The Point Reyes Farmland Protection Act, which has divided the West Marin ranching community since it was introduced by Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey in 1993, will finally be debated this month in the House of Representatives.

Or maybe it won't.

Although the legislation had been tentatively scheduled for hearing before the National Parks subcommittee on Oct. 30, subcommittee staff told The Light on Wednesday that its hearing date has been indefinitely postponed.

"It won't be on the schedule until the end of year, if it is scheduled at that time," said Dan Smith, a legislative aide to Congressman Jim Hansen, the Utah Republican who chairs the subcommittee.

Later on Wednesday, a press aide for Congresswoman Woolsey called The Light to refute Smith. Woolsey's aide, Tom Roth, said the Congresswoman was assured Tuesday on the House floor that her bill would get its long-awaited hearing.

"That information probably just hasn't gotten down to [Smith]," said Roth.

If it is ever enacted into law, the Farmland Protection Act would provide the US Department of Interior with $30 million to purchase development rights on property within a 38,000-acre Farmland Protection Area along the east shore of Tomales Bay.

However, it has encountered opposition from some ranchers who have argued it would devalue their property and invite the "regulatory creep" of federal authority onto their land.

After revising a previous version of the bill to address property owners' concerns, Woolsey reintroduced the bill in March, then met with ranchers in Tomales to explain the changes.

"I've listened to landowners and crafted the bill to fit their needs," Woolsey insisted this week in a written statement.

Under the proposed legislation, the Interior Department could purchase development rights or conservation easements only from willing sellers, and the easements would be managed by MALT (or by similar agencies in Sonoma County).

MALT's executive director, Bob Berner, said the bill would expand park boundaries to include the Farmland Protection Area, but the legislation explicitly states those 38,000 acres would not be regulated by the federal government.

Rather than providing public access to the land, the bill is intended to preserve open space by helping keep the Marshall shore in agriculture.

"It wouldn't expand parkland," said Berner, who has expected to testify in the Oct. 30 hearing. "It's simply a device to allow the federal government to spend money in this area."

Nevertheless, the Marin Farm Bureau five months ago voted 9-7 to oppose the bill. The debate divided the organization, however, leading to an agreement that no member could speak publicly about the legislation on behalf of the bureau.

A variety of groups have endorsed the bill for economic and environmental reasons, including the Marin Board of Supervisors, West Marin Chamber of Commerce, the state-established Tomales Bay Advisory Committee, and the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space Committee.