[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 4, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H1581-H1584]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     SPORTSMEN'S HERITAGE AND RECREATIONAL ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2013

  The Committee resumed its sitting.


                  Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Holt

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Stewart). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 10 printed in House Report 113-339.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following:

                        TITLE IX--CLIMATE CHANGE

     SEC. 901. AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO PLAN 
                   FOR A CHANGING CLIMATE.

       Nothing in this Act limits the authority of the Secretary 
     of the Interior to include climate change as a consideration 
     in making decisions related to conservation and recreation on 
     public lands.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 470, the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Sportsmen are among the first to notice the effects of our changing 
climate as changes in seasonal distribution of game and diminished 
natural habitats becomes more evident. As the climate continues to 
change, we will experience worse drought, flood, wildfire, and extreme 
weather events.
  For public lands and recreation there, climate change will mean 
changes in hunting seasons, migratory patterns, and the native and 
invasive species populations. We will experience sea level rise, 
wildfire, drought, and other manifestations of climate change. All of 
these are altering the landscape and changing the existing 
opportunities for hunting, fishing, and recreation on public lands. 
These should be considered. These will have a greater effect on 
sportsmen and on fishermen and hunters than all of the other things we 
have been talking about today.
  More than 75 percent of the Federal lands are open now for 
recreational

[[Page H1582]]

hunting, fishing and shooting, but climate change would transform 
irreversibly, and in fact is transforming irreversibly, our public 
lands in ways that will limit the ability of sportsmen to enjoy 
recreational activities in these areas.
  So this amendment says the Department should consider those things. 
In fact, it is even more limited than that. It says nothing will 
prevent the Department from considering these things. That is what this 
amendment is. I would hope that the House will accept this. I have been 
joined by a number of members of the House Sustainable Energy Coalition 
in offering this amendment. It is supported by Defenders of Wildlife 
and the Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club and the Natural 
Resources Defense Council.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the primary purpose of this underlying legislation is 
the premise that Federal lands should be open for hunting and fishing 
recreation rather than being closed. I believe this should be the 
policy of all of our multiple use Federal lands. The default option 
should be open regardless of whether your interests are mountain 
biking, rock climbing, hunting, fishing, logging, building a solar 
energy facility, mining, wind power, or developing oil and gas. Our 
Nation's multiple use lands were designed to be used for the benefit of 
the Nation. This open-before-closed concept is the foundation of what 
we are trying to do through this legislation.

                              {time}  1600

  We are trying to raise the bar of bureaucracy that the bureaucracy 
has placed between hunters and the outdoors.
  Reckless disregard of our Nation's hunting and fishing traditions 
means too often our Federal lands are closed off arbitrarily, and not 
just without public input, but against public sentiment.
  Now the gentleman is proposing that we give the Secretary another new 
tool to close lands, without scientific decisionmaking, without 
accounting for their actions. The gentleman proposes that we simply 
grant the Secretary the sole authority to dictate that we close off any 
and all of our Nation's lands from hunting and fishing based simply on 
the Secretary's mere opinion that hunting and fishing are a threat to 
our Nation's land because of climate change.
  Hunting and fishing are traditions and foundations that this Nation 
was built upon. They are not burdens to our national lands. They are 
one of the many purposes of our national lands.
  Just yesterday, Mr. Chairman, before the Rules Committee, one of my 
Democrat colleagues was commenting that he had a BB gun at age 7 and a 
.22 rifle at age 12. He talked about how, as a young man, he learned to 
respect guns and traditions. Yet that same Member is concerned about 
what children are learning today--the lack of respect for guns and the 
traditions of the outdoors.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe that this is one of the many benefits and 
reasons that we are here today, to help restore the opportunity for 
hunting and fishing traditions to take root on our Federal lands, to 
remind our Federal land managers that the exercise of these traditions 
are not a burden on our lands but one of the foundations of our lands.
  Finally, let me say this. Regardless of one's views on our climate, 
this amendment is not about climate change. It is about granting the 
Secretary a blank check to ban hunting and fishing. Nothing in the bill 
changes the Secretary's ability to manage our lands to ensure 
responsible management. The bill does require lands to be opened, 
however, before closed; but when closing lands, the Secretary must act 
in a measured fashion to ensure that our hunting and fishing traditions 
are protected and valued.
  I urge my colleagues to reject what I consider to be an antihunting 
and -fishing amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the time remaining on each side.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 3 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Washington has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. HOLT. I thank the Chair.
  I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Connolly), who is a leader of the Sustainable Energy and Environment 
Coalition Caucus and a cosponsor of this amendment.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague.
  As the cochair of the Green Dogs of the SEEC Caucus, I rise in 
support of this amendment and proud to cosponsor it.
  The bill before us purports to be about expanding opportunities for 
sportsmen on Federal lands, yet it fails to recognize the significant 
effect climate change will have on such opportunities. For example, 
what will climate change mean for hunters who are forced away from 
parks because of drought or threat of wildfire? As we witnessed this 
year, wildfire seasons are now longer, larger, and longer-term than 
ever before because of climate change. The migratory patterns of ducks 
and, for that matter, the patterns of fish, to name just two species, 
are also being negatively affected.
  What will climate change mean for anglers who find streams drying up 
and killing fish? Last September, Montana officials closed the 
Blackfoot River--not the Secretary, they did--the iconic backdrop for 
the book and film, ``A River Runs Through It,'' to protect fish from 
the stress of low-level river flows.
  Mr. Chairman, if we really want to protect and expand outdoor 
recreational opportunities, shouldn't we understand what climate change 
will mean, not only for hunters, but for the affected wildlife and 
their habitat?
  I urge my colleagues to support this simple, commonsense amendment.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my 
time and advise my friend I have no requests for time. I am prepared to 
yield back if the gentleman is prepared to yield back.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time just to 
address a couple of points that my friend, the chair, from Washington 
has raised.
  There is nothing in this amendment that gives the Secretary any new 
authority. It simply says that the Secretary should consider climate 
change in policies for managing these lands.
  Climate change is the problem that needs to be addressed. You can 
deny it all you want, but climate change will do more to restrict 
hunting and fishing and recreation on public lands than these imagined 
administrative reductions or restrictions or lawsuits or restrictions 
on lead shot or any of those things.
  There are a variety of adaptation strategies to promote resilience of 
fish and wildlife populations and forests and plant communities and 
freshwater resources and ocean resources. These are being studied by 
academic and scientific and, yes, government and nonprofit 
organizations.
  A great deal of thought is going into this. We want to make sure that 
there is nothing that restricts the Secretary from using these best 
adaptation strategies, these best management practices, to take into 
account what is real. It is not imagined. The climate is changing. It 
is affecting the ecology of all of these public lands.
  I urge support of this amendment and yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance 
of my time.
  I just want to point out that the gentleman wanted to clarify by 
saying this doesn't give authority, but the Secretary should consider. 
What if the Secretary considers under current law and then decides to 
take action?
  That is the point of the argument that I made, and that is that that 
action, then, on climate change could cause limited or no access to our 
public lands. That is why I said this amendment is kind of cloaked in 
different clothing, because it does not speak to climate change; in 
fact, it speaks to the potential closing of our public lands.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

[[Page H1583]]

  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 
printed in House Report 113-339.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of Mr. Kildee, I have an 
amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following:

 TITLE IX--SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING SNOWMOBILES ON NATIONAL FOREST 
                              SYSTEM LANDS

     SEC. 901. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The clear identification of roads, trails, and areas 
     for motor vehicle use in each National Forest will improve 
     management of National Forest System lands and protect these 
     national treasures, enhance opportunities, and address access 
     for motorized recreation experiences on National Forest 
     System lands and preserve areas of opportunity in each 
     National Forest for non-motorized travel and experiences.
       (2) The sport of snowmobiling supports thousands of jobs 
     across the country and provides a variety of enriching 
     recreational opportunities for both families and individuals.
       (3) In 2005, the Forest Service promulgated a Travel 
     Management Rule that required travel management plans for 
     off-road vehicles, with the exception of snowmobiles, on all 
     lands managed by the Forest Service.
       (4) Under the 2005 Travel Management Rule, the Department 
     of Agriculture deemed that the use of snowmobiles on National 
     Forest System lands presented a different set of management 
     issues and environmental impacts on National Forest System 
     lands than the use of other types of motor vehicles. 
     Therefore, the final rule exempted snowmobiles from the 
     mandatory designation scheme provided for under section 
     212.51 of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, but retained 
     the National Forest System's ability to allow, restrict or 
     prohibit snowmobile travel, as appropriate, on a case-by-case 
     basis.
       (5) In 2013, the Ninth U.S. District Court of Idaho ruled 
     in the case captioned as Winter Wildlands Alliance v. US 
     Forest Service, Case No. 1:11-cv-00586-REB, ruled that the 
     Forest Service must promulgate travel management rules that 
     include snowmobiles. The Ninth U.S. District Court of Idaho 
     required that the final rule be promulgated by September 14, 
     2014, barring no additional extension.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the Forest Service should continue to allow snowmobiles 
     access to National Forest System lands at the same levels as 
     were allowed as of March 28, 2013, subject to closures for 
     public health and safety at the discretion of the respective 
     agencies, until a final travel management rule is promulgated 
     for snowmobiles.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 470, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, in 1972, President Nixon signed Executive 
Order 11644, which required that the U.S. Forest Service create travel 
management plans for the operation of off-road vehicles in our national 
forests, including snowmobiles. These travel management plans were 
designed to address the concerns of different users. They can be simple 
or detailed enough to affect noise, carbon emissions, traffic patterns, 
and protect animal migratory patterns.
  In 2005, the Forest Service finalized its travel management rules for 
off-road vehicles in the national forest system except for snowmobiles, 
which were granted an exemption.
  Each year, outdoor enthusiasts contribute enormous amounts to our 
economy, and snowmobiles support thousands of jobs not only in my 
district, but across the country. Not only do many of our residents 
enjoy snowmobiling, but it attracts significant tourism to areas like 
Eagle and Summit and Grand Counties and actually creates jobs in those 
areas.
  Although snowmobiles were exempted from this rule, individual forest 
managers were still able to restrict snowmobile travel as appropriate 
on a case-by-case basis through individual travel management plans 
which met the unique needs of each area.
  In 2013, however, a Federal District Court in Idaho in the Winter 
Wildlands Alliance v. U.S. Forest Service ruled the Forest Service must 
develop an overarching travel management rule that includes snowmobiles 
to comply with President Nixon's original executive order.
  This amendment states that while the National Forest Service develops 
this travel management plan, it is a sense of Congress that the Forest 
Service should continue to allow snowmobiles on Federal lands during 
this rule's development with the same restrictions that were in place 
prior to the Winter Wildlands Alliance decision to ensure that the 
ability of snowmobilers to recreate is not interfered with because of 
this period where we are developing our permanent policy.
  Given the breadth of outdoor activities, it makes simple sense that 
public lands should be available for multiple uses, including 
snowmobiling. About a quarter of Americans who participate in outdoor 
recreation enjoy motorized vehicles as part of that activity. Like 
other outdoor enthusiasts, snowmobilers contribute to communities by 
renting equipment, staying in hotels, purchasing souvenirs, enjoying 
local restaurants, and more.
  As off-road vehicle use expands, it becomes increasingly important 
for the U.S. Forest Service to issue its rules to determine whether 
areas are open or closed to snowmobiles. This sense of Congress will 
allow that certainty that will allow our tourism industry to continue 
and our residents to continue to enjoy snowmobiling.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. POLIS. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I say on a personal note, I was looking for you on the floor at the 
end of last week. I was prepared to take Seattle and offer you 34 
points. I think you probably would have taken that bet.
  I just want to make this point. If the gentleman will say that the 
results on the gridiron in New Jersey last Sunday, if the gentleman 
will say that the better team won--and you don't have to make any other 
adjectives--but if the gentleman will say that, I will be more than 
happy to accept this amendment.
  Mr. POLIS. I will be happy to say on the record that the better team 
on that particular day won. There is still some doubt about whether 
that was, in fact, the Denver Broncos that took the field.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Well, I knew that the gentleman would 
find something to say.
  I just want to say, dealing with the amendment, I think this 
amendment, again, in the spirit of adding more activity on Federal 
lands, I think this adds to it. I am prepared to support the amendment.
  Mr. POLIS. I thank the chair.
  I yield to the ranking member, Mr. DeFazio.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I congratulate Mr. Polis and Congressman Kildee, who is detained at 
the White House, for offering this amendment.
  I appreciate that the majority has accepted it. This will be a 
temporary provision until such a time as the final rule is adopted. 
There was never, I don't think, intent to have this sort of a blanket 
ban on snowmobiles, and this would correct that error by the Forest 
Service as they go through a deliberative process on where, when, and 
how snowmobiles will access Federal forest lands on a unit-by-unit 
basis.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Washington for 
his remarks. You know that when the defense of one team scores more 
points than the offense of the other team, your team is not in good 
shape. But I congratulate the gentleman on the 12-second, fastest ever 
score in a way that was quite embarrassing for the Broncos, but we will 
be back next year. We look forward to challenging in the NFL.
  I appreciate the support from both the chair and the ranking member 
for Mr. Kildee's and my amendment. This rule will help the U.S. Forest 
Service improve management, prevent the disruption of the tourism 
industry, allow for the continued enjoyment of residents in 
snowmobiling, and ensure that

[[Page H1584]]

off-road vehicles are used in a manner that protects natural resources, 
minimizes conflict with other users, and provides and protects 
motorized recreation.
  Until we finalize the travel plan, snowmobilers will be able to, 
under this sense of Congress, enjoy their favorite activity, and 
communities should continue to reap the economic benefits of hosting 
these winter sport enthusiasts.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does anyone seek time in opposition?
  Seeing none, the question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee 
do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Mullin) having assumed the chair, Mr. Stewart, Acting Chair of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3590) to 
protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, 
and shooting, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution 
thereon.

                          ____________________