[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.

                                
