look forward to the challenge of collaborative efforts involving the Federal agencies and other interested stakeholders as we work to preserve our lands, our access and the common good. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on this subject that we feel so passionately about. STATEMENT OF WALTER “BUD” PIDGEON, PRESIDENT, Mr. PIDGEON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, appreciate, the opportunity to testify before this Committee on behalf of the Wildlife Legislative Fund of America, or the WLFA. We have been organized since 1977 as a volunteer sportsmanbased organization to protect our American heritage to hunt, fish, and trap, and to support the vital role of scientific wildlife management. We pursue these objectives at the Federal, state, and local level for over 1.5 million members and our affiliates. Public land really provides us with a critical base for hunters and fishermen around the country. A national survey of fishing and hunting and wildlife-associated recreational activities indicate that over 4 million Americans hunted on our public lands last year. And of these citizens, about half of them, hunt on a full-time basis on public land, and it is critical for them to have that access. Hunting and fishing are important recreational activities occurring on public lands. All the public land masses-national forests, the Bureau of Land Management, national wildlife refuges and preserves, the national park systems are very important to us. Each of these systems individually provide access for hundreds of thousands of hunters and anglers. On BLM land, for example, a half million hunters were on those lands this last year. And the National Forest Service is comparable to this. But it really doesn't tell the story. Those of you who hunt or fish know, if you want elk hunting access to forest lands in the West, it would have to be by other kinds of access than walking. Try to hunt the wild turkey in the Appalachians-the forests of Virginia and West Virginia, and you have the same problem. In my home State of Ohio, I hunt primarily on public land myself. Units of national park system preserves provide another example. And South Florida's Big Cypress Preserve is a great example where access issues are coming forth as we speak. Last year, nearly 20,000 man days of hunting were affected there last year. And I can't imagine, if you were a urban southern Florida person, how you could have any other hunting experience other than in that particular area. Within the national wild refuge system, over 500 units were acquired through hundreds of thousands of dollars hunters provided through duck stamps over the last 60 years. And half of the refuge system, thank goodness, are provided to hunters for hunting opportunities. Access to public land has an array of recreational activities that are important as well. Public health comes to mind, for just being out in the outdoors. There is something about that. Human beings have to be out there once in a while. Management of these areas are important but many other things are as well, for example, the economic base of rural areas depend a lot of times on hunters and fishermen coming into those areas. Unfortunately, as it was mentioned a couple of minutes ago, we did not have the welcome sign out over the past several years, due to the last administration and others. And it is unfortunate because hunters, in particular, have constantly battled for access to public lands. In 1997, the enactment of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act is a great case in point where we were able to come to Congress to be able to seek access, and we really do appreciate that. This particular bill, I think, adds a thought to what could happen for the future. It could be a model for us to use to create a bill to recognize public access on all public lands. This act obviously resulted in the agency responding positively to hunters being on-site. And lawsuits from animal rights extremists have been outlawed and that is really exciting news. I would welcome the opportunity for our organization to work with you, to model future legislation that would provide public access for hunting throughout the public lands system. Thank you. [The prepared statement of Mr. Pidgeon follows:] Statement of Walter "Bud" P. Pidgeon, Jr., President, The Wildlife Mr. Chairman: I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the Wildlife Legislative Fund of America (WLFA) regarding the importance of recreational access to public lands. WLFA was organized in 1977 to protect the American heritage to hunt, fish, and trap and support scientific wildlife management. We pursue these objectives at the Federal, state, and local level on behalf of over 1.5 million members and affili ates. America's public lands provide critically important fishing and hunting opportunities to hunters and anglers across the nation. The latest National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Associated Recreation indicates that over 4 million Americans hunted on our public lands. Over half of these citizens hunt exclusively on public lands. Limitations on hunting access to public lands would have catastrophic effects on this large segment of the sporting community. Hunting and fishing are important recreational activities occurring on public lands and access to those lands is crucial to maintaining hunting opportunities for millions of Americans. Four major public lands systems provide hunting (and fishing) opportunities: National Forests (192 million acres), Bureau of Land Management (264 million acres), National Wildlife Refuges (92 million acres) and Preserves within the National Park System (20 million acres). Each of these systems individually provide access for hundreds of thousands of hunters and anglers. BLM estimates over half a million hunted on lands under its management. Forest Service numbers are comparable, but barely tell the whole story. Try to imagine elk hunting without access to Forest lands in the west. Trying to imagine the pursuit of wild turkeys in the Appalachians without access to the Forests of Virginia and West Virginia. And even units of the National Park System-the Preserves-provide critical access for hunters. For example, in South Florida's Big Cypress Preserve (established as the first Preserve in 1974) there are nearly 20,000 man-days of hunting effort each year. In urban South Florida, our hunting tradition would be eliminated without Big Cypress. The National Wildlife Refuge System is a special case where many of its over 500 units were acquired with hunters' dollars. Monies raised annually for over 60 years from he sale of Duck Stamps. Now over half of the units are open to hunting pro viding an array of opportunities from duck hunting in Atlantic salt marshes to brown bear hunting on Alaska's Kodiak Island. Access to public lands for an array of recreational activities is critical to assuring public health, maintaining public support for land conservation and management, and providing a stable economic base for many rural communities. Unfortunately, many recreational users-including hunters and anglers-felt less than welcome on their lands in recent years. The hanging out of a "not welcome" sign on our public lands was clearly contrary to our laws and Congressional intent. And it cut off much of the citizen support for conservation of the important habitats and resources on these lands. Hunters in particular have constantly battled for access to public lands and have needed Congress to assure that traditional access. The 1997 enactment of National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act is a case in point. Facing threats to hunting, fishing and other forms of wildlife recreation from a disinterested Administration and hostile animal rights radicals, the sporting community asked Congress for help. It responded by legislatively designating wildlife dependent recreation including hunting and fishing as priority public uses of refuges. Congress expressly recognized the legitimacy of these traditional activities on refuge lands and further provided that if found to be compatible, these uses are to be "facilitated" on refuges. The 1997 Act may provide a model for recognizing and securing public access for hunting (and other recreation) on public lands. Express legislative recognition of these activities and a direction to facilitate such uses have assured hunting use of refuge units. The agency has responded to Congressional direction. Threats of lawsuits to close Refuges to hunting from animal rights extremists have been extinguished by the law. Passage of similar legislation for other public lands systems should be strongly considered. WLFA would welcome the opportunity to work with the Committee to fashion an appropriate legislative measure. Thank you again for the opportunity to appear today. WLFA appreciates the Committees consideration of the importance of recreation on the public lands and looks forward to working with the Committee to further ensure continued access to recreational opportunities. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Pidgeon. STATEMENT OF RUSSELL L. EHNES, AMERICANS FOR Mr. EHNES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Russ Ehnes, and I am testifying today on behalf of Americans for Responsible Recreational Access. ARRA was founded almost a year ago because of growing concerns that fewer and fewer opportunities were available for recreational activities on public lands and waterways. A series of steps taken by the previous administration to limit access to public lands caused considerable concern among our members and many recreational enthusiasts. Our members recognize the critical importance of protecting our environment; we also recognize that not all forms of outdoor recreation are suitable for all sites. We also believe it is the role of government and its citizens to actively discuss ways outdoor recreation activities can be made available to all citizens, regardless of age or physical well-being. During the last 5 years, the Federal Government has erred on the side of closing access to public lands rather than managing access. We have called this the crisis of closure. Let me mention three examples. First, when the National Park Service announced its intention to ban snowmobile from national parks despite the fact that cleaner and quieter snowmobiles will be soon introduced to the marketplace. Second, when the Forest Service promulgated a rule changing the management of approximately 60 million acres of forests, inventoried roadless forests lands. Third, when President Clinton created and expanded many national monument areas without regard to the impact to local communities and recreational activities. Some have suggested that all of these actions were necessary because of the abuse on the part of a few. When someone breaks our traffic laws, society's response is not to ban all traffic on our highways. Rather, we increase enforcement and we prosecute lawbreakers. The same should hold true for activities on Federal lands and waterways. We know land managers have a tough job, made even tougher because much of what they do is challenged in the court of law. Increased administrative burdens and legal fees siphon off funds for needed work at the district level. We say this is not fair to these civil servants or the American people. Access is also being denied because of a lack of funds for maintenance and management. As our urban centers become more congested, more must be done to make our Federal lands accessible to all Americans. Making sure the money reaches the ground at the district level is critical, and we encourage this Committee to exercise its oversight to ensure this happens. Maintaining our parks and forests should not rest solely on the Federal Government. The private sector, along with volunteers, can also play an active role in the stewardship of public lands. Let me give this Committee an example from my own experience. Since 1986, the Great Falls Trail Bike Riders Association in Great Falls, Montana, has worked closely with the U.S. Forest Service in the Lewis and Clark National Forest. Our club has committed to maintain over 400 miles of trail each year. We have literally rebuilt more than 10 miles of trail and have cleared countless miles of trail for use by all recreationists. We have also made a 15-year commitment to hand pull a serious noxious weed infestation that is more than a half mile from the nearest trail. All of these things are done by volunteers. Hundreds of recreational clubs throughout the U.S. have undertaken similar activities to assist the government in providing stewardship of our public lands. But these clubs do more than just trail conservation. They sponsor and run educational programs to teach people to use Federal lands safely, respectively, and responsibly. We don't pretend to have all the answers to the challenges of managing Federal lands. From our standpoint, one thing is clear: Posting "do not enter" signs or "keep out" signs does nothing to foster civic pride or respect for the government. As I have said, our members recognize the critical importance of protecting our environment, and we recognize that not all forms of recreation are suitable for all sites. We also believe that the consultative process of determining what is and what is not appropriate must be done in an open forum, as is the case of this Committee hearing. We stand ready to do our share in terms of participating in these policymaking discussions. We are encouraged that the current administration seems intent on seeking the opinion of local government officials and citizens prior to promulgating Federal policies governing our lands. In terms of what we believe this Committee should and can do during the 107th Congress, we have these thoughts: First, rigorously exercise your oversight responsibility of the executive branch. The Federal bureaucracy needs to be reminded that maintaining access to Federal lands and waterways for recreational purposes is a national priority. Second, explore whether a new designation recognizing recreational access is worthy of congressional action, a concept similar to wilderness designation but less restrictive and more receptive to appropriate recreational access. This is a new century and new thinking is warranted for this area of public policy. Thank you for the opportunity to comment to the Committee. Statement of Russ Ehnes on Behalf of Americans for Responsible Mr. Chairman: My name is Russ Ehnes, and I am testifying today on behalf of Americans for Responsible Recreational Access (ARRA). We appreciate having this opportunity to participate in this important hearing. ARRA was founded in June of last year because of a growing concern that fewer and fewer opportunities were available for recreational activities on public lands and waterways. ARRA is comprised of the following organizations: The American Horse Council, the Motorcycle Industry Council, the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America, the American Council of Snowmobile Associations, the National Marine Manufacturers Association, the American Motorcyclist Association, the Personal Watercraft Industry Association and the National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council. In addition, a number of state and regional user organizations have affiliated with ARRA. Our members recognize the critical importance of protecting our environment. We also recognize that not all forms of outdoor recreation are suitable for all sites. We believe it should be the role of government and its citizens to actively discuss ways in which outdoor recreational activities can be made available to all citizens regardless of age or physical well-being. Unfortunately, many of the policies pursued by the Federal Government over the past five years served to limit opportunities for recreational access. ARRA members have been concerned with the general attitude of closing off public lands to Americans. We have called this the "Crisis of Closure." We witnessed this when the National Park Service announced its intention to limit snowmobile access to many of our National Parks without regard to the fact that newer, cleaner and quieter snowmobiles are on the verge of being introduced to the marketplace. We witnessed this again when the U.S. Forest Service promulgated a rule that would change the management of approximately 60 million acres of inventoried roadless areas in our national forests without regard to the impact such major shifts in land use management would have on local economies adjacent to the affected national forests. It goes without saying that we were pleased when Judge Lodge issued a preliminary injunction temporarily halting the roadless rule because the Forest Service failed to abide by the consultative process as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). And, we witnessed this many times when President Clinton arbitrarily placed "off limits" millions of acres of Federal land to recreational activities when he established or expanded numerous national monument areas. We do not deny that there are problems associated with managing and using our public lands. The solution to such problems should not be, however, the simple response of denying access to these lands. Too often some interest groups push agencies to cut off access to these lands to only but a select few. Automatically restricting access is the easy way out and is too punitive to millions of law-abiding citizens who care about the environment. |