[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 98 (Monday, July 25, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 25, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                           Amendment No. 2398

    (Purpose: To require a period of review of proposed regulations 
     relating to law enforcement activities of the Forest Service)

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Montana [Mr. Baucus] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 2398.

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:
       None of the funds made available to the Forest Service 
     under this Act may be used by the Secretary of Agriculture to 
     prescribe and implement regulations relating to law 
     enforcement activities of the Forest Service, unless, 
     notwithstanding section 553 of title 5, United States Code, 
     not later than 90 days before the date on which the Secretary 
     prescribed final regulations relating to such activities, the 
     Secretary provides a copy of proposed regulations relating to 
     such activities to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
     and Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture 
     of the House of Representatives for review and comment by 
     such committees.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana is recognized.
  Mr. BAUCUS. I am proposing an amendment that allows the House and 
Senate Agriculture Committees 90 days to review and comment on any 
regulations the Forest Service issues relative to law enforcement 
before those rules become final. This amendment is about letting people 
enjoy the forest, something the Forest Service seemed bent on stifling 
when it issued draft enforcement regulations this past February. At 50 
pages in length, these regulations read like a chapter from George 
Orwell's ``1984.''
  On the surface, the new rules seem to prohibit swearing, making 
unreasonable loud noises, collecting rocks or fossils, or discharging 
or possessing a firearm on national forest land.
  Surely our district forest rangers have better things to do than read 
a 50-page bureaucratic treatise on prohibited human behavior and then 
patrol the woods to make sure that no one is making unreasonably loud 
noises. This is Big Brother at its worst. Folks are sick and tired of 
Federal bureaucrats regulating every imaginable human activity. What 
are our national forests for, after all, if you cannot pick up a rock, 
use a firearm for target practice, or legally hunt, and even let off 
steam and yell a little bit in the woods?
  To be honest, I felt like going to the Forest Service headquarters 
and yelling a little bit myself and try to knock some sense into them.
  Forest Service Chief Jack Ward Thomas apparently agrees. This past 
April, several of my colleagues joined with me in writing Chief Thomas 
to protest these rules. He subsequently withdrew them and proposed to 
write a new set. For that I commend him.
  This next time around, however, I believe we owe it to the public to 
make sure that the regulations are narrowly tailored and do not 
prohibit legitimate activities in our national forests.
  This amendment will give Congress the opportunity to make sure that 
Big Brother is not elbowing the public off the public lands in the 
future.
  Mr. President, I think it is a good amendment, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
  Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I am willing to accept the amendment on this 
side.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, we reviewed the amendment. I compliment 
the Senator from Montana, and we have no objections to the amendment.
  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague 
Senator Baucus in offering this amendment. The amendment calls for a 
90-day comment period before the U.S. Forest Service promulgates final 
law enforcement regulations.
  When the Forest Service first proposed new law enforcement 
regulations, many South Dakotans contacted me saying their rights would 
be violated by the restrictive new rules. After reading the proposed 
regulations, I agreed with my constituents.
  In April of this year, Senator Baucus and I and other Senators wrote 
to the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service urging him to withdraw the 
proposed regulations. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of that 
letter be printed in Record at this point.
  Mr. President, the proposed regulations simply were too subjective to 
be enforceable. There was concern about the impact the proposed 
regulations would have on multiple-use practices. Another concern was 
the fact that the proposed regulations would prohibit the collection of 
all fossils.
  This was considered an infringement on the rights of amateur 
collectors not only in South Dakota, but in all States where there are 
Forest Service lands. These amateur collectors long have made numerous 
contributions to science. Prohibiting their activities on Forest 
Service would mean a step backward in scientific advancement.
  The Forest Service agreed to our request to withdraw the new 
regulations. They were withdrawn just this past May. The amendment 
currently before the Senate will assure ample time for public input on 
any final law enforcement regulations issued in the future by the U.S. 
Forest Service. It is a sensible amendment and I urge its adoption.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                   Washington, DC, April 21, 1994.
     Mr. Jack Ward Thomas,
     Chief, U.S. Forest Service, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chief Thomas: We are writing to ask you to withdraw 
     the proposed rule of the U.S. Forest Service regarding 
     Prohibitions; Law Enforcement Support Activities, 36 CFR 
     Parts 261 and 262 (Federal Register, February 16, 1994).
       We appreciate the need for the National Forest Service to 
     revise regulations governing prohibited acts on Forest 
     Service lands. Clearly there is a need to update existing 
     Forest Service policy for a variety of reasons, including 
     making policy consistent with current enforcement laws. 
     However, the proposed rule as written broadens existing 
     Forest Service policy well beyond what is necessary. This 
     broad-brush approach may well result in increased enforcement 
     costs to the Forest Service, despite the increased level of 
     fines specified in the rule.
       The proposed rule is simply too subjective to be 
     enforceable. It is hard for us to justify to our constituents 
     how Forest Service personnel can impose charges and fines for 
     many of the prohibited acts listed in the proposed rule. 
     Enforcement of some provisions would seem to rely on highly 
     subjective judgments--for example, ``unreasonably loud 
     noises'', or ``interfering with any person.'' These and other 
     prohibited acts are not defined with specificity.
       There is considerable concern throughout the country of the 
     impact the proposed rule would have on multiple-use 
     practices. There also is a concern that the proposed rule 
     would prohibit the collection of all fossils. We ask that 
     this provision be withdrawn as a prohibited act.
       Again, we wish to work with you in revising Forest Service 
     enforcement policy. The proposed rule goes too far in many 
     areas, and we ask that if be withdrawn so we can work 
     together to develop a better approach.
           Sincerely,
     Senator Max Baucus.
     Senator Thomas A. Daschle.
     Senator Larry Pressler.
     Senator Larry E. Craig.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time is yielded back.
  The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 2398) was agreed to.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. BYRD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator is recognized for 5 minutes.


                           Amendment No. 2399

(Purpose: To require certain Federal agencies to prepare and submit to 
     Congress rankings of the proposals of such agencies for land 
                              acquisition)

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 2399.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 89, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
       Sec. 312. (a)(1) The head of each agency referred to in 
     paragraph (2) shall submit to the President each year, 
     through the head of the department having jurisdiction over 
     the agency, a land acquisition ranking for the agency 
     concerned for the fiscal year beginning after the date of the 
     submittal of the report.
       (2) The heads of agencies referred to in paragraph (1) are 
     the following:
       (A) The Director of the National Park Service in the case 
     of the National Park Service.
       (B) The Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service in the 
     case of Fish and Wildlife Service.
       (C) The Director of the Bureau of Land Management in the 
     case of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (D) The Chief of the Forest Service in the case of the 
     Forest Service.
       (3) In this section, the term ``land acquisition ranking'', 
     in the case of a Federal agency, means a statement of the 
     order of precedence of the land acquisition proposals of the 
     agency, including a statement of the order of precedence of 
     such proposals for each organizational unit of the agency.
       (b) The President shall include the land acquisition 
     rankings for a fiscal year that are submitted to the 
     President under subsection (a)(1) in the supporting 
     information submitted to Congress with the budget for the 
     fiscal year under section 1105 of title 31, United States 
     Code.
       (c)(1) The head of the agency concerned shall determine the 
     order of precedence of land acquisitions proposals under 
     subsection (a)(1) in accordance with criteria that the 
     Secretary of the Department having jurisdiction over the 
     agency shall prescribe.
       (2) The criteria prescribed under paragraph (1) shall 
     provide for a determination of the order of precedence of 
     land acquisition proposals through consideration of--
       (A) the natural resources located on the land covered by 
     the acquisition proposals;
       (B) the degree to which such resources are threatened;
       (C) the length of time required for the acquisition of the 
     land;
       (D) the extent, if any, to which an increase in the cost of 
     the land covered by the proposals makes timely completion of 
     the acquisition advisable;
       (E) the extent of public support for the acquisition of the 
     land;
       (F) such other matters as the Secretary concerned shall 
     prescribe; and
       (G) the total estimated costs associated with each land 
     acquisition.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Presiding Officer.
  Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment which would require land 
management agencies such as the National Park Service, the Bureau of 
Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service and Forest Service to 
submit a prioritized list of land acquisitions with the President's 
budget each year.
  This amendment will provide information to Members of Congress which 
will help them to evaluate the hundreds of millions of dollars in land 
acquisitions made each year. Please allow me to explain my reasons for 
offering this amendment.
  Over the years Congress has wisely taken steps to preserve our 
natural heritage. In many instances this has been done through 
management efforts without the purchase of land. However, when 
appropriate Congress has directed the Federal Government to acquire 
land for preservation or recreation activities. We have protected many 
remarkable natural areas through the establishment of national parks, 
monuments, wilderness areas, wildlife refuges, national scenic areas 
and other conservation efforts.
  While there is no shortage of areas in this beautiful country to be 
preserved, there is a limited amount of funding available to accomplish 
these goals. As a result, our Nation has a nearly $5 billion backlog in 
land acquisitions for both the Department of Interior and the 
Department of Agriculture. When compared to an annual acquisition 
budget of around $215 million, it is obvious that Congress faces a 
difficult and daunting challenge to match the preservation efforts 
established by law.
  Because of this extreme backlog we must be prudent without limited 
funding and purchase land in a priority based upon the resources that 
are being protected.
  Each year as the President's budget request is reviewed by Congress, 
it is often modified. Some projects recommended by the agencies are 
deleted, increased or decreased and others which are not requested are 
added to the list.
  It is our constitutional duty to review the President's budget 
request and to make changes as we see fit. My amendment is intended to 
help members make those decisions by providing information on the 
resources and ecological values of the land being purchased.
  Specifically, the bill requires each of the land management agencies 
funded by the Interior Appropriations bill to include a prioritized 
list of the land acquisitions with the President's budget request. The 
amendment sets forth some general criteria to be used by the agencies 
in developing the list but, it also directs the agencies to develop 
other appropriate criteria. Criteria established by the amendment 
include the natural resources on the land, the degree to which 
resources are threatened, the length of time required for acquisition, 
the extent to which an increase in the cost of land may make a timely 
acquisition more cost effective and the extent of public support.
  What we would ask the agencies to do in this amendment is not new. 
Several of the agencies already produce these types of rankings when 
developing the President's budget request. The Bureau of Land 
Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Forest Service all 
compose priority based lists. In the case of these agencies, we will be 
merely codifying actions they already take.
  Unfortunatley, the National Park Service does not provide their list 
in priority order. Because of this Members have no way of determining 
how acquisitions interrelate.
  Mr. President, the purpose of the amendment is to try to make sense 
out of the myriad demands on the Federal budget for the acquisition of 
land, whether it be for national parks or wilderness areas or other 
areas. I think what this will do is bring order and allow the Congress 
to best determine how the process should proceed.
  I feel that this is not a critical item, but it is one that I believe 
will be a very important source of information for Congress as we 
decide on how our natural resources can best be preserved, which is the 
goal of the entire Congress.
  Mr. President, I yield the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I wish to compliment our colleague, 
Senator McCain from Arizona, for his amendment because he is basically 
saying to these various agencies that are involved in land acquisition 
to put some priorities and also let us know what their goals are and 
how much it is going to cost.
  Some of these land acquisition proposals, Mr. President, as you know 
being from a Western State, may come in kind of small initially, but 
there may be no end to how much they might cost. In other words, we 
might purchase 100 acres and find out this is the first 100 acres of a 
3,000 acre project in very expensive land.
  We should know from the beginning how much these land acquisition 
costs are estimated to be and we should prioritize so we should know, 
when we have scarce or limited resources, how best to use those 
resources. I think that is what the amendment of the Senator from 
Arizona is trying to accomplish. I think it is a big step in the right 
direction, and I compliment him on his amendment.
  I urge its adoption.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, if I can have half a minute from the 
Senator's time.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I yield the Senator from West Virginia 
whatever time he may need.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. I join with Mr. Nickles 
in complimenting the Senator from Arizona on his amendment. On this 
side, I wish to express support for it. It is my understanding the vote 
has already been ordered on it, if or when it were done. I am ready to 
vote. I think it is a good amendment.
  Mr. NICKLES. Will the chairman of the committee yield for one other 
observation?
  Am I correct, Mr. President, that we are also soliciting all 
Senators, if they have additional amendments, if they will please 
notify us so we can, at least by the conclusion of the Bumpers 
amendment, have a finite list of amendments so we might have that 
ordered tonight?
  Mr. BYRD. The Senator is correct. Mr. President, on this side, we 
have run the hot line some days ago, and we have a list of the 
amendments that remain. Most of them, I think, will go away. But I hope 
that we can at the close of the rollcall vote be in a position to 
perhaps take a look at the list and, hopefully, get consent to close 
the list. If we can do that, then we will not have any more rollcall 
votes tonight.
  Mr. HELMS. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. Bumpers is to be recognized immediately after the vote 
on the McCain amendment.
  Mr. HELMS. I will advise the managers of the bill that I have one 
final amendment, and I will accept a time limitation of 20 minutes 
equally divided, or whatever anybody proposes.
  Mr. BYRD. Twenty minutes?
  Mr. HELMS. That will be satisfactory with me.
  Mr. BYRD. All right. While the vote is going on, I will discuss this 
with the Senator.
  Mr. HELMS. I thank the Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time on the amendment has expired. The 
question occurs on agreeing to amendment No. 2399 offered by the 
Senator from Arizona. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk 
will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from California [Mrs. Boxer], 
the Senator from Iowa [Mr. Harkin], the Senator from Ohio [Mr. 
Metzenbaum], and the Senator from Maryland [Ms. Mikulski], are 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. SIMPSON. I announce that the Senator from Utah [Mr. Bennett], the 
Senator from New York [Mr. D'Amato], the Senator from Kansas [Mr. 
Dole], the Senator from Utah [Mr. Hatch], the Senator from Pennsylvania 
[Mr. Specter], the Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], and the Senator 
from Wyoming [Mr. Wallop] are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Wyoming, [Mr. Wallop] would vote ``yea.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
who desire to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 89, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 231 Leg.

                                YEAS--89

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boren
     Bradley
     Breaux
     Brown
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Coats
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Danforth
     Daschle
     DeConcini
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durenberger
     Exon
     Faircloth
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Ford
     Glenn
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     Mathews
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mitchell
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Nunn
     Packwood
     Pell
     Pressler
     Pryor
     Reid
     Riegle
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Sasser
     Shelby
     Simon
     Simpson
     Smith
     Thurmond
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wofford

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bennett
     Boxer
     D'Amato
     Dole
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Metzenbaum
     Mikulski
     Specter
     Stevens
     Wallop
  So the amendment (No. 2399) was agreed to.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I believe that under the order previously 
entered, Mr. Bumpers is now to be recognized to offer an amendment.
  I ask unanimous consent that the 1 hour on the amendment be equally 
divided between Mr. Bumpers and Mr. Reid.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Will the chairman yield?
  Mr. BYRD. Yes.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I would like to have----
  Mr. NICKLES. Reserving the right to object--I would like to withhold 
a moment.
  Mr. REID. What I would like to do is allot the time that has been set 
aside for myself and Senator Bumpers.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, may we have order in the Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, what I would like to do is----
  Mr. BYRD. I am standing 10 yards from the Senator, and I cannot hear 
him. It is not because I need a hearing aid; I do not.
  Mr. REID. I would like to divide up the 30 minutes set aside for 
those in opposition to the Bumpers amendment as follows: 9 minutes to 
Senator Reid; 9 minutes to Senator Craig; 4 minutes to Senator Byrd; 4 
minutes to Senator Murkowski; 4 to Senator Bryan.
  I ask unanimous consent that the time be divided in that manner.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. NICKLES. Will the chairman of the Appropriations Committee yield?
  Mr. BYRD. Yes.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I just say to my friend and colleague, 
Senator Byrd, we have hotlined to all of our colleagues, requesting if 
they have amendments to please notify us. We have had a good response--
maybe too good of a response. I urge my colleagues, again, as we are 
trying to finalize that list, to let us know of any amendments. It 
would be my expectation that shortly after the conclusion of the debate 
on the Bumpers amendment, we will try to come up with a finite list of 
amendments.
  Mr. BYRD. That is very encouraging. I thank the distinguished 
Senator.
  Does the Senator from New Jersey rise to inquire of me?
  Mr. BRADLEY. I would state to the chairman that I am prepared to 
offer an amendment on advanced computational technology initiative. We 
have talked about this, and I am in a discussion with the Senator to 
try to see if we can do that first thing tomorrow morning.
  Mr. BYRD. Does the Senator have any idea how much time he would need?
  Mr. BRADLEY. About 45 minutes, equally divided, would be sufficient. 
I am prepared to enter into a time agreement of that dimension.
  Mr. BYRD. Equally divided, 45 minutes?
  Mr. BRADLEY. Yes.

                          ____________________