[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 13141-13143]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              MILLE LACS LAKE FREEDOM TO FISH ACT OF 2012

  Mr. CRAVAACK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 5797) to amend title 46, United States Code, with respect to 
Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 5797

       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 ``Mille Lacs Lake Freedom To 
     Fish Act of 2012''.

     SEC. 2. MILLE LACS LAKE, MINNESOTA.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the owner or 
     operator of a vessel operating on Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota, 
     shall not, with respect to such vessel, be subject to any 
     Federal requirement under subtitle II of title 46, United 
     States Code, relating to licensing or vessel inspection.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Cravaack) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.


                             General Leave

  Mr. CRAVAACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous materials on H.R. 5797.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CRAVAACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, in March 2010, the U.S. Coast Guard ruled that Mille 
Lacs Lake was a federally navigable body of water based on historical 
interstate commerce.
  Specifically, the Coast Guard justified their actions by using a U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers determination from 1981 that said because 
lumberjacks in the 1800s floated logs on Mille Lacs Lake and down the 
Rum River, Mille Lacs Lake should now be made a federally navigable 
water body. Currently, the Rum River is dammed in three places, and the 
same Corps of Engineers report said that the dams prohibit through 
navigation. In addition, two previous Army Corps determinations in 1931 
and 1974 also considered the river nonnavigable.
  I would like to submit the U.S. Coast Guard determination for the 
Record.


[[Page 13142]]

                               Memorandum

     From: D. L. Nichols, CAPT, USCG, CGD Eight (dl).
     To: S. L. Hudson, CAPT, USCG, CG Sector Upper Mississippi 
         River (s).
     Subj: Navigability Determination for Mille Lacs Lake, 
         Minnesota.
     Ref: (a) 33 C.F.R. Sec. 2.36; (b) 33 C.F.R. Sec. 3.40-1; (c) 
                                            33 C.F.R. Sec. 3.45-1.
       1. For the purpose of determining its jurisdictional 
     authority, the Coast Guard has determined that Mille Lacs 
     Lake is a ``navigable waterway of the United States.''
       2. The geographic boundary between the Eighth Coast Guard 
     District and the Ninth Coast Guard District currently runs 
     through Mille Lacs Lake. This navigability determination is 
     for the entirety of Mille Lacs Lake. The Ninth District Legal 
     Staff has reviewed and agrees with this determination.
       3. No federal statute addresses the navigability of Mille 
     Lacs Lake, and no federal court has determined the 
     navigability of the waterway. Furthermore, Mille Lacs Lake is 
     not subject to tidal influence. This navigability 
     determination is based on the historical use of the waterway. 
     Specifically, Mille Lacs Lake has been used, in connection 
     with other waters, as a highway for substantial interstate or 
     foreign commerce.
       4. Navigability determinations are administrative findings 
     based on the criteria set forth in 33 C.F.R. 2.36. The 
     precise definitions of ``navigable waters of the United 
     States'' and ``navigability'' are dependent ultimately on 
     judicial interpretation and cannot be made conclusively by 
     administrative agencies.
       5. This opinion solely represents the opinion of the Coast 
     Guard as to the extent of its own jurisdiction to enforce 
     laws and regulations, and does not represent an opinion as to 
     the extent of the jurisdiction of the United States or any of 
     its agencies.
                                  ____


                               Memorandum

     From: CGD Eight.
     To: File.
     Subj: Legal Support for Navigability Determination for Mille 
         Lacs Lake, Minnesota.
     Ref: (a) CGD Eight (dl) memo of 3 March 2010, Navigability 
         Determination for Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota; (b) 33 
         C.F.R. Sec. 2.36; (c) 33 C.F.R. Sec. 3.40-1; (d) 33 
         C.F.R. Sec. 3.45-1.
       1. Purpose. This memorandum documents the legal basis for 
     the Coast Guard's determination of navigability in ref (a).
       2. Discussion.
       a. Internal waterways of the United States not subject to 
     tidal influence are ``navigable waters of the United States'' 
     if they ``[a]re or have been used, or are or have been 
     susceptible for use, by themselves or in connection with 
     other waters, as highways for substantial interstate or 
     foreign commerce, notwithstanding natural or man-made 
     obstructions that require portage.'' 33 C.F.R. 
     Sec. 2.36(a)(3)(i)(emphasis added). The test is one of 
     historic navigability. U.S. v. Harrell, 926 F.2d 1036 (11th 
     Cir. 1991). In 1921 the Supreme Court discussed the issue of 
     obstructions by stating that a waterway ``capable of carrying 
     commerce among the states is within the power of Congress to 
     preserve for purposes of future transportation, even though 
     it . . . be incapable of such use according to present 
     methods, either by reason of changed conditions or because of 
     artificial obstructions.'' Economy Light & Power Co. v. U.S., 
     256 U.S. 113, 122 (1921); see also U.S. v. Appalachian Power 
     Co., 311 U.S. 377, 408 (``When once found navigable, a 
     waterway remains so.''). When logs are floated on a waterway 
     in interstate commerce, the waterway is a highway for 
     interstate commerce. See id. at 405; Wisconsin Public Service 
     Corp. v. Federal Power commission, 147 F.2d 743 (7th Cir. 
     1945); United States v. Underwood, 344 F. Supp. 486, 490 
     (M.D. Fla. 1972).
       B. In April 1981 the ACOE conducted an historical analysis 
     of commerce on Mille Lacs Lake and the Run River in 
     Minnesota. See encl. (1). Historical accounts in the document 
     reveal a history of interstate commerce on Mille Lacs Lake. 
     Specifically, Mille Lacs Lake was ``used in the 
     transportation of logs'' from 1848 to 1904, and evidence 
     shows that at least a portion of the logs floated were 
     transported to markets outside of the state. Encl (1) at 5.
       3. Conclusion. Mille Lacs Lake has been used in the past as 
     a highway for interstate commerce. The Coast Guard thus 
     determines that Mille Lacs Lake is a ``navigable water of the 
     United States'' and the Coast Guard may properly enforce 
     applicable federal law on this waterway.
       Enclosure: Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) memo of 2 April 
     1981: Navigability Determination for Mille Lacs Lake and Rum 
     River, Minnesota

  Now the U.S. Coast Guard is forcing all Mille Lacs Lake fishing 
guides to spend time and money to obtain a Federal boating license. 
This license and associated costs can run well over $2,000, and 
according to testimony by the U.S. Coast Guard in the Transportation 
and Infrastructure Committee, they have to travel to Toledo, Ohio, or 
St. Louis, Missouri, in order to apply for these licenses in person and 
to take the tests.
  This new U.S. Coast Guard regulation is killing jobs by making it 
impractical for some fishing guides to even stay in business and making 
it even more expensive for tourists to hire their services.
  The Mille Lacs Lake Freedom to Fish Act removes this burdensome, 
administrative overreach from the U.S. Coast Guard and restores to the 
State of Minnesota the original authority to permit and inspect 
vessels.
  I truly appreciate all the Coast Guard does, I truly do. But the 
State of Minnesota already patrols Mille Lacs Lake quite well and the 
Coast Guard's authority over the lake is an unwanted intrusion. It's 
duplicative, and it's currently nonexistent. This would be a new area 
of jurisdiction for the Coast Guard requiring additional assets and 
manpower.
  The State has rules and inspection procedures in place to keep its 
residents safe and has been doing so for as long as anybody can 
remember. The State is perfectly capable of enforcing boating laws on 
Mille Lacs Lake, and ultimately Mille Lacs Lake belongs to Minnesotans 
and should not be controlled by the Federal Government.
  We heard from the U.S. Coast Guard on the issue in a Coast Guard 
Subcommittee hearing on May 24, 2011. Rear Admiral Kevin Cook and 
Deputy JAG Calvin Lederer testified about the burden this would impose 
on Minnesota fishing guides. Additionally, they were unable to provide 
adequate justification for the navigability determination beyond the 
Army Corps report.
  My legislation would stop fishing guides from being forced to spend 
over $2,000 on obtaining a fishing license they simply just don't need. 
Ultimately, it will allow Minnesotans to focus on what is most 
important--enjoying one of Minnesota's most beautiful lakes.
  This has been fully vetted by the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe and 
National Association of State Boating Law Administrators. This 
legislation is also supported by the Minnesota Department of Labor and 
Industry, fishing guides and resort owners, Minnesota Anglers for 
Habitat and Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Alliance.
  I would like to submit for the Record a letter of support from the 
Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Alliance.

                                                 Minnesota Outdoor


                                            Heritage Alliance,

                                                    June 31, 2012.
       Representative Cravaack: As president of the Minnesota 
     Outdoor Heritage Alliance (MOHA), I am always interested in 
     legislation that preserves our constitutional right to hunt 
     and fish, improves sportsmen recruitment and retention or 
     increases the economic viability of these pursuits for 
     Minnesota's sportsmen and women. Because of these 
     organizational goals, I am submitting this letter in favor of 
     the Mille Lacs Freedom to Fish (HR 5797) legislation. Since 
     many Minnesota guides are small, family owned concerns that 
     have been in business for many years, additional regulations 
     and fees are not only unnecessary but also cost prohibitive 
     and dangerous to our time honored way of guiding and fishing. 
     Moving this legislation forward will address these concerns 
     and update the laws in a way that is not only safe but 
     beneficial for our fishing industry and our fishing license 
     holders.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Tim Spreck,
                                                   MOHA President.

  Senator Klobuchar also introduced companion legislation that has been 
cosponsored by Senator Franken. In the committee markup, Representative 
Tim Walz and Ranking Member Rahall lent their support as well, making 
this truly a bipartisan and bicameral piece of legislation.
  I'd like to thank Geoff Gosselin and John Rayfield of the Coast Guard 
Subcommittee staff for their working with me on the language of this 
amendment, as well as Tom Dillon from legislative counsel. I would also 
like to thank Joel Amato, the chief boiler inspector from the Minnesota 
Department of Labor and Industry for providing his guidance and 
expertise, as well as Mr. Kim Elverum from the Minnesota Department of 
Natural Resources, and George Nitti of Nitti's Hunters Point Resort.
  Although the text of this bill is short, a lot of work went into 
making sure that this accomplishes the goals of restoring jurisdiction 
to Minnesota.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as 
I may consume.

[[Page 13143]]

  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5797 exempts the owners and operators of small 
passenger vessels operating on Mille Lacs Lake in central Minnesota 
from U.S. Coast Guard licensing and inspection requirements.
  This bill provides rather narrow regulatory relief. However, because 
this bill was rushed to legislation, to markup without first having a 
hearing on the bill itself or having the Subcommittee on Coast Guard 
and Maritime Transportation consider the specific bill, no one can say 
for sure what consequences might arise in the future. My concerns are 
somewhat allayed by learning the State of Minnesota has an adequate 
program to regulate vessels operating on its inland lakes, including 
Mille Lacs.
  Nonetheless, the Coast Guard has expressed concerns that the 
limitations imposed on its vessel safety authorities by this bill could 
create uncertainty and some confusion among the boating public, 
especially regarding marine casualty investigations and maritime 
liability.
  Notwithstanding these objections, and because the bill, as reported, 
would no longer vacate the Coast Guard's 2010 determination that Mille 
Lacs Lake is navigable, I do not object to the bill moving forward 
today.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRAVAACK. I thank my respected colleague for his kind remarks, 
and I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this important 
legislation to Minnesota.
  I yield back the balance of my time, as well.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Cravaack) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5797, 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 was amended so as to read: ``A bill to exempt the owners 
and operators of vessels operating on Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota, from 
certain Federal requirements.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________