FEDERAL LAND GRAB IS BACK

Young proposal would get more people outdoors

Rep. Don Young has resurrected the idea of spending more than $3 billion a year to buy land for protection and to help coastal towns with conservation work and other projects.
Young, R-Alaska, joined Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., at a news conference Thursday to announce introduction of the "Get Outdoors Act."
The GO Act is nearly identical to the Conservation and Reinvestment Act that Young and Miller convinced the U.S. House to pass, 315-102, in 2000. Their bill died in the Senate that year, though. Young introduced it again the next year, but it didn't go far.
This time, organizers of the kick-off news conference are taking a new approach.
Frank Hugelmeyer, president of the Outdoor Industry Association, said the legislation offers an antidote to a nation whose residents are growing ever heavier due to inactivity. The bill would provide millions for developing parks, open space and recreational access projects around the country, he noted.
"This is truly an infrastructure bill for the American people in terms of their health," Hugelmeyer said Thursday to a packed room in the Rayburn House Office Building. The event had been moved indoors because of rain.
Mark Fenton, billed as a health and walking expert, told the crowd that studies have shown that individual activity levels are greatly influenced by whether a person lives near a park or other place to go walking. Building and maintaining such areas can contribute to everyone's health, he said.
Young stuck to that theme in his remarks at the news conference, which he attended despite having his hands full on the House floor with debate over his six-year highway funding bill.
"I am 71 years old. I believe I look 28 years old," Young told the crowd, to much laughter. "But the importance of this is because I have spent thousands of hours outside. It is my cathedral. It's what's important to me. But it keeps me physically able."
"And I want everybody to know this is why I am on this bill," he said. "Because the outdoors, our lands, are so important for the future of this nation.
"I have watched a new generation of people spending time in front of the computer doing this," Young said, curling over an imaginary keyboard. "And as they do that, they do this," he said, spreading his hands wide.
Young and Miller often differ on environmental legislation and issues, but they chatted amiably at the news conference.
"You know he's sometimes way out left and I'm always right," Young quipped after Miller spoke. "But we've worked together to try to recognize the importance of activity outside."
Various groups with environmental, hunting and fishing, sports and recreational interests that support the bill have formed an umbrella organization, Americans for Our Heritage and Recreation, to build awareness of the connection between health issues and publicly accessible recreation.
Young's proposal would spread $3.125 billion around the country each year, guaranteed, from federal offshore oil and gas leasing revenue. States with coastlines would get most of the money.
Alaska's share would be $175.2 million a year, according to a breakdown handed out at a kick-off news conference Thursday.
In Alaska, about $85 million would go to coastal communities. The money could be used for such things as preventing erosion, enhancing fish populations and a wide variety of other projects.
Another $38.5 million would be available in Alaska from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. The fund helps buy private land to protect from development. The money can also be used for playing fields, hiking and biking trails, campgrounds and hunting and fishing access.
The bill would provide $22 million for payments to Alaska's local governments to compensate for the federal land within their borders that they cannot tax.
The last major chunk of money, $16 million, would go to the state for fish and wildlife conservation projects.
Young, at the news conference, said he didn't think the GO Act would pass this year. He encouraged the interest groups to continue pushing for it, though.
In 2000, Young pushed through his Conservation and Reinvestment Act while chairman of the House Resources Committee. Today, that position is held by Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., who was a fervent opponent of CARA.
Brian Kennedy, Resources Committee spokesman, said Pombo's outlook hasn't changed.
"The fact of the matter is that the federal government owns two-thirds of the land in the U.S. and we need to decrease that number, put it in the hands of private property owners, rather than increasing it," Kennedy said. "The other side of it is the price tag."
In 2000, the Senate stopped Young and Miller's previous bill, CARA, when influential members on the appropriations committee objected to dedicating so much money to specific programs. Sen. Ted Stevens, chairman of the committee, said he had promised to vote for the bill, but he had concerns about creating another dedicated fund.
Congress that year finally approved a compromise amendment that promised to provide about half the total that Young and Miller had sought for CARA programs. The compromise also limited the length of the program to six years, instead of the 15 years Young wanted.
Young said at the time that he didn't think the money for the compromise was secure.
Beth Osborne, policy director of Smart Growth America, said Young has proven to be correct.
"The appropriations process has fallen short in meeting this commitment_in fiscal year 2004 by $500 million," Osborne said in a letter to Young.
Washington, D.C., reporter Sam Bishop can be reached at sbishop@newsminer.com or (202) 662-8721.