on natural resources have come to order please the committee is meeting today for the consideration  several measures i do not have any opening remarks that would recognize and ranking member there is no remarks that are pursuant to committee rule three h and house rule levon two eighty four the chair nasa's that he may postpone further proceedings today on any legislation springs this is this is a land transfer legislation that involves fostering to facility which has been managed by solano county includes a county in the northern part of california in my my district just north of san francisco the bill the bill before so they will guarantee that they can continue the work that they do on behalf of youth that are assigned to this facility fostering to help rehabilitate california's young offenders and providing youths from across the state with much needed structures and significant vocational educational  presently salada county operates without spring on behalf of several other california counties under special youth authorization h r sixty one fifty nine the d c d c glade land exchange act will give salon accounting the eighty two acres that it's use frames and exchange it would give them in a senior national forest one hundred sixty acres of nearby land known as d c glade a property has access to the snow mountain wilderness area has been a high priority for acquisition by the forest service since at least the early hundred ninety s as we learn as we learn in last week's testimony from salon a county supervisor john vasco was the d p parcels would be a key addition to the mendocino national forest trail system according to the forest service feasibility exchange would also aid the hazardous fuels program and would allow the trail improvements at the appropriate time i will be offering them in the nature of sub substitute and again i'd like to thank you for giving this matter the attention of the committee i thank the gentleman for his of the nature substitute make several practical changes that have been worked out with the majority and the minority on the committee first amendment nature substitute directional on a county to underwrite any survey or administrative cost of the secretary deems necessary and allows for additional terms  allow salami county continued access to the several facilities currently covered by their special youth authorization including the white water tanks pipeline and access road with this change we're sure this law the county can continue to operate fostering is as they d on behalf of these troubled youths finally in order to comply with pay go we have required that's a lot of county continue to make payments to the federal government for the period of ten years and again i want to thank the committee for its consideration i want to thank the staff on both sides for working this working modify the boundary of the minuteman national park to include the historic site of the barrack farm colonel james byrd was a leading revolutionary war patriot and military figure and his farm in concord played a significant role in the events leading up to the opening battles of the revolutionary war war at lexington and concord in april seventeenth seventy five the inclusion of the beret farm within minutes with minute men will add a prominent feature to the historic story of the park one that will help bring to life the renowned events of the early days of america's struggle for independence mr chairman this boundary modification is important we ask it's a good bill it has the support of all local communities the gentleman from colorado requires that laws regarding the position or use of a weapon be governed by state and local governments if the commonwealth of massachusetts sees fit to impose similar restrictions then so be it but the national park service needs to stay out of this matter the park service does many things will but the regulation of firearms is not necessarily one of them when just in that private property owners were consulted regarding their inclusion into the boundary of the park but we do not know whether the same land owners are aware of these particular regulations that they might be exposed to so this would call for the state and local governments to govern gun laws on the land to be included in the national park and i hope my colleagues will join me in supporting the rights of law abiding gun owners and preventing the spread of overly strict national park service regulations chair recognize myself for five minutes first i certainly can understand the reasoning and am not adverse to reasons secretary of interior mr dirk kempthorne has proposed new regulations as we all know that would allow people to carry a concealed weapon in some national parks and wildlife refuge as i understand it the proposed rule would allow someone to carry a loaded weapon in a park or wildlife refuge only if the person had a permit for a concealed weapon and the state where the park or refuge was located allowed guns in the park the ge the hose amendment seeks to prejudge this rule making and to select tiddly provide for concealed weapons to be carried in a particular park unit that is a septic to this legislation i have no problems with  secretary putting this matter out for public comment in consideration and as i said i am sensitive to the point the gentleman from matter how it seeking to make however i do not believe we should prejudge the secretary's rulemaking on this matter  as you indicated secretary tim korn is going through the rule making process right now that has been extended upon request forward for an additional period of time to to receive additional comments on the rules the sally amendment would have congress adopting new weapons policy for a single m p s unit only without public comment or even awareness i think to do that under any circumstances inappropriate but to do so during the consideration of a but broader more public proposal is simply not a good idea and it's indefensible eye for the reasons you stated and the fact that the answers to the questions that the solly amendment raises are unclear i would urge it that we reject the amendment and i'm certain we're going to see this amendment in other pieces of legislation as we go forward but the crux of the points that you made mr chairman are the crux of the opposition as we go along and with that let me go back on us back at the members which seek recognition if not then the question on the amendment as it while it's and scenic stretches along the edge of the big bend national park dividing the u s from mexico and forming the elbow that gives the park its name when congress consider designating the river in one thousand nine hundred seventy eight the national park service had recommended designating the entire portion of the river that runs along the southeastern and southwestern boundaries the big ben national park but the mexican state of chihuahua which lies opposite most of the southwestern edge of the park objected to the inclusion of the stretch and congress declined to designate those sixty miles she was no longer opposes the designation and the august two thousand and four m p s general management plan for the river called for the addition the bill implements that plan the national parks  strongly supports the bill and i urge all members to do the same back to colorado defer all defer to the ranking member number one it is in our packet and the gentleman from colorado is recognize explain chairman in two thousand and six a living visitors to national park service lands were murdered thirty five rapes sixty one were robbed and sixteen were kidnapped this number is a great deal higher if we knew the number of illegal entrants to the park lands that may have been harmed this amendment reflects reflects the wishes of the chairman who wrote a letter to interior along with ranking member young earlier this congress seeking to govern national park service plans with state and local gun laws so this would make sure that as opposed to federal regulations it would be state and local regulations concerning the second amendment that would apply to the operation of this bill and with that i yield back mr chairman thank you carol recognize himself for five minutes in opposition once again to the mammoth for basically the same reason stated on the earlier legislation the gentleman has mentioned the letter that the ranking member mr young and i wrote to secretary kempthorne i would happily report to the secretary did respond favorably to that letter and that's why he has the proposed  new regulations under rule making process so therefore i do not wish to prejudge the secretary's actions he is putting it out for public comment in consideration that's a good thing and therefore i would oppose his amendment again not desiring to consider this issue on a park by park basis but rather waiting for the secretary's overall rule making to this administration and we're passing a permanent designation of this property and not to make sure that the right to ought to follow the laws and the rules of the states at the minimum and i'd prefer as we passed this making while in seeing the wilderness areas that the second amendment is not as i said earlier in the first introduction this amendment i certainly am sensitive to that gentleman ma'am and what he seeks to do here but map position is when we ask the secretary  to do something and there is a favorable response to that request and i'm not inclined to prejudge or jump out ahead and state what he should do based on our hopes because if he does it in the normal process and i think that is a more permanent and long term way to address our mutual desires and this park by park basis that seeks to undermine the secretary's actions jumma california's recognizer five minutes i just want some clarification does it impact the second amendment in any way because that's what some of us are second amendment guys and we want to make sure to what extent it does if it or is it just going to be a myth and this guy and i if you're a lefty we need to get his clarification on it too as well and specific language to make sure that it doesn't and this is what this does this is what this clarification does make sure that the right to bear not allow that to happen now is regulations apparently public comments going to come in and all these other things that regulations apparently is going to say that what i'm saying is very frankly don't think much going to happen in regulation realm and the next four months i mean i'm being realistic about this and we're going to pass something we want to be in the position to say yes we're going to make sure the second amendment is protected if we begin to california  yes it would appear to me that under current law as it exists today the second amendment rights are undermined and so what we're asking here is the secretary be allowed the public comment period as ended by the way it ended june thirtieth so it's my understanding secretary is ready to proceed now allow him to issue rules and regulations that we hope will not allow the further undermining of the second amendment rights and again the piece by piece basis that which we are considering this issue in my opinion does not strengthen it rather seeks to undermine second amendment rights by doing it on such a piecemeal basis rather than allowing an overall policy to be set in place and allow the secretary the time to do that in the normal process reclaiming my time do we have a letter from the n r a or anyone else that would be opposing this amendment to make sure that does not violate the second amendment yeah but you're just one individual of the body as a whole grande will not stop construction of the southern border fence now will it stop law enforcement activities law enforcement operations need to remain unobstructed in order to protect the natural beauty of this area patrol the border and sadly to save many who will cross the border illegally only to die in the stifling heat this minute will also ensure that this designation will not be used as a political tool like the tartan river designation for purposes the wild and scenic river act was never intended to  has accepted and will now proceed with the next scheduled bill and come back to vote on amending h r six one seven seven one with its final passage the next item for  national trail system to provide authority to purchase land from willing sellers for nine designated trails that currently lack such authority h r eight hundred forty seven provides the same authority for these nine trails which exist for the rest of the trails in the system and will only allow acquisition from willing sellers and stressing that point again eight hundred forty seven has language throughout the bill that emphasizes and i quote the last may be acquired by the federal government for the trail except with the consent of the owner subcommittee heard this and at the proper time i will be offering them in the nature of the substitute to make some technical corrections as requested by the administration i urge my colleagues to support this energy and natural resources committee when the senate senate companion measure was reported by the committee last september i urge my colleagues to support this amendment the nature of a substitute no you'll back to th lans out of this body this committee and on the floor of the house there was a normal no war clause and i just think this only affects this one trail and i just believe very frankly that it should be included because it is three times already as i understand and recognize to explain his amendment and mr chairman you're right we have debated this earlier so i will not go back into that again except to say that this is referring to about ten trails or so so for that reason it's even bringing this bill to us it's a very important bill and we're happy to move it forward at the request of the national park service we're adding a reference to the title of the feasibility study also short title to the bill adding the short title to the  sentially identical to the language that has been adopted in most store trail bills most recently in the captain john smith water trail bill of two thousand and six with that i urge its adoption adoption of the substitute deal back any further maybe we'll resume it sitting under the chairs prior announcement is now in order to vote on those matters which were postponed the question is now in the amendment offered by mr lamb born on behalf of mr sall r five eight five three and the clerk will call the mr cannon mr cole mr costa mr bishop mr boring mr bishop mr bourne mr schuester mr starving mr sarbanes votes no mr sall go mr cannon mr abercrombie mr mr flake this trip alone mr sarbanes well it's now mr sallie this is sally votes mr flake this trip alone mr know mr cole mr costa mr bishop mr boren mr schuster mr sarbanes mr cannon mr ortiz mr flake mr pearce mr brown mr fourteen you mr holt this is nick morris rogers