The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the Senate section on pages S14271-S14274 on Nov. 7, 2003.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Dayton,
Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Kerry, Mr.
Harkin, Mr. Coleman, Mr. Reid, and Mr. Nelson of Nebraska):
S. 1840. A bill to amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to encourage owners and operations of privately-held farm and ranch land to voluntarily make their land available for access by the public under programs administered by States; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am joined by Senators Roberts, Daschle, Dayton, Dorgan, Johnson, Baucus, Enzi, Kerry, Harkin, Coleman, Reid, and Nelson of Nebraska in introducing the ``Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program of 2003''.
Newspaper headlines across North Dakota over the past year confirm that one issue has emerged as among the most controversial that we have seen in the State in some time. That issue has to do with who can hunt in North Dakota, and under what conditions.
As one State senator said during the 2003 session of the North Dakota legislature: ``In all my years in the legislature, I haven't gotten so many calls as [on] this one.''
Some have called for stricter limits on the number of out-of-state sportsmen in order to provide greater hunting opportunities for North Dakota citizens. On the other side, many of the rural businesses in North Dakota whose livelihoods have come to depend increasingly on the dollars spent by non-resident hunters have urged a less restrictive policy.
An article earlier this year in a North Dakota paper began with the declaration that, ``No bill has stirred more passion in people than Senate Bill 2048, which deals with capping the number of out-of-state hunters.'' One State legislator termed the debate over the bill,
``civil war between residents of North Dakota fighting over hunting ground.''
At its core, the hunting debate is about demand exceeding supply. Quite simply, the public desire for hunting and other outdoor recreation opportunities increasingly exceeds the amount of land available for such activities. And the problem is growing worse each year. Other States face a similar challenge, and they too are in a quandary as they seek to address it.
In response to this growing problem, I have been working with a number of my colleagues--as well as farm, conservation, and sportsmen's groups--to develop a positive, straightforward, voluntary and incentive-based approach to addressing the ``supply side'' of this issue. And I am pleased to be introducing that initiative today.
Our proposal is a voluntary landowner incentive program. Its formal title is the ``Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program of 2003''. As the title indicates, it is strictly voluntary in nature.
It would work like this: Under the program--which I to refer to as the
``Open Fields'' proposal, the U.S. Department of Agriculture would provide $50 million per year to State programs that offer incentive payments to farmers and ranchers who agree to allow public access on their land, under terms established by each state.
The ``Open Fields'' program would be funded in the same way that Federal farm and conservation programs are currently financed--through USDA's Commodity Credit Corporation. To receive funding under the program, interested states would describe the benefits that the state hopes to achieve by encouraging public access on private farm and ranch land--through such activities as hunting, fishing, birding, and related outdoor activities--and the methods that the State will use to achieve those benefits.
In determining the distribution of funds under the program, USDA would give priority to those States that propose--1. to maximize participation by offering a program whose terms are likely to meet with widespread acceptance among landowners in the state; 2. to ensure that land enrolled under the state program has appropriate wildlife habitat; 3. to increase public access on land enrolled in habitat improvement projects under the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program; and 4. to use other Federal, state or private resources, in a collaborative way, to carry out the program.
But participation by the States and individual land owners in each State would, as I have indicated, be completely voluntary.
In designing the ``Open Fields'' program, our aim has been to build on what works--to grease the wheel, rather than re-invent it. For example, about 13 States already have programs designed to increase the amount of private land available to the public, but these programs are generally modest in scope and suffer from limited funding. Our legislation is designed to give these struggling State programs a needed shot in the arm and to encourage other States.
In North Dakota, for example, we have the Private Land Initiative, under which revenue generated from the sale of habitat stamps is used to provide cost-share assistance for wildlife habitat, and to support the Conservation PLOTS program--PLOTS stands for ``Private Land Open To Sportsmen.'' Under this program, owners agree to make their land accessible to the public in return for cost-share and incentive payments. Earlier this year, State officials made an additional $1.5 million available to increase public access on private land, in an effort to help diffuse tensions in the debate over resident versus non-
resident hunters.
Other States have similar programs. Kansas, for example, has its
``Walk-In Hunting'' program. Montana has a ``Block Management, Public Access/Private Land'' program. Nebraska sponsors a Conservation Reserve Program/Management Access Program, under which landowners with CRP ground receive a bonus payment if they take steps to improve habitat and allow public access on their CRP land. Colorado recently implemented its ``Walk-In Access'' program, under which interested hunters purchase a $20 stamp that gives them access to private land enrolled in the program and a directory of participating landowners.
All of these are fine, innovative programs, but they lack the resources needed to meet the public's growing demand for places to hunt and engage in other forms of outdoor recreation.
Make no mistake about it, wildlife-related recreation is a major force in defining our national character and in shaping our economy. For example, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in 2001, 82 million Americans age 16 years and older participated in wildlife-
related recreation. During that year, over 34 million people fished, 13 million hunted, and over 66 million participated in at least one type of wildlife-watching activity such as observing, feeding, or photographing wildlife in the United States.
According to the Fish & Wildlife Service, those 82 million people who engaged in wildlife-related activities spent an estimated $108 billion, including over $35 billion on fishing and nearly $21 billion on hunting. That's big business by any definition, and it is a slice of the national economy that is increasingly important to our rural communities and small businesses. In 2001 alone, for example, $20 billion was spent on food, lodging, and transportation by those who hunted and fished, while wildlife-watching participants, including birders, spent another $8.2 billion on those same items.
In North Dakota, wildlife-related recreation generated nearly $1 billion for the State's economy during the 2001-2002 season, according to the North Dakota Game and Fish Commission. The Commission estimates that direct spending by hunters and anglers laws $469 million during the season, generating nearly $545 million in additional economic activity. North Dakota ranks second in the Nation in terms of the percentage of the State's resident's who hunt, 19 percent, and fifth among States in the percentage of State residents who fish, 29 percent.
To underscore the importance of non-resident hunters to my State, the Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that North Dakota ranks third among States in the percentage of hunters in the State who are non-residents. The estimated 52,000 non-resident hunters in our State make up an estimated 37 percent of all hunters. Only South Dakota, 65 percent, and Colorado, 43 percent, rank higher.
In addition, there is ample evidence, from North Dakota State University and individual business owners, that the wildlife and hunting opportunities created by the Conservation Reserve Program have helped to cushion the economic impact first created when the CRP withdrew land from production and caused farmers to purchase fewer inputs and other services so important to our struggling rural communities. So it is critically important that we look for additional means to increase sporting opportunities for the public, and do so in a way that not only allows traditional farming operations to continue, but also increases a farm's income-earning potential. Our proposal would do just that.
All in all, this program will be good for farm income, good for conservation, good for our struggling rural communities, and a positive force in strengthening the bond between producers and the general public.
Finally, there are also broader policy reasons to move in this direction. For example, it is likely that future world trade agreements are increasingly going to limit the ability of the United States and other major agricultural producing countries to support our farmers in a way that is considered to be trade, or market, ``distorting.'' In other words, U.S. policymakers are likely to find it more and more difficult to provide government farm support in a way that is tied either to production or prices. Instead, we will have to find so-called
``green box'' means of supporting farm income--payments that are not based on bushels produced or current commodity prices. That's clearly the direction that the European Union is taking, and we had better take notice. The program we are announcing today fits neatly in the current green box definition, and should be one of the many tools available to support farm income well into the future, even if new trade agreements constrain our farm policy options.
I am pleased that our legislation has already received the support of a number of farm, sportsmen, and conservation organizations, including the North Dakota Farmers Union, the North Dakota Farm Bureau, the National Farmers Union, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, the Wildlife Management Institute, the Izaak Walton League of America, the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, the National Rifle Association, the Mule Deer Foundation, Pheasants Forever, the American Sportfishing Association, Pure Fishing, Trout Unlimited, Bass Anglers Sportsmen Society, the Ruffed Grouse Society, the Wildlife Society, the Pope and Young Club, the Federal of Flyfishers, the International Hunter Education Association, the Boone and Crocket Club, the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the North American Grouse Partnership, the Texas Wildlife Association, and the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada.
In closing, let me quote from one of news articles that appeared in a North Dakota paper last year.
Commenting on the controversy over the proposed change in the pheasant season opening date, the Bismark Tribune editorialized that,
``On one extreme are landowners catering to out-of-state hunters, in part, because of weak and declining rural economies. For them, this is a matter of survival. On the other hand, many sportsmen feel that the growing numbers of acres dedicated to out-of-state hunters, willing to pay big bucks to hunt, are destroying the sport for the state's residents . . . The two sides are a long, long way apart.''
My hope is that we can find ways to bring people together, and in the process strengthen our rural economy, encourage conservation, and preserve our hunting traditions for generations to come. And that's what this proposal is all about.
I ask unanimous consent that additional material be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
November 6, 2003.Hon. Kent Conrad,Hon. Pat Roberts.
Dear Senators: We are writing to express our support for the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program Act of 2003, your legislation to establish state-administered, voluntary, incentive-based programs to expand public access to private lands.
In an era when more and more hunters and anglers are faced with ``no trespassing'' signs and more land is being converted to commercial hunting and fishing operations, this legislation is critically needed to expand access to places to hunt and fish.
This summer, Field and Stream magazine published the results of its 2003 National Hunting Survey. Based on that survey, Field an Stream concluded that a major reason for the decline of hunting in America is the lack of available habitat and access to that habitat. As representatives of outdoor enthusiasts that would benefit from greater access to private lands, we applaud your efforts to enact this new voluntary, incentive-based program. We estimate that your legislation, if fully funded, would encourage landowners to open up more than 10 million new acres of private land to the public each year, dramatically enhancing the experiences of hunters and anglers as well as bird watchers, hikers, and others who enjoy the outdoors.
A number of states already have established programs to work cooperatively with private landowners to pay for access to their lands. Kansas, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and Nebraska all have very successful programs that open millions of acres of lands to the public each year, and several other states are initiating similar programs. These programs are popular with hunters and anglers as well as private landowners. In fact, due to a lack of financial resources, many states are unable to take advantage of the offers by private landowners to enroll in their access programs. By supplementing state resources that currently are being dedicated to this purpose, your legislation will provide additional income to ranchers and farmers, while expanding opportunities to hunters and anglers.
We look forward to working with you to enact this legislation as expeditiously as possible.
Sincerely,
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.
Wildlife Management Institute.
Izaak Walton League of America.
International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.
Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation.
National Rifle Association.
Mule Deer Foundation.
Pheasants Forever.
American Sportfishing Association.
Pure Fishing.
Trout Unlimited.
Bass Anglers Sportsmen Society.
Ruffed Grouse Society.
The Wildlife Society.
Trout Unlimited.
Pope & Young Club.
Federation of Flyfishers.
The International Hunter Education Association.
Boone and Crockett Club.
Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association.
National Shooting Sports Foundation.
North American Grouse Partnership.
Texas Wildlife Association.
United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada.
____
National Farmers Union,
November 6, 2003.Hon. Kent Conrad,Ranking Member, Senate Budget Committee,U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Conrad: On behalf of the 300,000 family farmers and rancher members of the National Farmers Union
(NFU), I write in support of your legislation to establish a voluntary incentive program to encourage farmers and ranchers to provide public access for hunting on their property where appropriate wildlife habitat is maintained.
We believe the ``Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program Act of 2003'' can act both as an important supplement to existing state programs as well as an appropriate stimulus to create new opportunities in additional states. In addition, this program can help alleviate the potential conflict between landowners and the rapidly growing demand by hunters for increased access to rural lands by expanding the availability of private land where hunting is allowed.
Experience demonstrates that the rural impact of hunting on private lands can be an important contributor to rural economic development and provide a much needed boost to the incomes of farmers and ranchers as well as rural businesses. Your proposed legislation provides a unique opportunity to enhance the potential of hunting activities in our Nation's rural areas while ensuring that producer participation is voluntary and that contract terms are designed to achieve a high level of both local control and landowner acceptance.
We look forward to working with you and your colleagues to achieve passage and implementation of this incentive program.
Sincerely,
David J. Frederickson,President.
____
S. 1840
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Voluntary Public Access and Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) according to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in 2001, 82,000,000 individuals in the United States aged 16 years and older participated in wildlife-related recreation, including 34,000,000 individuals who hunted, and more than 66,000,000 who engaged in wildlife-related recreation such as observing, feeding, or photographing wildlife, in the United States;
(2) individuals who participated in wildlife-related activities in 2001 spent an estimated $108,000,000,000, including--
(A) more than $35,000,000,000 on fishing;
(B) nearly $21,000,000,000 on hunting; and
(C) more than $28,000,000,000 on food, lodging, and transportation;
(3) the growing public demand for outdoor recreational opportunities is increasingly constrained by the limits on both public and private land resources;
(4) limited public access on private land has often frustrated and disappointed hunters and other naturalists, and undermined the relationship between land owners and the general public;
(5) several States have established successful but modest walk-in programs to encourage public access on private farm and ranch land, yet the demand for such voluntary access programs remains largely unfulfilled;
(6) traditional agricultural markets have in recent years offered limited income opportunities for farm and ranch land owners and operators; and
(7) current proposals to reform world agricultural trade favor the development of new methods to support the income of agricultural producers that have minimal impact on agricultural production and prices.
SEC. 3. VOLUNTARY PUBLIC ACCESS AND HABITAT INCENTIVE
PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Chapter 5 of subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839bb et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 1240Q. VOLUNTARY PUBLIC ACCESS AND HABITAT INCENTIVE
PROGRAM.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a voluntary public access program under which States may apply for grants to encourage owners and operators of privately-held farm and ranch land to voluntarily make that land available for access by the public under programs administered by the States.
``(b) Applications.--In submitting applications for a grant under the program, a State shall describe--
``(1) the benefits that the State intends to achieve by encouraging public access on private farm and ranch land, through such activities as hunting, fishing, bird watching, and related outdoor activities; and
``(2) the methods that will be used to achieve those benefits.
``(c) Priority.--In approving applications and awarding grants under the program, the Secretary shall give priority to States that propose--
``(1) to maximize participation by offering a program the terms of which are likely to meet with widespread acceptance among landowners;
``(2) to ensure that land enrolled under the State program has appropriate wildlife habitat;
``(3) to strengthen wildlife habitat improvement efforts on land enrolled in a special conservation reserve enhancement program described in 1234(f)(4) by providing incentives to increase public access on that land; and
``(4) to use additional Federal, State, or private resources in carrying out the program.
``(d) Relationship to Other Laws.--Nothing in this section preempts a State law (including any State liability law).
``(e) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate such regulations as are necessary to carry out this section.''.
(b) Funding.--Section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(8) The voluntary public access program under section 1240Q, using, to the maximum extent practicable, $50,000,000 in each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.''.
SEC. 4. PREVENTION OF EXCESS BASE ACRES.
Section 1101(g)(2) of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7911(g)(2)) is amended by striking subparagraph (C).
____
Section-By-Section Summary--Voluntary Public Access and Habitat
Incentive Program of 2003
Sec. 1. Title: ``Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program of 2003''.
Sec. 2. Findings: Describes--
(1) the importance of wildlife-related recreation of the U.S. economy;
(2) the growing demand for outdoor recreation activities such as hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching;
(3) the increasingly limited opportunities for the public to access private land;
(4) the modest hunter access programs begun in some states; and
(5) the need to identify WTO-compliant means of supporting farm income in the future.
Sec. 3. Establishes the ``Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program of 2003'' and provides $50 million in Commodity Credit Corporation funds annually (2003-07) to States for the purpose of encouraging owners and operators of privately-held farm and ranch land to voluntarily make their land available for access by the public under programs administered by the States. Priority for funding under the program is given to those States that propose--
(1) to maximize participation by offering a program whose terms are likely to meet with widespread acceptance among landowners;
(2) to ensure that land enrolled under the State program has appropriate wildlife habitat;
(3) to strengthen wildlife habitat improvement efforts on land enrolled under the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program; and
(4) to use additional Federal, State, or private resources in carrying out the program.
Clarifies that nothing in the bill preempts a State law
(inclosing any State liability law).
Sec. 4. Repeals Sec. 1101(b)(2)(C) of the 2002 Farm Bill, a provision that USDA has interpreted to require that land enrolled under any State conservation program that prohibits the production of a crop be removed from a farm's acreage base for purposes of federal farm program benefits.
____
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators Conrad, Roberts and others in introducing the Voluntary Public Access and Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program Act of 2003. This bill offers an excellent opportunity to help conserve wildlife habitat, increase the amount of land available for outdoor recreational activities, and help farmers and ranchers.
Hunting and other outdoor activities are very popular and are an important part of our country's heritage. Unfortunately, the shortage of public land in some States limits the ability of people to enjoy these activities. Providing incentives to increase public access to private lands can enhance outdoor recreational opportunities and help rural economies.
In many rural areas businesses associated with wildlife recreation, such as sporting goods stores, campgrounds, and motels and hotels, are an important part of the economy. By increasing the lands available for outdoor recreation, not only will more local residents be able to enjoy this activity, but we will also encourage more people to visit rural areas, bringing additional revenue to these rural communities. When hunting, bird watching or hiking on accessible lands, visitors stay in local lodging, purchase goods in stores and eat in restaurants. The money generated from these activities is good for rural economies.
In many States, such as Iowa, many farmers and landowners have traditionally granted hunters and other outdoor recreationists permission to use their land when asked. This bill will help compensate owners and operators of farm and ranch land for their generosity and also encourage more of them to provide such access to their land. And, of course, this bill will benefit wildlife by encouraging landowners and operators to maintain, increase and improve habitat for wildlife.
In States access programs now operating, information listing enrolled private land is often readily available to allow recreationists to access the land without the need to bother the owners to ask for permission. Many existing programs also have the very important benefit of reducing the liability of landowners and operators in case of injury to people using their land. State programs also help ensure enforcement of hunting and other regulations and help landowners and operators posts signs and information.
Currently at least 13 States have public access programs that would be eligible for funds from this bill. While Iowa currently does not have a program, there is great interest in starting a program, and I believe this bill will enable Iowa to start one. This bill provides flexibility to allow States to design programs to meet the particular needs and interests of landowners and recreationists in each State while at the same time ensuring that the goals of increasing wildlife habitat and available lands for public recreation are met.
I am proud to cosponsor this bill and urge my colleagues to support it.
____________________
