H.R. 689: To interchange the administrative jurisdiction of certain Federal lands between the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management

H.R. 689

To interchange the administrative jurisdiction of certain Federal lands between the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management

Date
June 2, 2009 (111th Congress, 1st Session)

Staff Contact
Communications

Floor Situation

The House is scheduled to consider H.R. 689 on Tuesday, June 2, 2009, under suspension of the rules, requiring a two-thirds majority vote for passage. H.R. 689 was introduced on January 26, 2009, by Rep. Herger (R-CA) and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, which held a markup and reported the bill by voice vote on May 14, 2009.

Bill Summary

H.R. 689 would transfer administrative jurisdiction of certain land within the Shasta-Trinity National Forest in California between the U.S. Forest Service to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The BLM would assume control of 12,000 acres of Forest Service land while the Forest Service would take control of 5,000 acres of land currently administered by the BLM.

Background

The Shasta Trinity National Forest is the largest forest in California with a landscape ranging from 1,000 to 14,162 feet.   The 2.1 million acre forest encompasses five wilderness areas, hundreds of mountain lakes and 6,278 miles of streams and rivers.

According to the Committee on Natural Resources, in House Report 111-108, the purpose of the exchange is to "ease problems that off-highway vehicle (OHV) users are having regarding OHV use on the Trinity-Shasta National Forest and adjacent public lands. Due to the ‘patchwork' nature of the federal lands in that area, OHV permitting is currently split between the BLM and the FS, and thus OHV users have to deal with two agencies, and conflicting regulations on OHV use, when trying to obtain a permit. Upon enactment of this exchange into law, OHV use in the area will be consolidated on BLM-administered public lands and users will need only obtain permits from the BLM."

Cost

According to CBO, H.R. 689 would have "no significant effect on the federal budget and would not affect revenues or direct spending."