William Tauzin: “Mr. Chairman, the business of the amendment limits Federal acquisitions to in-holdings, unless the property is within…”

“Mr. Chairman, the business of the amendment limits Federal acquisitions to in-holdings, unless the property is within the boundaries of an existing Federal property an in-holding, there can be no new acquisitions. In doing so, of course, it says, in effect, that if a willing seller wishes to sell property that is partially in, partially outside the boundaries of an existing Federal facility or if he wants to sell property that is adjacent to, if the government is interested in launching a particular reserve or wilderness area and there is willing sellers willing to sell that property, this amendment would prohibit that sort of a purchase. In a sense, it inhibits the property rights of the landowners who want to sell, who want to sell their property for the expansion of a park. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson) makes much of the fact that under current law, agencies are creating new parks in wilderness areas by acquiring an acre, or some acreage, without ever coming to Congress, without every notifying Congress. The beautiful thing about CARA is that that can no longer happen. Under CARA, every land acquisition has to be reported to Congress, whether it is from a willing seller or not, and Congress makes a determination by specific grant of authority through the appropriations process to acquire a piece of land.”