Raúl Grijalva

We are estimating two to four years.

Yes. That has been our experience.

These and other Forest Service policies are not perfect, they are also not part of a vast conspiracy to 'lock up' federal land.

The criticism today... appears to be that it favors preservation and conservation over other use.

If access means motorized access without limits, then Times Square should be a great hunting ground.

But while these and other Forest Service policies are not perfect, they are also not part of a vast conspiracy to lock up Federal land.

That does not narrow the species that can be considered for viability.

And I am glad for the point because multiple means multiple.

You told us on this species of conservation concern that it would be based on scientific evidence of risk, but if you read the document, the word science isn't there.

There are I think it is over 65 plans need to be revised.

So it is not a good idea?

While these and other Forest Service policies are not perfect, they are also not part of a vast conspiracy to 'lock up' federal land.

The Forest Service must determine forest management systems, harvesting levels, and procedures in the light of all uses.

Congress has tasked the Forest Service with a difficult balancing act.

They are not ill informed, nor are they developed in secret.

The Forest Service's Proposed Planning Rule, Travel Management Rule, and system for issuing special use permits are not perfect.

Water rights are a sacred issue in the West, and any attempt to upset the balance of state water law and primacy is something that will be taken very seriously by this Congress.

It is not simply about a mining company and their profit line. It is about a value and a spirit of the American people.

I have seen the mile pilings that are supposedly cleaned up out there, which is certainly not true.

The question, is the filing correct or not?

Was the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 a wilderness act or a mining act?

The U.S. Geological Survey said this withdrawal, the million acres, would affect approximately 12 percent of available uranium in Arizona.

I would just like to tell my colleagues because it is such a special place, as the gentleman just talked about, let us hope nobody stumbles onto some uranium in the process because it could jeopardize the whole thing.

I appreciate that. I know the tribal government does as well.

The Grand Canyon and the Colorado River are far too important to allow the short-term gains from mining to leave permanent scars on the crown jewel of our national parks.