More news from OutdoorWire

OutdoorWire

OutdoorWire

Portal page for OutdoorWire Access and Landuse Central Read More
4x4Voice

4x4Voice

California OHV recreation news and information Read More
MUIRNet-News

MUIRNet-News

News and information about outdoor recreation Read More
4x4Wire

4x4Wire

Off road recreation and news and information Read More
TrailTalk Forums

TrailTalk Forums

4x4Wire TrailTalk Forums for 4x4 tech information Read More
  • 1
Search 4x4Wire for more on OHV recreation and 4x4 Tech
Custom Search
Chief

WILDERNESS LEGISLATION PASSED IN THE 108TH CONGRESS (2003 – 2004)

WILDERNESS LAWS PASSED IN THE 108TH CONGRESS (2003 – 2004)

Below is a list of the Wilderness legislation passed by the 108th Congress and signed into law by the President. The 108th Congress approved two bills adding over 800,000 acres of public land to the National Wilderness Preservation System.Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act (Nevada)(Public Law 108-424)This Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act was sponsored in the House by Reps. Jim Gibbons (R-NV), Jon Porter (R-NV) and Shelly Berkley (D-NV) and in the Senate by Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and John Ensign (R-NV). This omnibus public lands measure contained six separate titles. The titles deal with wilderness designation and release, land disposal, utility corridors, the designation of an off-highway vehicle trail, conveyances for county and state parks, and a transfer of jurisdiction of two 8,000-acre parcels of land to and from the Fish and Wildlife Service. The wilderness title designated 14 Wilderness areas totaling approximately 768,000 acres and releases approximately 245,000 acres from Wilderness Study Area status. There are several controversial public land issues in various titles of the bill. For example, the environmental community was united in opposition to provisions in the bill that grant rights of way for pipelines that could transport rural Nevada’s water to Las Vegas.Gaylord Nelson Apostle Islands National Lakeshore Wilderness (Wisconsin)(Public Law 108-447)This measure grants permanent wilderness protection to 33,500 acres (or approximately 80 percent) of wild land found in the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on the waters of Lake Superior in Wisconsin. Known as the ancestral home of the Ojibwe people, the Apostle Islands include remarkable cliff formations, sea caves and some of the most pristine sandscapes remaining in the Great Lakes region. The "Gaylord A. Nelson National Wilderness" was signed into law as part of the year-end omnibus appropriations package in December 2004. Gaylord A. Nelson is a former U.S. Senator and governor from Wisconsin. He is well known as the founder of Earth Day.

2049 Hits
0 Comments
Chief

WILDERNESS LEGISLATION PASSED IN THE 107TH CONGRESS (2001 – 2002)

WILDERNESS LEGISLATION PASSED IN THE 107TH CONGRESS (2001 – 2002)

Below is a list of the Wilderness legislation passed by the 107th Congress and signed into law by the President. The 107th Congress approved a total of four bills adding more than a half a million acres of public land to the National Wilderness Preservation System.Big Sur Wilderness (California)(Public Law No: 107-370)The Big Sur Wilderness and Conservation Act of 2002 made significant additions to the Ventana, Silver Peak, and Pinnacles Wilderness Areas in California. In total, the measure added 56,880 acres of public land to the National Wilderness Preservation System. These areas are located in the Big Sur/Monterey congressional district represented by Congressman Sam Farr (D-CA) who sponsored the bill.James Peak Wilderness and Protection Area (Colorado)(Public Law No: 107-216)The bill designated the 14,000 acre James Peak Wilderness and adjacent “protection area” in the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests in Colorado. The bill also made a 3,000-acre addition to the Indian Peaks Wilderness Area. The measure was sponsored in the House by Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) and in the Senate by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO).Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002 (Nevada)(Public Law No: 107-282)This measure designated more than 440,000 acres of Wilderness in southern Nevada’s Mojave Desert region. This bill also included provisions dealing with a range of recreation, development, and conservation issues on public lands in Nevada’s Clark County. The measure was sponsored by Nevada Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and John Ensign (R-NV) and in the House by Jim Gibbons (R-NV).Black Elk Wilderness Addition (South Dakota)(Public Law No: 107-206)As part of the 2002 Emergency Supplemental Defense Appropriations Act, Congress approved a 3,600-acre addition to the existing Black Elk Wilderness in South Dakota. The wilderness addition was part of a larger settlement agreement included in the legislation allowing some fuel reduction treatments on approximately 8,000 acres of the 1.2 million-acre Black Hills National Forest, among other provisions.

2028 Hits
0 Comments
Chief

WILDERNESS LEGISLATION PASSED IN THE 106TH CONGRESS (1999 – 2000)

WILDERNESS LEGISLATION PASSED IN THE 106TH CONGRESS (1999 – 2000)

Below is a list of the Wilderness legislation passed by the 106th Congress and signed into law by the President. The 106th Congress approved a total of eight Wilderness bills adding approximately 1,066,000 acres of public land to the National Wilderness Preservation System.Gunnison Gorge Wilderness & Expansion of Black Canyon of the Gunnison (Colorado)(Public Law No: 106-76)This bill expanded the Black Canyon of the Gunnison Wilderness Area by 4,419 acres and designated the 17,700-acre Gunnison Gorge Wilderness Area (total of 22,119 acres). The measure also redesignated the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Monument as a National Park. The legislation was sponsored by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO) and Representative Scott McInnis (R-CO).Otay Mountain Wilderness (California)(Public Law No: 106-145)The measure designated 18,500 acres of land managed by the Bureau of Land Management in southern California as the Otay Mountain Wilderness Area. The Otay Mountains are home to the Tecate Cypress and more than a dozen other sensitive species. The measure was sponsored by Representative Brian Bilbray (R-CA) and Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA).Dugger Mountain Wilderness (Alabama)(Public Law No: 106-156)The bill designated 9,200 acres in the Talladega National Forest in Alabama as the Dugger Mountain Wilderness Area. Dugger Mountain, the second-highest peak in Alabama, is located 70 miles east of Birmingham. Alabama conservationists worked tirelessly for nearly a decade to see Dugger Mountain permanently protected as Wilderness. The measure was sponsored by Representative Bob Riley (R-AL) and Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL).Black Ridge Canyons Wilderness (Colorado)(Public Law No: 106-353)The bill designated 75,000 acres of land managed by the Bureau of Land Management outside of Grand Junction, CO as the Black Ridge Canyons Wilderness Area and also created the adjacent 122,000-acre Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area. This region contains innumerable spires, pinnacles, and the second highest concentration of natural rock arches in the Southwest. The measure was sponsored by Representative Scott McInnis (R-CO) and Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO).Steens Mountain Wilderness (Oregon)(Public Law No: 106-399)The bill designated approximately 172,000 acres of Wilderness in eastern Oregon as the Steens Mountain Wilderness Area. Of the Wilderness designated by the measure, 100,000 acres are "cow-free." Steens Mountain located in Oregon's high desert is one of the crown jewels of the state's wildlands. It is some of the wildest and most remote land left in Oregon. The legislation is the result of months of intense negotiations between Oregon's Governor, the state's congressional delegation, public land managers, ranchers and conservationists. It was sponsored by Representative Greg Walden (R-OR) and Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Gordon Smith (R-OR).Spanish Peaks Wilderness (Colorado)(Public Law No: 106-456)The measure designated 18,000 acres of high mountain forest land (reaching elevations of up to 13,626 feet) in the San Isabel National Forest in Colorado as the Spanish Peaks Wilderness Area. This area has been studied and considered for wilderness designation for nearly two decades. The U.S. Forest Service first recommended creating a wilderness area around the peaks in 1979. The bill was sponsored by Representative Scott McInnis (R-CO) and Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO).Priest & Three Ridges Wilderness (Virginia)(Public Law No: 106-471)The bill designated two Wilderness areas on the George Washington National Forest in Virginia: the 5,963-acre Priest Wilderness Area and the 4,608-acre Three Ridges Wilderness Area. Both of these areas are located in the northern part of the National Forest and lie east of the town of Montebello and the Blue Ridge Parkway in Nelson County. The Appalachian Trail runs through both the Priest and Three Ridges Wilderness areas. The measure was sponsored by Representative Virgil Goode (Ind.-VA) and Senators Chuck Robb (D-VA) and John Warner (R-VA).Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Wilderness (Nevada)(Public Law No: 106-554)The bill permanently protected approximately 757,000 acres of land managed by the BLM in northwestern Nevada as Wilderness. The areas designated as Wilderness were encompassed in 11 existing Wilderness Study Areas. The measure also created the nearly 800,000 acre Black Rock Desert Emigrant Trail National Conservation Area (much of the Wilderness acreage overlaps with the boundaries of the NCA). This unique region is home to huge playas, rugged mountains, and a wide array of wildlife. The historic Applegate-Lassen Emigrant Trail, which played a pivotal role in the western migration and California Gold Rush, runs through the heart of the region. Passage of this bill has effectively doubled the amount of designated Wilderness in the state of Nevada. The measure was sponsored by Senator Richard Bryan (D-NV) and co-sponsored by Senator Harry Reid (D-NV).

1646 Hits
0 Comments
Chief

H.R. 1483 - Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE October 10, 2005 H.R. 1483 Celebrating America’s Heritage Act As ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on September 26, 2007SUMMARYH.R. 1483 would establish six national heritage areas (NHAs), which are nonfederal landsand communities managed privately in conjunction with the National Park System. For eachof the new areas, the bill would authorize the appropriation of $1 million annually, up to$15 million over 15 years. In addition, the bill would increase the ceiling on authorizationsof appropriations for nine existing NHAs.Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that the National ParkService (NPS) would spend $6 million in 2008 and $46 million over the 2008-2012 periodto implement H.R. 1483. An additional $60 million would be spent after 2012. EnactingH.R. 1483 would have no significant effect on revenues or direct spending.The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the UnfundedMandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribalgovernments.ESTIMATED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENTThe estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1483 is shown in the following table. The costs ofthis legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources and environment). By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONSpending for Proposed NHAs Estimated Authorization Level 6 6 6 6 6 Estimated Outlays 6 6 6 6 6Spending for Existing NHAs Estimated Authorization Level 0 3 4 4 5 Estimated Outlays 0 3 4 4 5Total Spending Under H.R. 1483 Estimated Authorization Level 6 9 10 10 11 Estimated Outlays 6 9 10 10 11BASIS OF ESTIMATEFor this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 1483 will be enacted early in fiscal year 2008 andthat the authorized amounts will be appropriated for each year. The NPS would use suchappropriations to provide technical and financial assistance to the managing entities of theNHAs, which are usually local nonprofit organizations. Historically, the NPS has receivedappropriations of between $8 million and $14 million a year for that purpose.Spending for Proposed NHAsThe authorization levels in the table include $1 million annually for each of the six NHAsthat would established by the bill: • Journey Through Hallowed Ground NHA in Maryland and Virginia; • Niagara Falls NHA in New York; • Muscle Shoals NHA in Alabama; • Freedom’s Way NHA in Massachusetts and New Hampshire; 2 • Abraham Lincoln NHA in Illinois; and • Santa Cruz Valley NHA in Arizona.Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that the NPS would spend$6 million in 2008 and $30 million over the 2008-2012 period to assist the NHAs withplanning and development. We estimate that $60 million would be spent for this purposeafter 2012.Spending for Existing NHAsThe bill would raise, from $10 million to $15 million, the authorization ceiling for nineNHAs that were established in 1996. Under this provision, the nine NHAs would be eligibleto receive additional payments of up to $1 million annually after they have reached theexisting ceiling. The affected areas, and their aggregate appropriations to date, include: • America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership ($5.1 million); • Augusta Canal NHA ($4.7 million); • Essex NHA ($9.3 million); • Hudson River Valley NHA ($6 million); • National Coal Heritage Area ($1.9 million); • Ohio and Erie Canal National Heritage Canalway ($9.4 million); • Rivers of Steel NHA ($9.4 million); • South Carolina National Heritage Corridor ($7.9 million); and • Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area ($2.1 million).Based on appropriations to date and assuming appropriation of the additional amountsauthorized by the bill for each area after it reaches the existing ceiling, CBO estimates thatimplementing this aspect of H.R. 1483 would cost $16 million over the 2008-2012 period.We expect that three of the NHAs would begin receiving the additional funding in 2009.That number would increase to five by 2012. As under existing law, authority for funding 3for those nine areas would expire after fiscal year 2012; therefore, no additional amountswould be spent after that period under the legislation.INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND PRIVATE-SECTOR IMPACTH.R. 1483 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRAand would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.PREVIOUS CBO ESTIMATESCBO has transmitted cost estimates during the 110th Congress for several bills that wouldestablish the Journey Through Hallowed Ground NHA (see S. 289 and H.R. 319), theNiagara Falls NHA (see S. 800 and H.R. 713), and the Abraham Lincoln NHA (see S. 955).The estimated costs of those bills were the same as those for the similar provisions inH.R. 1483.ESTIMATE PREPARED BY:Federal Costs: Deborah ReisImpact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Leo LexImpact on the Private Sector: Amy PetzESTIMATE APPROVED BY:Theresa GulloDeputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis
1246 Hits
0 Comments
John Stewart

Recreational Trails Program

Recreational Trails ProgramWhat is the Recreational Trails Program?The U.S. Congress first authorized the Recreational Trails Program in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. It was reauthorized in 1998 under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21).The Recreational Trails Program provides funds to the States to develop and maintain recreational trails and trail-related facilities for both nonmotorized and motorized recreational trail uses. Examples of trail uses include hiking, bicycling, in-line skating, equestrian use, cross-country skiing, snowmobiling, off-road motorcyling, all-terrain vehicle riding, four-wheel driving, or using other off-road motorized vehicles.Who administers the program?The Recreational Trails Program is an assistance program of the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Each State administers its own program, usually through a State resource or park agency. Each State develops its own procedures to solicit and select projects for funding. Each State has a State Recreational Trail Advisory Committee to assist with the program. In some States, the committee selects the projects, in others, the committee is advisory only. See the State contact list.How much money is available?Under TEA-21, the Congress authorized the Recreational Trails Program $30 million in 1998, $40 million in 1999, and $50 million annually for 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. Previous funding in 1996 and 1997 was $15 million each year.Half of the funds are distributed equally among all States, and half are distributed in proportion to the estimated amount of off-road recreational fuel use in each State-fuel used for off-road recreation by snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, off-road motorcycles, and off-road light trucks.What projects are eligible?Recreational Trails Program funds may be used for: maintenance and restoration of existing trails; development and rehabilitation of trailside and trailhead facilities and trail linkages; purchase and lease of trail construction and maintenance equipment; construction of new trails (with restrictions for new trails on Federal lands); acquisition of easements or property for trails State administrative costs related to this program (limited to 7 percent of a State's funds); and operation of educational programs to promote safety and environmental protection related to trails (limited to 5 percent of a State's funds).States must use 30 percent of their funds for motorized trail uses, 30 percent for nonmotorized trail uses, and 40 percent for diverse trail uses. Diverse motorized projects (such as snowmobile and motorcycle) or diverse nonmotorized projects (such as pedestrian and equestrian) may satisfy two of these categories at the same time. States are encouraged to consider projects that benefit both motorized and nonmotorized users, such as common trailhead facilities. Many States give extra credit in their selection criteria to projects that benefit multiple trail uses.Which projects are not eligible?Recreational Trails Program funds may not be used for: property condemnation (eminent domain); constructing new trails for motorized use on National Forest or Bureau of Land Management lands unless the project is consistent with resource management plans; or facilitating motorized access on otherwise nonmotorized trails.These funds are intended for recreational trails; they may not be used to improve roads for general passenger vehicle use or to provide shoulders or sidewalks along roads.A project proposal solely for trail planning would not be eligible (except a State may use its administrative funds for statewide trail planning). However, some project development costs may be allowable if they are a relatively small part of a particular trail maintenanace, facility development, or construction project.Who can sponsor a project?States may make grants to private organizations, or to municipal, county, State, or Federal government agencies. Some States, by policy, do not provide funds to private organizations. Projects may be on public or private land, but projects on private land must provide written assurances of public access.States are encouraged to use qualified youth conservation or service corps for construction and maintenance of recreational trails under this program.How does project funding work?Project amounts vary by State, but most range in value from $2,000 to $50,000. Some States set minimum or maximum allowable dollar values.In general, the maximum Federal share for each project from Recreational Trails Program funds is 80 percent. A Federal agency project sponsor may provide additional Federal funds, provided the total Federal share does not exceed 95 percent. The non-Federal match must come from project sponsors or other fund sources. Funds from any other Federal program may be used for the non-Federal match if the project also is eligible under the other program. States also may allow a programmatic match: if some project sponsors in a State provide more match funds than required, other sponsors in the State may provide less. Some in-kind materials and services may be credited toward the project match.Usually, project payment takes place on a reimbursement basis: the project sponsor must incur costs for work actually completed, and then submit vouchers to the State for payment. Reimbursement is not normally permitted for work that takes place prior to project approval. However, working capital advances may be permitted on a case-by-case basis, and some project development costs may be reimbursable.How do I obtain Recreational Trails Program project funding?Each State has its own procedures to solicit and select recreational trails projects for funding. A project sponsor should develop its proposal sufficiently so that the project may move quickly into implementation after project approval.If you have a trail project proposal, first contact your State to find out the program requirements and criteria for project selection. As a project sponsor, you should: * Develop a workable project. What are your trail needs? What can you do realistically? * Get public support for your project. How does your project benefit your community? Are there other potential project sponsors? * Find other funding sources. The normal Federal share is limited to 80 percent. Some State or local governments may provide some matching funds, but usually the project sponsor has to provide most or all of the match. o Consider donations of materials and volunteer labor. o Consider how to involve youth conservation or service corps in your project. * Develop a good project design. * Consider the project's natural environment. Consider user needs, including use by people with disabilities. * Consider potential problems: o Environmental impacts - these must be documented and minimized. o Permits - you may need to obtain various permits prior to submitting your proposal. o Possible opposition - some people may oppose your project for various reasons, including concerns about property rights, liability, safety, or historic or environmental impacts. * Complete the project application. If your project is approved, get to work! States may withdraw project approval if a sponsor does not begin work within a reasonable time frame.For more information on the Recreational Trails Program, see the Recreational Trails Program-State Trail Administrators contact list: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/rtpstate.htm

2293 Hits
0 Comments

4x4Voice BLOG Categories

OutdoorWire Websites

OutdoorWire

OutdoorWire

Portal page for OutdoorWire Access and Landuse Central Read More
4x4Voice

4x4Voice

California OHV recreation news and information Read More
MUIRNet-News

MUIRNet-News

News and information about outdoor recreation Read More
4x4Wire

4x4Wire

Off road recreation and news and information Read More
TrailTalk Forums

TrailTalk Forums

4x4Wire TrailTalk Forums for 4x4 tech information Read More
  • 1

4x4 Tech from 4x4Wire

Jeep Tech

Jeep Tech

Jeep Tech from 4x4Wire Read More
Toyota Tech

Toyota Tech

Toyota Tech from 4x4Wire Read More
Mitsubishi Tech

Mitsubishi Tech

Mitsubishi Tech from 4x4Wire Read More
Isuzu Tech

Isuzu Tech

Isuzu Tech from 4x4Wire Read More
  • 1