Transcripts For CSPAN2 Hearing On Protecting Federal Employe

Go to cspan. Org or listen where you are on the cspan radio app. Up next, a hearing looks at what is protecting employees from direct Land Management agencies. This is held by a Natural Resources subcommittee. Its about an hour. Subcommittee on National Parks and public land will now come to order. The subcommittee is meeting to hear on antipublic land extremism. Under rule 4f any oral statement are limited to the chair and the ranking minority member. Therefore i ask that all unanimous consent that all others Opening Statements are being made a part of the record, if theyre there by 5 00 today. Hearing no objection there is so ordered. And thank you for being here for the subcommittee on National Parks, batting antipublic land extremism. Were here in part to review the results of a recent Government Accountability Office Report detailing the i am pablths of antigovernment extremism on public land managers and federal facilities. As well hear, that report found some shocking details about the threats these federal employees faced just doing their job. Federal land managers and Law Enforcement personnel have been followed around in stores and had their homes staked out and faced murder by those who have antigovernment ideologies. I hope we can agree that this is unacceptable. These people are hard working employed by the federal government. No one should face this in their home or work community. And we should keep this in mind. East extremist ideologies didnt come up in a vacuum. And rhetoric used against our public land and the Public Service who manage them. Attempts to push this eyed ol into the political mainstream has a very real impact on peoples lives. As gao found, quote, some feel unit employees they consider receiving threats a normal part of their job. Officials describe being threatened while off duty, such as being harassed in local stores or being monitored at their homes, which officials said in some cases they did not report because it was a common occurrence. If we could turn to the screen, well see a handful of statements Public Officials have made in recent years. When senator harry read may call domestic terrorists, i call patriots. Former senator dean heller in nevada on the standoff in bunkerville, nevada. And a bureaucrat of basically terrorism of the at what point do we band together and say enough is enough from blm. Thats from the state representative Michelle Fiori of nevada. The federal government, the blm, Forest Service, d. E. A. , any of those guys are the not elected. The those other entities answers to me, the beaver county, utah shaveeriffs, camer noel. I will fight day and night to return nevadas lands to its rightful owners, its citizens and that was from senator ted cruz. This rhetoric often turns to violence. In 2012 utah golfer gary herbert saw the transfer of public land act. Requires federal agencies to cede most federal land to state control after 2014. A researchers at university of california san diego found that in the year after utah and other Western State legislators made the demand for transfer they saw a decrease in violence directed the a public lands employees. In that context its tis pointing to see my republican colleagues to invite a witness with little experience on the issues were hear to discuss and written about giving away federal land to state and private control. Former blm director bob abby said in 2014, the rhetoric today does lead to increased animosity and tension and theres a belief that its okay to do certain things outside the law and some people believe theyre going to get away with it. Today, i hope we can examine this rhetoric and the danger that it creates. That we could consider how to protect public employees, promote collaboration and end the culture of threats and violence. With that id like to recognize Ranking Member cur sis curtis. Thank you, madam chair. No one in this room condones violence or threats against federal employees. Its unfortunate that i need to make that statement. Our boots on the ground are often in a difficult position. May have to support the popular laws and regulations that have impact on peoples livelihood. Your staut should be and is of the utmost importance. While im supportive of the practical recommendations made in the jails report youre looking at today, im concerned that the title and narrow focus of this hearing may be misleading. I take issue that theres a problem of threats occurring in the west. Being from the west and representing the state with a High Percentage of public lands, i would like to set the record straight. Calling for local ownership and control of public lands does not embody an attack on the federal government. In fact many of my constituents think the opposite. The vast majority of my constituents impacted, are Hardworking Taxpayers raising families and contributing to their community. They love the Public Public lands that surround them and want to be good stewards of them and part of the Decision Making process. This does not make that theyre not dangerous or threatening to federal Land Management in the field. In fact, frequently hear how much they appreciate and work well with the local agents. Land owners and users who disagree with specific management decisions should not be made, but sill somehow placed on a Government Watch list, a potential threat. And those westerners and those who disagree with management decisions does nothing to build the trust and cooperation, vital of proper stewardship. Land and is the case with most of our politics, finger pointing and divisiveness is counterproductive in the long run. Youll hear from gao witnesses with regard to a report that the committee asked them to compile, the its Forest Service and National Park service, to bring their facilities into compliance post 9 11 security standard. This report, while important to consider, only took into account four years of data and recorded threats. Among the four Land Management agencies and there also does not appear to be a for the violence or as a parking ticket. And the agencies continue to make progress and take common sense efforts to secure federal facilities, however, nothing in the report makes any mention of the existence of a culture of antigovernment attack and abuse. Which is the title of this hearing. My hope is that the testimony and witnesses here today can all learn the powerful lesson and that the vast majority of citizens are not in the powerful grabbing incidents showcased today. They natural seek compromise and cooperation of our government. I hope to hear examples of how federal land managers and local citizens have worked to listen to each other and Mutual Understanding and come up with collaborative and on the Ground Solutions which make it the most positive outcome for all concerned. As a committee we should be promoting and fostering more of the cooperative and collaborative efforts which will do far more to facilitate safety and even suspending tens of millions of dollars. With that, madam chair id like to thank the witnesses for being here today and look forward to your testimony and yield my time. Thank you, mr. Curtis. I would like to turn to our committee panel. Under the rules the statement is five minutes, and you can submit a longer statement. The light will turn yellow, and then you have one minute. The chair now recognizes mr. Dan nichols, rancher and former county supervisor. Mr. Nichols. You have five minutes. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. My name is dan nichols and im a selfemployed ranchers 41 years vlm committee, past committee on the National Wildlife refuge. Five term retired county commissioner, partnership, board member and a participant in three of the five ongoing collaborative initiatives in our community. The economy of the county is a Natural Resource base with reliance on the multiuse concept public lands administered by the u. S. Forest service, the blm and the National Wildlife refuge. It lies in the southeast corner of oregon and 75 federally and state owned and it has a land mass of 10,120 square miles, larger than six west coast states as only a population of 7,380 people, of which, 5200 are registered. And a quick look at an oregon state map and one would incorrectly staum assume the area is uninheaabitedment and m comments come from this perspective. And residents in rural Western States are not listened to, much less heard. The opinions and desires of populous outside of rural committees are politically driving issues that result in legitimate grievances with federal Land Management policies. Much of what is often described is antigovernment is coming from a place of feeling excluded or being on the losing end of unbalanced Natural Resource management. In the course of doing their jobs, federal employees become the local messengers of new policies and regulations resulting in them becoming the recipients of the frustration and anger of the people that are not being listened to. Our community has issues of concern with federal Land Management. Were not unique in that regard. What it does make us unique is the manner in which issues of potential dissension and polarization are resolved. The culture of collaboration has been established in the county that enables the diversity of opinions to be collectively and respectfully considered. We have been working with federal employees in our community. Through that interaction the community has gained appreciation for them as professionals, individuals and contributing members of our community. Collaboration also provides a venue for discussion of issues with the Broader Community beyond the county. For us, the Term Community includes those with an interest and a commitment to participate, including stake holders from outside the local area that care about issues in ways we may not always appreciate. It is necessary to have them at the table as well because its a collaborative, and an opportunity to speak and listen, we learn and better understand each others views. It is the setting where rural voices are heard and understood, by those from the other areas that are the source of many of the problematic issues. Collectively through collaborative efforts, the county residents found the ability to meet our interests, as following examples. It seems the protection act of 2000, which is sponsored and threatened by congressman greg walden, and recently out from the National Wildlife refuge comprehensive plan and the wildfire collaborative and wetland initiative. The culture of collaboration has changed the way we deal with complex and controversial issues in the county. Real benefits have been acleveland for the local community, the federal agencies and the Natural Resources we all care about, urban and return alike. We can all learn from the lessons of people that are successful bridging the divide. Our experience can provide the opportunity for congress to develop the format for a much needed larger discussion. I ask for your support of a larger collaborative to produce meaningful progress with legitimate grievances of the american people. The collaboration is recognized as the successful approach to the issue and resolution in the county and state of oregon and needs to be implemented on a National Level as well. Thank you and i look forward to any questions you may have. Thank you very much, mr. Nichol. The chair now recognizes professor peter a walker, professor of geography at university of oregon. You have five minutes. My name is peter walker. Im a professor of geography and universal study at the university of oregon. I personally saw the wildlife refuge in hardy county. I had 100 indepth interviews and my observations are printed in my book, how they took over the National Wildlife refuge. A lot can be learned from the refuge occupation for safeguarding employees and enabling them to construct in Rural Communities. The great majority of hardy county rejected and planned to launch an antigovernment resolution. I use the word militant because they used armed force to achieve a radical political goal. The situation was explosive. Almost certainly if the Community Called for militants, lives would have been lost. Hardy county rejected the militantss call because the community invested for decades in building collaborative approaches vowing to isolate the resource issue that the management issued, could only be reserved through armed force. In the past, there had been a lot of facilities between the communities and agencies. And hardy county was tired of fighting and tired of the litigation. And it was for almost anyone wanted. And even when people knew that regulations would be coming, they wanted to get ahead of the process and make sure that local voices would be heard. Farmers, researchers, environmentalists, tribes and federal, state and county workers, inattention nahle built a culture of collaboration. The community thought Better Solutions could be found by building the relationship and listening to each other. Humanizing those with whom they might see things differently. For decades over oneonone phone calls and cups of coffee at kitchen table, Community Created their own ways to solve problems. When outside militants proposed violent confrontation, the community had a better way. Federal employees were central to this history. Ironically the outside militants had no idea that the county was recognized nationally for something of a poster child for collaborative approaches, including building positive relationships with federal workers. Militants believed by vilifying ap harassing employees they would rally support for their cause. Militants leaders, leaders never met a bureau of Land Management or by implication, any employee who is a good person, closed quote. Most people didnt see it that way. Through collaboration, federal employees were contributing to better partners and for the part in the community and above all by listening. No longer just uniform damages, federal employees were friends and members of the community and the county does not like members of the community being harassed. When the occupation ended ranchers with allot uments on the National Wild life, and thoet employees who born much of the harassment from outside the militants. To reaffirm that the federal workers are valued members of the community. As a nation were enormously fortunate by chance the militants chose the county. They literally told the militants to go home. We should see the relatively peaceful outcome as the occupation as hopeful evidence that conflicts between Rural Communities and federal agencies can be minimized and at in at least some cases Winwin Solutions can be found, but defied with the culture that afflicts our nation today. So haarney county is much like any other places, the experience and collaboration demonstrates principals that can be applied in Rural Communities. Thats my most Important Message and in haarney county i saw the endless division and conflict doesnt define who we are as a nation and how they work in our community. There are better ways. America can do better and haarney county proved it. Thank you. Thank you, professor walker. The chair now recognizes miss ann marie fennell, director of National Resources and from the u. S. Government community office. You have five minutes. Chairwoman, Ranking Member and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our report on how Land Management, fish and wild service and now National Park service protects your employees and secure their facilities nearly 700 million acres of land managed. Summarizing the finding, with four of the five agencies, ill discuss, number one, what is known about the number of assaults against their employees. Two, approaches agencies take to protect their employees and three, the extent to which the agency met federal requirements. First, available federal Law Enforcement data shows a range of threats and assault against the four federal Land Management employees in fiscal years 2013 through 2017. The severity of these incidents range from phone threats to the stabbing of an employee outside of the central building. Number of incidents vary by agent. With a five year period there were 88 incidents for blm. 56 for fish and Wild Life Service and 29 for park service. Fbi data for this time weird showed the fbi initiated, and the majority of these investigations dlm and individuals motivated by antigovernment ideology. The fbi investigated a case where a blm officer received over 500 harassing phone calls and several Land Management<\/a> agencies. This is held by a Natural Resources<\/a> subcommittee. Its about an hour. Subcommittee on National Parks<\/a> and public land will now come to order. The subcommittee is meeting to hear on antipublic land extremism. Under rule 4f any oral statement are limited to the chair and the ranking minority member. Therefore i ask that all unanimous consent that all others Opening Statements<\/a> are being made a part of the record, if theyre there by 5 00 today. Hearing no objection there is so ordered. And thank you for being here for the subcommittee on National Parks<\/a>, batting antipublic land extremism. Were here in part to review the results of a recent Government Accountability<\/a> Office Report<\/a> detailing the i am pablths of antigovernment extremism on public land managers and federal facilities. As well hear, that report found some shocking details about the threats these federal employees faced just doing their job. Federal land managers and Law Enforcement<\/a> personnel have been followed around in stores and had their homes staked out and faced murder by those who have antigovernment ideologies. I hope we can agree that this is unacceptable. These people are hard working employed by the federal government. No one should face this in their home or work community. And we should keep this in mind. East extremist ideologies didnt come up in a vacuum. And rhetoric used against our public land and the Public Service<\/a> who manage them. Attempts to push this eyed ol into the political mainstream has a very real impact on peoples lives. As gao found, quote, some feel unit employees they consider receiving threats a normal part of their job. Officials describe being threatened while off duty, such as being harassed in local stores or being monitored at their homes, which officials said in some cases they did not report because it was a common occurrence. If we could turn to the screen, well see a handful of statements Public Officials<\/a> have made in recent years. When senator harry read may call domestic terrorists, i call patriots. Former senator dean heller in nevada on the standoff in bunkerville, nevada. And a bureaucrat of basically terrorism of the at what point do we band together and say enough is enough from blm. Thats from the state representative Michelle Fiori<\/a> of nevada. The federal government, the blm, Forest Service<\/a>, d. E. A. , any of those guys are the not elected. The those other entities answers to me, the beaver county, utah shaveeriffs, camer noel. I will fight day and night to return nevadas lands to its rightful owners, its citizens and that was from senator ted cruz. This rhetoric often turns to violence. In 2012 utah golfer gary herbert saw the transfer of public land act. Requires federal agencies to cede most federal land to state control after 2014. A researchers at university of california san diego found that in the year after utah and other Western State<\/a> legislators made the demand for transfer they saw a decrease in violence directed the a public lands employees. In that context its tis pointing to see my republican colleagues to invite a witness with little experience on the issues were hear to discuss and written about giving away federal land to state and private control. Former blm director bob abby said in 2014, the rhetoric today does lead to increased animosity and tension and theres a belief that its okay to do certain things outside the law and some people believe theyre going to get away with it. Today, i hope we can examine this rhetoric and the danger that it creates. That we could consider how to protect public employees, promote collaboration and end the culture of threats and violence. With that id like to recognize Ranking Member<\/a> cur sis curtis. Thank you, madam chair. No one in this room condones violence or threats against federal employees. Its unfortunate that i need to make that statement. Our boots on the ground are often in a difficult position. May have to support the popular laws and regulations that have impact on peoples livelihood. Your staut should be and is of the utmost importance. While im supportive of the practical recommendations made in the jails report youre looking at today, im concerned that the title and narrow focus of this hearing may be misleading. I take issue that theres a problem of threats occurring in the west. Being from the west and representing the state with a High Percentage<\/a> of public lands, i would like to set the record straight. Calling for local ownership and control of public lands does not embody an attack on the federal government. In fact many of my constituents think the opposite. The vast majority of my constituents impacted, are Hardworking Taxpayers<\/a> raising families and contributing to their community. They love the Public Public<\/a> lands that surround them and want to be good stewards of them and part of the Decision Making<\/a> process. This does not make that theyre not dangerous or threatening to federal Land Management<\/a> in the field. In fact, frequently hear how much they appreciate and work well with the local agents. Land owners and users who disagree with specific management decisions should not be made, but sill somehow placed on a Government Watch<\/a> list, a potential threat. And those westerners and those who disagree with management decisions does nothing to build the trust and cooperation, vital of proper stewardship. Land and is the case with most of our politics, finger pointing and divisiveness is counterproductive in the long run. Youll hear from gao witnesses with regard to a report that the committee asked them to compile, the its Forest Service<\/a> and National Park<\/a> service, to bring their facilities into compliance post 9 11 security standard. This report, while important to consider, only took into account four years of data and recorded threats. Among the four Land Management<\/a> agencies and there also does not appear to be a for the violence or as a parking ticket. And the agencies continue to make progress and take common sense efforts to secure federal facilities, however, nothing in the report makes any mention of the existence of a culture of antigovernment attack and abuse. Which is the title of this hearing. My hope is that the testimony and witnesses here today can all learn the powerful lesson and that the vast majority of citizens are not in the powerful grabbing incidents showcased today. They natural seek compromise and cooperation of our government. I hope to hear examples of how federal land managers and local citizens have worked to listen to each other and Mutual Understanding<\/a> and come up with collaborative and on the Ground Solutions<\/a> which make it the most positive outcome for all concerned. As a committee we should be promoting and fostering more of the cooperative and collaborative efforts which will do far more to facilitate safety and even suspending tens of millions of dollars. With that, madam chair id like to thank the witnesses for being here today and look forward to your testimony and yield my time. Thank you, mr. Curtis. I would like to turn to our committee panel. Under the rules the statement is five minutes, and you can submit a longer statement. The light will turn yellow, and then you have one minute. The chair now recognizes mr. Dan nichols, rancher and former county supervisor. Mr. Nichols. You have five minutes. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. My name is dan nichols and im a selfemployed ranchers 41 years vlm committee, past committee on the National Wildlife<\/a> refuge. Five term retired county commissioner, partnership, board member and a participant in three of the five ongoing collaborative initiatives in our community. The economy of the county is a Natural Resource<\/a> base with reliance on the multiuse concept public lands administered by the u. S. Forest service, the blm and the National Wildlife<\/a> refuge. It lies in the southeast corner of oregon and 75 federally and state owned and it has a land mass of 10,120 square miles, larger than six west coast states as only a population of 7,380 people, of which, 5200 are registered. And a quick look at an oregon state map and one would incorrectly staum assume the area is uninheaabitedment and m comments come from this perspective. And residents in rural Western State<\/a>s are not listened to, much less heard. The opinions and desires of populous outside of rural committees are politically driving issues that result in legitimate grievances with federal Land Management<\/a> policies. Much of what is often described is antigovernment is coming from a place of feeling excluded or being on the losing end of unbalanced Natural Resource<\/a> management. In the course of doing their jobs, federal employees become the local messengers of new policies and regulations resulting in them becoming the recipients of the frustration and anger of the people that are not being listened to. Our community has issues of concern with federal Land Management<\/a>. Were not unique in that regard. What it does make us unique is the manner in which issues of potential dissension and polarization are resolved. The culture of collaboration has been established in the county that enables the diversity of opinions to be collectively and respectfully considered. We have been working with federal employees in our community. Through that interaction the community has gained appreciation for them as professionals, individuals and contributing members of our community. Collaboration also provides a venue for discussion of issues with the Broader Community<\/a> beyond the county. For us, the Term Community<\/a> includes those with an interest and a commitment to participate, including stake holders from outside the local area that care about issues in ways we may not always appreciate. It is necessary to have them at the table as well because its a collaborative, and an opportunity to speak and listen, we learn and better understand each others views. It is the setting where rural voices are heard and understood, by those from the other areas that are the source of many of the problematic issues. Collectively through collaborative efforts, the county residents found the ability to meet our interests, as following examples. It seems the protection act of 2000, which is sponsored and threatened by congressman greg walden, and recently out from the National Wildlife<\/a> refuge comprehensive plan and the wildfire collaborative and wetland initiative. The culture of collaboration has changed the way we deal with complex and controversial issues in the county. Real benefits have been acleveland for the local community, the federal agencies and the Natural Resources<\/a> we all care about, urban and return alike. We can all learn from the lessons of people that are successful bridging the divide. Our experience can provide the opportunity for congress to develop the format for a much needed larger discussion. I ask for your support of a larger collaborative to produce meaningful progress with legitimate grievances of the american people. The collaboration is recognized as the successful approach to the issue and resolution in the county and state of oregon and needs to be implemented on a National Level<\/a> as well. Thank you and i look forward to any questions you may have. Thank you very much, mr. Nichol. The chair now recognizes professor peter a walker, professor of geography at university of oregon. You have five minutes. My name is peter walker. Im a professor of geography and universal study at the university of oregon. I personally saw the wildlife refuge in hardy county. I had 100 indepth interviews and my observations are printed in my book, how they took over the National Wildlife<\/a> refuge. A lot can be learned from the refuge occupation for safeguarding employees and enabling them to construct in Rural Communities<\/a>. The great majority of hardy county rejected and planned to launch an antigovernment resolution. I use the word militant because they used armed force to achieve a radical political goal. The situation was explosive. Almost certainly if the Community Called<\/a> for militants, lives would have been lost. Hardy county rejected the militantss call because the community invested for decades in building collaborative approaches vowing to isolate the resource issue that the management issued, could only be reserved through armed force. In the past, there had been a lot of facilities between the communities and agencies. And hardy county was tired of fighting and tired of the litigation. And it was for almost anyone wanted. And even when people knew that regulations would be coming, they wanted to get ahead of the process and make sure that local voices would be heard. Farmers, researchers, environmentalists, tribes and federal, state and county workers, inattention nahle built a culture of collaboration. The community thought Better Solutions<\/a> could be found by building the relationship and listening to each other. Humanizing those with whom they might see things differently. For decades over oneonone phone calls and cups of coffee at kitchen table, Community Created<\/a> their own ways to solve problems. When outside militants proposed violent confrontation, the community had a better way. Federal employees were central to this history. Ironically the outside militants had no idea that the county was recognized nationally for something of a poster child for collaborative approaches, including building positive relationships with federal workers. Militants believed by vilifying ap harassing employees they would rally support for their cause. Militants leaders, leaders never met a bureau of Land Management<\/a> or by implication, any employee who is a good person, closed quote. Most people didnt see it that way. Through collaboration, federal employees were contributing to better partners and for the part in the community and above all by listening. No longer just uniform damages, federal employees were friends and members of the community and the county does not like members of the community being harassed. When the occupation ended ranchers with allot uments on the National Wild<\/a> life, and thoet employees who born much of the harassment from outside the militants. To reaffirm that the federal workers are valued members of the community. As a nation were enormously fortunate by chance the militants chose the county. They literally told the militants to go home. We should see the relatively peaceful outcome as the occupation as hopeful evidence that conflicts between Rural Communities<\/a> and federal agencies can be minimized and at in at least some cases Winwin Solutions<\/a> can be found, but defied with the culture that afflicts our nation today. So haarney county is much like any other places, the experience and collaboration demonstrates principals that can be applied in Rural Communities<\/a>. Thats my most Important Message<\/a> and in haarney county i saw the endless division and conflict doesnt define who we are as a nation and how they work in our community. There are better ways. America can do better and haarney county proved it. Thank you. Thank you, professor walker. The chair now recognizes miss ann marie fennell, director of National Resources<\/a> and from the u. S. Government community office. You have five minutes. Chairwoman, Ranking Member<\/a> and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our report on how Land Management<\/a>, fish and wild service and now National Park<\/a> service protects your employees and secure their facilities nearly 700 million acres of land managed. Summarizing the finding, with four of the five agencies, ill discuss, number one, what is known about the number of assaults against their employees. Two, approaches agencies take to protect their employees and three, the extent to which the agency met federal requirements. First, available federal Law Enforcement<\/a> data shows a range of threats and assault against the four federal Land Management<\/a> employees in fiscal years 2013 through 2017. The severity of these incidents range from phone threats to the stabbing of an employee outside of the central building. Number of incidents vary by agent. With a five year period there were 88 incidents for blm. 56 for fish and Wild Life Service<\/a> and 29 for park service. Fbi data for this time weird showed the fbi initiated, and the majority of these investigations dlm and individuals motivated by antigovernment ideology. The fbi investigated a case where a blm officer received over 500 harassing phone calls and several Death Threats<\/a> once the officers personal information was pursued on twitter. However, the number of actual ariss and assaults is on core. Not all are not in the data bases for various reasons. Folks, some are investigated by local and state law. And may not be included. In addition, Land Management<\/a> Agency Employees<\/a> do not all the report all tlit. Some said in certain circumstances they can perceive as threats as a normal part of their job. Second, federal man agency protect their employees building relationships with local, state and Law Enforcement<\/a> and entities. For example, the Las Vegas Police<\/a> kept a patrol car outside in nevada during a high profile court case. The Agency Officials<\/a> have the ability to protect the employees such as those in remote locations and also the number of that officers at the four agency has declined 20132018. The largest increase of 22 . Before Land Management<\/a> agencies have not secured all Agency Officials<\/a> cited various reasons for not doing so, including lack of resources, training. And not complying, the requirement, you complete the assessment, could lead the agency, to protect their own facility. While pish and fish and wildlife, have these, the other parts do not. The standard require that agency use assessment that makes certain requirements. The Forest Service<\/a> needs and parks partially need these services. Without client methodology, the agencies may not identify all the risks their facility face or the counter pressure to mitigate their risk. Made six recommendations calling for agencies to develop a plan to conduct assessment and that the was achieved. The agency agreed and chairwoman, Ranking Member<\/a>s and the subcommittee. This completes my statement and will any questions. You have five minutes. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today and for the interest in the federal lands. The Decision Making<\/a> on federal land has been contentious for many years. Decade, if not longer, in some respect, thats not surprising given that theres potential for conflict when federal hands consume large parts of the west. There is for states and individuals, because its their ability to foster promise of a place to live. Economic diversity and education and public safety, physical safety and access to land for a variety of cultural, economic. And further, its spread across multiple agencies and bureaus judging by often conflicting laws, missions and regulation. Whats different, the implications are drafted in different ways. And theyre invited by clear and outdated laws, and they have perverse incentives. If people dont feel theyre being listened down. Undoubtedly Civil Servants<\/a> are in a difficult place when youre now they adequately have their own safety. This is important, staff should be trained to handle conflict solutions. And federal actions can wittingly or unwittingly create attentions. Being willing to compromise, willing to be creating this i believe that even in this broken system theres collaboration among interests. I believe its cooperative federalism. And a specific decision reflects unique circumstances, histories and priorities for communities and land users. Americans can and do successfully purveysue varying d competing interests. This requires on relying on people who directly finished or are harmed by those decisions, solution respect the roles of the Property Owners<\/a> whether being irrelevant or various public Land Management<\/a> decision. Ownership is a incentin incenti viewership. Third, solutions, while there are many degrees of and ways to accomplish this, empowering the communities drives Decision Making<\/a> effective. States and communities already share the cost of maintaining federal lands, whether by the liability of no management, the lost opportunity of poor management for the infrastructure needed to support management. My written many it has example how each have resolved conflict and men them the Forest Management<\/a> program, the Forest Service<\/a> youth of Good Neighbor<\/a> authority, Antiquities Act<\/a> and the freedom act of the 115th congress and draw an example 1984 compromise for Forest Service<\/a> land in northern arizona. Within the broader Protracted National<\/a> debate over wilderness air designations, the coalition of interest came together to speak resolution in a more finally fashion. Its interesting who formed this coalition, it was a mix of Energy Companies<\/a> and National Park<\/a> association, local chambers of commerce, the grazing Advisory Board<\/a> and a variety of low, state and federal politicians. The discussions resulted in an all, but universally satisfying compromise of the arizona wilderness act. It created nine wilderness areas including the blm first and allowed for timber production within negotiated bown tris. The point is coming to a solution is hard work and complicated work, but its a way forward through collaboration and fairly clearcut an obvious outcome. But i think the more congress can encourage and even pursue and states and private individuals initiate, the thank you very much. Thank you, ms. Tubb. Thank you for the testimony, and each member will be recognized to are five minutes. Thank you, chair haaland. And thank you to our witnesses for your input. The unfair and negative treatment of federal employees harms our nation, threatens the loss of Institutional Knowledge<\/a> and undermines the agency and service to the american people. The elected officials and they would not be able to use the employees as political pawns. Even the way that we talk about this could have a dangerous and devastating consequence on these individuals to soy something of undermining the serious and important work they do. No one no matter where they work should be felt that theyre hostages in their own home. Surely we can manage at least the minimum. Words matter more than ever. A manager is sometimes harassed and attacked and we have a duty to rise above this Political Climate<\/a> in our words and actions. The first is fennell. Your report says that federal land felt harassed and intimidated at the grocery sore and its so common they dont report it anymore. Can you tell us more about some of the experiences . When you have not been informed of various incidents, theyve informed us under circumstance circumstances. They may consider that part of their regular job duties, some, however, indicated that it depends on the because there are circumstances. So what may appear to be a threated for one employee may not be perceived as bad for another. There is the judgment thats involved in terms of whether they calm forward. In terms of reporting potential threats. Thank you. In your testimony you mentioned previously that many of the employees were traumatized with the mount huron takeover. And others failed to return to units. Briefly elaborate that threat, literal assault by employees have, a knowledgement of some of the agencies. Some of them said they were the situations, the staring, inside and they were traumatized by the evident and chos to ask for a transfer and that was illustrative of the example that occurs there, but we did not hear consistent examples throughout in terms of how many transfers have been requested. We do not specific information to get to that information . Do you expect you will get addition additional its not part of our scope of debut, but we can follow up and get with your staff. And mr. Nichols. How has the county changed, the social consequences from this kind of violence in the name of taking back the land . Glenn county was elated it was over with. Things havent changed dramatically within the Community Ear<\/a> than there is division to some agree, where there wasnt before over several things. Basically, the community got back on its feet rolling and doing what weve always done and thats working together and trying to survive all of the things that we have to survive in our community. Theyre very positive reaction to the whole situation and were moving ahead, moving forward. Thank you, and professor walker you spent an awful lot of times interviewing accounts. What did this inflict on you. As commissioner nichols said generally the community has bounced back, a community that works well together. I think there has been a lot of longte longterm, to choose specific individual relationships. There are people who still tell me they wont patronize businesses of people who they perceive to be on the other side of the issue. I think theres a general sense of wariness, of concern about us suspicion about people of the community which there was not before familiar occupation. On the other side, i would actually say in my observation, if anything, the damage to some of those folks relationship, some individual relationships have actually been countered by a reinforce of a committee to working together through the collaborative model. I attended to my knowledge, the first collaborative meeting in the high desert county, collaborative in march 2016 right after the occupation ended. And the facilitator of that group told me that the attendance at that particular moo eth was higher than he had ever seen before. So its a mixed bag. Theres been some ive exceeded my time. I yield back. Recognizing Ranking Member<\/a> curtis. I talked to the gao report it reads agency sfishs said at that building relationships with the public, visitor and loc local, producing potential tension. After hearing your testimony, it sounds like that could have been written based on a case study in your area. Would you agree with that . Im sorry, can you say that again . The report says the best way to keep the Federal Point<\/a> safe is to build relationships of trust. Yeah, i would generally agree with that. I think that really you should be asking okay. Please. Mr. Nichols, ranches in that community and my quick understanding is that relationships in that Community Prior<\/a> to the establishment of collaborative culture, that commissioner nichols refers to, was quite bad and since then, that trust has been built in ways that really serve the Community Well<\/a> under pressure, yes. Yeah, and maybe to both of you, as the world looks back on your community and this incident, it seems to me like a rhetorical question, maybe its not. Would you rather be remembered for the Relationship Building<\/a> with federal employees or this one incident . Relationship with the employees or what, sir . So my paint point of that is, and the focus of this hearing is focused op all thats bad. What im hearing from your community theres a lot thats good. The question is im assuming youd rather be remembered for the Relationship Building<\/a> that youve done and not this one incident. As ive referred to earlier, the bundy occupation is over and again. We have moved on. Yes, there are differences of opinion about things, there always is, there always will be, but there isnt a hostility and aggression toward one another or anything else that was evident during that time. Totally it was total anarchy in our community for a month, six weeks. Thats not a good place to be, not good at all. And its my sense, its not reflective of what rur as a community. Its toward the relationships. And creating relationships without more divisiveness. I was able to be part of a pact signed together and theyre finding parmney and peace in these conflicts. My county worked daily and because of that better decisions. When i go down in that country i hear great things about the local reputation from bml down there and i feel it was a winwin. Im curious, the title of the hearing alleged a widespread culture of attacks and abuse, let me read that again, a widespread culture of antigovernment attacks and abuse. First of all, do you agree with the characterization of the level threat to an antigovernment activist . No, i dont. And i think its not caris particular to label all conflict as antigovernment. I think weve said across the panel, theyre passionate issues because they effect peoples lives, that doesnt mean theyre antigovernment. Thank you. In your testimony, you argue that its important for a federal Land Management<\/a> agencies not to create unnecessary tension. What are some ways that agencies can defuse tensions and encourage relationship . I think its Relationship Building<\/a> and seeking compromise. Granded land managers have a very difficult have a tough place because of regulations nevertheless i think theres enough tools to create a give and take for land managers. Weve heard and i want to endorse that we want to keep our federal employees safe. I wouldnt wan th and i feel like this is a common concern for all federal employees and in Law Enforcement<\/a>, even local Law Enforcement<\/a>. I would hate to compare the statistics that weve heard today for federal Law Enforcement<\/a> threats versus local Law Enforcement<\/a> and i believe the number of lives lost in local Law Enforcement<\/a> would far exceed this. So id like to just in my team, a plea for care and concern. All Law Enforcement<\/a>. We havent been talked about at the border and consistent threats and keep all of them in mind as we work to keep our environment safer. Thank you, madam chair. I yield my time. Thank you, mr. Curtis. Thank you, madam chair, i say thank you to all the panelists. I want to start with miss fennell. In your testimony you stated, as i read that as a close of fiscal year 2018, the number of fields Law Enforcement<\/a> officers at each of the four Land Management<\/a> agencies has declined since fiscal year 2013 and that decline makes it more difficult to protect employees. Can you first elaborate on the impact that the declines have had on employee safety . Its one of a number of factors that have we are going to leave this hearing at this point. You can see the remainder on our website, cspan. Org, type attacks on federal employees in the search box which youll find at the top of our home page. The u. S. Senate is about to gavel in on this wednesday morning, Senate Lawmakers<\/a> plan to resume debates on appealing wavers on states to offer low cost insurance plans with the Affordable Care<\/a> act 12 15 eastern toed and lawmakers plan to turn to 2020 federal spending on several departments including agricultural commerce, and housing. Now to live coverage of the senate here on cspan2. The u. We offer you today a sacrifice of thanksgiving for we borrow our heartbeats from you. Inspire our lawmakers to love discipline and cherish","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia803103.us.archive.org\/34\/items\/CSPAN2_20191030_131500_Hearing_on_Protecting_Federal_Employees_from_Anti-Government_Attacks\/CSPAN2_20191030_131500_Hearing_on_Protecting_Federal_Employees_from_Anti-Government_Attacks.thumbs\/CSPAN2_20191030_131500_Hearing_on_Protecting_Federal_Employees_from_Anti-Government_Attacks_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}