Copyright 2000 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
August 12, 2000, Saturday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1187 words
COMMITTEE:
HOUSE resources
SUBCOMMITTEE: FORESTS
AND FOREST HEALTH
HEADLINE: TESTIMONY FOREST SERVICE
ACCESS POLICIES
TESTIMONY-BY: HELEN CHENOWETH-HAGE ,
CHAIRMAN
BODY:
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HELEN
CHENOWETH-HAGE CHAIRMAN SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND FOREST HEALTH HEARING ON
PUBLIC ACCESS TO ARKANSAS NATIONAL FORESTS August 12, 2000 Today the
Subcommittee convenes to consider the many ways in which public access to
National Forests in Arkansas is likely to be curtailed by the avalanche of
rules, policies, and administrative procedures currently under development by
the U. S. Forest Service. Your Congressman, Jay Dickey, has worked aggressively
on your behalf to bring the Subcommittee to Hot Springs to hear first-hand from
the working people in Arkansas. Jay has fought to require the Forest Service to
keep its lands open so average folks can use it to recreate and make a living.
This year he was the undisputed leader in the House of Representatives at
attempting to stop the Environmental Protection Agency's naked power grab known
as TMDL regulations under the Clean Water Act. In fact, Arkansas can proudly
boast to being "ground zero" on that issue. As a westerner, I am interested to
learn that you have experienced many of the same challenges and frustrations we
have with national forest management. For example, Montgomery County Judge, Ted
Ester, will testify that 80 percent of his county is owned by the Forest
Service. Private landowner Mike Lenard will inform us how the Forest Service is
not a good neighbor for small inholders such as his family. So I look forward to
hearing from Regional Forester, Elizabeth Estill, concerning steps the Forest
Service can take to make its land management more friendly to the rural
traditions and culture of Arkansas. The Forest Service is presently revising
many of its rules and policies regarding where and how people can travel within
these forests. This Subcommittee has held numerous hearings on rulemakings such
as the roadless area initiative, the new road and
transportation management policy, and the new forest plan regulations. Many
people are concerned that the various proposed rules effectively combine to keep
people out of huge expanses of their National Forests. This is a legitimate
fear, especially considering that extreme anti-access groups have had an unfair
'insiders role' in dictating these access-limiting policies. It is also obvious
that the rulemaking process has been unwisely accelerated for political
purposes, bypassing meaningful public dialogue in the rush to claim a
Presidential legacy'. Administration officials have testified that 'nothing
could be further from the truth' - that there is no intention to exclude people
from their forests. But policy is not what you say; policy is what you do. What
the Administration is doing is imposing a series of top- down, anti-access
rules, using Execu7lv-e Orders and other Washington-knows-best edicts and
decrees to force their vision on your landscape - a vision that values wildlife,
wilderness, and water, but not people. The legal justification for today's
hearing is contained in the Constitution of the United States. Article IV
(Section 3) of that revered document states: "The CONGRESS shall have Power to
dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory
or other Property belonging to the United States." Since the Administration
refuses to follow Article IV (Section 3) and many other parts of the
Constitution, Congress must exert its constitutional role in this process. In
this way, we hope to help you ensure that these new rules do not unfairly post
'No Trespassing' signs across your forests.
LOAD-DATE:
September 6, 2000, Wednesday 
