![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
: National Desk, Environment Reporter
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRe...d=140-10282003 Contact: Bonnie Galvin, 202-429-2681, Kristen Brengel, 202-429-2694, Dave Slater, 202-429-8441, Pete Rafle, 202-429-2642, all of The Wilderness Society WASHINGTON, Oct. 28 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a statement of The Wilderness Society: Not only will fewer wild and scenic places gain protection next year under a $19.66 billion Interior Department spending bill agreed to last night, but existing environmental protections for wild landscapes in Alaska and the Rocky Mountain West were stripped away during final negotiations. Perhaps the most egregious development was the elimination of a provision passed by the House of Representatives that would have protected National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, National Monuments, and Wilderness Areas from road-building under a 19th-century mining law known as RS 2477. The House had voted to add the Republican-sponsored compromise language during floor debate, but conferees stripped it out of the final bill, despite support for the clause from conservation groups and members of Congress from both parties. (See attached backgrounder below for more information.) "This was a truly radical move," said Kristen Brengel of The Wilderness Society. "By removing their own compromise language, the House leadership has signaled that parks, refuges, and wilderness are on the chopping block and ready to be carved up by roads. Back in July, the American public was left with the impression that Congress would protect the country's most sensitive land from the Bush Administration's overreaching regulation. Now we know that nothing is sacred, even America's National Parks could be in danger." The bill also abandons the Conservation Trust Fund, and underfunds its programs by hundreds of millions of dollars. Congress established the Conservation Trust Fund in 2000 to provide a special pot of money for, and only for, priority conservation, recreation and wildlife programs, including effective and popular programs like the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), Forest Legacy, and State Wildlife Grants. A bipartisan coalition of 56 senators had sent a strongly worded letter to conferees asking them to maintain the Conservation Trust Fund commitment. However, the conference Interior Appropriations bill does not include the Conservation Trust Fund mechanism. Cuts in Conservation Trust Fund programs include a 44 percent reduction in LWCF federal land acquisition, from $313 million in Fiscal Year 2003, to $177 million. "This significantly undermines our nation's ability to protect its remaining wild and natural places, and the wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources that make them special," said Bonnie Galvin, Director of Appropriations and Budget for The Wilderness Society. "The Conservation Trust Fund promised critically-needed funding that would have, after decades of struggle, ensured adequate resources to protect and enhance our nation's parks, forests, wildlife refuges and other public lands. This bill, in contrast, cuts hundreds of millions of dollars from federal land acquisition and other priority conservation activities." "There are people across the country willing to sell their land to strengthen and expand National Parks and Refuges, but they can't wait forever," said Galvin. "These are more than just numbers. Wild places will be developed and paved over because of the cuts in conservation spending." Among the other environmentally damaging provisions of the bill approved last night by a House-Senate conference committee was a provision sponsored by Senator Ted Stevens (R, AK) that would hamstring citizens' ability to challenge certain timber sales in the Tongass National Forest in south-east Alaska. At press time, it was not yet clear whether a provision allowing drilling in the waters of Alaska's Bristol Bay was included. -- RS 2477 Background o Last-minute Removal of "RS 2477" Provision Opens Sensitive Public Lands to Damaging Road Claims Last night, while finalizing the Interior appropriations bill for 2004, Congress removed an important provision to the House bill that would have protected some of America's most sensitive and beloved public lands from damaging road claims made under an arcane law known as Revised Statute 2477. The provision, section 337, would have barred implementation of a recent Department of the Interior regulation establishing procedures for issuing "recordable disclaimers of interest" with regard to any lands within a designated National Park, National Wildlife Refuge, National Monument, and Wilderness and Wilderness Study area. The circumstances under which this provision was stripped from the bill are troubling. In July, the House majority passed a measure that limited an amendment by Rep. Mark Udall that would have prohibited use of federal funds to process road claims made under RS 2477. In doing so, the majority stated a commitment to prohibiting BLM from processing disclaimers on roads crossing National Parks, National Monuments, Wilderness Study Areas, National Wildlife Refuges, or federal Wilderness areas. Just last week, 104 House members sent a letter to House and Senate members of the Interior Appropriations conference committee to urge them to leave intact the House-passed amendment. But last night's ill-conceived elimination of the provision means that counties could be allowed to develop roads across these precious lands that are owned by all Americans. "The conservation community is often condemned for asking for too much, but in this case we supported a compromise agreement and had the rug pulled out from under us," said The Wilderness Society's Kristen Brengel. "Congress passed an amendment in July saying that they wanted to limit use of this extreme and harmful rule. Now, they have used a closed conference to pull a bait and switch that clearly establishes that they are not even going to put National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges off limits to these damaging road claims." http://www.usnewswire.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|