Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/26/1998 01:15 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HJR 52 - OPPOSE AMERICAN HERITAGE RIVERS Number 0177 CO-CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON announced the first order of business was House Joint Resolution No. 52, Relating to opposition to the designation of any rivers in Alaska as American Heritage Rivers under the American Heritage Rivers initiative. REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of HJR 52, read the following sponsor statement: "Many of you will be wondering, 'What is the American Heritage River Initiative?' It has not been a widely publicized program. President Clinton first announced it on February 4, 1997 in his State of the Union message. Then in May and September there were announcements in the Federal Register. Since his State of the Union message President Clinton issued Executive Order 13061 directing agencies to establish and implement the initiative. "The program has two objectives: (1) to enhance our citizens' enjoyment of the historic, cultural, recreational, economical, and environmental value of our rivers, and (2) to protect the health of our communities by delivering federal resources more effectively and efficiently. The President's purpose is to support communities within existing laws and regulations by providing them with better information, tools and resources, and encouraging local efforts deserving of special recognition. "We wonder. It all sounds very good, and quite innocent, just like so many federal acts and initiatives in the past. They all seem innocent and even beneficial until they begin touching the lives and rights of real people. "For instance, it was a false promise when people were told there is a self-defense provision in the Endangered Species Act. John Shuler of Montana kills a grizzly bear after it attacked him late one night. Federal officials rendered the provision a nullity saying that Mr. Shuler was at fault for going into the 'zone of imminent danger.' That zone happened to be his own back yard. "It was a false promise when they adopted wilderness legislation saying that there was a provision for protection of 'valid existing rights.' The promise was that no private land would be taken into wilderness areas without the consent of the owner, that only federal land would become wilderness, and that no buffer zones would be created. Not so! Kathy Stupak-Thrall of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan has been compelled to fight government attorneys who say the provisions have no meaning, or they do not apply to her private property and her 'valid existing rights.' These lawyers say that Congress didn't know what the language of the phrase 'valid existing rights' meant. Therefore, they can interpret it anyway they wish. "I would say there is good reason for the distress throughout our country regarding the president's American Rivers proposal. particularly with an attitude like that driving government attorneys. The American people are not stupid. They are well aware that a legacy of betrayals and broken promises are attached to these types of well-intentioned, pleasant sounding, feel-good programs. "For this reason, many states are joining (United States) Representative Helen Chenoweth of Idaho who has introduced legislation asking for the complete withdrawal of the initiative. There are three major areas of concern: (1) the lack of congressional approval, (2) the vague language and absence of definitions, and (3) the excess federal control over private property and state water rights. "As a sovereign state, it also conflicts with our rights to control and manage our own navigable waters. "One important point is that Congress should be making rules and regulations respecting federal lands and resources, not the president or his appointees. We are again faced with the President stepping beyond the boundaries of his office. As Chenoweth stated in a press release after a House Resources Committee meeting: 'We are doing things exactly backwards here today. Instead of Congress making the proposal and the Administration commenting on it, we are actually in a position today of taking testimony not on the creation of a new program, but on how to stop it.' "In addition, there is no justification of the need for such an initiative, and the details of the initiative are insufficient. It does not include any details on how the cleanup will be accomplished, what will actually be done, and who will do the work. Allowing more time for the public process is another concern. As it is, there has not been sufficient time for reviews and comments by the public on the initiative. Some people believe it is just another intrusion of the federal government and a way to get control of all of our lands. To protect our sovereignty this initiative must be stopped. I urge you to vote yes on this legislation." Number 0499 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES explained the Chena and Kenai Rivers are the focus here in Alaska including their entire drainage systems affecting private property and other property interests. Number 0599 REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES made a motion to adopt HJR 52 (0- LS1308\E) for testimony. There being no objection, it was so adopted. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES explained there was tremendous outpour of opposition during the interim when there was an attempt to turn the Kenai River into an American Heritage River. The assembly finally defeated the proposal. Number 0663 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN explained he attended a Western States Coalition meeting and heard Kathleen McGinty, Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, state that they would listen to the accommodations if a state or area did not want to be included. In addition, in 1953, the Submerged Land Act gave title to the states for lands beneath navigable waters. The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the Act also affirms the right and power of the state to "manage, administer, lease, develop, and use said lands and natural resources in all accordance with applicable state law." The American Heritage Rivers Initiative undermines Alaska's sovereignty. Number 0795 KATHLEEN BENEDETTO, Executive Director, Minerals Exploration Coalition (MEC), testified via teleconference in Montana. The coalition is a non-profit advocacy group for the multiple use of public lands. Specifically, MEC works to maintain access for mineral entry on public lands. The membership, including 30 corporations, represents a diverse group of professionals and companies engaged in mineral exploration and development. She read the following: "I have more than twenty years of experience in the minerals industry as an exploration geologist and activist. In 1993, I co- founded the Women's Mining Coalition to work on responsible mining law reform. I have worked closely with the Western States Coalition, the Alliance for America and other grassroots organizations. The common thread for these groups is a commitment to improving and modernizing national environmental policy by promoting a strong conservation ethic that recognizes our most important resource, people, as part of the environment. "Today I am pleased to testify before your legislature in support of your resolution opposing designation of any rivers in Alaska as American Heritage Rivers under the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, established by President Clinton through Executive Order 13061. "MEC believes that if a river is designated as an American Heritage River, the designation will be used to restrict mineral access to public lands within the watershed. Each new land use program presented by the Administration further restricts access to public and private lands for mineral development, grazing, timber harvest and motorized recreation. "These restrictions are established under the auspices of saving the environment without regard for the impact that they will have on people. In some cases the restrictions do not provide any environmental benefit and may actually contribute to degradation of the environment and wildlife populations and habitat. "The continued ability to discover and harvest the rich mineral resources of this country is critical. Mineral and other natural resources are the source of new money and the raw materials needed in manufacturing. Each American requires more than 40,000 pounds of mined materials annually. These mined materials are necessary to provide a clean healthy environment for society. "For example, gold is an important component in all electronic equipment, including telephones, computers and satellite technology. Gold filaments allow us to reach out and touch our family, friends, and neighbors, and even those folks with whom we may not see eye-to-eye. It is used to trigger the development of air bags and in the protective clothing used by firefighters. "Mineral and other natural resources are plentiful throughout the United States and the rest of the world. Access to and distribution of those resources are where many problems arise. On occasion such problems are the result of formidable terrain or lack of infrastructure. However, in most situations these problems are artificial and have been created by political decisions. "The demand for natural resources will not decrease. Unchecked, political decisions restricting access to resources will go beyond negatively impacting rural communities and public land states, to impacting urban areas and the world's community as a whole. "I applaud the efforts of the Alaska legislature and encourage them to pursue passage of House Joint Resolution No. 52, opposing designation of any river in Alaska as American Heritage Rivers under the American Heritage Rivers Initiative. "Alex Annett with the Heritage foundation, in 'Good Politics, Bad Policy: Clinton's American Heritage Rivers Initiative,' identified the five most serious problems with the initiative: 1. It violates a number of constitutional and statutory provisions; 2. It is wasteful and inefficient; 3. It reduces the role and the authority of states; 4. It threatens property rights; and 5. It 'serve(s) political purposes.' "It is my observation that when the Clinton Administration has been unsuccessful with a legislative initiative they choose to circumvent Congress and the democratic process by issuing an executive order. This has been most apparent in their environmental and land use policies. The American Heritage Rivers Initiate is a good example. "During the 104th session of Congress a serious effort was made to pass the omnibus American Heritage Areas Bill. However, as a result of the UNESCO designation of Yellowstone as a world heritage site in danger and the concerns of private property organizations throughout the country, the American Heritage Areas Bill did not pass. In response, during the 1997 State of the Union Address, President Clinton, announced the American Heritage Rivers Initiative. The initiative is a watered down version of the American Heritage Areas Bill. To the uninitiated the program appears to be rather benign. And has often been described as a pork barrel project - just an opportunity to bring in some federal dollars. Even if this was the case, the whole concept flies in the face of efforts to reduce the size of government. It is a giant step backwards. American Heritage Rivers Initiative expands federal bureaucracy, increases centrally planned conservation through punitive regulation. And does not encourage locally driven incentive based conservation efforts. "Finally, I call your attention to the list of executive orders and initiatives used by the administration that are affecting resource and recreation based communities, rural school districts, and specific industries or companies: no logging in the Tongass National Forest, twenty year moratorium on mineral entry in the New World Mining District and the Sweet Grass Hills, denial of access to coal reserves in Montana, no oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), severely restricted drilling in the Lewis and Clark and Helena Deerlodge National Forest, the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, signing of the Global Warming Protocol, Al Gore's Clean Water Initiative, the administrative rewrite of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 3809 regulations governing hard rock mining, and most recently, the emergency moratorium of timber harvest within 'roadless areas.' "I encourage Alaska to sign the resolution opposing the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, House Joint Resolution No. 52. Congress needs support to stop the Administration from usurping their constitutionally delegated responsibilities." Number 1235 DICK COOSE, Assembly Member, Ketchikan Gateway Borough, stated the borough supports HJR 52. Representative James has described very well what will happen to Alaska. Number 1260 STAN LEAPHART, Executive Director, Citizens Advisory Commission on Federal Areas, testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. The initiative at best is poorly defined and duplicates existing programs designed to provide assistance to local government. The initiative at worst represents an entirely new federal program conceived without statutory authority - a threat to state and local government authorities and the rights of private property owners. In addition, he wondered why it would take the creation of a new federal program to improve the delivery of services by the 12 departments and agencies on the American Heritage Rivers Interagencies Committee. The initiative, on the contrary, would require agencies to focus on a new program resulting in fewer resources available for more important programs. The initiative really represents an effort to create a program that Congress refused to create when it rejected a number of bills that would have created a national heritage area partnership program. The commission is also highly skeptical of the claims that a designation would only occur if there is broad community support, especially because of the loose definition of the term "community." The current federal administration has justified the commission's skepticism through such actions as the creation of the 1.7-million acre Grand Staircase Escalade National Monument despite objections from local communities, state and local governments, and Utah's congressional delegation. In addition, the claim that a river designation would not result in additional federal regulations may be true legally, but it would require adherence to an entire array of program guidelines in order to maintain its designation and qualify for federal funds. A designation would not come without some cost to local control or loss of opportunities for private property owners. Currently there are 26 rivers in Alaska that are designated as wild and scenic, or recreational under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The United States Forest Service has recently recommended another approximately 20 rivers as wild and scenic or recreational. It is also in the process of revising the Chugach National Forest's plan. And, over the next few years other federal agencies will be revising management plans for their areas which will include making recommendations for additions to the wild and scenic rivers system. Once a river is recommended, the agency is required to manage it as if it was already designated by Congress. "We don't need, in this state, another program that will place additional federal controls over Alaska's river systems." Number 1559 TADD OWENS, Representative, Resource Development Council for Alaska, Incorporated (RDC), testified via teleconference in Anchorage. The RDC strongly supports HJR 52. The RDC finds three aspects of the initiative troubling. Firstly, it is a threat to private property owners throughout the United States. Secondly, there is no clear justification for such a program threatening to add to the already cumbersome federal land management policies in Alaska. Thirdly, it acts as another roadblock to developmental projects and recreational activities. There is no legal authority or practical need for additional lands in Alaska to be placed under federal land management. The American Heritage Rivers Initiative is unnecessary and likely to create conflict between state and local communities and the federal government. The RDC urges the passage of HJR 52. Number 1641 LEONARD EFTA testified via teleconference in Kenai. He announced his support of HJR 52 and wondered by what authority the President has to issue legislation for funds to support the American Heritage Rivers Initiative. It is obvious, whenever there is money involved there are strings attached. Number 1702 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion and asked unanimous consent to move HJR 52 (0-LS1308\E) from the committee with individual recommendations and the attached zero fiscal note. There being no objection, HJR 52 was so moved from the House Resources Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|