FOREST SERVICE'S MANAGEMENT POLICIES 

 FOR THE GREEN RIVER AND HELLS CANYON 



TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1996 



House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Na- 

 tional Parks, Forests and Lands, Committee on 

 Resources 



Washington, DC 



The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05, in room 1324, 

 Longworth House Office Building, Hon. James Hansen [chairman 

 of the subcommittee] presiding. 



STATEMENT OF JAMES V. HANSEN, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE 

 FROM UTAH, AND CHAIRMAN OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

 NATIONAL PARKS, FORESTS AND LANDS 



Mr. Hansen. The Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and 

 Lands convenes today for an oversight hearing on the Forest Serv- 

 ice's policies for river management. We will focus specifically on 

 two magnificent and popular recreation rivers, the Green River in 

 Utah, which is within the Flaming Gorge National Recreation 

 Area, and the Snake River in Idaho in the Hells Canyon National 

 Recreation Area. 



This is the fourth of our series of oversight hearings on Forest 

 Service policies and land management activities. While today's 

 hearing is more narrowly focused than previous oversight hearings 

 have been, the specific issues we are addressing are representative 

 of the process and controversy that agency management must face 

 regularly on every National Forest. 



We look forward to hearing from the witnesses about how the 

 process works and how they believe it might be improved. We hope 

 to learn how many layers of planning, analysis, and decisionmak- 

 ing the Forest Service must go through before it resolves how a 

 particular stretch of river or piece of land will be managed; how the 

 public can best get involved, how long the planning process takes 

 and what it costs; how many different laws guide or otherwise af- 

 fect the management decision on the Green River or the Snake 

 River or a particular part of any National Forest; and what other 

 Federal agencies share jurisdiction over the issues you must ad- 

 dress as you manage the rivers and lands in the National Forest. 



Finally, we will look for lessons learned from the two case stud- 

 ies today so that we might find ways to better resolve controversies 

 over public use and resource management, determine what decision 

 should be made and when, reduce the Forest Service planning and 

 management costs, and assure that the quality of the environment 

 of our rivers and forests is maintained for future generations. 



(1) 



