[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 24009-24010]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          BEAR RIVER MIGRATORY BIRD REFUGE VISITOR CENTER ACT

  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 3322) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
construct an education and administrative center at the Bear River 
Migratory Bird Refuge in Box Elder County, Utah.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3322

       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 ``Bear River Migratory Bird 
     Refuge Visitor Center Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The Bear River marshes have been a historical waterfowl 
     oasis and an important inland waterfowl flyway for thousands 
     of years.
       (2) Congress created the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge 
     as one of the first National Wildlife Refuges, for the 
     purpose of protecting waterfowl habitat and migratory birds, 
     educating the public regarding, and enhancing public 
     appreciation of, waterfowl habitat and migratory birds.
       (3) The Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge was virtually 
     destroyed by the devastating floods that occurred between 
     1983 and 1985.
       (4) Refuge employees, aided by volunteers, have taken 
     valiant actions to rebuild the Refuge by restoring habitat, 
     increasing its attractiveness to waterfowl, reducing 
     waterfowl botulism, and providing recreational and 
     educational opportunities to the public.
       (5) The Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge lacks a functional 
     education and administrative center.
       (6) The creation of such a facility would significantly 
     enhance public appreciation of waterfowl and the need to 
     preserve waterfowl habitat.
       (7) Congress has taken significant steps to provide funding 
     for the construction of an education and administrative 
     center.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       For the purpose of this Act, the following definitions 
     apply:
       (1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (2) Refuge.--The term ``Refuge'' means the Bear River 
     Migratory Bird Refuge in Box Elder County, Utah.
       (3) Education and administrative center.--The term 
     ``Education and Administrative Center'' means the facility 
     identified in the Environmental Assessment dated 1991 and 
     entitled ``Restoration and Expansion of the Bear River 
     Migratory Bird Refuge''.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE EDUCATION 
                   CENTER.

       (a) Construction.--The Secretary shall construct the 
     Education and Administrative Center at the Refuge for the 
     purposes of providing for the interpretation of resources of 
     the Refuge for the education and benefit of the public, the 
     advancement of research, protection, and health of waterfowl 
     habitat, and for the administration of the Bear River 
     Migratory Bird Refuge.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $11,000,000 to carry out subsection (a).

     SEC. 5. MATCHING CONTRIBUTIONS REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Donation of Funds and Services.--The Secretary may 
     accept donations of funds and services from nonprofit 
     organizations, State and local governments, and private 
     citizens for the construction of the Education and 
     Administrative Center.
       (b) Matching Funds.--The Secretary may not require matching 
     funds or contributions in kind with a combined total value of 
     more than $1,500,000 for construction of the Education and 
     Administrative Center.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Hansen) and the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. 
Christensen) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen).
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The Bear River marshes in the northern portion of the Great Salt Lake 
have been a waterfowl oasis and an important inland waterfowl flyway 
for centuries, and I am pleased that the House is taking action to 
improve research opportunities and educational experiences at the 
refuge.
  To give a little history of the Bear River marshes, in 1843, explorer 
John C. Fremont described the area by saying ``The waterfowl made a 
noise like thunder, as the whole scene was animated with waterfowl.'' 
Later, settlers moved in and began draining the marshes so slowly that 
no one noticed until 1910 when botulism killed over 2 million birds and 
another deadly outbreak in 1920 killed 1.5 million birds. In 1928, at 
the urging of many individuals and organizations, Congress turned this 
unique area into a National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge soon became a 
popular attraction for various groups from sportsmen and school groups 
to wildlife photographers.
  Then came Utah's 100-year floods of 1983 and 1985 when there was a 
man-made river running down State Street in Salt Lake City and Glen 
Canyon Dam was spilling over. Those wet years also caused the rising 
Great Salt Lake to breach the refuge dikes and saltwater contaminated 
wildlife habitat, destroyed marsh vegetation and destroyed the newly 
constructed visitors and administrative facilities.
  In 1989, the water finally receded, and since that time refuge 
employees and scores of volunteers have worked tirelessly cleaning 
debris, moving 1 million cubic yards of earth, restoring 47 water 
control structures and 47 miles of dikes, and purchasing easements to 
restore the habitat to its previous condition.

                              {time}  1130

  Mr. Speaker, thanks to their good efforts, the refuge once again 
attracts hundreds of waterfowl and an increasing number of human 
visitors. There are 221 species of birds that have been recorded at the 
refuge, and 206 of those constantly come back each year. However, the 
refuge still lacks a functional education and administrative center 
which denies the public a rich educational opportunity.
  I have worked with my colleagues on the Committee on Appropriations 
and with the Senate Committee on Appropriations to provide funding for 
the reconstruction of these facilities. Local communities, the Friends 
of Bear River

[[Page 24010]]

Bird Refuge and other nonprofit groups have demonstrated their interest 
and dedication to a research and education center by raising an 
additional $1.5 million for the project.
  This bill recognizes the efforts of the refuge staff, the community, 
and the local Friends group to rebuild the refuge. Between the prior 
appropriations and the contribution from local supporters, over 80 
percent of the funding has already been secured. This is a good bill.
  Finally, I would like to compliment Al Trout, the refuge manager, who 
has worked so diligently to put this together, a truly dedicated public 
servant.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support the legislation of the 
distinguished gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) which would authorize 
the construction of a new education and administrative center at one of 
our Nation's oldest migratory bird refuges. It was unfortunate that 
floods destroyed the center nearly 18 years ago. I understand the 
frustration of the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) that a new facility 
has not been built to replace the original building.
  As Members may recall, the 1997 National Wildlife Refuge Improvement 
Act established environmental education and resource interpretation as 
priority uses at all national wildlife refuges. Education centers like 
the one planned for Bear River are essential to ensure that the Fish 
and Wildlife Service promotes the wildlife wonders throughout our 
national wildlife refuge system and generates public awareness and 
appreciation for these resources.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support this legislation. I look 
forward to working with both the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) and 
our ranking member, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), who 
adds his commendation and support for the bill to improve visitor 
services within our national wildlife refuges.
  Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise 
today in support of the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge Visitor Center 
Act. This legislation will allow the Refuge to construct an educational 
and administrative headquarters. It is my hope that bird enthusiasts 
throughout the West will be able to come to see the thousands of birds 
that visit the area each year and hear what explorer John C. Fremont 
called ``a noise like thunder.''
  The Refuge was created by Congress in 1928 to ensure the survival of 
the birds and natural wetlands of the area. Unfortunately, due to 
massive flooding in the 1983 to 1985, the entire Refuge was destroyed 
and the wetlands completely covered with water.
  Today, the Refuge consists of 74,000 acres. In 1993, land acquisition 
added nearly 9,000 acres of uplands, wetlands, and mudflats. The 
historic 65,000 acres of the Refuge, consisting mainly of marsh, open 
water, and mudflats, have slowly seen salt deposits from the flood 
flushed out. Now, the wetland is on the verge of full recovery, and 
with marsh plants thriving, birds are returning in increasing numbers 
to the Refuge.
  I am excited to see this legislation come before the body. I strongly 
believe that this bill will be beneficial to the Bear River Migratory 
Bird Refuge habitat by increasing its attractiveness to birds, and to 
people.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gillmor). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) that the House suspend 
the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3322.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________