Don Young

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce today the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act. This important conservation measure is modeled after the highly successful programs that Congress created to assist African and Asian elephants, rhinoceroses, and tigers. Based on the success of the African Elephant Conservation Act, I am confident that this small investment of Federal funds will provide the lifeline that neotropical migratory birds need to survive in the wild. Neotropical birds, like bluebirds, robins, orioles, and goldfinches, travel across international borders and depend upon thousands of miles of suitable habitat. In fact, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, neotropical migratory birds typically spend five months of the year at Caribbean/Latin American wintering sites, four months in North American breeding areas, and three months traveling to these sites during spring and autumn migrations. Sadly, there are 90 North American bird species that are listed as either threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act and an additional 124 birds that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified on its list of Migratory Nongame Birds of Management Concern. In North America, an estimated 70 percent of prairie birds are declining. The Government of Mexico lists approximately 390 birds species as endangered, threatened, vulnerable, or rare. What is lacking, however, is a strategic plan for bird conservation, money for on-the-ground projects, public awareness, and any real coordination among the various nations where neotropical migratory birds reside. While the full extent of the problems facing neotropical migratory birds is unclear, there is no debate over the fact that both bird populations and critical habitat declined significantly in the 1990's. We must act now before more of these species become endangered or extinct. This bill will contribute to the recovery and conservation of migratory birds, without violating private property rights. There are 60 million adult Americans who enjoy watching and feeding birds at their homes. In fact, these activities generate some $20 billion in economic activity each year. In addition, healthy bird populations are an invaluable asset for farmers and timber interests. By consuming detrimental insects, these birds prevent the loss of millions of dollars each year. Under the terms of this legislation, an individual or an organization would be able to submit a project proposal to the Secretary of the Interior. While the bill does not limit the type of projects, I would expect that efforts to determine the condition of neotropical migratory bird habitat, implement new or improved conservation plans, undertake population studies, educate the public, and reduce the destruction of essential habitat would be forthcoming. Since these birds migrate between the Caribbean, Latin America, and North America, comprehensive plans must be developed. It does little good if we are successful in conserving suitable habitat in only a portion of their range. During the previous Congress, I introduced a similar bill to assist neotropical migratory birds. In fact, that bill was the subject of a public hearing on September 17, 1998. At that time, the Administration testified that ``H.R. 4517 goes a long way in promoting the effective conservation and management of neotropical migratory birds by supporting conservation programs and providing financial resources. We applaud this important and timely initiative.'' In addition, representatives from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the National Audubon Society testified in strong support of my legislation. I am confident that a Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund would provide much-needed support for projects designed to conserve critical habitat for declining migratory bird species in an innovative and cost-effective way. I urge my colleagues to support the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to salute two outstanding young women who have been honored with the Girl Scout Gold Award by Farthest North Girl Scout Council in Fairbanks, Alaska. They are: Erin Shaw and Rachel Shaw. They are being honored for earning the highest achievement award in United States Girl Scouting. The Girl Scout Gold Award symbolizes outstanding accomplishments in the areas of leadership, community service, career planning, and personal development. The award can be earned by young women aged 14 through 17, or in grades 9 through 12. Girl Scouts of the U.S.A., an organization serving over 2.5 million girls, has awarded more than 20,000 Girl Scout Gold Awards to Senior Girl Scouts since the inception of the Gold Award program in 1980. To receive the award, a Girl Scout must earn four interest project patches, the Career Exploration Pin, the Senior Girl Scout Leadership Award, and the Girl Scout Challenge, as well as design and implement a Girl Scout Gold Award project. A plan for fulfilling these requirements is created by the Senior Girl Scout and is carried out through close cooperation between the girl and an adult Girl Scout volunteer. As members of Farthest North Girl Scout Council, Erin and Rachel Shaw began working toward the Girl Scout Gold Award in the late spring of 1998. They completed their project in the areas of leadership and community service by developing their communication skills and then working with the hearing impaired community. They used these skills to reach out to various parts of the community. They used their skills to plan and implement a deaf community carnival for people with hearing impairments and their families, as well as students who were learning sign language. I believe they should receive the public recognition due them for this significant service to their community and their country.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I submit three recent newspaper articles concerning issues surrounding the mysterious fires in Vail, CO, to be included in the Congressional Record and recommend that my colleagues read them. [From the Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 21, 1998] Romer Tabs Resort Fires As Terrorism Vail, Colo.--Seven separate fires that destroyed a ski lodge and other buildings at 11,000 feet were an ``act of terrorism,'' Gov. Roy Romer said Tuesday as workers resumed an expansion project at the Vail Mountain resort. ``I know that mountain quite well, and it's inconceivable some natural occurrence would cause simultaneous fires on that ridge,'' Romer said at a news conference in Denver, 100 miles to the east of Vail. The fires broke out early Monday and caused an estimated $12 million in damage, destroying the luxurious Two Elk restaurant, the Ski Patrol headquarters, a picnic spot and four chairlifts. The fires came after the Rocky Mountain resort on Friday began an 885-acre expansion project that wildlife groups say will make the area uninhabitable for endangered lynx. Cross- country skiers say the project will limit access. The groups have denied any involvement. State and federal agents were investigating the fires, which burned independent of each other. Two of the buildings destroyed were more than a mile apart. Vail officials said the nation's busiest ski area would open as planned on Nov. 6. If the fires are linked to Vail's expansion, they would rank among the worst acts of eco-terrorism in the past decade, said Ron Arnold, executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, a Bellevue, Wash., group that tracks ecological crimes.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support S. 1132. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1132 and urge my colleagues to pass this measure. S. 1132 is a bill introduced by Senator Jeff Bingaman and has a companion bill, H.R. 3936 which was introduced by Congressman Bill Redmond, both from the State of New Mexico. Mr. Bingaman and Mr. Redmond have worked hard to develop a bill that will increase the size of Bandelier National Monument and protect its watershed. Mr. Speaker, S. 1132 modifies the boundary to include lands within the upper watershed of the Bandelier National Monument which potentially can threaten the Monument with flooding, erosion, and water quality. The expansion will include approximately 935 acres of land and can only be acquired with the consent of the landowner. This boundary expansion will help enhance and protect the lands within the Bandelier National Monument. I urge my colleagues to support S. 1132. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 604, I call up the Senate bill (S. 1132) to modify the boundaries of the Bandelier National Monument to include the lands within the headwaters of the Upper Alamo Watershed which drain into the Monument and which are not currently within the jurisdiction of a Federal land management agency, to authorize purchase or donation of those lands, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, we have been assured of the clearance by the minority. There is minority on the floor. They agree with it.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 129) to correct a technical error in the enrollment of H.R. 3910, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, section 06(a) requires the Secretary to allocate ten percent of the total allowable catch (TAC) of pollock in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands area as a target species to the western Alaska community development quota (CDQ) program, beginning on January 1, 1999. And, prior to allocating the remaining ninety percent of the TAC of pollock to catcher vessels and catcher/ processors pursuant to paragraphs (1)-(3) of section 06(b), section 06(b) requires the Secretary to allocate to the CDQ program the amount of additional pollock that will be incidentally taken by vessels that harvest the directed fishing allowance of non-pollock groundfish species that has been allocated to the CDQ program. During the 1998 fishing year, the Secretary has regulated the CDQ programs for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands pollock and for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands non-pollock groundfish species as two separate regulatory programs. To ensure that vessels that participate in the CDQ pollock fishery are afforded an opportunity to harvest the entire ten percent of the TAC of pollock that subsection (a) allocates to the CDQ program, section 06(a) and (b) collectively direct the Secretary to continue, for the purpose of catch accounting only, to regulate the CDQ fisheries for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands pollock and for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands non-pollock groundfish species as separate regulatory programs. Separate accounting for the by-catch of non-pollock groundfish species in the directed CDQ pollock fishery and for the catch of non- pollock groundfish species in the directed CDQ non-pollock groundfish fishery will prevent the by-catch of non-pollock groundfish species in the directed CDQ pollock fishery from being deducted from the 7.5 percent of the TAC of non-pollock groundfish species that the Secretary has allocated to the CDQ program. This will allow vessels participating in the directed CDQ pollock fishery to collectively harvest as by-catch a small amount of non-pollock groundfish species in addition to the 7.5 percent of the TAC for such species that the Secretary has allocated to the CDQ program. However, the total harvest of non-pollock groundfish species--both as by-catch and in the directed fisheries for such species--shall not exceed the allowable biological catch for each species. And it continues to be the intent of Congress that the Secretary regulate the CDQ programs for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands pollock and for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands non-pollock groundfish species in a manner that continues to ensure that no species is subjected to overfishing. Because they take effect on January 1, 1999, the Secretary must implement subsections (a) and (b) of section 06 by promulgating emergency regulations. However, as soon thereafter as practicable, the Secretary shall implement section 06(a) and (b) by promulgating regulations that have been recommended by the North Pacific Council to implement those subsections and other appropriate conservation and management measures.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I rise to once again address the issue of international land reserves, particularly World Heritage Sites. I find it necessary to emphasize, for the benefit of those who continue to claim otherwise, that these reserves are designated with little or no input from the public or local government. They are very unpopular. The Department of Interior, in cooperation with the Federal Interagency Panel for World Heritage has identified a shopping list of 94 sites in 31 States and the District of Columbia that they would like to make World Heritage Sites. This list was compiled by the Department with the assistance of an ``inside'' non-governmental organization, the U.S. National Committee of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (US/ICOMOS). US/ICOMOS is also a principal advisor to the United Nations on the listing of cultural properties as World Heritage Sites. Twenty-two of the sites on the shopping list have been designated World Heritage Sites. Congress is the ultimate decision-maker in managing public lands. The clear and direct approval of Congress and the input of local citizens and public officials must be required before land can be designated for inclusion in international land reserves. Let's maintain sovereign control over lands in the United States. I wish to include in the Record the detailed descriptions of the cultural properties on the Department of Interior's list of future choices for World Heritage Sites. The complete list and other information on this important issue can be found on the Committee on Resources website at: http://www.house.gov/105cong/issues.htm. Indicative Inventory of Potential Future U.S. Nominations to the World Heritage List--Cultural properties Prehistory and Living Communities (formerly Archaeology) Post-Contract Aboriginal Taos Pueblo, New Mexico (36 deg. 25' N.; 105 deg. 40' W.). A center of Indian culture since the 17th century, the pueblo of Taos, still active today, symbolizes Indian resistance to external rule. The mission of San Geronimo, one of the earliest in New Mexico, was built near Taos Pueblo in the early 17th century. Criteria: (v) An outstanding example of a traditional human settlement which is representative of a culture and which has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change. Post-Contract Aboriginal/Developed Agriculture Pecos National Monument, New Mexico (35 deg. 35' N.; 105 deg. 45' W.). This site was occupied since before A.D. 900 up until the 19th century. The archaeological excavations of the area led to the development of a cultural sequence which in turn enabled the comparative dating of southwestern U.S. sites. This classification is the cornerstone of the understanding of Southwestern archaeology. In addition to the archaeology at Pecos, there are the foundations of a Spanish mission, the ruins of an 18th-century church, and numerous Pueblo Indian structural remains, including restored kivas. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Developed Agriculture Moundville Site, Alabama (33 deg. 0' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). This is probably the site described by De Soto in his Mississippian expedition. This site demonstrates the Mesoamerican influence on the culture of the Southeast. It is a ``ceremonial'' site with over twenty extant mounds and burial areas. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Casa Grande National Monument, Arizona (33 deg. 0' N.; 111 deg. 30' W.). Casa Grande is a four-story tower of packed earthen walls built over 600 years ago by the agricultural Indians of the Gila River Valley. The site also contains important Hohokam Indian remains dating from about 900 A.D. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Hohokam Pima National Monument, Arizona (32 deg. 55' N.; 111 deg. 30' W.). Hohokam Pima is part of the site of Snaketown, which was continuously inhabited by the Hohokam/ Pima cultures for over 2,000 years. This site contains essentially all phases of Hohokam cultural development from the earliest villages established around 400 B.C. up to A.D. 1450. Subsequently this same site was occupied by the Pima from the time of contact with the Spanish until around 1940. The Hohokam Pima site clearly demonstrates the Mesoamerican influence in the Southwestern U.S. The site is located on a Pima reservation. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Ocmulgee National Monument, Georgia (32 deg.50' N.; 83 deg.40' W.). The large mounds and surrounding villages at Ocmulgee demonstrates the cultural evolution of the Indian mound-builder civilization in the southern U.S. Criteria: (iii) Bears an exception testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Poverty Point, Louisiana (32 deg.40' N.; 91 deg.25' W.). An archaeological site that flourished from 1,000-600 B.C. It contains a geometric earthwork complex, consisting of 11.2 miles of raised terraces arranged in six concentric octagons, and Poverty Point Mound, a bird-shaped ceremonial structure. Criteria: (iii) Bears an exception testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Chaco Culture National Historical Park, New Mexico (36 deg.10' N.; 108 deg.0' W.). This property bears testimony to the first five periods of the Chacoan variant and one period of the Mesa Verdean variant of the Pueblo civilization. Chaco Canyon is a large canyon which contains approximately 1100 ruins including 13 major Pueblo Indian villages. These villages consist of 3-5 story buildings which often contain over 1,000 rooms. The ceremonial complex consisting of the large villages is dated between A.D. 1,110 and 1,300 and clearly demonstrates the cultural links between the Mesoamerican cultures and the Pueblo Indians of the Southwestern U.S. Criteria: (ii) Exerted great influence, over a span of time and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in town-planning; and (iii) bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Mound City Group National Monument, Ohio (39 deg.25' N.; 83 deg.1' W.). Twenty-three burial mounds of Hopewell Indians (200 B.C.-A.D. 500) have yielded vast quantities of artifacts that give insights into the ceremonial customs of the Hopewell people. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Archaic/Paleo-Indian Cape Krusenstern Archaeological District, Alaska (67 deg.0' N.; 164 deg.0' W.). Cape Krusenstern consists of a series of marine beach ridges (and nearby hills) which contain evidence of nearly every major cultural period in Arctic prehistory and history. This area is very near the probable route taken by man's first crossing into North America and is still inhabited today. Due to land subsidence along the coast a unique stratigraphy has formed which allows a complete dating sequence in an area where few dates are available. Each ridge represents approximately a 200-year time span for a total of approximately 8,000 years. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Ventana Cave, Arizona (32 deg.25' N.; 112 deg.15' W.). Ventana Cave offers a unique history of the hunter/gatherer cultural development and continuity. This site has been occupied continuously from 200 B.C. until the present. Excavations here solidified the stratigraphic sequence dates, and made a significant contribution to knowledge of the development of Hohokam culture in this area. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Paleo-Indian Lindenmeir Site, Colorado (40 deg. 55'; 105 deg. 10' W.). This site was one of the earliest Folsom sites to be excavated by archaeologists and was instrumental in establishing man's presence in North America at its current early date. The site consists of a kill site marked by numerous bison bones and a camp a short distance away. This is one of the few early man sites where both site types were found, and it gives a more complete picture of the early hunters' life and cultural adaption. Criteria: (iii) Bears a unique testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Hawaiian Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historical Park, Hawaii (19 deg. 25' N.; 155 deg. 55' W.) This area (formerly known as City of Refuge National Historical Park) includes sacred ground, where vanquished Hawaiian warriors, noncombatants, and kapu breakers were granted refuge from secular authority. Prehistoric housesites, royal fishponds, and spectacular shore scenery are features of the park. Criteria: (v) An outstanding example of a traditional human settlement which is representative of a culture and which has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change. European Exploration and Colonial Settlement La Fortaleza-San Juan National Historical Site, Puerto Rico (18 deg. 28' N.; 66 deg. 10' W.). Spanish defenses at San Juan guarded their sea lanes to the Caribbean; at this site they founded one of their earliest colonies in the Americas. La Fortaleza, the first fortification of San Juan (built 1533-40), has been the residence of the island's governors since the 1620s. The massive masonry citadel of El Morro was begun in 1591. Criteria: (iv) An outstanding example of a type of structure which illustrates a significant stage in history; and (vi) directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. San Xavier Del Bac, Arizona (32 deg. 10' N.; 111 deg. 0' W.). ONe of the finest Spanish colonial churches in the United States, having a richly ornamented baroque interior. (Comparative national and international study will be necessary before the United States would consider nominating property representative of this important international development. For example, the California and Texas mission systems would be examined.) Criteria: (iv) An outstanding example of a type of structure which illustrates a significant stage in history. Savannah Historic District, Georgia. The first settlement in the English colony of Georgia, which was founded with philanthropic intent, Savannah has retained much of James Oglethorpe's original city plan and possesses many structures of architectural merit. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in town-planning; and (vi) directly and tangibly associated with events or with ideas of outstanding universal significance. Architecture: Early United States Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia (38 deg. 0' N.; 78 deg. 30' W.). Thomas Jefferson, the third American President, was a popularizer of the Classic Revival architectural style. In Monticello, his mansion, he combined elements of Roman, Palladian, and 18th-century French design with features expressing his extraordinary personal inventiveness. Criteria: (i) A unique artistic achievement, a masterpiece of the creative genius; and (ii) has exerted great influence, over a span of time and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. University of Virginia Historic District, Charlottesville, Virginia (38 deg. 0' N.; 78 deg. 30' W.). Includes original classrooms and professors' quarters housed in pavilions aligned on both sides of an elongated terraced court, as well as the doomed Rotunda, a scaled-down version of the Pantheon which was the focal point of Thomas Jefferson's design. Jefferson envisioned a community of scholars living and studying in an architecturally unified complex of buildings. Criteria: (i) A unique artistic achievement, a masterpiece of the creative genius; and (ii) has exerted great influence, over a span of time and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Architecture: Modern U.S. Consideration will be given to the nomination of a ``thematic'' Chicago School district, including some of the properties listed in this grouping. Auditorium Building, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 51' 87 deg. 40' W.). Constructed in 1889, this building is one of the most important works by Chicago School architects Dankmar Adler and Louis Sullivan. Criteria: (i) A unique artistic achievement, a masterpiece of creative genius; and (ii) has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Carson, Pirie, Scott and Company Store, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). A commercial establishment designed by Louis Sullivan in an original and practical form, Carson, Pirie, Scott and Company was his last large commercial commission. An iron and steel framwork supports the structure, which is most notable for its elaborate ironwork ornament on the first and second floor facades. Sullivan's designs combine organic and geometric shapes in intricate and delicate patterns, in a type of ornament that is the hallmark of his work. The addition was by Daniel H. Burnham in 1904-6, Criteria: (i) A unique artistic achievement, a masterpiece of creative genius; and (ii) has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Leiter II Buiding, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). Constructed in 1889-91, this building is the masterwork of architect William Le Baron Jenny. One of the earliest surviving examples of the Chicago School curtain wall proto-skyscraper. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Marquette Building, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). Architects William Holabird and Martin Roche make their first decisive statement on a new concept in building--steel framing. Constructed 1893-4. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Reliance Building, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). This building (1890-5) by Daniel Burnham and John Root is a key monument of the ``Chicago School.'' It has a steel framework and is covered with terra cotta sheating except on the granite first floor. Windows form continous bands and are ``Chicago windows'' large single, fixed panes of glass which fill an entire bay except for narrow, movable, double hung sash in the project bays. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Rookery Building, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). One of the last great masonry structures of the 19th century, designed by Daniel Burnham and John W. Root. Constructed in 1886-88, The Rookery is a transitional structure which presaged the modern steel frame office building. It combines skeletal cast-iron columns and spandrel beams supporting masonry with granite and brick and terra cotta. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. South Dearborn Street-Printing House Row North Historic District, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). This commercial district contains landmark structures in the development of skyscraper construction and some of the finest achievements of the ``Chicago School'' of architects: The Manhattan Building by William Le Baron Jenny, the first complete steel skeleton building, with wind bracing; the Daniel Burnham-designed Fisher Building, an early curtain- wall structure; the Old Colony Building by Holabird and Roche, using Corydon Purdy's wind bracing system; and the Monadnock Building, by Burnham and Root (north section) and Holabird and Roche (south section), one of the largest masonry bearing-wall structures ever built. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Prudential (Guaranty) Building, Buffalo, New York (42 deg. 50' N.; 78 deg. 50' W.). The last collaborative effort of Dankmar Adler and Louis Sullivan, the 13-story Prudential, constructed in 1895, is a trumpth of early skyscraper design. It links two skyscraper periods and departs from the earlier commercial use of elaborate ornamentation in favor of an emphatically vertical appearance. Although appearing rectangular in shape, it is actually U-shaped due to light corridors above the first floor. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Wainwright Building, St. Louis, Missouri (38 deg. 40' N.; 90 deg. 10' W.). Significant prototype of the modern office building, constructed in 1890-91. This building represents deliberate attempt to create an historical form expressive of the new mass of the multistory office block. For Sullivan, the potential aesthetic quality of the tall building lay in its unusual height. To emphasize this height to the maximum degree, he devised a system of closely ranked, pier-like verticals that give the street elevations their forceful thrust. Criteria: (1) Represents a unique artistic achievement, a masterpiece of the creative genius; and (ii) has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Architecture: Wright School A single, or thematic, nomination representative of this group will be considered. Frank Lloyd Wright Home and Studio, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 50' W.). Wright lived and practiced here, in the Shingle-style home he built for his family, during the ``First Golden Age'' of his long career. Constructed 1889-98. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Unity Temple, Oak Park, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 50' W.). Wright designed the Temple with a rooftop skylight, rather than a steeple. Constructed in 1906 of poured concrete, the Temple is basically a concrete cube with stark and largely unornamented interior walls. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Robie House, Chicago, Illinois (41 deg. 52' N.; 87 deg. 40' W.). This brick house, with its low horizontal emphasis, was designed by Wright in his ``Prairie'' style, utilizing an open plan focused on a large central chimney mass. He continued inside walls to the exterior to tie the surrounding landscape to the house. Constructed 1907-9. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. Taliesin, Wisconsin (43 deg. 10' N.; 90 deg. 10' W.). The second great center of Wright's activity, this combination of home, workshop, laboratory, and retreat consists of several groupings of structures designed individually to suit their different uses. It is the summer home and studio of the Taliesin Fellowship. Criteria: (ii) Has exerted great influence, over a span of time, and within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture. FallingWater, Pennsylvania (39 deg. 55' N.; 90 deg. 25' W.). One of the most famous of Frank Lloyd Wright's designs, regarded by many as his masterwork. Criteria: (i) A unique artistic achievement, a masterpiece of the creative genius. Engineering Brooklyn Bridge, New York (40 deg. 42' N.; 73 deg. 57' W.). Built by John A. and Washington A. Roebling, the Brooklyn Bridge was one of the world's first wire cable suspension bridges. The technical, problems faced in its construction were solved by solutions that established precedents in bridge building. The cables themselves are supported by two massive Gothic pylons, each with two pointed arches. The main span is 1595 feet. Criteria: (iv) An outstanding example of a type of structure which illustrates a significant stage in history. Eads Bridge, Illinois-St. Louis, Missouri (38 deg. 40' N.; 90 deg. 10' W.). The first major bridge in the world in which steel was employed in the principal members. The secondary members and the tubes enveloping the steel staves forming the arch ribs are of wrought iron. Criteria: (iv) An outstanding example of a type of structure which illustrates a significant stage in history. Washington Monument, District of Columbia (38 deg. 52' N.; 77 deg. 02' W.). The hollow shaft, free of exterior decoration, is the tallest free-standing masonry structure in the world (555 feet). It commemorates the achievements of George Washington, first President of the United States. Criteria: (iv) An outstanding example of a type of structure which illustrates a significant stage in history. Science and Industry McCormick Farm and Workshop, Virginia (37 deg. 40' N.; 79 deg. 35' W.). of the inventions that revolutionized agriculture during the first half of the 19th century, the mechanical reaper (1834), was probably the most important. The well-preserved farmhouse and workshop of Cyrus McCormick, its inventor, are included within this property. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. Original Bell Telephone Laboratories, New York (40 deg.45' N.; 74 deg. 0' W.). From 1898 to 1967, America's largest industrial research laboratory, responsible for numerous contributions to pure science and pioneering work in telecommunications technology. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. General Electric Research Laboratory, Schenectady, New York (42 deg. 50' N.; 73 deg. 55' W.). A three-building complex recognized as the first industrial research facility in the United States. Since its construction in 1900, work at the laboratory has made many contributions to scientific knowledge, especially in the areas of physics and chemistry. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. Goddard Rocket Launching Site, Massachusetts (42 deg. 12' N.; 71 deg. 50' W.). At this site, on March 16, 1926, Dr. Robert H. Goddard launched the World's first liquid propellant rocket, an event that set the course for future developments in rocketry. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. Lowell Observatory, Arizona (35 deg. 12' N.; 111 deg. 40' W.). Astronomical research conducted at this observatory, founded by Dr. Percival Lowell, has greatly enhanced man's knowledge of the Universe. Most significant of the observatory's discoveries was the first observable evidence of the expanding universe, made by Dr. V. M. Slipher in 1912. The observatory is also noted for intensive studies of Mars, the discovery of Pluto, and research in zodiacal light and sunspot phenomena. The 24-inch Lowell refracting telescope, installed in 1896, is in operation in its original housing. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. Pupin Physics Laboratories, Columbia University, New York (40 deg. 45' N.; 73 deg. 58' W.). Enrico Fermi conducted his initial experiments on the fission of uranium in these laboratories. In addition, the uranium atom was split here on January 25, 1939, 10 days after the world's first splitting in Copenhagen. The cyclotron control room contains the table which held the instruments used on that night. The United States would consider nominating this site only if the Copenhagen location is no longer extant. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. Trinity site, New Mexico (33 deg. 45' N.; 106 deg. 25' W.). The world's first nuclear device was exploded here in July 1945. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with an event of outstanding universal significance. Humanitarian Endeavor and Social Reform New Harmony Historic District, Indiana (38 deg. 08' N.; 87 deg. 55' W.). Founded by the Rappite religious sect in 1815, New Harmony was purchased in 1825 by British visionary and socialist reformer Robert Owen, who sought to alleviate evils spawned by the factory system. Some 35 structures from the Rappite-Harmonist period survive. This property will be compared to Owenite remains in the United Kingdom and to other communal societies in the U.S. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. Chapel Hall, Gallaudet College, District of Columbia. This large Gothic Revival structure (1867-70) is the earliest major building at the college, the only institution of higher learning specifically devoted to the education of the deaf. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events or ideas of outstanding universal significance. Warm Springs Historic District, Georgia (32 deg. 50' N.; 84 deg. 40' W.). The National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, which grew out of the Warm Springs Foundation established by Franklin D. Roosevelt, became one of the leading charitable institutions of the 20th century. Warm Springs Hospital was the major international center for the treatment of infantile paralysis (polio); the research that led to the development of the preventive vaccines had its roots here. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. International Affairs Aleutian Islands Unit of the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (Fur Seal Rookeries), Alaska (57 deg. 30' N.; 170 deg. 30' W.). Originally frequented by the native peoples of Alaska, these islands have lured Russian, British, French, Spanish, and American fur hunters since the 18th century. The seal herds have several times been threatened with extinction due to indiscriminate hunting, but a notable 1911 convention between the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia (USSR), and Japan has provided them with international protection and management. Today's flourishing herds illustrate the international application of conservation principles. Criteria: (vi) Directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance. Statue of Liberty National Monument, New Jersey-New York (40 deg. 37' N.; 74 deg. 03' W.). French historian Edouard Laboulaye suggested the presentation of this statue to the United States, commemorating the alliance of France and the United States during the American Revolution. The cooper colossus was designed by Frederic Auguste Bartholdi and erected according to plans by Gustave Eiffel. The national monument also includes Ellis Island, the depot through which many millions of immigrants and emigrants passed. Criteria: (iv) An outstanding example of type of structure which illustrates a significant stage in history, and (vi) directly and tangibly associated with events of outstanding universal significance.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I introduced H.R. 901, ``The American Land Sovereignty Protection Act,'' to reestablish Congress as the ultimate decision-maker in managing public lands and maintain sovereign controls of lands in the United States. The bill insists that no land be designated for inclusion in international land use programs, such as World Heritage Sites, without the clear and direct approval of Congress and requires that local citizens and public officials participate in decisions on designating land near their homes for inclusion in these international land programs. World Heritage Sites are natural areas of cultural monuments recognized by the World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), under ``The Convention Concerning Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage.'' Proponents of World Heritage Sites keep saying that they are designated at the request of local communities. They seem to believe that if they keep repeating this mantra often enough, then somehow it will prove true. The Committee on Resources has now held three hearings on this issue and has yet to find one example where a World Heritage Site designation was requested by a broad-based cross- section of either the public or local officials. On the contrary, the Committee has found that World Heritage Site designation efforts are almost always driven by federal agencies, usually the Department of Interior, and often face strong local opposition. The Department of Interior, in cooperation with the Federal Interagency Panel for World Heritage has identified a shopping list of 94 sites in 31 States and the District of Columbia that they would like to make World Heritage Sites. So far, twenty-two of the sites on this list have been designated World Heritage Sites. I would like to include this list and the detailed descriptions of the natural properties on this list. More information on this important issue can be found on the Committee on Resources website at: http://www.house.gov//105cong/ issues.htm World Heritage Shopping List for United States (by state)

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2807) to amend the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994 to prohibit the sale, importation, and exportation of products labeled as containing substances derived from rhinoceros or tiger, with a Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment, with amendments.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 2129) to eliminate restrictions on the acquisition of certain land contiguous to Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 494, the resolution just agreed to.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 494) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States has enjoyed the loyalty of the United States citizens of Guam, and that the United States recognizes the centennial anniversary of the Spanish-American war as an opportune time for Congress to reaffirm its commitment to increase self-government, consistent with self-determination, for the people of Guam.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I support this resolution on the centennial of the Spanish-American War to recognize the loyalty of the United States citizens of Guam who have become part of this Nation due to that conflict. This resolution serves as recognition of Guam's 100 years of loyalty and service to the United States, and calls on the House of Representatives to reaffirm its commitment to the people of Guam for increased self-government. Mr. Speaker, it has been one hundred years since the United States raised the first American flag over Guam on July 21, 1898. The islands were transferred to the United States after the Spanish-American War pursuant to the Treaty of Paris, signed December 10, 1898, and raitifed and proclaimed on April 11, 1899. Article IX of the Treaty states that ``The civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants of the territories hereby ceded to the United States shall be determined by the Congress.'' Guam was administered by the United States Navy until forced to surrender the island in 1941 to the invading forces of Japan. During the occupation from 1941 to 1944, the people of Guam remained staunchly loyal to the United States, risking torture and death, and subject to forced labor, ruthless executions, and other brutalities. The island was returned to U.S. Naval jurisdiction after the liberation of the people of Guam in 1944. As an unincorporated territory of the United States, Guam's relationship with the United States has been characterized by Guam's political development from an island administered by the U.S. Department of the Navy to one governed by the people of Guam under the Guam Organic Act approved by Congress in 1950 in Public Law 630. In the same Act, Congress extended U.S. citizenship to the people of Guam. Congress subsequently authorized expanded self-governance by permitting the people of Guam to elect their own government and a delegate to represent them in the U.S. House of Representatives. In addition, in 1976 Congress committed to a major advance in self-government for Guam by authorizing a constitution, which Guam has yet to complete. Today, while the people of Guam continue their quest for increased self-government within the United States community, they can be assured that the adoption of a constitution as authorized by Congress will not prejudice or preclude their right of self-determination and the fundamental right to seek a change in their political status in the future. This resolution serves as recognition of Guam's 100 years of loyalty and service to the United States and calls on the House of Representatives to reaffirm its commitment to the people of Guam for increased self-government. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of work that has gone into this legislation. There is a lot of, I hope, hopeful signs that we will not address this issue too soon unless there is some misapplication of the legislation by the Department of Interior. I have been a strong supporter of the concessionaires because they bring visitors to the parks and they open the parks for the people I believe they should be serving. There has been some policies of the Park Service to exclude people from the parks for their own services. I think that is very unfortunate. But I would like to address section 419, that ensures it does not disrupt the ongoing bidding process for cruise ships entry permits in Glacier Bay National Park. The administration does support this provision. It grandfathers the 1998 Glacier Bay Prospectus in current law. The prospectus was issued last February, and is the basis for awarding cruise ship entry permits in Glacier Bay. These are 5 year permits lasting from the year 2000 to the year 2004. Without this language, the bill could force the Park Service to redo the prospectus. Years of expensive work and extensive negotiations will be thrown out the window. The measure provides that terms and conditions of existing law apply to the prospectus, and also sunsets a preference to renew Glacier Bay entry permits on December 31, 2009. I believe this solves a unique problem in a unique problem. Section 419 does not apply to any other park in the Nation. I believe this is a correct step forward, and I would suggest respectfully, although have I some reservation, Senator Thomas has done a great job on this, as has the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen). I support the legislation.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1677) to reauthorize the North American Wetlands Conservation Act and the Partnerships for Wildlife Act, as amended.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I am presenting to the House a modified version of S. 1677, the Wetlands and Wildlife Enhancement Act. This measure was approved by the other body on September 30th. The first two sections of the bill extend the North America Wetlands Conservation Act and the Partnerships for Wildlife Act for an additional 5 years. These two important conservation programs are dedicated to improving and acquiring wetlands for both migratory birds and nongame species. In fact, as a result of the North American Wetlands Conservation Act, more than 3 million acres of wetlands have been purchased in the United States and Canada over the past 7 years. Section 3 of this bill is designed to clarify the membership of the North American Wetlands Conservation Council. I am pleased that Ducks Unlimited, which has contributed some $80 million for essential migratory bird wetland projects will continue to serve on the Council in the future. Mr. Speaker, the House version of this legislation was overwhelmingly adopted on May 19th of this year. Section 5 of this proposal is the text of my bill, H.R. 2863, the Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act. This measure was extensively debated on the House on September 10 and adopted by a vote of 322 to 90. Since that time, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has conducted a hearing on this bill and reported it favorably. During these deliberations, the Senate suggested that this bill be changed in several ways. I have incorporated those modifications, which increase the maximum criminal penalties for baiting and direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the effects of changing strict liability to the ``knows or reasonably should have known'' legal standard. In terms of penalties, these are maximum levels and will only be imposed in the most severe and egregious cases. H.R. 2863 will not allow baiting and will not imperil any migratory bird population. What it will do is allow hunters to simply present evidence in their own defense. The current strict liability interpretation, if you were there and even a small part or amount of bait is present, you are guilty, it is fundamentally wrong. This violates one of our most basic constitutional protections, that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Furthermore, the ``knows or reasonably should know'' standard has been effectively used in the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas for over 20 years. During that time, no migratory bird populations have been put at risk, there has been an 88 percent conviction rate in baiting cases and, not surprisingly, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has never attempted to overturn or challenge this legal standard. It is time we provide fairness and equity to migratory bird hunters throughout this country. Section 6 of the bill incorporates the text of H.R. 2807 and H.R. 3113. These measures were overwhelmingly adopted by the House of Representatives. The fundamental goal is to eliminate the U.S. market for illegally obtained rhino and tiger products and to extend the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund. This Fund has supported some 40 conservation projects in 10 range states in Africa and Asia. Without this legislation, these two magnificent species will continue to slide towards extinction. Finally, the last sections of the bill implement the text of S. 2317. This measure was approved by the other body on September 21. This legislation is designed to make several minor changes in four units of our National Wildlife Refuge System and to reduce the penalties for those individuals who unintentionally violate certain provisions of the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act. Briefly, this section would remove 37 acres from the Upper Mississippi National Wildlife and Fish Refuge, 1,430 acres from the Kilcohook Coordination Area, and a 634-acre easement from the Lake Elsie National Wildlife Refuge. These lands have lost the wildlife values that led to their inclusion in the system and, therefore, they should be removed. Finally, this section renames a refuge in the State of Oregon to better reflect the true nature of the unit. In the future it will be called the Klamath Marsh Wildlife Refuge. This is a good bill, Mr. Speaker. These changes are minor housekeeping matters that are noncontroversial. They have been suggested by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and I find no objection to their enactment. Mr. Speaker, this is a comprehensive conservation measure that is good for migratory bird hunters, our Refuge System, essential wetland habitat acquisition, and for two of the most endangered species, rhinos and tigers, on earth. Each of these provisions, except for the minor refuge changes, has been fully debated and resoundingly approved by this body, and I urge an ``aye'' on S. 1677. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced a bill today in order to aid our Administration in taking responsible action regarding the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). This last May, the US Geological Survey (USGS) released it's petroleum resource assessment of the ``1002 area'' within ANWR. The USGS published that in-place resources could be as high as 31.5 billion barrels of oil. This is orders of magnitude higher than other predictions this Administration has released during this decade. Of course, this 31.5 billion barrel figure does not factor in all of the economic and technological variables that are realities for the industry. However, it demonstrates that there clearly is significant energy potential currently being withheld from the American public by this Administration. To really understand the energy potential for the Nation within ANWR, we must use the most advanced scientific methods available. The Secretary of the Interior, as our Nation's landlord, clearly has a fiduciary responsibility to gather the maximum amount of information to make an informed decision. Regardless of a person's position on development of the coastal plain, we should all support an understanding of the potential beneath the frozen tundra of this area. By using 3-dimensional seismic testing in the 1002 area of ANWR, we will be able to have a much clearer understanding of this potential. Currently, there are several significant discoveries on state lands adjacent to the 1002 area of ANWR. These fields could potentially drain the federal mineral estate from their surface occupancy on state lands. This potential drainage could withhold millions of dollars to which the US Treasury and American public are entitled. Without the best science available, this possibility continues to be a significant reality. It is incumbent upon this Administration to safeguard the people's trust and mineral estate. To allow this potential diminishment because of political ideology is unwise and irresponsible. Even if this legislation were to pass with the few legislative days remaining in this 105th Congress, it will not open ANWR. In fact, sadly so. I feel the coastal plain holds our nation's greatest energy potential and should be opened to sensible development. The reality is this Administration will not allow ANWR to be developed under any circumstances. With this fact, we must fulfill our obligation of scientific understanding and use the best science technology available to estimate the coastal plain's potential. If my fellow Alaskans send me back to represent them as their Chairman, I plan to reintroduce this bill and move it through the legislative process. This legislation will help accomplish the goal of understanding the coastal plain of ANWR's potential in a non-invasive and environmentally benign manner. Seismic testing examines the sub-surface structure with almost insubstantial effects. The fact is, seismic has already been allowed in this area with negligible impacts. This legislation will allow 3-D seismic into this area for a much more accurate assessment of the resource. We need this kind of understanding while devising a sound national energy strategy for the American people. I look forward to working with the Administration in the 106th Congress while we work to fulfill our obligation to the public and gather the best information by using the most advanced technology available.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, since July 17, 1998, Congressman John Dingell, W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Richard Baker, Chris John, and I have been circulating a discussion draft and asking for comments to help further this legislative proposal. Our proposal is based on the idea that funds derived from outer continental shelf or OCS activities should be shared with coastal states impacted by the development, as well as reinvested into conservation. Today, we, along with several of our colleagues, will be introducing H.R. 4717. To set the stage we must digress to the topic of oil and gas revenues paid to the Federal Treasury by companies involved in producing the federal mineral estate. Currently, would-be oil and gas operators on our public lands, and in federal waters, must bid for a lease at auction, pay rent on this tract if successful with their bid, and pay a royalty on each cubic foot of natural gas and barrel of oil produced. The receipts from oil and gas development onshore, in states like New Mexico and Wyoming, are shared with the state which hosts the federal lease. Generally, half of the revenues the federal government receives from mineral development is shared with these public and land states. However, oil and gas produced in the federal waters of the OCS is not shared in this manner with adjacent states. There have been numerous attempts to address this inequity. Most have failed at the hands of large states like California and Florida with the help of the environmental community opposed to OCS revenue-sharing because they perceived it as incentive for new oil and gas production. One of the first negotiations took place between Louisiana Governor Earl Long and President Truman. Governor Long has a long history of quotable and embellished stories, but this one is told as follows: Governor Long approached President Truman regarding the issue of revenue from offshore drilling with his state of Louisiana. President Truman, sympathetic, came back with an offer of 50% of the revenues to be shared with impacted adjacent states, such as Louisiana. Governor Long, in typical Earl Long style replied that if Louisiana could not get its due of 100%, it wanted nothing at all. And since that day Louisiana and the other coastal states received just that. Which brings us to where we are today. With more than 90% of the offshore federal production occurring off the coast of Louisiana, no state is more energized when this issue of revenue sharing is brought up. Past proposals had formulas which favored producing coastal states such as Louisiana and Texas, which have been supportive of responsible development of OCS oil and gas resources. Some previous proposals even penalized states like Florida and California who annually seek a moratorium on OCS leasing. Not so, this time. We all realize the necessity of keeping our large states supportive of in order to have major legislation passed into law. It seems appropriate to thank those individuals and groups involved with this bill introduction. The proposal has been a process-driven, seeking input from a diverse array of individuals and groups. Countless meetings and information exchanges occurred throughout the summer and into the fall. Any success realized today, with this bill introduction, came from the diversity of the participants and our determination to stay true to an open process and dialogue. Today, you find Congressman that run the spectrum of ideology and geography together supporting this bill. You see the same with the groups who have come out to support this endeavor and I look forward to continuing this collaboration. Since July, when Congressman Dingell, Tauzin, Baker and John and I began circulating a discussion draft, posted it to the House Resources Committee website, we have been affirmatively seeking comments on the specifics of this idea. I can't stress enough our desire for critical input. Most of our discussion draft ideas were based upon existing reports or programs. Your input has been critical to making this proposal realize it's legislative potential. Today, we are moving into the next step in our process by introducing this bill. Yes, the 105th Congress is nearly finished, but we felt it worthwhile to formally introduce a legislation for thorough scrutiny until the 106th Congress meets. And the citizens of Alaska so willing, I intent to come back and re-introduce the Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1999 early next year. Please understand, today's introduction does not signal the end our dialogue. I am committed to working with all interested individuals and groups to improve this bill next Congress, should compelling arguments for further amendments. I am dedicating myself to continue the dialogue begun four months ago into the 106th Congress, and working together, we can build a coalition sufficient to enact the ``Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1999'' into law.***HD***Title I The first title of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act will redistribute 27% of the total OCS receipts in a given year and is based on a Minerals Management Service's advisory committee's report. This report was prepared by the Administration and local government officials, and oil and gas industry representative, and conservation- community interests. The panel took a pragmatic approach, by suggesting only revenues from new oil and gas development be considered. While this reduces Budget Enforcement Act-induced concerns, it was troublesome to the environmental community because of the implementation that such revenue-sharing would be a strong incentive for new development. Hence, our bull utilizes all revenue, from both existing production and new leases. With this change not only will the funding levels increase to benefits the programs included in our bill, but we wanted to address the environmental community concerns from the outset. Let's be candid about the perception that this bill includes incentives for oil and gas production. The only true incentive for a company to produce oil and gas, onshore or offshore, is the price of a barrel of oil or cubic foot of gas. A company examines the economics when making its development decisions. Companies will not decree to place a billion-dollar rig offshore based on a state or local government official's desire to increase their share of the fund our legislation would establish. They invest in the OCS if, and only if, they have reasonable expectations of making a profit. Obviously, even in today's oil & gas price environment, many companies have decided to compete in our OSC--especially in the Gulf of Mexico, but also in the Beaufort Sea, and even on existing leases off California. Would they like to know their royalties are put to noble purposes for the good of taxpayers throughout the Nation? Well, of course, The Land and Water Conservation Fund primarily fueled by OCS receipts does just that, and has since 1965. But, no one believes LWCF has been an incentive for oil and gas drilling, rather its just been a good idea to reinvest some of our oil and gas dollars in the acquisition of lands and conservation of our renewable resources by both state and federal entities. In addition, we have asked the Minerals Management Service to prepare data to show the amount of new production which would be necessary to increase a state's allocable share by 10%. Preliminary data shows that if all existing leases were to begin producing offshore California, there would be an increase in California's allocable share of only 1 percent, or about $1 million annually. I strongly doubt the people of California would abide new development off their coast simply to gain this revenue for coastal impact assistance. I argue that this issue of incentives is a ``red herring.'' When a rational person examines the funding distribution, released today, they will see states like Florida and California as some of the largest recipients of impact assistance, despite the current and likely future leasing moratoria. Nevertheless we wish to address the perception of incentives. We are and have always been committed to keeping this bill free of drilling incentives as this is revenue-sharing legislation, pure and simple. To date, we have not received one comment which provides an adequate alternative to funding distribution to areas impacted by OCS development. But, we will work with individuals and groups in finding alternative which accomplishes the goal of providing funds to areas impacted by development which factors in the amount of development adjacent to a given state.***HD***Title II The second title of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act reinvests 23% of the OCS funds into land-based conservation efforts, with a focus on the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). More than 30 years ago, the LWCF Act created a unique partnership between Federal, State and local governments by authorizing matching grants for the acquisition and development of recreation and conservation resources. Similarly, the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program (UPARR), created in 1978, provided Federal funds to distressed urban areas to rehabilitate and construct recreation areas. Together, these programs strived to develop a national system of parks that would, day-in and day-out, meet the recreation and open-space demands of the American public. Our proposal recognizes the noble potential within these programs and provides the stable funding they have been lacking. LWCF monies have helped fund over 37,500 State and local projects including campgrounds, trails, playgrounds, and parks throughout the country. UPARR grants have been used to rehabilitate and develop nearly 1,500 urban recreation and park projects in more than 400 local jurisdictions. Yet, with the ever increasing demands of Americans for accessible recreation facilities, State and local governments have identified nearly $3 billion in capital investment needs nationally over the next five years for land acquisition and new construction. Nonetheless, despite the successes of the state-side LWCF matching grant and UPARR programs and the continuing demand for recreation and conservation resources, neither program has been funded over the past three years. Title two of our bill would revitalize the LWCF and UPARR programs by providing matching grants to federal, state, local, and urban governments for the acquisition and development of conservation and recreation resources. Our bill provides annual funding which in many years provides funding at full $900 million levels. This bill will recommit Congress to the vision that revenues earned from the depletion of a nonrenewable resource should be invested in permanent assets that will serve the conservation and recreation needs of all Americans. The 23% for land-based conservation would be distributed as follows: 42% to be utilized for Federal LWCF; 42% to State and local conservation and recreation projects; and 16% to fund UPARR programs. It is important to point out that the funds allocated for State and local conservation and recreation projects only could fund one-half of the projects' costs and all expenditures would have to be consistent with the States' comprehensive outdoor recreation plans. Also the stated, territories, the District of Columbia, Indian tribes, and Alaska Native Village Corporations would all be eligible to receive matching grant funds.***HD***Title III For over six years, some segments of the conservation community have advocated the creation of an excise tax to provide funding for non-game wildlife projects and conservation education. Included in this bill is funding for wildlife conservation and education. Conservation education is critical to ensuring that people understand the interdependence between man and the environment. We are losing the idea that people and the environment that surrounds them not only can coexist, but must coexist. As the urban sprawl envelops more of the public geography and ideology, we must work to educate with the principles of sustainable use. Hiking, biking, bird-watching, canoeing, mountain climbing, and hunting are all sustainable and acceptable uses of our lands and resources. Education by using sound scientific principles is the only way to ensure that our use of our resources will be sustainable for future generations. Another void this legislation helps to fill, is the issue of game vs. non-game funding. This issue divides the sporting community who need unity to accomplish our common goals. The excise tax initiative, while well intentioned, was divisive as it created segmented funding for a particular species of wildlife. Our bill provides funding for both species of wildlife, game and non-game through the existing mechanism of Pittman-Robertson. Pittman-Robertson currently allows for the flexibility to address the needs of non-game species, as well as game species. We all realize that Pittman-Robertson is currently focused on funding game species. However, our bill will create a new subaccount, named the ``Wildlife Conservation and Restoration'' subaccount. The conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1998 will provide funding at higher levels than any other federal source for wildlife. Above levels proposed by the excise tax initiative. This will provide wildlife funding to help move the conservation community beyond the debate of game versus non-game funding and provide for conservation education. This funding is provided with the knowledge that many states will utilize them for non- game and watchable species and these functions can take place with the bill as drafted. However, we allow the flexibility for individual states to maximize their digression. I am very active in the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus and am currently the chairman of the Executive Council. The Sportsmen's Caucus is the largest Caucus in the Congress and sportsmen's champion. Far too often, our sportsmen and women are criticized for their outdoor recreation. The mass public does not understand our role in the economy or appreciate our heritage. The sporting community, represented by those who enjoy and utilize the outdoors are a huge segment to our Nation's economy. Members of the Caucus leadership, like Saxby Chambliss often incorporate our significance in their speeches. We should take a moment to realize how much our sportsmen contribute to the economy and environment. If hunting and fishing were a corporation, it would rank 10th on the Fortune 500 list. This is ahead of giant corporations like AT&T. Sportsmen activities support more than twice the number of workers employed by Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart, incidently, Wal-Mart is the largest Fortune 500 employer. Sportsmen's assets equal, $60 billion in retail sales, 1.9 million jobs supported, and $8.7 billion in state and federal tax revenues. Economists estimate that these factors create a $169 billion ripple effect in our country's economy. Some additional facts related to the taxes the sporting community pays are also interesting: Tax revenues generated by sportsmen are greater than the box office total of all United States movie theaters. Also, exceed the combined box office earnings of the all-time top ten grossing films. Federal tax revenues generated by sportsmen could pay for the combined budgets of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species appropriation, Bureau of Land Management, National Biological Service, and National Park Service. For two years! Federal tax revenues from New York sportsmen alone could pay for the entire U.S. Forest Service fish and wildlife budget. Pennsylvania sportsmen could pick-up the same tab. Sportsmen's sales tax revenues generated in North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and West Virginia could pay for their state's entire parks and recreation budgets. All of you are well aware that the sporting community, especially those who engage in hunting and fishing, have been supporting the larger community of outdoor recreation for decades. Their generous contributions through the sportsmen trust accounts of Dingell-Johnson and Pittman-Robertson have immeasurably benefitted wildlife and their habitat. With that success in mind, I look forward to working with all individuals and groups to see this new subaccount passed into Law.