THE EMERY COUNTY PUBLIC LAND MANAGEMENT ACT INCLUDED IN S. 47, THE JOHN D. DINGELL, JR. CONSERVATION, MANAGEMENT, AND RECREATION ACT; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 132
(Extensions of Remarks - August 02, 2019)
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1026-E1027]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE EMERY COUNTY PUBLIC LAND MANAGEMENT ACT INCLUDED IN S. 47, THE JOHN
D. DINGELL, JR. CONSERVATION, MANAGEMENT, AND RECREATION ACT
______
HON. JOHN R. CURTIS
of utah
in the house of representatives
Friday, August 2, 2019
Mr. CURTIS. Madam Speaker, I rise today regarding the Emery County
Public Land Management Act, that was included in S. 47, the John D.
Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act. This became
Public Law 116-9 on March 12th, 2019.
Throughout 2018 and early 2019, Senator Hatch, Senator Romney, and
myself heavily engaged with the Emery County Commissioners and Emery
County Public Lands Council to draft this important piece of
legislation. After Senator Hatch's retirement, Senator Romney helped to
carry the ball across the finish line.
This law is the result of countless hours of deliberation, and thus I
find it important to highlight some areas of congressional intent of
particular interest. While these should generally be clear in the text
and corresponding map, the historical context of how we arrived at some
of these decisions may be of benefit to the Department of the Interior,
future members of the Utah delegation, or those in Utah. The Utah
delegation, and particularly myself, look forward to the implementation
of this new law.
Of note, Jake Bornstein (my Legislative Director), Romel Nicholas
(Senator Hatch's public lands staffer), and Kelsey Berg (Senator
Romney's Deputy Chief of Staff) were the main staff points of contact
in our respective offices for the bill. Jake and Romel have extensive
correspondence with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that further
demonstrates the accurate characterization of the congressional intent
I outline here.
Most important to this process, our founding principle was to never
take any action that would end a current ongoing use. For example, we
were immensely careful to not close a road, trail, air strip, or other
existing use in the legislative text or corresponding map with a
wilderness designation. Further, we worked extensively to avoid more
restrictive designations, such as wilderness, to areas it would limit
ongoing activity. We worked to draw designation boundaries along
geographic and physical features, or just outside a cherry stem, to
ensure management made sense for the area.
Any designation boundary that does not follow these trends,
particularly any designation that puts at risk an existing use due to a
poorly drawn boundary, was a clerical error and should be resolved
under the authority clearly provided in Sec. 1221. Given the pure scale
of this bill and legislative map, we realized this authority would be a
vital tool to resolve these errors.
I'd also like to point out the clear intent within Sec. 1232. Section
(e), which clearly states that non-wilderness activities or uses that
can be seen or heard from areas within wilderness are to be left
uninterrupted by this legislation.
On the topic of roads, we worked closely with BLM to ensure all roads
in the 2008 RMP were not put into a wilderness designation, often
referred to as ``cherry stemmed''. Our intent was to preserve these
roads and for them to stay open. These cherry stems are of various
sizes and were intended to ensure an adequate corridor is there to
facilitate necessary maintenance. In the Recreation Area, we included
language in Sec. 1222 to ensure the necessary maintenance to existing
routes may continue and allow rerouting of roads or trails to protect
the resources of the Recreation Area.
Finally, I would like to explain that the driving force for this
compromise bill was certainty, and thus preventing the designation of a
national monument using the authority granted to the President under
the Antiquities Act. As so many know, national monument designations in
my home state of Utah have been the source of extensive controversy. In
my view, land management is most effective when it is driven by local
voices, compromise, and well-reasoned planning. Sweeping designations
via national monument are often politically-inspired and they erode the
quality of management for the areas they intend to protect. With the
passage of the Emery County legislation, the need for a national
monument is forfeited because a clear plan has been laid out for the
long-term management of the San Rafael Swell. To be clear, this is a
view that was shared by the many parties, including locally elected
officials, conservationists, and recreationists, that were intimately
involved in the forging of this compromise legislation. Any
[[Page E1027]]
future national monument designation under the Antiquities Act in Emery
County would be a violation of the good faith agreement that was shared
among those that negotiated as part of this bill's process.
I believe this bill is a big win for all stakeholders, and I look
forward to watching what was a 20-year journey for Emery County come to
fruition.
____________________