[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 13 (Wednesday, February 9, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1214-S1215]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Nelson of 
        Nebraska, and Mr. Ensign):
  S. 339. A bill to reaffirm the authority of States to regulate 
certain hunting and fishing activities; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Reaffirmation 
of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act 
of 2005.'' This legislation explicitly reaffirms each State's right to 
regulate hunting and fishing. I am pleased that Senators Ben Nelson, 
John Ensign, Max Baucus, and Ted Stevens are joining me in sponsoring 
this important bill.
  This is a Nevada issue, but it also is a national issue, as a recent 
Federal circuit court ruling undermines traditional hunting and fishing 
laws. In Conservation Force v. Dennis Manning, the Ninth Circuit Court 
of Appeals ruled that State laws that distinguish between State 
residents and non-residents for the purpose of affording hunting and 
related privileges are constitutionally suspect.
  This threatens the conservation of wildlife resources and 
recreational opportunities. Although the Ninth Circuit found the 
purposes of such regulation to be sound, the court questioned the 
validity of tag limits for non-resident hunters.
  I respect the authority of States to enact laws to protect their 
legitimate interests in conserving fish and game, as well as providing 
opportunities for in-State and out-of-State residents to hunt and fish. 
That's what this legislation says--we respect that State right.
  Sportsmen are ardent conservationists. They support wildlife 
conservation not only through the payment of State and local taxes and 
other fees, but also through local non-profit conservation efforts and 
by volunteering their time.
  For example, in Nevada there are great groups such as Nevada Bighorns 
Unlimited and the Fraternity of Desert Bighorn. These are dedicated 
sportsmen who spend countless hours and much of their own money 
building ``guzzlers'' in the desert, which help provide a reliable 
source of water for bighorn sheep and other wildlife. Without these 
efforts it would be extremely hard for bighorn sheep to survive in much 
of their historic range in Nevada because much of their historic range 
has been fragmented by development. Today, Southern Nevada is in the 
midst of a very difficult 500-year drought, and the work of the 
conservation groups has saved thousands of our bighorn sheep.
  The deep involvement of local sportsmen in protecting and conserving 
wildlife is one important justification for the traditional resident/
non-resident distinctions, and provides the motivation for our 
legislation. The regulation of wildlife is traditionally within a 
State's purview, and this legislation simply affirms the traditional 
role of States in the regulation of fish and game.
  This bill is time sensitive. The out-of-State hunters that brought 
the suit in the 9th Circuit are now threatening to get a restraining 
order from the Federal court to delay the opening of the big game 
season in Nevada this year. This threat itself is causing great damage 
to conservation and fish and game management in Nevada.
  According to The Las Vegas Sun, Nevada's Wildlife Department has 
already borrowed $3 million to get through the fiscal year, eliminated 
three positions, and has plans to eliminate five more. Delaying hunting 
seasons while the courts resolve this issue could cause the Department 
to literally shut down.
  Uncertainty with regard to hunting and fishing regulations is bad for 
the conservation of Nevada's resources. This bill needs to pass now. I 
look forward to working with my colleagues to expedite passage of this 
important legislation. I ask that the text of this bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 339

       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 ``Reaffirmation of State 
     Regulation of Resident and

[[Page S1215]]

     Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CONSTRUCTION OF 
                   CONGRESSIONAL SILENCE.

       (a) In General.--It is the policy of Congress that it is in 
     the public interest for each State to continue to regulate 
     the taking for any purpose of fish and wildlife within its 
     boundaries, including by means of laws or regulations that 
     differentiate between residents and nonresidents of such 
     State with respect to the availability of licenses or permits 
     for taking of particular species of fish or wildlife, the 
     kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that may be taken, or 
     the fees charged in connection with issuance of licenses or 
     permits for hunting or fishing.
       (b) Construction of Congressional Silence.--Silence on the 
     part of Congress shall not be construed to impose any barrier 
     under clause 3 of Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution 
     (commonly referred to as the ``commerce clause'') to the 
     regulation of hunting or fishing by a State or Indian tribe.

     SEC. 3. LIMITATIONS.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed--
       (1) to limit the applicability or effect of any Federal law 
     related to the protection or management of fish or wildlife 
     or to the regulation of commerce;
       (2) to limit the authority of the United States to prohibit 
     hunting or fishing on any portion of the lands owned by the 
     United States; or
       (3) to abrogate, abridge, affect, modify, supersede or 
     alter any treaty-reserved right or other right of any Indian 
     tribe as recognized by any other means, including, but not 
     limited to, agreements with the United States, Executive 
     Orders, statutes, and judicial decrees, and by Federal law.

     SEC. 4. STATE DEFINED.

       For purposes of this Act, the term ``State'' includes the 
     several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of 
     Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and 
     the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
                                 ______