Rick Hill: “First, at the end I will ask the chairman, of course, to do the study. But beyond the study is the emphasis that the…”

“First, at the end I will ask the chairman, of course, to do the study. But beyond the study is the emphasis that the secretaries need to have, that any plan has to put the emphasis on consolidation of private lands and eliminating public lands. I want to make one other point here. That is, that while the bill provides for exchanges of land, the bill, CARA, does not provide for the exchanges of mineral interests in the land. This amendment would provide that. I pointed out to Members that there are 37 million acres in the State of Montana where the BLM has subsurface rights but not surface rights. Those subsurface interests also ought to be incorporated into any effort to consolidate lands. There are many things that I like about this bill. I have expressed concerns about the lack of sufficient protection for property rights. But I also believe the bill does not go far enough to set forward a plan on when do we buy land, why should we buy land, how is that going to impact the communities that are associated with that. That is what this amendment would do. Yes, this amendment is specific to Montana. But there was an amendment earlier where the gentleman from California had a provision in this bill that was specific to his district for a specific need. I am simply suggesting that Montana deserves an equal standing.”