Congressional bills seek to slow down federal regulation and controls

Congress' Appropriations Committees flexed muscle this past year to curb some of the administration's zeal to regulate and control public land policy beyond their legal mandate. In spite if intense lobbying by the Green Advocacy Groups, the following provisions passed, and were signed into law by the President:

• The U.S. Fish & Wildlife can't buy any more land to establish new refuges unless Congress consents.
• The National Park Service (NPS) can't spend any funds on activities responding to the United Nations Biodiversity Treaty.
• The NPS, when processing grants or contracts, must attach the language of 18 USC 1913 to each. This law states that it is illegal to use this grant money for lobbying.
• The Forest Service can't transfer funds to a budget item or can't reprogram any appropriated funds without Congressional consent.
• The cost of consulting services (i.e. Nature Conservancy) paid by the Department of Interior (DOI) and Forest Service must be made a part of the public record and open for public inspection.
• No funds are to be used to publish or distribute any material that in any way promotes support or opposition to any pending legislative proposal (such as the 1995 BLM literature on pending grazing legislation).
• Before any decision on Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Plan (ICBEMP) is made, DOI and Agriculture must prepare and submit a report to Congress on land and resource management planning, policy, and project decisions that will result. They must submit a detailed time and cost estimate of each decision. They must also analyze the current economic and social customs and cultures of the communities within the ecosystem and determine the impacts each EIS alternative will have on each.
• No Heritage Area shall include any portion of a city, town, or village unless the local government agrees by resolution.
• No funds can be spent on new revisions of National Forest Plans until new rules are published in the Federal Register. Forests whose plans have already been officially announced can go forward. Recent Forest Plan revisions have featured dramatic cutbacks in grazing, logging and access. This provision should provide some short-term relief.
• No funds can be spent for the introduction of the grizzly bear into the Selway-Bitterroot area of Idaho and Montana.
  (from Blue Ribbon magazine, 2/98)