[House Report 107-642]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 107-642
======================================================================
UPPER MISSOURI RIVER BREAKS BOUNDARY CLARIFICATION ACT
_______
September 5, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 4822]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 4822) to clarify that the Upper Missouri River Breaks
National Monument does not include within its boundaries any
privately owned property, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment
and recommend that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 4822 is to clarify that the Upper
Missouri River Breaks National Monument does not include within
it boundaries any privately owned property, and for other
purposes.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
On January 17, 2001, President Bill Clinton established by
Executive Order the Upper Missouri River Breaks National
Monument in north-central Montana. From Fort Benton, Montana,
downstream to the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge,
the monument spans 149 miles of the Upper Missouri River, the
adjacent Breaks country, and portions of Arrow Creek, Antelope
Creek and the Judith River. It covers approximately 377,346
acres of federal land, including the Missouri Breaks country
north of the Missouri River. The area remains remote and nearly
as undeveloped as it was in 1805 when the famed Lewis and Clark
Corps of Discovery came upon it. The Monument also includes
approximately 81,911 acres of private land within its external
boundaries. Therein lies the problem and the need for H.R.
4822.
Section 2 of the Antiquities Act (16 U.S.C. 431 et seq.)
authorizes the President to establish ``* * * historic
landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other
objects of historic and scientific interest that are situated
upon lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United
States as national monuments.'' It also states that a monument
shall be confined ``* * * to the smallest area compatible with
the proper care and management of the objects to be
protected.'' The legislative history is clear on why the
Antiquities Act was created--to provide the President the
expeditious means to protect federal lands and resources
threatened by theft or destruction. It was not created to
permit a President to unilaterally include areas of private
lands within the external boundary of a national monument,
especially when that land was not under any kind of immediate
threat.
Notwithstanding that the proclamation for the Upper
Missouri River Breaks National Monument declared that private
property, permitted livestock grazing, hunting, fishing, and
similar activities within the boundary will not be affected,
the proclamation states that ``* * * the Secretary shall
prohibit all motorized and mechanized vehicle use off road,
except for emergency or authorized administrative purposes.''
This creates a questionable situation for the private property
owners whose land is within the Monument boundaries. Many whose
private land is now within the external boundaries of the
monument believe the President violated both the intent and
spirit of the Antiquities Act by including private property in
the monument.
H.R. 4822 simply directs the Secretary of the Interior to
redraw the boundaries of the Monument to include the 377,346
acres of federal land cited in the proclamation and exclude all
private land. The revised map would be cited in the January
2001 Monument Proclamation.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 4822 was introduced on May 22, 2002, by Congressman
Dennis Rehberg (R-MT), and was referred to the Committee on
Resources. Within the Committee, the bill was referred within
the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public
Lands. On June 13, 2002, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the
bill. On July 10, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met to
consider the bill. The Subcommittee on National Parks,
Recreation, and Public Lands was discharged from further
consideration of H.R. 4822 by unanimous consent. There were no
amendments offered to the bill, and the bill was ordered
favorably reported to the House of Representatives by voice
vote.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII 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 this bill.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) 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 this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
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 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does
not authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not
apply.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c)(3) of rule XIII 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 this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 30, 2002.
Hon. James V. Hansen,
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. 4822, the Upper
Missouri River Breaks Boundary Clarification Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan
Carroll.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 8422--Upper Missouri River Breaks Boundary Clarification Act
In January of 2002, the Upper Missouri River Breaks
National Monument was established by Presidential proclamation.
The monument comprises 377,346 acres of federal lands located
along the Missouri River in Montana. Although the designation
applies only to those federal lands, the external boundaries of
the monument include about 39,000 acres of land owned by the
state of Montana and nearly 82,000 acres of privately owned
land.
H.R. 4822 would clarify that the monument does not include
any privately owned land and would require the Secretary of the
Interior to redraw the map of the monument to exclude such
lands. Based on information from the Bureau of Land Management,
CBO estimates that implementing this bill would not
significantly affect the agency's costs. The bill would not
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply.
H.R. 4822 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandate as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would impose no costs on state, local or tribal governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Megan Carroll.
This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing
law.
DISSENTING VIEWS
We are strongly opposed to H.R. 4822. The unnecessary,
unreasonable, and unworkable legislation would cut up the
boundaries of the Upper Missouri Breaks National Monument,
making this national monument look like Swiss cheese.
H.R. 4822 calls into question not only the exterior
boundary of the Upper Missouri Breaks National Monument but
also the basis for the boundaries of numerous national parks,
national monuments and national forests around the country.
There has been a lot of focus on the Upper Missouri Breaks
boundary map which contains Federal, state and private lands.
This map reflects the fact that public lands are intermingled
with state and private lands in many sections and that monument
features bisect all these lands. This is not uncommon.
Intermingled public and private lands are common throughout
the country. Numerous national park, national monument and
national forest boundaries have such intermingled public and
private lands.
H.R. 4822 is based on the erroneous premise that including
private property within the exterior boundary makes that land
part of the national monument. It does not. On that point both
the monument proclamation and the Antiquities Act are clear.
The only land that is part of the national monument is the
Federal land because the Antiquities Act applies only to
objects of historic or scientific interest ``that are situated
on lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United
States.'' (16 U.S.C. 431). As the State of Montana's largest
newspaper, the Billings Gazette, noted in an editorial opposing
H.R. 4822 ``If something isn't in, what's the point of taking
it out?''
H.R. 4822 is also based on the erroneous premise that these
private lands are subject to regulation and management as part
of the national monument. Again, they are not. Neither the
monument proclamation nor the Antiquities Act gives the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) any authority to subject these lands
to regulation and management as part of the national monument
and the BLM as consistently informed the public of such in both
meetings and written materials.
The term ``private property rights'' has been thrown out a
lot with regards to this legislation. Yet, proponents of H.R.
4822 have been unable to show even one legitimate threat to
private property by its placement inside the national monument
boundary.
It is telling that more than half of the private lands
dealt with by H.R. 4822 have for nearly 26 years already been
inside the boundaries of a designated national conservation
unit. These 35,000 plus acres of private property are located
not only inside the boundary of the national monument but also
the boundary of the Upper Missouri National Wild and Scenic
River established by Congress in 1976. Private property rights
were not violated by the wild and scenic designation and they
are certainly not violated by the monument designation.
The Upper Missouri Breaks are a special place. Lewis and
Clark traveling through the Breaks on their historic journey
noted their beauty and grandeur. Today the Breaks remain much
the same way as seen by the Lewis and Clark Expedition.
Legislation such as H.R. 4822 adds nothing to the perpetuation
of the resources and the way of life that have made this area
famous. Rather, it diverts energy and resources from addressing
the real needs of the area.
H.R. 4822 is a classic example of a solution in search of a
problem. It is both bad and unworkable public policy that
attempts to play on people's fears rather than dealing with the
facts and as such it should be rejected by the House.
Nick Rahall.
Edward J. Markey.
Hilda L. Solis.