Contents
page
Chapter 3
Public Lands
The difference in environmental legacy between the Clinton
administration and the 106th Congress is nowhere more pronounced
than in the protection of our most treasured public lands and
resources. President Clinton provided permanent protections for
threatened lands and waters across the country by designating 18 new
national monuments. His actions will ensure that among other
resources, 3,000 year old Sequoia trees (the Giant Sequoia National
Monument), hundreds of miles of the Pacific coastline (California
Coastal National Monument), and millions of acres of beautiful
landscapes will be preserved from destructive development, logging,
mining, and grazing. The Clinton administration took another vitally
important step in public lands protection when it announced the
final rule to protect nearly 60 million acres of undeveloped
roadless areas in national forests, including the Tongass National
Forest in Alaska.
But on Capitol Hill, the 106th Congress made much more modest
progress to protect our public lands. On a high note, Senate
Environment Committee Chairman Robert Smith (R-N.J.) managed to get
a $7 billion Everglades Restoration bill out of his committee,
heralding its eventual enactment. Although the House passed a
landmark bill (H.R. 701) that would allocate nearly $3 billion each
year in funding for land and water conservation programs, this bill
ran aground in the Senate and contained little-known provisions that
would damage ecologically sensitive coastal areas and encourage
offshore oil drilling. With the demise of H.R. 701, the Clinton
administration and the House Appropriations Committee agreed to
provide approximately $1 to $2 billion per year for six years in
conservation-related funding through the appropriations process.
Other than this funding, most other public lands bills that
passed were either damaging to the environment or had very limited
environmental benefits. The 106th Congress also missed the
opportunity to pass a bill to protect Utah's unique red rock
wilderness and to ban oil and gas drilling in the pristine Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge.
Continuing a trend that began in the 104th Congress, the 106th
Congress sanctioned back door attacks on public lands by attaching
almost 20 riders that undermine public lands protections to
must-pass appropriations bills (See Appendix A). Faced with a
Clinton administration that was eager to secure protection of our
public lands, some members of Congress introduced legislation and
tried to attach riders that would undermine these executive
actions.
ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE - STEPS FORWARD
"A bill to designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge as wilderness"
S. 867, Sen. William Roth
(R-Del.)
Status: Referred to the Environment and
Public Works Committee
Sen. Roth introduced legislation (S.
867) that would preserve the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)
by designating it as a protected wilderness area. Environmentalists
enthusiastically support this bill, which protects ANWR from oil and
gas development. However, powerful committee chairmen - such as
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Frank
Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Senate Appropriations Chairman Ted Stevens
(R-Alaska) - want to open the refuge to drilling. In the end, this
bill never made it out of committee despite the support of 28
cosponsors from both sides of the aisle.
"Morris K. Udall Wilderness Act of 1997"
H.R.
1239, Rep. Bruce Vento (D-Minn.)
Status: Referred to
the House Resources Committee
Introduced by Rep. Vento, H.R.
1239 would also designate ANWR as a wilderness area, making it part
of the National Wilderness Preservation System. Although this bill
was cosponsored by 172 members of the House and was strongly support
by the environmental community, no congressional action was taken on
it during the 106th Congress.
ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE - STEPS BACK
Sen. Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska)
used rising gas prices as an excuse to open the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas development. These senators
together have received more than $300,000 in campaign contributions
from oil and gas companies, and the state itself stands to profit
substantially from new oil and gas drilling revenues in their state.
Sens. Murkowski and Stevens have led a short-sighted effort to allow
drilling in the refuge which is pristine wilderness and represents
only five percent of the Arctic Slope. This 1.5 million acre coastal
plain - often called "America's Serengeti " for its similarity to
Africa's wildlife-rich plain - is America's premier birthing and
nursing ground for Arctic wildlife -- including polar bears,
grizzlies, wolves, golden eagles, snowy owls and a migrating herd of
130,000 caribou. Oil drilling would forever sacrifice this
wilderness and would not appease the United States' long-term
appetite for energy. As Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) stated, "Opening
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will have absolutely no impact
on gas prices, now or in the foreseeable future."
Budget Resolution, S. Con. Res. 101
Status: Damaging
provision that assumed oil revenues from drilling in ANWR rejected
during conference
One provision in the Senate version of the
FY 2001 Budget Resolution would have assumed revenues from oil
drilling in ANWR in the budget calculations. During debate on the
Senate floor on April 6, 2000, Sen. William Roth (R-Del.) offered an
amendment (S. Amdt. 2955) to modify this provision so that it would
not encourage further oil exploration by including oil drilling
revenues. Unfortunately, Sen. Roth's amendment was tabled by a vote
of 51-49, allowing this provision to stay in the budget resolution.
However, during the budget negotiations between the House and the
Senate, 18 members of the House sent a letter to Finance Committee
Chairman Kasich (R-Ohio) expressing their strong opposition to oil
and gas exploration in the Arctic Refuge. Faced with strong
opposition from both House and Senate members, the conference
committee removed this provision from the bill.
"National Energy Security Act of 2000"
S. 2557,
Sens. Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Trent
Lott(R-Miss.)
Status: Brought directly to the Senate
floor. No final action taken.
Introduced by Sens. Lott and
Murkowski, S. 2557 not only would mandate oil drilling in the Arctic
Refuge but would roll back environmental protections and offer a
range of tax breaks and subsidies for the oil, coal and nuclear
industries. This bill went straight to the Senate floor for
consideration, but with only seven cosponsors it failed to garner
enough support to pass.
The Republican energy plan, the "National Energy Security Act of
2000," which was introduced by Sens Murkowski and Majority Leader
Lott would allow oil drilling across the Refuge's entire 1.5 million
acre coastal plain. Estimates vary on how much oil lays under the
Refuge, which could be as little as a six-month supply; at even the
most generous estimates the supply would not be enough to make a
dent in the world price of oil, which determines the price in the
U.S.. Despite this, in the wake of national gas price spikes,
Murkowski, Stevens, and Lott proposed to attach the S. 2557 as a
rider to the FY 2001 Labor-HHS Appropriations bill, and again the
Republican leadership brought the bill to the Senate floor for
debate just days before the end of the second session. Opposition to
drilling in ANWR from Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), William Roth
(R-Del.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and
Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) forced Sen. Murkowski and Majority Leader
Lott to back down. S. 2557 did not pass this session.
"Arctic Coastal Plain Domestic Energy Security Act of
2000"
S. 2214, Sen. Frank Murkowsk (R-Alaska), H.R.
2250, Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska)
Status: Referred to
the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
Introduced
by Sen. Murkowski and Rep. Young in their respective chambers, this
legislation would allow oil and gas exploration in the Arctic Refuge
coastal plain. The Energy and Natural Resources Committee, chaired
by Sen. Murkowski, held a hearing on S. 2214, but the bill never
garnered enough support to pass out of committee. H.R. 2250 was
referred to the House Resources Committee, but no congressional
action was taken.
PUBLIC LANDS - STEPS FORWARD
In the midst of repeat attacks on our environment throughout the
106th Congress, Americans applauded the president for protecting
some of our nation's most magnificent landmarks. Utilizing the
powers vested in him by the Antiquities Act of 1906, President
Clinton designated millions of acres of vulnerable public lands as
national monuments - forever protecting them from resource
exploitation and development.
During his administration, President Clinton designated 19 new
national monuments, and expanded three existing monuments, covering
millions of acres of lands and waters across the nation. He
protected more than 1 million acres, a largely undisturbed
wilderness area with some of the most dramatic landscapes in the
country, next to the Grand Canyon in Arizona. The president also
designated the Agua Fria National Monument in Arizona, which
includes 72,500 acres of a desert plateau rich in high-desert flora
and fauna and numerous archeological sites, and the Giant Sequoia
National Monument, protecting majestic 3,000 year old redwoods and
rare wildlife species in one of the last remaining old growth
ecosystems in the country. The president also expanded the Pinnacles
National Monument in California to provide greater protections for
the areas unique rock formations. The president also proclaimed 840
miles of the California coastline a national monument, protecting an
important habitat for the recovery of sea lion, seal, otter, and sea
bird populations.
In June of 2000, President Clinton designated four more monuments
that protect prime spawning ground for salmon in Washington state,
high desert areas and countless archeological sites in Colorado,
thousands of acres of forest in Oregon, and one of the world's
largest stands of ironwood trees in Arizona. And before leaving
office in January 2001, President Clinton declared seven new
monuments, and expanded one existing monument on 30,000 acres of
coral reefs in and around St. John and Buck Island in the U.S.
Virgin Islands. He also designated two historic fortresses on
Governor's Island as national monuments, opening the island to the
public for the first time.
PUBLIC LANDS - STEPS BACK
National Monuments Riders
Rep. James Hansen
(R-Utah) and Sen. Don Nickles (R-Okla.)
Status:
Rejected by the House and Senate by floor votes
Efforts to
weaken the president's authority to designate national monuments
were soundly defeated during consideration of the Interior funding
bill in both houses of Congress. On the House side, Rep. Hansen
authored a rider that would have prohibited funding for all new
monuments designated since 1999 - including the Giant Sequoia
National Monument. On the House floor, Rep. Earl Blumenaeur (D-Ore.)
said, "I think it would be a tragedy for this House to use this
back-door attempt to try and take away a power to have disastrous
consequences on lands that belong to the American public." After a
contentious floor debate in September, the House approved an
amendment offered by Rep. Norman Dicks (D-Wash.) by a vote of
243-177 that removed this rider from the bill.
During consideration of the Interior bill on the Senate floor,
Sen. Nickles also offered a rider that would have stripped the
president's authority under the Antiquities Act to designate new
monuments, but it was defeated (49-50) after Sens. Lincoln Chafee
(R-R.I.), Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), Jim Jeffords (R-Vt.), Peter
Fitzgerald (R-Ill.) and Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) crossed party lines to
oppose it.
Grazing Rider
Sponsor: Sen. Peter Domenici
(R-N.M.)
Status: Enacted on 10/11/00 as part of H.R.
4578, the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill (Pub. L. No.
106-291)
For the sixth year in a row, a rider was included in
the Interior Appropriations bill (Sec. 116) that allows grazing on
public lands to continue without environmental review. Authored by
Sen. Domenici, this rider allows Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and
other federal agencies to extend indefinitely grazing permits that
expire or are transferred in the coming fiscal year without reviews
required under environmental statutes, such as NEPA and the
Endangered Species Act. Furthermore, while this rider will allow
ranchers to challenge the grazing permitting process, it does
nothing to improve the public's ability to challenge grazing permits
- or to force the Interior Department to litigate - even when public
resources are being damaged. During negotiations on the FY 2000
Interior Appropriations bill, Sen. Domenici agreed with White House
officials that he would not include this rider in the FY 2001
appropriations bills, but he failed to honor this promise.
During consideration of FY 2001 Interior bill, Sen. Durbin
(D-Ill.) offered an amendment to strike the rider from the bill, but
was defeated by a vote of 38-62. As Sen. Durbin noted on the Senate
floor, "[T]he net effect ... [is] that we allow any bad actors
(ranchers) who are destroying the environment on our land, our
public land, to continue under the old terms and conditions and not
face changes that would be in place"
Hardrock Mining Rider
Sponsors: Sens. Larry Craig
(R-Idaho) and Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Status:
Modified successfully in the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations
conference committee
The nation's largest toxic polluter -
hardrock mining - is governed by a law that has not been reformed
since its original enactment in 1872. The Mining Law of 1872 gives
the mining industry special rights, such as an exemption from having
to pay mining royalties and the option of purchasing land at below
market prices. Furthermore, federal land managers have little
authority to deny permits for new mines and there are paltry few
environmental standards for mines on federal lands. Throughout the
years, mining companies have abandoned heavily polluted mine sites
and left taxpayers with the bills for cleanup.
The 3809 regulations, so-named because they are located in the
code of federal regulations at 43 CFR 3809, provide the only federal
environmental oversight specifically for hardrock mining on public
lands managed by the Department of Interior. The current 3809
regulations, adopted by former Secretary of Interior James Watt, do
not address contamination from huge open-pit mining and the
widespread use of toxic chemicals in the open environment. Since
their adoption, the current 3809 regulations have left taxpayers
potentially liable for cleanup costs that often exceed $1
billion.
Year in and year out, some western members of Congress have tried
to stop the BLM from enacting stronger hardrock mining regulations
on public lands by attaching riders to appropriations bills. Last
year, these members of Congress agreed to a bipartisan compromise
provision, which was attached to the FY 2000 Omnibus Appropriations
bill, that would allow BLM to enact stronger environmental
regulations as long as they are not inconsistent with a 1999
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study. However, in fiscal 2001,
Congress failed to honor this agreement, and Sen. Larry Craig
(R-Idaho) and Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska) tried to attach a provision
to the Agriculture spending bill that would block these stronger
rules. As a result of this rider, the BLM would have been prevented
from improving taxpayer protection from bankrupt mining companies,
denying mine proposals in environmentally or culturally sensitive
areas, or establishing strong environmental performance
standards.
During debate on the Senate floor, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.)
tried, but failed by a vote of 56-36, to improve the rider. The
rider later was dropped from the Agriculture bill but added to the
Interior bill. During Interior bill negotiations, the Clinton
administration and Sen. Reid (D-NV) agreed on a compromise that
honored the agreement made in FY 2000, allowing rules to be issued
as long as they are consistent with the NAS study.
Snowmobiles in National Parks Rider
Sponsor: Sen.
Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.)
Status: Enacted on 12/21/00 as
part of H.R. 4577, the FY 2001 Omnibus Appropriations bill (Pub. L.
No. 106-554)
The National Park Service (NPS) announced in
April of 2000 that it would begin enforcing limits on the use of
snowmobiles in National Parks and even ban them in some areas.
Snowmobiles cause damage to our national parks through noise,
emissions, and wildlife disruption, all of which led the NPS to ban
snowmobiles in the most heavily impacted areas.
Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.) proposed a rider to the FY 2001
Interior Appropriations bill that would have prevented National Park
Service from limiting snowmobile use in parks until the agency
completes a snowmobile study. After a contentious debate, Sen.
Thomas withdrew his amendment. On the House side, Rep. Rick Hill
(R-Mont.) also planned to offer a rider to the Interior bill that
would prevent funding for restricting snowmobile use in Yellowstone
National Park, Grand Teton National Park and John D. Rockefeller
National Memorial Parkway's winter use plan, but this rider never
made it to a vote. However, in the final omnibus bill, Sen. Thomas
was able to add his snowmobile rider that prevents the Park Service
from taking any actions to restrict snowmobiles in national parks
for 2 years (although it will not apply to work on the proposed
restrictions in Yellowstone and Grand Teton).
"San Rafael Western Legacy District and National Conservation
Act"
S. 2048, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah); H.R. 3605,
Rep. Christopher Cannon (R-Utah)
Status: Approved by
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the House
Resources Committee, Pulled from House Floor, and rejected as a
rider to the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill in conference
committee
In both the House and the Senate, legislation was
introduced to establish the San Rafael Western Legacy District in a
unique and starkly beautiful area in southern Utah known as the San
Rafael Swell. Despite its title, S. 2048 introduced by Sen. Hatch
and H.R. 3605 introduced by Rep. Cannon omit numerous spectacular
parts of the Swell and fail to curtail extensive illegal off-road
activity that is damaging the area's fragile resources. Furthermore,
these bills do not designate a single acre of wilderness, even
though more than 1 million acres qualify for this designation.
Although S. 2048 was approved by the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee, this bill was never considered on the Senate
floor. The House companion, H.R. 3605, passed the House Resources
Committee but was pulled from consideration on the House floor after
Democrats and moderate Republicans offered a series of successful
amendments to strengthen environmental protections in the bill.
During the final weeks of the session, Rep. Hansen made a final
effort to pass H.R. 3605 by attaching it as a rider to the Interior
Appropriations bill during conference. However, the rider ultimately
was stripped from the bill thanks to the efforts of Reps. David Obey
(D-Wis.) and Norman Dicks (D-Wash.), and the Clinton
administration.
"Giant Sequoia Groves Protection and Management Act of
2000"
H.R. 4021, Rep. George Radanovich
(R-Calif.)
Status: Approved by the House Resources
Committee
Introduced by Rep. Radanovich, this bill sought to
prevent President Clinton from creating the Giant Sequoia National
Monument by requiring an 18-month study of the area before monument
designation. This bill passed the House Resources Committee by voice
vote in April of this year but was not considered on the House
floor. On April 15, 2000, President Clinton granted monument status
to the area, capping a year-long NRDC campaign to persuade the
president to provide permanent protections for the famed ancient
sequoias. Encompassing 328,000 acres in the Sequoia National Forest,
the new monument will allow for continued public access for hiking,
camping, river rafting, kayaking, horseback riding and other
recreation
Obstruction of National Monument
Designations
H.R. 1487, Rep. James Hansen (R-Utah); S.
729, Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho)
Status: Passed the
House; Approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
H.R. 1487, introduced by Rep. Hansen (R-Utah), would impose
procedural requirements designed to obstruct the president's ability
to designate national monuments. The bill would delay the monument
designation process to the point that it would likely become
ineffective. The bill passed the House during the first session by a
vote of 408 to 2. The Senate companion bill, S. 729 introduced by
Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), passed the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee and garnered the support of 17 cosponsors, but
was never considered on the Senate floor.
"National Monument Accountability Act"
H.R. 4121,
Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho)
Status: Referred to House
Resources Committee
This bill, introduced by Rep. Simpson,
also would have undermined the designation of new national monuments
by requiring congressional approval before designations take place.
The bill did not garner enough momentum to pass the House
Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
"American Land Sovereignty Protection Act"
H.R.
883, Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska); S. 510, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell
(R-Colo.)
Status: H.R. 883 passed the House as amended
on 5/20/99; S. 510 referred to the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee.
Rep. Young and Sen. Nighthorse
Campbell's legislation, dubbed the "Black Helicopter Bill" because
it is grounded in distrust of the United Nations, would require
Congress to approve U.N. designations of Biosphere Reserves and
World Heritage Sites within the United States and would prohibit
federal designation of Biosphere Reserves unless there is no adverse
effect on state and local government revenue, and adjacent
nonfederal property is not restricted in use. By so doing, the bill
would effectively end U.S. participation in these two international
programs that fully recognize national sovereignty and foster
tourism. It would also infringe upon the ability of the United
States to protect its natural and cultural resources. Only after
significant changes were made, to limit the bill's impact, did it
gain enough support to pass the House. The amended bill is still
objectionable because it would restrict the ability of the Secretary
of Interior to nominate sites for World Heritage and Biosphere
Reserve protection. It also requires a number of additional
unnecessary reports. This bill, however, stalled in the Senate and
faced a veto threat by the White House.
FORESTS - STEPS FORWARD
On January 5, 2001, President Clinton announced his decision to
protect up to 60 millions of acres of America's forests. In October
1999, the president directed the U.S. Forest Service to develop a
plan for permanently protecting up to 60 million acres of national
forests from roadbuilding. The President's directive, known as the
"Roadless Initiative," will dramatically improve forest protection
by banning the construction of additional roads in forests across
the country, including the Tongass National Forest in Alaska - the
largest unspoiled old growth forest in the United States and the
largest temperate rainforest in the world. The rule bans both
road-building and logging.
There has been much sound and fury but little action from
Congress in response to the Roadless Initiative. Rep. Helen
Chenoweth-Hage (R-Idaho), chair of the House Subcommittee on Forests
and Forests Health Multiple, and Sen. Craig (R-Idaho), chair of the
Senate Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land Management, both held
hearings on this issue. And during consideration of the FY 2001
Interior Appropriations bill, there were isolated and unsuccessful
attempts, in the form of legislative riders, to block the Forest
Service's roadless rule. Further attacks on the rule are expected in
the 107th congress.
FORESTS - STEPS BACK
Logging Riders
Sponsor: Sen. Larry Craig
(R-Idaho)
Status: Rejected from the FY 2001 Interior
Appropriations bill
Sen. Craig proposed an amendment to the
Interior bill that would have forced the Forest Service to delay its
roadless rule. Fortunately, Sen. Craig dropped this controversial
rider after agreeing to a slightly less contentious, but still
objectionable, substitute amendment that provides emergency funding
for salvage logging in wildfire-burned areas and for commercial
'thinning' of other forests, in addition to more legitimate fire
prevention measures. This substitute amendment (see below),
introduced by Sen. Pete Domenici (R- N.M.), fails to provide
necessary environmental protections and could lead to unnecessary
commercial logging in our national forests under the guise of fire
prevention.
National Forests Logging Rider
nsor: Sen. Peter
Domenici (R-N.M.)
Status: Enacted on 10/11/00 as part
of the H.R. 4578, FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill (Pub. L. No.
106-291)
Continuing his practice of adding anti-environmental
provisions to spending bills, Sen. Domenici (R.-N.M.) added language
to the Interior bill that will increase damaging logging activities
on public lands by limiting environmental reviews required under the
National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.
This rider also shortens the time allowed for review of
administrative appeals and is likely to increase litigation against
ill-planned logging. This will be the first time Congress has
imposed expedited procedures on National Forest management
activities since the notorious "Salvage Rider" of 1995.
Although the administration negotiated some of the worst language
out of the rider, it still contains provisions that could delay
important administration conservation efforts. It also undermines a
more moderate response to wildfire fears and creates momentum for
those who would like to waive the application of environmental laws
to logging in national forests.
White Mountain National Forest Exemption
Rider
Sponsor: Sen. Judd Gregg
(R-N.H.)
Status: Withdrawn in the FY 2001 Interior
Appropriations conference committee
Sen. Gregg authored a
provision in the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill that prevents
the new roadless rule from applying to the White Mountain National
Forest in New Hampshire. This provision would deprive this popular
national forest of the protections being developed for roadless
wilderness areas in other national forests. This rider was
ultimately withdrawn during the Interior bill conference committee
negotiations with the Administration.
"Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of
2000"
H.R. 2389, Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.); S. 1608,
Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
Status: Enacted on 10/30/00
(Pub. L. No. 106-393)
In rural counties containing large
national forests, there is limited private property to generate
taxes that help fund schools and other county infrastructure. As a
result, the federal government makes what's know as county payments
to substitute for lost property taxes. Historically, county payments
were calculated by a formula that is directly related to the value
of the timber sales in the national forest. However, timber sales
have declined since 1980, and funding for rural schools has
suffered. Legislation was introduced in both the House and the
Senate to address the allocation of funding based on revenues from
local timber sales. Environmentalists support school infrastructure
funding, but strongly oppose basing school funding to federal timber
sales because it encourages unnecessary logging in our forests.
As passed by the House, H.R. 2389 would lead to increased logging
in forests in order to provide adequate funding for schools. H.R.
2389 provides county school payments for the next five years based
on the average of the three highest annual payments from FY 1985 to
1999. The largest problem with the bill is that payments are still
tied to timber sales and any shortfalls in funding must come from
the Forest Service budget. This creates an incentive for the Forest
Service to sell more timber, and thus increase logging, so that its
budget can make county school payments. The bill also requires
counties to spend 15-20 percent of the federal money on public lands
projects, but does not provide any safeguards to ensure that these
projects are environmentally sound. During floor consideration of
H.R. 2389 Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) tried unsuccessfully to improve
the bill by isolating timber sales from funding.
The Senate bill, which passed the Senate on September 13, 2000,
goes much further than H.R. 2389 to detach school funding from
timber sales. S. 1608, introduced by Sen. Wyden, eliminates some
incentives for increased logging by using money from the general
treasury, and not the Forest Service, to provide for any shortfalls
in funding. The bill requires that 50 percent of the public lands
projects be road maintenance and stream and watershed restoration.
All funds generated by the public lands projects must be returned to
the Treasury. Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) also added a new part of the
bill (Title III) that allows the counties to spend funds on a much
wider array of programs. These include education programs, fire
prevention, conservation easements and community forestry programs
on private lands.
This bill was signed by the president on October 30, 2000.
However, we haven't seen the last of this issue, because a provision
included in the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations conference report
authorized a federal advisory commission to study and report back to
Congress in three years on the issue of county payments.
LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION & RESTORATION - STEPS
FORWARD
"Restoring the Everglades, an American Legacy
Act"
S. 2797, Sen. Robert Smith (R-N.H.); H.R. 5121,
Connie Mack (R-Fla.)
Status: Enacted on 12/11/00 as
part of H.R. 2796, the Water Resources and Development Act of 2000
(Pub. L. No. 106-541)
The U.S. Senate, on September 25, 2000,
and the U.S. House of Representatives, on October 19, 2000, passed
legislation to authorize a large-scale U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
public works project intended - at least principally - to restore
the Everglades. The legislation was shepherded diligently through
Congress by Sen. Smith (R-N.H.), Chair of the Senate Environment and
Public Works Committee, with strong support from Sen. Bob Graham
(D-Fla.) and Sen. Connie Mack (R-Fla.). The primary sponsor on the
House side was Rep. Clay Shaw (R-Fla.). The legislation passed
virtually unanimously in both houses, the result of election year
politics and because the huge public works project promised
significant benefits to non-environmental interests in Florida.
The Corps' project is called the Comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Plan (CERP). The Everglades - the largest remaining
subtropical wilderness in North America - have been starved of water
in some parts and flooded in others as a result of the construction
and operation of an extensive canal and levee system criss-crossing
central and south Florida. CERP's purpose is to partially "replumb"
this part of Florida. While Congress made clear that environmental
restoration is the principal purpose of CERP, CERP is also intended
to provide additional water supply to agriculture and urban water
utilities. The Corps' current "blueprint" for CERP contains 67
projects to be implemented in stages over approximately 25 years at
an approximate cost of $8 billion. The legislation authorizes the
first ten of these projects, along with four pilot projects and
additional planning and monitoring activities, at a cost of $1.4
billion.
While environmentalists support the everglades restoration
legislation, some concerns remain. As enacted, the law contains the
bare minimum in terms of legal assurances that significant
restoration will occur in a reasonable period of time, so strong and
consistent political pressure will be necessary and possibly reforms
in the law. Moreover, the current CERP blueprint itself requires
modification so that restoration benefits to the Everglades will
arrive early in the project. Under the current implementation
schedule, significant benefits to Everglades National Park are not
provided until almost $4 billion and ten years into the plan.
"Programmatic" regulations, which the legislation requires be
developed over the next two years and over which the Department of
Interior has veto authority, will be crucial to our efforts to fix
these problems. These regulations - to be effective - will need to
include quantitative targets, a strong ongoing role for Interior and
an outside science review process.
The Everglades restoration legislation also contained a
resolution concerning the controversial proposal to develop a
commercial airport at the former Homestead air base.
Environmentalists, the Department of Interior, EPA, and other
agencies oppose the airport at the Homestead site, which is
immediately adjacent to Biscayne and Everglades national parks. A
congressional resolution, championed by Sen. George Voinovich
(R-Ohio) and strongly opposed by Senators Graham (D-Fla.) and Mack
(R-Fla.), expressed concern about the airport's potential pollution
and asked that any development at Homestead be consistent with
Everglades restoration efforts. On January 16, the Air Force
rejected the airport proposal and transferred the property to
Miami-Dade county, resulting in a major victory for protection of
the Everglades.
"The Conservation and Reinvestment Act"
H.R. 701,
Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) and Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.); S.
2123, S. 25, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.); S. 2567, Sen. Barbara Boxer
(D-Calif.); S. 2181, Sen. Jeff Bingaman
(D-N.M.)
Status: Passed the House, Approved by the
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee; Funding included in
H.R. 4578, the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill
For the
last two years, President Clinton has requested funding for his
Lands Legacy proposal, which would dedicate landmark levels of
funding for federal and state conservation programs to protect
America's land, water, and wildlife resources. Under the president's
plan, state and local governments would receive a significant
increase in funding for land, coastal protection, and historic and
wildlife preservation. The FY 2000 Budget included $652 million in
land conservation funding, and the president requested an increase
in funding for the FY 2001 Budget.
Opposition by western senators killed a landmark bill that would
have authorized long-term funding for land, wildlife, marine
coastal, and cultural conservation needs. House Resources Committee
Chairman Young and Ranking Member Miller compromised and agreed to
increased conservation funding and eventually joined forces to
introduce H.R. 701: the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA).
This bill, which passed the House on May 1, 2000 by a vote of 315 to
102, allocated revenues from outer continental oil and gas drilling
to provide almost $3 billion for the Land and Water Conservation
Fund, federal land acquisition, coastal area restoration, and state
wildlife programs. Although CARA provided important conservation
funding, it included incentives for offshore oil drilling in
ecologically sensitive areas, failed to ensure that funding to
coastal states will not be used for environmentally harmful
projects, did not include funding for non-game and vulnerable
wildlife species, and failed to guarantee that land acquisition will
not hamper efforts to protect ecologically important areas.
Although the bill overwhelmingly passed the House, CARA ran into
trouble in the Senate. Many western senators strongly opposed the
bill's provisions regarding federal land acquisition. Senate
Appropriations Committee members felt it was an intrusion into their
jurisdiction because it mandated long-term funding. The House-passed
version of CARA, introduced as S. 2567 by Sen. Boxer, never had a
chance of passing on the Senate floor. Sen. Murkowski and Bingaman
negotiated a compromise between their respective proposals, but
failed to get enough support to bring it to the floor for
consideration.
With the prospects for H.R. 701 increasingly dim, in a surprise
move Rep. Norman Dicks (D-Wash.) proposed an addition to the FY 2001
Interior bill in conference that would provide significant funding
for land and water conservation programs. Major portions of the
president's Lands Legacy proposal were incorporated into the bill,
funding conservation programs for six years, starting at $1.6
billion in the first year and increasing up to $2.4 billion by the
sixth year. The source of this significant new conservation funding
is general revenues and not offshore oil and gas drilling. The
funding was included in the final spending bill and, while falling
short of the ultimate goal of restoring full, permanent funding to
the Land and Water Conservation Fund, represents a landmark
contribution toward the conservation needs of state, local, and
federal lands and wildlife.
ENDANGERED SPECIES - STEPS BACK
Missouri River Endangered Species Rider
Sponsor:
Sen. Christopher Bond (R-MO)
Status: Rejected from the
H.R. 4635, the FY 2001 Energy and Water Appropriations
bill
Sen. Bond, representing the interests of the dwindling
barge transport industry along the Missouri River, inserted a
provision in the FY 2001 Energy and Water Appropriations bill that
would prevent the Army Corps of Engineers from modifying water flow
in the Missouri River to meet the needs of federally protected
endangered species. The environmental community strongly opposed
this rider because it blocks much needed water flow changes and
reform of the Army Corps of Engineers' operations on the Missouri
River, and would contribute to the extinction of three endangered
species. As Senate Minority Leader Daschle (D-ND) stated on the
Senate floor during the contentious debate on this rider, "A process
has been created, enacted by this Congress, that allows very careful
consideration of all the different factors that must be applied as
we make decisions with regard to management of a river, of wetlands,
of anything else...... The legislation currently within the energy
and water bill stops that in its tracks."
On September 7, 2000, Senators Daschle (D-N.D.) and Baucus
(D-Mont.) attempted to remove this damaging rider from the bill by
offering an amendment on the Senate floor. After a contentious
debate between Senators Daschle and Bond, this amendment was
defeated by a vote of 45 to 52. President Clinton threatened to veto
the Energy and Water Appropriations bill because of the inclusion of
this rider, and the rider was then dropped during conference
negotiations.
Rio Grande Endangered Species Rider
Sponsor: Sen.
Peter Domenici (R-N.M.)
Status: Rejected during the FY
2001 Energy and Water Appropriations bill conference
committee
As a result of water diversions that literally have
left sections of the river almost completely dry, the Rio Grande in
New Mexico is one of the nation's 10 most endangered rivers. The
silvery minnow, the last of four endemic species in the Rio Grande,
is on the brink of extinction. Other species, such as the
southwestern willow fly catcher and the Pecos bluntnosed shiner,
also are in danger of extinction after this past summer's drought.
Of the remaining wild fish populations, 95 percent are stranded and
threatened with extinction in a small stretch of the Rio Grande
River below the Elephant Butte dam, which is blocking the water
flow.
The BLM recently ordered the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy
District to keep water flowing to this small stretch of the river in
a final effort to save these endangered and threatened species. But
a rider inserted into the FY 2001 Energy and Water appropriations
bill by Sen. Domenici would prohibit the BLM from providing any
emergency supplemental water into the Rio Grande and Pecos rivers,
effectively blocking implementation of emergency conservation
measures to save the fish and directly violate the Endangered
Species Act.
Senators Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and Harry Reid (D-N.V.) strongly
opposed this rider and put substantial pressure on Sen. Domenici to
remove it from the bill. President Clinton vetoed the Energy and
Water bill because this rider was included in it, and while the
House voted to override it, the Senate did not have the votes to
override the veto until the Silvery Minnow Rider was dropped from
the bill. Sen. Domenici ultimately agreed to drop the rider after
communicating with Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt regarding the
management of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District.
DAMAGE DONE TO PUBLIC LANDS
ENACTED STEPS FORWARD |
2 BILLS EVERGLADES RESTORATION ACT LANDS
LEGACY CONSERVATION FUNDING |
ENACTED STEPS BACK |
1 BILL; 4 SIGNIFICANT RIDERS COUNTY PAYMENTS
ACT LOGGING RIDER SNOWMOBILES IN NATIONAL PARKS
RIDER GRAZING RIDER HARDROCK MINING REGULATIONS
RIDER |
Back to
contents page | Next
page