intent.
S. 2834 generally would require the BLM to designate areas, roads,
and trails where off-road vehicle use is permitted. We support the need
for the development of a timely county-wide travel management plan
conducted in accordance with all existing laws, including those that
are intended to protect natural and cultural resources and the
interests of all users of the area. We believe the intent of the
drafters is consistent with our view, but that some refinement in the
drafting may be required to effectuate this purpose. We also have
questions about the intent of the provisions in Titles VII and IX that
provide for funds to private entities for stated purposes. We would
like to work with the interested parties to better understand this
intent and ensure that if appropriate, it is carefully drafted.
Additionally, we have suggestions that we believe would improve the
drafting in a few other areas. We will be providing those suggestions
to the sponsors and the Committee, and would appreciate the opportunity
to continue to work together with the Committee as the bill is further
refined.
conclusion
The Wilderness Society believes S. 2834 represents a breakthrough
in what has been a long-polarized debate in Utah over land protection.
While not perfect as currently drafted, it presents a real opportunity
to afford real and lasting protection for an important part of
southwestern Utah's public land legacy. We appreciate the opportunity
to testify and look forward to working with the Committee and the
sponsors to fully achieve the promise inherent in this bill.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Meadows. Thank you for the
advocacy you bring to this cause and on this day especially. We
thank you.
Dr. Gibson of the Owyhee Range Service, welcome.
STATEMENT OF CHAD C. GIBSON, OWYHEE RANGE SERVICE, WILDER, ID
Mr. Gibson. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to
be here, committee members. We appreciate the opportunity to
have this legislation heard and for me to provide some
information in regard to that.
I've been a member of the Owyhee Initiative Work Group
since its beginning in 2001 as a representative of the Owyhee
Cattlemen's Association. So I bring this information from that
perspective. This initiative process provides an opportunity to
deal with land use conflicts that have been around forever in
regard to wilderness and wild and scenic rivers. But at the
same time it addresses the issue of trying to maintain
economically viable ranching, initiate preservation of tribal
and cultural resources and maintain a significant opportunity
for recreational use of this very sought after recreational
area.
The Association is supportive of the legislation as is
indicated and have some issues with it, but the Association
does support the legislation. The Association was initiated in
1878 and this is probably one of the largest tasks that they
faced in all of those years. The legislation and this effort is
clearly not going to get rid of all of the issues, but it
certainly provides a path forward that maybe gets them down to
a manageable level.
One of the issues is the establishment of the Owyhee
Science Review that the Association believes is extremely
important. It's intended as a means of assuring that scientific
information is appropriately obtained, properly considered and
applied. That's often an issue with scientific information
getting into disputes. We recently spent 18 days in court over
one of these.
The process imposes no burden on the Department that's not
already required. That is to provide information that's needed
to conduct the review. It ensures that the review is conducted
by independent scientists with specific knowledge of the issues
in question. The intent is to provide sound science for
everyone that's involved in and has an interest in resource
management.
While the scientific questions may be generated by issues
that arise from Owyhee County, they certainly will have broad
application in other areas. The Association believes that the
wilderness areas that have been identified are the very best of
the best and that they represent a very viable compromise in
acres that are going to be preserved as wilderness and acres
that are going to be released to other management, particularly
areas that have special management needs.
The same is true in regard to the wild and scenic rivers.
They're issues there that have been on the books since the mid
1970s and haven't been resolved. This is an opportunity to be
able to do that.
I think also of importance is the provision in the
legislation to implement the Shoshone Paiute Cultural Resection
Resource Protection Plan. It's been on the books for a number
of years and has just not been implemented because the
attention has not been given to it. The ever increasing visitor
participation in the area either from folks that just don't
know or from sometimes in the case of vandals the desecration
of some of those sites has been well documented. I think
recognition of that proposal or that plan and putting it into
effect will be a great help to these special values and
particularly to the tribe.
I think in the interest of time perhaps I could be, better
serve the committee by answering questions later on. So I'll
conclude my statement now.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gibson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chad C. Gibson, Owyhee Range Service, Wilder, ID,
on S. 2833
First I would like to thank the Committee for allowing this
legislation to be considered and for allowing me to provide information
at this hearing. I have been a member of the Owyhee Initiative work
group since its beginning in 2001 as a representative of the Owyhee
Cattlemen's Association and I offer the following comment from that
perspective.
The unique process known as the Owyhee Initiative was sponsored by
the Owyhee County Commissioners, the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Senator
Mike Crapo. The County and Tribes set forth the goal and issues they
wished to have addressed, sought interested and willing participants
and appointed diverse group of representatives from an equally diverse
group of conservation, ranching / landowner and recreational interest
groups (Owyhee Initiative work group). On paper it may have looked like
an impossible task; however, a condition for appointment was a strong
commitment to the assigned task. The resulting Owyhee Initiative
Agreement resulted from a willingness of the participants to recognize
and respect the views and beliefs of others and to seek common ground
from where the assigned goal and issue could be addressed. The Owyhee
Initiative Agreement resulted from a high level of commitment and trust
among all participants and the patient unwavering support of the
sponsors. Efforts such as the Owyhee Initiative provide a unique path
for the replacement of conflict and gridlock with cooperative effort to
achieve common interests.
Owyhee County is sprawled over nearly 5 million acres and possesses
a diverse landscape from small communities surrounded by intensive
irrigated agriculture to extremely rugged and remote back country. The
ranching community is dispersed throughout the County. Like many areas
in the west the private land that support ranching operations occupy
the most productive areas with water and other high resource values.
Historically, ranching on these lands has maintained an open space
landscape prized by residents and visitors alike for its benefit to
wildlife as well as human use. The best hope for avoiding fragmentation
through special use ownership is to maintain the opportunity for viable
ranching use. While viable ranch operations cannot be guaranteed, land
management that, at least, preserves the opportunity for success is
essential for maintenance of a viable open space landscape.
The Owyhee Initiative provides an opportunity to resolves land use
conflict through the identification and designation of Wilderness and
Wild and Scenic Rivers while preserving the opportunity for continued
economically viable ranching, initiating active preservation of Tribal
cultural resources and maintaining significant opportunity for diverse
recreational use.
Senate 2833 is the culmination of nearly 7 years of cooperative
collaborative effort to resolve conflict and move past management
gridlock in order to foster and allow progressive management of natural
resources in Owyhee County.
While the Owyhee Initiative Agreement imposes various commitments
on the participants, some elements cannot become reality without
Congressional Action. The Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008, S-
2833 contains the Congressional directives necessary to realize many of
the most important elements of the agreement.
I believe it is important to recognize the commitment and extensive
effort of the Committee staff in the effort to develop this
legislation. David Brooks has been especially helpful by committing the
time needed to understand the issues and provide positive legislative
solution. Frank Gladics has also been especially helpful with the
process.
I am here to express the Owyhee Cattlemen's Association support for
the components and concepts addressed in this legislation. The OCA was
first established in 1878 and perhaps has never engaged in an effort
more important to the future of Ranching in Owyhee County. This
legislation clearly will not resolve all conflict but does offer a
positive path forward.
The provision for establishment of the Owyhee Science Review and
Conservation and Research Center represents a unique approach to
combining the discovery of new information and application of new and
known science.
The Science Review is intended as a means of assuring that
scientific information is appropriately obtained considered and
applied. Independent peer review offers a unique opportunity to avoid
disputes over the proper application of science that lead to management
delay, gridlock and lengthy legal disputes. This process imposes no
burden on the Department that is not already required. It assures that
any review will be conducted by independent scientists with specific
knowledge of the issues in question. The intent is to provide sound
science based management guidance for all entities that have an
interest in resource management. While the scientific questions
proposed for review would originate in Owyhee County, the information
gained from peer review would in many cases have much broader
application.
Where scientific information is lacking the Conservation and
Research Center will provide an opportunity to coordinate and direct
research activity to meet the most pressing scientific information
needs. In addition the Center will provide a means to leverage and
coordinate conservation programs to achieve much broader scale
objectives than is now the case. The Center would also be in a position
to seek private grants and matching funds to provide increased research
and conservation program opportunity.
I believe that the designation of wilderness includes the lands
with the highest wilderness resource values within the county. The
areas identified for wilderness and the areas identified for release
from interim management were thoroughly investigated and evaluated and
represent a very positive resolution of this issue.
The application of wilderness management as well as the use of
wilderness by users requires that boundaries be readily identifiable on
the ground. A great deal of time was devoted to the identification of
wilderness boundaries in a manner that allows them to be clearly and
easily distinguished on the ground.
The identification of additions to the Wild and Scenic Rivers
System was a thorough process intended to assure that the additions
fully represented the unique rivers and canyonlands in the area. At the
same time the selection of proposed additions considered the avoidance
of future use conflicts.
The provision in the legislation to implement the Shoshone-Paiute
Cultural Resources Protection Plan will allow the Tribes and the
Department to go forward with a plan that has been on the shelf for a
number of years. Increasing visitor use over ever wider areas of the
County poses a growing threat to cultural sites and resources from
vandals or simply uninformed users. Significant depletion of the more
accessible cultural sites has already been documented. Official
recognition and implementation of the Shoshone-Paiute Cultural
Resources Protection Plan will assure much needed management of these
special value resources.
The legislation directs the Department to complete Recreational
Travel Management plans for the Owyhee Front and for the remainder of
the County within one year and three years respectively. The absence of
such plans is detrimental to both the affected resources (soils and
vegetation) and users who are unaware of the roads and trails that
would most satisfy their expectations. Without appropriate plans the
Department must fall back on generic ``existing road and trail''
designations. In such cases enforcement is not practical because
neither the user nor enforcer knows which trails were in existence at
the time of designation. Currently, new routes that are created almost
daily become ``existing'' routes to the next user. Thus, many users who
would not intentionally damage resource values if they were properly
informed are a significant problem in the absence of proper travel
management planning.
In addition to proper travel management planning and public
information, there is a need for adequate enforcement. While most users
would, out of respect for the land, observe posted rules for travel
use, some users need a more direct incentive. Unless adequate
enforcement can be applied, travel management planning and public
information will not solve the problem.
Having stated the above, there remains some concern relative to the
wording of the Act. Those concerns and recommendations for resolution
are discussed below.
RE: page 8, lines 10-14
SEC 4, (b) (3) (C) leaves an impression that it is necessary
to fence livestock out of wilderness areas to ``protect''
wilderness values. However, the areas in question have been
grazed for well over 100 years and wilderness values remain in
tact. Thus, exclusion of livestock does not equate to
protection of wilderness values. The intent was that exclusion
of livestock from areas of certain wilderness designation could
``enhance'' a wilderness experience simply by avoidance of
visitor encounters with livestock. It is my opinion and that of
the Owyhee Cattlemen's Association that the terminology should
be changed as indicated below.
(C) FENCING.--The Secretary may construct and maintain
fencing around wilderness areas designated by this Act as the
Secretary determines to be appropriate to (strike) protect
(insert) enhance wilderness values.
RE: Page 8, lines 23-24 and Page 9, lines 1 & 2.
The provision for the Donation of grazing permits or leases
contains an inadvertent contradiction as to the treatment of the lands
covered by a permit or lease. The termination language indicates that
the donation of a permit of lease in its entirety would result in
permanent closure of the land covered by the permit or lease. This
language does not recognize that the land covered by the donated permit
or lease may also be covered by another permit or lease that will
remain in use (Common use Allotment). The language needed to rectify
this issue is presented below.
(ii) TERMINATION.--The Secretary shall terminate any grazing
permit or lease acquired under clause (i) to ensure a permanent
end to (strike) grazing on (insert) grazing use authorized by
the permit or lease on the land covered by the permit or lease.
**
RE: Page 9, lines 15-22.
The following recommendation is to assure consistent terminology
and avoid potential issues in regard to interpretation of inconsistent
terminology.
(II) AUTHORIZED LEVEL.--To ensure that there is a permanent
reduction in the (insert) authorized level of grazing on the
land covered by a permit or lease donated under subclause (I),
the Secretary shall not allow grazing use to exceed the
authorized level established under that subclause.
RE: Page 9, lines 23-24 and Page 10, lines 1-5.
This section of the legislation provides for the acquisition of
private land within the boundary of the wilderness areas designated by
the Act. However, some of the private land offered for acquisition or
exchange is not within the wilderness boundaries. In addition the
language needs to provide a higher level of certainty that the
Secretary will, at the least, offer to acquire land or interests in
land (offered lands are depicted on appropriate maps) by purchase,
exchange or donation. The certainty is needed in order for ranchers to
adequately plan for reorganization of their ranch operations relative
to expected changes in resource inputs. Ranch management decisions
often have implication for future demands on capitol, labor and
resources over the next 18 months or more. Uncertainty as to the
availability of future capitol, labor and resources significantly
disrupts if not precludes effective ranch planning and management.
The Owyhee Cattlemen's Association believes that there are three
elements needed in language in order to adequately address the issue of
land acquisition. First, the legislation needs to recognize all of the
land that has been offered for potential acquisition both within and
outside of proposed wilderness. Second, the legislation needs to
provide a greater level of certainty that Secretary will, at the least,
offer to proceed with acquisition of the identified private lands.
Third, there needs to be and increased level of certainty that the
offer and completion of land acquisition will occur in a timely manner.
To this end, the following language is offered as a guide to arriving
at a workable and effective solution.
Strike the language at page 10, lines 1-5 and insert the following:
(A) IN GENERAL.--Consistent with applicable law, the
Secretary is authorized and directed to offer to acquire land
or interests in land as depicted on the map (insert appropriate
reference) by purchase, donation, or exchange.
Insert the following at page 10 after subparagraph (B).
(C) TIMING OF ACQUISITIONS--It is the intent of Congress that
the land purchase or exchange directed by this section be
completed not later than one year after the date of enactment
of this Act.
RE: page 22, line 2.
This line refers to maps in section 4(a)(2) that show land
identified as ``proposed for acquisition''. However, it appears that
the cited section only refers to maps showing the boundaries of
wilderness areas established under this act. This line needs to be
amended with the appropriate map reference. Based on the recommendation
above the reference should be (Section 4 (b) (4) (A).
The Owyhee Cattlemen's Association again thanks the Committee for
this opportunity and would like to express their great appreciation and
sincere thanks for the enormous support of this effort by Senator Mike
Crapo and his staff. The OCA is also greatly appreciative of the
willingness of the Committee staff to work toward a positive outcome of
this effort.
Senator Wyden. We thank you and thank you for your good
work.
Mr. Gehrke, welcome.
STATEMENT OF CRAIG GEHRKE, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, THE WILDERNESS
SOCIETY, BOISE, ID
Mr. Gehrke. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee,
thank you. My name is Craig Gehrke. I'm the Regional Director
of the Idaho Office of The Wilderness Society.
The Wilderness Society appreciates this opportunity to
testify in support of passage of S. 2833, the Owyhee Public
Lands Management Act of 2008. We are committed to working with
Congress to ensure that the legislation is true to the intent
of the Owyhee Initiative Agreement, an agreement to which The
Wilderness Society was a participant and was developed in Idaho
between conservationists, ranchers, Owyhee County elected
officials, the Shoshone Paiute tribe and others. The Wilderness
Society deeply appreciates the work done over the last several
months by the majority and the minority staff of the
subcommittee, Senator Crapo's staff and Senator Craig's staff
on S. 2833. That work has produced legislation that reflects
very important goals and objectives of the Owyhee Initiative
Work Group.
S. 2833 reflects the attempt by the Owyhee Initiative Work
Group to provide protection for outstanding wild areas in
Owyhee County while considering the lives with those who live
and work there. Through wilderness and wild and scenic river
designation, S. 2833 provides permanent protection for some of
the wildest, most diverse landscapes in Southwest Idaho ranging
from river canyons that are over 1,000 feet deep to vast
expanses of sage brush and grassland plateaus that provide
habitat for the sage grouse, pronghorn antelope, big horn
sheep, song birds, raptors and numerous rare plant species. The
river canyons in Owyhee County have been called the largest
concentration of sheer-walled volcanic rhyolite and basalt
canyons in the Western United States.
White water river enthusiasts come from around the country
to challenge these rapids on these rivers. This high desert
sage brush and canyon country not included in existing
wilderness areas in Idaho and is generally under represented in
the National Wilderness Preservation System. All the areas
proposed for wilderness in S. 2833 represent valuable additions
to the National Wilderness Preservation System. It's great to
see this picture up here. We look forward to see that it will
be a great benefit in the State of Idaho when the Owyhee Canyon
lands joins the ranks of Saw tooth and Hell's Canyon and other
special areas in Idaho that receive permanent protection.
The wilderness designation closes over 200 miles of vehicle
carved routes through these wild areas and that represents one
of the biggest threats to the wild places in Owyhee County. It
allows for the permanent retirement of voluntary livestock
grazing upon voluntary donation of the permits and acquisition
of private lands within and adjacent to the wilderness areas.
S. 2833 directs the BLM to develop and implement
transportation plans for the public lands outside the proposed
wilderness areas. Completion of these plans will lead to better
resource protection from damage resulting from cross country
motorized recreation in Owyhee County.
S. 2833 establishes the Owyhee Science Review and
Conservation Center in Owyhee County to conduct research
projects to address natural resource management issues that
effect public and private range lands in the county. The
Wilderness Society supports the establishment of the Owyhee
Science Review and the Conservation Center. We support the
collection and analysis of the most up to date information and
research regarding resource management and the sharing and
distribution of that information among all the interested
parties.
S. 2833 gives greater protection of the Shoshone Paiute
Cultural sites and resources in what's been called one of
Idaho's richest archeological areas. The legislation directs
the BLM to coordinate with the Shoshone Paiute tribe
implementation of the Shoshone Paiute Cultural Resource
Protection Plan. Implementation of this plan is needed to help
protect the cultural resources of Owyhee County from chronic
theft and vandalism.
In summary, The Wilderness Society has been proud to
participate in the Owyhee Initiative and is pleased to be here
today to urge the passage of S. 2833. We want to reaffirm The
Wilderness Society's commitment to the Owyhee Initiative and is
seeing through implementation of the entire agreement including
the provisions that are outside the scope of this legislation.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gehrke follows:]
Prepared Statement of Craig Gehrke, Regional Director, The Wilderness
Society, Boise, ID, on S. 2833
Thank you for the opportunity to testify and state The Wilderness
Society's (TWS) support for passage of S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Lands
Management Act of 2008. We are committed to working with Congress to
ensure that the legislation is true to the intent of the Owyhee
Initiative Agreement, a unique agreement developed in Idaho between
conservationists, ranchers, Owyhee County elected officials, members of
the Shoshone-Paiute Tribe, and others. TWS is also committed to working
with Congress to ensure that the legislation is in the best interest of
our public lands. S. 2833 provides lasting protection for critical
ecological, scenic, recreation and wild areas that are threatened from
development and degradation.
TWS deeply appreciates the work done over the past several months
by majority and minority subcommittee staff, Senator Crapo's staff, and
Senator Craig's staff on S. 2833. That work has produced legislation
that reflects important goals and objectives of the Owyhee Initiative
Work Group. The Owyhee Initiative Work Group was initially comprised of
the Owyhee Cattle Association, Owyhee County, Bruneau Soil Conservation
District, Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association, the Owyhee
Borderlands Trust, The Nature Conservancy, The Wilderness Society,
People for the Owyhees, and the Idaho Conservation League. The Sierra
Club was later added to the Work Group. The BLM, Idaho Department of
Lands, and the U.S. Air Force participated as ex officio members of the
Owyhee Initiative. After public hearings in Owyhee County urged
expansion of the Work Group, it was expanded to include Idaho Rivers
United, the Owyhee County Farm Bureau, Foundation for North American
Wild Sheep, and the South Idaho Desert Racing Association.
There are genuine and significant conservation gains achieved
through S. 2833. Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River designation,
preparation of travel management plans that will lead to better
resource protection from damage resulting from cross-country motorized
recreation in Owyhee County, closure of 200 miles of motorized routes
through proposed wilderness, establishment of a conservation research
center, increased protections of Shoshone-Paiute cultural sites and
resources, and acquisition of private land inholdings in candidate
wilderness areas and public rights of way across private land all
create a total package that TWS supports.
wilderness
The bill designates 517,000 acres of BLM wilderness. The landscape
within the wilderness proposal is diverse, ranging from river canyons
over a thousand feet deep to vast expanses of sagebrush and grassland
plateaus that provide habitat for sage grouse, pronghorn antelope,
bighorn sheep, songbirds, raptors, and numerous rare plant species.
More than 230,000 acres of lands proposed for wilderness are upland
plateaus and 224,000 acres are classified as low or moderate hills.
This high desert, sagebrush steppe habitat is not included in existing
designated wilderness in Idaho and is generally underrepresented in the
National Wilderness Preservation System. All of the areas proposed for
wilderness in S. 2833 represent valuable additions to the National
Wilderness Preservation System.
The river canyons in Owyhee County have been called the largest
concentration of sheer-walled volcanic rhyolite and basalt canyons in
the western United States. Many of the canyons are more than 1,000 feet
deep, nearly twice as deep as the Washington Monument is tall. River
enthusiasts come from around the country to challenge the famous white
water rapids of these rivers.
The greatest threat to wildlands in Owyhee County is escalating
motorized recreation. While WSAs are intended to be managed to protect
their wilderness character, WSA status has done little to limit
motorized use as the BLM has not regulated or closed WSAs to motorized
recreation. Consequently, WSAs in the Owyhee-Bruneau Canyonland region
have hundreds of miles of illegal motorized routes carved within their
boundaries. Wilderness designation will close these areas to motorized
abuse.
Lands not designated as wilderness will be released and no longer
managed to protect their wilderness characteristics, but may be
eligible for future wilderness consideration at a later date.
There are specific WSAs that TWS regrets will not be designated as
wilderness, specifically West Fork Red Canyon and Sheep Creek West.
West Fork Red Canyon is a rugged river canyon that supports redband
trout populations and would be a logical expansion of the Owyhee River
proposed wilderness. Sheep Creek West WSA was recommended for
wilderness by the BLM. Conservationists and ranchers could not reach
agreement on these two areas. While these two areas would have made
fine additions to the National Wilderness Preservation System, we
acknowledge that very nature of collaboration is compromise.
administration of wilderness
The legislation directs the BLM to conduct an inventory of existing
grazing management facilities and activities in wilderness. Grazing
will be allowed to continue subject to the congressional grazing
guidelines and wilderness wildlife management will be subject to
congressional wildlife management guidelines.
The bill contains standard language for wildlife management and
helicopter use and military overflights. In Owyhee County, Idaho Fish
and Game have used helicopters to transplant and re-establish
populations of California bighorn sheep, and subsequently used
helicopters to monitor population trends of bighorn sheep. We expect
this kind of helicopter use will be allowed to continue so long as BLM
determines, via required analysis, that such use meets the ``minimum
management tool'' concept of wilderness management.
The Act provides for the continuation of outfitting and guiding in
wilderness consistent with section 4(d)(5) of the Wilderness Act to the
extent necessary for realizing the recreational or other wilderness
purposes of the areas.
owyhee science review and conservation center
S. 2833 directs that the BLM coordinate with the State of Idaho,
Owyhee County, and the Shoshone-Paiute Tribe and consult with the
University of Idaho, federal grazing permittees, the public and federal
and state agencies to establish the Owyhee Science Review and
Conservation Center in Owyhee County to conduct research projects to
address natural resources management issues affecting public and
private rangelands in Owyhee County. The legislation states that the
purpose of the Center is to facilitate the collection and analysis of
information to provide federal and state agencies, private landowners
and the public with information to allow for improved rangeland
management.
TWS supports the establishment of the Owyhee Science Review and
Conservation Center. TWS supports the collection and analysis of the
most up to date information and research regarding resource management,
and the sharing and distribution of that information among all
interested parties.
wild and scenic rivers
S. 2833 designates 316 miles of Wild and Scenic Rivers in Owyhee
County. These rivers are some of the most spectacular whitewater rivers
in the lower 48 states. The boundaries for these rivers shall be \1/4\
mile from the high water mark on both sides of the river or the nearest
confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter.
water rights
In 2000 the Idaho Supreme Court ruled that wilderness areas do not
carry a federal reserved water right, thus S. 2833 expressly denies a
federal reserved water right for wilderness areas designated by this
act. However, each candidate wilderness area contains a proposed Wild
and Scenic River through which, under terms of the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act and Idaho law, will carry with it a federal reserved water
right. Those Wild and Scenic River water rights will be quantified and
adjudicated after designation in compliance with state and federal laws
and with input from federal agencies, the state and other interested
parties through Idaho's Snake River Basin Adjudication Court.
land exchanges and acquisitions and grazing preferences
The legislation authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to
permanently retire voluntarily relinquished grazing permits. Grazing
permittees have indicated their interest in permanently retiring 18,000
animal unit months (AUMS) from public grazing in wilderness, resulting
in 55,000 acres of cattle free wilderness and 260,000 acres of reduced
grazing.
The bill authorizes the sale of public lands within the Boise
District of the BLM that have been identified for disposal through
resource management plans, with proceeds from the sale of such lands
deposited in a special ``Owyhee Land Exchange Acquisition Account.''
Funds from this account can be used to purchase lands or interests
therein within or adjacent to the wilderness areas designated by this
Act and identified in a map dated March 25, 2008 prepared by BLM for
Senator Crapo. The account will terminate after 10 years or upon the
expenditure of $8 million, whichever comes first. TWS supports the
creation of this account as a unique way to acquire the private lands
scattered within or near the wilderness areas in Owyhee County.
Landowners with wilderness-quality inholdings within the proposed
wilderness areas would have the opportunity to sell or exchange their
land for equal value federal lands. All land exchanges will be
conducted in accordance with standard federal procedures. TWS believes
the exchanges will likely result in a positive gain for the public. The
lands that we understand would move into the federal estate have
extremely high ecological and wilderness values whereas the lands that
would move out of the federal estate and into private hands have
significantly lower ecological value and no wilderness value.
The public will benefit from anticipated exchanges because
inholdings in proposed wilderness would be removed. Acquisition of the
proposed private inholdings will prevent future conflicts regarding
landowner access and development issues, as well as acquire for public
ownership lands that are of key ecological importance, like riparian
areas and bighorn sheep habitat. Additionally, some of the private
inholdings that we understand would be acquired are in excellent
vegetative condition, and the acquisition of such lands into public
ownership is a positive step forward. We are also strongly supportive
of the acquisition of public rights-of-way across private lands,
facilitating public access to thousands of acres of public land where
access has been blocked by ``no trespassing'' signs and locked gates.
The proposed permanent retirement of livestock grazing within some
specific wilderness areas broadens the diversity of ecologically
significant areas in Owyhee County that are livestock free. These are
all positive actions that will benefit the public and our public lands.
transportation and recreation management
The primary threat to Owyhee wildlands is the dramatic increase in
illegal and inappropriate off-road vehicle use. To date, BLM has not
completed a comprehensive travel plan for the Owyhee area and
conservationists, ranchers and responsible ORV-users support the need
for a timely plan. The Act directs BLM to develop and implement
transportation plans for public lands outside the proposed wilderness
areas. The plans are to establish a system of designated roads and
trails and limit motorized and mechanized vehicles to designated
routes. Until the date that the BLM completes the transportation plans,
all recreational motorized and mechanized vehicle use shall be limited
to roads and trails lawfully in existence before the date of enactment
of the Act, i.e. cross-country travel is prohibited. The BLM is to
complete a travel plan for the Owyhee Front not later than one year
after passage of the act and not later than 3 years for the rest of
Owyhee County.
It is important that the BLM make real progress towards completing
these travel plans, as the past several years have demonstrated that
cross-country off-road vehicle use continues to grow every year in
Owyhee County. Delay of this legislation means that the unauthorized
network of user-created off-road vehicle trails will continue to grow
resulting in escalating user conflicts and extensive resource damage.
cultural resources
The canyonlands and sagebrush plateaus of Owyhee County contain the
richest concentration of archaeological sites in Idaho. The ancestors
of the Shoshone and Northern Paiute have lived, hunted, and worshipped
throughout Owyhee County and the Snake River Plain for thousands of
years. The Camas and Pole Creek Archaeological District alone
incorporates over 500 sites of archaeological significance. The
legislation directs the BLM to coordinate with the Shoshone-Paiute
Tribe in the implementation of the Shoshone Paiute Cultural Resource
Protection Plan and to enter into agreements with the Tribe to
implement the Plan. Implementation of this plan is needed to help
protect the cultural resources of Owyhee County from theft and
vandalism.
conclusion
The Owyhee Public Lands Management Act will achieve the following:
Designation of 517,000 acres of wilderness;
Designation of 315 miles of Wild and Scenic Rivers;
Closure of 200 miles of motorized routes in candidate
wilderness areas and completion of a travel planning process to
establish a designated system of motorized routes for all
public lands in Owyhee County;
Increased protections for Shoshone-Paiute cultural sites and
resources.
These are all tremendous and much needed conservation gains. We
look forward to continuing to work with you in furtherance of a
successful outcome.
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Gehrke. I'm going
to let most of the time go to my colleagues here because of the
interest in their home States. Just one question for you, Dr.
Gibson because the Oregon cattlemen work so closely with the
cattlemen in Idaho, Bob Skinner probably wouldn't let me get
away without asking this.
But what is your sense from a cattlemen's perspective?
What's the key issue in the Owyhee legislation?
Mr. Gibson. The key issue on a broad scale is the
implementation of the Science Review Program that deals with
basically the four aspects is the information that's being used
correct, was it collected correctly, was it interpreted
correctly and is its application reasonable and that really
affects virtually every cattleman in the county and that would
be a major issue with the entire county.
Senator Wyden. I know you have been reaching out across the
spectrum to various organizations and I think that's why Mr.
Gehrke gives a lot of bouquets to all concerned for their work
and I commend you for it. Let's go to my colleagues now for
their questions.
Senator Craig.
Senator Craig. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First of
all my fond regard and respect for Dr. Gibson, but he is
operated in a state of not full disclosure. He forgot for the
record to tell you, Mr. Chairman, that he and I were once in 4-
H together and that his mother was our 4-H leader. For Bob
Bennett we showed calves at the Washington County Fair. Now
that's full disclosure.
Anyway, it's been my privilege to work with Chad and the
Owyhee County Cattlemen over the years and his representation
of them has been a great asset to them. Dr. Gibson with no
guarantee that the private sector can provide the money to
carry out this bill, does the Working Group still support the
Owyhee Initiative without total funding?
Mr. Gibson. I can't speak for the total Working Group
because we've done everything by consensus from day one. We'd
have to address that the same way. In the absence of a
guarantee it would deal with, probably the, some of the members
of the Working Group more so then the Working Group as a whole.
I don't know what, you know, without a guarantee but a
promise of some sort it would be a matter of each of those
members of the Work Group making up their own mind as to how
they want to go forward.
Senator Craig. I don't question the good faith that any one
stakeholder group or individual has brought to the table, but I
have continually expressed this concern that everybody crosses
the line at nearly the same time, or there's a clear ability
that all parties remain as whole after the fact as they have
come to agree before the fact. I still struggle with that some
and that's probably a question that in many respects
legislatively cannot be asked or answered. But I don't question
the commitment that has been verbally expressed by all parties.
So thank you for that.
Craig, let me ask you a couple of questions that I think
are extremely important to me and I think to the State of Idaho
and certainly to Owyhee County. You're sitting where Secretary
Bruce Babbitt sat a good many years ago in the later days of
the Clinton Administration. He was alluding to a series of
executive orders that was going to permeate the Administration
in its latter days that many of us were very frustrated by
because while we were working the process of trying to gain
some recognition and designation of certain public resources,
the Congress was working its will.
As a result of that, an executive order was produced that
included Escalante Grand Staircase National Monument. I'm sure
you remember that. Craters of the Moon in Idaho. There was
parcels of land in Arizona and in Southwest Oregon and in
California. All of them, in that instance, designated as
monuments.
Other Presidents, both democrat and republican in the
moment of full disclosure, have used the executive order as a
tool, some in much larger ways. A former Secretary Andress
under the Carter Administration designated millions of acres of
park land in Alaska and was hung in effigy in the streets of
Anchorage, but to no avail. The land was secured. The land was
designated and many of the citizens of Alaska were very
frustrated.
We're in the midst of a Presidential campaign, so I want to
fast forward a bit. I'm assuming, and it certainly will, be my
effort to make this bill, and Mike Crapo's effort, as
successful as possible. But I'm not at all confident based on
the effort of this Congress that we'll get much done this year.
If we were not able to pass and bring into law an amended
or at least a final version of the Owyhee Initiative and if
Hillary Clinton or a Barack Obama became President of the
United States, policy attitudes would change. Players would
change. Approaches toward public land resource allocation and
management would change with that.
If that were to happen, and this is a hypothetical question
and they are always the most difficult to answer, but you've
been at the table. You've been a very good, oftentimes
challenging, necessarily so, demanding stakeholder. If that
were to change and you had access to a democrat administration,
would you go to them, look them squarely in the eye and say,
it's a done deal? All of the stakeholders are at the table.
We've struck an agreement and if you're going to do this by
executive order, I recommend you encourage passage of the
legislation or you, by order, create the Owyhee Initiative as
it has been written.
Could you respond to that?
Mr. Gehrke. I think responding to that, Senator Craig, I'd
be glad to because from my standpoint I think wilderness and
wild and scenic designation by Congress is the best protection
for this country that we're talking about. I think that the
group behind this, the Owyhee Initiative Work Group, the local
buy in, is something like I've never seen before in all the
years I've been doing this. I don't want to jeopardize that. I
don't want to walk away from that.
We've been kidding ourselves for a long time that the
Owyhee Initiative just doesn't die regardless of how many times
it's been hit between the eyes by something. We're sticking
with it as long as Senator Crapo will stick with it, as long
the Work Group sticks together, we're committed to wilderness
designation, to this package that we've put together all these
years. So I have no intention of going to a different
Administration and saying ok, the rules have changed now. We're
sticking to this as long as it has traction in the Congress, as
long as there's traction with Senator Crapo and the Work Group
stays together and works with The Wilderness Society to get
this through.
Senator Craig. Thank you. Dutifully recorded in the
committee record. Thank you.
Bill, you ask an interesting question, or you drew some
frustration over receipts from public lands and how they were
used in the case of the Washington County effort. Let me just
philosophize for a moment with you because I know you don't
totally disagree, but you've been flexible over time in the
Owyhee Initiative shows that with Craig's effort and other's
effort. The low hanging fruit of wilderness from its inception
in '63 forward is in large part been accomplished.
We have marvelous tracts of land designated as wilderness.
Those that are most difficult to designate today are in large
part associated near and or around metro areas. They are
sometimes tied into unique and important economic entities,
like the ranching in Owyhee County. It is not breaking with
historic tradition to take public resource that can ultimately
benefit local economy.
I believe that concept started with Gifford Pinchot in the
early 1900s when he counseled Teddy Roosevelt and they created
the Forest Preserves. His term went something like this, we
cannot separate the communities of interest from its land. Now
the communities of interest at that time were not The
Wilderness Society, they were communities of people that lived
adjoining the public lands. They weren't eastern groups
reflecting on western land. They were western enclaves of
citizens who were deriving their economic interest from the
public land.
Today where that happens, and in some instance where the
public interest and the economic interest come together, but
one is clearly reshaped by the other. I don't believe, and I
would hope, I or others could convince the Congress that the
sale of public resource in a changed environment can benefit
the local economy, not just by the change of use in the public
lands. But oftentimes, by the very economic entities that it is
changing by its designation in this case in Owyhee County,
cattlemen in traditional ranching.
What it will do in Washington County in Southern Utah is
change and allow the County Commissioners and citizens there to
recognize maybe slightly different economic viabilities or
assets that they can employ in the affected utilization of this
new designation. So it is not precedenting, precedent. It has
been historically true. It should remain that in these unique
interests.
I think just the raw sell off of land for the good of the
treasury is a different story. So that's my two bits today. I
think it's historically accurate. I would hope that in these
instances, where all parties have come to the table and values
can be adjusted and both parties can benefit, there is a clear
recognition of transferring public values to private and
economic values when both sides agree.
Do you wish to respond to that?
Mr. Meadows. I have probably three responses. First of all
I would challenge that the work we're doing in Washington
County is designed to get the low hanging wilderness fruit.
We've been recognizing Utah for a long time.
Senator Craig. I don't think it exists anymore.
Mr. Meadows. It's, you know, BLM wilderness quality lands
have been hard to designate in the State of Utah. I think this
is a real breakthrough on that point. The larger question.
There is existing law that allows for the sale of public land.
In many cases the Bureau of Land Management lands are the lands
that are sort of left over.
I mean there are lots of high quality economic and land
conservation lands included there but it's almost by accident
of history rather than by design. We think for a variety of
reasons, conservation interests, economic interests, management
interests, there is a need to be flexible in the disposal of
land and in the sale and purchase of land. We fully support
that.
But there is law that allows that to occur to the benefit
of local communities, we think, and to the benefit of the
Federal estate. When one changes the law to allow for 10
percent of the sale value to actually go back into the county
for operational purposes, we think that it is outside the norm.
We believe strongly in asset value should be transferred to
asset value and so rather than asset value to operational
value.
The County will benefit greatly from the disposal of up to
9,000 acres of BLM lands that are adjacent to the communities.
This is going to add dollars to the tax rolls. It allows for a
planned growth strategy. We think that is a benefit, a great
benefit to the community and one that we fully support, but
when you add to that the actual distribution of cash to a local
county government or to a water district or some other non-
Federal asset base, we think that's a wrong approach to take.
Senator Craig. Mr. Chairman, I've taken too much time.
Thank you. I appreciate that observation. I think there is a
strong argument and you helped shape it a bit. Capital to
capital asset verses capital to O and M. I think that becomes a
reasonable question that has to be asked and should be asked.
But if it makes the deal then maybe it's worth looking at.
Thank you.
Senator Wyden. Ok. Thank you, Senator Craig.
Senator Crapo.
Senator Crapo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I know
that we're pushed for time here and I've been so involved with
this that all my questions have been answered. I know enough.
But I would like to just make one other quick statement. As
we see two strong representatives of the Work Group for the
Owyhee Initiative here in front of us, as I look out over the
audience I see many other members of the Work Group who've been
working with us this last 6 or 7 years. It's just rewarding to
me to see that kind of commitment for them to come here even
though they were not witnesses to be a part of this.
Also to have the President of The Wilderness Society here,
we've got to take this opportunity and thank him for letting us
have Craig Gehrke and all the time that's Craig's put into this
and the commitment of The Wilderness Society to work with us on
this. I just want to, as I look out over the audience I just
did not want to let my opportunity slide by before to commend
all those who were not able to get to the witness table but who
came all the way out here from Idaho to support this. Thank
you.
Senator Wyden. Well said.
Senator Bennett.
Senator Bennett. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I too,
think most of my questions have been answered. I want to
publicly thank Bill Meadows for his leadership and his
cooperation as we work through this. I understand that it's
perhaps been difficult for him as it has been difficult for
Commissioner Eardley to come to this. They've both been
stretched about as tautly as they possibly can be to come to
something they can both endorse and I appreciate that.
Just to be sure I don't misunderstand, Bill, recognize that
you have concerns about the allocation of the funds. You do
support the Wilderness and National Conservation Area
designations that are in the bill today?
Mr. Meadows. Senator, as we have discussed, I believe The
Wilderness Society believes that we're going to have
significant, lasting protection in the designation of these
wilderness areas and national conservation areas. I have to add
that I have many colleagues with whom I work on a daily basis
and you have colleagues in the Senate who I know are going to
continue a conversation about boundaries and cherry stems and
perhaps other units that want to be added. I think The
Wilderness Society looks at this in much the same way we were
talking about with Senator Craig just a minute ago.
There are conservation values that we believe are important
to protect. We recognize and honor the economic, cultural and
social values that are also needed to be protected. Working in
communities is really important to us and our ability to be a
strong voice. We think The Wilderness Society's role here is to
be a strong voice for conservation, acknowledging that there
are lots of other voices, we're going to proclaim our support
for wilderness and national conservation here.
I think what you have done in bringing those social,
cultural, economic and conservation values together to be
applauded and The Wilderness Society is pleased to support the
wilderness and national conservation areas that you've
recommended. We think that's good work.
Senator Bennett. Thank you. Commissioner Eardley, you've
been stretched as well. You've stated your support for this
bill with that stretching occurring. Can you explain perhaps
some of the compromises you feel that you've had to make here?
Mr. Eardley. Thank you, Senator. We feel that, you know, we
feel that we've done most of the compromising. We look out to
the west of us in Nevada. We look at Clark County and we look
at Lincoln County and we see that, you know, 70,000 acres in
Clark County was privatized or designated to be privatized.
90,000 acres in Lincoln County. We wonder why frankly, we
wonder why that didn't work in Washington County where we're
going to end up after three tiers of sales about 9,000 acres.
However, that's, you know, that's definitely progress and
we're very supportive of that process and it will benefit, I
think, Washington County. So therein has been a lot of
compromise. We've gone from our expectation and maybe somewhere
between 90 and 70,000 acres down to 20,000 acres that we were
approximately a year ago and now at 9,000 acres, 5,000 acres to
become in the third tier.
Just a comment, if I might, make one about Mr. Meadows
assuming that there's going to be a lot of prosperity as the
result of the sales of land that will be on our tax rolls,
property tax. Obviously he's never tried to manage anything on
revenues from property tax. No one's ever got wealthy doing
that. That's a very difficult thing to do.
Again, we want to apply these revenues to where it is to
the land that's been affected by the change. We think they're
noble and worthy causes that we would direct those funds to.
Senator Bennett. Would one of those causes be a law
enforcement dealing with off-highway vehicles?
Mr. Eardley. Yes, that's part of our conservation
perspective as well, Senator. You know, agriculture, ranching,
reserving open spaces, those kinds of things that we simply
would not have the funds to accomplish without a source of
revenue. It certainly would not come from property tax.
Senator Bennett. I see. Thank you. Just picking up on what
Commissioner Eardley commented, Mr. Chairman, I would point out
that the process of land sales and the allocation of money has
been taken absolutely from the Nevada bills. That is, we have
seen what the Congress has done in Nevada, in four different
counties in every instance providing for money to be allocated
in this same formula. We did not want to go beyond the Nevada
precedent.
We did not want to create something new, recognizing as
Bill Meadows has made clear that even the Nevada precedent
remains controversial. Some people oppose it, but as
Commissioner Eardley said we look over the boundary at our
neighboring State and see that it has been done there and it
has been done successfully there. So that is the genesis of the
procedure that we have written into this bill.
Now I have no further questions. Again, I thank both the
County Commission as represented by Mr. Eardley and The
Wilderness Society as represented by Mr. Meadows for the
constructive cooperation, occasionally with a few raised voices
and a tight lips as we've talked through some of these things.
But it has been a gratifying experience to see everybody work
together to say let's do the best thing for the land and let's
do the best thing for the community. That's reflected in the
title of the legislation as it is for both conservation and
growth. I thank you for holding the hearing, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Senator Bennett and commend you
for all of your good work.
I think I'll wrap up very briefly by saying that if you
really think about the best of Earth Day and what it was
supposed to always be about and what Gaylord Nelson envisioned.
It's about what we're trying to do today.
It's about trying to bring people together, environmental
folks, ranchers, cattlemen, business people, local government
and trying to find common ground. I want to commend all of you
for the way that you're approaching this. I think Senator
Bennett said something early on that all of us would identify
with that when you go into these discussions about public lands
it's ultimately about good faith. It's about actually being at
the table and trying to get it done and trying to come up with
a result that satisfies all concerned. I can tell you in this
room I see an awful lot of good faith and a desire to come
together and get these matters resolved.
Toward that end, what we're going to do and I spoke with
Chairman Bingaman about this and I know Senator Domenici, our
ranking minority member, feels this way as well. We're going to
direct our bipartisan staff to work very closely with all of
you, to work with the Administration to see if we can get these
matters resolved. We will have to tackle a number of additional
issues and we're going to do it with the kind of good faith
that Senator Bennett has talked about.
So thank you for coming and approaching, particularly Earth
Day, with exactly the kind of spirit that I think the founders
had in mind. With that the subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:09 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Responses of Joel Holtrop to Questions From Senator Barrasso
s. 934/h.r. 1374
Question 1. Mr. Holtrop, could you elaborate on this parcel of land
and what exactly warrants this exchange?
Answer. Tract W-1979 in Leon County, Florida is a tract that has
evolved into an unmanageable, problem area for the Apalachicola
National Forest. It is fragmented from the Forest with a major highway
(Capital Circle) to the north and private large-scale developments to
the east and west, which include a grocery store, strip mall, and a
300+ unit apartment complex. The southern boundary is a 100-foot wide
power line easement. Due to the property's configuration, along with
the surrounding developments and highway, there are public health and
safety risks associated with management of this area through prescribed
fire and other activities. Unmanaged recreation and illegal activity
have become prevalent on this tract as well. These issues will compound
over the next 3 years as Capital Circle is widened to a 6-lane highway
and the adjoining developments continue to expand. For these reasons,
the Forest Service supports disposition of this property to acquire
private tracts within the Apalachicola National Forest better suited
for public use and management. The disposition of Tract W-1979 through
S. 934 would reduce boundary management costs and would allow for the
purchase of priority endangered species habitat, critical wetlands, and
potential recreation areas for the public.
Question 2. If this land has been on the Forest's surplus list for
10 years why hasn't the forest carried out an administrative exchange?
Answer. Leon County has expressed strong interest in Tract W-1979.
An administrative exchange was discussed several years ago with the
County. The County, however, does not presently own any land suitable
for exchange. As a result, the County would be required to purchase and
hold title to private land of equal value in advance of consummating an
exchange with the Forest Service. Referred to as an Assembled Land
Exchange, these often take many years to complete and there is a risk
the proponent may end up owning unwanted property if the exchange is
never finalized. For this reason, an administrative exchange with the
County has not been pursued.
Question 3. If the agency is unwilling to complete these exchanges
administratively, why should Congress give the agency the proceeds when
these lands are sold or exchanged?
Answer. As mentioned in response to Question 2, Leon County does
not presently own any land that would be suitable for administrative
exchange. Under the Florida National Forest Land Management Act of
2003, the Forest Service is authorized to sell seventeen isolated
tracts of land in Florida and can use the proceeds from land sales to
purchase inholdings around the National Forest or cover administrative
expenses. The proposed legislation would expand that authority by
adding Tract W-1979 and would also allow the Forest Service to use the
proceeds from the sale of improved, non-greenland tracts in the 2003
Act for the acquisition, construction, and maintenance of a new
District Office to serve the public on the Osceola National Forest and
the Apalachicola National Forest. The Forest would subsequently realize
a substantial deferred maintenance savings associated with the existing
50-year old Osceola Ranger District Office and would be relieved from
an estimated $1,000,000 future expense associated with modifications to
resolve accessibility, health and safety, and general maintenance
issues.
______
Responses of Julie Jacobson to Questions From Senator Barrasso
s. 2833
Ms. Jacobson, this bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to
fence off these wilderness areas as ``appropriate to protect wilderness
values.''
Question 1. How many miles of wilderness boundary will result on
BLM lands if the Owyhee Wilderness Bill is passed?
Answer. We estimate roughly 630 miles of the exterior wilderness
boundary crosses BLM-managed public lands.
Question 2. What is the current cost of building a mile of remote
fencing in each of these following BLM Districts: Owyhee, Bruneau, and
Jarbidge?
Answer. The cost of new fence construction is dependent upon
several factors, including the remoteness of the project and the type
of terrain. In general, new fencing in Owyhee County would likely be in
the range of $5,500 to $7,000 per mile.
Question 3. If the BLM is not appropriated any additional funds to
build these fences, what other areas of the BLM's budget would have to
be borrowed from to pay for the fencing?
Question 1. Section 4(h)(3)(C) of S. 2833 states:
The Secretary may construct and maintain fencing around
wilderness areas designated by this Act as the Secretary
determines to be appropriate to protect wilderness values.
The legislation makes clear that the fencing is not mandatory. It
is not possible at this time to determine how many miles of fence might
be constructed or what source of funds might he used.
Responses of Julie Jacobson to Questions From Senator Craig
Question 4. Ms. Jacobson: One of my concerns about the language we
are reviewing today lies in Section 6--Lands Identified for Disposal.
It states, ``proceeds from the sale of public land under subsection (a)
SHALL he deposited in a separate account in the Treasury of the United
States to be known as the ``Owyhee Land Acquisition Account''.'' Should
I be concerned that such language could redirect federal dollars away
from the Boise Foothills project? Could you provide more clarity on
this situation? What parcels are involved and where? What phase is this
project in?
Answer. It is my understanding that under Public Law 109-372, the
Idaho Land Enhancement Act (commonly referred to as the Boise Foothills
Act) the BLM lands identified for exchange are in the northern part of
the state and that none of them are within BLM's Boise District. Under
section 6(a) of S. 2833 only lands within the BLM's Boise District
would be affected. Therefore there should be no conflict with Public
Law 109-372. Furthermore, I am informed by the BLM in Idaho that the
Boise Foothills project is slated to be completed within the next
month.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Statement of Janine Blaeloch, Director, Western Lands Project, on S.
2834
Founded in 1997, the Western Lands Project is a non-profit,
membership organization conducting research, outreach, and advocacy for
reform in federal land exchange policy. We also scrutinize a broad
range of projects that propose to sell, give away, or relinquish public
control of public lands.
We request that this testimony be made part of the record for S.
2834.
federal land disposal and county subsidies
We opposed the original version of this bill as part of a coalition
of more than forty organizations, and we urge you not to pass the
current bill. We object to the ``disposal'' of public land by fiat,
particularly where such privatization will facilitate the development
of more subdivisions, golf courses, and water pipelines in an arid
region.
In Section 702, the legislation directs the sale of public lands in
two ``tiers.'' While it is not clear in the bill, according to the bill
summary on Senator Bennett's web page, these lands were identified for
disposal by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in its current Resource
Management Plan (RMP).
It is important to note that under the normal administrative
process, lands identified as suitable for disposal in an RMP will not
necessarily or inevitably be sold or exchanged--and even after being
identified as such are subject to environmental analysis under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) prior to sale. This
legislation mandates the sale of certain lands, and it is not clear
whether NEPA compliance would be required before the sales. But the RMP
process alone cannot ensure that environmentally sensitive lands or
lands that should be retained in public ownership are protected from
``disposal''--the more specific and detailed analysis for each
individual sale must be conducted.
Senator Bennett repeatedly stresses that his legislation is modeled
on public land bills sponsored by Majority Leader Harry Reid, and some
outcomes of Mr. Reid's legislation are instructive. A case in point is
an area north of Las Vegas that was identified for disposal by the BLM
and mandated to be sold in Senator Reid's Clark County land bill of
2002. After their sale was directed by Senator Reid, several thousand
acres were found to host a rare plant species and important
paleontological features, and their sale is now in dispute.
Like Clark County, Nevada, Washington County, Utah is rich in
cultural resources and is home to many sensitive, threatened, and
endangered species--not appropriate territory for bypassing or fast-
tracking environmental analysis. Land disposal should not be mandated
in legislation in a wholesale manner, but left discretionary to the
agency and based on the deliberative process provided in existing law.
We also oppose the use of proceeds from the sale of public land to
subsidize local government administration, infrastructure, and a grab-
bag of uses the County may choose. Public lands are not a liquidity
fund for local politicians and developers to dip into for basic
services and pet projects.
Washington County would receive 10 percent of proceeds from the
sale of federal lands and would be authorized to use the funds for a
list of purposes so broad and open to interpretation as to be
meaningless. Again, implementation of Senator Reid's Clark County bill
provides a good example of how the leeway provided in categories such
as ``conservation purposes'' and ``public safety'' plays out. Clark
County projects funded by American taxpayers through federal land sales
have included such things as a $42 million shooting range and an
``urban trail'' system that consists of city sidewalks.
It should be noted that non-federal parties that own land in either
of the proposed National Conservation Areas or in any other part of the
county that lies within desert tortoise critical habitat stand to
receive a premium from American taxpayers if the government acquires
their land. Former Utah Representative Jim Hansen slipped a special
provision into a 1996 omnibus parks and public lands bill, PL 104-333,
that effectively inflates the value of any non-federal land in the
entire county acquired by the federal government through purchase or
exchange. In language enacting the Sand Hollow Land Exchange between
the BLM and the Washington County Water Conservancy District, Hansen
inserted the following provision:
In acquiring any lands and any interests in lands in
Washington County, Utah, by purchase, exchange, donation or
other transfers of interest, the Secretary of the Interior
shall appraise, value, and offer to acquire such lands and
interests without regard to the presence of a species listed as
threatened or endangered or any proposed or actual designation
of such property as critical habitat for a species listed as
threatened or endangered pursuant to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973.
Restrictions on development that result from the presence of an
endangered species generally reduce the fair market value of a piece of
land, so this provision gives an inflated value to non-federal tortoise
habitat anywhere in the county.
Some of the more extreme provisions of the original Washington
County bill have been removed or reduced in scope, but that does not
make this a reasonable bill. The former version contained a massive
giveaway of public land to the local water conservancy district, while
this one includes a merely large, free right-of-way on public land.
Presuming the county and the city of St. George continue to sprawl
across the desert, federally-subsidized pipeline projects and the like
will be back in future legislation.
dixie national forest conveyance
The land sale directed in Title X does not belong in this
legislation, nor any bill, for that matter. The landowner who would
benefit by this special sale of public land has a trespassing use on 25
acres of national forest land next to his private holding. He does not
qualify to purchase the land under existing laws such as the Small
Tracts Act and thus has sought special legislation to enable him to
purchase the land. The sale of the 25 acres--let alone the 112 acres he
would be allowed to purchase through this bill--is not in the public
interest.
Our organization submitted testimony against a version of this
conveyance introduced in the 107th Congress (HR 5180). At that time,
the landowner wanted 560 acres, and the site contained wet meadows and
riparian habitat along a major creek. It's not known whether those
features are still encompassed in the proposed land sale, but by
setting a short deadline for the sale, the legislation precludes
environmental analysis and disclosure under NEPA. The proposal is an
egregious example of doling out a public asset for the benefit of one
person and should be abandoned once and for all.
conclusion
We urge the committee to reject S. 2834, along with any future
proposals (from either party) that privatize federal land, subsidize
irresponsible development, and bilk taxpayers for the benefit of a
select few.
Thank you for your consideration of this testimony.
______
Statement of Marcia Argust, Legislative Representative, Campaign for
America's Wilderness, on S. 2833
The Campaign for America's Wilderness applauds the work of the
Owyhee Initiative Work Group, Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID), and Chairman
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), which led to the April 22, 2008 hearing before
the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands
and Forests on the Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008 (S. 2833),
sponsored by Senator Crapo. In a time of polarized congressional
politics and frequent disputes over public lands in the West, this
hearing is a positive sign of what can be done when bipartisanship,
dialogue, and hard work are chosen over distrust, lawsuits, and
stalemate.
Senator Crapo and Senator Bingaman, Chairman of the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, worked together to shape a new bill that
avoids some of the divisive policy issues and legislative pitfalls that
might have thwarted Senator Crapo's original bill (S.802) from moving
forward. The new bill remains true to the needs and intentions of Sen.
Crapo's constituency: sustaining existing ranching operations,
assisting the livelihood of the local community, and preserving quality
wilderness.
The Campaign for America's Wilderness strongly supports this
legislation, which will protect as wilderness more than a half million
acres of stunningly beautiful canyonlands and ecologically rich high
desert in southwestern Idaho. This area boasts the last vestiges of
intact sagebrush ecosystems, lush riparian pockets, juniper stands, and
oases that provide for diverse populations of wildlife and plant
species. The bill would also designate over 300 miles of rivers as Wild
and Scenic, binding together wilderness units and creating unspoiled
wildlife and rafting corridors.
Because the Owyhee-Bruneau Canyonlands are only an hour and a half
drive to Boise and the Treasure Valley area?one of the fastest growing
regions in the nation?the Owyhee landscape is faced with encroaching
development and is frequently overrun by skyrocketing numbers of
motorized recreationists. The latter has taken a toll on both the
landscape--illegal trails are created every week, adding to the already
10,000 miles of trails and roads that criss-cross the land and fragment
ecosystems--and the Owyhee County budget. The County is forced to spend
funds to monitor and conduct search and rescues on millions of acres of
federal land. For these reasons, it's imperative that S. 2833 be
enacted this Congress.
While S. 2833 may not be a perfect bill from our perspective, the
dynamics of this area make a ``perfect'' bill nearly impossible. Owyhee
County is not an area where the wilderness would be designated on a
mountainside, thousands of feet above where people live and work.
Rather, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act protects lands closer to
communities and residents.
By the very nature and diversity of the groups engaged in shaping
S. 2833, it was clear from the start that the Owyhee legislation would
not reflect every provision that every stakeholder wanted, but it would
seek to include the critical provisions each group needed to stay at
the negotiating table. Against all odds, the legislation has succeeded
in this goal. To drive home this point, a list of the broad groups
endorsing S.2833 follows this statement for inclusion in the hearing
record.
Senator Crapo deserves high praise for his commitment to bringing
together myriad and diverse interests to find common ground on a
comprehensive plan for the future of public lands in Owyhee County. His
years of work will pay off for ranching families who will be able to
continue operating, sportsmen who will continue to hunt in some of the
best game territory in the West, as well as have access to new areas
that will be open to the public under this legislation, communities
that will have more law enforcement resources, Tribes which will
receive more protection for cultural resources, and outdoor enthusiasts
who will be able to enjoy this unspoiled, vast landscape for years into
the future.
We're pleased that Senator Bingaman worked with Senator Crapo on
this measure and is committed to moving it through the Senate. We look
forward to quick passage of the Owyhees legislation and to working with
Senator Crapo and the Owyhee Initiative stakeholders to ensure full
implementation of the bill and the Owyhee Initiative Agreement.
______
Statement of Katie Fite, Biodiversity Director, Western Watersheds
Project, Boise, ID
From the beginning, this was not a ``collaborative'' process.
Western Watersheds Project was purposefully excluded from the process,
since we had been involved in trying to change abusive livestock
grazing practices. Livestock grazing is currently destroying--through
cattle causing irreversible weed spread and other adverse ecological
effects--much of the area this Bill affects. Thus, the process
purposefully cut out parties that would advocate for more integrated
and ecosystem--based management in the grazing-imperiled and nationally
significant Owyhee Uplands.
This Bill will only result in the landscape becoming more
fragmented by extensive new livestock facility development, and
intensified grazing use as a result of facilities, and/or cattle forage
``treatments through burning, spraying and herbiciding, and other
development in across the 200,000 acres of hard-released WSAs. This
Bill will be a tremendous loss for biodiversity, public lands,
wildlife, and waters in the Owyhee region. The primary beneficiary of
released WSA lands in the Bruneau-Sheep Creek region west of the
Bruneau River is the ag-conglomerate of billionaire public lands
rancher Simplot, whose grazing use occurs across nearly all that area.
The portions of the sagebrush WSAs to be released are nearly always
biologically critical plateau areas, which provide critical sagebrush
habitats for rare and declining wildlife. The stringer Wilderness of
the OI in many area focuses on the canyons--which in many cases are not
being grazed due to their rugged nature, and which are not used by
imperiled species like sage-grouse. However, the WSA portions to be
released are the plateau lands where ranchers seek to increase grazing
use--to the detriment of public wild lands and wildlife.
carving or shaving off portions of wsas will promote cattle and
facility degradation of critical sagebrush habitats
From the maps we have reviewed, it appears that the deleterious
``shaving'' or carving off parts--or entire regions--of WSAs remains a
central part of this Bill. This is particularly alarming in the
Bruneau-Sheep Creek area, in the heart of Little Jacks Creek where
Simplot and Davis grazers covet a destructive new livestock water
pipeline in released WSA lands, and in portions of the Jarbidge region
where industrialization of the landscape for livestock, and the
accompanying livestock-promoted weds and cheatgrass-fueled fires, are
wreaking havoc on the landscape. The ONLY thing that has kept
politically powerful ranchers from intensifying grazing use near the
canyons has been WSA status of lands. Thus, lands in WSAs to be shaved
for release here are remnant better condition lands including critical
big game and sage-grouse nesting and winter range.
The Owyhee Bill Releases and shavings of WSA areas in the Jarbidge-
Bruneau and Sheep Creek regions will be a large net loss for wild lands
and wildlife. The Release of these lower elevation sagebrush habitats
that are currently in better ecological condition primarily because of
the limited grazing use they currently receive is an ecological
travesty. It is being done for the sole benefit of billionaire public
lands rancher Simplot (who grazes close to a million acres in the
Owyhee region), a Brackett permittee, and one or two others.
permit retirement questions
While WWP strongly supports grazing permit retirement, the acreage
to be retired here consists largely of lands ranchers have difficulty
grazing due to spring mud conditions (lower Battle Creek near Owyhee
River), or lands where their cattle grazing has so beat out the
understory over the years that little forage remains (some portions of
Jacks Creek), as well as areas where they have been able to graze few
very AUMs due to limited water (plateau portions of Jacks Creek).
Recent BLM documents (the Bruneau BLM Battle Creek allotment EA) show
ranchers have been grazing far below levels shown on grazing permits in
the Little Jacks Creek area. Much more detail on the grazing permit
purchase must be provided to enable full understanding of how few AUMs
are actually being grazed, compared to AUM numbers to be purchased.
public land should not be sold to acquire permits
While we have been assured that the intent of the Bill is not to
sell public lands to purchase grazing permits, we request that language
be changed to make it crystal clear that is not the intent.
``interests'' must be defined
The Owyhee Bill refers to the purchase of ``interests'. The scope
of any interests here must be clearly defined, as ranchersmay consider
all manner of things from fences to grazing permits as ``interests''.
any private land, conservation easement, or other acquisitions should
not be the funded by sales of public lands
We are opposed to the sale of public lands associated with the
Owyhee Bill. Purchase of lands and/or ``easements'' should be done with
Land and Water Conservation Funds, or through other mechanisms. While
FLPMA allows sales of public lands, retaining intact blocks public
lands in the Owyhee region is critical to protection of sage-grouse, a
landscape species, other wildlife, and public recreational use.
Plus, Land Use Plans like the Bruneau MFP are a quarter century
old, and lands targeted for disposal a quarter century ago may have
much higher values to the public now. The Owyhee RMP is now nearly 10
years old, and allows disposal of lands now realized to be especially
critical to sage-grouse and other native wildlife.
value of appraisals
We are very concerned that Appraisals may over-value private lands,
and under-value BLM lands. As the four maps prepared for Congress show,
very little land is to be acquired, but many millions of dollars would
be spent--and an unrevealed acreage of public land would be sold to do
this.
A review of the maps shows that some of the areas for acquisition
may not even be located next to Wilderness. Portions of this Bill seem
primarily designed to be a way to transfer funds to some select
ranchers.
vital information to understand what bill actually will do is lacking
Information essential to provide adequate Testimony on this current
Owyhee Bill has not been provided to us by Bill proponents. WWP has
requested copies of any Agreements that may have been signed with
ranchers, and other information and we have not received it. It is
impossible to understand from the Bill what AUMs would be retired
where. For example, in the 2006 version, a Buyout would have occurred
in the Little Jacks area that only removed one permittee, while still
leaving the other (Simplot) to graze in the same area. Is that still
the case?
Are there still detailed Rancher Agreements, and if so what do they
say?
It is likely BLM and ranchers will rely on those Agreements--and
haggling over Agreement intent management, and whittling away at
wilderness values, will occur This is happening in the Steens.
It is exceedingly difficult to comment adequately without much more
information. This Bill appears to be on a fast-track so as to prevent
public understanding of many important details.
No public hearings have been held in Idaho on this latest version,
either.
wsa release
This Bill releases several WSAs in their entirety.
Released WSAs include magnificent old growth western juniper and
labyrinthine rhyolite canyons on the Oregon border adjacent to lands
proposed for Wilderness status by the Oregon Natural Desert Association
in Oregon. In the three WSAs to be released here, ranchers have long
sought to burn, spray and destroy mature and old growth forested
vegetation to eke out more AUMs on grazing-depleted lands in the
vicinity of Juniper Mountain.
Released WSAs also include the sagebrush country of Sheep Creek
East and West WSAs. At a time when sage-grouse, pygmy rabbits and other
rare and declining sagebrush-dependent species are hurtling toward ESA
listing, the is the last thing in the world Congress should be doing.
Keeping these lands free of new roading and intensified livestock
facilities and disturbance, which will result from release under this
Bill, is in the public interest. Their release to placate a billionaire
rancher, is not. The sagebrush WSAs and portions of WSAs targeted for
hard release include critical sage-grouse lek, nesting, brood rearing,
wintering and other habitats.
mapping poorly portrays magnitude of wsa release
A series of 4 Maps (Little Jacks Creek, Pole Creek, North Fork,
Owyhee River,) labeled as having been prepared for this Senate
Committee very poorly depicts the 200,000 acres (over 300 square miles)
of WSAs to be released. The lands targeted for release are colored
almost indistinguishably from the lands that would become Wilderness in
this mapping, which gives the illusion of larger blocks of Wilderness.
Of particular interest is the fact that the coloring of the map of
Pole Creek may mask the release of WSA lands near a private parcel to
be acquired.
partial donation must be clarified
The section on partial donation of permits is troubling. This may
result in cuts in only ``paper cows''--unless reduction tied to
capability of the land is specified. Could the wording of the Bill mean
that in areas where ``paper cows'' or permitted AUMs may greatly exceed
the number being grazed under actual use and/or under active use (which
is the case in many Owyhee allotments) grazing use may be intensified
in non-Wilderness lands? Greater clarity of language must tie
reductions to the capability of the land area, and not ``paper'' cows.
reference to fencing wilderness should be dropped
Fences in sagebrush landscapes are particular hazards to sage-
grouse, as well as antelope and wintering big game, including mule
deer, antelope, bighorn sheep, and elk. Winter snow conditions and
windblown weeds may make fences even with supposed ``friendly'' wire
spacing be barriers and deadly to wildlife.
Now increasingly research shows that sage-grouse frequently die
from collisions with fences too.
By including reference to fencing, the Bill sets the stage for
ranchers proposing as much as several hundred miles of new fencing
right along the Wilderness boundary, with devastating effects to
wildlife. Since much of the Bill's Wilderness is stringers along
canyons, the total acreage of potential Wilderness lands to be fenced
is immense.
This reference to fencing would also promote the building of new
fences into ACECs in areas where ACEC boundaries differ from
Wilderness--as in the Jarbidge--allowing potentially intensified
grazing use in sections of WSAs outside Wilderness.
wild and scenic river
The Bill fails to designate large segments of the West Fork Bruneau
and other worthy areas as WSRs. The Bill's very bad water language
threatens the integrity of any WSR that may be designated.
water language
The Bill's language related to water rights is unacceptable.
numerous provisions weaken wilderness
The Bill should simply state that the areas are managed according
to the Wilderness Act.
trail plan
This is not needed, and could be harmful. It can be interpreted as
mandating more trails than currently exist. The purpose of Wilderness
is not to have trails or a trail plan. There are no established
equestrian trails, and only a few informal trails into canyons in the
WSAs. This does seem to allow establishment of a greatly expanded trail
footprint in Wilderness here.
outfitting
This language authorizes (and perhaps mandates) outfitting and
guiding. The Wilderness Act says outfitting ``may'' occur, but does not
mandate it. It omits key words found in the Wilderness Act. The Owyhee
wording does not have a standard whether outfitting and guiding is
proper. This may guarantee outfitting that is currently occurring to
continue even if it may conflict with non-outfitted members of the
public.
wildlife
This Owyhee bill is not exactly consistent with the Wilderness Act
and should be changed. I can certainly envision ranchers promoting
extensive mechanized vegetation killing of trees or shrubs as
``treatments'' for wildlife in wilderness. This is particularly
troubling since a recent ``mule deer initiative'' promotes extensive
vegetation manipulation in Idaho. Under the broad wildlife management
section, none of the provisions are consistent with the Wilderness Act.
Motorized use and habitat manipulation should not be allowed for
routine wildlife management, even if ``occasional''. The existing uses
section is a perversion of the Wilderness Act.
Under this provision, motorized tree chopping equipment could
conceivably be proposed to travel crosscountry to ``treat'' lands to
try to produce more deer to bolster Game Department tag sales--at the
expense of migratory birds and other native wildlife that ma rely on
forested vegetation. Or this could be used to drill seed pseudo-native
cultivars in burned sagebrush lands--if agencies claimed this promoted
certain wildlife values.
insects, fire and disease
This section is not exactly consistent with the Wilderness Act.
Especially when viewed together with the Wildlife Section. I can
readily envision proposals for mowing sagebrush vegetation to create
``fuelbreaks'' inside wilderness, or chain saw felling of trees as a
``hazardous fuels project''.
It also includes local agencies, and is a subtle devolution of
federal authority over public land and should not be allowed.
military overflights
This section allows the military to greatly mar Wilderness values.
It should be deleted. Military activity and plane noise may increase
even more--as now Singapore Air Force planes are bedded down at
Mountain Home and sonic booming and flying low level over the Owyhee
Canyonlands. Israeli, German and other planes may soon follow. Noise
pollution over America's airspace is being promoted to keep funding
flowing to the Mountain Home Airbase. So this language, in the context
of the Owyhee Bill particularly, should be removed.
These comments are prepared without full information on many components
of the Bill, due to the sudden scheduling of a Hearing, and incomplete
information that is available.
______
Statement of Jack Trueblood, Boise, ID, on S. 2833
Thank you for accepting this letter of comment on pending
legislation. Please enter it into the record of comment on S. 2833, the
Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008.
I am opposed to this legislation for a variety of reasons but most
specifically because of the inclusion of the area north of the east
fork of the Owyhee River known as Dickshooter Ridge. This area from the
Dickshooter Ranch to the river, roughly bounded by Deep Creek on the
west and Battle Creek on the east, was studied by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) as a candidate for the wilderness system. It was not
recommended for inclusion because it contains a network of primitive
roads used by ranchers and big game and bird hunters. Some proponents
of this legislation will tell you that these are new roads,
``pioneered'' by guys like me. This is not true. I have hunted there
for upland birds and big game since the late 1960s and my father did
before me. The roads were already there and date to around the early
20th century when the country was homesteaded.
If this area is suddenly designated ``wilderness'' (in spite of the
roads) it represents lost opportunity for any hunter who either does
not own livestock or hire an outfitter. It is not practical to suppose
that a bird hunter and his dog would walk the eight or nine miles from
the wilderness boundary to the river canyon (where the chukar hunting
is best), hunt birds in the heat of September, and then walk back. Nor
is it practical to assume he could carry a camp on his back. He is
going to have a gun, ammunition and water to carry on the way in and,
with a little luck, a heavy bird vest on the way out with birds that
need to get in a cooler as quickly as possible.
The possibility of hunting a bighorn sheep, deer or antelope is
greatly restricted with the lack of access. Those of us who want to
continue to hunt this area would need to hire the services of an
outfitter or purchase saddle and pack horses plus all the gear that
goes with pack animals. Both these options are very expensive and not
practical for the average hunter.
As I mentioned above, Dickshooter Ridge was not recommended for
wilderness designation by BLM. If it is now included in the new Owyhee
River Wilderness, then I hope Congress will designate the roads that
traverse Dickshooter Ridge as ``cherry-stem roads'' which can be used
to access recreation deep within the wilderness. There is plenty of
precedent for designating ``cherry stem roads'' or access corridors,
based on previous wilderness legislation and even within this bill.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
______
American Rivers,
Washington, DC, April 22, 2008.
Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 304
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Pete V. Domenici,
Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate,
304 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Domenici: On behalf of
our 65,000 members and supporters, I write in strong support of the
Wild. and Scenic River provisions of S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Lands
.Management Act. S. 2833 would preserve and protect over 300 miles of
some of the most spectacular unprotected river canyons in the United
States under the Wild and. Scenic Rivers Act. We applaud Senator Crapo
and the group of stakeholders, including ranchers, river
conservationists, outfitters, anglers, hunters and local county
commissioners, that helped develop this legislation that protects some
of our nation's most outstanding rivers while providing greater
certainty in public lands management in Idaho.
As you know, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act protects the nation's
best free-flowing rivers from activities that would destroy their wild
character. Originally passed in 1968, a Wild and Scenic designation is
currently the strongest tool available to protect rivers from future
pollution, inappropriate development, and impoundment. A Wild and
Scenic designation does not prevent development and use of a river;
instead, the goal is to preserve the existing character of a river.
Uses and development compatible with the management goals of a
particular river are allowed.
American Rivers thanks the Committee for holding a hearing on. S.
2833 and urges the enactment of this legislation this Congress. We look
forward to working with you and your staff on technical amendments to
the bill to ensure the integrity of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act is
maintained.
Sincerely,
Rebecca R. Wodder,
President.