Am I also correct, Mr. Chairman, that Congress intends, under this legislation, that the Fish and Wildlife Service protect the private property rights of parties affected by critical habitat designations by using Federal lands to the maximum extent possible, or by taking other actions to ameliorate the impacts on private property, such as memoranda of understanding with State agencies? Specifically, the California Resources Agency has filed comments on the proposed critical habitat designation asking for revisions to reflect a 1991 memorandum of understanding it has signed with the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Frank Riggs: “Am I also correct, Mr. Chairman, that Congress intends, under this legislation, that the Fish and Wildlife Service…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the protection of private property rights in relation to critical habitat designations.
Share
More from Frank Riggs
The ruling effectively ended racial preferences in admissions to the University of Texas. So, what do university leaders do now, according to two articles, the San Antonio Express News and another Texas newspaper furnished to me by our…
Our concern is that we do not want Federal law to necessarily override State law with respect to the day-to-day administration of bilingual education programs. I think the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) would acknowledge that…
But as I understand what the gentleman is saying, if there is a legitimate legal or policy dispute in the eyes of a local school district and ultimately its governing board and its top administrators, and if that dispute is between Federal…
I have to disagree with the gentlewoman. It says, ``The school admitted 32 African-Americans for the fall of 1998, almost twice as many as 1997, but less than half the number accepted in 1996, the last class admitted under affirmative…





