[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 100 (Tuesday, July 15, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7429-S7431]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I like to talk today about the 
stateside portion of the Land and Water Conservation Fund which doubles 
both the pleasure of those who use outdoor recreation facilities as 
well as the money. The stateside matching grant program of the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund basically provides two for the price of one, 
and I will explain that a little further. The Land and Water 
Conservation Fund grant program, or the LWCF as it is known, has had a 
substantial long-term effect on our overall attitudes and policies 
toward outdoor recreation. The land and water stateside program has 
truly a unique legacy in the history of American conservation and 
recreation.
  When I say stateside program, I am talking about a State/Federal 
matching grant. What better way for the Federal Government to 
participate than matching local funds for public parks and recreation 
facilities. Local funds provide an opportunity for involvement and 
pride and responsibility by the communities at hand.
  The first legacy of this kind is the notion basic to the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund Act that States must assume the leadership role 
as provider of recreation opportunities. It should not be left to an 
indifferent Federal Government headquartered in Washington, DC. It 
should start in the communities where the people recreate.
  From a historic perspective, the Land and Water Conservation Fund has 
contributed significantly to outdoor recreation. Through fiscal year 
1995, a total of 37,300 projects had been approved to support the 
acquisition of

[[Page S7430]]

open space for park land and the development of outdoor recreation 
facilities. The Federal share of $3.2 billion has been matched by State 
and local contributions, for a total investment of over $6.5 billion in 
local park and recreation. So when you take Federal matching with the 
State matching, you get two for the price of one.

  I think it also important to note from where the Federal share comes. 
It comes from OCS revenues; that is, off-shore oil and gas revenues. As 
a consequence, for those who are very sensitive about OCS drilling, I 
should point out that the revenue stream to provide the matching grants 
for the Federal share for land and water conservation comes 
specifically from OCS. If we do not have offshore oil and gas 
exploration, we are not going to have the money to fund the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund. Last year, OCS revenues totaled over $3 
billion.
  I believe, with advanced technology, we can safely pursue OCS 
activities off our shores and also provide a revenue stream for 
recreation through the Land and Water Conservation Act. The facts 
should not be lost on this body, the realization of just where these 
funds come from.
  Further, States have received over the years about 8,200 grants and 
counties some 4,800, while cities, towns, and other local agencies 
matched more than 24,000 grants. The facilities that the $6.5 billion 
investment has bought are those that are down your street, across your 
town, in the inner city, and virtually every nook and cranny of our 
country. The parks and facilities serve virtually every segment of the 
public. Millions of Americans have walked and jogged and picnicked, 
hiked, biked, fished, hunted, golfed, or played ball in at least one of 
these areas. These are the destination parks and facilities for 
families, campers, and hikers, areas where kids learn to play baseball, 
learn to swim, and really get an appreciation of nature. And those are 
the facilities in their neighborhoods and near their homes.
  Further, the statewide program is unquestionably one of the most 
successful programs established by Congress. The Americans for our 
Heritage and Recreation Coalition, consisting of a number of groups 
which banded together to seek reliable funding sources, concluded that 
the Land and Water Conservation Fund is ``arguably the most important 
environmental program of this century'' and that a reliable source of 
funding should be restored.
  I had the pleasure of recently addressing the Conference of Mayors in 
San Francisco. There were over 400 mayors there led by Mayor Daley of 
Chicago and Victor Ashe of Knoxville. They unanimously passed a 
resolution strongly urging the Congress and President to restore 
funding to the statewide LWCF program. The Western Governors 
Association passed a similar resolution. I ask unanimous consent that 
copies of both of these resolutions be printed in the Record for the 
benefit of my colleagues.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

      65th Annual Conference of Mayors, San Francisco, June 20-24

                                Adopted


                    land and water conservation fund

       1. Whereas, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) was 
     established by Congress over thirty years ago to provide 
     quality recreation for the American public; and
       2. Whereas, in the past LWCF has provided federal matching 
     assistance to states and their localities for acquiring land 
     and developing quality public outdoor recreation facilities 
     for the benefit of present and future generations of 
     Americans; and
       3. Whereas, the results of the program are evident in 
     nearly every community in the nation through projects ranging 
     from inner city playgrounds to suburban baseball fields to 
     state natural areas; and
       4. Whereas, over the past couple of years there has been no 
     funding for state and local parks projects under LWCF despite 
     availability of royalties from Outer Continental Shelf Oil 
     and Gas payments pledged to the Fund; and
       5. Whereas, it is the local park which is the most used and 
     visited of any parks in our national parks system,
       6. Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the United States 
     Conference of Mayors urges the President and Congress to 
     recognize the outstanding legacy of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund and the continuing unmet need for local 
     public outdoor parks and recreation facilities by increasing 
     the appropriations in the next fiscal year budget for the 
     state and local grants portion of LWCF; and
       7. Be it further Resolved, That the United States 
     Conference of Mayors urges the President and Congress to 
     strongly consider the parks and recreation needs of state and 
     local governments at the same time it considers national park 
     priorities as outlined in the 1997 budget agreement; and
       8. Be it further Resolved, the United States Conference of 
     Mayors reaffirms its support for the 1994 report by the 
     National Park Service's Land and Water Conservation Fund 
     Review Committee which recommended a 30 percent allocation of 
     LWCF to local governments; and
       9. Be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution 
     be forwarded to the bipartisan leadership of Congress.
       Project Cost: Unknown.
                                                                    ____


       Western Governors' Association, Medora, ND, June 24, 1997

                        Policy Resolution 97-012

     Sponsors: Governors Bush and Geringer.
     Subject: Allocation of Land and Water Conservation Fund 
         Appropriations.


                             a. background

       1. In 1964, the President and Congress enacted one of the 
     most successful and far-reaching pieces of conservation and 
     recreation legislation in America's history, the Land and 
     Water Conservation Fund.
       2. The Act emphasizes a leadership role for the states in 
     achieving a national outdoor recreation system which requires 
     commitments to planning, establishment and expansion, and 
     funding of projects on a coordinated basis at the local, 
     state, and national level.
       3. The Fund has provided more than $5.6 billion to acquire 
     new federal park and recreation lands and has provided 
     matching grants to state and local governments which have 
     resulted in the establishment of over 27,000 basic recreation 
     facilities in every state and territory of the nation (or 
     37,300 new or improved basic recreation facilities).
       4. The Fund receives deposits from three sources:
       a. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) revenues derived from 
     leasing oil and gas sites in coastal waters (approximately 
     90% of total deposits).
       b. Sale of Federal surplus real properties.
       c. A portion of Federal motorboat fuel taxes.
       5. In 1995, a National Recreation & Park Society survey 
     indicated that state and local recreation agencies needed 
     $27.7 billion in capital investment for rehabilitation, land 
     acquisition, and construction for the next five years. The 
     survey additionally estimated that state and local agencies 
     would have only half of these necessary funds.
       6. These estimates indicate a long-term deficit of public 
     recreation investment nationally.
       7. In 1976, the Act was amended by:
       a. raising the Appropriation ceiling from $600 million to 
     $900 million; and
       b. changing the allocation formula, which had given 40 
     percent to federal agencies, to read that ``not less than 40 
     percent of any appropriation would go to Federal agencies.''
       8. While states received approximately sixty percent of the 
     allocated grant money before 1976, during the last ten years 
     they received, on average, only 7.5% of the allocated grant 
     money from the LWCF.
       During Fiscal Year 1996 and 1997, states received zero 
     funding from the LWCF, despite a large increase in OCS 
     revenues.


                     b. governors' policy statement

       1. A true partnership to ``Build a Nationwide System of 
     Parks'' can only be achieved by increasing LWCF 
     appropriations and by balancing the funding between federal, 
     state and local agencies.
       2. To rebuild this partnership and revive the true intent 
     of the LWCF Act, Congress should increase LWCF appropriations 
     and amend the LWCF to increase the percentage of LWCF funds 
     allocated to the states to 50 percent.


                   c. governors' management directive

       1. Western Governors' Association shall survey this 
     resolution to the President of the United States, the 
     Secretary of the Interior, western congressional delegations, 
     and appropriate House and Senate committee chairmen and 
     ranking minority members.
       2. Western Governors' Association staff and Natural 
     Resource Group shall continue to monitor and study this issue 
     and recommend specific action items for the Governors.

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, in campaigning for the Presidency of 
the United States, candidate Bill Clinton at the time stated:

       I will acquire new park lands and recreation areas with 
     funds now available in the Federal Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund to increase opportunities for hunting, 
     fishing and other outdoor recreation activities.

  Candidate Clinton said:

       I would increase funding for several programs. . . and 
     reinvigorate the Land and Water Conservation Fund to make 
     more funds available for the acquisition of public outdoor 
     open spaces.

  And he also said:

       I would also make funds available from the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund to help address critical infrastructure 
     needs in State and local facilities.


[[Page S7431]]


  Unfortunately, I guess our President has overlooked it or was kidding 
because if you look at the administration's proposal for the stateside 
funding for the Land and Water Conservation Act which would address the 
critical needs in State and local facilities, there is a large zero.
  Secretary Babbitt, in May 1996, in an interview with the San Jose 
Mercury News, is credited with stating that he is working on a proposal 
to take the Land and Water Conservation Fund off budget, so a full $1 
billion a year can be spent on the parks. Reportedly, the Secretary 
said that the effort would not occur until the next year, meaning that 
it would be contingent on President Clinton's reelection. Well, it is 
now next year. President Clinton has been reelected. The 
administration, however, has been silent vis-a-vis the proposal for the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund.
  We have instead a proposal to use $315 million of the $700 million 
contained in the budget agreement for the purchase of the Headwaters 
Forest in California and a mine in Montana. We do not know an awful lot 
about the Headwaters Forest acquisition. We do know that the Headwaters 
Forest is 40 air miles from the nearest national forest. We know that 
access to the Headwaters Forest is extremely limited. We know that the 
agreement with the current landowner of the Headwaters Forest is 
contingent on a favorable ruling by the Internal Revenue Service. 
Getting a favorable ruling from the Internal Revenue Service is a 
herculean effort, and I am not sure that the IRS knows how to basically 
spell the word ``favorable,'' but that is a subject for a statement for 
another day. The bottom line is that these projects have never ever 
been authorized by the appropriate committees of jurisdiction. No 
hearings, none whatsoever. No hearings have been held and no 
legislation has been introduced. This is from an administration that 
prides itself in the public process. Public process suggests 
legislation, suggests hearings, and action by the appropriate House and 
Senate committees. Neither of these have been proposed in the case of 
the acquisition of the area known as the Headwaters Forest in 
California or the area proposed for the mine purchase in Montana.
  This is very much like the recent land grab in the State of Utah. 
There was a process ongoing where the committees were discussing the 
merits of withdrawing 1.6 million acres of public land in Utah and 
putting that land in wilderness. While these discussions were 
occurring, the administration saw fit to invoke the Antiquities Act 
and, overnight, basically put this 1.6 million acres in Utah into 
wilderness over the objections of the Utah congressional delegation and 
Utah's Governor. The President's action occurred without any hearings, 
without any public process. And, ironically, the announcement came not 
in Utah but in front of the Grand Canyon in Arizona.
  Well, the media saw fit to not make an issue of it so not too many 
people in the United States reflected on the inconsistency between the 
President's promises and his actions.
  But, again, this is what is proposed in the budget agreement: the 
purchase of the Headwaters Forest in California and a mine in Montana--
no hearings, no public participation in the process, simply an outright 
purchase. This is not the purpose of the Land and Water Conservation 
Fund.

  We do not know just what is their objection, relative to the 
procedure, but as the Senator who is chairman of the Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee, the fact that the administration is circumventing 
the public process is certainly, in my opinion, inappropriate.
  What we do know is that the benefits derived from funding the 
stateside Land and Water Conservation Fund program are great. That is 
why we should take the $315 million and invest it in the State matching 
grant program because it will return over $630 million in benefits.
  Roger Kennedy, former Director of the National Park Service, perhaps 
put it best when he said,

       Without a doubt, the Land and Water Conservation Fund ranks 
     highest among the most successful and significant 
     conservation/recreation movements ever experienced in these 
     United States. This State-driven program has resulted in much 
     needed and highly beneficial public outdoor recreation 
     opportunities for the benefits of all the people. More 
     accessible park and recreation facilities have become a 
     reality.

and continue to become even a greater use and benefit to the Nation.
  Mr. President, it is very difficult to compare the relative value of 
expanding a wildlife refuge, say, in the Florida Keys, with the 
addition of acreage to a unique urban park such as the Presidio in San 
Francisco. It is difficult to compare the value of supplementing 
Federal holdings in Glacier National Park with a purchase of land, say, 
next to Gettysburg National Battlefield. But those are the types of 
decisions that are faced day-in and day-out by the Congress in 
determining priorities for funding under the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund.
  I, therefore, urge my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee and 
those in the Senate to provide funding for the stateside Land and Water 
Conservation Fund Grant Program. In the absence of these grants, I fear 
local park and recreation services will fail to meet the ever-growing 
demands of the American public and the Federal Government will be asked 
to fill the void. It is a role the Federal Government cannot and should 
not play. The answer to this dilemma is simply the stateside matching 
grant of the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
  Mr. President, I have already noted the action taken by the mayors of 
the Conference of Mayors in San Francisco relative to support of this 
program because it is so significant relative to community involvement 
and community responsibility. I urge my colleagues to reflect on that, 
as well as, again, on the statement from the Western Governors Council 
in support of this program.
  There is one other item I want to bring to the attention of my 
colleagues relative to action before this body. I ask unanimous 
consent, since no other Senator is seeking recognition, that I may 
speak for another 5 minutes on chemical weapons disposal.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________