[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.
____________________