[House Report 105-500]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
105th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 105-500
_______________________________________________________________________
BWCAW ACCESSIBILITY AND FAIRNESS ACT OF 1997
_______
April 29, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 1739]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1739) to amend the Act designating the Boundary Waters
Canoe Area Wilderness to clarify certain provisions of law
regarding activities authorized within the wilderness area, and
for other purposes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``BWCAW Accessibility and Fairness Act
of 1997''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS.
The Congress finds and declares that it is in the national interest
to protect, preserve, and improve for the long term the diverse
resources of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness for the benefit
of the people of the United States.
SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN CERTAIN PORTION OF BOUNDARY
WATER CANOE AREA WILDERNESS.
(a) Seagull Lake.--Section 4(c) of the Act of October 21, 1978,
entitled ``An Act to designate the Boundary Waters Canoe Area
Wilderness, to establish the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Mining
Protection Area, and for other purposes'' (Public Law 95-495; 92 Stat.
1649, 1650) is amended as follows:
(1) In paragraph (2), by striking ``, that portion generally
east of Threemile Island, Cook County''.
(2) In paragraph (3), by striking ``Sea Gull, Cook County,
that portion generally west of Threemile Island, until January
1, 1999''.
(b) Motorized Portages.--Section 4(g) of the Act of October 21, 1978,
entitled ``An Act to designate the Boundary Waters Canoe Area
Wilderness, to establish the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Mining
Protection Area, and for other purposes'' (Public Law 95-495; 92 Stat.
1649, 1651) is amended to read as follows:
``(g) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent the operation
(in the same manner as in 1992) of motorized vehicles to transport
boats across the portages between the Moose Lake chain and Basswood
Lake, between Fall Lake and Basswood Lake, and between Vermilion Lake
and Trout Lake.''.
(c) Prohibition of Subsidies.--Section 4 of such Act is amended by
adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
``(j) Subsidy for Motorized Portages Prohibited.--No Federal funds
may be used to operate or to assist in any way in the operation of any
motorized portage within the wilderness area.''.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 1739 is to amend the Act designating
the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness to clarify certain
provisions of law regarding activities authorized within the
wilderness area, and for other purposes.
Background and Need for Legislation
The Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness is the only
lakeland-based wilderness area in the continental United
States. Encompassing over 1.3 million acres, it is located on
the northern edge of the Superior National Forest in Minnesota.
The Boundary Waters Canoe Area was included as part of the
original 1964 Wilderness Preservation Act; however, to gain
official wilderness designation for the Boundary Waters, Former
Senator Hubert Humphrey (D-MN) made a compromise which allowed
for motor-use to continue. The compromise allowed for motors on
a limited number of lakes and limited motorized transport of
boats, motors, gear and people across land between motorized
lakes as well as some logging, mining and snowmobiling.
In 1978, another agreement further clarified specific uses
within the wilderness. This agreement allowed the use of 25-
horsepower motors on a limited number of lakes and limited
motorized transport of boats, motors, gear and people across
land between motorized lakes.
In 1992, a lawsuit was settled challenging the use of three
of the existing portages that allowed access between motorized
lakes. This lawsuit betrayed the 1978 agreement, and removed
motorized access from these three portages.
H.R. 1739 would re-open the three portages of Prairie,
Trout and Four Mile to motorized transport allowing for boats
to be transported mechanically between motorized lakes. The
bill would also suspend the ten horse-power motor restriction
proposed take effect in 1999 on Seagull Lake. This keeps the
current situation which imposes a ten-horsepower motor
restriction on all the lake inside the designated wilderness
area and no restriction on the portion outside the wilderness.
All non-motorized paddle only lakes will remain paddle only
under this bill.
Committee Action
H.R. 1739 was introduced on May 22, 1997, by Congressman
James L. Oberstar (D-MN). The bill was referred to the
Committee on Resources, and within the Committee to the
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health. On September 9,
1997, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 1739, where the
Administration testified in opposition to the bill. In its
view, the bill does not provide a solution to the existing
controversy, and it may increase the current polarization of
the issue. On October 7, 1997, the Subcommittee met to mark up
H.R. 1739. An amendment to maintain current law for Seagull
Lake was offered by Congressman Bruce Vento (D-MN) which failed
by voice vote. Mr. Vento offered an amendment to insure that
only those portages that were motorized in 1992 can be
motorized under H.R. 1739; this amendment also failed by voice
vote. An amendment to limit motorized portages solely to trucks
and trailers and not other commercial operations was offered by
Mr. Vento, and failed by voice vote. An amendment to prohibit
federal subsidies for private portages was offered by Mr.
Vento, and failed on a 3-4 roll call vote, as follows:
An amendment to keep Four Mile Portage non-motorized was
offered by Mr. Vento, which failed on voice vote. An amendment
to close Alder, Canoe, and Loon Lakes and Lac la Croix to
motorboats was offered by Mr. Vento, and failed by voice vote.
The bill was then ordered favorably reported to the Full
Committee by roll call vote of 5-2, as follows:
On October 22, 1997, the Full Resources Committee met to
consider H.R. 1739. An en bloc amendment to prohibit subsidies
for motorized portages, limit motorized portages to those
mentioned in the bill, and limit motorized portages solely to
trucks and trailers and not other commercial operations was
offered by Congresswoman Helen Chenoweth (R-ID), and adopted by
voice vote. Regarding the prohibition against subsidizing
motorized portages, the Committee intends that the amendment
affect only motorized concessions meant to provide portaging
services. The U.S. Forest Service is still required to provide
adequate funding to maintain the portages and effectively
manage and supervise the concessions operating them in the same
manner as in 1992 and before, just as it is responsible for
maintaining, managing and supervising all other lands and
waters in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area. Mr. Vento then
offered three amendments which all failed by voice vote. The
first amendment struck the portion of the bill which reopened
Seagull Lake to motorboats. The second amendment retained Four
Mile portage as a nonmotorized portage. The third amendment
closed Alder, Canoe, and Loon Lakes and Lac la Croix to
motorboats. The bill as amended was then ordered favorably
reported by a roll call vote of 22-7 to the House of
Representatives, as follows:
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Article I, section 8 and Article IV, section 3 of the
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority
to enact H.R. 1739.
Cost of the Legislation
Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out
H.R. 1739. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Compliance With House Rule XI
1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, H.R.
1739 does not contain any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in tax
expenditures. According to the Congressional Budget Office,
enactment of H.R. 1739 could affect offsetting receipts by
increasing permits fees to use portages, but any effects would
be negligible.
2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 1739.
3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R.
1739 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, October 29, 1997.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1739, the Boundary
Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Accessibility and Fairness Act of
1977.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Victoria V.
Heid.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill, Director.
Enclosure.
H.R. 1739--Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Accessibility and
Fairness Act of 1997
CBO estimates that enacting this bill would have no
significant impact on the federal budget. Because H.R. 1739
could affect offsetting receipts, pay-as-you-go procedures
would apply; however, CBO estimates that any such effects would
be negligible. H.R. 1739 contains no intergovernmental or
private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 and would have no significant impact on the
budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.
H.R. 1739 would remove some currently planned restrictions
on the use of motorboats on Seagull Lake in Cook County,
Minnesota, and also would permit motorized vehicles to be used
to transport boats across portages in the Boundary Waters Canoe
Area Wilderness in the same manner as they were last permitted
in 1992. The bill would prohibit federal funds from being used
to operate any motorized portages in the wilderness area. Based
on information from the U.S. Forest Service, CBO expects the
enacting this bill could increase the offsetting receipts from
permit fees to use the portages, but we estimate that any such
effects would be negligible.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Victoria V.
Heid. This estimate was approved by Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Compliance With Public Law 104-4
H.R. 1739 contains no unfunded mandates.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed
is shown in roman):
SECTION 4 OF THE ACT OF OCTOBER 21, 1978
AN ACT To designate the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, to
establish the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Mining Protection Area, and
for other purposes.
administration
Sec. 4. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Effective on January 1, 1979 the use of motorboats is
prohibited within the wilderness designated by this Act, and
that portion within the wilderness of all lakes which are
partly within the wilderness, except for the following:
(1) * * *
(2) On the following lakes and river, motorboats with
motors no greater than ten horsepower shall be
permitted: Clearwater, Cook County; North Fowl, Cook
County; South Fowl, Cook County; Island River east of
Lake Isabella, Lake County; Sea Gull[, that portion
generally east of Threemile Island, Cook County];
Alder, Cook County; Canoe, Cook County.
(3) On the following lakes, or specified portions of
lakes, motorboats with motors of no greater than ten
horsepower shall be permitted until the dates
specified: Basswood River to and including Crooked
Lake, Saint Louis and Lake Counties, until January 1,
1984; Carp Lake, the Knife River, and Knife Lake, Lake
County, until January 1, 1984; [Sea Gull, Cook County,
that portion generally west of Threemile Island, until
January 1, 1999;] Brule, Cook County, until January 1,
1994, or until the termination of operation of any
resort adjacent to Brule Lake in operation as of 1977,
whichever occurs first.
* * * * * * *
[(g) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to require the
termination of the existing operation of motor vehicles to
assist in the transport of boats across the portages from
Sucker Lake to Basswood Lake, from Fall Lake to Basswood Lake,
and from Lake Vermilion to Trout Lake, during the period ending
January 1, 1984. Following said date, unless the Secretary
determines that there is no feasible nonmotorized means of
transporting boats across the portages to reach the lakes
previously served by the portages listed above, he shall
terminate all such motorized use of each portage listed above.]
(g) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent the
operation (in the same manner as in 1992) of motorized vehicles
to transport boats across the portages between the Moose Lake
chain and Basswood Lake, between Fall Lake and Basswood Lake,
and between Vermilion Lake and Trout Lake.
* * * * * * *
(j) Subsidy for Motorized Portages Prohibited.--No Federal
funds may be used to operate or to assist in any way in the
operation of any motorized portage within the wilderness area.
DISSENTING VIEWS
We oppose H.R. 1739. This proposal is unneeded and should
be rejected by the full House.
The 1978 BWCA Wilderness Act, Public Law 95-495, is
working. This law, supported by a bipartisan, overwhelming
majority in the House and in the Senate, was a responsible
compromise. The legislation balanced local recreational
concerns with the national interest to preserve the BWCA as a
wilderness area. Over twenty percent of the water surface area
remains open to motorboats, while the remaining waters offer a
wilderness experience unmatched in our country.
This compromise law has been so successful that the BWCAW
is the most popular wilderness unit in our entire National
Wilderness System. While the area comprises only one percent of
the acreage of the entire wilderness system, the BWCAW accounts
for over 10 percent of the use of the system. This success is
consistent with the commitments made throughout the history of
the BWCAW and the representations made by past Minnesota and
national lawmakers.
Another measure of the success of the existing BWCAW law
has been the response of the Minnesota legislature to H.R. 1739
and its attack on the BWCAW. As a direct response in opposition
to the changes proposed by H.R. 1739, the state legislation on
the BWCA has been introduced in the Minnesota House and Senate.
This bipartisan legislation would continue the current level of
restrictions on motorized use in the wilderness. The
legislation has broad bipartisan support with over 75 Senate
and House members from all regions of the state included as
authors.
H.R. 1739 would undo two provisions of the 1978 compromise.
The legislation would restore trucks to three portages in the
wilderness area--Trout Portage, Prairie Portage, and Four Mile
Portage. Public Law 95-495 takes a definite position on
motorized portages. The 95th Congress thought that this issue
was important enough to address through specific provisions in
the law. It is not an issue upon which Congress was silent.
Clearly and without any ambiguity, the law states:
* * * unless the Secretary determines that there is
no feasible nonmotorized means of transporting boats
across the portages to reach the lakes previously
served by the portages listed above, he shall terminate
all such motorized use of each portage listed above.
To further underline Congressional intent on the use of
trucks, Chairman Phil Burton, the floor manager of the
legislation, defined ``feasible'' during the actual floor
debate on the Conference Report. He stated ``feasible meant a
method involving two able-bodied resort guests and one able-
bodied guide.'' The Chairman and the lead author of the bill
went on to state: ``I would expect that the Secretary will
terminate motorized use of these portages.''
The Congressional record is clear. Motorized use of these
portages was to be eliminated, a position upheld by the Federal
courts. The removal of trucks from the portages has not
diminished motorized access. The latest Forest Service numbers
on use levels for 1996 show that motorboats continue intense
use of the lakes connected by the portages in question at close
to the ceiling established by law and administered by the
National Forest Service.
Last year for Basswood Lake, over 100 percent of the day
use motorboat permits were used (2,427 permits used out of
2,375 available). For Trout Lake, 413 out of 588 available
permits were used. This high use level is not a deviation from
past use. In fact, over the past two years, even though trucks
were not allowed on the portages, near capacity levels of
motorboat use on Basswood Lake and Trout Lake have been the
norm. For the 1995 through 1996 seasons, over 98 percent of the
motorboat permits on these two lakes have been used. It is
important to remember that each permit can be used for up to 4
motorboats, a practice that is common for Basswood Lake. Under
conservative estimates, that would mean up to nearly 10,000
motorboats have used Basswood Lake and nearly 2,000 motorboats
have used Trout Lake over the past two years, an average of
6,000 motorboats per year for these two lakes.
As the Forest Service data demonstrates, even after the
trucks were removed from the portages, access to Trout and
Basswood was and is available. For individuals who do not want
to or cannot portage their own boat, commercial, non-motorized
portage services are available for Prairie Portage. Free market
advocates should note that a commercial, non-motorized portage
service was available for the Trout Lake portage, but was
discontinued because people chose not to use it.
Nearly 6,000 motorboats each year can't be wrong--a
feasible, nonmotorized means of transporting boats across the
portages exist and motorized portages should not and need not
be reintroduced into the BWCA.
Nor are the motorized portages necessary for the disabled.
Individuals are not being denied access on the basis of
personal disability. In fact, organizations such as the
Minnesota State Council on Disability, the official state body
that represents the disabled, Wilderness Inquiry, the American
Amputee Foundation, and Disabled Sports USA oppose efforts to
introduce motorized vehicles into the wilderness to accommodate
the disabled.
The 1978 compromise law provided a 20 year phase-out of
motors on a portion of Sea Gull Lake. H.R. 1739 would stop that
1999 phase-out and permanently keep open 3,600 more acres of
water in the BWCAW to motorboats, fragmenting the 1978 efforts
at compromise.
H.R. 1739 is yet another example of the Committee's ongoing
attack against our national conservation system. Foiled in
their attempts to force wholesale changes in the 104th
Congress, this Committee is now slowly seeking to dismantle our
special wilderness system, our National Parks, and our legacy
to future generations.
Despite the fact that in a recent nationwide poll, 70
percent of the American people opposed reintroducing trucks and
jeeps in the BWCAW, the Committee is moving ahead with its
agenda. From the designation of the Superior National Forest by
President Teddy Roosevelt to the inclusion of the Boundary
Waters Canoe Area in the original Wilderness Act by Senator
Hubert Humphrey, strong voices on both sides of the issue have
been heard. But each and every time that the national
government has been called on to act, the American people and
their elected leaders have recognized the BWCA wilderness as a
special area. Hopefully, this Congress will not retreat from a
century of commitment to this national treasure.
Bruce F. Vento.
Maurice Hinchey.
Eni Faleomavaega.
George Miller.