[Senate Hearing 114-500]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 114-500
PENDING LEGISLATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
PUBLIC LANDS, FORESTS, AND MINING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
S. 1167 S. 2018
S. 1423 S. 2223
S. 1510 S. 2379
S. 1699 S. 2383
S. 1777
----------
APRIL 21, 2016
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
S. Hrg. 114-500
PENDING LEGISLATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
PUBLIC LANDS, FORESTS, AND MINING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
S. 1167 S. 2018
S. 1423 S. 2223
S. 1510 S. 2379
S. 1699 S. 2383
S. 1777
__________
APRIL 21, 2016
__________
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
21-976 WASHINGTON : 2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
MIKE LEE, Utah BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
STEVE DAINES, Montana AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia
CORY GARDNER, Colorado MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia
------
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining
JOHN BARRASSO, Chairman
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO RON WYDEN
JAMES E. RISCH DEBBIE STABENOW
MIKE LEE AL FRANKEN
STEVE DAINES JOE MANCHIN III
BILL CASSIDY MARTIN HEINRICH
CORY GARDNER MAZIE K. HIRONO
JOHN HOEVEN ELIZABETH WARREN
JEFF FLAKE
LAMAR ALEXANDER
Colin Hayes, Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Chief Counsel
Lucy Murfitt, Senior Counsel and Public Lands and Natural Resources
Director
Angela Becker-Dippmann, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
David Brooks, Democratic General Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Barrasso, Hon. John, Subcommittee Chairman and a U.S. Senator
from Wyoming................................................... 1
Wyden, Hon. Ron, Subcommittee Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator
from Oregon.................................................... 2
Lee, Hon. Mike, a U.S. Senator from Utah......................... 3
Flake, Hon. Jeff, a U.S. Senator from Arizona.................... 4
Risch, Hon. James E., a U.S. Senator from Idaho.................. 4
WITNESSES
Casamassa, Glenn, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System,
U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture............ 8
Pool, Mike, Acting Deputy Director for Operations, Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Department of the Interior.................... 25
Whelan, Major General Martin, Director of Future Operations,
Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Headquarters, U.S. Air
Force; accompanied by Miller, Jennifer, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Installations, U.S. Air Force.................... 55
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
Alaska Bible College:
Statement for the Record..................................... 84
Alderson, George and Frances:
Letter for the Record........................................ 86
Alexander, Alice:
Statement for the Record..................................... 87
American Forest Resource Council:
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1510...................... 88
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1699...................... 91
American Rivers:
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1423...................... 94
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1510...................... 96
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1699...................... 98
Bailey, Marcia:
Statement for the Record..................................... 100
Baker, Dr. Norman:
Letter for the Record........................................ 101
Barrasso, Hon. John:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
Bilodeau, Katheryn (and Jeremiah Busch):
Letter for the Record........................................ 102
Blackshear, Sherry and Ronald:
Letter for the Record........................................ 106
Bowen, Betsy:
Letter for the Record........................................ 107
Boxer, Hon. Barbara:
Statement for the Record..................................... 64
Brandt, Vicky:
Letter for the Record........................................ 108
Brownley, Hon. Julia, et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 111
Brumlik, Mr. & Mrs. Daniel:
Letter for the Record........................................ 109
Brunstad, Harold:
Statement for the Record..................................... 110
Capps, Hon. Lois, et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 111
Casamassa, Glenn:
Opening Statement............................................ 8
Written Testimony............................................ 10
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 74
Cascadia Wildlands:
Letter for the Record........................................ 113
Chilcoat, Rose:
Letter for the Record........................................ 115
Clark/Gamble, Carolyn and Rick:
Letter for the Record........................................ 118
Combs, Tom and Kristin:
Statement for the Record..................................... 119
Crapo, Hon. Mike:
Statement for the Record..................................... 120
Crawford, Dennis:
Statement for the Record..................................... 122
Curtis, Richard:
Letter for the Record........................................ 123
DeVane, Connor:
Letter for the Record........................................ 125
Dobkevich, Judith:
Statement for the Record..................................... 126
Dubrosky, Doug:
Letter for the Record........................................ 127
Durr, Greg:
Letter for the Record........................................ 128
Durr, Rebecca:
Letter for the Record........................................ 129
Ecotrust Forest Management:
Letter for the Record........................................ 130
Farr, Hon. Sam, et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 111
Feltham, Wendy:
Letter for the Record........................................ 132
Flake, Hon. Jeff:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
Friends of the Kalmiopsis and Soda Mountain Wilderness Council:
Letter for the Record........................................ 133
Gershten, Dr. Mitchell:
Letter for the Record........................................ 137
Giedt, Jean:
Letter for the Record........................................ 138
Graber, Michael:
Letter for the Record........................................ 139
Hansen, Bev:
Statement for the Record..................................... 140
Havrilla, Robert:
Letter for the Record........................................ 141
Hayden, Anne:
Letter for the Record........................................ 142
Hazelleaf, Tom:
Letter for the Record........................................ 143
Hill, Paul and Ann:
Letter for the Record........................................ 144
Hilscher, Hilary (and Neil Johannsen):
Letter for the Record........................................ 145
Huesemann, Drs. Michael and Joyce:
Statement for the Record..................................... 146
Janzen, Gayle:
Letter for the Record........................................ 148
Jayne, Jerry:
Letter for the Record........................................ 150
Jeffries, Tim:
Letter for the Record........................................ 151
Johnson, Reid:
Letter for the Record........................................ 152
Johnson, Steven:
Letter for the Record........................................ 153
Kalmiopsis Audubon Society:
Letter for the Record........................................ 154
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center:
Letter for the Record........................................ 156
Klein, Nora:
Letter for the Record........................................ 157
Kloefkorn, Walter:
Letter for the Record........................................ 158
Kotler, Danielia:
Letter for the Record........................................ 159
Krafchuk, Bonnie:
Letter for the Record........................................ 160
Kring, Juli:
Letter for the Record........................................ 161
Kuntz, Laurie:
Letter for the Record........................................ 162
Lambeth, Larry:
Letter for the Record........................................ 163
Langton, Kimber:
Letter for the Record........................................ 164
Larkin, Beau:
Letter for the Record........................................ 165
Lasley, Louise:
Letter for the Record........................................ 166
Lee, Hon. Mike:
Opening Statement............................................ 3
Lipschik, Matthew:
Letter for the Record........................................ 167
Lish, Christopher:
Letter for the Record........................................ 168
Liss, Tonia:
Statement for the Record..................................... 169
Loeschen, Doris:
Statement for the Record..................................... 170
Magliola, Lawrence:
Letter for the Record........................................ 171
Mantooth, Roberta and James:
Statement for the Record..................................... 172
McCarthy, Michael:
Letter for the Record........................................ 173
McKeon, Renae:
Statement for the Record..................................... 175
McPhee, Joe:
Letter for the Record........................................ 176
Meeks, Mark:
Letter for the Record........................................ 177
Menard, Jana:
Statement for the Record..................................... 178
Messmer, Jim:
Letter for the Record........................................ 179
Moser, Rich:
Letter for the Record........................................ 180
Mueller, Tara:
Letter for the Record........................................ 181
Murray, Hon. Patty:
Statement for the Record..................................... 62
Nagel, Clinton:
Statement for the Record..................................... 182
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior:
Statement for the Record regarding S. 1510................... 53
Neumann, David:
Statement for the Record..................................... 184
North Olympic Timber Action Committee:
Letter for the Record........................................ 186
Null, Ciry:
Statement for the Record..................................... 190
Oakes, Elizabeth:
Statement for the Record..................................... 191
Oliver, Judith:
Letter for the Record........................................ 192
Olson, Dr. Sherry:
Letter for the Record........................................ 193
Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society:
Letter for the Record........................................ 194
Oregon Wild, et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 196
Orzechowski, Larry:
Statement for the Record..................................... 198
Penry, Marlene:
Letter for the Record........................................ 199
(The) Pew Charitable Trusts:
Statement for the Record..................................... 200
Pool, Mike:
Opening Statement............................................ 25
Written Testimony............................................ 27
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 77
Port of Port Angeles, Washington:
Letter for the Record........................................ 203
Potter, Dave and Kirsten:
Statement for the Record..................................... 205
Probst, Richard and Kelly:
Letter for the Record........................................ 206
Rankin, Michael:
Statement for the Record..................................... 207
Reed, Mary:
Letter for the Record........................................ 248
Risch, Hon. James E.:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
Written Statement for the Record regarding S. 1167........... 5
Written Statement for the Record regarding S. 1777........... 6
Rogue River Coalition:
Letter for the Record........................................ 249
Rogue Riverkeeper:
Letter for the Record........................................ 251
Roney, Scott:
Letter for the Record........................................ 252
Ross, B. Elliot:
Letter for the Record........................................ 253
Rothschild, Hon. Jonathan:
Letter for the Record........................................ 254
Russell, Alex:
Statement for the Record..................................... 255
Serra, Dawn:
Letter for the Record........................................ 256
Shaw, Nancy:
Letter for the Record........................................ 257
Shaw, William:
Statement for the Record..................................... 258
Sierra Club:
Letter for the Record........................................ 259
Smith, Charles:
Letter for the Record........................................ 261
Smith, Vicki:
Letter for the Record........................................ 262
Strahan, Dave:
Letter for the Record........................................ 263
Sutherland, Hugh:
Letter for the Record........................................ 265
Temple, Ray (and Stephanie Hazen):
Statement for the Record..................................... 266
Thomas, Sally:
Letter for the Record........................................ 267
Trout Unlimited:
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1423...................... 268
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1699...................... 270
Twight-Alexander, Susanne:
Letter for the Record........................................ 272
Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration:
Statement for the Record..................................... 273
Uyenishi, Steve:
Letter for the Record........................................ 279
Wagner-Starley, Christie:
Letter for the Record........................................ 280
Whelan, Major General Martin:
Opening Statement............................................ 55
Written Testimony............................................ 57
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 81
Wiese, Deborah (and Ruth Haasl):
Letter for the Record........................................ 282
Wilcox, Tom:
Letter for the Record........................................ 283
Wild Rogue Outfitters Association:
Letter for the Record........................................ 285
(The) Wilderness Society:
Letter for the Record........................................ 286
Wilderness Watch and Friends of the Clearwater:
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1167...................... 293
Letter for the Record regarding S. 1777...................... 296
Wilderness Watch, et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 303
Wolper, Steven:
Letter for the Record........................................ 307
Wyden, Hon. Ron:
Opening Statement............................................ 2
Yoder, Chris:
Statement for the Record..................................... 308
__________
This official record contains a random selection of statements for the
record submitted for this hearing. A complete record of all statements
submitted for the record is on file with the Senate Energy Committee.
The text for each of the bills addressed at this hearing can be found
on the committee's website at: http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/
index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings? ID=A9500EE4-7F6A-400F-8C58-
1F2C5A3CFF93.
PENDING LEGISLATION
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 21, 2016
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests and Mining,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 p.m. in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John
Barrasso, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. The Subcommittee will come to order.
The purpose of today's hearing is to receive testimony on
nine bills pending before this Subcommittee.
Three of these bills designate hundreds of thousands of
acres of new wilderness and add hundreds of miles of river
segments to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. These
include: S. 1423, the Central Coast Heritage Protection Act,
sponsored by Senator Boxer; S. 1510, the Wild Olympic
Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, sponsored by Senator
Murray; and S. 1699, the Oregon Wildlands Act, sponsored by
Senator Wyden.
Already 110 million acres of lands have been added to the
wilderness system. Additionally, tens of millions of acres are
protected as ``roadless'' by the Forest Service and the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM). In my view we must take a more
balanced approach between adding lands to the wilderness system
and Congress releasing lands. The agency currently manages
wilderness study areas to be managed in accordance with the
land management plans.
These bills also propose to designate thousands of acres of
potential wilderness. Potential wilderness gives the agency
authority to remove all uses prohibited by the Wilderness Act
on multiple use lands and provides the agency with
discretionary authority at some future date to convert
potential wilderness to designated wilderness without needing
any additional authority or approval from Congress. This is
troubling to me as it could have far reaching impacts for the
management of our forests and our public lands.
Today we also have two Idaho bills on the agenda that
revisit past wilderness and wild and scenic river designations.
Senator Crapo's bill, S. 1167, the Owyhee Wilderness Areas
Boundary Modifications Act, would authorize the continued use
of motorized vehicles to herd livestock in certain wilderness
areas. Senator Risch's bill, S. 1777, would amend the Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act to maintain or replace certain facilities and
structures at Smith Gulch. In these two cases Congress needs to
provide further direction to the agencies so we can actually
carry out the legislative intent.
The remaining four bills on the agenda include: S. 2018, to
convey a federal reversionary interest in Glennallen, Alaska,
sponsored by Chairman Murkowski; S. 2223, to transfer
administrative jurisdiction over certain BLM land to the VA for
inclusion in the Black Hills National Cemetery, sponsored by
Senator Thune; S. 2379, to convey a federal reversionary
interest to the City of Tucson, sponsored by Senator Flake; and
S. 2383, to withdraw certain BLM outside the Utah Test and
Training Range (UTTR) to facilitate and enhance weapons testing
and pilot training at the Air Force, sponsored by Senator Hatch
and Senator Lee.
So I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here
today.
I would now like to turn to Senator Wyden for any opening
remarks or comments he would like to add.
STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We are
going to look at important public lands bills today, and I
especially appreciate the inclusion of my Oregon Wildlands
bill. There are important challenges here, and I am just going
to touch on a few.
One is the Frank Moore Wild Steelhead Sanctuary Act, which
is a bill to honor a World War II hero and conservationist in
Oregon. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this
Committee to find a way to honor his legacy.
I also have two Oregon tribal bills, the Coos and the Cow
Creek bills. Helping these tribes has been important to me
since I was Chair of this full Committee, because they provide
these tribes with the land base that they deserve. I appreciate
the continued efforts of the Chair and the Ranking Member of
the Committee and their staffs on helping me get these bills
over the finish line.
With respect to my bill on the agenda today, the Oregon
Wildlands Act is a compilation of several wilderness and wild
and scenic provisions that were included in my O&C bill. So
this is actually the second time these bills have been heard in
this Committee, because the Committee held a hearing on the O&C
bill last July.
I know the Committee has received many letters of support
for the legislation from groups across Oregon representing
conservation, fish and wildlife, and sportsmen's interests. I
also appreciate the continued support and commitment from the
Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service to work with
me on this important bill.
The Oregon Wildlands Act designates hundreds of miles of
rivers in Oregon as wild and scenic. It expands wilderness for
some of Oregon's most treasured areas and protects over 100,000
acres as National Recreation Areas.
My state is a special place, and it has remarkable natural
features and diverse landscapes that lend themselves to a
variety of recreational pursuits. We essentially have it all.
Climbing, hiking, bird watching, we have everything. That is
why the bill is so important. The qualities that make Oregon's
natural treasures unique are exactly the reasons for protecting
them, and I want to make sure that our kids and our grandkids
can enjoy them for years to come and continue to support the
ecosystems and wildlife that depend on them.
The Oregon Wildlands Act was a part of my O&C bill, and I
am just going to take a quick minute to talk about that. Unlike
other forestry proposals that are out there, and the recently
released Bureau of Land Management Resource Management Plan,
this legislation is different.
My O&C bill would double the harvest compared to the
average harvest over the last decade, and it would ensure
lasting protections for Oregon's special places. With tough
forestry and conservation issues, you always face the same
challenge. I am looking down the dais and all of us, as
Westerners in particular, understand what this is about. Not
everybody is going to get what they asked for, and nobody is
going to get everything they think they deserve. The question
is in the West can you come up with a challenge so that all of
the responsible parties get what they need? Looking down the
row and to Senator Heinrich, I think all of us as Westerners
have been through that, and that, in my view, sums up the
challenge.
Finally, I want to talk for a moment about Senator Crapo's
Owyhee bill. I know the wilderness management issues are
difficult in his state, just as they are for all of us as
Westerners. Senator Crapo has worked very hard to bring diverse
interest groups together to pass the Owyhee Wilderness bill in
2009. And of course, again, as Westerners we know that is the
way you go about this right.
My understanding is the Bureau of Land Management recently
changed its policies on grazing within these wilderness areas
which the ranchers believe are inconsistent with what they
agreed to in 2009. So I want to just state, in wrapping up, my
commitment to work with Senator Crapo to thread the needle on
this to find a solution that is consistent with the Wilderness
Act and also with the grazing language that was included in the
original Owyhee Wilderness bill.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Barrasso for his help on
including the Oregon Wildlands Act today and for our witnesses.
I hope they will excuse my bad manners. The last plane for
Oregon leaves in a little bit, so that is going to be my
immediate challenge.
I really appreciate you all being here, and we look forward
especially to working with you on the Oregon Wildlands bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Wyden.
We have some sponsors of initial legislation here with us.
I think Senator Lee was the first to arrive if you would like
to make any statement regarding your legislation?
STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE, U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH
Senator Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thanks
to all of you for being here. This is an important issue to our
state.
We are grateful for the fact that you are willing to
include S. 2383 in the hearing this afternoon. The Enhancement
of the Utah Test and Training Range is an issue that the Utah
delegation, both in the House of Representatives and here in
the Senate, feel is great importance to our national security
and the capabilities of the Air Force.
As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I have
had the opportunity this year to question Air Force leaders on
the importance of readying our nation's test and training
ranges for fifth generation weapons systems and technology.
Lieutenant General John Raymond, the Deputy Chief of Staff
for the Air Force Operations, told the Airline Subcommittee on
March 8th that enhancing training is, ``something that is going
to be absolutely critical for our readiness going forward,''
and that the Air Force will put nearly $1 billion in FY'17 to
make sure that the ranges have the capabilities and the air
space that they need to address these high end threats and to
test the systems that we need.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Lee.
Senator Flake, is there anything you would like to add
about your legislation?
STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA
Senator Flake. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
this being talked about today.
This would simply provide for the unencumbering of title to
non-federal land owned by the City of Tucson for purposes of
economic development to buy a conveyance of the federal
reversionary interest to the city.
We know this was a deal that was done in 1989 and it was
done with an equal land exchange at that time, but somehow BLM
does not see it that way. The City of Tucson would simply like
the full use of this land.
This legislation would just complete the transaction that
began in 1989.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Flake.
Senator Risch.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES RISCH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO
Senator Risch. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I have two pieces of legislation that I would like to speak
to briefly.
First of all, I have a lengthy statement on each one which
I would ask unanimous consent to put in the record.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Risch. S. 1177 is simply a bill that would allow
for one of the lodges that is on the Salmon River to obtain
permits in order to use certain motorized equipment. This is on
private property and it was never the intention, I don't
believe, of anyone to stop that. This would very clearly allow
them to use the kinds of things that they need to maintain the
things that are there, not necessarily to improve. As usual
this is a government-made problem, and this will resolve it.
Interestingly enough the local Forest Service people say
well they don't have the authority to issue such a permit. The
higher-ups say that they do have the authority and the
testimony I am reading today from the Forest Service says,
``The Department opposes Senate bill 1777 because it would
create a negative precedent for other commercial recreation
service providers on wild and scenic rivers across the nation.
We hope to work with Senator Risch and Senator Crapo to find a
solution that is mutually beneficial to their constituents and
the Forest Service.''
So I have got a real good solution. Issue the permits, then
we really do not need this legislation. Again, this is very
diminimus in the overall scheme of things. It was the intent
always, when all of this was passed, that the private
landholders could continue to operate they have traditionally
been operating. I will be interested to hear the Forest Service
position on that. Hopefully it is more than just in this, what
I have in this prepared statement.
Secondly, I am helping Senator Crapo on Senate bill 1167.
Senate bill 1167 is another government-made problem. Senator
Crapo worked very hard with the people. It was a collaborative
sort of thing in order to get this particular wilderness put in
place. What it did allow for is the people who were running
cattle out there to continue running cattle and to do it the
way they have always done it.
Now for those of you who do not run cattle, I can tell you
that every year we have to go out and gather the cattle. There
are a couple of ways you do it. One is on a horse. One is on a
four-wheeler. If you are down in Owyhee County, you want to be
on a four-wheeler because you can cover about ten times the
amount of ground on a four-wheeler that you can on a horse.
It's always been allowed, but the BLM has modified its rules
since the original bill was passed and they are now trying to
prohibit four-wheelers on the ranchers that are operating down
there.
What this bill does is simply allow us, again, to go back
with what was the understanding. Interestingly enough, this is
supported by our flagship conservation group in Idaho, the
Idaho Conservation League, Rivers United which is our flagship
group when it comes to wild and scenic rivers, the Wilderness
Society and the Pew Foundation. All these people know that this
is what was intended.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Risch.
At this time, we will turn to our witnesses.
At the end of the witness testimony we will begin a round
of questions. The witnesses' full written testimony will be
made part of the official hearing record. We will ask you to
please keep your statements to five minutes so that we may have
time for questions.
The witnesses include: Mr. Glenn Casamassa, who is the
Associate Deputy Chief of the U.S. Forest Service; Mr. Mike
Pool, who is the Acting Deputy Director of the Bureau of Land
Management; Major General Martin Whelan, who is the Director of
Future Operations at the U.S. Department of the Air Force, and
you are accompanied by Ms. Jennifer Miller, who is the Deputy
Assistant Secretary regarding Installations.
So welcome to all of you.
If we could start with you, Mr. Casamassa.
STATEMENT OF GLENN CASAMASSA, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL
FOREST SYSTEM, U.S. FOREST SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE
Mr. Casamassa. Yes, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Subcommittee, my name is Glenn Casamassa and I serve as the
Associate Deputy Chief for the National Forest System.
There are four bills I've been asked to address, and I have
provided written testimony for the record.
S. 1423, the Central Coast Heritage Protection Act,
designates National Forest System lands on the Los Padres
National Forest in California as wilderness and additional to
existing wilderness and designates potential wilderness areas,
scenic areas and a national recreation trail.
The legislation also directs the Forest Service to study
creating a connection between the northern and southern
portions of the Los Padres using a trail corridor, directs the
Forest Service to study the feasibility of opening a new trail
to an existing off-highway vehicle trail and additional access
to wilderness scenic areas and potential wilderness areas by
Indian tribes for traditional, cultural and religious purposes.
The Department is generally supportive of the 24 additions
of the eight existing wilderness areas and the designation of
the new Diablo Caliente Wilderness and would like to work with
the bill's sponsor and the Subcommittee to develop legislative
maps and additional language to clarify the intentions of some
portions of the bill.
The Department supports the Wild and Scenic River
designation and will provide more details on the suitability,
eligibility and classification information with the bill's
sponsors and the Subcommittee to facilitate as much consistency
as possible between the agency's findings and the river
segments proposed for designation in the bill.
Senate bill 1510, the Wild Olympic Wilderness and Wild and
Scenic River Act of 2015, would designate new and expand
existing wilderness areas, potential wilderness areas and
certain rivers in the Olympic National Forest and Olympic
National Park as wild and scenic rivers.
The Department supports designation of suitable rivers to
the national wild and scenic river system as well as the new
wilderness areas and additions to existing wilderness in S.
1510.
The Department would like to work with the bill's sponsors
and the Subcommittee on aspects of the bill such as the
identification of potential locations of future restoration or
habitat improvements, on language to be included in the bill
that affords reasonable time for completion of the required
comprehensive river management plan and boundary modifications
to ensure that the boundaries are crafted to best support the
agency's ability to manage and preserve wilderness
characteristics.
Senate bill 1699, the Oregon Wildlands Acts, would
designate new and expand existing wilderness areas and would
designate certain rivers in the Rogue River--Siskiyou in the
Siuslaw National Forest as Wild and Scenic rivers.
In summary, the Department is supportive of the following
portions of the bill: Designate rivers and streams on National
Forest System land as part of the National Wild and Scenic
Rivers and defer to the Department of Interior in regard to the
proposal to designate rivers and streams flowing on lands
administered by the BLM; supportive of the technical changes
that amend the existing designation in the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act as they provide a more appropriate naming convention
and better reflect management classification and correction;
supportive of the technical correction to remove the offensive
name of the designation of Squaw Creek to Whychus Creek and
other name designations; supportive of the designation of
wilderness additions to the Wild Rogue Wilderness that has both
BLM and U.S. Forest Service parcels; and, as we have previously
testified in July of 2015 in support of Senate bill 132, the
Oregon and California Land Grant Act of 2015, the designation
of the Devil's Staircase Wilderness which would include
transfer of administrative jurisdiction of 49-acre parcel
managed by the BLM to the Forest Service to be managed as part
of the Siuslaw National Forest as site of cultural significance
to the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians. The Department
would also like to work with the Subcommittee on some potential
amendments and map revisions that we believe would improve this
bill.
With respect to Senate bill 1777, to amend the Wild and
Scenic River, the Department opposes the amendment to the Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act because it would create a negative
precedent for other commercial recreation services providers on
wild and scenic rivers across the country.
The facilities and structures for commercial recreation
services at Smith Gulch in Idaho are authorized and operated
under a 20-year term, special use permit to the River of No
Return Lodge Incorporated issued and administered by the Salmon
Challis National Forest. This permit is issued with provisions
and terms similar to those of recreation facilities throughout
the National Forest System. The permit takes into account the
location and surrounding of facilities improvements the public
values if affected by such an operation and any specific public
health and safety concerns.
The Department encourages the operator or the recreation
services business at Smith Gulch to work with the appropriate
local Forest Service official to revise any issues related to
their existing permit.
This concludes my remarks of the four bills. I'd be happy
to answer any questions. Thank you for the opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Casamassa follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Pool.
STATEMENT OF MIKE POOL, ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS,
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Pool. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member,
and members of the Subcommittee. I am Mike Pool, the BLM Acting
Deputy Director for Operations.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony
today which will briefly summarize our written statements.
Senate bill 1167 focuses on the boundaries and the
management of six wilderness areas in the Owyhee Canyonlands
regions of Idaho. The Department acknowledges the dedicated
efforts of the stakeholders to collaborate on issues concerning
wilderness management in this region and we generally support
stakeholder driven efforts to redefine management boundaries;
however, the Department strongly opposes this bill because it
proposes broad management changes that will lift the central
protections from the wilderness areas. We would like to work,
take the opportunity to continue to work with Senator Crapo and
the Subcommittee on a balanced approach to issues concerning
roadless management in this region.
Senate bill 1423 would designate three wilderness areas on
BLM managed land within the Carrizo Plain National Monument in
California, establish the Black Mountain Scenic Area on lands
managed by the BLM and the Forest Service and designate or
expand nine wilderness areas within the Los Padres National
Forest, two of which would include BLM-managed public lands.
The Department supports this bill as it pertains to lands
managed by the BLM and would like to work with Senator Boxer
and the Subcommittee to address various technical concerns
including ensuring consistency with the 2010 Carrizo Plain RMP
and correcting various references to other laws.
Senate bill 1699 would establish two new National
Recreation Areas on forest lands in Western Oregon, protect
over 280 miles of Oregon rivers under the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act and establish new conservation designations in
Western Oregon. The Department shares the goals to protect,
conserve and enhance the unique recreational and natural
resources of the proposed recreational areas and support the
bill's conservation designations. We would like to work with
Senator Wyden and the Subcommittee on clarifying the impact of
the management language for the proposed recreational areas on
existing commercial, recreation and timber production
activities and to provide updated maps that are more closely
tailored and aligned to the various designations in the bill.
Senate bill 2018, relating to Glennallen, Alaska and Senate
bill 2379 relating to Utah Park in Tucson, Arizona would
require the Department to convey without consideration
reversionary interest in two parcels pending under the
Recreation of Public Persons Act. The Department supports the
goal of conveying the reversionary interest in both of these
bills and could support them if they were amended to ensure the
payment of fair market value for the conveyance of the
reversionary interest.
Senate bill 2223 would transfer approximately 200 acres of
public land to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to be
incorporated into the Black Hills National Cemetery in South
Dakota. The Department supports this bill and we look forward
to working with the state's congressional delegation and the
Subcommittee to meet the needs of the Black Hills National
Cemetery.
Senate bill 2383. As introduced Senate bill 2383 provides
for the limited use and short-term closure of approximately
700,000 acres of public lands surrounding Utah Test and
Training Range by the United States Air Force. The bill would
also direct a large land exchange between the BLM and the State
of Utah and recognizes the existence and validity of
unsubstantiated rights of way claims, RS2477. The Department
supports the military's periodic limited use of the lands
surrounding the UTTR and we support the concept of major land
exchanges like this one that further the public interest,
consolidate ownership of scattered tracks of land to make them
more manageable and enhance resource protection. We do not,
however, support the withdrawal for the proposed share use
area. We also strongly oppose the resolution of unsubstantiated
rogue claims in the manner laid out in the bill. We appreciate
the efforts of Senator Hatch and the Subcommittee to begin
addressing the concerns we raised in our testimony on the House
version of the bill, and we look forward to continuing our
discussion.
Finally, the National Park Service also submitted a
statement for the record in support of Senate bill 1510, the
Wild Olympic Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I'll be
glad to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pool follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
General.
STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL MARTIN WHELAN, DIRECTOR OF FUTURE
OPERATIONS, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR OPERATIONS, HEADQUARTERS,
U.S. AIR FORCE; ACCOMPANIED BY JENNIFER L. MILLER, DEPUTY
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INSTALLATIONS, U.S. AIR FORCE
General Whelan. Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member,
distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to come before you to discuss this important issue,
specifically the need to balance responsible land management
with evolving military requirements at the Utah Test and
Training Range.
If enacted, S. 2383, would provide the Air Force the
capability to employ larger weapons safety buffers at the Utah
Test and Training Range or UTTR, through the temporary closure
and use of some current BLM land and any state land transferred
to BLM. This would be accomplished at little additional cost
and with no disruption to the historically responsible
environmental management of these prized lands.
The Air Force believes the bill's concept of short periodic
closures is the best way to serve the public's interest while
addressing both the Air Force's emerging operational
requirements and the Department of Interior's effective
stewardship of these lands.
The Air Force's operational capabilities are advancing at a
rate that challenges the geographic boundaries of the ranges.
These constraints compromise effective tests and evaluation and
our ability to conduct realistic and relevant live training.
One important aspect driving the need for larger geographic
containment is the increasing size of weapon safety footprints.
For safety reasons it is vital that the Air Force control
for the duration of a mission. Access to the areas oppose even
a remote risk to the public from debris or components should
the weapons event fail. The Air Force's enviable test safety
record is testimony to this extraordinary level of caution.
In the last 20 months the Air Force expended over 27,000
munitions in support of Operation Inherent Resolve which is
more than we expended during all of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The Air Force's involvement in such combat operations is not
expected to decrease in the near future. A well-trained force
and continued testing and training of our improved combat
capabilities are critical to our continued success supporting
these operations.
Technological advances incorporated in both our legacy and
newest combat aircraft and the weapons associated with those
systems represent an unprecedented leap in combat capability.
These advances enable crews to identify and engage multiple
targets from greater distances with improved accuracy. This
technology that enables the greater employment distances and
increases precision drives the need for larger segments of
range and buffer lands.
Safely containing large footprint weapons testing
historically accomplished at the UTTR is especially
challenging. Some standoff weapons footprints soon exceed the
capability of our existing range enterprise configuration to
provide the superior live weapons testing and tactics
techniques and procedure validation that have long been a U.S.
strategic advantage in combat capability and readiness.
We are working diligently and creatively to overcome these
limitations. In some cases, we've relied on modeling and
simulation to accomplish the specific events. In other cases,
we simply accept certain levels of artificiality that degrade
the training quality for live events at the local and regional
levels.
Given these gradual drifts from realistic training and
realistic reliance on simulation it is absolutely imperative we
sustain certain irreplaceable live environments, like the UTTR,
to accomplish these unique and uncompromising tests and
training events.
In the past and under select circumstances the Department
of Defense components have assumed administrative jurisdiction
over buffer lands with full responsibility for land management.
Generally however, it is neither efficient nor cost effective
for the services to expend resources on full time land
management when all that is required is brief periods of
restricted access.
This bill is similar to legislation allowing the overlap of
weapons safety footprints on the Cabeza Prieta in Arizona. That
example, commonly decided by the Air Force in how to
successfully enable military missions while minimizing the
impact on other agencies and the public. If enacted, S. 2383
would likewise provide the Air Force a much needed capability
through brief closures to BLM land and any state land
transferred to the BLM.
We believe this bill's concept of short periodic closures
would serve the public interest better than the alternative of
complete withdrawal. We recognize the Administration continues
to have concerns with several provisions of S. 2383 that we may
create challenges for effective management of these lands. We
welcome the opportunity to continue working with the sponsors
and the Department of the Interior to address these concerns.
I thank you for the opportunity to come before you and I
welcome any questions.
[The prepared statement of General Whelan follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you so very much.
Ms. Miller, do you have anything to offer in addition? I
know you are here primarily in a support role.
Ms. Miller. Supporting role, Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
We will turn to the questioning now with Senator Lee.
Senator Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate your willingness to accommodate my schedule.
General Whelan, can you tell us why it is important from an
Air Force readiness standpoint to have the UTTR expanded and
enhanced as soon as possible, especially given that both the
388th and the 419th fighter wings are already out there this
year trying to achieve F35 Iowa City this year?
General Whelan. Thank you, Senator, and I appreciate the
opportunity to explain the importance of the Utah Test and
Training Range in this particular legislation to help us with
our training, our tactics, techniques and procedures
development and effectively the readiness of the force.
As our new generation fighters, the F35 and F22, have
longer ranges and the weapons with them have longer ranges, we
effectively can engage weapons at a distance that preserves the
capabilities that we have and the people that fly our weapons.
So by employing those weapons at longer distances the
probability of something going wrong covers a greater land
mass. And through this legislation by increasing these buffer
areas we're able to do realistic testing without any of the
artificialities that we currently have to put in place to
enable the live testing, realistic testing, that we do to
enhance our capability.
We also support the fact that we don't need this access 24/
7, 365 days a year. And so by allowing these buffer lands with
the periodic shortages, not to exceed three hours, not to
exceed 100 hours a year, allow us to do our effective training
while also maintaining the access to the lands and the programs
that are effectively run by the Department of Interior.
Senator Lee. So this plan really does minimize the impact
on surrounding communities, the inconvenience anybody else
might suffer?
Tell us what it would do though if we do not get this done
in a timely manner? What kind of impact would that have on the
Air Force? What would be the consequence of that?
General Whelan. Sir, if we don't get the opportunity to
make the changes that are brought forth in this legislation
we'll continue to have to work on a case by case basis for each
of the tests that we do. Our process is set up that we program
testing and training long in advance. We program through
Congress for the funding to do all the testing, development and
then the training of our crews and without this legislation
we'll have to continue to de-conflict on a more manpower
intensive basis than through the procedures that are being
allowed for under this legislation.
Senator Lee. Thus limiting the ability that we would
otherwise have to take full advantage of this new technology,
this new platform, this new weapons system?
General Whelan. Yes, sir. It would limit our ability to
test.
For instance, today, to make sure that the footprint stays
sufficiently small, we either reduce the speed of the aircraft
that we would normally use to engage the weapon which is an
artificiality because in combat we won't do that or we come
down in altitude and actually dispense the weapon at a lower
altitude to bring down that area which we wouldn't normally do
in a contested environment.
So by allowing the buffer zone we're able to maintain the
range space and the buffer zones that we need to do this
training and effectively train our crews to go into combat,
should that become necessary.
Senator Lee. Okay. In that case we need to get this done,
don't we?
General Whelan. Yes, sir.
Senator Lee. Thank you very much, General.
General Whelan. Thank you, sir.
Senator Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Lee.
Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Mr. Chairman, first let me ask unanimous
consent to put into the record statements from Senator Patty
Murray on S. 1610 and Senator Barbara Boxer on S. 1423.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Heinrich. Mr. Casamassa, let me start with you.
There seems to be a little bit of confusion around S. 1777.
You heard my colleague at the beginning, Senator Risch of
Idaho, state that this commercial lodge is on private land. My
understanding is that it is on Forest Service titled land. Who
actually owns the title to this property?
Mr. Casamassa. Senator, the National Forest. It's on
National Forest System lands.
Senator Heinrich. So it is actually on public land not on
private land?
Mr. Casamassa. On public land and it is permitted on as it
relates to the public land.
Senator Heinrich. Okay, that is very helpful to clear that
up.
Major General Whelan, it is great to see you again. I want
to ask you a couple of questions about the Utah Test and
Training Range legislation.
First, let me say that I support the intent of this
legislation, and I think we will get there on this because it
is quite important. But I wanted to ask you, in particular,
about Title III which seems to be somewhat incongruent with the
rest of this legislation.
This section of the bill grants nearly 6,000 miles of
rights-of-way across three Utah counties. Is Title III of H.R.
4579 in any way driven by military necessity?
General Whelan. Thank you for the question, sir.
From an Air Force operational perspective, we're looking
for the contiguous support but if I may have Ms. Miller, see
if----
Senator Heinrich. Sure.
General Whelan. She's more the detail for our specific land
use part of the mission area.
Senator Heinrich. That would be fine.
Ms. Miller. Yes, Senator.
The Air Force doesn't have any particular equity in Title
III. We understand that there may be some concerns with
Department of Interior and BLM, but there's no operational
requirement for that provision from the Air Force perspective.
Senator Heinrich. And it was not drafted in response to any
request from the Air Force?
Ms. Miller. Correct, Senator.
Senator Heinrich. Great, that is very helpful.
Director Pool, is the land exchange in S. 2383 a result of
a negotiation between the BLM and the state and have you gone
through the typical exchange decision-making process in this
case?
Mr. Pool. Senator, I think there's been some informal
discussions regarding both respective sets of properties. But I
think we're still on the front end in that this would be a, at
least under our authority, it would come under FLPMA.
Senator Heinrich. Right.
Mr. Pool. And that we would have to proceed with an
inventory process of values associated with public lands. And
we're going to have to address the suitability and public
interest determinations through the NEPA analysis process. So
that's, kind of, where we're at at this stage.
Senator Heinrich. Having not done NEPA or gotten that far
down the road yet on this, are you aware of any sensitive
public resources in this area?
Mr. Pool. I think there's some cultural resources. There's
some historic mining districts. There's some greater sage
grouse habitat associated with some of these parcels.
So I think we're just going to have to do a more intensive
evaluation of all parcels and make a determination of whether
or not they should be transferred out of federal ownership.
Senator Heinrich. What about tribal consultation? Is any
tribal consultation--
Mr. Pool. That would occur as part of the exchange NEPA
process.
Senator Heinrich. Okay.
Mr. Pool. We would indeed do that.
Senator Heinrich. I also wanted to switch gears to Owyhee
country.
I am wondering if you can help us better understand the lay
of the land with the grazing guidelines that govern grazing in
national wilderness areas.
I am going to read a short section from the motorized
vehicle use section. ``Where practical alternatives do not
exist, maintenance or other activities may be accomplished
through the occasional use of motorized equipment. The use of
motorized equipment should be based on a rule of practical
necessity and reasonableness. Moreover, under the rule of
reasonableness, occasional use of motorized equipment should be
permitted where practical alternatives are not available and
such use would not have a significant adverse impact on the
natural environment.''
The way that I understand that is typically interpreted is,
for example, if you have to do an activity like taking silt out
of a silted in stock tank, something where the only practical
way to do that in many cases is to go in once every 10-15 years
with a backhoe, dig that out under permit, and then you are
done. Whereas, if say you are just mending a fence and you can
take your T bars and your fence post pounders and things on
horseback, then that would be required as the least impactful
tool in that case. Can you talk a little bit about those
guidelines and what they mean for areas like this?
Mr. Pool. I can.
Your scenarios are good analogies of what we can authorize
by basically going through what we call a minimum effects
analysis. We address those on a case by case depending on the
type of access the permitee needed prior to wilderness
designation, and it varies.
But we go through, first of all, we have to determine if
it's even necessary. And if so, then we go through a range of
alternatives including motorized, non-motorized and it's on a
case by case.
So, I think we try to be fair and practical in working with
our permitees to provide the needed access they need to have to
get into some of these improvements.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you very much.
Senator Barrasso. I have just a couple of questions for Mr.
Casamassa and Mr. Pool.
Today we are considering several pieces of legislation.
When you combine it all it would designate almost a half a
million acres, 458,194 acres, of new wilderness. That number
does not include another 625,000 acres of BLM lands withdrawn
for national security purposes or the additional 118,000 acres
of BLM lands recommended for withdrawal and repurposing as
national recreation areas even though these areas would not
allow the use of motorized vehicles on permanent or temporary
roads.
I would like to talk about one specific category of land
withdrawal that I mentioned in the opening statement. This is
the idea of potential wilderness. Between S. 1423, S. 1510 and
S. 1699, there are almost 50,000 acres, about 48,900 acres, of
land recommended for this designation as potential wilderness.
So, it is a lot of land.
The 1964 Wilderness Act did not really provide for a
category called potential wilderness. It had other categories,
but not a category for potential wilderness. So while the
National Park Service Act of 1976 established a category for
potential wilderness, it did so for National Park System units
only.
So both the BLM and the Forest Service have lands in these
bills that would be designated as this new category, this
potential wilderness land, which are currently lands used as
multiple use.
Could you explain a little bit about how your agencies plan
to use a potential wilderness designation to convert land from
multiple use to designated wilderness? How does this all work?
Mr. Casamassa. Senator, one of the things that we'd have to
do is assess what the non-conforming uses are within the
potential wilderness areas, determine the impacts of those and
then consider how we would then mitigate those uses in those
areas and eventually reduce those non-conforming uses in order
to then phase that into designated wilderness.
Senator Barrasso. Mr. Pool, would you like to add
additional comments?
Mr. Pool. Yes.
We have two methods by which the wilderness designations
could result within BLM.
The first authority was 603 under the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act (FLPMA). It directed the agencies to
inventory public lands for wilderness characteristics,
determine the suitability for wilderness management and produce
wilderness suitability reports and report to Congress. Those
currently exist throughout the Western range lands, and only
Congress can either release or designate those areas
wilderness.
The other authority that we use as part of our planning is
under FLPMA 201. That requires us to maintain an ongoing
inventory of resource values associated with public lands and
that does include wilderness characteristics. So if we're going
through a planning process or if we acquire new lands, just
like we inventory all other natural resources, we do inventory
for wilderness characteristics and we maintain those values in
their current form. That's what we do today.
So there's two different authorities that help us manage
the wilderness program.
Senator Barrasso. Mr. Casamassa, back with you looking at
this wild Olympics bill, S. 1510.
In 2012 the Port of Port Angeles released an economic
impact analysis. They detailed the implications of S. 1510. The
study concluded that the wilderness designation would result in
reduced timber yields, and they said that there were more than
400 jobs, intersector jobs, in terms of job losses in the
region. This legislation is going to add over 125,000 acres of
Olympic National Forest to the wilderness tally.
Could you just explain a little bit of how the Forest
Service plan to reduce allowable acreage available for timber
harvest on the peninsula would work without impacting yields
and how would that work and the implications are consistent
with that study from 2012?
Mr. Casamassa. Yes, Mr. Chairman, the--we estimate that it
is approximately eight percent of that total, 123,000 acres
that are currently in suitable timber management areas. That
certainly would be, you know, those 10,000 acres would be
collectively reduced from the overall timber base and the lands
that we would manage as forest management. There would be some
level of impact, but given that it's 10,000 acres, it would be
somewhat minimal based on the significance of it all.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Casamassa, I understand that the goal of S. 1777 is to
allow the installation of solar panels on the cabins at Smith
Gulch. But I have to admit I was a little confused to see lawn
mowers, weed trimmers and hydroelectric generation and
transmission facilities listed as equipment that would be
allowed under the legislation as they do not seem to be related
to the installation of solar panels.
Can you shed any light on why that equipment is included in
that legislation?
Mr. Casamassa. Senator, as far as the way that the terms
and conditions of the existing permit for that facility reads
there are limitations as to what, if anything, would be
permitted in addition to what is presently being permitted.
These are requests that are being made, and we don't
necessarily believe that they're in conformance with the terms
and conditions of the permit authorized to not only this
outfitting and guide camp but adjacent outfitting and guide
camps along the river corridor as well.
Senator Heinrich. Great. That's very helpful. As a former
outfitter guide, I see where you're coming from.
I want to say just a word about S. 1510. I support Senator
Murray's Wild Olympics bill which was carefully designed,
frankly, to protect and grow the local outdoor recreation
economy on Washington's Olympic peninsula. The bill provides
permanent protections to important wildlife habitat and
recreation land. It protects the health of rivers and streams
that provide drinking water to thousands of Washingtonians. I
hope there are at least a few salmon in those. It supports the
robust shellfish industry as well and seeks to improve the
health of Puget Sound.
I have heard from Senator Murray that her bill is supported
by thousands of Washington residents including many on the
Olympic peninsula, local and national recreation and
conservation organizations, outdoor recreation companies and
local elected leaders. I just wanted to put on the table my
support for that legislation, and I look forward to working
with her to accomplish that.
Finally, before we wrap up, I will just leave one last
commentary and then turn it back over to the Chair.
We have heard a little bit today about multiple use versus
wilderness. That is a little bit, to me, as a former outfitter
guide, of an apples and oranges comparison simply because
wilderness is multiple use. Grazing is allowed in wilderness.
Hunting is allowed in wilderness. Fishing is allowed in
wilderness. I was a guide in wilderness areas, so obviously,
recreation as well.
So while it does come with certain limitations, it also
comes with a multiple use mindset that is not completely
incongruous with the overall multiple use mandate that our
public land agencies have.
Thank you all.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.
Mr. Pool, when the original Owyhee initiative began in 2000
it was a collaborative effort between diverse stakeholders
including the Shoshone-Paiute tribe, ranchers and locals, state
governments, environmental groups, people working together. The
collaboration resulted in the Owyhee Public Land Management Act
of 2008. It was signed into law as part of the Omnibus Lands
bill of 2009.
At the time the legislation was negotiated, the BLM left
the stakeholders with the impression that current permittees
would be able to continue reasonable grazing activities on new
wilderness land, including the use of motorized vehicles for
herding and for routine inspections. That was the impression
that was left. So can you tell us what led the BLM to revise
that policy to now disallow the use of motorized equipment for
herding and routine inspections in livestock management in this
area where it had previously been allowed?
Mr. Pool. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I think that we've, our
criteria, we feel like using motorized equipment, ATV-type
applications, is not consistent with the purpose of the
Wilderness Act or the values that are associated with that
designation.
We have worked with our permittees, continue to provide
them as needed authorizations to use motorized vehicles to get
to their improvements, and I think we've been very reasonable.
But when you start using ATVs or motorcycles to herd cattle, we
believe that is inconsistent with the purpose of the Wilderness
Act.
Senator Barrasso. I am going back to the impression that
was left with the current permittees when all this
collaborative effort came through.
Does this decision then impact only the Owyhee Wilderness
Area or will it also impact other wilderness areas with grazing
permits? And if so, how many acres are we talking about and how
many AUMs have been impacted by this decision or have all the
permittees been given an opportunity to comment on this policy
and this decision?
Mr. Pool. Well, I don't know to what extent there are other
wilderness areas that BLM manages where we would allow
motorized vehicles for herding or gathering. I know of none.
But many of our wilderness areas that we manage in BLM we do
provide a continuation of livestock use in the designated
wilderness areas. That's clearly afforded in the act itself.
And then we continue to work with them, case-by-case basis, you
know, on the minimal effects tools to determine if we can
permit the permittee to use motorized vehicles, including in
some cases heavy equipment, to maintain their grazing and
permits.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Senator Heinrich, do you have any additional questions?
Senator Heinrich. No.
Senator Barrasso. If not, I want to thank all of you for
taking time to be with us today and for your testimony.
Other members of the Committee may submit written questions
to you. If they do, I hope that you will respond quickly in
writing. The hearing record will be open for two weeks.
Senator Barrasso. I want to thank all the witnesses for
your time and testimony today.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:24 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]