[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 29 (Thursday, February 28, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1028-S1029]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ALEXANDER (for himself, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Corker, and Mr. 
        Paul):
  S. 421. A bill to prohibit the Corps of Engineers from taking any 
action to establish a restricted area prohibiting public access to 
waters downstream of a dam, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation 
along with Senator McConnell, Senator Paul, and Senator Corker, to 
prevent the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from restricting fishing 
rights in some of the best fishing areas in the States of Tennessee and 
Kentucky below 10 dams along the Cumberland River.
  I have talked with the Corps several times about this. They have told 
me the only solution is legislation. I am hoping there is some other 
solution by reasonable compromise.
  But I am taking the Corps's advice. On Tuesday, Congressman Ed 
Whitfield, of Kentucky, introduced legislation on this matter, and so I 
am introducing similar legislation today.
  I have also drafted language that could be included in an 
appropriations bill that would prevent the Corps of Engineers from 
using any funds to restrict fishing in what is called the tailwaters 
below these 10 Corps of Engineers dams on the Cumberland River.
  Today I spoke with the Secretary of the Army, John McHugh. I urged 
him to have the Corps give Congress enough time to consider this 
matter, perhaps to work out something with the Corps by compromise or, 
if not, to pass legislation.
  On Monday, I am meeting with the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Jo-
Ellen Darcy, who is in charge of the Corps of Engineers, to ask that 
the Corps stop taking any further action to build physical barriers 
along the Cumberland River.
  Earlier, I met with James DeLapp, the colonel who is the commander of 
the Nashville District. Then I met, along with Congressman Whitfield 
and Congressman Cooper of Nashville, TN, with MG Michael Walsh, who is 
the deputy commanding general. I have had a number of meetings on this 
subject, and I am determined to get some result, one way or the other.
  I am delighted to have the Republican leader, Senator McConnell, my 
colleague, Senator Corker from Tennessee, and Senator Rand Paul of 
Kentucky as cosponsors on the legislation.
  One may say, with a large number of problems facing our country--from 
Iran to the sequester--why is a Senator--in fact, four, and a number of 
Congressmen interested in fishing?
  There are 900,000 Tennesseeans who have fishing licenses, and one of 
my jobs is to represent them. I know and they know these are some of 
the best fishing areas in our State.
  This is an area where grandfathers and grandsons and granddaughters 
go on Saturdays and go during the week. There are lots of Tennesseeans 
who consider these prize properties and their lands. These are public 
lands, and they feel they have a right to be there.
  The problem is that the Corps of Engineers wants to erect physical 
barriers below the dams to keep the fishermen out of the area that is 
just below the dam.
  The Corps' goal is laudable. The goal is to improve safety, they say. 
We all support safety, but there are much better solutions than this.
  Let me give an analogy. When you have a railroad crossing, you do not 
keep the gate down at the railroad crossing 100 percent of the time. 
The track is not dangerous if the train is not coming.
  The water comes through these dams only 20 percent of the time, and 
the water is not dangerous if the water is not spilling through the 
dams. So if we kept the gate down at the railroad crossing 100 percent 
of the time, we would never be able to travel anywhere. That is the 
same sort of reasoning we have here.
  From Washington, the Department of the Army is saying they have a 
policy, which they have had since 1996--which they have never applied 
on the Cumberland River--that suddenly they have decided, after all 
these years, they have to close the fishing area 100 percent of the 
time, even though it might be dangerous only 20 percent of the time.
  I am not the only one who thinks this is an unreasonable policy.
  Last week, I went to Old Hickory Dam, near Nashville. About 150 
fishermen were there with me on the banks of the Cumberland River. I 
met with the Corps officials. They turned the water on so I could see 
it spilling through the dam. Then they turned it off. I met with Ed 
Carter, the director of the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. I met 
with Mike Butler, the chief executive of the Tennessee Wildlife 
Federation. I have talked with the Kentucky wildlife people and this is 
what they say. They think the Corps' plans to improve safety are so 
unreasonable that the wildlife agencies will not even help them enforce 
it. But they say, on the other hand, there are reasonable ways to 
improve safety; that is, to treat the waters below the dam the way the 
Tennessee Valley Authority does, for example, which is to erect large 
signs--some of which already exist at Old Hickory Dam--blow the siren 
when the water is coming through. You can close the parking lot. You 
could patrol the area. There are lots of ways to put the gate down, in 
effect, on these fishing areas 20 percent of the time. That makes a lot 
of sense, and the local agencies are willing to help do that.

  Our legislation makes clear that for purposes of this act, installing 
and maintaining sirens, strobe lights, and signage for alerting the 
public of hazardous waters shall not be considered a part of the 
prohibition. It makes no sense to take these public lands and say to 
people: Well, the lawyers came in and said we need to be careful. Of 
course we need to be careful; however, being careful does not mean you 
keep the gate down over the railroad crossing 100 percent of the time, 
and it doesn't mean you close the area to fishing 100 percent of the 
time when it is dangerous only 20 percent of the time.
  I am also concerned about the $2.6 million the Corps needs to 
transfer from other parts of its budget to put up these physical 
barriers. Where is the money coming from? I thought we were in the 
middle of a big sequester, a big budget crunch. I thought we were out 
of money. One of the areas which has some of the most difficult 
problems to deal with is the Department of the Army. This is no time to 
be wasting money building barriers that the wildlife people in 
Tennessee and Kentucky, whose job it is to encourage boat safety, think 
are unreasonable.
  I am doing what the Corps has said needs to be done, which is to 
provide legislation. I look forward to continuing to work with the 
Corps of Engineers. My hope is that we can work out a reasonable 
solution with the wildlife agencies.
  The county judges on both sides of the border are very involved in 
this. They see the economic benefit that comes from the large number of 
people who visit those areas for recreational purposes. They leave 
their dollars behind. This creates good jobs in Tennessee and Kentucky.
  Basically, these are public waters. Tennessee and Kentucky fishermen 
ought to have access to them, and there shouldn't be an edict from 
Washington that puts the gate down the railroad crossing 100 percent of 
the time. I am going to do my best to see that doesn't stand. I hope we 
can work it out, but if we cannot, I am glad to introduce this 
legislation with Senator McConnell, Senator Corker, and Senator Paul. 
The same legislation is in the House of Representatives with 
Congressman Whitfield. I look forward to my meeting Monday with the 
Assistant Secretary of the Army.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record as follows:

                                 S. 421

       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 ``Freedom to Fish Act''.

[[Page S1029]]

     SEC. 2. RESTRICTED AREAS AT CORPS OF ENGINEERS DAMS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of 
     Engineers, shall not take any action to establish a 
     restricted area prohibiting public access to waters 
     downstream of a dam owned by the Corps of Engineers.
       (b) Exclusion.--For purposes of this Act, installing and 
     maintaining sirens, strobe lights, and signage for alerting 
     the public of hazardous water conditions shall not be 
     considered to be an action to establish a restricted area 
     under subsection (a).
       (c) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), this section 
     shall apply to an action described in subsection (a) on or 
     after August 1, 2012.
       (2) Existing restrictions.--If the Secretary of the Army, 
     acting through the Chief of Engineers, has taken an action 
     described in subsection (a) during the period beginning on 
     August 1, 2012, and ending on the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall--
       (A) cease implementing the restricted area resulting from 
     the action; and
       (B) remove any barriers constructed in connection with the 
     restricted area.
                                 ______