Democrats yesterday used a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing on the economic importance of outdoor recreation to hammer Republicans and the Trump administration for environmental policies that could put the growing industry at risk.
"Supporting outdoor recreation means taking meaningful action to protect the environment," said Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), ranking member of the full committee. "If we do not take care of our environment, the benefits of outdoor recreation to the economy, and to the American people, will vanish."
Democrats on the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee supported the broadly popular "Outdoor Recreation Jobs and Economic Impact Act" that Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio), the panel's chairman, repeatedly touted. Enacted last year, the law instructs the Commerce Department to analyze outdoor recreation's contributions to the U.S. economy.
But "there is more work to be done," Pallone said. "If we want the outdoor recreation industry to thrive, we must protect the land, water and wildlife resources that are the foundations of outdoor activities."
Several witnesses from the outdoor industry echoed the ranking member's sentiments, but none more forcefully than Jeremy Jones, the founder of Jones Snowboards and the nonprofit Protect Our Winters. He told the subcommittee about the negative impact that climate change was already having on the winter sports industry, shortening the operating season and causing some ski resorts to go out of business. Jones then referred to his children.
"In the future, what will these places look like for Mia and Cass?" he asked. "Will they experience a lifetime of snowy winters?"
He concluded his testimony by pointing to a press release Latta put out ahead of the hearing.
"You said you look forward to hearing firsthand from witnesses on how Congress can support the outdoor recreation economy's growth and viability," Jones said to the chairman. "I respectfully request that you act on climate and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions to ensure the future and prosperity of outdoor recreation."
Latta, who has consistently voted against efforts to combat climate change, didn't respond to Jones on the issue. He and other Republicans on the panel were more interested in narrow tweaks they could make to benefit the industry. Some recommendations they received included adjusting tariff codes on imported outdoor gear, considering recreational vehicles when crafting autonomous vehicle legislation and expanding Wi-Fi into national parks.
Outdoor Industries Association report
The hearing came the same week as a report released by the Outdoor Industries Association that found U.S. consumers spend $887 billion every year on a range of outdoor activities including camping, hunting, fishing and water sports (Greenwire, April 25).
After appearing as a witness at the House subcommittee hearing, OIA Executive Director Amy Roberts headed across the Capitol to talk about the report at a briefing for Senate staffers. The briefing also included local officials from several Western states who talked about how their communities had transitioned from relying mainly on extractive industries to outdoor recreation.
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the co-chair of a new outdoor recreation caucus, also appeared at the briefing. He argued that the report showed that lawmakers and federal officials are out of step with where the market is going.
"So much of our politics and so much of our agency work tends to get driven toward what was driving our economy in the past instead of what's going to be driving our economy in the future," he said.
After the event, Heinrich told E&E News that he is also concerned that Trump administration environmental policies may put the outdoor industries at risk.
"These [outdoor] activities tend to gravitate toward places where you have healthy landscapes, and the more that you sort of thoughtlessly push incompatible uses together, the more conflicts you're going to have and the more economic opportunity you're going to lose out on," he said. "The key is not to necessarily prohibit specific economic uses, but to be thoughtful about where they happen. And to make sure that multiple use does not mean every use has to happen on the same acre of land."
Reporter Kellie Lunney contributed.
