House Committee on Natural Resources Archives - Page 4 of 8

Committee Passes Legislation to Require Transparency, Public Input in Antiquities Act

October 12, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources

Today, the House Committee on Natural Resources passed H.R. 3990, the “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” or the “CAP Act.” Introduced by Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), the bill protects archeological resources while ensuring public transparency and accountability in the executive’s use of the Antiquities Act.

“Congress never intended to give one individual the power to unilaterally seize enormous swathes of our nation’s public lands… Our problem isn’t President Obama or President Trump. It’s the underlying law – a statute that provides authority to dictate national monument decisions in secrecy and without public input. The only path to the accountability we all seek – no matter which party controls the White House – is to amend the Act itself,” Bishop stated.

“Under this new, tiered framework, no longer would we have to blindly trust the judgement or fear the whims of any president. The bill ensures a reasonable degree of consultation with local stakeholders and an open public process would be required by law. It strengthens the president’s authority to protect actual antiquities without the threat of disenfranchising people.

“Ultimately, if enacted, it will strengthen the original intent of the law while also providing much needed accountability.”

Click here to view Chairman Bishop’s full opening statement.

Click here to view full markup action.

Click here for more information on H.R. 3990.

Rep. Rob Bishop: Restore the Antiquities Act’s noble vision

October 11, 2017 — In a Tuesday op-ed, I explained the constitutional threat posed by the Antiquities Act, and why its repeated abuse is inconsistent with the constitutional pillars of the rule of law and checks and balances. As it turns out, there’s a reason the Founders chose these principles as the basis of our government: arbitrary rule has no incentive to be accountable to the people that policies affect. Without that accountability, political and ideological manipulation corrodes the balance of power.

Some of the most egregious abuses – the use of the Antiquities Act as a political weapon – happened under President Bill Clinton’s administration.

In 1996, prior to the designation of the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument in Utah, Clinton’s then-Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality Katie McGinty stated the following, “I’m increasingly of the view that we should just drop these utah [sic] ideas. we [sic] do not really know how the enviros will react and I do think there is a danger of ‘abuse’ of the withdraw/antiquities authorities especially because these lands are not really endangered.”

Could there be any clearer statement of the prioritization of political ideology over the will of people?

The monument was designated in the waning months of Clinton’s re-election campaign. Its total acreage: 1.7 million — three times the size of Rhode Island. No town halls, no public meetings, and no public comment sessions were ever held in Utah. No input was solicited from local stakeholders or land managers in the area. Utah’s governor, congressional delegation, public officials, and residents from across the state all expressed outrage at the lack of prior consultation or warning of the designation. In what feels like symbolism, the proclamation wasn’t even signed in Utah; it was signed in Arizona.

Read the full op-ed at the Washington Examiner

What They Are Saying: Democrats Call for Antiquities Act Transparency

October 11, 2017 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources through its newsletter The Scope:

If there’s anything we learned from the recent national monument review and decades of Antiquities Act (Act) abuse, it’s that Republicans and Democrats finally want the same thing: transparency and public input in the Act’s uses.

Ironically, for Democrats, it’s also an admission of the underlying problem – a statute that provides the president with unilateral authority to dictate national monument decisions in secrecy and without public input. It’s a recognition that the only path to creating the accountability we all seek – no matter which party controls the White House – is to amend the Act itself.

Thankfully, we have a solution: Chairman Bishop’s “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” or “CAP Act.”

Over the past months, Democrats have gone above and beyond to argue the importance of transparency in the executive’s use of the Act and for local communities to have a voice in the process. Well, we agree.

TRANSPARENCY:

Ranking Member Raul Grijalva (D-AZ): “It has been opaque and it has been contrived.”
Ranking Member Raul Grijalva: “…let’s see some transparency and public accountability.”
Rep. Ruben Kihuen (D-NV): “It’s obviously very, very disappointing in the lack of specificity and transparency.”
Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-CA): “The American people deserve to know what the President’s intentions are.”
Rep. Donald McEachin (D-VA): “[T]he American people deserve transparency and honesty.”
Rep. Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam): “The people of Guam deserve transparency…”

NOTE: While protecting the chief executive’s authority to designate monuments, the “CAP Act” requires proper environmental review and safeguards for public notice and coordination.

PUBLIC INPUT:

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR): “…should focus on addressing local input…”
Rep. Ruben Kihuen: “This whole process has been a sham. There hasn’t been transparency… listen to the American people.”
Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA): “…zero interest in hearing directly from the people who would be most impacted.”
Rep. Grace Napolitano: “…listen to my constituents as well as local stakeholders on what the monument means to our community.”
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM): “It doesn’t come as a surprise that local voices were not taken into consideration…”
Sen. Martin Heinrich: “…a sloppy, inaccurate, and Washington-first work product devoid of local engagement. [N]ew Mexicans…are in the dark about what is going to happen…”

NOTE: While protecting the chief executive’s authority to designate monuments, the “CAP Act” requires all county commissions, state legislatures, and Governors in the area to approve of new monuments between 10,000 and 85,000 acres.

POLITICALLY DRIVEN PROCESS:

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR): “…a politically driven process.”
Rep. Grijalva: “…choosing to appease… special interest friends instead of listening to the American people.”
Sen. Martin Heinrich: “It’s clear this…is a politically driven attempt by Washington.”
Sen. Martin Heinrich: “The public deserves better than predetermined political conclusions based on hearsay and claims that are easily disproven if the department had actually taken the time to listen to and work with local communities.”

NOTE: The “CAP Act” allows the president to make unilateral designations to protect resources under imminent threat while imposing public input requirements for larger monuments. It would end the era of politically motivated land grabs taking place in the dark of night, while restoring the Act’s intent.

Subcommittee Chairmen Respond to Antiquities Act Reform Legislation

October 10, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

Tomorrow, the Committee will markup H.R. 3990, the “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” or “CAP Act.” Introduced by Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), the bill protects archeological resources while ensuring public transparency and accountability in the executive’s use of the Antiquities Act.

“The Constitution gives to Congress alone the jurisdiction over public lands. While the executive should be able to move swiftly to protect small archeological sites from imminent threat of looting or desecration, the decision over whether to set aside vast portions of land in perpetuity should only be made after the lengthy debate, public input and accountability that are the unique attributes of the legislative branch,” Subcommittee on Federal Lands Chairman Tom McClintock (R-CA) said.

“Our government works best when it works with the people it serves to accomplish objectives for the common good. For too long, our leaders have not adhered to these principles. The ‘National Monument Creation and Protection Act’ seeks to protect the public’s interests from executive overreach through collaboration with local stakeholders, comprehensive review of monument designations and congressional direction on any future presidential monument reductions. I thank Chairman Bishop for his leadership on this issue and look forward to passage of this important legislation,” Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR) stated.

“When Teddy Roosevelt created the Antiquities Act, his intent was to set aside unique areas of land, not to cutoff millions of acres for the federal government to control that produces no revenue or benefit – all while hurting local governments. Through the years, the abuse of this power has snowballed to a point where President Obama designated more acreage during his Presidency than all other Presidents combined. This process unfairly eliminates local input altogether and severely limits the public’s access to hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities as well as reasonable resource development on their public lands. It is important that the decision to designate or expand national monuments is returned to Congress, where the local citizens and communities can have a say,” Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs Chairman Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) said.

“This legislation secures a future for locally supported national monuments, checked executive authority, and empowered local governments. The original intent of the Act is upheld and strengthened with measures that bring us into the twenty-first century. I firmly believe this will provide the accountability we need when it comes to protecting our lands,”Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans Chairman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) stated.

“Regardless of political affiliation, presidents on either side of the aisle shouldn’t be able to create massive new national monuments by executive fiat without local public input. It is, after all, the people living near these national monuments that are most affected by their creation. Our nation’s public resources are best managed when the people that use those lands are intimately involved in the process. Chairman Bishop’s ‘National Monument Creation and Protection Act’ protects private property rights and empowers local stakeholders while also including important clarifying definitions that should have been included in the original law. I am grateful for his strong leadership on this issue and am proud to be a cosponsor,” Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Chairman Paul Gosar (R-AZ) said.

Rep. Rob Bishop: Antiquities Act is a Menace to Constitutional Government

October 10, 2017 — You heard it in your high school civics class: America has “a government of laws and not of men.” The rule of law is the basis of the constitutional order erected by the Founders. “A government with unpredictable and arbitrary laws poisons the blessings of liberty itself.” The first axiom is from John Adams, the second is from James Madison. Their sentiments were universal in the founding generation and ought to continue today. Checks and balances have no teeth when our leaders can disregard the laws and rule according to their whims.

I said that the rule of law should still be the foundation of our politics. Unfortunately, that certainly does not mean it is not threatened. There is no more flagrant violation of this principle of our government than the repeated abuse of the Antiquities Act in the designation of national monuments.

Passed in 1906 authorizing the president to protect “antiquities,” or objects of historic interest under imminent threat, the plain language of the law requires that all designations be “confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

The act is not difficult to understand. It is not ambiguous. Any honest reading reveals that it was created to protect “landmarks,” “structures,” and “objects” – not vast swaths of land.

Read the full opinion piece at the Washington Examiner

NCFC Member Grant Moore Joins Sen. Lee, Chairman Bishop on Antiquities Act Panel in Washington

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) – October 4, 2017 – Grant Moore, president of NCFC member the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association, joined Utah Senator Mike Lee and House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop in a Heritage Foundation panel today on Capitol Hill to discuss national monuments and the Antiquities Act.

At the panel, “National Monuments and the Communities They Impact: Views Beyond the Beltway,” Mr. Moore criticized last year’s designation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument by President Barack Obama, which he said lacked sufficient industry input and public deliberation. The monument designation affects fisheries worth more than $100 million, he said.

“We’re not opposed to monuments,” Mr. Moore said. “We’re opposed to the process in which it was done. It was not transparent. It was not open. If we hadn’t stumbled upon what was happening, we would have had a signature and we wouldn’t have had a say at all.”

Mr. Moore complimented Chairman Bishop for meeting with fishermen and listening to their story in a visit to New Bedford, Mass., last year arranged by Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities. He also praised another meeting organized by the NCFC earlier this year in which Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke met with fishermen in Boston as part of his review of national monuments.

Secretary Zinke has reportedly recommended to President Donald Trump that commercial fishing be allowed in the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Monument. The Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association, based in Newport, R.I., was one of eleven NCFC member organizations that publicly voiced its support for the Secretary’s reported recommendations. At today’s panel, Mr. Moore praised these recommendations, but called them a “Band Aid” that would not prevent the Antiquities Act from being misused to create large national monuments in the future.

“We need to reform the Antiquities Act so it’s not abused,” Mr. Moore said. “Nobody should have the power with the stroke of a pen to put people out of business. Nobody. It has to go through a public process.”

In his remarks, Senator Lee also called for changes to the Antiquities Act. “What’s needed is a wholesale reform of the Antiquities Act to return its monumental power back to where it belongs – to the people who reside closest to the proposed monuments,” he said. “Local residents must have ultimate say over whether their communities can be upended in this way.”

Chairman Bishop discussed the original intent of the Antiquities Act to save endangered antiquities while leaving the smallest footprint possible. But with national monuments now frequently encompassing hundreds of millions of acres, he argued that they are no longer leaving the smallest footprint possible.

“What started as something noble and grand turned into something far different, far less, and it is time now to reform it and make it useful again,” Chairman Bishop said. “The Antiquities Act desperately needs some kind of reform because it is being abused today.”

Watch the full panel here

Politicians call for more flexibility in Magnuson-Stevens Act

September 29, 2017 — During testimony at a Congressional hearing Tuesday, officials and lawmakers alike called for the next version of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to include greater flexibility to oversee the country’s regional fisheries.

The House Committee on Natural Resources’ Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans discussed three bills and a draft of another all focused on reauthorizing or amending the law that oversees the country’s fishery management programs in federal waters.

“It is my hope that we can use these bills in front of us today to produce a strong, bipartisan Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization that supports jobs and our fishermen by strengthening the science, data and process used in federal fisheries management,” said U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colorado), the subcommittee chairman.

U.S. Rep. Jared Huffman (D-California) welcomed the call for a bipartisan approach. In noting that it’s been more than a decade since the last reauthorization of Magnuson-Stevens, he said that partisan agendas have delayed important updates that would address flexibility and accountability issues.

“This process has focused on weakening fundamental environmental protections in place of making meaningful improvements to our important fisheries management framework,” said Huffman, the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Rep Young’s Magnuson Bill to Move Ahead with Input from Calif. Rep Huffman; Aim is No Poison Pills

September 28, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Alaska’s Representative Don Young closed Tuesday’s hearing on four fisheries bills, by remarking to the panel, “We are going to use the vehicle of [HR] 200. I’m going to work with Mr. Huffman and see if we can’t come to some conclusion.

“The basic skeleton of the Magnuson Act … we’re going to keep the skeleton whole. Get those comments and suggestions to us, because we’re going to try to get something moving by October or November this year,” Young said.

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA) introduced a discussion draft called “Strengthening Fishing Communities through Improving Science, Increasing Flexibility, and Modernizing Fisheries Management Act.” The discussion paper includes sections on Council transparency, flexibility in rebuilding fish stocks, Saltonstall-Kennedy Act reform, red snapper cooperative research and others.

Rep. Jared Huffman said after the hearing Tuesday that Democrats and Republicans have many agreements when it comes to fishery regulations and management.

However, he said previous attempts in recent years to amend and reauthorize the law have stalled because of “poison pill” riders that would exempt fisheries from conservation policies such as the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Protection Act.

“Instead of making meaningful improvements to our most important fisheries statute, this process has focused on weakening fundamental environmental protections in place of making meaningful improvements to our important fisheries management framework,” Huffman (D-San Rafael) said in his opening statement at the committee hearing. “This partisan process does a disservice to hardworking fishermen across the country including those in my district.”

Members from both sides of the aisle were in agreement that the law — known as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 — has worked to prevent overfishing and replenish overfished stocks as was intended upon its passage.

Two other bills were discussed and commented on at the hearing by invited witnesses. HR 3588 and HR 2023 are focused on modernizing recreational fisheries and managing red snapper in regional ways, respectively.

The hearing was before the Water, Power, and Industry Subcommittee of the larger House Committee on Natural Resources.

Witnesses included Chris Oliver, Director of NOAA Fisheries; Mayor Johnathan Mitchell of New Bedford; Mike Merrifield, Southeastern Fisheries Association; Susan Boggs, co-owner of a charter operation out of Alabama, and others.

Chairman Doug Lamborn opened the hearing saying “Many of you here today probably consider this to be a fishery hearing, but I assure you it is much more than that. …whether we are talking about a commercial, recreational, or charter boat operation, the working waterfront that provides shore side support, a boat manufacturer or your local mom and pop bait and tackle shop, today’s hearing is about supporting American small business. It’s my hope today that we will create a strong, bi-partisan MSA that supports jobs and our fishermen, and that supports the science data and process used in federal fisheries management.”

Jonathan Mitchell, Mayor of New Bedford, pushed back on the concept of “flexibility.”

“The term “flexibility” should not be understood as a euphemism for deregulation,” Mitchell said. “The councils are in the business of finely calibrating decisions in light of relevant environmental and economic data, and their own experience and expertise.

“In the discharge of their duties, they tend not to win friends either in the fishing industry or in the conservation community, and given the goals of Magnuson-Stevens, that’s probably the way it should be,” Mitchell said.

Susan Boggs, co-owner in a charter boating operation in Alabama, supported the current MSA.

“I am here today to tell you that MSA is working. This law was written to bring fisheries back from collapse, to ensure long-term sustainability for future generations, and to provide a conduit for stakeholders to be a part of the management process.

“There are several species of fish that are critical to the charter/for-hire sector in the Gulf of Mexico, but perhaps none more than red snapper. Since 2007, when annual catch limits became a requirement, the recreational sector’s quota for red snapper has tripled. MSA has worked for us.

“A suggestion that I would offer to this committee that would have a meaningful impact on the management of this fishery would be a Federal Red Snapper angler license,” she said.

“No one can tell you how many anglers target Red Snapper in the Gulf of Mexico. This license does not have to be cost prohibitive. Even a $10 fee would provide better data on the number of anglers targeting this species and could generate millions of dollars that could be used for cost recovery, stock assessments and better landings data which should include more real-time reporting using current technology from private anglers.”

Chris Oliver listed challenges to NOAA, nationwide and how MSA can tackle them. “We face formidable challenges managing recovering stocks to benefit both commercial and recreational user groups with fundamentally different goals and objectives, and who are experiencing increased fish interactions due to the strong management measures that have improved historically overfished populations.

“Together with our partners, it is essential that we continue to explore innovative, science-based management approaches and regional management tools. We must remain dedicated to exploring ways to maximize economic opportunities from wild-caught fisheries for commercial and recreational fishermen, processors, and communities. We are committed to working with Congress on the bills put forth by this subcommittee, to ensure that annual catch limits, accountability measures, stock rebuilding, and other aspects of our management construct are working, while protecting the overall, long-term conservation and sustainability of the nation’s fishery resources.”

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

MASSACHUSETTS: Mayor Mitchell testifies in front of Congress on Magnuson-Stevens

September 27, 2017 — NEW BEDFORD, Mass. — Mayor Jon Mitchell traveled to the nation’s capital Tuesday to speak on potential improvements to the Magnuson-Steven Act, which governs marine fishery management in the United States.

He spoke to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans regarding one key theme: flexibility.

“What New Bedford has to say about commercial fishing carries weight in the halls of Congress,” Mitchell said. “We are the biggest commercial fishing port in the country. We should have a seat at the table when Congress goes about reforming our nation’s fisheries laws.”

Mitchell was invited to testify by Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop who visited New Bedford last year. Though invited by the Republicans to speak in front of Congress, the Democratic mayor pitched bi-partisan ideas in the reauthorization of the act.

“What’s really interesting is there isn’t a great deal of difference between the Democratic and Republican reauthorization bills,” Mitchell said. “I testified as much.”

While in Washington, D.C., he also met with Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, to discuss tax reform in cities as well as infrastructure. Away from fishing, he also met with Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, who co-sponsored the DREAM Act aimed at helping resurrect DACA.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

Fishing rule reforms debated on Capitol Hill

September 27, 2017 — How large of a role should the federal government have in regulating fishing fleets?

Republicans and Democrats on the House Committee on Natural Resources discussed this question Tuesday in Washington, D.C., as part of renewed efforts to reauthorize and potentially amend a 40-year-old law that works to prevent overfishing and provide aid to fishing fleets.

Committee member and California 2nd District Rep. Jared Huffman said after the hearing Tuesday that Democrats and Republicans have many agreements when it comes to fishery regulations and management.

Read the full story at the Eureka Times-Standard