6. Nothing in this Memorandum of Understanding shall be construed as obligating either party hereto to the expenditure of funds or for the future payment of money in excess of appropriations authorized by law. 7. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as limiting in any way the responsibility and authority, as defined by law, of the Commissioner, Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, and the Director, National Park Service, in connection with the administration and protection of lands and resources under their respective administrations. 8. No member of, or Delegate to Congress, or Resident Commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of the Memorandum of Understanding or to any benefit to arise therefrom, unless it is made with a corporation for its general benefit. 9. This Memorandum of Understanding shall become effective when signed by the parties hereto and shall continue in force until terminated by mutual agreement or by either party upon six (6) months notice in writing to the other of his intention to do so. Amendments to this Memorandum of Understanding may be proposed by either party and shall become effective upon approval by both parties. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this Memorandum of Understanding as of the date last signed below. Acting Chairman, Senate Commerce Committee, DEAR MR. Moss: I would like to register my opposition to any legislation designed to give jurisdiction of control over wildlife to the individual states. As far as I can see, the present system has worked quite well and there is no compelling reason for a change. I would not want local game and fish departments to exercise any control over management of game in the national parks or refuges administered by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Our national parks, for example, were created to maintain conditions in the parks as close as possible to their original ecological balance, while the game and fish departments are mainly concerned with regulation of wildlife populations for the benefit of hunting. I would not want to risk having the effectiveness of the National Park Service reduced by interference from local game management philosophies. Also, I would like to request some information. Why is this hearing being held now, prior to the opening of the first session of the 91st Congress? Conceivably your ocmmittee will have a different composition and it would seem appropriate for the new members to have a firsthand opportunity to participate in the questioning at the hearing. Further, this hearing was apparently called in such haste that only proponents of the legislation were aware of it, details of the exact location of the hearing were unavailable at Sen. Fannin's office as late as the morning of October 25, and information pertaining to the status of the hearing, acceptability of written comments, length of time the record would be held open was unavailable. Under the circumstances. I question that this "hearing" fills the purposes for which hearings are held, but request nonetheless that this letter be included in the record. Very truly yours, Mrs. ELIZABETII B. BARNETT. [Telegram] MERRITT ISLAND, FLA., December 10, 1968. Hon. Senator WARREN C. MAGNUSON, I am opposed to Senate bill 2951 and 3213. We don't believe that at this time they are in the best interest of the people and good conservation management. J. B. JOHNSON. OJUS, FLA., December 31, 1968. Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, DEAR SENATor Magnuson: I am a resident of Florida who has been spending the holidays in Phoenix, Arizona. I have just learned that a regional hearing was held in my home state regarding Senate Bills 2951 (Sen. Bible, Nevada) and 3212 (Sen. Fannin, Arizona). As a long-time resident of Florida, I know that the phrase, "states' rights" can be farcical. Among other deplorable practices, these words have enabled greedy lobbyists to drain swamps and grab off the emerging land-thereby helping to eradicate the wildlife whose habitat was these swamps. The "land grabbers"-and the poachers have brought the Florida alligator close to extinction. I do not want hunting in the National Parks and National Monuments; I do not wish to lose the federal protection of the rare and endangered species; and I most certainly do not wish to lose the fine wildlife management at the federal level to 50 agencies who will be at the mercy of "pressure groups" at the state level. Please make it a matter of public record that I am 100% against SB 2951 and SB 3212. Very respectfully yours, О LAUGHLIN FORREST. |