Greg Walden

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. I would like to take a moment to outline just how Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act complies with the NEPA standards and often exceeds those standards. The Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act requires public notice, public collaboration, and an opportunity for the public to object to any proposed action. Read the bill: Pages 22, 23, 24, 25, 33, and 34. It is right there in black and white. The judicial review requirement under this bill is identical to those in the Healthy Forest Restoration Act which Congress passed last year. See page 35. Now, we actually passed that a couple years ago, and I know my friend and colleague from West Virginia voted against it when it was in the House and voted against the conference report when it came back. So it is no surprise because he doesn't like this bill because he hated the Healthy Forest Restoration Act even after the Senate voice-voted it, as did my colleague from New Mexico, Mr. Udall, opposed the Healthy Forest Restoration Act. So some of the same people who are here today saying we are going to do all these awful things said the same thing a couple years ago when we passed the Healthy Forest Restoration Act. Ironically, some of those same Members now say, oh, we are not fully implementing the Healthy Forest Restoration Act and we should be doing more on that. We wouldn't have it if they had been in charge because they voted against it every time they had an opportunity. The Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act also requires disclosure of the decision rationale, economic analysis, and analysis of the environmental effects of the project which leads to a very transparent agency process, page 32. We require independent, third- party, scientific peer review of recovery practices. See page 13 and page 24. These are just a few examples of how this legislation complies with the intent of NEPA, and if the agency fails to comply with all these things, we prescribe in the law they can be sued. If they fail to comply with the very laws that have been identified by my colleague, they can be sued. These projects can be halted. We do not say do anything you want, notwithstanding any other Federal law, including all the ones you have heard listed repeatedly. Those laws still have to be complied with. Currently there are bills that actually go further than where this bill goes. They would waive environmental documentation altogether. My friend and colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall), one of the most vocal critics of this legislation, has introduced H.R. 4875, which, through categorical exclusion, would waive environmental documentation completely for insect emergency areas in Colorado. We do not do that here. I read where one of the opponents of this legislation worked on the sale in the Biscuit fire, and said we do not need this bill, we did 16 million boardfeet of harvest, and we did it using existing laws. Yeah, they used a categorical exclusion which you cannot even do now. We have a balanced bill here. It involves the public. It tracks with what we did with the Healthy Forest Restoration Act to allow for free decisional appeals and for judicial appeal. It is backed by all kinds of groups that love to be in the outdoors, the Bear Trust International, Boone and Crockett Club, the Bow Hunting Preservation Alliance, the Archery Trade, the Congressional Sportsmen Caucus, you go through it, people are out there enjoying the woods, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the Deer Management Association, and professional firefighters groups and the Society of American Foresters. We are trying to give our Federal land managers the troops that our State and tribal land managers have, and we are trying to allow them to be able to move quicker and still involve the public because this Member of Congress believes fundamentally the public should have the right to appeal a decision of the government, and this bill allows that. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments of my colleague and friend from southern Oregon, and we have tried to come together on this legislation, and we have not quite gotten there yet, but I have to rise in opposition to his amendment. The term ``timber production land'' means different things when discussing different forests. Even in the broadest sense, land where timber is the primary objective has been steadily decreasing, reflecting a shifting focus on timber production to using harvest for other purposes, such as wildlife habitat, hazardous fuels reduction or forest health. For example, in Oregon there are 32 million acres of BLM and national forestlands. Less than 20 percent is designated for timber production. In the State of California, of the 12 national forests in the Sierra framework, totaling over 11 million acres, only 1 percent is designated as timber production land. These figures illustrate just what a devastating effect the amendment would have. It would be very, very restrictive, guaranteeing only a very small portion of the Nation's forests would have proper recovery efforts in the event of a catastrophe. Obviously, a quicker review and recovery is necessary than what this amendment would allow at this point. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett).

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am delighted today to bring H.R. 4200 to the House for its consideration. I have spoken on it during the debate on the rule. This legislation is extraordinarily important for America to become a better steward of her forests. Our Committee on the Forest and Forest Health has traveled the Nation's forests. We have listened to the experts from the scientific community. We have listened to the experts in the fire-fighting community. We have held field hearings where we have heard from tribal leaders who manage forestlands and move quickly after catastrophic events. We have met with State foresters who, in many cases, are in after a major forest fire or blowdown in a matter of days, if not weeks, doing what we propose to allow your Federal Land Management Agencies to do. You see, every other manager of Federal forest does what we are trying to put in place here. We do require that environmental laws be followed. We do provide for administrative appeal and litigation. What we require is that the underlying forest plans be followed. And if those forest plans say you can't harvest here and you have to do this sort of retention there for snags and habitat, then you have to do that. We don't change any of that. We require a site-specific evaluation, so it isn't a one-size- fits-all plan. We don't do that from here. We just say, whatever your plan called for, whatever the scientists on the ground say needs to be done, let us give our Federal land managers the authority to move quicker than they can move today if an emergency exists. It is precisely what we expect out of our Federal Emergency Management Agency and, yes, demand: quick action after a hurricane in southern States, let us say, to clean up, to restore, to prevent erosion, to fix roads, to do the things that Americans expect and actually think are being done. We want to protect our watersheds, and this legislation will help us do that. The timber that comes out, if that is what the decision is, will have value. Today, when it takes 2 to 3 years to harvest a burned, dead tree that bugs have been in, that rot has occurred and nobody bids on it, it has no value, or very little by then. What the Congressional Budget Office found, unlike what my colleague from New Mexico said is, what they found is by passing this legislation, we would actually act quicker and the trees wouldn't have deteriorated, and the receipts to the Federal Government would be up 40 percent, not that we would harvest that many more trees necessarily. But you do it while they still have value. And that makes sense to the taxpayers and the forests. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota, the chairman of the Forest Committee and the Agriculture Committee, Mr. Gutknecht.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Madam Chairman, I certainly appreciate all of the work that Mr. Duncan has done on our Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health, and the gentleman's comments today really, I think, make a very, very strong point. We have more forested acres today than we did 100 years ago, and we have more trees today than we did. In fact, one of the issues we face in America's forests in the West is overstocked forests. And when forests get overstocked, then bugs come in, nature takes over, you have disease, you have stressed trees, and often they die. And then you get a fire. You have seen earlier in the debate pictures of these forests after they have burned. Now I represent a district that is nearly 70,000 square miles, home to, I think, 10 or 11 national forests. More than half of the land mass of the district I represent is in government ownership. I love to get out and backpack and hike. I was up on Dog Mountain this weekend in Columbia Gorge. I love these forests. I want healthy green forests, I want to protect the watersheds. I also drive through forests that burned years ago and nothing has been done to recover them. There are valuable stands of timber there that could have been harvested to pay for the recovery effort. The Congressional Budget Office says if we allow the Forest Service and the BLM to move quicker on the projects they deem to be appropriate under their planning documents and in compliance with the Federal environmental laws, we could actually increase receipts by 40 percent from those sales. Forty percent. We could pay for the restoration work. We could restore the forests. Now, you have heard comments today about how do we define a disaster. Well, we define it virtually identically to the way the Federal Emergency Management Agency defines a major disaster. The language is almost identical. It means any natural catastrophic catastrophe, including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind-driven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowslide, drought. All of those things contribute to a catastrophe in America's forests, and so we use the same definition. So if you don't like our definition here, well then maybe we need to change FEMA. But I don't think anybody would stand for that in an emergency. If we have an emergency in a forest, the emergency doesn't end when the smoke clears. We have also heard today, erroneously, no site evaluation. We would wipe that out. Nobody would ever have to go on the ground. That is not true. Go to page 32 of the manager's amendment that we are debating today: We require the agencies to show rationale for their decision, economic analysis and justification, an analysis of the environmental effects of the project, and how such effects will be minimized or mitigated consistent with applicable land and resource management plan. And it goes on through. And let me say, we continually heard this nonsense that somehow you can do this without ever following the Clean Water Act or Safe Drinking Water Act or the Endangered Species, and that is simply not the case; because Americans act, and that is simply not the case; because Americans under our law would have the same right they have under existing law in the Healthy Forest Restoration Act to appeal, and to appeal to a court of law who would immediately shut down a project with a temporary restraining order, stop them in their tracks if they didn't follow existing Federal law. The safeguards are in this bill to do what is needed to be done to improve America's forests, to get them back into restored status, to move quickly after a catastrophe, after a disaster, as we expect the government to do after a lot of different events that occur in our country. We just want to be able to do that in our forests as well, like every other forestland manager has the authority to do. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I would just comment to my colleague from Oregon that we looked at using the HFRA procedures, and they are just not fast enough. When you have a catastrophe, an emergency, the agency has testified before our committee that the Chief of the Forest Service has said, yes, I was able to use the Healthy Forest Restoration Act procedures even in Katrina because the trees were on the ground, and they posed a fire threat. I said, why can't you use those then when a forest is burned when the trees are still standing? He said it is a different threat. He also said that had he had this, and he wants this authority, by the way, and had he had it, he would have been able to move quicker. And that is really the underlying issue here is the ability to move without upending any of the environmental laws, but move quicker procedurally. The public still has a right to input; the public still has the right to object and appeal and to stop a project if a law is being violated. Finally, I would just conclude regarding this amendment that, indeed, it is so proscriptive that very few forests would be able to take advantage of the underlying legislation. Again, only about 1 percent the Sierra framework forest in California, most of the Southeast forests would be excluded, and actually very few in the Northwest. So I hope my colleague from Oregon, my friend, and I can continue to work on this legislation as it moves forward to find common ground, but we think we have found pretty good balance right here, the Republicans and Democrats that are cosponsoring this bill and have worked now on the 50th draft to work out all the issues before bringing it to the Committee of the Whole for its consideration. So I urge opposition to the DeFazio amendment.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Again, Mr. Chairman, let me say that the national organizations that represent the men and women who put their lives on the line to put out fires support this legislation. The national organizations, the Fire Chiefs International, the Forest Firefighters folks, support this legislation because they know what it will do and how important it is. The Udall amendment may sound plausible, may sound reasonable, and it is neither. The Udall amendment is based on the theory that salvage increases fire risk. Wildfire fighting associations representing over 12,000 firefighters disagree. This amendment also requires that no practice may be carried out unless the Secretary certifies the practice or project will not increase fire risk or decrease forest regeneration. Now, if you haven't been involved in this discussion like we have in nine hearings and 50 drafts, you would think, well, that sounds reasonable. We wouldn't want to do anything that would increase fire risk or maybe decrease regeneration. Well, let me give you an example of what happens in the real world. Imagine the following scenario: Logging creates logging slash. Under contractual agreements it must be cleaned up, often within 30 days. The agency could get sued because of the increased fire risk that exists during that 30-day period. To do a recovery after a hurricane, the Forest Service proposes a salvage sale to capture value, remove hazardous fuels and plant a mix of willow species and riparian areas and mixed conifers on the drier sites. A lawsuit could be filed saying the agency hasn't proven that one seedling that survived that fire or that hurricane would be affected. So otherwise they can get you coming and going. You can't prove that an action in the forest will not have any effect. If you go hiking in the forest, you could step on a seedling. And I am going to tell you, if you do a project in the forest you are going to have an effect. That is why our legislation requires mitigation and minimalization. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. One of the issues here with the amendment is there no specified time period. There is no specified landscape. It is wide open. Does this mean anytime, anywhere in the forest you might step on a seedling, then, boom, you are going to get sued? As for Mr. Donato, let us be forthright about this. The BLM did suspend the funding while they responded to allegations they hadn't followed the rules. When they got the answers, they were satisfied with them and the funding continued and the research continues. And even Mr. Donato said, don't overinterpret my findings. I yield 2 minutes to my colleague from Washington (Mr. Baird).

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I want to clarify that the gentleman was in error when he quoted the Congressional Budget Office. This increase would not increase salvage logging by 40 percent. It increases the receipts from the logging that would take place that would be following the forest management plans, because the timber wouldn't deteriorate. That is the whole point here. We will get more money out if they make a decision to cut. It doesn't mean you are going to cut more trees. So I just wanted to put that on the record, and I submit the CBO cost estimate for the Record: H.R. 4200--Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act Summary: H.R. 4200 would establish new procedures for responding to catastrophic events causing damage to certain federal land. The legislation would direct the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to establish research protocols for assessing methods of restoring federal land following such events and would specify expedited procedures for implementing projects to rehabilitate that land, which could include timber harvests. CBO expects that enacting H.R. 4200 would increase direct spending by $5 million in 2007, but would reduce it by $21 million over the 2007-2011 period and by $23 million over the 2007-2016 period. Enacting the bill would not affect revenues. H.R. 4200 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. Federal assistance authorized by this bill would benefit state, local, and tribal governments. Estimated Cost to the Federal Government: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 4200 will be enacted near the start of fiscal year 2007. The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 4200 is shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources and environment) and 800 (general government). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great American, dedicated family man, proud Oregonian, outdoorsman, and a good friend of mine, Judge Dennis Reynolds. Over the last decade, Judge Reynolds has played a significant role in shaping the future of Grant County. Today, as the Judge approaches retirement from elected public service, we thank him for his years of dedication and recognize the numerous contributions he has made during his 12 years in office. Mr. Speaker, people in my part of the country have a long and rich heritage of being caring stewards of the land and responsible managers of the environment. This is a way of life that Judge Reynolds has embraced, from his days working in the lumber industry through his many years of unselfish public service. Judge Reynolds has never given up on his belief that to be an Oregonian is to love the land and to treat it with great respect. The Judge has worked tirelessly at the local level to promote and support good stewardship and sound policies that protect our communities and our precious forests from the threats of catastrophic wildfire, windstorms, and bug infestation. In a county where the majority of its land is in public ownership, it is imperative that county officials and local leaders have a strong working relationship with State and Federal Government. People in all levels of government have appreciated Dennis' polite and straightforward approach. During his tenure, Judge Reynolds has been an effective leader, steadfastly advocating for the wellbeing of all rural communities by promoting an effective use of natural resources that recognizes not only the economic value, but also the social value of a productive environment. Mr. Speaker, as Grant County's chief executive, he has led the county through tough financial times, overseeing essential projects that have improved the way of life for those who reside in this beautiful Blue Mountain region of Oregon. These projects include the construction of a new county health services center, a new criminal justice center, a remodel of the Grant County Courthouse, a new facility to house the Grant County Road Department, and a new building for the fairgrounds. Mr. Speaker, although these projects of bricks and mortar and concrete and steel will benefit Grant County for many years to come, Judge Reynolds' real impact has been how he has treated his fellow man and the heart with which he has approached every task. Dennis has cared deeply about the people he has so ably served. Mr. Speaker, Judge Reynolds' distinguished accomplishments are well known throughout Oregon. However, those who know Dennis know that he would list his most rewarding accomplishments as marrying his wife Julie and together raising their three sons, Percy, Beau, and Jake. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Judge Dennis Reynolds, a man of vision, a man of heart, and a man of service.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the citizen soldiers of Delta Company, 113 Aviation, Oregon National Guard on the occasion of their return home tomorrow from a 14-month deployment to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Commanded by Captain David Doran, the 92 Soldiers of this heavy lift helicopter company operating CH47D Chinooks proved to be one of the most effective and versatile aviation companies in the Army's Total Force Structure. The ``Mustangs'' of Delta 113 were alerted in June 2004 and assembled from cities and towns throughout Oregon, including: Athena, Baker City, Beaverton, Bend, Boardman, Clackamas, Corvallis, Echo, Eugene, Fairview, Haines, Helix, Hermiston, La Grande, LaPine, Lyons, McMinnville, Merrill, Milton-Freewater, Ontario, Pendleton, Pilot Rock, Portland, Prineville, Redmond, Roseburg, The Dalles, Umatilla, Union, and Vale. By late February 2005, the aircrews were fully trained, loaded up, and ready for deployment into the theater of operations. In March 2005, Delta 113 arrived in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Within the first 20 days, the maintainers had the aircraft ready to fly, aircrews were oriented on the mission and environment, refuelers had moved out beyond Kandahar to Forward Operating Bases, and Delta 113 had assumed the mission. They immediately integrated with Task Force Griffin (12 Aviation Brigade) and in 3 weeks, the Mustangs had conducted a thorough relief- in-place of the outgoing Heavy Lift Helicopter Company and were conducting all heavy lift operations in southern and western Afghanistan. Their missions included: Combat Service support and Air Assault support for units of the 25th Infantry Division and 173rd Airborne as well as the 7th Special Forces; downed aircraft recovery; and transporting VIPs, including Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. These missions were all accomplished while flying their standard re- supply missions, moving more than 95 percent of personnel and equipment throughout southern Afghanistan. The Mustangs were responsible for airlifting 11 million pounds of supplies and equipment and 45,000 troops. In addition they carried troops directly into contact with the enemy, executing over 100 deliberate operations with the 173rd Airborne and 3rd and 7th Special Forces Groups. Delta 113 was critical to the success of Operation Catania in June of 2005. This 4-day operation resulted in the death or capture of over 150 Anti-Coalition Militants, marking it as one of the largest single engagements of Operation Enduring Freedom to date. During this fighting, four CH47Ds were damaged by enemy fire and two were forced to make emergency landings. All four were recovered and repaired by ``Mustang'' Downed Aircraft Recovery Teams (DART) on the same day and returned to service within 24 hours. In September 2005, the Mustangs lost a crew of 5 and an aircraft to an enemy RPG during Operation Hazurbus. The fallen soldiers included Sgt. Tane Baum and Warrent Officer Adrian Stump, both of Pendleton. The Company quickly rallied and continued to execute assigned missions. This ability to remain focused during a time of extreme tragedy is the hallmark of this unit's greatness and an example of their committnent to duty and dedication to mission accomplishment. In addition to their taxing in support of Operation Enduring Freedom missions, the Mustangs deployed 2 aircraft, aircrews, and support personnel to Islamabad, Pakistan, to conduct humanitarian aid missions in October 2005. They were on site for 1 month and during that time moved over 750,000 pounds of supplies, evacuated 750 casualties, and transported 650 aid workers. Executing deliberate combat operations to sustain all ongoing combat and combat support missions throughout the country, the Mustangs of Delta 113 gained the reputation throughout CJTF-76 as a highly dependable, professional organization able to execute a wide range of aviation missions. Mr. Speaker, due to the versatility of the CH47D Chinook Helicopter and the expertise and skill of ``Mustang'' aircrews, the combat units they transported were able to pursue and eliminate hundreds of Taliban and AI-Qaeda fighters in the region. By penetrating deep into the heart of the Taliban's stronghold, the Mustangs of Delta 113 were instrumental to the success of the ground forces in denying Anti- Coalition Militants respite and sanctuary in Afghanistan. I take great pride in the sacrifice and outstanding performance of all of Oregon's patriots who serve our nation at home and abroad, and am particularly looking forward to joining the friends and families of Delta 113 in Pendleton on this weekend to officially welcome them back to our great state.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share with you my pride in Steve Gilmore, a member of my staff who is leaving our service to assume new responsibilities as the Vice President of Governmental Affairs for the Chamber of Medford/Jackson County. A little over 7 years ago, I had the good fortune to invite Steve Gilmore to join my staff in my district office in Medford, OR. When Steve became a member of our team, he was a recent college graduate with incredible enthusiasm, a passion for the operations of government, and an intense interest in the history of our great Nation. He was highly motivated with a deep and unselfish desire to help others. Those are among the many qualities that have enabled Steve to serve the constituents of the Second Congressional District with such effectiveness. Steve, a former student body president at Eastern Oregon University, brought significant leadership skills to his duties throughout his 7 year career with the U.S. House of Representatives. His fellow workers and my constituents sought his counsel because he had the ability to weigh large quantities of diverse information and arrive at commonsense solutions to complex problems. Steve has approached any and all tasks presented to him with enthusiasm, good cheer, and a quiet determination to get positive results. He leaves with a file overflowing with notes and cards of sincere appreciation from Oregonians he assisted. As all of my colleagues know, people seeking our assistance are often frustrated, distraught, and discouraged. Steve has been particularly good at helping those people to have confidence that we can work through their difficulties to make the system more responsive to their needs. Always a gentleman, Steve's innate kindness has always been reflected in his interactions with his fellow staff members and those I represent. Steve has taken very seriously our commitment to be compassionate and responsive in fulfilling our mission to assist our constituents through difficulties they confront with our government. I appointed Steve as my special projects coordinator and my director of constituent services because I knew I could count on him to wholeheartedly tackle special issues and cases that arise in a vast territory like Oregon's Second Congressional District. I'm confident that Steve will do an outstanding job of productively growing the involvement the Chamber of Medford/Jackson County in the political process. I am sorry to see Steve leave, but am pleased that he has been offered this great new opportunity. I thank him deeply for his exemplary service. Mr. Speaker, I know that you and my colleagues join me in wishing Steve and his lovely wife, Mindy, the best of success in this new avenue of service.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great American, a dedicated Oregonian, an avid Oregon Duck fan, and a good friend of mine, Mayor Rick Allen. Throughout his career, Mayor Allen has played a significant role in shaping the City of Madras, while paving the way for future development and growth. Today, we thank him for his years of public service and recognize the numerous contributions he's made during his tenure in office. Mr. Speaker, following graduation from Madras High School in 1975, Rick took over as the manager of the local bowling ally. It was there that he began learning the ways of the business world. His hard work at the bowling alley gave him the experience and knowledge that led him to his next business endeavor as the manager of the Tiger Mart. It didn't take long until Rick had purchased Tiger Mart and turned it into a thriving gas station and mini mart. Soon, he'd be on to even bigger and better endeavors. First elected in 1982, at the young age of 25, Rick embarked into the world of politics as a member of the Madras City Council. His business savvy brought efficiency and effectiveness to his elected post and to the operation of local government. Rick served 6 years as a member of the city council, and served as the mayor for the last 2 years. Following his service on the city council, Mayor Allen went on to serve 8 years as a Jefferson County Commissioner, continuing his role of public stewardship. Mr. Speaker, following a brief departure from elected office, Rick's dedication and devotion to his community called him back for a second tour of duty. In 2000, the City of Madras faced great uncertainty with alleged scandals and wrongdoings within the city government. During these tumultuous times, Rick recognized the need for stability and consistent leadership, which encouraged and inspired him to mount a write-in candidacy to once again return to serve as the Mayor of Madras. He was overwhelmingly elected in 2001, securing 80 percent of the vote and upon election immediately went to work to rebuild and restore trust within the community. Mr. Speaker, those who know Rick best will tell you that he's not one to back down from a challenge and he's not afraid to make an unpopular decision if he believes it is best for the community. During his tenure, Rick tackled challenges and controversy head on. He was a visionary for growth, led the charge for expansion, and has been a champion for economic development in the region. Under his leadership, the city acquired industrial land near the airport while making significant improvements and enhancements to the airport property. Rick has been a strong advocate for recreation and rafters who float along the lower Deschutes River. He was a key player in East Madras Development Project, which will establish 1,700 new homes, an 18-hole golf course, over 60 acres of open space, and 20 acres set aside for the local schools. Mr. Speaker, these illustrate just a few of Mayor Allen's accomplishments during a long and distinguished career. I ask that my fellow colleagues join me in congratulating this extraordinary man and great American. For years to come the region will flourish and residents will benefit from the foundation and vision that Mayor Allen has pursued. I wish Rick the best in future endeavors, and personally, I would like to thank him for all he's done for the people of Jefferson County, the Second Congressional District, and the great state of Oregon.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight and commend the service of Mr. Terry R. Adams, a resident of Oregon's Second Congressional District, for his service to his community and the nation as a member of the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents. Mr. Adams recently completed his term as the president of the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents and had previously served in many positions of responsibility in the Association for more than 18 years. Mr. Adams has also served the insurance industry in many positions at the state level, including as president of the Oregon/Idaho state affiliate. Mr. Adams has been recognized by his peers for his service in the industry, having twice been honored as the Professional Agent of the Year by the Professional Insurance Agents of Oregon/Idaho, first in 1996 and again in 2001. Terry is a principal of Reinholdt & O'Harra Insurance in Ashland, Oregon, where he has spent his professional career advising consumers about how to obtain the best insurance coverage for their needs. Mr. Adams' dedication to the highest standards of professionalism as a professional insurance agent has earned him the respect of friends, colleagues and the insurance industry as a whole. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to rise today to share with my colleagues the good work that Mr. Adams has done throughout his career as a member of the insurance community, and again congratulate him on the completion of his term as the president of the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate Bend, Oregon resident Rachael Scdoris. Rachael is a legally blind, competitive dog sled racer and cross-country runner who today was awarded the prestigious Casey Martin Award--an annual award that Nike bestows to any disabled person in the world who has overcome their adversity and pursued their sport of choice with the same passion and competitive spirit that renowned golfer Casey Martin has demonstrated in his career. Rachael was born with congenital achromatopsia, a genetic disorder that severely limits her vision. Nonetheless, she was the youngest musher to complete a 500-mile sled dog race, and the first disabled athlete to race the 1,161-mile Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race in 2005. Introduced to the sport of dog sledding by her father, Jerry, at age 3, Rachael's lifelong dream was to compete in the Iditarod. In 2003, because of her disability, Rachael was refused entry by the Iditarod Trail Committee, but after her determined appeals, the committee finally voted to allow her the aid of a visual interpreter on another sled in the 2005 Iditarod. Though Rachael's dogs became ill and she was forced to drop out after 750 miles, she has already entered the 2006 Iditarod. She is the spokesperson for her vision foundation and the annual ``Race for Vision'' sled dog race in Oregon, which raises money for Healthy Beginnings, an organization that provides free vision screening, eye exams, and glasses to low-income individuals. She has twice been named one of the 100 Most Outstanding Female Athletes in the Nation, an ABC ``Person of the Week'' and a 2004 Olympic Torch carrier. Rachael was selected from over 44 applicants to the Casey Martin Award because her story mirrors that of Casey Martin who in 1998 sued the PGA Tour for the right to be able to use a golf cart in competition. Casey, another Oregonian, has Klippel-Trenauny-Weber Syndrome, a rare, incurable and degenerative condition that causes chronic leg pain and makes it physically impossible for him to walk during tournaments. I applaud Nike for sponsoring this award in the name of Casey Martin because he embodies the beliefs that we as Americans all hold dear--the importance of diversity, a commitment to sports, and the fact that everyone should have the right to participate. I've had the great pleasure of spending time with Rachael and, like countless others, am tremendously inspired by her strong sense of determination and amazing successes. It is my honor to represent Rachael in the U.S. Congress, and I congratulate her for her outstanding achievements.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, first of all, to respond to my colleague from Washington, a simple deed restriction takes care of that. They do not go through this and pay and pay and pay and pay. They put it in the deed when they cut the deal, and they pay fair and just compensation for taking somebody's property. That would be stupid to do that over and over. They do that in the deed, and that is a restriction that carries with the property. Let me talk about a couple of the differences between these two plans and why I support the underlying Pombo bill. Among other things, section 10, page 18, they give 3 years, the government, to come up with a recovery plan. Our plan says 2 years. So if they want to recover species, we say get it done in 2 years with the recovery plan; they say 3. If my colleagues want to talk about spending, they create a new science board. GS15s, section 20 in the bill, $1 million a year. CBO says we will compensate private property owners to the tune of maybe $6 million in the first 5 years. That is all they score out. This, $1 million a year for bureaucrats, and private property owners are left carrying their own costs. That is not fair and right in America. So if the Members want bigger bureaucracy, pay GS15s here in Washington, a total of $1 million combined over the year, and they get just as much as we are talking about trying to help out the private property owners. And if they ask the government for some sort of safe harbor for entering into a habitat conservation program, basically they get back a written determination under our provision that prevents them from being prosecuted, from the government's coming back and double-timing them, saying, yes, go ahead and we will not prosecute if you do everything you said you were going to do. Under the alternative, as I read it, whatever they do, they would have to get an incidental take permit and then they still do not have any kind of protection from the government's coming back again after them. So what we are trying to do is create cooperative partnerships with private landowners through new conservation programs and give certainty over 10-, 20-, and 30-year periods to recover species and set up recovery programs that would come together in 2 years, not 3, and provide for compensation when somebody loses their farm or a portion thereof just as if a highway ran through it.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, we heard about Theodore Roosevelt. Indeed, 100 years ago this year, Theodore Roosevelt created the Great Forest Reserves. He also created the Klamath Wildlife Refuge. He created the forest reserves for both the future home building needs of the country and for water, if we read his statements, and, of course, for nature as well. He created the wildlife refuge in the Klamath Basin to ensure that we would have healthy wildlife populations for generations to come; and, indeed, the wildlife refuge is home to the greatest concentration of bald eagles in the United States, in the lower 48. Ninety-six years after he created that refuge, this Federal Government made a decision to shut the water off to 1,200 farm families in that basin based on the Endangered Species Act and interpreted by the government scientists without peer review, without peer review. When the National Academy of Sciences reviewed the decisions, they said the agency made mistakes in the outcome under the Endangered Species Act; and further they went on to say that those decisions put in jeopardy potentially those very species, the sucker fish in the Upper Klamath Lake and the Coho Salmon in the Klamath River. It potentially could have damaged both of those. This act changes that. This act changes that, because we put into law for the first time really clear criteria and guidance about science. And unlike the substitute that will be offered soon, we allow a full public process, a 1-year timeline for the Secretary to further define the criteria of the science. We do not define it in the statute; we give guidance and then there will be a full public process. We require empirical data and peer review and the Secretary to have that opportunity, and peer review is certainly important. The other alternative does not do that. It sets it in standard. It is politicians writing it. Science is critical. Let me talk about the private property rights. I believe in them. When the government says it is going to build a highway across your property, the Constitution says the government has to pay you for it. The ESA is the environmental highway across your property. But it does not open the door as a blank check to developers to go out and pick the most sensitive wildlife habitat area in the country and say, I am going to build a $50 million hotel and casino here. Not at all. Let us go to the law that we are proposing. Page 15, open your manuals, sub (C): ``The foregone use would be lawful under State and local law and the property owner has demonstrated the property owner has the means to undertake the proposed use.'' It eliminates the speculative things that people were concerned about. We heard that. This is an improvement. This clearly says that. And there is no double-dipping. This section says you cannot come back and get a second bite at the same apple, so you have to follow State and local zoning ordinances and laws, you have to prove you are financially capable of undertaking the activity, and the government has to give you an answer when you propose to do something on your private, private, property here. That is one of the great things about this country. We can talk about the bald eagle, and I am a big fan of them, but one of the underpinnings of our great democracy is our private property rights. In the case of the Klamath Basin, in many respects they were taken away when their water was cut off and 1,200 farm families were left destitute. I believe in recovery, I believe in species, and I think what we are changing in this bill will build new partnerships that will bring landowners and the government together like never before, that respects the rights of private owners of property, and will actually result in increased recovery of species and habitat. Mr. Chairman, I urge approval of the underlying bill.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a very special event that is taking place in the heart of the 2nd Congressional District on Sunday, September 25, 2005--the Central Oregon Crop Walk. This weekend, over 125 walkers will gather in Bend, Oregon to raise awareness and funds to fight hunger at home in Central Oregon and in nearly 80 countries around the world. Since 1998, this gathering has become an annual event in Bend and is now in its 8th year. This Fall, walkers participating in the Central Oregon Crop Walk join Oregonians in four other communities--Baker City, Hood River, Corvallis and Grants Pass--and 1,800 Walks nationwide, to make a real difference toward ending hunger one step at a time. Money raised by walkers in Oregon and around the nation supports Church World Service, an organization of 36 religious denominations united together to relieve poverty and aid in social and economic development. I applaud Oregonians participating in local Crop Walks and am very pleased to see so many faith groups coming together to support food programs that provide relief to families in our community and around the world. Events like Crop Walks are a vital link in the chain of services-- public and private--that provide for the most needy in our Nation and the working poor that struggle to make ends meet each month. There are also several pieces of important Congressional legislation that would move our Nation closer to resolving the challenge of food insecurity and hunger. The Hunger Free Communities Act (H.R. 2717) sets a goal of ending hunger by the year 2015 along with establishing grant programs that would support local food programs and improve the coordination of Federal, State and local nutrition services. The Stop Senior Hunger Act (H.R. 1792), which renews the federal commitment to locally- administered programs like Meals on Wheels and congregate meal programs at local senior centers, is another important component in tackling hunger by targeting the vulnerable senior population. Finally, common sense measures like the Relief Trucking Tax Credit Act (H.R. 1954), which would give transportation and trucking companies a 25-cent/mile tax credit for volunteering trucks and drivers to transfer charitably donated food for hunger relief efforts, will help more food reach those in need. Because hunger is a problem that can take a variety of faces and forms in communities around the country, resolving it requires a variety of approaches. For this reason, I am proud to be a cosponsor of each of these measures and am hopeful that when they are combined with efforts like the Crop Walk that hunger and food insecurity will be a challenge that we overcome once and for all. I urge my colleagues to support these sound legislative endeavors, and join me in highlighting the outstanding work of participants of Crop Walks occurring throughout Oregon.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Barbara Johnson, a trusted and dedicated member of my staff who has served the U.S House of Representatives and my constituents with distinction and an unswerving commitment to excellence. Barbara keeps my district schedule in a meticulous fashion. Due to her efficient ways, I've never missed an official meeting on her scheduling watch. Every constituent seeking an appointment or my assistance receives a prompt and accurate response from Barbara, and visitors leave my office with a smile after dealing with her. Simply put, Barbara is a pleasure for people to work with and she's darn good at what she does. In over three years of making district travel arrangements for me and my staff, there has never been a glitch. My colleagues can fully appreciate what a significant achievement that is. With a district larger than thirty-three states and my commuting back to my district every week, it is comforting to know that even the most ambitious travel schedule will go smoothly in Barbara's hands. Mr. Speaker, as we all know, many times our constituents receive their first impression of us when they visit our offices. Barbara greets every visitor with a friendly smile and a warm welcome. People walking into my District Office know immediately from Barbara's cheerful demeanor and hospitable nature that they are welcome and are going to receive the best service I can render. Although I could list many more of her significant contributions to our enterprise, her greatest asset is her ability to work with the fellow members of the team. She is always of good cheer and considerate of her fellow staff members. She is the calming force in stressful times and the mature, steady hand in any crisis. We tease her about being the ``Mom,'' but without a doubt, she demonstrates that quiet and loving leadership that is often associated with an outstanding mother. Sadly for our office and the residents of southern, central and eastern Oregon, at the end of this month Barbara will be leaving her service post in the United States Congress. Fortunately, she is moving on to new opportunities and a new phase in her very productive life. Although I am very happy that Barbara and her husband, Jim, will be enjoying the many new adventures that lie ahead for them, there is no doubt that Barbara will be sorely missed. She leaves with my deepest gratitude for her service and the enduring friendship of all who have had the good fortune to work with her. She may be living in another city, but she will always be a member of our team.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I rise to pay special tribute to the life and spirit of an outstanding community leader, Mr. Earl MacPherson. Earl passed away on July 10, 2005, at his home in Medford, Oregon. He is survived by his wife, Lyn; daughters, Laura and Adrienne; son, Ronald; and step-son, Robert. On behalf of the constituents of Oregon's Second Congressional District, my family, and myself, I offer deepest condolences to his family for their loss. Earl's passing, after a life replete with civic accomplishments, concludes a remarkable string of military and volunteer service that set a commendable standard for other leaders and volunteers to follow. His legacy and contributions to southern Oregon veterans and seniors will live on for generations to come. With service in the United States Marine Corps, the Oregon Army National Guard and the Oregon State Defense Force, Earl dedicated 50 years of service in defense of our Nation during World War II, the Korean and Vietnam Wars. In 1944, following the Battle of Saipan, he received the Purple Heart medal for wounds sustained during an enemy grenade attack. Ever the warrior, Earl spent the past 30 years championing the causes of, and lending his voice to, his fellow veterans. He was the founder and chairman of the Jackson County Allied Veterans Council, organized and started Medford's annual Veterans' Day parade and was instrumental in establishing the annual Southern Oregon Stand-down event to aid homeless veterans. In addition, Earl was an active member of some fifteen different veterans' organizations, including his beloved Marine Corps League. Mr. Speaker, I cannot begin to list all of his accomplishments as a volunteer. In fact, I last had the pleasure of seeing Earl at the dedication of the Medford Veterans Park Memorial, a fitting final project for an unparallel veterans' advocate. Earl's focus on community involvement extended beyond veterans' concerns. Since 1991, he had served on the Board of Directors of the Medford Senior Center. Under his guidance, this vitally important facility became a well spring for the mental, physical, and social health of thousands of Jackson County seniors. Samuel Logan Brengle, the legendary leader in the Salvation Army, once spoke the following words that reflect Earl's character and life. He said, ``The final estimate of men shows that history cares not an iota for the rank or title a man has borne, or the office he has held, but only the quality of his deeds and the character of his mind and heart.'' Indeed, Earl MacPherson has exemplified these ideals through his service, sacrifice and commitment to his country and his community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I rise to honor an esteemed member of the United States Air Force, Senior Airman John A. Lockheed, an Air Traffic Control Journeyman with the 270th Air Traffic Control Squadron stationed at Kingsley Field in Oregon's Second Congressional District. The United States Air Force has presented Airman Lockheed with their most prestigious award and the Force's highest honor for an enlisted member of the Air National Guard by selecting him as 2005's most ``Outstanding Airman,'' an honor given to only one enlisted Air National Guard member each year. The Air Force boasts a long tradition of talent, service and dedication, so to be recognized as one of the elite speaks volumes of Airman Lockheed's abilities and outstanding performance. After volunteering for deployment to Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Airman Lockheed was quickly certified to control air traffic. The Air Force so trusted his skill, they selected him to be the facility trainer for incoming personnel. His duties ranged from rapidly securing airspace clearances for aircraft evacuating wounded troops to controlling aircraft returning from completed missions, and he was the watch supervisor's choice for handling even the most complex traffic issues. Ever ready and capable of tackling challenging situations as they arose, Airman Lockheed immediately assumed control of half of Iraq's airspace on one occasion when another center lost radio and radar coverage. In addition to volunteering for a 120-day extension of his tour in Iraq, Airman Lockheed extended his spirit of service beyond traditional roles. He was active in a program that delivered school supplies to children called ``Operation Crayon,'' served on the Kingsley Field Honor Guard, was the unit Combined Federal Campaign Representative, and volunteered with the local Boy Scouts. Most impressive is that this record of accomplishment has been built in a short amount of time. Airman Lockheed, 21, enlisted in the Oregon Air National Guard in 2002 and just completed basic training and air traffic control school in 2003. America's men and women in uniform are truly the finest in the world, and this tradition of excellence continues through the service of patriots like Senior Airman John Lockheed. A simple thank you cannot fully express my gratitude for his commitment and dedication. I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations to Airman Lockheed on this prestigious award. The United States Air Force and the entire United States of America are extremely fortunate to benefit from his service. It is an honor to represent him in the United States Congress.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the City of Hines, Oregon, on the occasion of its 75th Anniversary. Although incorporated on December 8, 1930, Hines has a rich history going back to the 1870s. In 1873, Mr. George A. Smyth was the earliest recorded settler near what is now Hines. He and his immediate family moved from the Willamette Valley to the ``Warm Spring'' area just south of Hines. Shortly thereafter, two brothers by the names of William and Montz Currey set up their ranch headquarters at a small spring, which is now located in the northwest section of Hines. They had a small general store and saloon that was used occasionally as a barricade by nearby settlers when rumors of attacks were circulated after the Paiute Indian uprising in 1878. The Warm Spring was also the site of year-round cattle grazing and many buckaroo camps for the fall and spring cattle round-ups. In 1924, the Fred Herrick Lumber Company received a contract to start construction of the Malheur Railroad company's tracks to the City of Burns. The lumber company anticipated harvesting 890,000,000 board feet of Ponderosa pine from the nearby Bear Valley District of the Malheur National Forest. They chose the site of the Warm Spring for the construction of a lumber mill because it provided an ice-free log pond. In 1928, the Edward Hines Lumber Company of Chicago took over the Herrick interests of both the railroad and uncompleted lumber mill because of numerous delays in the project. Due to the Hines Company's strong interest in the area, the Stafford- Derbes & Roy Company, a real estate development firm from New Orleans, purchased land from various ranchers and homestead owners to develop the beginnings of a new city. This project was advertised across the country as ``The greater Burns development in the Great Harney Valley, it is Oregon's first made-to-order community, and one of the first scientifically planned cities undertaken in America.'' Edward Hines and his wife designed and planned the new city around a circular park that was to be, and still is, the heart of Hines. Mrs. Hines stipulated that every house be constructed with slight differences. She wanted this new city to look different from other mill towns. In 1929, Edward Hines ordered the first 150 homes built for his employees who were due to arrive within a year from Minnesota and Mississippi. In December 1930, the City of Hines was incorporated. The first officers to serve the city were selected, and by 1931 they had their first elementary school and post office. For the next sixty years, Hines Lumber and its employees prospered in this hidden oasis of the high desert. Development slowed when the mill closed in the early 1990's. However, the loggers who lived there were very proud to have worked for the Edward Hines Lumber Company. Hines has always maintained its own identity. Even today, its residents are fiercely independent people who pride themselves on being from Hines and not from the adjacent city of Burns. This strong sense of community and history is evident by the families that still gather in Hines City Park, the hub of this pioneer town, as envisioned by Mr. and Mrs. Hines. Mr. Speaker, on the occasion of the 75th Anniversary of Hines, thank you for allowing me to share with my colleagues the history of this fine town.

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon

Mr. WALDEN of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. I believe it would undermine the efforts to eradicate production and trafficking of cocaine in Colombia which is the primary source of narcotics entering our Nation. We have heard some level of debate today about is the amount of cocaine down coming into the United States or not? But the real issue is, how much higher would it be if we did not have this program in place? Operations under the Andean Counterdrug Initiative have been instrumental in reducing the cultivation of coca 33 percent since 2002 and cultivation of poppies 52 percent last year. Are those exactly the percentages and which years do you compare? The point is not the exact numbers. The point is the trend and the trend is that there is less being grown because we know we are eradicating it every year. If we are eradicating it, if we are ripping this stuff out, if we are spraying it, if we are making sure it is not growing, that is that much more is not available. That seems pretty obvious on its face. But this program is doing more to help improve the stability of the country of Colombia and the people who live there, particularly the realm of violent crime in Colombia. Kidnappings are down 34.5 percent in 2004 and almost 61 percent through May of this year. Homicides are down. Terrorist attacks are down. Internal displacement of people, also down by more than 50 percent. Over 200 Columbian narco-traffickers have been extradited to the United States in the last 2 years, including the leader of the Cali Cartel, an important FARC commander, and an AUC commander. The point is we are taking these narco-traffickers out of the business of trafficking in narcotics, of bringing this terrible stuff to our borders and to our people. This is a good program that has done well and we need to continue to fund it.