[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 98 (Tuesday, July 25, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H6864-H6867]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
OREGON LAND EXCHANGE ACT OF 2000
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
Senate bill (S. 1629) to provide for the exchange of certain land in
the State of Oregon.
The Clerk read as follows:
S. 1629
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Oregon Land Exchange Act of
2000''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) certain parcels of private land located in northeast
Oregon are intermingled with land owned by the United States
and administered--
(A) by the Secretary of the Interior as part of the Central
Oregon Resource Area in the Prineville Bureau of Land
Management District and the Baker Resource Area in the Vale
Bureau of Land Management District; and
(B) by the Secretary of Agriculture as part of the Malheur
National Forest, the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, and the
Umatilla National Forest;
(2) the surface estate of the private land described in
paragraph (1) is intermingled with parcels of land that are
owned by the United States or contain valuable fisheries and
wildlife habitat desired by the United States;
(3) the consolidation of land ownerships will facilitate
sound and efficient management for both public and private
lands;
(4) the improvement of management efficiency through the
land tenure adjustment program of the Department of the
Interior, which disposes of small isolated tracts having low
public resource values within larger blocks of contiguous
parcels of land, would serve important public objectives,
including--
(A) the enhancement of public access, aesthetics, and
recreation opportunities within or adjacent to designated
wild and scenic river corridors;
(B) the protection and enhancement of habitat for
threatened, endangered, and sensitive species within unified
landscapes under Federal management; and
(C) the consolidation of holdings of the Bureau of Land
Management and the Forest Service--
(i) to facilitate more efficient administration, including
a reduction in administrative costs to the United States; and
(ii) to reduce right-of-way, special use, and other permit
processing and issuance for roads and other facilities on
Federal land;
(5) time is of the essence in completing a land exchange
because further delays may force the identified landowners to
construct roads in, log, develop, or sell the private land
and thereby diminish the public values for which the private
land is to be acquired; and
(6) it is in the public interest to complete the land
exchanges at the earliest practicable date so that the land
acquired by the United States can be preserved for--
(A) protection of threatened and endangered species
habitat; and
(B) permanent public use and enjoyment.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act--
(1) the term ``Clearwater'' means Clearwater Land
Exchange--Oregon, an Oregon partnership that signed the
document entitled ``Assembled Land Exchange Agreement between
the Bureau of Land Management and Clearwater Land Exchange--
Oregon for the Northeast Oregon Assembled Lands Exchange, OR
51858,'' dated October 30, 1996, and the document entitled
``Agreement to initiate'' with the Forest Service, dated June
30, 1995, or its successors or assigns;
(2) the term ``identified landowners'' means private
landowners identified by Clearwater and willing to exchange
private land for Federal land in accordance with this Act;
(3) the term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Northeast
Oregon Assembled Land Exchange/Triangle Land Exchange'',
dated November 5, 1999; and
(4) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the
Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture, as appropriate.
SEC. 4. BLM--NORTHEAST OREGON ASSEMBLED LAND EXCHANGE.
(a) In General.--Upon the request of Clearwater, on behalf
of the appropriate identified landowners, the Secretary of
the Interior shall exchange the Federal lands described in
subsection (b) for the private lands described in subsection
(c), as provided in section 6.
(b) BLM Lands To Be Conveyed.--The parcels of Federal lands
to be conveyed by the Secretary to the appropriate identified
landowners are as follows:
(1) the parcel comprising approximately 45,824 acres
located in Grant County, Oregon, within the Central Oregon
Resource Area in the Prineville District of the Bureau of
Land Management, as generally depicted on the map;
(2) the parcel comprising approximately 2,755 acres located
in Wheeler County, Oregon, within the Central Oregon Resource
Area in the Prineville District of the Bureau of Land
Management, as generally depicted on the map;
(3) the parcel comprising approximately 726 acres located
in Morrow Country, Oregon, within the Baker Resource Area of
the Vale District of Land Management, as generally depicted
on the map; and
(4) the parcel comprising approximately 1,015 acres located
in Umatilla County, Oregon, within the Baker Resource Area in
the Vale District of the Bureau of Land Management, as
generally depicted on the map.
(c) Private Lands To Be Acquired.--The parcel of private
lands to be conveyed by the appropriate identified landowners
to the Secretary are as follows:
(1) the parcel comprising approximately 31,646 acres
located in Grant County, Oregon, within the Central Oregon
Resource Area in the Prineville District of the Bureau of
Land Management, as generally depicted on the map;
(2) the parcel comprising approximately 1,960 acres located
in Morrow County, Oregon, within the Baker Resource Area in
the Vale District of the Bureau of Land Management, as
generally depicted on the map; and
(3) the parcel comprising approximately 10,544 acres
located in Umatilla County, Oregon, within the Baker Resource
Area in the Vale District of the Bureau of Land Management,
as generally depicted on the map.
SEC. 5. FOREST SERVICE--TRIANGLE LAND EXCHANGE.
(a) In General.--Upon the request of Clearwater, on behalf
of the appropriate identified landowners, the Secretary of
Agriculture shall exchange the Federal lands described in
subsection (b) for the private lands described in subsection
(c), as provided in section 6.
(b) Forest Service Lands To Be Conveyed.--The National
Forest System lands to be conveyed by the Secretary to the
appropriate identified landowners comprise approximately
3,901 acres located in Grant and Harney Counties, Oregon,
within the Malheur National Forest, as generally depicted on
the map.
(c) Private Lands To Be Acquired.--The parcels of private
lands to be conveyed by the appropriate identified landowners
to the Secretary are as follows:
(1) the parcel comprising approximately 3,752 acres located
in Grant and Harney Counties, Oregon, within the Malheur
National Forest, as generally depicted on the map;
(2) the parcel comprising approximately 1,702 acres located
in Baker and Grant Counties, Oregon, within the Wallowa-
Whitman National Forest, as generally depicted on the map;
and
(3) the parcel comprising approximately 246 acres located
in Grant and Wallowa Counties, Oregon, within or adjacent to
the Umatilla National Forest, as generally depicted on the
map.
SEC. 6. LAND EXCHANGE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this Act,
the land exchanges implemented by this Act shall be conducted
in accordance with section 206 of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1716) and other applicable laws.
(b) Multiple Transactions.--The Secretary of the Interior
and the Secretary of Agriculture may carry out a single or
multiple transactions to complete the land exchanges
authorized in this Act.
(c) Completion of Exchanges.--Any land exchange under this
Act shall be completed not later than 90 days after the
Secretary and Clearwater reach an agreement on the final
appraised values of the lands to be exchanged.
(d) Appraisals.--(1) The values of the lands to be
exchanged under this Act shall be
[[Page H6865]]
determined by appraisals using nationally recognized
appraisal standards, including as appropriate--
(A) the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions (1992); and
(B) the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice.
(2) To ensure the equitable and uniform appraisal of the
lands to be exchanged under this Act, all appraisals shall
determine the best use of the lands in accordance with the
law of the State of Oregon, including use for the protection
of wild and scenic river characteristics as provided in the
Oregon Administrative Code.
(3)(A) all appraisals of lands to be exchanged under this
Act shall be completed, reviewed and submitted to the
Secretary not later than 90 days after the date Clearwater
requests the exchange.
(B) Not less than 45 days before an exchange of lands under
this Act is completed, a comprehensive summary of each
appraisal for the specific lands to be exchanged shall be
available for public inspection in the appropriate Oregon
offices of the Secretary, for a 15-day period.
(4) After the Secretary approves the final appraised values
of any parcel of the lands to be conveyed under this Act, the
value of such parcel shall not be reappraised or updated
before the completion of the applicable land exchange, except
for any adjustments in value that may be required under
subsection (e)(2).
(e) Equal Value Land Exchange.--(1)(A) The value of the
lands to be exchanged under this Act shall be equal, or if
the values are not equal, they shall be equalized in
accordance with section 206(b) of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1716(b)) or this subsection.
(B) The Secretary shall retain any cash equalization
payments received under subparagraph (A) to use, without
further appropriation, to purchase land from willing sellers
in the State of Oregon for addition to lands under the
administration of the Bureau of Land Management or the Forest
Service, as appropriate.
(2) If the value of the private lands exceeds the value of
the Federal lands by 25 percent or more, Clearwater, after
consultation with the affected identified landowners and the
Secretary, shall withdraw a portion of the private lands
necessary to equalize the values of the lands to be
exchanged.
(3) If any of the private lands to be acquired do not
include the rights to the subsurface estate, the Secretary
may reserve the subsurface estate in the Federal lands to be
exchanged.
(f) Land Titles.--(1) Title to the private lands to be
conveyed to the Secretary shall be in a form acceptable to
the Secretary.
(2) The Secretary shall convey all right, title, and
interest of the United States in the Federal lands to the
appropriate identified landowners, except to the extent the
Secretary reserves the subsurface estate under subsection
(c)(2).
(g) Management of Lands.--(1) Lands acquired by Secretary
of the Interior under this Act shall be administered in
accordance with sections 205(c) of the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1715(c)), and lands acquired by
the Secretary of Agriculture shall be administered in
accordance with sections 205(d) of such Act (43 U.S.C.
1715(d)).
(2) Lands acquired by the Secretary of the Interior
pursuant to section 4 which are within the North Fork of the
John Day subwatershed shall be administered in accordance
with section 205(c) of the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act (43 U.S.C. 1715(c)), but shall be managed primarily for
the protection of native fish and wildlife habitat, and for
public recreation. The Secretary may permit other authorized
uses within the subwatershed if the Secretary determines,
through the appropriate land use planning process, that such
uses are consistent with, and do not diminish these
management purposes.
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be
necessary to carry out this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. Hansen) and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) each will
control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen).
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, S. 1629, sponsored by Senators Smith and Wyden of
Oregon, and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden) on the House side,
would facilitate two exchanges of public and private lands in Oregon:
the Triangle Land Exchange in the Northeast Oregon Assembled Land
Exchange.
Approximately 54,000 acres of BLM and Forest Service land is proposed
to be traded for nearly 50,000 acres currently held by private
ownership in northeast Oregon. The value of the lands exchanged will be
the same or equalized by cash payments to the Secretaries. The proposed
exchange has been proceeding under administrative process for 4\1/2\
years with a variety of delays along the way. The bill creates a
legislative resolution to the exchange.
Both the government and the public have interest in this exchange.
Federal agencies will acquire sensitive river corridors which will
improve the efficiency of their protection efforts for threatened and
endangered fish. Communities and landowners will benefit from these
exchanges because the consolidation of ownership patterns and the
release of previously inaccessible forest lands will boost local
economies and enhance the ability of the private sector to manage its
own lands.
The land exchanges have received the strong collective support of
several Oregon Indian tribes, conservation groups such as the Oregon
Natural Desert Association, Oregon Trout and the Sierra Club, the
Governor and scores of concerned citizens at large.
Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden) for his
tireless efforts to bring this bill to the floor. His constituents are
lucky to have someone of his caliber representing their interest.
I urge my colleagues to support S. 1629.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on the issue of S. 1629, the Oregon Land
Exchange Act. As the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) stated, it is a
bill that has come to us from the Senate sponsored by Senators Smith
and Wyden and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden) who has done
yeoman's work on this issue in the House.
The issue has been before the House for nearly a year. There have
been a series of administrative actions that go back several years
regarding these proposed exchanges.
{time} 1545
In October of 1999, the subcommittee held a hearing on the issue, and
in April of this year the bill was marked up. Before the hearing and
before the markup, I and my staff made extensive inquiries of
knowledgeable environmental groups throughout Oregon to see what
concerns they might have regarding the legislation and what changes
they might like to see. What I heard back, for the most part, was the
benefits of the exchange, particularly along the north fork of the John
Day. No one, until quite recently, came forward with specific
objections to specific parcels involved as a small subset of the entire
exchange. It is unfortunate that those concerns were raised so late in
the process.
In general, the legislation identifies isolated parcels of publicly
owned lands in eastern Oregon. I have spent some time looking at the
maps; and it is quite a dispersed ownership, much of it really public
islands surrounded by private land, in particular a large block of
lands along the north fork of the John Day River, which is critical
salmon habitat, and other private inholdings to allow the Forest
Service and the BLM to block up their holdings in the public arena.
The bill is supported by Oregon Trout, the Native Fish Society, and
the governor of Oregon. I contacted the Oregon Natural Resources
Council, the Oregon Natural Desert Association, and the Sierra Club
during consideration. They did support the Forest Service preferred
alternative for the Northeast Oregon Assembled Land Exchange, which is
part of the legislation. It is very complex legislation and includes
other exchanges.
As I said earlier, I have heard some concerns very recently from a
number of people who reside in the district of the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Walden) raising concerns. In general, I am skeptical of
land exchanges. When I was first here, I opposed a land exchange
proposed by the chairman of the Committee on Resources, joining with
the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller) and very few others on the
committee to oppose that, because we did not believe the public was
getting full value. I have, in my district, put great emphasis in
scrutinizing any proposals for even minor land exchanges.
This is a large exchange; and all I can do in part is rely upon the
governor, the advocates, like Oregon Trout and Native Fish Society, the
environmental groups that are the most knowledgeable of the area about
the benefits, and try to weigh those benefits against what I am told
are some
[[Page H6866]]
detrimental exchanges on isolated parcels.
Unfortunately, I believe that at this point we cannot fix what minor
problems might result, and we are threatened with harvest along the
north fork of the John Day this summer or next fall if this exchange
does not go forward. The owners there have withheld harvest for 3 or 4
years, and now this year went in and actually marked trees along the
north fork, and I do know of the benefits and I am very familiar with
that area.
The ranking member has recently revealed a report from the GAO which
goes to the issue of land exchanges and problems with land exchanges;
and I am hopeful that my efforts and the efforts of other members of
the Oregon delegation, the resource agencies involved, and the interest
groups that have scrutinized this have prevented any of those problems
from recurring in this particular legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I would again, although unfortunately it comes very late
in the process, I would enter the letter from the Friends of Rudio
Mountain, Inc., into the Record at this point in time raising their
concerns about that particular aspect of the exchange:
Friends of Rudio Mountain, Inc.
Forest Grove, OR, July 20, 2000.
Representative Peter DeFazio,
RHOB, Washington, DC.
Dear Peter DeFazio: We are writing today with new and
extremely important information that you should be informed
of regarding the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 (HR2950).
The following new information gives the public moral grounds
to ask you to stop all legislation regarding The Oregon Land
Exchange Act Of 2000 (HR2950).
Our first concern is that misleading information has kept
the public in the dark. We want to make it clear that
Prineville District BLM officials have told us from the start
that the Congressional Trade (HR2950) followed PHASE 1 of the
NOALE Land Exchange. We were told that the maps in the FEIS
for the NOALE were the same as the maps that you are using
for The Oregon Land Exchange Act. This is not the truth.
Two weeks ago we received a set of the maps that outline
the lands involved in (HR2950). Our group and many other
special interest groups were not aware that entirely
different maps were involved or that certain public lands of
such high value in critical areas were being disposed of in
(HR2950) until we reviewed maps 1 through 6. Had we known
that the Congressional Trade was based on a different set of
maps and that it intended to dispose of parcels of public
land not set for disposal in PHASE 1 of NOALE we would have
offered stormy opposition and this Bill would most likely
have died at the onset. We are certain that if the true clear
picture would have been laid out the Bill would not have had
any supporters.
Please note that on July 19th Jessica Hamilton from
Congressman David Wu's office spoke with one of the public
officials that has been involved from the start with the
NOALE exchange and (HR2950). During her conversation with him
he told her the same misleading information that we had been
led to believe. He firmly told her that he was not aware of
any Rudio Mountain land at all that was involved in the
Congressional Bill and that he was certain that no public
land defined as Phase 2 Disposal Parcels in the FEIS
were involved in (H.R. 2950). On this same date he told us
that he was not aware that the Congressional Bill maps
were different from those of the PHASE 1 maps of the FEIS,
furthermore, he told us once again the same information
that he had told to Jessica Hamilton. He kept insisting it
was true until we told him that we had documents in our
possession to prove him wrong. He firmly denied sending us
anything at which point we reminded him that we had a map
that he had outlined for us and other correspondence from
him and that we were going to the State Director regarding
certain matters. At this point he admitted that several
thousand acres of PHASE 2 Rudio Mountain public land had
been put into the Congressional trade because it contained
Old-Growth Timber. He told us not to worry about it
because the BLM was opposed to disposing of any Rudio
Mountain land and even if Congress passed the Bill the BLM
definitely would not allow those parcels to be traded away
and that the NEPA process had not been completed on those
parcels so BLM could not get rid of them even if Congress
passed the Bill. Talk about being led down the garden
path! Shortly after this conversation this public official
put in a call to Jessica Hamilton to clarify certain
matters. I have not had the opportunity to discuss the
matter with Jessica to see exactly what he clarified.
Our second major concern is that the public lands involved
do not meet the requirements of the Congressional Bill. (H.R.
2950) is defeating the purpose for land trades in Oregon. The
agencies are not disposing of isolated parcels of public land
as they would like the public to believe. (H.R. 2950) will
dispose of large parcels of public land that are adjacent to
other public land, for example, (SEE MAP 4), T12S R28E,
Parcels 117B--139A--139B, (consisting of about 1500 acres),
T12S R29E, Parcel 145, T12S R30E, Parcel 150A, (about 600
acres surrounded by public land and adjoining a major
highway), to name just a few examples. Parcels like this have
been targeted because they contain Old-Growth Timber. These
public lands are currently being utilized by the public at
large. To call them isolated or hard to manage is extremely
misleading. In this same locale many parcels that are in fact
isolated with no public access have been skipped over as they
contain no Old-Growth Timber. In some areas small portions of
large blocks of public land have been marked for disposal.
Why would the agencies want to break apart large parcels when
they could offer parcels that are truly small, isolated and
separated from larger tracts. The answer is crystal clear,
they contain no Valuable Old-Growth Timber.
Our third concern is that we have been involved in public
meetings with the agencies regarding the NOALE exchange from
the very beginning. The original EIS and FEIS for the NOALE
exchange concerned only public lands that were marked for
PHASE 1 of the process but it also listed lands that were
being considered for a PHASE 2 exchange. PHASE 2 public land
consisted mainly of high value Old-Growth habitat and
critical wildlife habitat in the vicinity of Rudio Mountain.
We have corresponded with the BLM regarding Rudio Mountain
Lands for a number of years. BLM officials have always
assured us both verbally and in writing that they would
never trade any land in the vicinity of Rudio Mountain
unless they could gain private land on Rudio Mountain that
would block up to other public land that would benefit the
public.
Some time ago former Congresswoman Elizabeth Furse and
former Senator Mark Hatfield forwarded over 100 statements
from individual people to the BLM addressing this very issue.
The BLM had a firm agreement with us that no Rudio Mountain
public land would ever be traded for land anywhere else
except for on Rudio Mountain. In (H.R. 2950) over 8000 acres
of the very best public land on Rudio Mountain will be
forfeited in exchange for logged over land hundreds of miles
from Rudio Mountain.
Attached hereto as EXHIBIT A is a letter that we sent to
Jessica Hamilton to assist her in researching our concerns.
EXHIBIT A outlines some of the parcels of public land that we
are concerned with.
Will you stand by while hundreds of people are deceived
through this Congressional Land Exchange. Will you stand by
and let some of the most beautiful, untouched land in the
State of Oregon be put into the control of a third party
facilitator whose only interest is to reap outlandish profits
by placing the public land into the hands of private parties
and the Old-Growth Timber into the hands of private
industries. Rudio Mountain public lands contain some of the
best critical wildlife habitat and outstanding Old-Growth
left in the State of Oregon. This valuable habitat in harmony
with other things is responsible for producing and
maintaining some of the best quality and wholesome wildlife
in the Western States.
We can not afford to lose these treasures. We have walked
these lands and forests for decades and our love for this
land, for the forests and the wildlife is overflowing. To
take such simple yet important pleasures from us would be
heartbreaking.
Once again we ask you to stand with us and stop this land
exchange. In closing this letter we have two requests. First,
please consider the facts that we have set forth, second,
please take one minute to look deep into our hearts before
you make any decisions for our future and those that will
come after us, who shall one day yearn to walk through the
special places where we walk today. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Kathleen R. Kidwell,
For Friends of Rudio Mountain, Inc., & Others In Opposition
To The Land Exchanges.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Walden), who has done a remarkable job on this piece of
legislation and actually has a companion bill with this Senate bill we
are considering, H.R. 2950.
Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's
yielding to me and his hard work on this legislation. I thank him for
his time and help on it.
I want to thank the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) as well, with
whom I have worked on this and several other pieces of legislation in
this session in a partnership that I think benefits all of our
constituents in Oregon. We need to continue to work to move all those
bills through the process and down to the President's desk.
I also want to thank the chairman of the full committee, the
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), and others who have worked in a
bipartisan effort on this compromise legislation, including our Oregon
Senators, Senator Wyden and Senator Smith.
The reason this bill passed unanimously out of the Senate and the
[[Page H6867]]
House Committee on Resources is because people know it is good for the
environment and good for the people. It will add 54\1/2\ miles of
threatened and endangered species habitat for Bull Trout, Chinook
Salmon, Mid-Columbia Steelhead, and Westslope Cutthroat Trout. It will
add over 71\1/2\ miles of riparian zones under Federal management. It
will increase public land holdings within the Wild and Scenic River
System corridors by over 1,300 acres. It will increase commercial
forest land under management by Federal agencies by more than 5,218
acres.
And as we have heard already, it is supported by Oregon's Democrat
Governor John Ktizhaber, Oregon Trout, Oregon Trout Unlimited, Native
Fish Society, the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs, and the
Umatilla Reservations, to name just a few.
Mr. Speaker, this stack of documents I have in this box next to me,
which I will not dump out on the table, but certainly could, weighs
more than 13 pounds. It is some 5 years' worth of National
Environmental Protection Act processes and failed time lines in an
attempt to execute this exchange administratively. We have seen two
U.S. Forest Service environmental impact assessments, a draft EIS for
the Triangle Exchange, draft EIS and final EIS for the Northeast
Assembled Land Exchange; we have had official consultation with all
four impacted native American tribes, each of which supports the
exchanges; and had formal consultation with and concurrence by the
National Marine Fisheries and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
This bill goes so far as to take the BLM and the Forest Service's
preferred alternatives from these 5 years of NEPA processes and
includes the preferred alternatives in this act.
Mr. Speaker, this is a sound environmental bill, providing sought-
after Federal management of these vital salmon and steelhead streams.
We cannot afford to allow these exchanges to fall apart due to
bureaucratic failings and an increased hypersensitivity to land
exchanges both good and bad.
Mr. Speaker, I share my colleague's concerns about land exchanges and
will continue to vigorously review them as they come before this body
to make sure the public gets its due in any exchanges that may be
proposed.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sununu). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) that the House suspend
the rules and pass the Senate bill, S.1629.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________