Ralph Regula

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, if it is in order, I ask unanimous consent that we have 30 minutes, 15 minutes for each side, to debate the amendment to be offered by the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio] and any amendments thereto.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, first of all, for the Members' information, I believe this will be the last amendment and the last vote. There is one additional amendment, and we are going to accept that amendment.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. REGULA. Secondly, I want to thank all the Members for their patience today. It has been difficult, but we have dealt with a lot of very challenging policy issues. I think we have tried to deal with them in a fair way; you win some and you lose some, but that is the way democracy should work. Now, let us address this amendment. We had over 400 letters from Members requesting something, almost every Member in this body, we had 150 Members request land acquisition projects, 150. We denied them all. But now we are being asked to give just one out of 150. If we yield to this one, we will have 149 requests later on that we are supposed to meet. Let me tell you where the money is coming from. USGS, United States Geologic Survey. What do they do, earthquake research, geology research. They provide enormous amounts of scientific advice to many different agencies, and we are being asked to take $15 million out of this agency for one land acquisition, even though we have had requests from 150 Members. The Committee on the Budget clearly said a moratorium on land acquisition. We have tried to respond to that because that became the policy by a vote of this body. I would point out that this money goes essentially to the State of Florida. The State of Florida should be responsible for their own projects. I am [[Page H 7003]] not questioning the merits of the land acquisition. I am simply saying that, under the circumstances, this is not a good policy and would not be fair to the other 149 Members that we have had to deny land acquisition projects.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I accept the amendment.

Mr. REGULA. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Chairman, I do not think this is fair to the Members who have an interest in these amendments and, therefore, I have to object to that request.

Mr. REGULA. I object.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman yield?

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I have been assured by the gentleman from Alaska that he will hold a hearing on this issue prior to the conference on this bill, and if the evidence would indicate that these aircraft are important to law enforcement, I think we can deal with it in the conference committee.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I think we have had the assurance of the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee that there will be a hearing on this. This bill does not take effect until October 1. We will have a conference committee in September. If the hearing indicates that there is a need, I have been assured by the gentleman that we can deal with that in conference and ensure that there is adequate equipment. I think the point is accurate; it is not just getting a donation of an airplane. Again, it is the operating costs that factor in. So it does not stop with the airplane.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. REGULA. Reclaiming my time, I do plan to have oversight hearings and we will certainly include one on this prior to conference.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Alaska.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I do not know that we had testimony that indicated a need. I think we just accepted the budget justifications that were offered by the department. It is kind of a routine thing, but I think the issue has been raised, and therefore, prior to conference we should have an oversight hearing in our Appropriations subcommittee. We have had a huge workload, and I think this indicates a need for that type of a hearing.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, this is a bipartisan amendment. It strikes the language in the Fish and Wildlife Service administrative provisions which amends the Emergency Wetlands Act of 1986 to allow the Fish and Wildlife Service to retain the refuge entrance fee collections. Under the current law, 70 percent of these fee collections are distributed through the Migratory Bird Conservation Act to be used for land acquisitions approved by the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission. And I might add that my amendment that was just approved, as amended by the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Gilchrest], provides funds to do the bird count. We looked at the language. In effect what this does is allow the refuge entrance fee collections to be used to buy additional wetlands which, of course, provide habitat for migratory birds. It is supported by a wide range of groups who are interested in the preservation of wildlife, as well as the various sportsmen groups. I think it is a good amendment. We have worked it out with the authorizers and I know that we have had support on both sides. The amendment strikes language in the Fish and Wildlife Service administrative provisions which amends the Emergency Wetlands Act of 1986 to allow the Fish and Wildlife Service to retain all of the refuge entrance fees. Under current law, 70 percent of these fee collections are distributed to the migratory bird conservation account to be used for land acquisitions approved by the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission. Currently the Commission receives approximately $21 million from duck stamp receipts, $18 million from import duties, and $1.7 million from refuge entrance fees, which are all available for land acquisition through a permanent appropriation. The committee had proposed language to allow the Fish and Wildlife Service to retain the $1.7 million which goes to the migratory bird conservation account since the current amount which the Fish and Wildlife Service retains does not cover the costs involved to collect the fees, and serves as a disincentive to increase future collections. The committee also noted the 5-year moratorium on land acquisition that was included in the budget resolution, and reduced funding in the bill for land acquisition by 78 percent or $184 million. The $41 million permanent appropriation out of the migratory bird conservation account for land acquisition would have been reduced by 4 percent or $1.7 million. However, in deference to the authorizing committee which raised an objection to this language in the Rules Committee, the amendment is being offered to strike the language.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment marked No. 2.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I started out here to allow money in Fish and Wildlife to use the volunteers to count the birds, migratory birds, breeding birds. Of course, this was something the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] is interested in, and all of us are interested in. I have been involved in that, too. We use Boy Scouts, we use 4-H Club members, we use all kinds of people. I do not want to lose sight of the original objective of what I was trying to achieve here. Mr. Chairman, I will say, in fairness to the westerners, and I have recently spent 2 days in California in the mountains, and there is absolutely no indication, no boundary markers, nothing. If you look at a map, it is a section of private land, a section of public land, a section of private land, and it is a checkerboard, because, of course, that is the way it was laid out when the land was originally given to the railroads, so people who would be out there trying to do any kind of a count, whether it is a fauna or flowers or birds or whatever, would not really know whether they were on public lands or private lands. That was the concern that is expressed. One last thing, Mr. Chairman. It illustrates the problem, and I hope the gentleman, Mr. Gilchrest, and the gentleman, Mr. Miller, both of whom are members of the authorizing committee, will resolve this problem in their committee and bring us a piece of legislation. When that happens, all of this drops out. This illustrates the importance of the authorizers dealing with this. This is temporary legislation to deal with an immediate concern.

Mr. REGULA. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.