[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 158 (Tuesday, September 25, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H8856-H8858]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




DIRECTING SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO MANAGE AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY IN 
                     POINT REYES NATIONAL SEASHORE

  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 6687) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to manage the 
Point

[[Page H8857]]

Reyes National Seashore in the State of California consistent with 
Congress' longstanding intent to maintain working dairies and ranches 
on agricultural property as part of the seashore's unique historic, 
cultural, scenic and natural values, and for other purposes, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6687

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. MANAGEMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY IN POINT REYES 
                   NATIONAL SEASHORE.

       Public Law 87-657 (16 U.S.C. 459c, et seq.) is amended as 
     follows:
       (1) In section 5(b) (16 U.S.C. 459c-5(b))--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``As used in'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(1) As used in'';
       (B) by striking ``The term `agricultural property' as 
     used'' and inserting the following:
       ``(2) The term `agricultural property' as used'';
       (C) by striking ``means lands which were in regular use'' 
     and inserting ``means--
       ``(A) lands under agricultural lease or permit as of 
     September 1, 2018, or lands that were in regular use''; and
       (D) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and
       ``(B) on the northern district of the Golden Gate National 
     Recreation Area, lands under agricultural lease or permit as 
     of September 1, 2018, or lands that were in regular use for, 
     or were being converted to, agricultural, ranching, or 
     dairying purposes as of May 1, 1978, together with 
     residential and other structures relat ed to the above uses 
     of the property that were in existence or under construction 
     as of May 1, 1978.''.
       (2) In section 5 (16 U.S.C. 459c-5)--
       (A) by inserting before subsection (a) the following:
       ``(a) The Secretary shall manage agricultural property 
     consistent with Congress' long-standing intent that working 
     dairies and ranches continue to be authorized to operate on 
     agricultural property as part of the seashore's unique 
     historic, cultural, scenic and natural values.''; and
       (B) by redesignating subsequent subsections accordingly.
       (3) In section 6 (16 U.S.C. 459c-6), by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(c)(1) In areas of agricultural property where Tule Elk 
     present conflicts with working ranches or dairies, the 
     Secretary shall manage the Tule Elk for separation from the 
     working ranches or dairies. To minimize the conflicts and 
     prevent establishment of new Tule Elk herds on agricultural 
     property, the Secretary may work with Indian Tribes 
     interested in the following:
       ``(A) Partnering with the Secretary in the relocation and 
     reestablishment of Tule Elk on Tribal lands.
       ``(B) Participating in hunting Tule Elk on a subsistence or 
     ceremonial basis.
       ``(C) Other partnerships and activities that the Secretary 
     determines are suitable and feasible for this purpose.
       ``(2) Nothing in this subsection reduces or diminishes the 
     authority of the Secretary to use other existing authorities 
     or management tools to separate Tule Elk from agricultural 
     property.''.
       (4) By adding at the end, the following:
       ``Sec. 10.  Consistent with the purposes of this Act, 
     including section 5(a), the Secretary is directed to 
     complete, without delay, the General Management Plan 
     Amendment for Point Reyes National Seashore and the northern 
     district of Golden Gate National Recreation Area, its 
     Environmental Impact Statement, and, upon completion of the 
     Record of Decision, issue leases and special use permits of 
     20 years for working dairies and ranches on agricultural 
     property. Nothing in this Act requires the Secretary to issue 
     leases and special use permits of 20 years in circumstances 
     where there is no willing lessee, or to a previous lessee who 
     has abandoned or discontinued ranching.''.
         Amend the title so as to read: ``A bill to direct the 
     Secretary of the Interior to manage the Point Reyes National 
     Seashore in the State of California consistently with 
     Congress' long-standing intent to continue to authorize 
     working dairies and ranches on agricultural property as part 
     of the seashore's unique historic, cultural, scenic and 
     natural values, and for other purposes.''.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock) and the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Huffman) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).


                             General Leave

  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present this bill on behalf of its 
author, Mr. Huffman, and its cosponsor, Chairman Bishop. Chairman 
Bishop has also asked that I commend my colleague from California for 
his work and collaboration on this measure.
  Representative Huffman worked to forge consensus with diverse local 
stakeholders on a complicated issue. When we found local solutions that 
the local people agree is the answer, as has been done here, we should 
do everything we can on both sides of the aisle to advance the solution 
forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the measure, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that is strongly bipartisan. It reaffirms 
congressional intent to continue to authorize sustainable, working 
dairies and ranches within a portion of the Point Reyes National 
Seashore. This is consistent with the seashore's historic, cultural, 
scenic, and natural values.
  It also honors repeated Federal promises that the ranches and dairies 
in the Point Reyes National Seashore would be offered long-term permits 
so that they can have the certainty and the clarity they need to obtain 
financing, make family succession plans, and other decisions necessary 
to continue operations.
  For over 150 years, agriculture has been a vital part of the fabric 
of West Marin, part of my district in northern California. This 
includes the historic ranches and dairies in the Point Reyes National 
Seashore and also some northern portions of the Golden Gate National 
Recreation Area. These ranches and dairies contribute to the unique 
history, character, and cultural heritage of these magnificent national 
park units.
  The statutory history of Point Reyes reflects Congress' intent to 
continue ranching in the pastoral areas of the seashore to ensure that 
future generations could experience these working landscapes. We are 
reaffirming that intent with this bill.
  I think the agricultural heritage of West Marin is worth protecting. 
The National Park Service agrees. Across Presidential administrations 
and since the creation of the seashore and the GGNRA, the Park Service 
has consistently supported continuation of the ranching heritage in 
these areas. Today, Congress is reaffirming longstanding policy and 
decades of diligent efforts by the Park Service.
  We are also making good on a commitment Interior Secretary Salazar 
made in November of 2012 to provide long-term assurances for these 
ranchers and dairies. He specifically directed the Park Service to 
proceed with extending 20-year permits consistent with applicable laws 
and planning processes.

                              {time}  2100

  Toward that same end, this bill directs the issuance of 20-year 
leases and permits after completion by the Park Service of a robust 
general management plan update process, including public engagement and 
environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act, which 
must include compliance with the Endangered Species Act and any other 
environmental reviews.
  Through this planning and environmental review process, the Park 
Service will receive public comment, evaluate possible measures that 
could improve the environmental sustainability of the ranches and 
dairies, and ensure the good stewardship of the seashore's national 
resources.
  The general management plan and the NEPA process will inform how the 
Park Service exercises its broad discretionary authority to set terms 
and conditions in the leases and the permits, and can develop critical 
strategies, actions, and policies on a wide range of issues involving 
land and natural resource management within the seashore.
  As any visitor to Point Reyes knows, one of the unique features of 
the seashore is the successful return of the majestic tule elk. This 
legislation envisions a healthy coexistence of thriving elk herds and 
the historic ranches and dairies within the seashore through effective 
management.
  It provides direction to the Park Service to manage for effective 
separation between tule elk and livestock in areas where growing elk 
herds have

[[Page H8858]]

presented conflicts with working ranches and dairies, such as taking up 
permanent residence on dairies' critical organic pastureland, 
interfering with ranch operations, or damaging infrastructure, hardly 
the outcomes envisioned by the Park Service's 1998 elk management plan.
  While providing this general policy guidance, the bill leaves broad 
discretion to the Park Service to determine how best to manage the elk. 
It leaves in place all existing tools, while adding a new opportunity 
to explore relocation and cultural ceremonial activities with 
interested Native American Tribes.
  I am grateful for the broad public support that this bill has 
received, ranging from the Marin Conservation League to the Marin 
County Farm Bureau and the Marin County Board of Supervisors.
  I also want to address, briefly, some misconceptions that a few of 
the bill's critics have raised.
  First, nothing in this bill elevates ranching above other uses of the 
seashore. It specifically does not amend the purpose section of the 
enabling act, which means that operations of the ranches and dairies 
will remain consistent with the policies and legal requirements that 
govern the Interior Department's stewardship of the land.
  It is important to remember that less than one-third of the seashore 
is in agricultural use today. Nearly twice that amount is designated as 
wilderness. Nothing in this bill expands agriculture. It is limited to 
the areas where there is currently ranching or dairy operations.
  I also want to address and emphasize the fact that nothing in this 
bill suggests elimination of elk from the seashore. I am not aware of a 
single stakeholder who has suggested eliminating elk. If they had, I 
would reject it. There is no reason elk and ranching cannot coexist on 
the seashore if there is effective management and separation in areas 
of conflict. This bill leaves broad discretion to the Park Service to 
determine the strategies and actions that make the most sense to 
achieve that goal.
  For those worried that this bill may somehow reopen the 2012 decision 
by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to not renew for Drakes Bay Oyster 
Company and to designate and manage Drakes Estero as marine wilderness, 
let me be emphatically clear. There is nothing in the letter or the 
intent of this bill that possibly could be read to do that. The bill 
has nothing to do with the oyster issue. It focuses on making sure the 
unresolved part of Secretary Salazar's 2012 decision, the part 
providing long-term assurances for the historic ranches and dairies, is 
actually carried out.
  In this regard, I was mindful in drafting the bill of Secretary 
Salazar's specific direction in his memo of November 29, 2012, that the 
Park Service work with the ranches and dairies to ``reaffirm my 
intention that, consistent with applicable laws and planning processes, 
recognition of the role of ranching be maintained and to pursue 
extending permits to 20-year terms. . . .''
  Secretary Salazar also directed that ``the values of 
multigenerational ranching and farming at Point Reyes should be fully 
considered in future planning efforts. These working ranches are a 
vibrant and compatible part of Point Reyes National Seashore and both 
now and in the future represent an important contribution to Point 
Reyes' superlative natural and cultural resources.'' I couldn't agree 
more.
  Finally, we have been careful in this bill not to micromanage or tie 
the hands of the Park Service. As we made clear in amendments at markup 
and in the committee report, the Service retains the ability to 
exercise commonsense discretion in the supervision of the seashore's 
agriculture property and in administering its various permits and 
leases.
  For example, the Park Service is not financially responsible for 
operating ranches and dairies. It is not required to bring back 
property into agriculture if it has been retired or converted to other 
purposes. It doesn't have to allow ranching on agricultural property 
where there is no willing lessee.
  Nothing in this bill diminishes any of the Secretary's existing 
discretionary authority regarding how to manage agricultural property, 
including setting and enforcing permit terms and conditions and 
allowing shorter lease or permit terms if a rancher does not want a 20-
year lease or permit. All of this is common sense.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6687 is a narrowly tailored bill to 
help ensure that sustainable ranches and dairies continue as part of 
the fabric of our spectacular Point Reyes National Seashore for 
generations to come. The bill does this without compromising any 
environmental standards. It is consistent with both longstanding 
congressional intent, with Secretary Salazar's 2012 policy directive, 
and with the current National Park Service planning process.

  I am proud that this bill has been a refreshing bipartisan effort 
here in Congress, and I do want to thank my colleagues on the Natural 
Resources Committee for their support and assistance, especially 
Chairman Rob Bishop and his staff, as well as Ranking Member Raul 
Grijalva and his staff, who have worked diligently to perfect this 
legislation and to move it forward.
  I also want to thank my staff, especially my district director, Jenny 
Callaway, as well as Logan Ferree and Christine Sur from my legislative 
team, for their hard work to make this bill possible.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask for adoption of the bill, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6687, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to direct 
the Secretary of the Interior to manage the Point Reyes National 
Seashore in the State of California consistently with Congress' long-
standing intent to continue to authorize working dairies and ranches on 
agricultural property as part of the seashore's unique historic, 
cultural, scenic and natural values, and for other purposes.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________