[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 5597, ``DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN EXPANSION ACT,
WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH''; H.R. 5751, ``GOLDEN SPIKE 150TH ANNIVERSARY
ACT''; AND H.R. 5875, TO AMEND THE PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE
RESTORATION ACT AND THE DINGELL-JOHNSON FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH
RESTORATION ACT, TO PROVIDE PARITY FOR UNITED STATES TERRITORIES AND
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO MAKE TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO SUCH ACTS
AND RELATED LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL LANDS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
Tuesday, May 22, 2018
__________
Serial No. 115-46
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
or
Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
30-229 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
ROB BISHOP, UT, Chairman
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Democratic Member
Don Young, AK Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Chairman Emeritus Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU
Louie Gohmert, TX Jim Costa, CA
Vice Chairman Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Doug Lamborn, CO CNMI
Robert J. Wittman, VA Niki Tsongas, MA
Tom McClintock, CA Jared Huffman, CA
Stevan Pearce, NM Vice Ranking Member
Glenn Thompson, PA Alan S. Lowenthal, CA
Paul A. Gosar, AZ Donald S. Beyer, Jr., VA
Raul R. Labrador, ID Ruben Gallego, AZ
Scott R. Tipton, CO Colleen Hanabusa, HI
Doug LaMalfa, CA Nanette Diaz Barragan, CA
Jeff Denham, CA Darren Soto, FL
Paul Cook, CA A. Donald McEachin, VA
Bruce Westerman, AR Anthony G. Brown, MD
Garret Graves, LA Wm. Lacy Clay, MO
Jody B. Hice, GA Jimmy Gomez, CA
Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen, AS Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Daniel Webster, FL
Jack Bergman, MI
Liz Cheney, WY
Mike Johnson, LA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR
Greg Gianforte, MT
John R. Curtis, UT
Cody Stewart, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel
David Watkins, Democratic Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL LANDS
TOM McCLINTOCK, CA, Chairman
COLLEEN HANABUSA, HI, Ranking Democratic Member
Don Young, AK Niki Tsongas, MA
Stevan Pearce, NM Alan S. Lowenthal, CA
Glenn Thompson, PA Ruben Gallego, AZ
Raul R. Labrador, ID A. Donald McEachin, VA
Scott R. Tipton, CO Anthony G. Brown, MD
Bruce Westerman, AR Jimmy Gomez, CA
Daniel Webster, FL Vacancy
Jack Bergman, MI Vacancy
Liz Cheney, WY Raul M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio
Greg Gianforte, MT
John R. Curtis, UT
Rob Bishop, UT, ex officio
----------
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Hearing held on Tuesday, May 22, 2018............................ 1
Statement of Members:
Bishop, Hon. Rob, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Utah.................................................... 6
Bordallo, Hon. Madeleine, a Delegate in Congress from the
Territory of Guam.......................................... 53
Hanabusa, Hon. Colleen, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Hawaii............................................ 4
Prepared statement of.................................... 5
McClintock, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California........................................ 2
Prepared statement of.................................... 3
Stewart, Hon. Chris, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Utah.............................................. 20
Statement of Witnesses:
Aponte-Hernandez, Hon. Jose F., Representative, Puerto Rico
House of Representatives................................... 54
Prepared statement of.................................... 56
Supplemental testimony submitted for the record.......... 57
Cox, Dean, Commissioner, Washington County Commission, St.
George, Utah............................................... 40
Prepared statement of.................................... 41
Foxley, Doug, Chairman, Transcontinental Railroad, 150th
Celebration Commission, Salt Lake City, Utah............... 11
Prepared statement of.................................... 13
Smith, P. Daniel, Deputy Director, National Park Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC............ 7
Prepared statement of.................................... 8
Questions submitted for the record....................... 10
Van Dam, Paul, Member, Board of Directors, Conserve Southwest
Utah, Ivins, Utah.......................................... 28
Prepared statement of.................................... 30
Additional Materials Submitted for the Record:
Department of the Interior, Statement for the record on H.R.
5597....................................................... 63
Department of the Interior, Statement for the record on H.R.
5875....................................................... 66
List of documents submitted for the record retained in the
Committee's official files................................. 67
Submissions for the Record by Representative Stewart on H.R.
5597
Access Fund, April 16, 2018, Letter addressed to Rep.
Stewart................................................ 20
Conservation Fund, March 27, 2018, Letter to Rep. Stewart 21
Dixie Metropolitan Planning Organization, May 17, 2018,
Letter addressed to Rep. Stewart....................... 21
Hooper, Steven B., May 17, 2018, Letter addressed to
Senator Hatch.......................................... 22
Ivins City Resolution No. 2018-09R....................... 22
Larkin, Dannielle, May 17, 2018, Letter addressed to
Senator Lee............................................ 23
LaVerkin City Resolution No. R-2018-09................... 24
Southern Utah Climbers Coalition, Letter addressed to
Rep. Stewart........................................... 25
St. George, City of, Resolution No. 2018-04-001R......... 26
Washington City Resolution No. R2018-06.................. 26
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 5597, TO PROVIDE FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE
DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH,
``DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN EXPANSION ACT, WASHINGTON
COUNTY, UTAH''; H.R. 5751, TO REDESIGNATE GOLDEN SPIKE NATIONAL
HISTORIC SITE AND TO ESTABLISH THE TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILROAD NETWORK,
``GOLDEN SPIKE 150TH ANNIVERSARY ACT''; AND H.R. 5875, TO AMEND THE
PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION ACT AND THE DINGELL-JOHNSON
FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT, TO PROVIDE PARITY FOR UNITED
STATES TERRITORIES AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO MAKE TECHNICAL
CORRECTIONS TO SUCH ACTS AND RELATED LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
----------
Tuesday, May 22, 2018
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Federal Lands
Committee on Natural Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in
room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Tom McClintock
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives McClintock, Westerman, Curtis,
Bishop; Hanabusa, Lowenthal, and McEachin.
Also present: Representatives Stewart, Gonzalez-Colon;
Bordallo, Sablan, and Plaskett.
Mr. McClintock. The Subcommittee on Federal Lands of the
House Natural Resources Committee will come to order.
The Chair would ask unanimous consent that all Members on
the witness list testifying on today's panel be allowed to sit
with the Subcommittee, give their testimony, and participate in
the hearing from the dais.
Without objection, so ordered.
In addition, I would ask the following Members be allowed
to sit with the Subcommittee and participate in the hearing for
the consideration of the bills we have before us today: Mrs.
Radewagen from American Samoa; Miss Gonzalez-Colon from Puerto
Rico; Mr. Sablan from the Northern Mariana Islands; and Ms.
Plaskett from the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Without objection, so ordered.
Under Committee Rule 4(f) any oral opening statements at
hearings are limited to the Chairman, Ranking Minority Member,
and the Vice Chairman. This will allow us to hear from our
witnesses sooner and help Members keep to their schedules. I
would ask unanimous consent that all other Members' opening
statements be made part of the hearing record if they are
submitted to the Subcommittee Clerk by 5:00 p.m. today.
Without objection, so ordered.
We will be continuing our parliamentary experiment into the
individual consideration of bills before us. So, we will hear
testimony on each of the bills in sequence. If a witness is
addressing multiple bills, the complete testimony will be heard
at one time. After all the testimony is heard on the first
bill, Members will have 5 minutes per round to ask questions on
that bill. Then we will hear from our witnesses on the next
bill and repeat that process.
Be sure to tell us how you think it is working.
With that, we will begin with opening statements, starting
with mine.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM McCLINTOCK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Mr. McClintock. We have three bills before us today. First
we will consider H.R. 5751, the Golden Spike 150th Anniversary
Act, sponsored by Natural Resource Committee Chairman Rob
Bishop of Utah.
Chairman Bishop's bill prepares for the sesquicentennial
celebration of the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad,
which will be celebrated on May 10, 2019.
The completion of the Transcontinental Railroad, which was
consummated with the driving of the final spike at Promontory
Summit, literally transformed America. It finished the great
race across the frontier between the Union Pacific and Central
Pacific Railroads.
I think it is difficult today to fully appreciate how
revolutionary this event was for our Nation. On that single
day, at that single moment, for the first time, the American
continent was connected both by railroad and telegraph. The
3,000-mile journey from New York to San Francisco that had
taken weeks now took only days. Messages that took days to
transmit by Pony Express rider now took only seconds.
The Golden Spike 150th Anniversary Act will recognize the
Golden Spike National Historic Site by redesignating it as
Golden Spike National Historical Park. Additionally, the bill
ensures that other sites and structures critical to the
history, construction, and legacy of the Transcontinental
Railroad are recognized and linked together in a new
Transcontinental Railroad Network.
The bill will also help to restore the Federal Government
as a good neighbor by ensuring that neighboring landowners and
the Park Service can work together to expedite minor projects
that crisscross park and private boundaries.
Next, we will consider H.R. 5597, offered by Congressman
Stewart of Utah. H.R. 5597 reflects a well-balanced compromise
that has been achieved by Congressman Stewart and his staff,
who have worked diligently with local communities and experts
in biology and ecology.
This bill authorizes a transportation and utility corridor
through the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area in Washington
County, Utah. The much-needed corridor will reduce traffic
congestion while simultaneously improving the air quality of
the area.
This legislation also adds 6,800 acres to the Red Cliffs
Desert Reserve, created in 1996 to provide additional habitat
for the Mojave Desert tortoise.
Finally, H.R. 5875, introduced by Delegate Bordallo of
Guam, seeks to address parity concerns between the 50 states
and the U.S. territories with regard to the formulas within the
Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson conservation programs.
While the territories are included in the statutory definition
of ``states,'' they are not afforded an opportunity to receive
an equal share of Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson
funding. Delegate Bordallo's legislation provides the Secretary
of the Interior greater flexibility in apportioning
conservation funds, and requires parity between the states and
territories with respect to funding for basic hunter education
programs.
I would like to thank our witnesses for appearing before
the Subcommittee today. I look forward to hearing their
testimony.
With that, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McClintock follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Hon. Tom McClintock, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Federal Lands
We have three bills before us today.
First, we will consider H.R. 5751, the Golden Spike 150th
Anniversary Act sponsored by Natural Resource Committee Chairman Rob
Bishop of Utah. Chairman Bishop's bill prepares for the
sesquicentennial celebration of the completion of the Transcontinental
Railroad on May 10, 2019.
The completion of the Transcontinental Railroad, consummated with
the driving of the final spike at Promontory Summit, transformed
America. It finished the great race across the frontier between the
Union Pacific and Central Pacific Railroads.
It is difficult today to remember how revolutionary this event was
for our Nation. On that day, for the first time, the American continent
was connected both by railroad and the telegraph. The 3,000-mile
journey from New York to San Francisco that had taken weeks, now took
only days. Messages that took days by Pony Express rider now took only
seconds.
The Golden Spike 150th Anniversary Act will recognize the Golden
Spike National Historic Site by redesignating it as Golden Spike
National Historical Park. Additionally, the bill ensures that other
sites and structures critical to the history, construction, and legacy
of the Transcontinental Railroad are recognized and linked together in
a new Transcontinental Railroad Network.
The bill will also help to restore the Federal Government as a good
neighbor by ensuring neighboring landowners and the Park Service can
work together to expedite minor projects that crisscross park and
private boundaries.
Next, we will consider H.R. 5597, offered by Congressman Stewart of
Utah. H.R. 5597 reflects a well-balanced compromise that has been
achieved by Congressman Stewart and his staff who have worked
diligently with local communities and experts in biology and ecology.
Specifically, this bill authorizes a transportation and utility
corridor through the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area in
Washington County, Utah. The much needed corridor will reduce traffic
congestion while simultaneously improving the air quality of the area.
This legislation also adds 6,835 acres to the Red Cliffs Desert
Reserve, created in 1996 to provide additional habitat for the Mojave
desert tortoise.
Finally, H.R. 5875, introduced by Delegate Bordallo of Guam, seeks
to address parity concerns between the 50 states and U.S. territories
with regard to the formulas within the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-
Johnson conservation programs.
While the territories are included in the statutory definition as
``states,'' they are not afforded an opportunity to receive an equal
share of Pittman-Robertson and Dingle-Johnson funding. Delegate
Bordallo's legislation provides the Secretary of the Interior greater
flexibility in apportioning conservation funds and requires parity
between the states and territories with respect to funding for basic
hunter education programs.
I'd like to thank our witnesses for appearing before the
Subcommittee today and look forward to hearing their testimony. With
that, I yield back and recognize the Ranking Member for her opening
statement.
______
Mr. McClintock. I now recognize the Ranking Member for her
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. COLLEEN HANABUSA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the
witnesses for providing your testimony for this hearing.
Today, we are considering three bills related to the
management, designation, and funding of Federal land that falls
under the jurisdiction of this Subcommittee.
First, H.R. 5597, introduced by Representative Stewart,
amends and renews the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan
developed by Washington County, Utah. This includes the 6,800-
acre expansion to Red Cliffs Desert Reserve in exchange for the
construction of a 300-foot-wide northern transportation
corridor through the reserve.
The proposed transportation corridor would, unfortunately,
run through the habitat for the threatened Mojave Desert
tortoise, and would, as determined by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, violate the terms of the Habitat Conservation
Plan. While I respect this proposal and years-long planning
effort for a transportation corridor to accommodate population
growth in Washington County, the bill precludes the
environmental review and public involvement process typically
required when dealing with habitat of endangered or threatened
species.
Disrupting the habitat of the threatened Mojave Desert
tortoise could set a precedent for counties to supersede
habitat conservation plans when local development conflicts
with the needs of federally funded and federally protected
species. We can and must work together to ensure that our
public lands are managed in a manner that balances conservation
with economic development.
Second, Chairman Bishop's bill, H.R. 5751, redesignates the
Golden Spike National Historic Site as the Golden Spike
National Historical Park, and directs the Secretary of the
Interior to establish a program known as the Transcontinental
Railroad Network within the National Park Service. The
completion of the first transcontinental railroad in the United
States took place on May 10, 1869 in Promontory, Utah. The
roughly 1,900-mile system of tracks that linked the Pacific and
Atlantic Coasts for the first time in the Nation's history was
built mostly by hand, with workers laboring tirelessly to place
each spike over the course of 6 years.
I would like to congratulate Chairman Bishop and all the
members of the Utah's House congressional delegation for the
introduction of this legislation. This bill is a fitting
commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the historic
connection of the American coasts by rail, which had a
tremendous impact on our country's economic and cultural
development.
However, I would also like to note that the Golden Spike
National Historic Site also strives to honor the legacy of
early Chinese immigrants. Once the site received Federal
protection and began to develop facilities to accommodate
public visitation, administrators selected a unique quartzite
stone, which is visible in the rock work of the visitor center
external walls.
I am actually reading from the National Park Service
website that talks about a legacy from the Far East. I am
hopeful that in the creation of the national park within the
National Park Service of the Transcontinental Railroad Network,
that the work of the Chinese immigrants that was a substantial
labor force that completed the railroad is also acknowledged.
Many of the Chinese Americans are attempting to rebuild that
history, and I think this would be an amazing place for them to
start.
The third bill we will be discussing today is H.R. 5875,
from Representative Bordallo. This proposal amends the Pittman-
Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson
Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act to allow United
States territories and the District of Columbia to enjoy equal
funding considerations for wildlife restoration efforts,
sportfishing, aquatic education, wetlands restoration, and
boat-related activities.
Since the inception of the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-
Johnson Acts, approximately $18 billion of taxes have been
directed from sport hunting and fishing to states for
conservation and recreation projects. This bipartisan
legislation would remove outdated and arbitrary caps in current
law that prevent our five U.S. territories and the District of
Columbia from receiving full state-equivalent shares of this
Federal funding at no cost to the taxpayers.
I am pleased to see a bipartisan effort to do the right
thing, and I look forward to learning more of this effort from
Representative Bordallo.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hanabusa follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Hon. Colleen Hanabusa, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Federal Lands
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to the witnesses for
providing your testimony for this hearing.
Today, we are considering three bills related to the management,
designation, and funding of Federal land that fall under the
jurisdiction of this Subcommittee.
First, H.R. 5597, introduced by Representative Stewart, amends and
renews the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan, developed by
Washington County, Utah. This includes a 6,800-acre expansion to Red
Cliffs Desert Reserve in exchange for the construction of a 300-foot-
wide northern transportation corridor through the Reserve.
The proposed transportation corridor would unfortunately run
through habitat for the threatened Mojave desert tortoise, and would,
as determined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, violate the terms
of the Habitat Conservation Plan.
While I respect this proposal and the years-long planning effort
for a transportation corridor to accommodate population growth in
Washington County, the bill precludes the environmental review and
public involvement process typically required when dealing with the
habitat of endangered or threatened species.
Disrupting the habitat of the threatened Mojave desert tortoise
could set a precedent for counties to supersede habitat conservation
plans when local development conflicts with the needs of federally-
protected species. We can and must work together to ensure that our
public lands are managed in a manner that balances conservation with
economic development.
Second, Chairman Bishop's bill, H.R. 5751, redesignates the Golden
Spike National Historic Site as the Golden Spike National Historical
Park, and directs the Secretary of the Interior to establish a program
known as the Transcontinental Railroad Network within the National Park
Service.
The completion of the first transcontinental railroad in the United
States took place on May 10, 1869 in Promontory, Utah. The roughly
1,900-mile system of tracks that linked the Pacific and Atlantic coasts
for the first time in the Nation's history was built mostly by hand,
with workers laboring tirelessly to place each spike over the course of
6 years.
I would like to congratulate Chairman Bishop, and all the Members
of Utah's House congressional delegation, for the introduction of this
legislation. This bill is a fitting commemoration of the 150th
anniversary of the historic connection of the American coasts by rail,
which had a tremendous impact on our country's economic and cultural
development.
The third bill we will be discussing today is H.R. 5875 from
Representative Bordallo. This proposal amends the Pittman-Robertson
Wildlife Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson Federal Aid in Sport
Fish Restoration Act to allow U.S. territories and the District of
Columbia to enjoy equal funding considerations for wildlife restoration
efforts, sportfishing, aquatic education, wetlands restoration, and
boat-related activities.
Since the inception of the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson
Acts, approximately $18 billion of taxes have been directed from sport
hunting and fishing to states for conservation and recreation projects.
This bipartisan legislation would remove outdated and arbitrary caps in
current law that prevent our five U.S. territories and the District of
Columbia from receiving full, state-equivalent shares of this Federal
funding, at no cost to taxpayers. I am pleased to see a bipartisan
effort to do the right thing. I look forward to learning more about
this effort from Representative Bordallo.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
______
Mr. McClintock. Great, thank you. We will now move on to
consideration of each of the bills.
We will begin with H.R. 5751.
I would ask the witnesses to keep their oral statements to
5 minutes. We have some helpful timing lights to keep you
within those rails. If you have testimony on more than one
bill, we would ask that you give all of that testimony within
the 5 minutes the Chair allotted.
With that, I will introduce Chairman Rob Bishop to present
his bill.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROB BISHOP, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF UTAH
Mr. Bishop. I appreciate this opportunity of coming here
and talking about this bill.
Next year will be the 150th birthday of this historic
event. And I think it is bigger than just Golden Spike itself.
Not only is the Golden Spike the place where the United States
was finally unified for the first time and we were able to go
from ocean to ocean, but in that entire area are a whole bunch
of other entities that illustrate how transportation has
changed the course of America.
So, we have not only areas in which we talk about pioneers
coming in wagons, but other areas in which we talk about trains
and train transportation, and how that revolutionized America,
but also within walking distance of the Golden Spike is also an
entity that was responsible for the motors that put the space
shuttle into flight.
There is an entire corridor or area in which we can talk
about the significance of transportation, and it can be a
learning experience for people coming up there. I am excited
about the changes that could go in this place. It is a
significant part of American history, and more people need to
have the access that can be provided not just by the
redesignation, but also by the historic trail system that is
going to be resurrected, developed.
We have done this in other areas. This is going to be for
transportation now, so I am excited about this. I think it is a
good thing. And I am looking forward to a heck of a good
celebration come May of next year, when we celebrate the 150th
anniversary of the uniting of this Nation together. I invite
you all out to that event.
Mr. McClintock. With that, we will first hear testimony
from Mr. Daniel Smith, Deputy Director of the National Park
Service.
Mr. Smith, welcome.
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Smith. Mr. McClintock, Ranking Member Hanabusa, and
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
present the Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 5751,
the Golden Spike 150th Anniversary Act.
I would like to submit our full statement on this bill for
the record, and summarize the Department's views.
In addition, I would like to submit a statement for the
record on H.R. 5597 and H.R. 5875, so that any comments on that
would be referred to the BLM or to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
The Department supports redesignating Golden Spike National
Historic Site as Golden Spike National Historical Park, which
is in keeping with Secretary Zinke's commitment to highlight
less-visited units of the National Park System as we approach
the celebration of the 150th anniversary of the May 10, 1869
Last Spike Ceremony marking the completion of the first
transcontinental railway. This is a fitting time to enact this
redesignation.
The Department supports the goals of the other provisions
of H.R. 5751, but has concerns about them and would like to
work with the Committee on amendments to address those
concerns.
Golden Spike preserves 2,735 acres of land where the Union
Pacific Railroad and the Central Pacific Railroad came together
to form the first transcontinental railroad. Set in a vast,
open landscape mostly unchanged from 1869, it retains an
unparalleled concentration of historic transcontinental
railroad engineering features, archeological sites, and
associated cultural landscape elements. It is the only National
Park Service unit that preserves physical evidence of the
construction, completion, and maintenance of the
transcontinental railroad.
Golden Spike was first designated a 7-acre national
historic site on April 2, 1957 by Secretary of the Interior
Fred Seaton. Eight years later, Congress authorized the
acquisition of approximately 2,200 acres of land, including 15
miles of historic railroad grade, and placed it under NPS
administration. The boundary was expanded by 532 acres in 1980,
mainly to protect additional cultural features.
Today, Golden Spike is the second-largest national historic
site in the National Park System. Given its size and the
complexity of the resources, the Department believes that it is
wholly appropriate to redesignate Golden Spike National
Historic Site as Golden Spike National Historical Park.
This bill would also establish the Transcontinental
Railroad Network program. The Department supports the goal of
raising the profile of other transcontinental railroad sites
and resources, and promoting opportunities for visitors to
learn about this chapter of our Nation's history. However, we
note that there has been no study conducted to define the
significance of the objects or sites that would be commemorated
or highlighted as transcontinental railroad sites and
resources.
The Department would like to work with the Committee to
further clarify how the proposed network would function. At the
time when the Department is focusing resources on reducing the
NPS's $11.6 billion deferred maintenance backlog and addressing
other critical National Park Service needs, the network and the
infrastructure needed to support it would be difficult to
prioritize at this time.
The bill also includes sections regarding activities
adjacent landowners may propose to undertake on NPS lands that
meet the definition of ``historical crossing'' and related to
invasive species. The Department is concerned that these
sections would create an unnecessary new process that is too
broad and does not align with laws, regulations, and policies
that generally apply to all NPS units.
In keeping with our desire to be a good neighbor, we would
like to work with the Committee to address adjacent landowners'
interests and concerns about rights-of-way and special use
permits without establishing a park-specific process to address
issues that also affect other parks.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement, and I would be
pleased to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]
Prepared Statement of P. Daniel Smith, Deputy Director, Exercising the
Authority of the Director of the National Park Service, Department of
the Interior
Statement on H.R. 5751
Chairman McClintock, Ranking Member Hanabusa, and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the Department
of the Interior's views on H.R. 5751, a bill to redesignate Golden
Spike National Historic Site and to establish the Transcontinental
Railroad Network.
The Department supports redesignating Golden Spike National
Historic Site as Golden Spike National Historical Park, which is in
keeping with Secretary Zinke's commitment to highlight less-visited
units of the National Park System (System). As we approach the
celebration of the 150th anniversary of the May 10, 1869, ``Last
Spike'' ceremony marking the completion of the first transcontinental
railway, this is a fitting time to enact this redesignation. The
Department supports the goals of the other provisions of H.R. 5751, but
has concerns about them, as explained in this statement, and would like
to work with the Committee on amendments to address those concerns.
Section 3 of H.R. 5751 would redesignate Golden Spike National
Historic Site (Site) as Golden Spike National Historical Park (Park)
and include it in the Transcontinental Railroad Network that would be
established by Section 4. The Site preserves 2,735 acres of land where
the Union Pacific Railroad and the Central Pacific Railroad came
together to form the first transcontinental railroad, linking the
United States politically, economically and physically. Set in a vast
open landscape mostly unchanged from 1869, the Site retains an
unparalleled concentration of historic transcontinental railroad
engineering features, archeological sites, and associated cultural
landscape elements. It is the only System unit that preserves physical
evidence of the technology and methods involved in construction,
completion, and maintenance of the transcontinental railroad. The
National Park Service (NPS) operates replica locomotives ``Jupiter''
and ``No. 119'' daily in the summer. These provide visitors with a
unique opportunity to learn about the transcontinental railroad.
The transcontinental railroad was among the greatest technological
feats of the 19th century and represents one of the most ambitious and
expensive projects ever undertaken by the Federal Government. The
daunting task of construction across vast expanses of the country,
within a relatively short time frame, required the government to forge
creative partnerships with private corporations to accomplish this
unprecedented construction feat. The legacy of this government-
corporate partnership, and the fierce competition it spawned between
rival railroad companies, is clearly reflected in the parallel grades
and other features. Thousands of people, including Civil War veterans,
Buffalo Soldiers, Mormons, and American Indians, as well as immigrants
from Ireland, China, and other nations, were employed in the railroad's
construction, often toiling under the harshest of conditions in some of
the most remote and difficult landscapes of the West.
The Site offers a walking trail and two opportunities to drive the
transcontinental railroad grade and see what workers were building in
1869, including the ``10 Miles of Track, Laid in one Day'' sign where
the Central Pacific Railroad built 10 miles and 56 feet of track on
April 28, 1869.
Golden Spike National Historic Site was first designated a national
historic site on April 2, 1957, by Secretary of the Interior Fred
Seaton using the authority of the 1935 Historic Sites Act. The Site
consisted of 7 acres of land owned by the Central Pacific Railway
Company. Eight years later, through Public Law 89-102, enacted July 30,
1965, Congress authorized the acquisition of approximately 2,200 acres
of land for the Site and placed it under the administration of the NPS.
Most of the land acquisition, which included 15 miles of historic
railroad grade and associated archeological features that remained from
the construction, was completed in 1966 and 1967. The Site's boundary
was expanded by 532 acres through Public Law 96-344, enacted September
8, 1980, mainly to protect additional cultural features.
The NPS encourages Congress to follow a standard pattern of
nomenclature for units of the System, and prefers that the term
``national historical park'' be reserved for units of greater physical
extent and complexity than typical national historic sites, which are
sometimes smaller than 1 acre with a single historic structure. Today,
among System units that are designated ``national historic sites,''
Golden Spike, at 2,735 acres, is second in size only to the Sand Creek
Massacre National Historic Site. Given the Site's size and the
complexity of the resources that are managed at the Site, the
Department believes that it is wholly appropriate to redesignate Golden
Spike National Historic Site as Golden Spike National Historical Park.
Section 4 would establish a Transcontinental Railroad Network
program (Network). The Department supports the goal of raising the
profile of other transcontinental railroad sites and resources and
promoting opportunities for visitors to learn about this chapter in our
Nation's history. However, we note that there has been no study
conducted to define the significance of the objects or sites that would
be commemorated or highlighted as transcontinental railroad sites and
resources. The Department would like to work with the Committee to
further clarify how the proposed Network would function. At a time when
the Department is focusing resources on reducing the NPS's $11.6
billion deferred maintenance backlog and addressing other critical
national park needs, the Network and the infrastructure needed to
support it would be difficult to prioritize.
Section 5 would require the Park Superintendent to enter into
agreements with adjacent landowners regarding activities the landowners
may propose to undertake on NPS lands that meet the definition of
``historical crossing.'' This term is not commonly found in NPS
legislation. It is defined in H.R. 5751 as ``a corridor across
historical railroad rights-of-way within the Park that have been used
by adjacent landowners in an open manner in the past 10 years for
vehicle, farm machinery, or livestock travel, or where existing utility
or pipelines have been placed.'' Adjacent landowners may propose any
activity. H.R. 5751 does not limit the types of proposed activities to
only activities that have occurred previously. Within 30 days of the
notice from an adjacent landowner's proposed activity, the Park
Superintendent would be required to approve or disapprove the proposed
activity.
This section would create a Park-specific process and timeline and
name the Park Superintendent as the official to whom the processes are
delegated. NPS superintendents currently have the delegated authority
to approve or deny requests from stakeholders related to many types of
activities on NPS lands, including issuing special use permits,
approval of amendments, and renewals of existing rights-of-way,
pursuant to Director's Order #53: Special Park Uses. Authority to
approve new requests for rights-of-way is delegated to NPS regional
directors, also pursuant to Director's Order #53. The Department is
concerned that this section would create an unnecessary new process
that is too broad and does not align with laws, regulations, and
policies that generally apply to all units of the System. In keeping
with our desire to be a good neighbor, we would like to work with the
Committee to address adjacent landowners' interests and concerns about
rights-of-way without establishing a Park-specific process to address
issues that other parks also face.
Section 6 would require the Park Superintendent to authorize
adjacent landowners to participate in the eradication of invasive
species on NPS land within 30 days of such a request. This section,
like Section 5, would create a Park-specific process and timeline and
name the Park Superintendent as the official to whom the processes are
delegated. NPS superintendents currently have the delegated authority
to approve or deny requests from stakeholders to participate in
eradication of invasive species, pursuant to Director's Order #7:
Volunteers-in-Parks. The Department is concerned that Section 6, like
Section 5, would create an unnecessary new Park-specific process that
is too broad and does not align with laws, regulations, and policies
that generally apply to all units of the System. Again, in keeping with
our desire to be a good neighbor, the Department would like to work
with the Committee to address adjacent landowners' interests and
concerns about invasive species eradication without establishing a
Park-specific process to address issues that other parks also face.
With visitation at Golden Spike National Historic Site on the rise
for several years now, the NPS looks forward to working with partners
to host a grand and memorable 150th anniversary event. The
sesquicentennial year presents unique opportunities to increase
partnerships in support of the park, as well as increase awareness and
understanding of the transcontinental railroad's significant role in
our Nation's history.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record by Rep. McEachin to Deputy Director
P. Daniel Smith
Question 1. I am extremely displeased with the National Park
Service's announcement yesterday that it is proposing to roll back a
regulation prohibiting inhumane and scientifically unjustified methods
of hunting on National Preserve lands in Alaska. I have opposed
attempts to roll back this regulation and continue to believe that
these hunting methods have no place on Federal lands. NPS is
statutorily mandated to conserve wildlife species on National Preserve
lands and in 2015, after an extensive, multi-year engagement process,
NPS implemented the current common-sense wildlife management
regulations. Please explain how the Service can disregard all of that
work and do a complete 180 on its position.
Answer. Since the 2015 final rule (Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in
National Preserves, 80 FR 64325) was implemented, Secretary Zinke has
issued two Secretarial Orders (3347, 3356) regarding how the Department
should manage recreational hunting and trapping in the lands and waters
it administers. These orders include direction representing the
Secretary's desire to better collaborate with state, tribal, and
territorial partners.
The proposed changes to regulations (Alaska; Hunting and Trapping
in National Preserves, Docket Number 1024-AE38), are part of the
National Park Service's (NPS) efforts to work cooperatively with the
state of Alaska to ensure that hunting regulations for adjacent lands
and waters are complementary. Taking into account the Secretarial
Orders described above, NPS has reconsidered its earlier conclusions
and has proposed allowing these previously prohibited practices,
consistent with the goal of aligning its rules with those of the State.
The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on May 22,
2018, and is currently open for public comment. NPS will also be
conducting an environmental assessment of the proposed changes,
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Once the public
comment period ends and the environmental assessment is completed, the
NPS will review the comments and that input will inform the final rule,
which would also be published in the Federal Register. The final rule
would be effective 30 days after this publication.
______
Mr. McClintock. Great. Thank you for your testimony.
I will defer to the Committee Chairman to make our next
introduction.
Mr. Bishop. Yes. I appreciate all the witnesses who are
here. I have worked with almost all of you very significantly
over the past. But I would like to introduce Mr. Foxley before
he gives his testimony this time.
Mr. Foxley comes from Box Elder County, which is my home
county, as well. Admittedly, his father was mayor of the other
town in Box Elder, and he graduated from the wrong high school
in the county. But despite that fact, he still survived in some
particular way.
I met him in the beginning when I was a young legislator
and he was the Deputy Lieutenant Governor for the state of
Utah. Since that time, we have worked on a whole number of
issues specifically to help benefit the state of Utah and its
citizens. This is only the recent of a whole litany of
collaborative efforts we have had. I appreciate him being here,
although I believe in your vast history this is the first time
you have actually addressed Congress, in which case it isn't
that big of a deal. So, I welcome Mr. Foxley, and I appreciate
you for recognizing it, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Foxley.
STATEMENT OF DOUG FOXLEY, CHAIRMAN, TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILROAD,
150TH CELEBRATION COMMISSION, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
Mr. Foxley. Thank you, Chairman Bishop. Thank you, Chairman
McClintock and Ranking Member Hanabusa, and members of the
Subcommittee. My name is Douglas Foxley, and I am Chair of the
Transcontinental Railroad Celebration Spike 150 Commission to
celebrate and commemorate the ``wedding of the rails'' with the
driving of the Golden Spike. The celebration will be held at
Promontory Summit on Friday, May 10, 2019, as you have heard,
in Congressman Bishop's district.
The Spike 150 Commission was established in early 2017 by
an act of the legislature and the governor of the state of
Utah. I think all those who have spoken today have talked about
the historical importance of this, so I will not go into that.
I was asked by Governor Gary Herbert to chair this event,
and I asked Congressman Bishop and my good friend, Spencer
Ficklin Stokes, to co-chair this event with me. Mr. Stokes was
at the 100th anniversary celebration, carried on his shoulders,
on his father's shoulders, because his father wanted Spencer to
appreciate later in life that which occurred here.
At the 100th Celebration of the Driving of the Golden
Spike, many Federal and state dignitaries came to Promontory
Summit, along with John Wayne. Mr. Wayne will not be at the
150th celebration, at least I don't think so, but we invite you
to join Congressman Bishop and also Congressman Curtis, who
will be celebrating his birthday there, along with Congressman
Stewart at this landmark event next year.
To celebrate the 150th, Union Pacific is bringing in from
Cheyenne, Wyoming two historic steam engines: the 4014, called
``The Big Boy'' because it is the largest steam engine ever
built, along with the 844. They will be at Ogden Union Station
in the Champagne Pose, where a large gala will be held on the
night of May 9. Move over, Winter Olympics, we are going to
have the big celebration.
The next day, we will have a presentation from a world
class historian of Promontory Summit and enjoy a performance by
the world-renowned Tabernacle Choir, the Utah Symphony, and a
yet-to-be-announced major guest artist. Yes, the actual Golden
Spike will hopefully make its reunion debut at the site that
day.
In anticipation of the May 10 event, I met with Congressman
Bishop and his staff almost a year ago, and they suggested this
idea of designating the current historic site as a national
historic park. Congressman Bishop charged me with getting all
of the ranchers and adjacent landowners, along with the elected
Box Elder County officials, on board before proceeding with
this initiative. I am proud to say that in working with Utah
State Representative Scott Sandall, who brought the ranchers
together and who also happens to be one of the adjacent
landowners, we accomplished this task. This effort is supported
by the Utah State Legislature, the governor of Utah, and the
entire Utah congressional delegation.
Why is this national historic park designation important?
Why is it worth doing? In the history of this amazing country,
this place, virtually unspoiled, recognizes that President
Lincoln and others thought big. President Lincoln envisioned a
transcontinental railroad. And even though the Civil War was
raging, he encouraged Congress to pass the Transcontinental
Railroad Act in 1862, which they did. We are hoping, actually,
to have a copy of that Act on display at the State Capitol
building.
After the Civil War ended, this effort came together, and
many worked together: Chinese, Mormon Graders, Irish, and Civil
War veterans of both parties. It is our hope and our belief
that if this designation occurs, that it will once again re-
engage a new generation with the great historic event which
occurred here this time.
Members, I encourage you to support this bill, and I thank
you for this opportunity of being able to speak today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Foxley follows:]
Prepared Statement of Douglas S. Foxley, Chairman of the Utah
Transcontinental Railroad Celebration Spike 150 Commission
Statement on H.R. 5751
Chairman Bishop, Chairman McClintock, Ranking Member Hanabusa and
members of the Subcommittee, my name is Douglas S. Foxley and I am the
Chair of the Utah Transcontinental Railroad Celebration Spike 150
Commission to commemorate the ``wedding of the rails'' with the driving
of the Golden Spike. The celebration at Promontory Summit will take
place on May 10, 2019, in Congressman Bishop's district. The Spike 150
Commission was established in early 2017 by an act of the Utah State
Legislature and governor of the state of Utah.
One of the most iconic and life-altering events in America's
history--the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad--happened in
Utah on May 10, 1869. Through a series of activities and events, the
Spike 150 Commission aims to inspire, educate, and reflect on the
Transcontinental Railroad legacy as it unifies Americans to see that
great things are possible with vision, hard-work, dedication, and
collaboration.
As you know, but for the Civil War, this event was the most
historic event of the 19th century. It was at the time the equivalent
of the moon shot. Ironically, a hundred years later rockets made near
the site by Orbital ATK allowed man to walk on the moon.
I was asked by Governor Gary Herbert to chair this event and I
asked Congressman Bishop's and my good friend Spencer Ficklin Stokes
who is here today to co-chair this event with me. Mr. Stokes was at the
100th anniversary celebration, carried on his shoulders by his father
to appreciate what it signified. At the 100th Celebration of the
Driving of the Golden Spike, many Federal and state dignitaries came to
Promontory Summit along with John Wayne. Mr. Wayne will not be at the
150th celebration, at least I don't think so, but we invite you to join
Congressman Bishop and the many other dignitaries slated to attend this
landmark event next year.
To celebrate the 150th, Union Pacific is bringing in from Cheyenne,
Wyoming two historic steam engines: the 4014, called ``The Big Boy''
because it is the largest steam engine ever built along with the 844.
They will be at Ogden Union Station in the ``Champagne Pose'' where a
large Gala will be held on the night of May 9. The next day we will
have a presentation from a world class historian at Promontory Summit
and enjoy a performance by the world renowned Mormon Tabernacle Choir,
the Utah Symphony, and a yet-to-be announced major guest artist. Yes,
the actual Golden Spike will hopefully make it's reunion debut on-site
that day too.
In anticipation of the May 10 event, I met with Congressman Bishop
and his staff almost a year ago where they suggested the idea of
designating the current National Historic Site as a National Historical
Park. Congressman Bishop charged me with getting all of the ranchers
and adjacent landowners along with the elected Box Elder County
officials on board before proceeding with this initiative. I am proud
to say that in working with Utah State Representative Scott Sandall,
who brought the ranchers together and who also happens to be one of the
adjacent landowners, we accomplished this task. This effort is
supported by the Utah State Legislature, the governor of Utah, and the
entire Utah congressional delegation.
Why is this National Historical Park designation important? Why is
this worth doing? In the history of our amazing country, this place,
virtually unspoiled, recognizes that President Lincoln and others
`thought big.' President Lincoln envisioned a transcontinental railroad
and even though the Civil War was raging, he encouraged Congress to
pass the Transcontinental Railroad Act in 1862 which they did. In fact,
President Lincoln personally established the eastern terminus of the
railroad, Mile Marker Zero, in Council Bluffs, Iowa.
After the Civil War, attention was focused on bringing this vision
to life. Competing groups, one from the east, The Union Pacific, and
one from the west, The Central Pacific Railroad, started their Race to
Promontory and neither side at the time knew where the they would meet.
Construction of this nationally unifying project was performed by many
ethnic and cultural groups including the Chinese, African Americans,
Irish, Mormon Graders, veterans of the Civil War from both sides, and
many others. They were successful in achieving this amazing
accomplishment with their picks and shovels, their horsepower, and
black powder. The country was finally connected coast to coast by rail
and telegraph. A journey from New York City to San Francisco now took
only a week instead of months.
It is the hope of Mr. Stokes, myself, and the Commission that we
will connect the next generation of young men and women who will be
carried on the shoulders of their parents that day. We hope that they
will take it upon themselves the duty and obligation to think big and
find ways that we can continue to unite and connect this great country
together but also to the entire world.
For this, along with many other reasons, the Commission to
Celebrate the 150th Anniversary of the Driving of the Golden Spike
overwhelming supports Congressman Bishop's H.R. 5751 redesignating the
Golden Spike National Historic Site and establishing the
Transcontinental Railroad Network. I hope that this Committee takes the
appropriate action to make this happen thereby honoring and preserving
this historic site and the effort by so many Americans to unite our
Nation by rail.
______
Mr. McClintock. Great, thank you very much. That concludes
our testimony on H.R. 5751. We will now move to questions on
the bill. I will begin.
Mr. Foxley, you mentioned Lincoln. I have a town in my
district named Lincoln. It was formed in 1859. But it was not
named after Abraham Lincoln, it was named after Charles Lincoln
Wilson, who was one of the directors of the California Central
Railroad. It was testimony to how important the railroad was to
my district.
So, I may be a little biased in this. The first depot on
the transcontinental route moving out of San Francisco and
Sacramento was actually in Rocklin and later moved to
Roseville, where the Union Pacific still has a major yard. You
can travel the foothills in my district and still see the
original tunnels, original railwork that were part of the first
transcontinental railroad route.
I also have Sutter's Mill in my district, which was, of
course, the genesis of the Gold Rush. But what really made
California economically, and what really made California an
integral part of the Nation was the transcontinental railroad,
so this is a pretty big deal, I think, for the country and
particularly the many parts of it that were integral to the
railroad itself.
I guess the only question I really have is how would this
network that you have mentioned work? Or maybe Mr. Smith can
address that, as well.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, the network would be akin to what
we have now in the Underground Railroad to Freedom Network. It
could be akin to the Civil Rights Sites Network that was just
passed by Congress this last year and signed into law by the
President.
We do recommend that there be some type of a theme study or
a resource study done so that we would really be able to find
the truly significant sites that would be associated with this
important happening of the transcontinental railroad. But we
have those two exact examples, which went through theme studies
so that we would know exactly what we were talking about that
would be included in that type of network.
Obviously, it would relate most directly to those areas on
that first line connecting transcontinentally. But then again,
there may be people who make a case for other sites along that
line. And that is why a study would really help us see what is
most significant.
Mr. McClintock. And does this include the authority for the
study?
Mr. Smith. I am sorry?
Mr. McClintock. Does this include the authority for the
study?
Mr. Smith. At this current time it does not. We would
request that that be added to the bill.
Mr. McClintock. OK. And that is the concern that you
expressed regarding your deferred maintenance backlog and the
other resource demands on the Department?
Mr. Smith. Yes, those are certainly our concerns. But
Congress is giving us studies at this time, and we do find the
money for studies, Congressman.
Mr. McClintock. When you look at the broad history of this
country, and those seminal moments that really were turning
points, I think that the meeting of the rails at Promontory is
a sadly neglected part of our history, because it really did
make a quantum leap in the connectivity of the country. It
literally joined the country together. We don't really
appreciate that today. But when you think about that quantum
leap of weeks to cross the continent down to days, from days to
send a message across the continent to minutes and even
seconds, it really was remarkable.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, I would associate myself with both
your remarks and Chairman Bishop's remarks about the national
significance of this rail line being completed in Utah, yes.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you.
Ms. Hanabusa.
Mr. Foxley. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman?
Mr. McClintock. Yes, Mr. Foxley?
Mr. Foxley. If I may, my great-grandfather, General Lot
Smith, had been mustered out of the Mormon Battalion, and was
actually at Sutter's Mill when gold was discovered. He was
called back to Salt Lake City by Brigham Young. It took him
3\1/2\ weeks to get from Sutter's Mill to Salt Lake City. So, I
would be extremely supportive of what is going on here, but as
you know, your city of Sacramento has an amazing railroad
museum, the premier railroad museum. And we are hoping that
sites like that: Reno, Omaha, Ogden, and others, would be
incorporated in this network. It is a great story to be told.
Mr. McClintock. Even better.
Ms. Hanabusa.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Smith, the bill authorizes adjacent landowners to
participate in the removal of invasive species on Park Service
land. I assume that you have had this done before. How does
that process work?
Mr. Smith. Yes. The Park Service across the country, in
removing invasive species, has asked for all the help we can
get. We have many programs where we have volunteers who help us
do that. I am not familiar with the exact species that have
overtaken the natural species of sagebrush and all that used to
be there. But obviously, if there are issues where invasives
need to be removed, we would coordinate and cooperate with
landowners to help us accomplish that.
Anything that helped this landscape appear as it did in
1869 would be something that, from the historical aspect, we
would try to recreate.
Ms. Hanabusa. You mentioned this yourself in your
testimony, but the bill does not authorize any additional money
for the management of the Golden Spike National Historic Site.
Do you anticipate the need for additional funds to carry out
what is anticipated by this bill?
Mr. Smith. At this time I don't. I do know that we are
working currently to prepare to update the exhibits that will
be at the visitor center there.
There is deferred maintenance. The visitor center is a
Mission 66 visitor center, so I know we have deferred
maintenance monies that we will certainly be concentrating on
to help that facility be ready for this anniversary.
As far as staffing at this time, we do not think that this
would be necessary. And the network would not necessarily be
run out of Golden Spike National Historical Park. That would
probably be run out of Washington, as we run those other sites
currently.
Ms. Hanabusa. The bill also authorizes the National Park
Service to enter into agreements with adjacent landowners to
expedite approval of projects within existing historical
crossings. The terms of the agreement includes a 30-day time
limit for approving the actual permit. Is that a sufficient
amount of time for you?
Mr. Smith. In some cases it might not be. As the
superintendent at Colonial National Historical Park, I issued
not hundreds, but certainly close to 100 special use permits.
Those permits, when they are negotiated, in this case with
landowners, can be very flexible. They can be established for
up to 5 years before they have to be renewed. They can be
amended.
One of the reasons I would like to coordinate and cooperate
with the Committee is that I think it could be done under the
existing special-use permits that park superintendents have at
their disposal. If there is something more unusual that I don't
understand about the situation there at Golden Spike, I
certainly would take that in consideration as we look for a way
to resolve that.
On some of these things, there might be Section 106
consultation that is required, and that type of thing. But a
special use permit, once it is negotiated between the park and
the landowners, it shouldn't take any time at all to execute.
And I would be very surprised if it is really quite the problem
that the bill seems to think it is.
I would say that I do not know the total specifics of the
adjacent landowners next to this rather linear corridor that we
have, but I had a 23-mile parkway that I was able to do
special-use permits on while I was 10 years at Colonial, so I
think there is a way to do that under existing processes that
the Park Service has.
Ms. Hanabusa. I think you can probably work with the
Committee to have both, so that if for some reason your
special-use permit doesn't work, that this provision could then
kick in.
Mr. Smith. Yes, Congresswoman, I look forward to that being
something that we work together to make sure we assure that the
Park Service's concerns are covered, but also that adjacent
landowners have their issues covered.
Again, Secretary Zinke wants us to be a good neighbor, and
I will work to make sure that we assure that in this bill.
Ms. Hanabusa. And, remember, we are looking at less than a
year for the opening of this event, so you have to move very
quickly, Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith. I am very much aware of that. And with the two
chairmen looking at me, I certainly don't need much more
direction.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you. With that I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Chairman Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you. I appreciate both of you here,
testifying on this.
Mr. Foxley, if I could just ask you, is there private-
sector involvement in this project?
Mr. Foxley. Yes, there is. The state of Utah, in the recent
2018 general legislature, appropriated $1 million for the
celebration.
In addition, Union Pacific Railroad has given us a very
significant grant. They will contribute over $1 million, not
only in money, but also in other things.
The O.C. Tanner Foundation has given us a grant. If you
were going to put a dollar amount on it, it would be in excess
of $1 million, to have the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, the Utah
Symphony, a major guest artist, and others. Several prominent
families and foundations in Utah have promised and will be
committing money to this event.
This is, I think, an excellent example of a public-private
partnership. We are working in conjunction with this site. We
can make the site an even more attractive site for visitors and
others.
Mr. Bishop. Mr. Smith talked briefly about the network that
we are establishing at the same time. Do you also think that
that is going to bring attention, maybe visitation, to some of
the lesser-known areas of interest that are around there that
are all connected with this same story of history?
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, I think that is what happens with
these types of networks. It brings the type of national
attention to get to a site in Utah that has that national
significance.
So, I think that when the network is established, it would
bring more attention and certainly possibly more visitation to
the historical park.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you. I actually was asking Mr. Foxley for
that one, but I do appreciate your answer. It was a good one.
Mr. Smith. I apologize.
Mr. Bishop. No, no, that is fine.
I am totally fascinated and happy that you are in the
position you are right now. You have shown your ability to work
marvels in every assignment that you have had. That is why I am
totally confident in your ability of making sure that the
network we have for the Underground Railroad, as well as the
African-American Civil Rights Network will go forward. And I am
also totally confident that this network will go forward, too,
and will be managed brilliantly.
So, if you want authorization for a study, I promise you,
you have it. It is going to be in the bill.
At the same time, I also want you to know to be careful. He
wrote the bill. If he had my ideas in it, you may not like it
nearly as much as the one you already have here.
Mr. Foxley, are there some parts of history, though, that
can be emphasized simply by making this change, and maybe some
increases in not only the programs at the visitation facility?
Mr. Foxley. One of the things we are working in conjunction
with the Utah State Parks, Box Elder County, and others is to
augment activities next year at the site, which will hopefully
drive visitorship at the park. There will be a lot of attention
brought upon this. Major media, both national and local, are
highlighting what is going to happen here. And we want patrons
who will come to the site to have a good experience.
Close to the historic site, there is a world-renowned
public land art, the spiral jetty. And there are many things of
interest. We want to tie all of these together so that people
can come to Box Elder County, and especially Brigham City, and
eat at the Idle Isle, and enjoy the Golden Spike.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you. And I appreciate your emphasis on
Brigham City and not your hometown of Tremonton. You are
getting that down properly.
Mr. Foxley. It pains me, but I understand the politics of
the Committee.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Bishop. If I can have you wearing purple instead of
red, is that taking it too far?
Mr. Foxley. Maybe socks.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Bishop. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate all the testimony. I
am looking forward to this event next year. I think it is a
significant one for the history of this country, and something
which we have to remember. I will yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you.
Are there further questions on H.R. 5751 by members of the
Committee?
Mr. Curtis.
Mr. Curtis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Hanabusa. I was pleased to be asked by Chairman Bishop to be a
co-sponsor of this, and that delights me. As was referred to by
Mr. Foxley, I share a birthday with this commemoration. And I
can't imagine a better way to celebrate my birthday than to
have the Mormon Tabernacle Choir sing to me and the railroad. I
just want to express my support not only for this bill, but for
the celebration, as well.
Because I shared my birthday with this, I think as a young
man, when this was taught to me in school, I paid special
attention. And I am worried that many of our youth don't
appreciate what has happened there, and the commemoration. Mr.
Foxley, maybe you can address any efforts we are making through
the public schools to help them with an awareness of this
issue, and anything that we can do here on a congressional
level to bring awareness to the issue.
Mr. Foxley. Thank you very much, Congressman. We have been
working with the State Office of Education Superintendent, Sid
Dixon. I am pleased to say that the Beverley Taylor Sorenson
Arts Foundation is going to emphasize this project next year in
grades K through 6. There is also a revised curriculum which is
being developed for the high schools. There are library kits,
there is going to be a massive effort.
Craig Jessop, the former conductor of the Mormon Tabernacle
Choir, is working with Kurt Bestor and others to have songs
sung. There will be major coverage of the events, which will be
broadcast that day to all of the public schools in Utah through
KSL TV and others. So, it is a major effort.
We have also reached out to many of the communities, in
particular the Chinese-American community. It is our hope that
while we cannot change the past, we can write the future. It is
the hope of our commission that the signage at the site will be
in both English and Chinese, for our Chinese friends and
visitors.
We are also hoping, and are working with a major foundation
at this time, to have a film in Chinese for our Chinese
tourists, so they can appreciate what happened here.
I think, as was mentioned in earlier comments, this site--
and I didn't realize this until I got involved with this--how
important this is to many communities, but in particular the
Chinese communities. I recently addressed a group of Chinese
historical workers. Congresswoman Grace Meng from New York was
there, and others. But this site is important, and we need to
make certain that this is a time when we are uniting all groups
who worked on this site.
Mr. Curtis. That is fantastic. Finally, let me just express
my appreciation. The efforts that you have described, with that
comment and earlier about the private partnership, demonstrate
a tremendous amount of work on your part and on the Committee's
part. Let me just say it is impressive, and I look forward to
participating with the celebration next year.
Mr. Foxley. I think you don't realize, but you accepted an
invitation to be an honorary chair, along with Congressman
Stewart and Congressman Bishop.
Mr. Curtis. Yes, I didn't mention that because I haven't
done any work. But I am pleased to be honorary chair, as well.
Mr. Foxley. We are willing to do it for you, as long as you
pass the bill.
Mr. Curtis. Good. Thank you. I yield my time.
Mr. Bishop. John has to realize when you are 149 you forget
these things.
Mr. Curtis. That is true. I might also just interject that
as a Chinese speaker, I am really pleased to hear about the
work that has taken place with that community, and would offer
my services as an honorary chairman if I can be helpful in that
regard at all.
Thank you. I yield my time.
Mr. McClintock. That concludes our hearing on H.R. 5751.
Mr. Smith, I know you have submitted written testimony on
the bills before us, and at this point both you and Mr. Foxley
are certainly welcome to stay, but you are also free to go.
Thank you again for your testimony.
Mr. Foxley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McClintock. Next we will hear H.R. 5597, and the Chair
would introduce Congressman Chris Stewart to explain the bill.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRIS STEWART, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF UTAH
Mr. Stewart. Thank you, Chairman. And before Mr. Foxley
leaves the room I would like to welcome him and other members
from my home state. And I would like to thank the Chairman and
Ranking Member, Chairman Bishop, the Full Committee members, as
well as members of the Subcommittee, for allowing me the
opportunity to speak to you regarding my bill.
This is a long title, hang in with me here, The Desert
Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act. Hereafter, we
will just call it H.R. 5597. And Mr. Chairman, I ask for
unanimous consent that the letters of support be added to the
record.
Mr. McClintock. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
Access Fund
April 16, 2018
Hon. Chris Stewart,
323 Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, DC 20515.
Re: Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act, Washington
County, Utah
Dear Congressman Stewart:
Access Fund and the local rock climbing community in Washington
County, Utah have been closely tracking the Desert Tortoise Habitat
Conservation Plan Expansion Act--Draft Bill (HCP) which proposes
creating additional 6,865 acre reserve for tortoise habitat known as
Zone 6. Legislative language of the bill has not yet been disclosed to
the public.
The proposed boundary of Zone 6 encompasses numerous highly valued
rock climbing resources (cliffs and boulders) known as Moe's Valley and
the Zen area. Moe's Valley (Zone 6) is an international climbing
destination that draws climbers both locally and from around the world
to experience high quality rock climbing. Access Fund and the local
climbing organization Southern Utah Climbers Association (SUCA) support
continued access to Moe's Valley are committed to continued stewardship
of the climbing area and the surrounding environment.
We request language be included in the HCP bill that explicitly
notes ``rock climbing as an appropriate recreational activity'' within
the proposed Zone 6 under the HCP. In addition, existing trails to
access climbing resources should be recognized and allowed along with
appropriate stewardship and maintenance within Zone 6. Access Fund and
SUCA are available to provide detail maps and locations of all existing
climbing resources and access trails within Zone 6 to assist in land
use planning efforts associated with the HCP bill.
Thank you for your consideration of adding language to list ``rock
climbing as an appropriate recreational activity'' within Zone 6 of the
Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act--Draft Bill.
Access Fund and SUCA have the experience, local contacts, and resources
to help planners craft alternatives that encourage climbing while
sustaining the health, diversity and productivity of this important
habitat. Feel free to contact me via telephone (303-552-2843) or email
([email protected]) to discuss this matter further.
Sincerely,
Katie Goodwin,
Public Land Associate
______
THE CONSERVATION FUND,
Las Vegas, Nevada
March 27, 2018
Hon. Chris Stewart,
323 Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, DC 20515.
Re: Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act
Dear Congressman Stewart:
The Conservation Fund (TCF) is a national nonprofit 501(c)(3)
organization dedicated to preserving America's land legacy by acquiring
and protecting open space, wildlife habitat, and historic sites
throughout the nation. TCF also assists partners in business,
government, and the nonprofit sector with projects that integrate
economic development and environmental protection.
Through its distinct vision of environmental protection while
advancing economic vitality, TCF has worked closely with Washington
County and the State of Utah for over thirty years protecting over
117,00 acres. We replace the premise of ``or'' with the promise of
``and'' believing we can have a healthy environment and vibrant
economy; protect nature and create jobs; conserve natural resources and
use them sustainably; and support development and develop responsibly.
We have also been involved with Washington County in furtherance of
implementing the original Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) agreement and
support its renewal and continuation. We have reviewed the draft
``Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act'' providing
for the expansion of the Washington County HCP and believe it
represents a continued balanced approach consistent with the goals and
objectives of TCF. Expanding the HCP by creating an additional 6,865
acre reserve, renewing the HCP agreement for an additional 25 years,
and including many other conservation and recreation provisions as set
forth in the legislation, will ensure the County's commitment to
conserve resources vital to the area while using them in a way that
invigorates future prosperity and the conservation.
On behalf of TCF we are glad to support this important legislation
and look forward to continuing our work and partnership with Washington
County and the State of Utah advancing future environmental protection
and economic vitality. If you have any questions or concerns about the
role of TCF, or our support for this effort, please contact me directly
at (702) 655-8167 or via email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Mike Ford,
Nevada and Southwest Director
______
Dixie Metropolitan Planning Organization,
St. George, Utah
May 17, 2018
Hon. Chris Stewart,
323 Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, DC 20515.
Re: Support for the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion
Act
Dear Congressman Stewart:
The Dixie Metropolitan Planning Organization (Dixie MPO) supports
the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act based on
our understanding that The Act would accelerate this area's ability to
build critical transportation facilities, particularly the Northern
Corridor and the Western Corridor.
The Act preserves open space, adds protections to the Mohave Desert
Tortoise, protects current recreational activities that are conducive
to tortoise habitat, and allows for needed transportation development
in the greater St. George area. These goals are consistent with those
of our long-range Regional Transportation Plan and are respectful of
both the natural and built environments of this area.
The Act, while serving to prevent Utah School and Institutional
Trust Land (``SITLA'') development through the creation of Zone 6,
protects the Desert Tortoise and would still allow future development
of two major roads of regional significance: The Northern Corridor--a
vital transportation facility planned to prevent traffic gridlock,
improve air quality, and aid economic development within the St. George
Urban Area, and the Western Corridor (needed to meet transportation
demands in 2040 and beyond).
We must be able to build the transportation and utility
infrastructure necessary to meet the needs of our growing community. We
need the Northern Corridor, The Western Corridor, and the ability to
get water and electricity into the area. The bill ensures we can meet
these needs and offsets any negative impact on the desert tortoise and
other environmental concerns.
Thank you for your consideration and efforts on our behalf. Our
area needs this bill.
Sincerely,
Myron W. Lee, MPA,
Director.
______
May 17, 2018
Hon. Orrin Hatch,
United States Senate,
104 Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC 20510.
Re: Support for the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion
Act
Dear Senator Hatch:
I write you in support of the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan Expansion Act. The Act preserves open space, protects the Mohave
Desert tortoise, protects current recreational activities that are
conducive to tortoise habitat, and allows for needed transportation
development in the greater St. George area. It is a great bill and
should be passed!
I live in the St. George area and recreate on our public lands
regularly. The proposed Zone 6 will prevent the Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands (``SITLA'') from developing an area where
people commonly mountain bike, run, hike, and rock climb. Also, this
bill will not only protect these lands but also insure the continued
use of this area for special events that we have personally been part
of over the past decade. The area helps enhance to the beauty of the
St. George area and draws many tourists in that support our local
economy. The area also has a thriving desert tortoise population as
well.
Please support this bill and help it get passed. Our area really
needs it.
Sincerely,
Steven B. Hooper,
St. George, Utah
______
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-09R
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE WASHINGTON COUNTY DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN EXPANSION BILL
WHEREAS, the Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) has expired and needs to be renewed;
WHEREAS, Ivins City has benefited from the HCP since 2006 by having
open recreation space in the tortoise reserve and the ability to work
easily with the County for tortoise recovery;
WHEREAS, the city would like the HCP to be renewed so that the
residents can continue to benefit from the HCP;
WHEREAS, the utility development protocols (UDPs) are essential to
the continued growth and vitality of the cities in Washington County;
WHEREAS, the northern corridor is an important part of the
infrastructure plan for future growth in the County; and
WHEREAS, the creation of Zone 6 of the HCP ensures more open
recreation space, mitigates for impacts from the northern corridor, and
assists in tortoise recovery; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of Ivins City
for the bill to be passed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF IVINS CITY,
STATE OF UTAH, AS FOLLOWS:
That the Ivins City Council supports the Washington County Desert
Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Bill.
This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption by the
City Council.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE IVINS CITY COUNCIL, STATE OF UTAH, ON THIS
5th DAY OF APRIL, 2018 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Mehr............................................. X
Cheyne McDonald......................................... X
Jenny Johnson........................................... X
Miriah Elliott.......................................... X
Ron Densley............................................. X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Hart, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kari Jimenez, City Recorder
______
May 17, 2018
Hon. Mike Lee,
United States Senate,
361 Russell Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC 20510.
Re: Support for the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion
Act
Dear Senator Lee:
I write you in support of the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan Expansion Act. The Act preserves open space, protects the Mohave
Desert tortoise, protects current recreational activities that are
conducive to tortoise habitat, and allows for needed transportation
development in the greater St. George area. This bill is a great
example of positive collaboration between government entities and
considers the needs and wants of the local citizens. I believe it
should be passed!
I live in the St. George area and recreate on our public lands
regularly. I personally participate in the local cycling, hiking, and
climbing communities, thus I know how important both Zone 6 and the
current Desert Tortoise habitat areas are to those who love to recreate
in the majestic beauty of Southern Utah. This bill protects areas
important to these communities. The proposed Zone 6 will prevent the
Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands (``SITLA'') from developing
an area where people commonly mountain bike, hike, and rock climb. The
area also has a thriving desert tortoise population that will benefit
if this bill is passed.
Please support this bill and help it get passed. Our area needs it.
Sincerely,
Dannielle Larkin,
St. George, Utah
______
LA VERKIN CITY
RESOLUTION NO. R-2018-09
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE WASHINGTON COUNTY DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN EXPANSION BILL
WHEREAS, the Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan (``the HCP'') has expired and needs to be renewed; and
WHEREAS, LaVerkin City (``the City''), a municipality within
Washington County, Utah, has benefited from the HCP since 2006 by
having open recreation space in the tortoise reserve and the ability to
work easily with the County for tortoise recovery; and
WHEREAS, the City would like the HCP to be renewed so that the
residents can continue to benefit from the HCP; and
WHEREAS, the utility development protocols (UDPs) provided for
therein are essential to the continued growth and vitality of the
municipalities in Washington County; and
WHEREAS, the northern corridor is an important part of the
infrastructure plan for future growth in the County; and
WHEREAS, the creation of Zone 6 of the HCP ensures more open
recreation space, mitigates for impacts from the northern corridor, and
assists in tortoise recovery; and
WHEREAS, the Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan Expansion Bill (``the Bill''), currently proposed to be introduced
in Congress later this Spring:
Expands the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve and orders the
renewal of the HCP; and
Addresses the route for and construction of the northern
corridor in Washington County; and
Re-implements the UDPs; and
Clarifies and/or otherwise cleans up the Bureau of Land
Management (``the BLM'') Resource Management Plans (``the
RMPs'')
WHEREAS, passage of the Bill by Congress is in the best interest of
the citizens of the City.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the LaVerkin City Council:
1. That the City Council hereby declares and publishes its support
for the Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat
Conservation Plan Expansion Bill proposed to be introduced
in Congress, for consideration and possible action, in the
Spring of 2018; and
2. That this Resolution shall be effective upon adoption; and
3. That the City hereby declares that (a) if any part of this
resolution shall be declared invalid, such declaration
shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this
resolution; (b) all resolutions or policies in conflict
herewith are hereby repealed; and (c) this resolution shall
take effect immediately upon passage.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of April, 2018.
Richard M. Hirschi, Mayor
ATTEST:
Christy Ballard, City Recorder
______
Southern Utah Climbers Coalition
Hon. Chris Stewart,
323 Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, DC 20515.
Re: Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act--Washington
County, Utah
Dear Congressman Stewart:
As president of the Southern Utah Climbers Coalition, I would like
to voice our organizations support of the expansion to the Red Cliffs
Desert Conservation area, via your bill.
The area that comprises the expansion has been a vital area for
numerous forms of outdoor recreation to both the residents of and
visitors to Washington County. As the growth of the area accelerates
the few remaining areas of open space close to town become even more of
a refuge for both recreationalists as well as a wide range of endemic
species like the endangered desert tortoise.
The proposed Zone 6 expansion in your bill features numerous areas
for rock climbing, bouldering, mountain biking, hiking, rappelling, and
even responsible off road vehicle usage on already existing 4wd roads.
These uses have historically co-existed with numerous desert species
that call the cliffs and rocks home. Several recreational uses in Zone
6 have attained world renowned status such as the bouldering in Moe's
Valley, the rock climbing on the Zen Wall, and the mountain biking on
the Zen Trail. These uses draw outdoor recreationalists from all over
the world and as such are the fuel that powers the tourist sector of
the Southwestern Utah economy.
We request that language be included in the HCP bill that
explicitly notes these uses as ``appropriate recreational activities
within the proposed Zone 6 of the HCP.'' It might be valuable to note
that public law 111 which brought the HPC into the conservation program
included language that requires the building of the roads such as the
new corridor road, and also requires recognition of existing roads in
conservation zones which are necessary and used to access the
recreation. There is one road on the February map shown as a ``proposed
trial'' that provides access to the Zen wall and the upper gap climbing
areas. Many times folks with disabilities have hired guiding services
for zip lining or climbing in these areas and this dirt road that runs
from east to west, less than \1/4\ mile long, has very light traffic,
but needs to be included as a continued access road for motorized
travel on zone 6 to access recreation, otherwise it would not comply
with Public law 111, and the provisions of the Congressional
Disabilities Act. Everything else in the map and bill we support and
are grateful for you and the WCWCD commissioner's, the local City
councils, the TC committee in working hard to congressionally recognize
such uses as required continued access.
Thank you for your consideration of this additional language to the
bill. The Southern Utah Climbers Coalition has been involved in the
preservation of the areas within this proposed expansion since 2004 and
has worked with SITLA since that time to foster understanding of the
unique nature and value of this area to local recreationalists. We also
have a program in place working with state parks and other areas within
the conservation zones to regulate new climbing, bolting, clean up
areas, and are actively involved in managing and protecting both the
recreational and the habitat in the existing areas and will continue to
do so for the new zone 6. The turtle habitat numbers have increased in
zone 6, we believe it is directly related to the recreational uses
scaring away natural predators and being present to protect the species
and the land we all want preserved for further generations to come.
Sincerely,
Todd Goss,
President
______
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-04-001R
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE WASHINGTON COUNTY DESERT TORTOISE HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN EXPANSION BILL
WHEREAS, the Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) has expired and needs to be renewed;
WHEREAS, St. George City has benefited from the HCP since 2006 by
having open recreation space in the tortoise reserve and the ability to
work easily with the County for tortoise recovery;
WHEREAS, the city would like the HCP to be renewed so that the
residents can continue to benefit from the HCP;
WHEREAS, the utility development protocols (UDPs) are essential to
the continued growth and vitality of the cities in Washington County;
WHEREAS, the northern corridor is an important part of the
infrastructure plan for future growth in the County; and
WHEREAS, the creation of Zone 6 of the HCP ensures more open
recreation space, mitigates for impacts from the northern corridor, and
assists in tortoise recovery; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of St. George
City for the bill to be passed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. GEORGE
CITY IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH, that the city council supports the
Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion
Bill.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of St. George,
this 5th day of April, 2018.
Members of the Council Voting Aye
Jimmie Hughes
Michele Randall
Joe Bowcutt
Bette Arial
Ed Baca
CITY OF ST. GEORGE
Jonathan T. Pike, Mayor
ATTEST:
Annette Hansen, Deputy City Recorder
______
WASHINGTON CITY RESOLUTION R2018-06
A RESOLUTION OF WASHINGTON CITY SUPPORTING THE WASHINGTON COUNTY DESERT
TORTOISE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN EXPANSION BILL
WHEREAS, the Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) has expired and needs to be renewed; and
WHEREAS, Washington City has benefited from the HCP since 2006 by
having open recreation space in the tortoise reserve and the ability to
work easily with the County for tortoise recovery; and
WHEREAS, the city would like the HCP to be renewed so that the
residents can continue to benefit from the HCP; and
WHEREAS, the utility development protocols (UDPs) are essential to
the continued growth and vitality of the cities in Washington County;
and
WHEREAS, although the northern corridor is an important part of the
infrastructure plan for future growth in the County; the City Council
has grave concerns about the close proximity of the northern corridor
(as currently proposed) to Washington City homes and the additional
traffic which would flow onto Washington Parkway once it connects to
the northern corridor and the City Council is looking for all possible
mitigations prior to that occurring; and
WHEREAS, the creation of Zone 6 of the HCP ensures more open
recreation space, mitigates for impacts from the northern corridor, and
assists in tortoise recovery; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of Washington
City for the bill to be passed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF WASHINGTON
CITY IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, UTAH, that the city council supports the
Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion
Bill.
VOTED UPON AND PASSED by the City Council at a Regular Meeting held on
the 25th day of April, 2018.
Washington City
Kenneth F. Neilson, Mayor
Attest:
Danice B. Bulloch, MMC City Recorder
______
Mr. Stewart. One of the counties I am honored to represent
in Utah's 2nd District is Washington County. This is a place
unlike anywhere else in the world. It is home to beautiful red
rocks of southern Utah, and it spreads across a stunning
landscape from St. George to Zion National Park. Washington
County is one of the fastest-growing counties not only in Utah,
but actually in the entire Nation. And clearly, for a good
reason. For those of you who have had a chance to visit this
stunning part of the country, you would understand why.
In 2009, the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area, known
as the NCA, was added to the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve through
legislation sponsored by my good friend, former Senator Bob
Bennett, and signed into law by President Obama. The law
clearly states that the government entities identify one or
more alternatives for a northern transportation route. However,
this corridor has not been implemented, and my bill seeks to
fully implement congressional intent of this bipartisan
compromise by authorizing a northern corridor route that is
desperately needed.
Over the last year, Federal and state biologists have been
working tirelessly with Washington County, the Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Utah Division
of Wildlife Services, and other stakeholders to form a
compromised solution that would create a convenient corridor
that would reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and
allow the county's economy to flourish.
But also, and this is important, to minimize the effects on
the desert tortoise and its designated conservation area.
The plan that resulted from this coalition has become H.R.
5597, my legislation that is being discussed today. The plan
consists of a 300-foot-wide corridor that disrupts, and please
listen to this, this is important, it disrupts 147 acres of the
NCA, but makes up with that by more than 6,000 acres of prime
tortoise habitat.
If I could invest $147 and get more than $6,000 back I
would certainly do that, and I think this is a good example of
where we have made extraordinary progress in protecting this
prime habitat.
Not only does this bill protect the tortoise, but it also
continues to protect recreational activities in the area, such
as hiking, biking, and rock climbing, something that I love to
do. It will allow residents and visitors alike to continue to
enjoy the beauty of this region.
The corridor created by the Desert Tortoise Habitat
Conservation Plan is essential to the growth of Washington
County, and the legislation has the support of cities
surrounding the county.
I am confident that it will benefit the current and future
residents of Washington County and the tortoise population. The
corridor is a big win for the conservation efforts for the
desert tortoise and for the county, and I urge this
Subcommittee to support this important legislation.
Before I conclude, Mr. Chairman, I would like to recognize
a good friend of mine, someone who I greatly respect,
Washington County Commissioner, Dean Cox. He is new to the
position of a commissioner, but he has been working tirelessly
for the county for many generations and he is doing a wonderful
job, and he is a man that I have great respect for.
With that, Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity,
and I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Great, thank you very much. We will now
hear from Mr. Paul Van Dam, a member of the Board of Directors
for Conserve Southwest Utah. He comes to us today from, is it
Ivins, Utah? Ivins.
Welcome to the Committee.
STATEMENT OF PAUL VAN DAM, MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, CONSERVE
SOUTHWEST UTAH, IVINS, UTAH
Mr. Van Dam. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Committee. My pleasure to be here today. My name is Paul Van
Dam, and I represent Conserve Southwest Utah, which is a local,
grass-roots conservation organization in Washington County. We
have over 10 years' experience with the matter under
consideration.
I was Executive Director of the organization in 2008, when
a bill involving the Northern Corridor, the road now included
in H.R. 5597, first brought it to the public's attention. I
also testified in January of 2016 at a hearing on the issue in
St. George, where Mr. Stewart was also present.
Congressman Stewart's bill deals with more than just the
Northern Corridor. But this is the thrust of the bill. We have
watched this effort to get a highway through critical habitat
evolve in the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve, most of which is now
Red Cliffs NCA, with county and national leaders taking many
approaches.
Our written testimony provides background and information
to support our position, and reinforces our opposition to
current efforts to force a road that was never formally planned
during the official reserve process. My oral testimony focuses
on significant issues pertaining to the bill, but not all of
our concerns.
The highway is incompatible with protections of the
threatened Mojave Desert tortoise and other protected species,
and was clearly presented in the May 15, 2018 letter by the
Desert Tortoise Council, which is the definitive desert
tortoise organization containing biologists dedicated to the
furtherance of the tortoise. I present their letter to be
included in the record.
The purpose of the reserve and NCA is to provide permanent
habitat protection to the threatened tortoise. The reserve was
a mitigation for the take, harm or death, of tortoises that
opened up over 300,000 acres in Washington County for growth
and economic development, as is made clear on the Red Cliffs
Desert Reserve website information. The ESA specifically
prohibits a take via habitat destruction, which a highway would
certainly do. It is scientifically false that the road could
enhance the habitat.
Other transportation solutions exist that have not been
seriously considered by our local government. With no
independent review, we do not feel that leaders and planners
have done the due diligence necessary to deal with
infrastructure in our county.
Proposed Zone 6, as mentioned by the Congressman, is not
mitigation, and should not be presented as such. The addition
of Zone 6 on 7 or 8 miles from the existing reserve NCA is a
disconnected area containing a segment of tortoise habitat, and
cannot be accepted as mitigation for several reasons.
One, the best habitat of Zone 6 is not equal to the prime
habitat in Zone 3.
Two, Zone 6 habitat is already protected under ESA and
NEPA. Zone 3 is, in itself, mitigation. So, Zone 6 would become
mitigation for mitigation. Zone 6 cannot be a land bank. Damage
to one protected habitat cannot be balanced by another
protected habitat. Local governments should not get more
control of the habitat.
The county commission controls the Habitat Advisory
Committee, exerts play of control on the ACP administration,
and appoints a local HCAC representative, usually from
government. The utility development protocol that works with
the HCP allows utility development project decision making to
rest with the commissioners if there are conflicts. Some
development projects should not have been allowed during
tortoise inactive seasons, but were.
The county needs to renew the HCP and its take permit to
harm or kill tortoises to allow further development. The bill
circumvents the ESA and usurps U.S. Fish and Wildlife
responsibilities. The bill does not encourage fiscal
responsibility--$100 million dollars have been spent on buying
land inside the reserve that was private land, public, or other
land. BLM has traded land outside the reserve for the private
land in the reserve. Fish and Wildlife grants have been spent
buying land. The bill undermines these expenditures. Adding a
$100 million road to these potentially wasted expenditures is
not fiscally acceptable.
Finally, but importantly, the bill sets a bad precedent,
nationally. Nowhere is a local government allowed authority to
decide take and mitigation requirements. Any local government
could use this bill as precedent to remove protections for
listed species. That may be the sponsor's purpose, but it is
certainly not good for our NCA or others in this great country.
Utah's effort to wrest control of public land is clearly
evident. An open process resulting in the HCP and RPM is
opposed to this bill that resulted from closed-door meetings--
--
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Van Dam, I am afraid I am going to have
to interrupt you there.
Mr. Van Dam. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. The time has expired.
Mr. Van Dam. I am sorry, sir.
Mr. McClintock. It is quite all right. It happens all the
time. But we do try to keep to the schedule. But your testimony
in full will be in the record, and I am sure you will have the
opportunity to elaborate on those remarks shortly.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Van Dam follows:]
Prepared Statement of Conserve Southwest Utah on H.R. 5597
This testimony provides the historical and logical reasons H.R.
5597 should not pass. It is presented in terms of a summary of the
history, the proposed bill and our issues with it; and is then followed
by the details providing the basis for our position.
summary
Introduction
Conserve Southwest Utah (CSU) appreciates this opportunity to
submit testimony to the Federal Lands Subcommittee of the House Natural
Resources Committee on this matter that is very dear to the citizens of
Washington County and, due to the precedent-setting nature of this
bill, of great importance to American citizens.
As a local grassroots conservation organization in Washington
County we have over 10 years of detailed experience with the subject of
this bill. We have regularly attended Habitat Conservation Advisory
Committee meetings (the committee that oversees the Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve, most of
which is now Red Cliffs National Conservation Area--RCNCA) and public
meetings held by county elected officials and the BLM. We have met
face-to-face with local elected officials and organized public forums
in attempts to reach understanding and resolution. We organized citizen
participation in the development of the 2006 ``Vision Dixie'' long-
range county development concept, the 2009 Omnibus Public Lands
Management Act (OPLMA), the 2016 Resource Management Plans (RMPs) for
the two National Conservation Areas (NCAs), and testified in the 2016
field hearing for the Federal Lands Subcommittee. Hundreds of us have
spent thousands of volunteer hours achieving the protections that this
bill would throw aside.
We have watched this effort to enable a highway through critical
habitat evolve over these many years. Our testimony will provide
background information and bring the Subcommittee up to date on current
efforts by Congressman Stewart and our county elected officials to
force a road where one was never formerly planned and certainly never
approved.
Thank you for your consideration of our thoughts and concerns on
the matter under review today. Additionally, thank you for your service
to this Nation and its citizens. We look forward to a well-considered
decision from this body.
Summary of H.R. 5597
The following describes our understanding of the bill. The sections
of the bill are referenced below in ``Issues with H.R. 5597.''
-- Section 1 provides a short title for the bill.
-- Section 2 provides definitions.
-- Section 3 describes the HCP Amendment directed by the bill.
-- 3a states that the Department of the Interior (DOI) must
approve an HCP amendment and renew the permit in accordance
with this and other applicable laws.
-- 3b and c states that the county and the BLM will manage Zone 6
as they manage the other zones (to enhance the natural
values of such lands, including wildlife habitat).
-- 3d states RMP amendment requirements, addressing the HCP,
recreation and easements.
-- 3e and f defines ``mitigation credits,'' stating that Zone 6
can be used to mitigate damage in other zones, including
the highway, and to mitigate ``take'' (tortoise harm or
death) throughout the county.
-- 3g states that the DOI must accept the amendment within a
year.
-- 3h states there are no other effects to the HCP.
-- Section 4 addresses RMP/NCA Adjustments, requiring the DOI to
amend RMPs to incorporate this act, with coordination and
cooperation of local governments.
-- Section 5 addresses the RCNCA, stating the existing Rights-of-
Way (ROW) will remain in tack, provides for the highway,
and disallows BLM from water rights.
-- Section 6 addresses the BDWNCA, stating that ROWs are not to be
more restrictive than RCNCA, disallows the BLM from water
rights, and preserves grazing rights.
Summary of Our Position
H.R. 5597 takes a tremendous leap backward for Washington County,
Utah, by undermining the open, transparent citizen engagement that
created the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve/National Conservation Area
(Reserve/RCNCA) and the Beaver Dam Wash National Conservation Area
(BDWNCA) many years ago. These sensitive habitats and scenic signature
vistas of our area represent the best of the National Landscape
Conservation System, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The bill also takes a tremendous leap
backward for the entire country by undermining the ESA and NEPA by
basically giving control of listed species to a local government. To
grant the provisions defined in H.R. 5597 would not only do irreparable
damage to our local public lands but also undermine the foundation of
these basic environmental protections across the entire country. There
are appropriate processes in place to fairly address the county's
issues, using scientific and proper alternatives analyses. The county
has refused.
Background
Washington County and the city of St. George in the far southwest
corner of Utah is one of the fastest growing areas in the country. Over
half the land in the county is federally-managed, including its
signature landscape, a large section of rugged, red-rock canyon,
plateau and mesa area immediately bordering the northern urban area. In
the 1980s, after many years of study, the Mojave Desert tortoise was
listed as ``threatened'' under the Endangered Species Act. A Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) was adopted in 1990 to allow growth and
economic development of 300,000 acres of habitat while protecting
62,000 acres of land, 45,000 of which is BLM-managed. The HCP, while
offering permanent protection, requires periodic renewal every 20 years
(it has now lapsed). A layer of permanent protection was added by the
creation of the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area in the 2009
OPLMA. Public support for these protections has been very high at every
step.
These protections presented a challenge not unlike many cities
face: an area bordering an urban center that cannot be developed.
Washington County's local governments welcomed the HCP elements that
enabled growth and economic development to continue but have chaffed at
those elements restricting development on the protected federally-
managed public lands. Utah and Washington County have a long history of
resisting Federal influence, especially in public lands. The stage has
been set for this end-run around public support for protections and
around bi-partisan laws enacted to protect these lands.
Local governments agreed to the HCP because it was more acceptable
than consulting individually with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) on every development proposal in tortoise habitat. Due to this
agreement, development and subsequent loss of desert tortoise habitat
in most of Washington County was permitted to continue because the Red
Cliffs Desert Reserve and the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area
were permanently set aside and protected. The HCP process under the
Endangered Species Act has generally worked well in Washington County
up to this point and provides a win-win scenario, enabling growth and
economic development and habitat protection. To build a highway through
the designated critical protected area (Zone 3) now will encroach on
the already limited desert tortoise habitat and violate the spirit and
letter of the law agreed upon years ago. (See ``Maps''.)
H.R. 5597 is the latest installment of a series of actions by
Washington County to force a highway through protected habitat. Their
latest twist is to propose an addition to the HCP (Zone 6, an
unconnected parcel of mostly BLM- and SITLA-managed land) as mitigation
for damage done by the highway to tortoises and their habitat in the
prime Zone 3 area of the Reserve/NCA.
The proposal is presented by the county as a win-win-win: habitat
and the tortoise win because the highway will do no harm and an
expanded habitat is recognized; the people win because gridlock is
eliminated, and the economy will not suffer. This is an erroneous
characterization: it is actually a lose-lose-lose:
Habitat will be significantly damaged (as evidenced by
scientific consensus).
Zone 6, even though it is already protected by the ESA,
will decline (only superficial short-term protections are
proposed and the Western Corridor highway will inflict the
same damage as the proposed Northern Corridor highway).
The Northern Corridor highway will not solve our traffic
issues.
The action to reverse the environmental protections will
damage our economy rather than help it.
The public lands in Washington County contribute to our quality of
life, providing areas for world class outdoor recreation, protecting
water quality and clean air as well as providing wildlife habitat. CSU
works to ensure the irreplaceable cultural, scenic, ecological and
scientific values are protected and properly conserved. We hope that
county, state and national leaders will work with us, too.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Red Cliffs Desert Reserve/National Conservation Area
Looking at the area where the proposed Northern Corridor Highway
would be built, through the prime habitat of the Mojave Desert
tortoise, taken from the existing highway through the habitat, the Red
Cliffs Parkway.
See ``The History'' for more details.
Issues with H.R. 5597
This section describes our major issues with the bill. A reference
is provided for each issue to the pertinent section of the bill
summarized in ``Summary of H.R. 5597.''
Highway Incompatibility With Protection
The purpose of the Reserve and NCA is to provide permanent habitat
protection for the threatened Mohave Desert tortoise. The Reserve was a
mitigation for the ``take'' (harm or death) of tortoises in habitat
opened for growth and economic development. A highway must be
prohibited as it would be counter to the purpose of the HCP and NCA.
The ESA specifically prohibits a ``take'' via habitat destruction, and
the highway would certainly do that. The county has argued (Washington
Parkway Study) that a highway will not harm and may indeed enhance the
habitat. This position is scientifically false (See Desert Tortoise
Council Report) and has no support in the scientific community. The
county will argue they were given assurances the highway would be
allowed. This position is also false, as evidenced by meeting minutes
of the county's Habitat Conservation Advisory Committee (HCAC).
Ref: This issue pertains to the bill's section 3a (which requires
applicable laws to be followed, which state, in essence, that a highway
is not allowed), b and c (which state that the NCA is to be managed to
enhance the habitat, which a highway does not do), and section 5 (which
directs the highway to be allowed).
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Best map available to us, showing the 6 zones and the proposed
highway (black line in middle).
Highway Not Needed
(See ``Transportation Studies and Modeling'' for more details)
There is no need for the highway--other solutions exist that have
for some reason not been considered by our local governments, such as
mass transit, zoning to avoid choke points, revisions to existing
roads, additional interstate connections. The county has fixated on
what they erroneously believe is the one and only solution. No
independent or public review has been allowed.
Ref: This issue pertains to the underlaying presumption of the bill
that the highway is needed.
Zone 6 Not Mitigation
The addition of Zone 6, a discontinuous area containing a segment
of tortoise habitat, cannot be accepted as mitigation for a highway
through the Reserve's original prime Zone 3 habitat for several
reasons:
(a) By law a highway cannot be mitigated.
(b) Some of proposed Zone 6 is not habitat, and even the best
habitat in Zone 6 is not comparable for mitigation of prime
habitat in Zone 3 where the proposed highway would be
located.
(c) The proposed Zone 6 habitat area will be in danger from the
planned Western Corridor highway.
(d) The proposed Zone 6 habitat area is already protected by the ESA
and NEPA.
(e) The existing Reserve/NCA, including Zone 3, is itself a
mitigation for the habitat destruction throughout
Washington County. That leaves the proposed Zone 6 ``a
mitigation for a mitigation,'' which should not be allowed.
(f) It is also proposed that Zone 6 be used as a ``land bank'' for
further damage to the current Reserve/NCA habitat and other
listed species throughout the county. This concept is
invalid: damage to one protected habitat cannot be balanced
by another protected habitat.
Ref: This issue pertains to bill's section 3e, which declares how
Zone 6 is to be used for mitigation of damage in Zone 3 and elsewhere
in the county.
Local Government Usurping Federal Authority
There is still some property to develop in tortoise habitat within
the county, and since the prior HCP is expired, the county needs to
renew it and its ``take'' permit (to harm or kill tortoises). This
bill, and the HCP amendment it directs the BLM to approve, allows the
county to usurp the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
responsibilities and issue the ``TAKE PERMIT RENEWAL'' for 25 years.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits the ``take'' of listed
species through direct harm or habitat destruction, which this highway
certainly does. However, the ESA allows a ``take'' if there is an
approved HCP. Therefore, the county needs to renew the HCP and the take
permit to allow continued development, and this bill is their vehicle
to circumvent the ESA to get this unneeded highway at the same time, in
exchange for the Zone 6 habitat that is already protected and not a
viable mitigation.
Ref: This issue pertains to bill's section 4, which in ambiguous
language puts the county in control of habitat impact decisions over
the judgment of the BLM and USFWS, allowing existing laws (OPLMA, ESA,
NEPA) to be ignored.
Fiscal Irresponsibility
$60-100 million have been spent on buying land inside the reserve,
with more expense pending. For 20 years BLM has traded their land
outside the reserve for the private land inside the reserve. Fish and
Wildlife grants for millions of dollars have been spent on buying land
inside the HCP to preserve tortoise habitat. H.R. 5597 undermines the
basic purpose of these expenditures.
Ref: This issue pertains to the assumption that any bill should
support fiscally-responsible actions.
Setting a Bad National Precedent
Even more significant than the localized issues above are the
nation-wide, multi-state issues of completely undermining the basic
concepts and processes of the ESA and NEPA. Nowhere in the country is a
local government allowed this authority to decide ``take'' and
mitigation requirements. Any local government could use this bill as a
precedent to remove protections for threatened or endangered species.
Ref: This issue pertains to the bill's sections 3, 4, 5 and 6,
which when implemented for Washington County, Utah, would open the same
considerations for any county in any state.
Redundant/Confusing/Misleading Elements in the Bill
There are many detailed issues with the bill. A number of them stem
for misinterpretations county officials had with the Resource
Management Plan (RMP). These misinterpretations were cleared up in a
number of meetings with the BLM and it was agreed that the RMP was
correct, yet these issues are again brought up in this bill, as if they
had not been resolved. They should be removed from the bill.
The title of the bill is misleading, implying that the primary
purpose is to expand and enhance the habitat for threatened or
endangered species in Washington County. Its real purpose is to direct
a highway to be built through prime sensitive habitat for a listed
species, and to upset Federal control of environmental protections.
Ref: This issue pertains to the bill's sections 1, 5 and 6, which
each have elements that are redundant to elements already in the
approved Resource Management Plans (RMPs) for the NCAs or are
redundant/confusing.
Lack of Public Engagement
(See ``The History,'' especially ``Public Process'' below for
details)
The listing of the Mojave Desert tortoise and the creation of the
HCP, the OPLMA, the NCAs and the RMPs all had many opportunities for
public engagement and input which had significant impact on the end
products. By contrast, H.R. 5597 had almost no opportunity for public
engagement or input. It was developed in private and in a hurry. Our
local elected officials are the first to complain about Federal
Government actions that do not allow local engagement, and yet they
foster that very action. Perhaps they think local engagement only
applies to those with elected status and not their constituencies. The
development of this bill is a very poor example of an open and
transparent process.
Ref: This issue pertains to the assumption that any bill should
have adequate public engagement opportunities in an open and
transparent manner.
the details
The History
The historical background in Washington County of the Mojave Desert
tortoise, the protections afforded it and the public engagement
processes used to grant the protections are presented below.
Washington County: Growth and the Tortoise
Washington County, in the southwest corner of Utah, was a quiet
area of slow growth until the advent of affordable air conditioning for
homes and cars and until I-15 was completed between Salt Lake City and
Los Angeles. This made the area tolerable in the heat of summer and
accessible year around. Thanks to its climate and its environment based
in the scenic vistas of protected, federally-managed public lands, it
was discovered as a tourist and outdoor recreation mecca. There was not
much need for transportation planning, and ``ring roads.'' And it
started to grow. The Mojave Desert tortoise was long known to be in
danger in the early 1980s, but it was not an issue until the growth
started. When it was listed as a threatened species, with plenty of
warning and communication, the growth was just starting to build, and
the listing threatened the growth.
HCP and Reserve Purpose
In 1990, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Mojave
Desert tortoise as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. This
would have impeded development on private and state lands in the
county.
In 1995, local officials signed an agreement to establish a Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) to protect habitat of the tortoise by
establishing a Reserve, named the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Section 10 incidental take permit
which allowed for the loss of approximately 1,100 desert tortoises and
12,000 acres of desert tortoise habitat during land development over
the next 20 years. In trade, 300,000 acres of private and state land
were released for growth and economic development.
HCPs are developed to reduce the regulatory burden on private and
state landowners while addressing the habitat needs of listed species.
The HCP gave economic certainty to be able to develop those lands
outside the Reserve. Washington County and this Reserve, have some of
the highest density of endangered, threatened and special status
species in Utah. The only road improvement mentioned in the HCP was to
improve the Red Hills Parkway, which was done. New roads were not
allowed.
1993 Steering Committee meeting minutes make no mention of a needed
highway corridor. Habitat Conservation Advisory Committee meeting
minutes from 1996-1998 when the Reserve was first being established
make only one cursory reference to a road through the Reserve with no
details. All other references pertain to existing roads.
Washington County Growth & Conservation Act 2006
In 2006 Senator Robert Bennett and Congressman Jim Matheson
together with Washington County commissioners created the Washington
County Growth & Conservation Act of 2006, which dealt mainly with the
designation of wilderness areas, but also contained a provision for a
Northern Corridor. This was the bill that spawned the creation of
Citizens for Dixie's Future (now CSU). Citizen opposition to the road
and land transfer was strong and resulted in a public process named
Vision Dixie that involved nearly 3,000 county citizens, an effort we
believe the county thought would bolster their position. It did not.
Although the process revealed strong support for a good transportation
network it did not clearly support a road through the Reserve. Habitat
Conservation Advisory Committee (HCAC) meeting minutes in 2006 when the
Washington County Growth & Conservation Act was being developed reveal
the road was clearly rejected by a majority of committee members.
Washington County citizens have repeatedly voiced the opinion that
this amazing area deserves protection by rejecting the 2006 Lands Bill
and supporting our local Vision Dixie process in 2007 that preferred
protection of sensitive and scenic public lands such as those now
enacted as NCAs. Vision Dixie's Principle 3 states, ``Guard our
`Signature' Scenic Landscapes.''
Omnibus Public Lands Bill 2009
The Bennett/Matheson bill languished until 2008 when it was revived
for inclusion in an omnibus bill. In Subtitle O in the Omnibus Public
Lands Management Act (OPLMA) of 2009 there is a provision for BLM to do
a comprehensive Travel and Transportation Management Plan, in
accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA); the
Secretary of Interior in consultation with appropriate Federal
agencies, state, tribal, and local government entities (including the
County and St George, Utah), and the public, identify one or more
alternatives for a northern transportation route in the County. The
language in that bill does not, by any reasonable interpretation,
require the Northern Corridor to be built: it required the
identification of options to be considered for a northern
transportation route in the County, in consultation with agencies,
local entities, the state, tribes, and the public in development of the
BLM's Travel Management Plan. These routes were to then be reviewed in
accordance with Federal environmental law for suitability. The Lands
Bill does not require BLM to designate a northern transportation route
in the Transportation Management Plan.
Not long before the 2008 version of the Washington County Land Bill
was finalized as part of the 2009 OPLMA, Citizens for Dixie's Future
(now Conserve Southwest Utah) was contacted by Representative Jim
Matheson's aide to discuss support for the latest version, and was
assured the highway was not included. Bill sponsor Senator Robert
Bennett's April 22, 2008 on S. 2834 hearing comment makes it clear:
``Congressman Matheson and I have made significant changes to the
previous proposal. We have permanently protected large amounts of
biologically significant public land in Washington County, including
additional wilderness and a new national conservation area. We have
removed the designations for the Lake Powell Pipeline Corridor and the
Northern Corridor that bisected the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve.''
Red Cliffs NCA Creation
In 2009, the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area (NCA) was
established by U.S. Congress (Public Law 111-11), adding a layer of
permanent protection to the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve Mojave Desert
tortoise habitat. In 2015, the draft Resource Management Plan (RMP),
which further studied and rejected a highway through the NCA, was
released for public comment, causing much distress to county leaders.
BLM was following laws set up by Congress to protect this habitat.
44,725 acres within the 61,000-acre Red Cliffs Desert Reserve were
designated as NCA. Here is what is clearly stated in Section 1974 of
the OPLMA concerning the NCA and its purpose. The purpose of the NCA is
``to conserve, protect, and enhance for the benefit and enjoyment of
present and future generations the ecological, scenic, wildlife,
recreational, cultural, historical, natural, educational, and
scientific resources of the National Conservation Area; and to protect
each species that is located in the NCA and listed as a threatened or
endangered species on the list of threatened species or the list of
endangered species published under section 4(c)(1) of the ESP of
1973.'' Once the NCA was created, work began on the Resource Management
Plan and the Travel Management Plan with this ``purpose'' as the
driving force for the BLM's decision making.
County Challenge
Our current local elected representatives today want to rescind the
county's past agreements, which protected the publicly-managed habitat
in the Reserve in exchange for ease of development of 300,000 acres of
habitat in privately and state-held lands. This agreement included
disallowing a highway through the protected lands. Now that those lands
are mostly developed, our representatives seem to think reneging on the
agreement is an honorable course of action, so they have encouraged our
Federal elected officials to undermine the prior Federal laws to allow
a highway by proposing this new legislation in Congress.
Several efforts have been made to try and force this road in the
past. In 2013 an application for a right-of-way (ROW) that would have
authorized construction, operation and maintenance of the four-lane
highway through public land was made by the county. The case was set
aside and remanded to BLM for further action.
Senator Orrin Hatch introduced a bill in the Senate May 2017,
directing BLM to scrap its excellent RMP that took 4 years of study and
offered many opportunities for public comment. This is because the RMP
does not allow a four-lane highway through the reserve. This bill has
not gone to committee and sits in Congress.
Representative Chris Stewart's 2017 bill H.R. 2423 (Washington
County, Utah, Public Lands Management Implementation Act. To implement
certain measures relating to management of Washington County, Utah
required by Public Law 111-11) claimed the highway was in the Public
Law 111-11. That is untrue and the title of bill is very deceptive. It
was not in the 2009 bill and in fact was deleted from the bill by
Utah's Senator Bennett in 2008 as shown in April 2008 congressional
testimony mentioned above. Rep. Stewart's bill passed a house
committee, but never went to Floor vote of the Full House and it never
allowed public comment before it was introduced.
Now the county has again enlisted the help of Congressman Stewart
to run H.R. 5597 that adds a section of SITLA and BLM land known as
Zone 6 as theoretical mitigation for the highway in Zone 3.
HCP Renewal
In 2016 the 20-year HCP came up for renewal. At this point, the
county is operating under the old HCP that has been extended by the
USFWS while the county works in ``good faith'' to renew the permit. The
Washington County Commission needs to renew the HCP because there are
still private and state lands that could be developed in county.
However, they also want to amend the HCP renewal to allow the highway
in legislatively protected prime habitat--Zone 3--in exchange for less-
desirable habitat in the proposed Zone 6 that also has a proposed major
highway on its western border. This concept is the basis for Rep.
Stewart's new bill, Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Expansion Act.
The county commissioners asked all the cities to pass a resolution
to support the bill. But legislative language of the bill had not at
that time been disclosed to the public and they told CSU the bill's
text would be disclosed after introduction in Congress. In essence,
Washington County's town and city leaders were being asked, it
appeared, to support that about which they had few if any details.
Many questions remain. What is the proposed budget for managing
Zone 6, who would pay for this management, and would there be a long-
term funding commitment sufficient to provide the required high level
of public education, resource monitoring, and law enforcement to ensure
that the Zone 6 mitigation objectives are actually achieved.
Public Process
Until the last couple of years, the Reserve/NCA RMP process seemed
very open and transparent. The HCP and Reserve creation process was
very open and public and had large engagement in the community. The HCP
steering committee had members from Federal and local government, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, environmental organizations, mayors,
developers, and more. The meetings were open to the public and members
of the audience were allowed to make public comments. However, in spite
of the Northern Corridor being reputed to have been such an important
matter and in plans for decades, early meetings (January and February
1993) made no mention of this critical infrastructure so necessary in
the minds of current leaders for Washington County's future. However,
Ron Thompson, Washington County's water manager, did mention in the
first Steering Committee meeting that 1993 had been a banner year for
growth and developers were losing money due to the hold up in HCP
planning. So, it was clear the area was growing rapidly and yet no
mention of the road.
The Reserve was established and all seemed to be going well. Then
during the early days of the Washington County Growth & Conservation
Act of 2006, which gave rise to the very Vision Dixie process mentioned
earlier (see ``Washington County Growth & Conservation Act 2006'').
After that, with modification of the 2006 bill and passage in 2009
established the NCAs, providing direction to the BLM for their Resource
Management Plan, the public felt comfortable that the road issue had
been somewhat settled.
The RMP public process began in June 2010 with open houses for
public involvement in the process. 269 members of the public and
representatives from Federal agencies, as well as state and local
governments attended. In 2015, the public was invited to comment on the
draft RMP which was finalized by the BLM's Record of Decision (ROD) in
December 2016, which has led us to this challenge by Congressman
Stewart and county leaders to overturn the ROD regarding the road and
some other matters.
In 1993, meeting minutes show that the HCP Steering Committee
became the Habitat Conservation Advisory Committee (HCAC). The HCAC has
held open meetings during which the public has been allowed to make
comment and share their thoughts and concerns. In early 2015 the issue
of HCP renewal came up since the 20-year permit would expire in 2016.
From then until 2017 the HCAC conducted open work meetings focused on
the renewal process.
In 2017 things changed. The Washington County commissioners decided
to take the renewal process under their wing and started holding closed
meetings to discuss the Northern Corridor issue. The result of those
meetings was their plan to expand the Reserve by adding the proposed
Zone 6 to be used as mitigation for the building of the Northern
Corridor, resulting in the bill before us today. This process has been
the antithesis of the previous open and transparent efforts to engage
the public and account for their input.
In March of this year, the county presented its idea to the
citizens of Washington County and asked local city and town leaders to
support the county's efforts to expand the Reserve and build the
highway. The county's meeting was well attended but that meeting, and a
St. George meeting, revealed much opposition to the road and pitted
recreationists against conservationists. By adding Zone 6, a heavily
recreated area, to the H.R. 5597 bill, with the threat that if not
added recreational activities might be stopped due to development,
leaders effectively set up a red herring. Zone 6 land had not been
developed for many years, apparently due to soil and geological issues,
but it was enough to scare the recreational community into thinking
they needed to support the Northern Corridor to get their Zone 6.
The 2017 county effort that led to this bill did not provide the
public process citizens needed on this important matter. CSU has asked
Federal and local leaders to please support the prior agreements
understood by constituents to have been made in good faith. We've asked
they support an open and transparent decision-making process,
environmental protection as our brand, economic development with, not
instead of, environmental protections, a transportation vision for the
future rather than an unneeded highway. All of these elements support a
well-balanced quality of life for Washington County's constituents.
Transportation Studies and Modeling
Studies do not support need for the road. In 2007, UDOT's study of
ideas for a Northern Corridor dealt with the county's preferred route
(Red Hills Parkway to I-15 at MP 13) in a chapter titled:
``Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Consideration.''
There it was stated that the Northern Corridor Alternative would not
meet the objective of minimizing impacts to the reserve. The city of
St. George, UDOT, and FHWA determined that the anticipated
implementation challenges and potential environmental effects, as
previously described, would be substantial and thereby eliminated the
Northern Corridor Alternative from further consideration. Of course,
that was before this new idea of adding a Zone 6 to provide mitigation
for the highway acres used, but the addition of Zone 6 does not
eliminate the environmental issues considered in the transportation
report.
The 2011 Washington Parkway Cost/Benefit Study and the 2015-2040
Regional Transportation Plan revealed the road would not relieve
traffic congestion on other busy roads. As noted, the road had been
eliminated from further consideration in UDOT's 2007 study. Options to
deal with ever-increasing traffic in Washington County have been
suggested but ignored. HCAC 2006 meeting minutes include a suggestion
by committee members to consider a further-north, outside the Reserve/
NCA option, which local elected officials have rejected.
There is already a highway, Red Hills Parkway, which goes across
the NCA and was included in the HCP. There are alternatives for a
highway that would by-pass the NCA that have not been properly
considered. The data used to back up the model used to determine the
need for this highway has not been opened to public scrutiny although
CSU has asked for that data.
In a 2012 letter from our organization to the Utah Department of
Transportation regarding ``Comments on the Proposed UDOT Feasibility
Study for a Northern Corridor Parkway Through the Red Cliffs Desert
Reserve'' CSU stated that if UDOT proceeds to study the feasibility of
a Northern Corridor route, we suggested that it should look at more
than just traffic needs and projections and take into consideration the
reasons why in 2006 seven members of the Habitat Conservation Advisory
Committee voted unanimously against allowing the Northern Corridor.
The reason for that 2006 highway rejection by the HCAC--a road
bisecting Zone 3 would cause irreparable harm--is still reasonable
today as we consider H.R. 5597's suggested changes to mitigate for the
highway's acceptance.
Washington County officials assert that the UDOT study, 2012
Washington Parkway Study, done by UDOT's biologist showed that culverts
could be installed to ``actually help'' the tortoise population. It has
not been established that culverts would help. If the road is built,
there will be no ``undoing'' it. In fact, the Desert Tortoise Council
has challenged UDOT's biological study with their own biology. So, it's
one biologist and his study, for which he was paid by the state and
could provide questionable findings given that it's not an
``independent'' study, against a group whose mission is to support the
well-being of the Mojave Desert tortoise.
The proposed Northern Corridor highway's purpose is to alleviate
traffic around two I-15 exits by taking traffic around them, through
the Reserve, connecting the next exit north to a new intersection on
the existing highway that bisects the Reserve (as was approved by the
original HCP), basically moving the congestion point. It is very
unclear if this proposal has any real utility. There has been no known
technical or public review of the traffic model indicating this change
makes any significant difference. It is likely that the model merely
extrapolated existing traffic on existing roads, with no other
improvements made, and no consideration of significant mass transit or
the retirement/tourist demographic. Our elected officials (our county
commissioners, city councils and Congressman Stewart) have described
this road as ``essential'' to Washington County, yet they have not
supplied any definition of that label or evidence that it is true. It
is doubtful that they know what alternatives to bisecting the protected
habitat could address the same traffic concerns. Dictating this highway
as the solution is not justified.
There is a need for alternative ways to carry the ever-increasing
traffic in Washington County. A more robust transit system seems to be
on the horizon. CSU has made several suggestions that have not been
considered:
Run the Travel Demand Models with the Northern Corridor
excluded from the assumptions to study other singular or
combinational options to meet our transportation needs.
Include more robust multimodal transportation projections
in the modeling (expanded transit, Active Transportation,
circulator trolleys, vanpools, future light rail).
Modify General Plans from the political subdivisions to
project desired future land use and destinations rather
than relying on current plans that are constantly changing
with rezoning approvals, and often need updating to reflect
the rapid pace of development in the County.
Complete the Southern Parkway as a through-traffic bypass
route.
Remove or drastically modify I-15 through Washington City
and downtown St. George in order to reconnect as many
surface streets as possible in the congested core of the
metro area.
Give incentives to industrial and distribution businesses
in the old industrial park by the Middleton Tunnel to move
to the Fort Pierce Industrial Park to eliminate much of the
heavy truck traffic using Exit 8-St George Boulevard and
Exit 10-Green Springs.
Ask Intermountain Health Care to give DRMC employees
transit passes and start van pools for shift workers to
reduce automobile traffic. (DSU has led the way by
partnering with SunTran transit system on free transit
passes for students with a valid DSU student ID.)
references
H.R. 5597 and proposed HCP amendment:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr5597/text
http://conserveswu.org/wp-content/uploads/HCP-Amendment-3-22-18.pdf
Prior hearing testimony:
http://conserveswu.org/wp-content/uploads/Van-Dam-Paul-public-
hearing-testimony-Jan-22-2016.pdf
Desert Tortoise Council findings--highway impact on tortoise habitat:
http://conserveswu.org/wp-content/uploads/Desert-Council-Stewart-
letter-May-16-2018.pdf
maps
Proposed Northern Corridor highway through existing Reserve Zone 3:
http://conserveswu.org/wp-content/uploads/Northern-Corridor-map-
2018.pdf
Proposed Western Corridor highway through proposed Reserve Zone 6:
http://conserveswu.org/wp-content/uploads/Western-proposed-highway-
map.pdf
Proposed Zone 6:
http://conserveswu.org/wp-content/uploads/ZONE-6.pdf
Various options for Northern Corridor (blue is the proposed):
http://conserveswu.org/wp-content/uploads/HCP-Northern-Corridor-
map-BLM.pdf
______
Mr. McClintock. The Chair will now defer to Mr. Stewart to
make the introduction of our next witness.
Mr. Stewart. Once again, Chairman, thank you. I have
introduced Commissioner Cox already. Once again, he is just a
great leader in the community, and has enormous respect.
So, Commissioner Cox.
STATEMENT OF DEAN COX, COMMISSIONER, WASHINGTON COUNTY
COMMISSION, ST. GEORGE, UTAH
Mr. Cox. Thank you, Chairman Bishop, Chairman McClintock,
and Ranking Member Hanabusa, for the opportunity to testify in
support of H.R. 5597. I especially want to thank Representative
Chris Stewart for his work on this balanced legislation, which
is vital to the future of the desert tortoise and Washington
County, Utah. I also thank the city councils, recreation
enthusiasts, and conservation organizations that supported this
effort.
I am proud of this bill and the process we followed to
develop balanced solutions. H.R. 5597 expands and extends the
Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan in Washington County
by adding 6,835 acres of new, high-quality tortoise habitat
called the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve Zone 6.
For the past 22 years, Washington County has managed the
HCP. We are not new at species recovery, and we are darn good
at it. Our HCP boasts the highest densities of tortoise
throughout its range by a significant margin. We have also
taken far fewer than our permit authorized. The tortoises we
did remove from developing areas were successfully relocated to
the reserve, where they are now thriving. And many are
reproducing.
While we cannot control wildfire or drought, our HCP has
been successful and has held out as a model in the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service's HCP handbook. The original HCP agreement
expired in 2016. We have continued to manage the HCP on a
temporary extension. For over a year, we have met with
representatives of Federal and state agencies and other
stakeholders, including conservation groups, recreation
enthusiasts, and others.
One of our goals was to negotiate an extension that would
be good for the tortoise and help the county and our cities
deal with the rapid growth we are experiencing. According to
data released by the U.S. Census Bureau earlier this year, the
St. George Metro Area is the fastest-growing city in the United
States. This growth has funded our HCP. Our development fees
are \2/10\ of 1 percent of building costs, at $250 an acre. The
county has raised approximately $15 million, which is more than
$6 million than what was originally budgeted and committed when
the HCP was signed in 1996.
For more than 20 years, since before the creation of the
reserve, the county has had a transportation route on our long-
term plan that we call the Northern Corridor. As we worked on
the HCP renewal, it became clear that we needed to tackle the
issues of utility access and transportation. We consulted with
Federal and state desert tortoise biologists and traffic
engineers to find the optimum combination of traffic flow and
tortoise movement as we sought a new alignment for the roadway.
The new 4-mile-long route proposed in the bill is located
as close to the NCA's southern boundary as is feasible. The
300-foot-wide corridor is 4.3 miles long, covering only 147
acres of the Red Cliffs Reserve. I want to emphasize, however,
that the roadway crosses only 1.9 miles of the National
Conservation Area and impacts only 65 acres.
H.R. 5597 does not circumvent the procedures required by
the Endangered Species Act and its accompanying regulations.
That means the combination of building this new road and adding
Zone 6 must not be detrimental to the recovery of the tortoise.
H.R. 5597 provides more than ample mitigation for the full
implementation of Public Law 111-11, as mitigation.
For these impacts on the reserve and the NCA, the county is
prepared to add an additional 6,835 acres of prime tortoise
habitat, most of which is owned by the State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands. Not only are the state lands in that
area developable, but they are also highly recreated. Rather
than allowing the area to be developed and lose the recreation
and tortoise habitat, we are proposing to add area to the
reserve, manage recreation, and use it to mitigate for the
possible impacts from utility and transportation development.
Thank you for giving us a chance to speak to you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cox follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dean Cox, Washington County Commission
Statement on H.R. 5597
Thank you, Chairman Bishop, Chairman McClintock, and Ranking Member
Hanabusa for the opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 5597, the
Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Expansion Act. I especially
want to thank Representative Chris Stewart for his work on this
balanced legislation which is vital to the future of the desert
tortoise and of Washington County, Utah. I also want to thank all of
the City Councils, recreation enthusiasts and conservation organization
that supported this effort which were referenced by Rep. Stewart.
I am proud of this bill and the process we followed to develop
balanced solutions to help expand the habitat for the threatened Mojave
desert tortoise while planning for the welfare of our citizens. H.R.
5597 expands and extends the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan
in Washington County by adding 6,835 acres of new high-quality tortoise
habitat called Red Cliffs Desert Reserve--Zone 6 (Zone 6). In 1996, the
County entered into an agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Utah Department of Wildlife
Resources, and city partners to create a habitat conservation plan, or
HCP, for the Mojave desert tortoise. For the past 22 years, Washington
County has been managing the HCP, with the help of state and Federal
partners, for the recovery of the Mojave desert tortoise. We aren't new
at species recovery. We are good at it. Our HCP boasts the highest
densities of tortoise throughout its range by a significant margin. We
have also ``taken'' far less tortoises than our permit authorized. The
tortoises we did remove from developing areas were successfully
relocated to the Reserve where they are thriving, and many are
reproducing. While we cannot control wildfire or drought, our HCP has
been successful and is held out as a model in the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's HCP Handbook.
The Red Cliffs Desert Reserve that we created as part of the HCP
has become a popular recreation spot, a valuable area of open space,
and a real asset for educating the public about the tortoise. The
incidental take permit that is also part of the HCP agreement has
allowed continued development of private property in the county through
a process where developers work with the county to clear and protect
tortoises. The original HCP agreement expired in 2016 and we have
continued to manage the HCP on a temporary extension subject to
negotiations of a long-term extension of the HCP.
For over a year, we have met with representatives of the Bureau of
Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Division of
Wildlife Services, the Utah State School and Institutional Trust Lands
Administration (SITLA), the Dixie Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) and other stakeholders including conservation groups and
recreation enthusiasts. One of our goals was to negotiate an extension
that would be good for the tortoise and help the County and our cities
deal with the rapid growth we are experiencing. According to data
released by the U.S. Census Bureau earlier this year, the St. George
metro area is the fastest-growing city in the United States. There were
an estimated 165,662 people in 2017 in the designated metro area, which
includes most of Washington County, up 4 percent from 2016. This brings
many challenges that include managing transportation alternatives,
including increased use of transit, providing for utilities and land
use decisions.
This growth has funded our HCP. Our development fees are .2 percent
of building costs and $250 per acre. The County has raised
approximately $15 million which is over $6 million more than originally
expected and committed to by the 1996 HCP.
For more than 20 years, since before the creation of the Reserve,
the County has had a transportation route on our long-term plan that
would move traffic from the east to west in the densely populated part
of the county. Just like with the utilities, the routes are limited by
out stunning geography.
We call the future transportation route the Northern Corridor. As
the population grows, the city surface streets that allow east/west
transport will be inadequate to handle the demand. We don't want cars
bottlenecking and idling on our city streets. Our traffic experts have
been saying for decades that for a Northern Corridor route to carry
enough east/west traffic to help ease the congestion, it will have to
pass through the Reserve.
As we worked on the HCP renewal, it became clear that we needed to
tackle the issues of utility access and transportation. A small portion
of the Northern Corridor route must cross the Red Cliffs National
Conservation Area (NCA). We have consulted with Federal and state
desert tortoise biologists and traffic engineers to find the optimum
combination of traffic flow and tortoise movement as we sought a new
alignment the roadway. (Attachment #1--Northern Corridor Alignments
Map). The new 4-mile long route proposed in the bill is located as
close to the NCA southern boundary as is feasible. The 300-foot wide
corridor is 4.3 miles long covering only 147 acres of the Red Cliffs
Reserve. I want to emphasize that the roadway crosses only 1.9 miles of
the National Conservation Area created in P.L. 111-11 (the 2009 Omnibus
Public Lands Act) impacting only 65 acres. The route minimizes
fragmentation of habitat and requires two large span bridges that would
allow tortoises to pass below without ever noticing a road. It will
also include large culverts designed for tortoise connectivity. H.R.
5597 does not circumvent the procedures required by the Endangered
Species Act and its accompanying regulations. That means that the
combination of building this new road and adding Zone 6 must not be
detrimental to the recovery of the desert tortoise.
Water and power lines that run across the Red Cliffs Reserve are
necessary to supply the needs of our growing population. Much of our
communities' groundwater is in the sandstone aquifers in the Reserve.
In 1996, the partners in the HCP recognized that need, so we jointly
and cooperatively developed utility development protocols that set
standards for how utility development and maintenance can be managed to
avoid harm to the tortoises. The utility development protocols have
been in place and working for years. In fact, Congress recognized the
value of the protocols when it codified their applicability to the Red
Cliffs National Conservation Area in Public Law 111-11. The language of
the bill specified that the creation of a National Conservation Area
didn't affect the continued use of the utility development protocols in
the areas where the Reserve and National Conservation Area overlap.
H.R. 5597 provides more than ample mitigation for full
implementation of P.L. 111-11. Public Law 111-11 (which was signed by
President Obama in 2009) created the 45,000 acre Red Cliffs National
Conservation Area (NCA) and directed BLM to identify a transportation/
utility corridor across the NCA. The corridor is vital to reduce
traffic congestion and improve air quality.
As mitigation for these impacts on the Reserve and NCA, the County
is prepared to add an additional 6,835 acres of prime tortoise habitat,
called Zone 6, (Attachment #2--Zone 6 Map) most of which is owned by
the State of Utah's School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration
(SITLA). Not only are the state lands in that area developable, but
they are also highly recreated. As we studied the area, we learned that
the tortoise densities there are higher than densities in the Reserve.
Rather than allow the area to be developed and lose the recreation and
the tortoise habitat, we are proposing to add the area to the Reserve,
manage the recreation, and use it to mitigate for possible impacts from
utility and transportation development.
Washington County biologists and Utah Division of Wildlife
Resources (UDWR) conducted comprehensive tortoise surveys in the
proposed Zone 6 during the spring of 2017. The tortoise density is
actually higher than our estimate for the rest of the Red Cliffs Desert
Reserve. Approximately 30 percent of our tortoise observations were of
juvenile tortoises, indicating a growing reproductive population.
Washington County also initiated a citizen science project in the
adjacent areas soliciting tortoise observations by local trail users.
Citizens have submitted photos and locations of over 80 tortoises they
encountered while hiking or biking on trails in the area. This data, in
combination with our survey results and historic sightings, indicate a
healthy tortoise population that would be a valuable addition to the
Red Cliffs Desert Reserve. Protection of these lands from development
will also benefit federally endangered plants and other sensitive
species unique to our area.
The acres not necessary to mitigate for the Northern Corridor will
be banked against future needs as was done in the Clark County, Nevada
desert tortoise HCP.
In summary, the bill, if passed into law would:
Expand the HCP by creating an additional 6,865-acre
reserve with rich desert tortoise habitat known as Zone 6,
Renew the HCP agreement for 25 years,
Require Washington County and the BLM to manage Zone 6 in
accordance with the provisions of the existing HCP
agreement,
Apply the existing utility development protocols to
include Zone 6 as well as other areas covered by the HCP,
Allow for recreation to continue in Zone 6 on designated
trails, including hiking, biking, horseback riding, and OHV
use on designated roads,
Provide mitigation credits for the tortoises protected in
Zone 6,
Allow for the eventual construction of a northern corridor
crossing 4.3 miles of the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve,
Require BLM to amend the existing plans to accommodate
Zone 6,
Clarify the width of the right of way (ROW) for Old
Highway 91 as a 300 foot ROW on federally managed lands,
Clarify that the NCAs are not entitled to any Federal
water rights, and
Preserve existing utility and grazing rights in Beaver Dam
Wash.
I really appreciate the work that Congressman Stewart and his staff
have put in with us on solving these problems. Passage of this bill
creates a win for all of the stakeholders. Thank you.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McClintock. Great, thank you for your testimony.
That concludes our testimony on H.R. 5597. We will now go
to the Committee questions, and I will begin.
Mr. Cox, I grew up in Southern California. As a kid, I
found desert tortoises very easy to please. One of the over-
arching objectives of this Subcommittee is to be a good
neighbor to local communities. Does this bill have the full
support of Washington County?
Mr. Cox. This bill is really necessary for us. I appreciate
your position. Being from Southern California, we share a lot
of things in common with you, in fact, a lot of desert tortoise
habitat.
In California and, in fact, anyplace else in its habitat,
the highest density of tortoise is just over seven animals per
square kilometer. In Washington County, we have more than 15
tortoises per square kilometer on the average, and this area
that we are planning to add has surveyed, and we estimate that
it has more than 500 tortoises in it.
This little piece of roadway that we would need to develop
the Northern Corridor we estimate would disturb 10 to 20
animals. And we would work very hard to make that disturbance
as absolutely minimal as possible by designing porosity and
other factors in the road to maintain the integrity of that
for----
Mr. McClintock. Let me get back to the principal question I
have, and that is do the local communities of Washington County
support this bill?
Mr. Cox. Oh, yes. We have resolutions that support it--and
I am a little hard of hearing, but we have resolutions that
support from St. George City, which has about half of the
county's population. In addition, Washington City has passed a
resolution of support, La Verkin has passed one, Ivins has
passed one, Hurricane has just passed it, and Santa Clara has
it on their agenda.
Mr. McClintock. These are all the elected representatives
of the people of Washington County?
Mr. Cox. That is correct. I would say this would represent
more than 80 percent of the county's population.
Mr. McClintock. Commissioner Cox, how did you come upon
that title, ``Commissioner''?
Mr. Cox. How did I do what?
Mr. McClintock. How did you come upon that title of yours,
``Commissioner''? Was that conferred upon you by a majority of
the voters?
Mr. Cox. Yes, I was elected by the voters of Washington
County and I received 75 percent of the vote of the county.
Mr. McClintock. Just out of curiosity, Mr. Van Dam, which
voters in the jurisdictions of Washington County do you
represent?
Mr. Van Dam. Well, I am simply a former attorney general of
the state of Utah, the only Democrat to be elected in a long
time.
Mr. McClintock. Yes, but do you represent any of the
communities currently in Washington County?
Mr. Van Dam. No. I represent none of the communities.
Mr. McClintock. Did you represent a homeowners association
within Washington County?
Mr. Van Dam. No, I represent an organization that is
interested in----
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. Commissioner Cox. How did you
come upon this new habitat? How was it selected?
Mr. Cox. This has been a very intriguing process. We have
known for some time that the area west of Bloomington, south of
Santa Clara, west of St. George, had a lot of tortoises. It was
also pre-eminently state institutional trust land property.
We have developed a close working relation with SITLA and
many other entities and recognized that the renewal of the HCP
is good for the county, it is good for our residents. And SITLA
wanted to know, really, what they could do to help. This
investment is good for the state institutional trust lands
because it allows them to move forward with other lands in more
developable areas of the county.
We had the Department of Wildlife Resources do transects.
In fact, more than 340 kilometers of transects were done to get
an accurate count or estimation of the number of tortoise in
this Zone 6. This really is great mitigation. It is going to be
consistent with a process we called Vision Dixie, which calls
for us to preserve our signature scenic landscapes and maintain
our air and water quality by keeping our vital transportation
system functional and moving. It serves all of those purposes.
Mr. McClintock. Just one final question and that is, is
there a precedent for this kind of arrangement?
Mr. Cox. I am actually not aware if this precedence has
happened someplace else in an NCA. But I can tell you that
Public Law 111-11--that is the omnibus act that was the
Washington County lands bill--directed the BLM to identify one
or more routes for a northern corridor. They failed to do that.
We feel that there is a lot of precedence from Congress for
this route, and we are working hard to make that also
environmentally secure.
Mr. McClintock. Great, thank you.
Ms. Hanabusa.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Van Dam, you were finishing your testimony when you ran
out of time. Is there anything more you would like to add
before I ask you any questions?
Mr. Van Dam. I would just like to respond to some of the
information that has gone back and forth here, because there is
another side to that.
Ms. Hanabusa. Yes. Well, we will get to that with the
questions.
Mr. Van Dam. No, I was virtually to my last two lines
thanking you for the opportunity in the time I had left.
Ms. Hanabusa. Oh. Just so that I am clear, you are here
representing the Conserve Southwest Utah organization?
Mr. Van Dam. That is correct.
Ms. Hanabusa. What is your position with the Conserve
Southwest Utah?
Mr. Van Dam. I am a member of the board and an advisor.
Ms. Hanabusa. And is this conservation organization in
Washington County?
Mr. Van Dam. Yes.
Ms. Hanabusa. It is?
Mr. Van Dam. Exclusively.
Ms. Hanabusa. So, it deals only with Washington County, the
subject of this testimony today.
Mr. Van Dam. That is correct.
Ms. Hanabusa. You also mentioned that you were the elected
attorney general in the state of Utah. The only Democrat, I
think you said.
Mr. Van Dam. Yes, a lonely Democrat in Utah.
Ms. Hanabusa. So, when this whole thing occurred, and I am
talking about the existing Habitat Conservation Plan and what
happened in Washington County, were you in the position of the
attorney general at that time?
Mr. Van Dam. When what occurred, ma'am?
Ms. Hanabusa. When the Habitat Conservation Plan was
established under the Endangered Species Act.
Mr. Van Dam. No, I was not. I was a new resident of
Washington County. I had lived in Salt Lake City. I have owned
property in Washington County for over 40 years and I moved
there 10 years ago. This is about the same time I moved down.
Ms. Hanabusa. OK. You wanted to clarify some points that
were being made. And as I was listening to Mr. Cox it seemed
like there was not an agreement on certain things like the
road. Can I have your position on that?
Mr. Van Dam. One of the things that bothers me is that in
2008, our Senator Bennett and Representative Matheson at the
time passed a bill, an omnibus bill, that affected much of the
property in our county. And in that bill it is commonly said
that it provided for a northern corridor.
And the fact of the matter is that that bill did not pass
in its first iteration and underwent extensive changes. When it
got back for re-passage, that part of it had been taken out,
because the bill provided for a right-of-way for the Lake
Powell pipeline, and it provided for a northern corridor. And
that had been taken out of the bill. And the Senator said in a
public statement that those two things had been changed.
The other thing is it is very important to understand that
even though they say they are only going through a small part
of this preserve, that is not technically correct, because they
are going through another part of the reserve that is not rated
in the same way. And the allegation that our tortoise
population is the highest among these types of tortoises is
correct, but it has declined 40 percent over the last 7 years.
So, it is not doing as well as we would like it to do, but
doing better than other places in the country.
Our great fear is that the precedent established by
allowing a road, a highway through an NCA is going to be a very
difficult matter for us to deal with. So, we would rather not
have that as a precedent.
Ms. Hanabusa. In your written testimony, you were talking
about the Omnibus Public Lands Bill of 2009, and you were
talking about the original bill of 2006, and that it languished
all the way through, and when it finally passed--these are the
series of bills that you are talking about, right?
Mr. Van Dam. Yes.
Ms. Hanabusa. In the short period of time that you have
left, when you said that the population of tortoises have
declined about 40 percent from what they were when you
originally moved there, is that correct?
Mr. Van Dam. That is correct.
Ms. Hanabusa. And what caused the decline?
Mr. Van Dam. There have been natural wildfires, there have
been upper respiratory problems we have had there, and the
habitat that they are in now is not like the habitat that they
had when they lived in the valley and had to be removed some 20
years ago. It is just simply a more difficult place for them to
survive.
But our county then had 300,000 acres opened up for
development and for people by moving the tortoises up. We
really feel strongly that should be left alone at this point.
They have given up everything they could and this is their
habitat.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you. We are out of time.
Mr. McClintock. Further questions on this bill?
Mr. Curtis.
Mr. Curtis. Yes, thank you.
Commissioner, it is nice to have you here in Washington,
DC. I do have some questions, but I would actually prefer to
yield my time to Congressman Stewart.
Mr. Stewart. I would like to thank my friend, Mr. Curtis.
And I will be brief, so we can retain some time for you, if I
could.
Commissioner Cox, I am going to read you the language--and
this is not a press release, this is not a private statement,
this is not a comment in front of a group of people--this is
the actual language of the bill, as it currently exists, not
something that was removed or deleted in an omnibus. This is
the language of the bill. It clearly states that the government
entities identify one or more alternatives for a northern
transportation route.
As you read that, can you read that in any other way than
it would allow you and encourage what they foresaw, and that is
the necessity for this road to eventually be built?
Mr. Cox. I can't read that any other way, and I have read
that bill several times. It is quite clear that the BLM was
directed to identify one or more routes in its travel
management plan.
Mr. Stewart. So, it seems to me that this current law, what
we are doing here is just complying with the intent of
Congress, as expressed in this piece of legislation.
Mr. Cox. It is consistent with it. And in fact, the utility
development protocols are also in Public Law 111-11, and they
are clearly defined. It states that BLM may use these protocols
in its resource management plan. The BLM chose not to do that
in the Record of Decision that was signed in December of 2016.
And had they had done that, as I feel was the intent of
Congress, this wouldn't be necessary in this bill again today.
Mr. Stewart. Yes, thank you. I agree with you on that.
One other thing I want to mention is, look, let me just
state the obvious. It is your intention, and you representing,
as you said, 75 percent of the voters, but more broadly, you do
represent, as the leader, the commissioner there. This county
that I love and represent, they want to protect this tortoise.
Have you ever talked to anyone who does not want to protect
this tortoise?
Mr. Cox. No, I haven't. I think that the desert tortoise is
dear to all of us. And that is why we have taken such effort to
make sure that the tortoises that have been displaced with this
growth have actually been relocated and are thriving.
In Nevada, California, and other places that has not
happened. They have just bulldozed over them. But we care about
the tortoise----
Mr. Stewart. Which is my point, and that is--you alluded to
it and mentioned some of it, and that is the remarkable
achievement of the county under county leadership and others to
talk about the tortoise population.
Could you give us an idea? Do you know the answer to the
question, have these tortoise populations increased under this
county plan, or decreased over the last----
Mr. Cox. I could tell you that the tortoise population
decreased from when the plan was signed to 2007. In 2005 and
2006, Washington County was ravaged by fire. I am sure all of
our friends from California can relate to the fire. In fact, in
those 2 years, 25 percent of all 1,500 square miles in
Washington County burned. It was an unfortunate event, and it
had tortoise mortality.
But I actually have reports from the Utah Division of
Wildlife Resources, page 9, and we have that in the record,
that says since 2007 tortoise populations within the Red Cliffs
Desert Reserve appear to have stabilized, and there is no
evidence of further declines in tortoise densities.
In fact, the population trend since 2007 has not only
stabilized, but it is a positive trend, according to the
figures on pages 46 and 47 of that report.
Mr. Stewart. Thank you. And I guess there is nothing that
you or anyone else could have done about those fires.
Mr. Cox. It was an unfortunate thing. But we had years of
drought, and then massive amounts of water that caused a lot of
fuel. We had the cheatgrass invasion that fueled that. And the
important thing is those populations have stabilized and are
growing for the past 11 years.
Mr. Stewart. Thank you.
Mr. Curtis, I yield the remaining 15 seconds to you. I was
selfish, I apologize.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Curtis. No problem. In those few seconds, I think I
would just like to confirm.
Your county, I am assuming, is growing like the rest of the
state and you are under huge pressures for growth and planning.
And I know you don't have time to answer that question, but I
would like to make sure that is on the record. Thank you.
Mr. Cox. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. Further questions on this bill?
Mr. Lowenthal.
Dr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question first
is for Mr. Van Dam. You are a Washington County resident. Would
you say that part of the reason that you live there is because
of the beautiful protected lands? Tell us how you see this
highway corridor would affect the integrity of these protected
spaces.
Mr. Van Dam. My concern with this highway corridor, and I
do love the county and I am living there happily, is that it
sets a precedent in the most protected area, a precedent that I
know a lot of other people in this country would like to
follow. And I think we have to be very careful with precedent.
I have Senator Bennett's words here. And after his bill in
2008 had been changed, he said, ``We have removed the corridor
designations for the Lake Powell pipeline corridor and the
northern corridor that bisected the Red Cliffs Desert
Reserve.'' That is his own quote.
The Northern Corridor was meant for a different purpose
than what it is being quoted for here, because it was meant to
take off from our main highway, I-15, and go quite a ways up a
highway that goes north. Its purpose was quite different than
what the commissioner is making it to be.
The other thing you need to know is this road is going to
meet up with another road. There is a road called the Red Hills
Parkway that goes around and carries most of the traffic
northward above the city. This road duplicates that road, and
then it actually joins that road about a mile from Highway 18
that they want to get people to. And there is going to be a
traffic jam there of epic proportions because this road coming
across the reserve and going into an existing parkway that is
only a four-lane parkway, eight lanes then going that
direction, does not resolve the traffic problem.
Another one of our issues is that independent studies have
not been concluded to see what else could be done to move
traffic more efficiently in that direction. This is not even a
resolution to their problem.
So, the corridor has a lot of negative aspects to it, and
it will not solve the problem. As the fastest-growing community
or county and state in the Nation, our community is absolutely
an amazing thing to watch. You can almost see it grow from up
on the hill. This road does not solve the problem, that's for
sure, because of its very design. I don't know if anything more
can be done, and I believe nothing more can be done.
But the fact that it joins up with the very road it is
supposed to supplement a mile before the junction with the main
highway will be a traffic nightmare of almost unimaginable
proportions. And we think that a lot better can be done than
endangering endangered species.
Dr. Lowenthal. Following up, have you spoken to the
original administrator of the Washington County Habitat
Conservation Plan about this proposed corridor? And what did he
say about it?
Mr. Van Dam. If I may, sir, my hearing is not very good.
Dr. Lowenthal. Have you spoken to the original
administrator of the Washington County Habitat Conservation
Plan regarding the proposed corridor? And what did he say about
it?
Mr. Van Dam. The proposed corridor is not favored by the
administrator.
Dr. Lowenthal. It is not?
Mr. Van Dam. That is correct.
Dr. Lowenthal. You mentioned you were the former attorney
general. Do you think that building a highway through a
national conservation area is in keeping with the legislation
that protected the Red Cliffs in 2009? I think you mentioned a
little bit about that earlier.
Do you think that this is consistent with the legislation
that led to the protection of Red Cliffs in 2009? Is building a
highway through this national conservation area consistent with
that legislation?
Mr. Van Dam. It certainly is not consistent with it. And it
is almost unthinkable, because of what was gone through 20
years ago in establishing the reserve and establishing the NCA
was a very long and difficult process. And everything that has
gone on since then for 20 years, in buying all the property
within there, preserving the tortoises, spending an amazing
amount of time and effort is basically undone in the sense that
this highway now, a 300-foot-wide--think about that for just a
minute, a 300-foot-wide corridor. That is a football field wide
going across there. And the amount of miles that they say it is
going to go across is quite minimal, compared to----
Mr. McClintock. I am sorry, but----
Dr. Lowenthal. I am going to have to yield back, but thank
you for your answer.
Mr. Van Dam. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. Further questions?
Chairman Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. All right, let me do this quickly, then.
Commissioner Cox? Why do you need the road? Very quickly.
Mr. Cox. We need the road because the county is growing. My
wife is on the school board. I am honored to have her sitting
behind me. But she told me the other day that we have 33,000
children in our K through 12 program. Two-thirds of Washington
County's growth is internal growth. I am a fifth-generation
native, and this highway is necessary to protect our water, our
air, and to be able to move efficiently without being stuck in
gridlock.
Mr. Bishop. It is not just moving people. You are also
having utility corridors in the same area. Correct?
Mr. Cox. Yes.
Mr. Bishop. That same area?
Mr. Cox. That is the reason for the width. And then we want
to put a bike path on it, too. A lot of people want to be able
to ride a bike or walk----
Mr. Bishop. No, don't put the bike, that would be
recreation. That is obviously what people are not talking about
here.
I am assuming you did studies on this stuff.
Mr. Cox. Yes. In fact, I am not a traffic engineer, but
UDOT has many of them, and UDOT would be the lead agency on
this road. Their traffic engineers tell us it would carry
32,000 cars per day.
Mr. Bishop. I have been down there a lot. Last time I was
there, I told you, 3 days and it rained every day. So, when you
need to break the drought again, just invite me back down.
Mr. Cox. We need you to come back. It is getting dry again.
Mr. Bishop. I am appreciative of what you are talking
about, the rehabilitation of the species that actually is not
native to Washington County in the first place, but I hate to
say this. I was here while these bills were going forward, and
I was working with Senator Bennett and Congressman Matheson
because I was on the Committee and they were not.
It is interesting that this bill, the one that was actually
finally passed in an omnibus that talks about our process being
poorly run, was never heard in any place on the House side.
They didn't give Mr. Matheson a hearing on this bill at all. It
had one hearing in the Senate before it was actually placed in
an omnibus bill.
But it is very clear, from the discussions with all of
them, that the idea of a proposal was to have a road in this
area, but not presupposed where that road actually would be.
And that is why it was always there, that is why the language
is there, that is why this is a long time coming, but needs to
be there.
Mr. Stewart, I have 2 minutes left. Do you have anything
you would like to use for my time?
Mr. Stewart. I will go very quickly, Chairman, thank you.
I just want to be clear, you have consulted with traffic
and transportation experts on this plan?
Mr. Cox. We have. This road has been a key part of our
transportation plan, and the Dixie Metropolitan Transportation
Organization----
Mr. Stewart. OK, and I am going to accelerate, because I
only have a few minutes. So, they conclude that this route, is
the best----
Mr. Cox. It is not the very best route for a road in terms
of being the least expensive to construct. We also talked with
biologists, Fish and Wildlife, and others, and that is why we
brought the boundary of the road much farther to the south, so
that it would not bifurcate the reserve.
Mr. Stewart. OK, so experts were consulted and this was
their conclusion?
Mr. Cox. That is right. This would cost a little bit more
to build----
Mr. Stewart. But, all around, the best----
Mr. Cox. It would meet those transportation needs.
Mr. Stewart. Now, let's consider this, and we have to go
quickly--let's suppose that you are not authorized to do this,
that Congress prohibits you from doing this road. Tell us the
result of that. Because it seems to me that, environmentally,
we take a step backward instead of forward if that is the
outcome.
Mr. Cox. What happens is we start having our major
intersections fail. Currently, right now, intersection 10 on I-
15 is failing. That is Washington. As you look at the plans,
they just ripple on out and come into St. George.
If you come down on President's Day weekend right now, you
will queue up for half-a-mile before you are able to get on the
freeway. And that intersection hasn't failed yet. It will be
interminable when our population is 10 times larger.
Mr. Stewart. When we have a larger population and failed
transportation systems, are there environmental impacts from
that?
Mr. Cox. It is going to absolutely degrade our air and
water quality because of the number of cars that cannot move
efficiently. They will just be stuck in gridlock.
Mr. Stewart. Yes. And for those of us who live on the
Wasatch Front, which is the area around Salt Lake City, who
have air inversions and other poor air quality that you don't
have, we are trying to----
Mr. Cox. That could be coming our way if we don't get this.
Mr. Stewart. We are trying to make it so you don't become
like Salt Lake City, with the air inversions and that.
Mr. Cox. That is correct.
Mr. Stewart. All right, thank you.
And again, to the Chairman and the Ranking Member, thank
you for letting me participate in this hearing.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you.
Further questions on the bill?
Seeing none, that concludes our hearing on H.R. 5597. I
want to thank both of you for joining us today and for
traveling all this way to be here. Again, you are most welcome
to stay if you would like. If you have better things to do, you
are certainly welcome to leave.
With that, we will take up our final bill, H.R. 5875, and
the Chair would recognize Miss Gonzalez-Colon of Puerto Rico to
present the bill.
I am sorry, I apologize, that was for an introduction. The
Chair recognizes Ms. Bordallo to present the bill. My
apologies.
STATEMENT OF HON. MADELEINE BORDALLO, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE TERRITORY OF GUAM
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much. I want to thank Chairman
Bishop for being with us today, and of course Chairman
McClintock and Ranking Member Hanabusa for putting my bill on
the hearing schedule today.
H.R. 5875 is supported by all six Members representing U.S.
territories and the District of Columbia, and would fix a
problem that has gone overlooked for decades and decades. This
bipartisan bill would amend two Federal laws, the Pittman-
Robertson and the Dingell-Johnson Acts, to provide parity for
the five territories and DC with the 50 states under those
laws' Federal funding formulas.
These laws would provide Federal funding to support fish
and wildlife conservation and enhance hunting, sportfishing,
boating, and other outdoor recreational opportunities at no
cost to the taxpayers. Each state territorial fish and wildlife
agency receives a yearly allocation of this Federal funding
from the U.S. Department of the Interior. However, current
Federal law places arbitrary caps on how much funding the five
territories and DC can receive.
For example, each state is guaranteed at least a 1 percent
share of the yearly Pittman-Robertson apportionment, with the
Secretary of the Interior having the discretion to award more
funding based on population and other factors. However, current
law caps Guam, Puerto Rico, and the other territories' shares
at just \1/6\ of 1 percent. That means that all five
territories combined receive less than a single state's
Pittman-Robertson allocation each year.
The bill would fix this to provide each territory the
minimum 1 percent allocation guaranteed for each state. For
Dingell-Johnson, current law also caps arbitrarily the
territories and DC's yearly allocations. Guam, American Samoa,
the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the
District of Columbia are each capped at just \1/3\ of 1 percent
for Dingell-Johnson funding.
Puerto Rico's yearly share is capped at just 1 percent,
despite a population greater than nearly two dozen states.
Their population today averages about 3.7 million. The bill
would fix this by removing these arbitrary caps to allow the
Secretary of the Interior to exercise his or her full
discretion in allocating the Dingell-Johnson funding to each
territory and DC, based on the same criteria that is applied to
the states.
The bill would also make technical changes in the U.S. Code
to correct typos, drafting errors in these laws, and make them
all more reader-friendly.
Finally, it is important to remember that when we talk
about the five territories and DC, we are talking about more
than 4.4 million Americans. Some laws were put on the books,
Mr. Chairman, before many of the territories or DC had elected
Members to the House. In fact, the Federal Aid and Wildlife
Restoration Act was passed in Congress in 1937, before many of
us were born. That is the cause of a lot of these parity
issues, in my mind.
Absent Federal support, many conservation projects and
programs in the territories simply will never happen, as
limited territorial budgets often struggle to meet our
residents' basic needs.
Again, I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
Member, for this hearing, and my original co-sponsors from the
territories and DC for their support.
I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you very much for your testimony. Now
I will introduce the delegate from Puerto Rico, Miss Gonzalez-
Colon, to introduce our witness.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really
appreciate your time. And I want to thank you, the Ranking
Member, and my friend, Ms. Bordallo, for letting me participate
with this bill, and all the territory delegates for this
bipartisan initiative.
I think this is part of the efforts that we are doing for
making justice for all the Americans that are living in the
territories for having equal participation and lifting the cap
on many other issues.
I want to welcome especially Mr. Jose Aponte-Hernandez, who
is a former Speaker of the House in Puerto Rico, and I have
known him for many years. He is a very experienced legislator.
He was a former Speaker of the House, and currently is the
Chair of the Federal Relations Committee in the House. He has a
lot of experience in many issues in the Puerto Rico House of
Representatives, and I do know that he is a fighter for
equality on the island. And he knows, because he is chairing a
lot of the issues of the application of Federal laws on the
island actually with the local agencies, in terms of revealing
the unequal treatment in those Federal programs.
I am happy that he actually made it today, and I know that
today the governor of Puerto Rico has his message to the
budget, and he is here. So, thank you for coming on a short
notice. I look forward to his testimony and his insight on this
subject.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McClintock. That is by means of introducing Mr. Aponte,
who is recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOSE F. APONTE-HERNANDEZ, REPRESENTATIVE,
PUERTO RICO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman
Bishop from the Natural Resources Committee, Chairman
McClintock, Ranking Member Hanabusa, and members of the
Subcommittee of Federal Lands. Thank you to the Committee and
the Committee's leadership for convening this hearing and for
the opportunity to address this honorable Committee in support
of the H.R. 5875.
Any legislation that promotes greater equality for all
living under the U.S. flag is more than welcomed. I
congratulate Congresswoman Bordallo and my Resident
Commissioner Gonzalez-Colon, as well as Congresswoman Norton,
Congressman Sablan, and Congresswomen Radewagen and Plaskett
for co-sponsoring this bipartisan initiative.
H.R. 5875 would promote equality and justice in treatment
for the U.S. territories and the District of Columbia in the
assignment of funds for fish and wildlife restoration that are
raised by taxes on hunting and fishing supplies. Currently, a
very low, fixed amount of these funds is assigned to DC, Puerto
Rico, and the rest of the U.S. territories. These are mostly
islands where outdoor activities are a major economic factor
and an essential element of the quality of life, and DC, which
is one of the most important watersheds on the continent.
The importance of these issues for the U.S. territories is
not inferior to the other regions of the Nation. The Puerto
Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources employs
these funds to support maintenance of sports fisheries which
represent some $70 million a year in economic activity and to
provide hunter location. The Department is extremely dependent
of these funds, even in normal times. And I should not need to
say we are not in normal times.
The U.S. Department of the Interior announced that of this
program, Puerto Rico will get about $3.5 million this fiscal
year for fisheries, which is equivalent to the amount assigned
to the smallest states; and another $3.5 million for wildlife
restoration, which is $1.3 million less than the amount
assigned to smaller states. Each of other territories receive
only about a third of this amount.
The information may seem insignificant in the face of
national budgets, but are relevant for communities in economic
distress who have the same obligation to comply with
conservation policies as any other jurisdiction in the United
States. This bill improves their treatment in an area that will
foster economic development.
As a devout and staunch supporter for statehood for Puerto
Rico, I am not only in favor of more equitable treatment for
the island, but full parity with all the rights and
responsibilities it entails: precisely the same principles that
guide our service bases for our call for appropriate treatment
for our living in the United States. We should not be expected
to settle for less. This happens in too many aspects: health
care, infrastructure, public safety, and security. We need to
make sure it is corrected.
I support H.R. 5875. I respectfully urge the Members to
look beyond this Committee's jurisdiction at programs under the
jurisdiction of all committees you sit in where these U.S.
territories that are under the same flag get treated unequally.
I count on you to do what is right, and I thank you for your
attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Aponte-Hernandez follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jose F. Aponte-Hernandez, Puerto Rico House of
Representatives, Chairman, Committee on Federal, International Affairs
and Status Relations
Statement on H.R. 5875
Hon. Tom McClintock, Chairman; Hon. Colleen Hanabusa, Ranking
Member; and members of the Subcommittee, thank you to the Committee and
Subcommittee leadership for convening this hearing and allowing me to
address you in support of H.R. 5875.
Any legislation that promotes greater equality for all who are
living under the U.S. flag is more than welcomed. I appreciate and
welcome the opportunity to support such an effort and congratulate
Congresswoman Bordallo, Resident Commissioner Gonzalez-Colon,
Congresswoman Holmes Norton, Congressman Sablan, and Congresswomen
Radewagen and Plaskett for co-sponsoring this bi-partisan initiative.
H.R. 5875 would promote equality and justice in treatment for the
U.S. Territories and the District of Columbia in the assignment of
funds for fish and wildlife restoration that are raised by taxes on
hunting and fishing supplies, under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife
Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson Federal Aid in Sport Fish
Restoration Act.
Currently, a very low fixed amount of these funds are assigned to
DC, Puerto Rico and the rest of the U.S. Territories. This is because
rather than the formula for the rest of the states, which fixes a
minimum and a maximum of funding to be adjusted according to geography
and participants in outdoor activity, the formula for the territories
established fixed amounts, which for some programs must then be split
six ways amongst the U.S. Territories.
However, five of those jurisdictions are tropical insular areas
where the natural environment and the enjoyment of outdoor activity are
major factors in their economies and their quality of life. For
instance, DC is in the middle of the Chesapeake watershed, one of the
most important aquatic systems in the East Coast. So, the need for
attention to these issues in these regions is of no less importance
than in other parts of the Nation.
fishing in puerto rico
Fishing in Puerto Rico is both recreational and commercial at both
sea and fresh water lakes. We have over 1,000 commercial fishermen whom
generate $7 million ($7,000,000) a year in wholesale and $21 million
($21,000,000) in retail activity. The over 150,000 recreational
fishermen in both seawaters and lakes generate over $70 million
($70,000,000) a year in economic activity.
Especially in the aftermath of the recent weather events and
disasters, runoff, silting, and contamination from the disaster debris
have impacted many of our bodies of water. One of our most important
freshwater lakes, Lake Guajataca, suffered from damage to the dam
structure, requiring it to be partly emptied. Sea fishing, of course,
suffered enormous losses to the boat fleet and to the shore facilities
for fishermen. Our commercial fishermen are mostly small scale,
community based, not corporate entities. Fisheries have also suffered
for years from the presence of invasive species like lionfish.
hunting in puerto rico
Each year some 5,000 hunting licenses are issued in Puerto Rico.
Hunting in the main island of Puerto Rico is limited to birds, with a
pigeon season running from September to October (which did not happen
this year due to the disaster situation); a waterfowl season in
November and early December; while in the offshore natural reserve of
Mona Island, there are both shotgun and bow-and-arrow hunting seasons
from December to March to control the populations of wild goats and
hogs. The Hunter Education Program in Puerto Rico is supported, in the
face of its limited funding, by certified volunteer instructors who
lend their expertise to new would-be sportsmen.
In both cases the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and
Environmental Resources needs to make sure they are properly cared for,
and the Department is extremely dependent on these Federal funds even
in normal times. However, we are not in normal times. I do not have to
remind the enormous disaster recovery task and our public finances
situation. Too often nature protection is left behind when money is
short. Having these programs available enables the Department to manage
the recreational fisheries and wildlife populations to sustain much
needed economic activity.
funds this year
From the Department of the Interior's own announcement for Fiscal
Year 2018, we see that, out of these funds, for fishery restoration
Puerto Rico received $3,519,175, just the exact minimum quantity given
to the smallest states such as, for example, Delaware, who have a much
smaller geographic extension and smaller number of bodies of water.
Meanwhile, on the side of wildlife restoration, we received $3,452,263
which is about $1.3 million less than the least of the states. The
other Territories ended up receiving about a third of what Puerto Rico
receives, in each of the different programs. Now, these amounts may
seem little in the face of the national budgets of hundreds of
billions, but it is significant for our economies, and invaluable for
communities in tight economic times who also need to comply with the
same conservation standards and policies as the other jurisdictions in
the Nation.
In Puerto Rico, we were a bit more fortunate than our brothers in
other U.S. Territories since we got about a half percent more of the
funding but still, we stand for fairer treatment for all. As a devoted
and staunch supporter of statehood for Puerto Rico I am not only in
favor of more equitable treatment for the Island, but of full parity,
with ALL the rights AND responsibilities it entails. Precisely, the
same principles that guide our claim serve as a basis for our call for
proper treatment for all living in the United States, who should not be
expected to settle for less. This happens in too many aspects--health
care, infrastructure, public safety and security--we need to make sure
it is corrected.
I fully support H.R. 5875 and respectfully urge the Members to look
beyond this Committee's jurisdiction, at programs under the
jurisdiction of all committees you sit in, where these U.S. Territories
that are under the same flag get treated unequally. I count on you to
do what is right, and I thank you for your attention.
______
Supplemental Testimony Submitted for the Record
PUERTO RICO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
May 31, 2018
Hon. Tom McClintock, Chairman,
Hon. Colleen Hanabusa, Ranking Member,
House Subcommittee on Federal Lands,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC 20515.
Re: Extension of Remarks and Correction of Testimony on H.R. 5875
Dear Chairman McClintock and Ranking Member Hanabusa:
During the Legislative Hearing of the Subcommittee on May 22, 2018,
a question was raised by the Chair and by Congressman Sablan of the
Northern Marianas, on whether the Federal excise taxes on hunting and
fishing supplies, to be shared with the territories under the Pittman-
Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson Federal Aid
in Sport Fish Restoration Act, were collected in Puerto Rico.
At the time, this question was answered in the affirmative.
However, this answer was based on a misapprehension about the question
itself. Further consultation with the Puerto Rico Secretary of Natural
and Environmental Resources indicates to us that though taxes and fees
are levied on these sales in Puerto Rico, these are not the same as the
Federal excise tax referred to in these laws. It is necessary therefore
for me to provide you this clarification and correction, to the effect
that this question should have been answered in the negative. I would
not wish for it to be seen that there was any intention to mislead the
Subcommittee or the Members, as the Chairman made very strong
statements of sympathy in the face of such a situation, which I greatly
appreciate.
The disparity in treatment is still an issue for all the
territories, and I respectfully submit this correction of my testimony
so that the Subcommittee may have the proper information in its record
to act upon H.R. 5875.
Best regards,
Jose F. Aponte-Hernandez,
______
Mr. McClintock. Thank you very much for your testimony. We
will now go to Committee questions. I will begin. I just have
one question, either for Mr. Aponte or Ms. Bordallo, whoever
can help me on it.
I was not clear from the briefing materials. These funds
are financed by fees that are paid for from the purchase of
hunting equipment, ammunition, archery equipment, correct?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Chairman, if you give me the
opportunity, I want my advisor to translate to be sure that I
am answering correct.
Mr. McClintock. Sure.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. That is all right?
Mr. McClintock. Of course.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you.
[Pause.]
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. No, the funds are used at fisheries,
the location of the people, the hunters, and other things
that----
Mr. McClintock. No, I understand that. But the funds are
actually financed by fees that are paid for by the purchases of
hunting equipment?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Yes.
Mr. McClintock. Correct, OK. If I walked into a sporting
goods store in San Juan, would I be paying these fees?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Yes.
Mr. McClintock. So, I would be paying the fees as a
consumer in Puerto Rico, but I wouldn't have equal access to
those fees through these programs.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. That is right.
Mr. McClintock. So, basically, I would be paying for the
programs, but not receiving the benefits.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. That is right.
Mr. McClintock. That seems to be pretty open and shut to
me. That is all I have for questions.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. Ms. Hanabusa.
Ms. Hanabusa. I just have one, if anybody can answer it. Do
you know how much money you have lost over the years, whether
you go 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, by not having basically an
equitable position?
Mr. Sablan, do you know?
Anybody know?
[Pause.]
Ms. Bordallo. It is not a matter of losing the funds, it is
just a matter of we are not being able to expand at all. And
fishing is one of our most popular sports on Guam, and we are
just at a standstill.
And, of course, I think I mentioned it in my opening
statement, that it goes a long way to cover sportfishing and
other recreational activities on Guam. We are just not given
ample funding, so it has depleted over the years.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. In terms of population, Puerto Rico
ranks 29 and receives $3.4 million about Pittman, $3.5 Dingell.
Iowa is 30 and receives $11.5 and $4.5. This is part of the
disparity that we were living in Puerto Rico about funding.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you.
Anyone else? Yes.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Ms. Ranking Member. In the
case of the territories, we never receive the same amount of
funds in proportion with the rest of the states. It is like a
cap to the territories. So, even when we are paying in the
exact same rate, we are not receiving the same reimbursement to
the territories. It is like we are capped. This is happening in
other Federal programs. We are not receiving the same
reimbursement, in this case to the territories, for the same
purpose.
What the bill is asking is to having the same proportion to
the territories.
Ms. Hanabusa. I understand that is what the bill is asking
for. I was just trying to get a feel and----
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Sorry to interrupt you again, in the
case of Puerto Rico, we have not made the study of how much
funds we have lost.
Ms. Hanabusa. I think you just gave me funds.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. For the last years.
Ms. Hanabusa. It was $11-point-something million and $4.5
versus $3.5 and $3-point-something. I was just trying to get a
ballpark of----
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. States with less population than
Puerto Rico receive more funds than Puerto Rico. The cap that
established the law does not benefit Puerto Rico and the people
of Puerto Rico, to give the same opportunities and to comply
with all the laws that we have to comply with in Puerto Rico to
establish and to receive the funds. So, it is a negative
opportunity to Puerto Rico.
Mr. Bishop. Ms. Hanabusa, could I give a stab at this?
Ms. Hanabusa. Yes.
Mr. Bishop. I think because these funds are going to be
spread around all the states, it is going to be impossible to
figure out what would have been.
However, based on what he was saying, what a typical state
would be, you are probably in the $8 to $10 million range of
what the territories could be receiving, or at least Puerto
Rico could have received that they did not. It would be
different for every other territory. But I guess the right
answer is ``a lot.''
Ms. Hanabusa. Yes. I am just trying to get to ``a lot.''
That is all I want to get to. Thank you.
Mr. Sablan. It is almost $36 million a year.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thirty-six for CNMI?
Mr. Sablan. No, for----
Ms. Hanabusa. Oh, for everything?
Mr. Sablan. Everybody.
Ms. Hanabusa. OK, OK.
Ms. Bordallo. Also, Ranking Member Hanabusa, I want to
mention that this is not a fault of anybody who put these laws
together way back in 1937. We were not even Members of Congress
then. It was just the states, and now we want to straighten
this out, to be able to get a fair----
Ms. Hanabusa. We weren't a state, too. In 1947, Hawaii was
not a state.
Ms. Bordallo. That is right.
Ms. Hanabusa. Neither was Alaska.
Ms. Bordallo. That is true.
Ms. Hanabusa. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. Further questions?
Mr. Westerman.
Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to
point out that I know we all know that Pittman-Robertson funds
come from sales of ammunition and firearms and other sporting
goods equipment, but I believe it also receives funding from
boat engines and fuel purchases.
And maybe give Mr. Aponte a moment to elaborate on the
significance of the sportfishing business in Puerto Rico, and
possibly the level of funding that these guides contribute on a
yearly basis.
If you can get my southern English without help, you will
be doing very well.
[Pause.]
Mr. Westerman. The translator may need help.
[Pause.]
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. The funding supports the hunting and
the fishery. And any other information that you and the
Committee need I can provide later to the Committee.
But we use the funds in the development of the activities
that were from tourism and--not only for tourism, for the
people in Puerto Rico and to commerce--our people in Puerto
Rico that have to fight with the disparities and the
opportunities that we don't have because of our situation under
the U.S. flag.
And we now have the challenge to develop the economy of
Puerto Rico after Hurricanes Irma and Maria. And we were using
funding to restore Puerto Rico, and the opportunity that
changed the law and gave us more funding, H.R. 5875 increased
the opportunities to develop Puerto Rico because we don't have
to use our funding, the amount that we have now that is not too
much, to develop the hunting and fishery. We have the
opportunity to support and to break disparities and bring close
opportunities to Puerto Rico.
Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to
point out that if Puerto Rico is actively engaged in funding
the Pittman-Robertson Act, then they should be receiving funds
from that. I yield back.
Mr. McClintock. And I just, on a personal note, want to
compliment your translator, who seems to be fluent in Spanish,
English, and Arkansan.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. Further questions?
Ms. Bordallo.
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much. First I want to thank
Representative Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you for agreeing to
testify on my bill.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you.
Ms. Bordallo. Mr. Chairman, I did invite witnesses from
Guam, but you know it is quite a trip. And at this short
notice--21 flying hours--so they regretfully said that they
could not make it. But I do thank the Representative from
Puerto Rico.
I have a couple of questions to ask you, Representative. I
am sure that you feel strongly, as I do, that the U.S.
territories should be given equal access to Federal programs
and funding, on parity with the 50 states.
Do you agree that the state equivalent share of Pittman-
Robertson and Dingell-Johnson funding provided by this bill
will support projects and programs that otherwise might never
get adequate local funding? Do you think, if we change this and
we----
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Definitely.
Ms. Bordallo. It will?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Definitely. I point out in my written
statement that too often programs like this suffer when there
is a fiscal deficiency. Right now, when focus of all the
discretionary funding is on the disaster recovery, and the
importance of being able to categorize funds to things as
natural protection, is better for Puerto Rico.
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you. Another question I have. Can you
please speak to how increased Federal Pittman-Robertson and
Dingell-Johnson funding will help Puerto Rico and other
territories better serve their local sportsmen communities?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Yes. In many of these territories,
outdoors activities have important opportunities. It is a key
attraction for tourism or recreation opportunities. So, they
enforce the development of the island and our economy, and it
is better for all of us.
And the way that Puerto Rico increases and develops
positively the economy, the Congress and mainland have the
benefits also because we are less dependent and have more
opportunities to develop in our way.
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you. The popularity of hunting and
fishing in the territories is not reflected in the license
sales reported to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. For
example, Guam does not require fishing licenses. And I expect
that this is the same in other territories.
My question is, can you please speak to the popularity of
hunting and fishing in Puerto Rico? I think you have issued
5,679 hunting license sales reported in 2017. Is this correct?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Yes.
Ms. Bordallo. It is? OK, so why is it so important that
Puerto Rico, the other territories, and the District of
Columbia receive state-equivalent funding under all Federal
programs?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Why?
Ms. Bordallo. Why?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Because we are a territory and we
don't have the same equal rights as all the people under the
flag of the United States. This is not what our Nation was----
Ms. Bordallo. Founded on.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. They ask for equal rights and
democracy in all the world, but the people in the territories
don't have the same rights that the people in the 50 states.
So, we have to change that, and to present our Nation like the
best one in the world, but not in words, in action.
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much, Representative Aponte-
Hernandez. You put that very well. I agree with you.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you.
Ms. Bordallo. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you very much.
Further questions?
Miss Gonzalez-Colon.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want
to add for the record some issues that Mr. Aponte just brought
up in his statement. And he just pointed out that we issued
5,000 hunting licenses in Puerto Rico.
And on our island, we have a lot of areas, not just for
fishing and hunting, but for many recreational importance for
the islanders. I mean not just in Puerto Rico--Guam, American
Samoa, and the rest of the islands. This is $21 million in
retail activity, so this is an important area on the island,
with over 150,000 recreational fishermen, both in sea waters
and lakes that generate over $70 million in economic activity.
So, this is the importance of this kind of a bill. If we
don't adjust this kind of reimbursement of the money, assigned
to the education programs for the hunters, and in the case of
Puerto Rico, and this is one of the questions I have for
Representative Aponte. In 2009, the fisheries restoration and
Puerto Rico funding were $4 million, and that dropped to around
$3.5 million, that is correct?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. That is right.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. And that $3.5 million continues to be
in that range over the last 4 years?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. That is right.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. So, that drop of $500,000 needs to be
matched in a 25 percent by the Government of Puerto Rico?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Yes, we have to match it.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. So, we are not receiving the fund from
the Department of the Interior on a free basis. Puerto Rico
needs to match the amount of funds from the Department of the
Interior.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. About 25 percent.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. So, we are not receiving the funds on
a free level. We need to match those resources. Is that
correct?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. That is right.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. OK, so the bill would need to keep at
least the minimum of resources. In some cases, we are receiving
less than the rest of the states, even when we are selling more
licenses or more equipment than any other state. Correct?
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Yes.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. One of the areas that we are
experiencing here is that with the resources of sea, lakes,
licenses for fishermen and hunters, if we want to keep our
resources all together, and we have suffered enormous losses to
the boat fleet and to the shore facilities for fishermen after
the hurricanes, those resources are deeply needed.
And that is the reason I want to thank Congresswoman
Bordallo for having this bill, and Chairman Bishop for allowing
this hearing, because it is important to have a bill that
completes--I mean we have Mona Island, we have Vieques, we have
Culebra.
And we have a new sport, the sport of bow and arrow for
hunting seasons from December to March to control the
population of wild goats and hogs, among others. I do know that
many states have their populations; we have ours, too. So, this
is an issue that affects a lot of areas on the island. And I
know Guam has theirs. So, if we don't have the same resources
to manage those issues, we will never be able to assign
resources from the state level to manage those.
I want to thank Representative Aponte for being here today
and giving us the information from the Department of Natural
Resources from the island in terms of the statistics and any
other further information that the Committee may request from
the state level, even if it is licenses, if it is local money,
or matching funds for the state level so we can provide it. I
know the rest of the territories may do the same thing because
at the end we just want to have the information that is needed
to make a greater bill.
So, thank you for that. Thank you, Representative Aponte.
And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you. Any other questions?
Mr. Sablan.
Mr. Sablan. Just one. And my question is to the Chairman,
if I may. You had one question early on. Could you repeat that
question again?
Mr. McClintock. Yes. The question was, do the residents of
Puerto Rico pay the fees that go into these programs? The
answer was yes. Do they have full access to the benefit of
these programs that they are paying for? The answer was no.
That was pretty clear-cut to me.
Mr. Sablan. All right. No, that was all. Thank you.
Mr. McClintock. You yield back?
Mr. Sablan. [Nonverbal response.]
Mr. McClintock. OK. Any further questions?
Well, seeing none, that will conclude this hearing.
Representative Aponte, I want to thank you especially, not
only for the trip you made on short notice, but also for
staying through the full hearing to give your testimony,
guidance, and expertise, which is much appreciated.
Mr. Aponte-Hernandez. Thank you for the questions.
Mr. McClintock. There may be additional questions from
Members. If there are, they will submit those in writing, and
we will keep the record open for 10 business days to receive
your responses.
If there is no further business to come before the
Subcommittee, the Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:58 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD]
Prepared Statement of the U.S. Department of the Interior
Statement on H.R. 5597, Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan
Expansion Act, Washington County, Utah
Thank you for inviting the Department of the Interior (Department)
to present views on H.R. 5597, the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation
Plan Expansion Act, Washington County, Utah. The bill would require the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to renew the Desert Tortoise
Habitat Conservation Plan with an amendment; amend the Resource
Management Plans (RMP) for the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) St.
George Field Office and the Beaver Dam Wash and Red Cliffs National
Conservation Areas (NCA); and designate transportation and utility
corridors through these two NCAs.
The Department recognizes the work of Congressman Stewart and other
members of the Utah delegation to address a wide array of resource
issues and management concerns in Washington County. Secretary Zinke is
committed to restoring full collaboration and coordination with local
communities, working with partners to promote multiple use on public
lands, and making the Department a better neighbor. The Department
supports the bill's goals of providing economic certainty to the
communities of Washington County. We would welcome the opportunity to
work with the sponsor and the Subcommittee on a few clarifying
amendments, time frames, and to ensure consistency of implementation
with other laws.
background
Washington County, Utah, covers nearly 2,500 square miles, and is
among the fastest growing counties in the country, with a population
increase of 52 percent between 2000 and 2010. Population growth has
direct impacts on public lands within the county and poses management
challenges for a variety of resources. For over 20 years, the BLM has
worked closely with Washington County, the state of Utah, area tribes,
and Federal agency partners to manage sensitive resources in a way that
prevents conflicts and facilitates continued growth. As part of this
effort, Washington County and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) undertook a public process, including meetings between private
landowners and state and Federal land managers, to develop a Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) that allowed for continued growth while
ensuring protection of the threatened Mojave desert tortoise. The HCP
Implementation Agreement, signed by Washington County, the state of
Utah, the city of Ivins, the BLM, and the USFWS in February 1996,
established the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve (Reserve), a multi-
jurisdictional wildlife reserve of 61,022 acres largely composed of
Federal and state lands.
The HCP expired in 2016 and Washington County has requested an
extension of the permit with an amendment to facilitate the Northern
Corridor Highway route through the Reserve. The County is in ongoing
discussions with the USFWS to renew the HCP. This includes
consideration of the proposed highway construction.
Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009
In early 2009, Congress passed H.R. 146, the Omnibus Public Land
Management Act (Public Law 111-11, hereafter referred to as ``OPLMA''
or ``the Act''), which included major provisions affecting future land
management in Washington County, Utah. The Act established the Beaver
Dam Wash and Red Cliffs NCAs to be managed by the BLM, and designated
new wilderness areas to be managed by the BLM, U.S. Forest Service, and
National Park Service.
The congressionally-designated boundary of the Red Cliffs NCA
encompasses approximately 44,725 acres of public land managed by the
BLM, including about 70 percent of the Reserve, with additional state
and private lands. The Act also states that the purposes of the Red
Cliffs NCA are ``to conserve, protect, and enhance for the benefit and
enjoyment of present and future generations the ecological, scenic,
wildlife, recreational, cultural, historical, natural, educational, and
scientific resources.''
OPLMA also directed the BLM to identify one or more alternatives
for a ``northern transportation route in the County'' as part of a
comprehensive travel management plan and in consultation with
Washington County, the city of St. George, and other local governments.
St. George Resource Management Plans
Based on the congressional direction in OPLMA, the BLM prepared
RMPs for the Beaver Dam Wash and Red Cliffs NCAs. As required by the
Act, the BLM also prepared an amendment to the St. George Field Office
RMP to identify and manage priority biological conservation areas and
to facilitate the development of a comprehensive travel management
plan. The BLM signed Records of Decision completing this planning
process on December 21, 2016.
h.r. 5597
H.R. 5597 requires the Secretary to amend and renew the Desert
Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan, and to amend the RMPs for the St.
George Field Office and the Beaver Dam Wash and Red Cliffs NCAs. In
addition, the bill requires the Secretary to grant transportation and
utility corridors through both NCAs, prevents the Secretary from
acquiring water rights, and includes a number of other miscellaneous
provisions.
Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan Amendment & Renewal (Section
3)
Section 3 of H.R. 5597 requires the Secretary (after receipt of a
proposal from Washington County) to renew the HCP and issue associated
permits for a period of 25 years and accept an amendment to the
Reserve, which would expand it by approximately 6,900 acres (``Zone
6'') as depicted on the legislative map, and allow for construction of
a highway through the Reserve. Under the bill, Washington County would
manage Zone 6 in conformity with the HCP, and the Secretary would
manage the Federal lands in Zone 6. Concurrently with the HCP amendment
and renewal, the Secretary would be required to amend, within 1 year,
the St. George Field Office Resource Management Plan to manage Federal
lands within Zone 6, provide for the management of species consistent
with the HCP, and include certain Utility Development Protocols.
USFWS has been working with Washington County, BLM, and other
partners to explore options to meet the transportation needs of the
County and address the requirements of the Endangered Species Act for
renewal of the HCP. A primary consideration is how to meet the original
intent of OPLMA while minimizing impacts to desert tortoise. County,
state, and Federal biologists are currently analyzing potential
measures to reduce the impact of the highway such as bridging and
culverts. Washington County has proposed to offset remaining impacts by
adding Zone 6 to the Reserve, of which the BLM owns about 3,500 acres
and the state owns about 3,200 acres. This area is separated from the
Reserve boundary by 3 miles, but has tortoise densities comparable to
the area that would be affected by the proposed highway.
The Department will work cooperatively to address potential
conservation strategies raised in Section 3 of H.R. 5597, as well as
issues and impacts associated with the proposed highway construction
through the ongoing plan renewal process.
Section 3 states that Washington County would manage the proposed
Zone 6 area, which is currently composed of lands managed by the state
of Utah, private property, and BLM-managed public lands. The Department
would like to work with the sponsor and Subcommittee to clarify the
intent of this provision. In addition, we would like to work with the
sponsor to clarify the timeline for the HCP. The Department would like
to work with the bill's sponsor and the Committee to clarify the intent
and scope of certain language in section 3 of the bill as related to
application of mitigation credits. Finally, the Department would
welcome the opportunity to develop a legislative map for this section
that meets the sponsor's needs.
Resource Management Plan Amendments (Section 4)
Section 4 of H.R. 5597 requires the BLM, within 1 year, to amend
the RMPs for the Red Cliffs and Beaver Dam Wash NCAs and to amend the
St. George Field Office RMP Amendment. This section further requires
that these RMP amendments be: (1) in accordance with section 202(c)(9)
of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA); (2) in
coordination and cooperation with Washington County, Utah, St. George
City, other political subdivisions within the County, and the
Washington County Water Conservancy District; and (3) consistent with
the bill's other provisions and the HCP.
The Department recommends minor technical modifications to this
section to ensure the language is consistent with the sponsor's intent
regarding the time frame for completing the planning process. The
Department recommends that the RMPs be completed at the same time as
the HCP to enhance coordination efforts. We look forward to working
with state, tribal, and local government partners on this important
planning process.
Red Cliffs & Beaver Dam Wash National Conservation Areas (Sections 5 &
6)
Section 5 of the bill designates a 150-foot wide transportation and
utility corridor in each direction from the centerline of State Route
18 through the Red Cliffs NCA; prohibits the Secretary from acquiring
any water rights within or related to any land or interest in land
within the NCA; and requires the Secretary to grant to the state of
Utah or to one or more units of local government a 300-foot wide right-
of-way for the northern transportation and utility route as referenced
in OPLMA and as identified on the legislative map. Section 5 also
directs the Secretary to adhere to certain Utility Development
Protocols for new and existing utility management within the NCA.
Section 6 of H.R. 5597 designates a 150-foot wide transportation
and utility corridor in each direction from the centerline of old U.S.
91 through the Beaver Dam Wash NCA; prohibits the Secretary from
acquiring any water rights within or related to any land or interest
land within the NCA; and states that access to utilities and grazing
permits and maintenance of utilities located within the NCA shall be
preserved. This section also directs the Secretary to adopt Utility
Development Protocols for the construction, operation, maintenance, and
replacement of utilities within the NCA that are no more restrictive
than those developed for the Red Cliffs NCA. These protocols must
comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, including the
identification and consideration of potential impacts to fish and
wildlife resources and habitat.
The Department is committed to being a good neighbor and to
restoring full collaboration with local communities. As such, we
support this Section's goals of providing economic certainty to and
meeting the infrastructure needs of Washington County. The Department
notes that the legislative map referenced in Section 5 does not reflect
current land status data. We would welcome the opportunity to develop
such a map for this section.
Sec. 5(d) and Sec. 6(b) would prohibit the Secretary from acquiring
water rights or water rights related to any land or interest in land in
the NCAs. As consistent with Federal and state law, the ability for the
Federal Government to acquire water rights from willing sellers is
important to ensure adequate management of the designated areas--both
the lands within the NCAs and the public lands included in the Reserve.
If acquired, water rights would be used for campgrounds, visitor
facilities, recreation resources, livestock grazing, and administrative
uses that are in conformance with Utah water law.
The Department notes that the current RMP for the Beaver Dam Wash
NCA authorizes a 150-foot wide transportation and utility corridor
along old U.S. 91 through the NCA, and livestock grazing consistent
with section 1975(e)(4) of OPLMA in a manner that conserves, protects,
and enhances the ecological, scenic, wildlife, recreational, cultural,
historical, natural, educational, and scientific resources of the NCA.
conclusion
The Department is committed to working with state, tribal, and
local partners to manage public lands in Washington County. We support
the goal of addressing the infrastructure needs of growing rural
communities. As such, the Department would welcome the opportunity to
work with the sponsor and the Subcommittee on a few modifications to
the bill as it moves forward through the legislative process. Thank you
for the opportunity to provide this statement.
______
Prepared Statement of the U.S. Department of the Interior
Statement on H.R. 5875, To Amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife
Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson Federal Aid in Sport Fish
Restoration Act
The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (P-R Act), passed in
1937, along with the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (D-J
Act), passed in 1950, authorize grant programs that provide critically
important funding to states and territories for administering state
fish and wildlife programs and for implementing on-the-ground wildlife
and sport fish conservation. Revenues for the Wildlife Restoration
Program are derived from excise taxes on firearms, ammunitions, archery
equipment, and arrow components. Revenues for the Sport Fish
Restoration program are derived from excise taxes on fishing equipment,
motorboat and small engine fuels, and import duties. The source of
funding creates a ``user-pay-user-benefit'' cycle of success.
The U.S. Department of the Interior (Department), through the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration
(WSFR) program, apportioned approximately $1.1 billion in Wildlife and
Sport Fish Restoration grants to all 50 states and 6 U.S. territories
in Fiscal Year 2017. These grants provided essential support for state
agencies to conserve fish and wildlife species and their habitats, and
to enhance opportunities for boating, angling, hunting, and
recreational shooting. Through the funding that has been distributed,
nearly 10 million students have been trained in hunter education and
over 7 million hours have been contributed by volunteers to hunter
education and safety training. In addition, through this funding, 455
million acres are maintained for wildlife restoration and wildlife
recreation nationwide, and habitat improvements have been made on 2
million surface acres of reservoirs and lakes.
If enacted, H.R. 5875 would amend the P-R Act to remove the
apportionment caps of one-half of one per centum for the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, and one-sixth of one per centum for Guam, the U.S.
Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands to establish apportionment parity with the states for
one-half the revenues accruing from taxes imposed on pistols,
revolvers, bows, and arrows and to increase apportionments for Guam,
American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands under the Wildlife and Conservation
Restoration Account. Additionally, it would amend the D-J Act to remove
the per centum apportionment caps for the territories and the District.
The Department is committed to its mission of restoring trust and
fulfilling insular responsibilities, and recognizes the importance of
their respective natural resources. We are analyzing the proposed
amendments to the P-R and D-J Act and how the overall apportionments to
states and territories would be affected under H.R. 5875. We would be
happy to provide an analysis to the Committee, detailing the bill's
impacts to the WSFR program, to inform further consideration.
As the Committee considers H.R. 5875, the Department would like
bring the Committee's attention to a challenge in the administration of
these Acts. The Fish and Wildlife Programs Improvement and National
Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Act of 2000 (``Act'') (Pub. Law 106-
408, Nov. 1, 2000), Section 9 (a)(2) provides that:
. . . administrative funds may be used only for expenses for
administration that directly support the implementation of this
Act that consist of (2) personnel costs of employees who
directly administer this Act on a part-time basis for at least
20 hours each week, not to exceed the portion of those costs
incurred with respect to the work hours of the employee during
which the employee directly administers this Act, as those
hours are certified by the supervisor of the employee.
(emphasis added; 114 Stat. 1764)
FWS WSFR staff possesses expertise in managing financial assistance
programs, and are experienced in applying best business practices,
fiscal efficiencies, and fair resource allocation to each activity.
However, WSFR staff work on a myriad of programs causing difficulty in
meeting the requirements of Section 9(a)(2). We would like to work with
the Committee on finding a solution to this issue.
______
[LIST OF DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD RETAINED IN THE COMMITTEE'S
OFFICIAL FILES]
Rep. Bishop Submission on H.R. 5597
--Statement for the Record, State of Utah School &
Institutional Trust Lands Administration, dated May
29, 2018
Rep. Stewart Submissions on H.R. 5597
--Letter addressed to Rep. Stewart from Washington County
Convention & Tourism, Kevin Lewis, Director of
Tourism, dated May 17, 2018
--Letter addressed to Rep. Stewart from GRO Promotion,
Cimarron Chacon, President, dated March 26, 2018
Mr. Van Dam Submissions on H.R. 5597
--Letter addressed to Chairman Bishop and Ranking Member
Grijalva from citizens of Southwest Utah, dated May
15, 2018
--Letter addressed to Chairman Rob Bishop from the Desert
Tortoise Council, dated May 15, 2018
--Letter addressed to Chairman Bishop and Ranking Member
Grijalva from organizations opposing H.R. 5597,
dated May 15, 2018
--Letter addressed to Ranking Member Grijalva from Bill
Mader, dated May 1, 2018
Rep. Gonzalez-Colon Submissions on H.R. 5875
--Statement for the Record by Tania Vasquez Rivera,
Secretary of the Puerto Rico Department of Natural
and Environmental Resources, dated May 22, 2018
--Letter addressed to Chairman McClintock and Ranking
Member Hanabusa from Delegate Gonzalez-Colon, dated
June 1, 2018
[all]