[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 130 (Thursday, September 19, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10971-S10972]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 1174

  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now 
turn to the consideration of S. 1174, regarding the Lamprey River in 
New Hampshire, the bill be advanced to third reading and passed, and 
the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, speaking on behalf of the leader on our 
side, I reserve the right to object.
  I wonder if the Senator from New Hampshire would amend his request to 
include the following: That the Senate proceed to the immediate 
consideration of Calendar No. 599, S. 608, that the committee 
amendments be agreed to, the bill be read a third time, passed, and the 
motion to reconsider be laid on the table?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. STEVENS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, on behalf of the leadership, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, do I still have the floor?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I do not know about the other bill that was 
attempted to be added to my request for consideration of a bill, but I 
would just like my colleagues to know that this bill, S. 1174, passed 
unanimously out of committee with bipartisan support. It was placed on 
the calendar by the majority leader. It has the unanimous support of 
everyone on the Republican side. It has the support of my State of New 
Hampshire. It has the support of the individuals who helped to put this 
river into the wild and scenic bill. It is 12 miles of a beautiful 
river that we now preserve under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers 
Act, if this legislation passes.
  I find it outrageous that, for whatever reasons, political or 
otherwise, a piece of legislation that has that much support would be 
objected to; tying it, linking it to some other legislation. I think 
the other legislation can rise or fall on its own merit. This is a good 
bill.
  Mr. President, on August 10, 1995, Senator Gregg and I introduced S. 
1174, the Lamprey Wild and Scenic River Act, to designate a segment of 
the Lamprey River in New Hampshire as part of the National Wild and 
Scenic Rivers System. Since introduction, a hearing was held on the 
legislation in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and soon 
thereafter, as I said, the bill was reported unanimously out of the 
committee.
  I introduced this legislation after receiving the vote of support 
from each of the affected communities along this segment of the River. 
Ordinarily I do not encourage Federal ownership and control of State or 
private property, however, this legislation is different.
  The process for developing this legislation was different for two 
reasons. First, the legislation was developed from the bottom up, from 
environmentally conscious communities and local people. It is not a 
Washington initiative. Second, the bill is drafted to allow for maximum 
control at the local level in making land use and conservation 
decisions.
  The history of this legislation goes back almost 5 years when Senator 
Rudman and I introduced the Lamprey River study bill in February 1991, 
which was subsequently signed into law by President Bush later that 
year. Once the National Park Service determined the Lamprey River's 
eligibility for the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, a local 
advisory committee was formed to work with local communities, 
landowners, the National Park Service and New Hampshire's environment 
department in preparing a comprehensive management plan. This 
management plan was completed in January 1995.
  The Lamprey River Management Plan was subsequently endorsed by the 
advisory committee as well as the local governments affected by this 
designation. The primary criteria for my sponsorship of this 
legislation was the support of the local communities. If the affected 
towns did not vote in favor of designation, I would not be here today 
seeking support for this legislation.
  In fact, the town of Epping had expressed some reservation about 
designating the segment of the Lamprey which runs through the town and, 
out of respect for their concerns, the bill excludes that segment of 
the river. However, that segment was studied and found to be eligible, 
so we have included a section in our bill that would allow the town of 
Epping to be involved in the implementation of the management plan and, 
upon the town's request, be considered for future designation.
  The Lamprey River is well deserving of this designation for a number 
of reasons. Not only is the river listed on the 1982 National Park 
Service's inventory of outstanding rivers, but it has also been 
recognized by the State of New Hampshire as the ``most important 
coastal river for anadromous fish in the State.'' Herring, Shad and 
Salmon are among the anadromous species found in the river. In fact, 
New Hampshire fishing maps describe the Lamprey as ``a truly 
exceptional river offering a vast variety of fishing. It contains every 
type of stream and river fish you could expect to find in New 
England.''
  The Lamprey is approximately 60 miles in length and serves as the 
major

[[Page S10972]]

tributary for the Great Bay, which is part of the National Estuarine 
Research Reserve System. The Great Bay Refuge is also nearby, which was 
established several years ago following the closure of Pease Air Force 
Base. The preservation of the Lamprey is a significant component to 
protecting this entire ecosystem.
  The 11.5-mile segment, as proposed by our legislation, has been the 
focus of local protection efforts for many years. The towns of Lee, 
Durham, and Newmarket, local conservationists, the State government, as 
well as the congressional delegation have all come together in support 
of this legislation. I believe the management philosophy adopted by the 
Advisory Committee best articulates our goals for this legislation:

       . . . management of the river must strike a balance among 
     desires to protect the river as an ecosystem, maintain the 
     river for legitimate community use, and protect the interests 
     and property rights of those who own its shorelands.
  I just cannot understand why, at this hour, with all the work and all 
of the background, that the other side would play politics on this 
issue. It is an outrage. I think everybody should know it. I hope the 
people in New Hampshire hear me and know it, that this very significant 
piece of environmental legislation is being deliberately held up for 
whatever purposes. I will leave people to decide.
  But I do want to recognize two members of the Lamprey River Advisory 
Committee, Judith Spang of Durham, NH, and Richard Wellington of Lee, 
NH, who worked so hard and so long to pass this legislation.
  I might say to them, I apologize to you for the outrage that is being 
committed here on the floor of the Senate tonight. This is not the way 
we should do business in the U.S. Senate. This is an environmentally 
sound piece of legislation. It has the support of the communities, 
support of the State, support of every single Republican on my side, 
the support of most Democrats on the other side, and it has been passed 
out of the committee unanimously. And here it is held up deliberately.
  I find it an outrage. I do not know what I can do about it. 
Obviously, Senators have rights and I respect those rights. They have a 
right to object. But, having the right to object and objecting for good 
reason are two different things. There should be a good reason to 
object. There is no good reason to object to a piece of legislation 
that has unanimous support.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________