Text: S.Hrg. 113-93 — MISCELLANEOUS PARKS BILLS
-
PDF
(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
[Senate Hearing 113-93]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 113-93
MISCELLANEOUS PARKS BILLS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
S. 398 S. 1138
S. 524 S. 1151
S. 618 S. 1157
S. 702 S. 1186
S. 781 S. 1252
S. 782 S. 1253
S. 869 S. 1328
S. 916 S. 1339
S. 925 H.R. 674
S. 974 H.R. 885
S. 995 H.R. 1033
S. 1044 H.R. 1158
S. 1071
__________
JULY 31, 2013
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
85-179 WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected]
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RON WYDEN, Oregon, Chairman
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont MIKE LEE, Utah
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan DEAN HELLER, Nevada
MARK UDALL, Colorado JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota TIM SCOTT, South Carolina
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
Joshua Sheinkman, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
Karen K. Billups, Republican Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Republican Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on National Parks
MARK UDALL, Colorado, Chairman
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan MIKE LEE, Utah
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
Ron Wyden and Lisa Murkowski are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Bennet, Hon. Michael, U.S. Senator From Colorado................. 7
Gillibrand, Hon. Kirsten E., U.S. Senator From New York.......... 3
Heller, Hon. Dean., U.S. Senator From Nevada..................... 5
Kaine, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator From Virginia...................... 2
Portman, Hon. Rob, U.S. Senator From Ohio........................ 10
Reid, Hon. Harry, U.S. Senator From Nevada....................... 4
Sanders, Hon. Bernard, U.S. Senator From Vermont................. 6
Schatz, Hon. Brian, U.S. Senator From Hawaii..................... 9
Toothman, Stephanie, Associate Director, Cultural Resources,
Partnerships and Science, National Park Service, Department of
the Interior................................................... 11
Udall, Hon. Mark, U.S. Senator From Colorado..................... 1
Warren, Hon. Elizabeth, U.S. Senator From Massachusetts.......... 6
APPENDIX
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 49
MISCELLANEOUS PARKS BILLS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 31, 2013
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:01 p.m. in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark Udall
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO
Senator Udall. The Subcommittee on National Parks will come
to order.
Let me thank all of you for your patience and forbearance.
We had a cloture vote on the Floor of the Senate that continued
for a while. We thought there was going to be a second vote. At
this point it appears that second vote has been postponed.
So we now have the opportunity to have an important hearing
on our National Park portfolio. We're going to consider 25
bills covering a wide range of issues relating to the
Department of the Interior including National Park historic
preservation and recreation issues. Although the agenda is
lengthy, I believe many of the bills are non-controversial and
several have been the subject of previous hearings before this
subcommittee.
So I'm hopeful that we can move through the hearing
quickly.
The purpose of this afternoon's hearing is to hear the
Administration's views on these bills and allow committee
members an opportunity to ask any questions they may have. As
I've referenced, there is a large number of bills on today's
agenda. Because of that large number I won't read through the
list. But at this time I'll include the complete list of bills
in the hearing record. I have that list here.
Senator Udall. I know that a few members of the
subcommittee, Senator Portman, Senator Sanders, Senator Schatz
and maybe a few others have bills of personal interest to them
on today's agenda and I look forward to learning more about
their bills during the hearing.
If I could I'd like to take a minute to mention 2 bills of
particular interest to Colorado before I recognize my
colleague, Senator Bennet.
The first bill is S. 1071, which I introduced to allow the
National Park Service to make improvements to a visitor's
center located outside the boundaries of the Sand Creek
Massacre National Historic Site in Colorado. The Park Service,
I know, has been working with Kiowa County officials and has
identified a building that would be appropriate for shared use
benefiting both the county and the Park Service. But
legislation is needed so that the Park Service can provide
funding since the site is located outside of the park boundary.
I hope to see this bill move quickly. I know Senator Bennet
does as well because it would provide a real economic boost to
a great community that's been hit hard by the challenging
economic times we've been facing.
The second bill is one that Senator Bennet will share his
thoughts on. It would authorize the Pike National Historic
Trail Study.
I wanted just to say while many people are familiar with
Pike's Peak, relatively few people know that it was named after
Lieutenant Zebulon Pike. I found it interesting, and I know
Senator Bennet does as well, that he never actually climbed the
mountain that bears his name, although it's believed he did
climb nearby Mount Rosa. I will leave the rest of my remarks
for the record because I want to hear from my colleague,
Senator Bennet, and his support and his authorship of this
important bill.
Senator Udall. Senator Bennet, you're recognized.
[The prepared statements of Senators Kaine, Gillibrand,
Reid, Heller, Warren, and Sanders follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Tim Kaine, U.S. Senator From Virginia, on S.
916
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today and for
considering S. 916, a bill I've introduced with Senator Thad Cochran,
to reauthorize the American Battlefield Protection Program. Our states
hosted key battles of the Civil War and have led the nation in
preserving the land on which these defining battles were fought.
I was proud to have supported this program when I was Governor of
Virginia, and I am proud that 11 bipartisan cosponsors have joined my
friend Senator Cochran and me on this bill--six Democrats, four
Republicans, and one independent. The House of Representatives passed
identical legislation (H.R. 1033) on April 9 with a strong two-thirds
majority, which I believe is a testament to the depth of support for
this program across the country. The program also expires on October
1st of this year, making its reauthorization a timely priority.
America's battlefields are historic landmarks that help us
commemorate what made our nation what it is today. Too many of these
sites are open to haphazard development that could leave no trace of
the sacrifices made there. That is why this bill continues federal
competitive matching grants to protect these historic lands. It extends
the authorization for the American Battlefield Protection Program for
five years at the current funding level and adds sites of the
Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 to the program's eligibility.
These grants have a 1 to1 federal/non-federal match, which is often
exceeded on the non-federal side by private contributions.
The program is strictly voluntary. This bill specifies that land
will be acquired only from willing sellers and only at fair market
value. It also authorizes funding solely for land acquisition,
incurring no development or maintenance costs for the National Park
Service.
It would be worth protecting these battlefields for the historic
value alone, but these activities also have economic value. Battlefield
tourists do not simply pass through a region. They pay for guided
tours. They stay in hotels and bed and breakfasts. They dine at local
restaurants. They browse the shops on town streets. According to a
study by the Virginia Tourism Corporation, Civil War tourists in
Virginia stay twice as long and spend double the money of the average
tourist. Of out-of-town visitors interviewed at 20 battlefields, two-
thirds were visiting the area specifically to see the battlefield, and
three-quarters said they would visit other Civil War sites while in the
area.
On these battlefields, American soldiers demonstrated to posterity
the meaning--and the price--of freedom. To understand this history is
to understand ourselves as Americans. This effort brings together
federal, state, and private sector supporters to ensure future
generations will be able to visit these sites and appreciate the
historic deeds that transpired on this hallowed ground.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Kirsten E. Gillibrand, U.S. Senator From
New York, on S. 925
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to be
the sponsor of S. 925, a bill to improve the Lower East Side Tenement
National Historic Site, and for other purposes.
The Lower East Side Tenement Museum was founded in 1988; for the
past twenty five years has worked to preserve and interpret the history
of immigration through the personal experiences of the generations of
newcomers who settled in and built lives on Manhattan's Lower East
Side, America's iconic immigrant neighborhood. The Museum forges
emotional connections between visitors and immigrants past and present
through tours of its historic building at 97 Orchard Street, which was
declared a National Historic Landmark in 1994. The historic site became
an affiliated site of the National Park System (NPS) in 1998 in PL l05-
378 and is key part of the National Parks of New York Harbor, which
includes Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, and Castle Clinton.
The Museum now serves nearly 200,000 visitors per year, including
40,000 school children. Visitors explore recreated apartments and hear
the stories of real families from over twenty nations who lived in the
building from 1863 to 1935 when the City ofNew York condemned the
building as unfit for human occupancy.
The Museum purchased 103 Orchard Street, an 1888 tenement building,
in 2007 and renovated its lower floors as a visitor and education
center. Unlike the Museum's first historic structure, 103 Orchard
Street never closed to residents, and so has provided homes to more
recent waves of immigration. The Museum is now developing an exhibit to
present stories of Jewish Holocaust survivors, post-1965 Chinese
families, and 1950s Puerto Rican migrants. Together, these will extend
the Museum's immersive historic interpretations beyond 1935, where they
now end, into the present.
This project is a direct response to NPS Director Jon Jarvis's
``Call to Action'' to tell America's untold stories. The exhibit would
be the first at a National Park Service site to interpret the history
of Holocaust survivors rebuilding lives in America. It would also be
one of the few telling the stories of Puerto Rican migrants to the
mainland and post-1965 Chinese immigrants. The interpretation differs
from ethnic museums in that it presents the larger narrative of how
Americans came to be the people they are today. The new exhibit will
provide the setting for a powerful narrative about how Civil Rights Era
Americans came to embrace non-race-based immigration; the exhibit will
reflect the experiences of contemporary Americans in the diverse
communities that now constitute much of the nation.
S. 925 aims to expand the boundaries of the National Park Service
affiliated site at 97 Orchard Street to include this newer tenement
building. Including 103 Orchard Street is a direct response to the
Department of the Interior's 2006 General Management Plan for the site,
which recognized the need for visitor orientation, administrative
facilities, and additional exhibit space. It determined that any
boundary adjustment include significant features related to the primary
purpose of the site, address operational issues including access, or
protect resources critical to the site's mission. It also required
legislation to adjust the site's boundaries.
These new exhibits are directly related to the Museum's mission and
allow visitors to see how immigration has continued to evolve into the
present. The Museum estimates the expansion would allow it to
accommodate 50,000 additional visitors annually, including 12,000 New
York City students. Furthermore, these exhibits will be fully ADA
accessible which the majority ofthe original exhibits are not.
This legislation would secure a partnership between the new space
and the National Parks ofNew York Harbor. NPS would be able to assist
this site with education workshops, tours for New York City school
children, and exhibition construction and preservation, just as it has
done at the original site. This designation would help preserve
America's iconic immigrant neighborhood. It is critical to provide the
Tenement Museum with the resources it needs to continue to educate our
children and tell the important stories of our past immigrant
experience. The immigration story is America's story; New York's Lower
East Side has been 'stop one' for countless generations of new
Americans.
The Lower East Side Tenement Museum has worked for twenty five
years to enhance appreciation for the profound role immigration has
played and continues to play in shaping America's evolving national
identity. Today I ask that you support S. 925 and expand the affiliated
site boundaries to include this second historic building and help
ensure the Tenement Museum's success for years to come.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Harry Reid, U.S. Senator From Nevada,
on S. 974
Thank you Chairman Udall and Senator Portman for the opportunity to
submit testimony on this bipartisan proposal to conserve an amazing
piece of Nevada's natural heritage and create new opportunities for
economic development in Southern Nevada.
This May, I sponsored the reintroduction of the Las Vegas Valley
Public Lands and Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Monument Act with my
colleague Senator Heller and the entirety of the Nevada congressional
delegation. I would like to take this opportunity to thank my
colleagues for their willingness to work together on this legislation
through a hands-on, ground level approach.
The heart of this bill, the creation of the 23,000-acre Tule
Springs Fossil Beds National Monument, would conserve, protect and
enhance the unique and nationally important paleontological resources
in southern Nevada.
Efforts to protect the paleontological treasures within the Upper
Las Vegas Wash stretch back nearly 80 years, when during the first
fossil expedition in the area unearthed what was named ``Tule the Baby
Mammoth.'' Since that first discovery, over 400 paleontological sites
have been unearthed in Tule Springs, providing a record of human
activity dating back 11,000 years ago and a repository of Ice Age
fossils up to 200 millennia old. Since the 1950s, fossils of Columbian
mammoths, ground sloths, American lions, Dire wolves, Sabertoothed
tiger, and Camelops have been found.
Tule Springs is also home to some of the most sensitive species in
southern Nevada including the Las Vegas buckwheat, which is currently
being considered for listing under the Endangered Species Act, the
Merriam's bearpoppy, the Las Vegas bearpoppy, and the halfring
milkvetch. Tule Springs is also habitat for the desert tortoise,
burrowing owls, and kit foxes.
The fossil beds proposal is the product of over a decade of hard
work by the community. Recognizing the threats of development to the
area, a coalition of environmentalists, tribes, academics, and retired
Park Service employees formed in the mid-2000s with a goal of seeking a
protected status for Tule Springs. The Protectors of Tule Springs
collected over 10,000 signatures in support of protection and in 2009
the National Parks Conservation Association launched a campaign to add
the site to the National Parks system. A year later, a Park Service
reconnaissance report found the site suitable for inclusion in the park
system. The monument proposal was developed in close partnership with
local governments and the Clark County Commission, the Las Vegas City
Council, the North Las Vegas City Council and the Nevada State
Legislature have all passed resolutions supporting the addition of the
area to the national park system.
In addition to protecting the paleontological and natural resources
found within the site, the monument would be an economic driver in the
Las Vegas community. The monument would be located a mere 30 minutes of
the Las Vegas strip and is expected to generate $25 to $50 million for
the regional economy within the first four years of operation. This
economic boost will be welcomed as Las Vegas emerges from the recession
and one of the worst housing crashes in the country.
This bill also expands the Red Rock National Conservation Area by
roughly 1,700 acres. Red Rock is one of Nevada's most treasured outdoor
destinations and receives well over 1 million visitors every year. In
recent years, Red Rock has been celebrated as one of the top climbing
destinations in the world.
The legislation also make several land conveyances in the Las Vegas
Valley that are vital to the health of the economy and community in
Southern Nevada. Approximately 640 acres would be conveyed to each Las
Vegas and North Las Vegas to establish ``job creation zones.'' The
cities, after receiving the land, will master plan it and then sell it.
The proceeds from the sales will be allocated to the Southern Nevada
Public Lands Management Act fund, which provides funding for
conservation and recreation infrastructure in Nevada. The bill would
also convey 80 acres to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
for construction of an access road to their current shooting facility
near Sunrise Mountain. Nearly 2,500 acres will be conveyed to
institutions of higher education for the creation of new campuses in
Las Vegas, North Las Vegas and Pahrump. Three parcels of land will be
conveyed to Clark County for flood mitigation infrastructure for the
Southern Nevada Supplemental Airport. Finally, 410 acres will be
conveyed to the Air Force for inclusion in Nellis Air Force Base.
The Spring Mountains National Recreation Area Act will be amended
to allow the Forest Service to acquire lands from or exchange lands
with individuals. The Forest Service would also be allowed to sell
small parcels of land to residents who are currently in trespass on
National Forest lands in the Spring Mountains area.
Additionally, the bill would amend the SNPLMA boundary to add 4,000
acres in Las Vegas and 4,000 acres in North Las Vegas. These expansions
are meant to compensate Las Vegas and North Las Vegas for the
developable acres they would lose as a result of the National Monument
designation.
The bill would release the Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area from
wilderness consideration. The area has been adequately studied and
found to have no wilderness characteristics. With the release of the
Sunrise ISA, a vital transmission corridor can expand to meet the needs
of Southern Nevada and California.
Section 12 of this bill conveys 1,200 acres of public land in the
Nellis Dunes area for an off-highway vehicle recreation park managed by
Clark County, and designates roughly 10,000 acres of public land
surrounding the park as an off-highway vehicle recreation area. It also
designates an economic support area near the Las Vegas Motor Speedway
that will generate revenue to help pay for the management of the park
and recreation.
Finally, the bill protects the current operations at Nellis Air
Force Base, a vital part of Southern Nevada's economy, by allowing
military overflights over the Tule Springs Fossil Beds National
Monument, which is a critical flight corridor between Nellis Air Force
Base and Nellis Test and Training Range, and the additions to Red Rock
National Conservation Area.
I look forward to working with the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee to move this bill forward. I request that my
statement be included in the record.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Dean Heller, U.S. Senator From Nevada,
on S. 974
I first want to thank Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Portman for
allowing me to be here today, and for holding this hearing.
Eighty-seven percent of Nevada's lands are controlled by the
federal government-so the health of our communities is intertwined with
our public lands and the actions of land management agencies, and I am
grateful for the opportunity to work with my colleagues to address the
challenges that face public lands states, like Nevada.
I'm pleased to speak in support of S. 974, Las Vegas Valley Public
Land and Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Monument Act of 2013. This
bill is the culmination of several years of effort to protect unique
areas while providing for job creation opportunities.
It also plans for critical infrastructure that will be necessary to
meet the needs of the Valley. The centerpiece of the bill is the
designation of the Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Monument in the
Upper Las Vegas Wash. This area contains fossil beds that include Ice
Age mammals such as the Columbian mammoth, American lion, and ancient
horses. The monument designation will protect the unique natural values
and important scientific resources there.
In addition to the creation of the Monument, the bill also
facilitates economic development in the region, conveys land to the
Nevada System of Higher Education to expand education opportunities for
Nevadans, and transfers additional land for other public purposes.
Another important aspect of this bill is the facilitation of renewable
energy transmission. Releasing the Sunrise Instant Study Area will
expand opportunities for deployment of renewable energy, which is an
important part of Nevada's future. Additionally, the bill will create a
10,000 acre recreation area to be administered by the BLM for use by
off-highway vehicles in southern Nevada. The legislation would also
convey to Clark County approximately 1,000 acres for the development of
facilities to support the off-road vehicle recreation. I have worked
for many years on this important proposal to facilitate shared goals of
improving air quality, public safety, and OHV recreation while
protecting critical desert tortoise habitat.
S. 974 is a great example of how conservation, economic
development, and recreational opportunities can be achieved when
stakeholders come together to work out their differenc Thank you again
for the opportunity to be here today to discuss this important
legislation.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Elizabeth Warren, U.S. Senator
From Massachusetts, on S. 1186
Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to introduce the Essex National
Heritage Area Reauthorization Act (S. 1186), and I thank you for the
opportunity to offer a few words about this wonderful area. The Essex
National Heritage Area is special not only to the communities north of
Boston that it encompasses, but also to the many visitors it attracts
who go there to hike its network of nature trails and to learn about
17th Century settlers, 18th Century seafarers, and 19th Century
industrial workers.
The Essex National Heritage Area received its designation by
Congress in 1996 as place where natural, cultural, and historic
resources combine to form a cohesive, nationally important landscape.
This landscape includes historic homes and industrial architecture, as
well as scenic natural resources, including rocky coasts, harbors,
marshlands and rivers. It boasts 26 national historic landmarks, 9,968
sites on the National Register of Historic Places, 73 National Register
Historic Districts, two national park sites--Salem Maritime National
Historic Site and Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site--and a
national wildlife refuge.
What I find so remarkable about the Essex National Heritage Area
are the innovative ways that it involves its local communities in its
ongoing work. Just one example is the Youth Summer Job Corps. Through a
partnership with the National Park Service, the Essex National Heritage
Area employs 14-18 year-olds from local communities to work at the two
national park sites in Salem and Saugus, as well as at a working farm
in Ipswich. For 8-12 weeks in the summer, these teens work with
National Park Service staff, acquiring skills in historic preservation
and natural resource management. At the end of the summer, many of
these students come away with great job experiences and appreciation of
the role of their communities in our national story.
Also notable is how the Essex National Heritage Area is able to
make the most of its federal funding. As National Park Service Director
Jon Jarvis has noted, national heritage areas are places where small
investments pay huge dividends. Essex, like other heritage areas,
collaborates with local partners to carry out its mission of cultural,
historical and natural resource preservation, and in the process, makes
substantial contributions to its local economy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I hope the Committee will look
favorably on this bill to reauthorize the Essex National Heritage Area.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bernard Sanders, U.S. Senator From Vermont,
on S. 1252
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks
Hearing on Misc. National Parks Bills Senate Dirksen Building, Room 366
at 2:30pm July 31, 2013
Thank you Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Portman.
I speak today in support of The Upper Missisquoi and Trout Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act. This bill is endorsed by the entire Vermont
Congressional Delegation. The Senate bill I introduced is co-sponsored
by Senator Leahy, and the House companion is sponsored by Congressman
Welch.
Forty states have rivers under the Wild and Scenic System, spanning
the country from Florida to Alaska. The program was established in 1968
to recognize and preserve rivers for their remarkable scenic and
recreational value. Knowing the exceptional value of the Missisquoi and
Trout Rivers--enjoyed by paddlers, anglers and naturalists; communities
in northern Vermont sought to add these rivers to the national system.
The study and designation of these rivers under the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act has been a community lead effort from start to finish. This
proposed designation is the result of a congressionally authorized Wild
and Scenic study requested by local Vermonters. Over the past few
years, the Study Committee worked with local communities, and the
National Park Service to evaluate the rivers' potential for a Wild and
Scenic designation.
This year, the committee completed their work. They concluded what
Vermonters across the state already know. These 46 miles of river offer
outstanding resources, deep agricultural heritage, rich rural
character, extensive recreational opportunities, and scenic working
landscapes. The committee unanimously recommended that the Upper
Missisquoi and Trout rivers become Vermont's first in the Wild and
Scenic System.
This proposal enjoys widespread support across Vermont. Residents
in Berkshire, Enosburg Falls, Enosburgh, Montgomery, North Troy,
Richford, Troy and Westfield voted on our annual Town Meeting day this
spring to proceed with this measure. Robust public support is the
result of the Wild and Scenic Study Committee's careful work throughout
these past years, involving the people of northern Vermont at every
step to create a management plan that strikes the right balance between
recreational uses of our natural resources, and maintaining a healthy,
and beautiful environment.
Inclusion in the Wild and Scenic system will help protect the
natural, cultural and recreational qualities of the Upper Missisquoi
and Trout rivers; maintain good water quality within the rivers as well
as in Vermont's beautiful Lake Champlain, where the Missisquoi River
flows into.
I want to thank the efforts of the Wild and Scenic Study Committee
members in Vermont, and my delegation colleagues; Senator Leahy, and
Congressman Welch, for collaborating on this effort. I look forward to
working with my colleagues on the Committee to report this bill quickly
and favorably, to preserve these rivers for the people of Vermont.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL BENNET, U.S. SENATOR
FROM COLORADO
Senator Bennet. Thank you, Chairman Udall. It's a great
honor to be before you and also before our great colleague from
Hawaii, Senator Schatz. He's provided such extraordinary
leadership when it comes to National Parks since he's been
here.
But calling you, Mr. Chairman, gives me special
satisfaction. So thanks for having me today. Thanks for holding
this hearing, allowing me to testify for a few minutes in
support of S. 524, the Pike National Historic Trails Study Act
of 2013.
Mr. Chairman, I want to extend special thanks for your
support of this bill as an original co-sponsor. The bill is a
simple one, less than a page long.
The legislation would create a feasibility study regarding
the establishment of the Zebulon Pike National Historic Trail.
The trail would recognize Pike's journey into the West
starting in Missouri in 1806.
Crossing acreage in 7 modern day States and Mexico.
Until ending in 1807 in Louisiana.
Should the Park Service deem the route worthy of addition
to the system a separate act of Congress would be needed to
formally designate the trail.
I'm here today just to express support for the study
legislation and briefly describe why this trail is significant.
Born 3 years after our country's independence, Lieutenant
Zebulon Pike joined the Army when he was 20 years old. It was
in July of 1806 that the Army tasked him with exploring the
Southwestern border of the land recently acquired as part of
the Louisiana Purchase. The expedition started in Missouri,
moved across Kansas and then into the Southeastern part of our
home State of Colorado.
They trudged up the Arkansas River Valley. It was in
November of 1806 that Pike first saw the peak that would
someday bear his name. While, as the chairman said, he tried,
the Lieutenant never actually set foot on the summit of Pike's
Peak, the Easternmost, 14,000 foot mountain in the United
States and one of over 50 mountains in Colorado above that
height, the most in the Nation by far. Though the last person I
need to tell about that is the chairman of this committee, as
he has climbed every single one of them.
Following the detour to Pike's Peak, the expedition
continued on. They ate a Christmas dinner of buffalo meat near
the modern day city of Salida. Then they continued south over
the Sangre de Cristo Mountains and around what is now the Great
Sand Dunes National Park until they hit the Rio Grande River.
They established a smallish fort, now known as Pikes--just
south of present day Alamosa. It was there in February 1807
that Spanish soldiers captured Pike and his expedition and
marched them south to Santa Fe and then into the Chihuahua
region of Mexico. While they were treated fairly by the Spanish
it wasn't until June that Pike and most of his men were
returned to U.S. soil in Louisiana, nearly 1,000 miles from
where they were captured.
Mr. Chairman, Lieutenant Pike's expedition was the first
American led journey through the Southwest. The historical
significance of the journey to Colorado, to the West and to
this nation goes well beyond this brief summary. Beyond
recognizing the American pioneer in the rich history of the
western landscape, the establishment of the Pike Trail would
provide opportunities for economic development, as the Chairman
mentioned, all along the route.
The legislation is widely supported by local governments
across 5 States. I have letters of support for the bill from 22
county commissions, including 16 in Colorado. With your
permission I'd like to enter those letters into the hearing
record.
Senator Udall. Without objection.
Senator Bennet. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
These are local leaders, both Democrats and Republicans
seeking to diversify the economies of our rural communities.
I hope the Committee will recognize these worthy goals, see
fit to promptly and favorably move this bill forward in the
process.
Thank you again for allowing me to testify this afternoon.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Bennet.
When we get this project completed we'll continue to learn
about and appreciate the fascinating stories of Pike's travels.
As a member of the Intelligence Committee I'm particularly
intrigued with one of the theories which is that Pike allowed
himself to be captured so that he could both take advantage of
Mexico's resources and learn more about what the country south
of us was doing. There are other historians that think he was
not fully aware of the danger that he was in.
But whatever the case may be it's a fascinating part of the
history of our part of the country. I thank you for your
authorship.
Senator Bennet. Thank you. I thank the ranking member for
allowing this hearing as well.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Udall. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Bennet.
The ranking member has joined us.--As always.
I don't know if the ranking member has a statement or
whether as he gathers himself, I could turn to Senator Schatz
for a statement.
But Senator Portman, would you like to be recognized?
Senator Portman. Senator Schatz should go. He was actually
here before me.
Senator Udall. Senator Portman as always is gracious.
Let me recognize Senator Schatz for any comments he might
have.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ, U.S. SENATOR
FROM HAWAII
Senator Schatz. Thank you to the chairman and the ranking
member. Thanks, ranking member, for your accommodation. I
appreciate all of the pieces of legislation being considered
today.
I'd like to especially thank the committee for considering
S. 618, the Pacific Islands Park Act, which would direct the
Department of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies for
potential parks in Hawaii and Pacific Islands. It will direct
studies on Midway Atoll, the Northern Marianas Islands, Palau
and of course, most important to me, 3 studies in the State of
Hawaii. I want to thank the National Park Service for its
attention to this bill.
I appreciate the thoughtful comments provided on this
legislation. Look forward to working with the National Park
Service, the Subcommittee Chairman, the ranking member and the
full committee to incorporate any input that may be necessary
from the testimony and to consider any other suggestions that
may arise.
As you know, some of Hawaii's greatest resources are its
globally unique mountains, forests, volcanoes, trails and
wildlife. These studies are a critical step in protecting
natural resources preserving history and culture in Hawaii and
across the Pacific and providing access to residents and
visitors, who want to share in Hawaii's breathtaking natural
environment. Visitors from all over the world travel to Hawaii
to experience not only the natural beauty, but also the
cultural and historical significance of our national parks
which have resulted in a significant contribution to our
State's growing economy.
Parks are a wise investment supporting hunting, fishing,
camping and other outdoor recreational activities that
contribute a total of 725 and a half billion dollars annually
to the United States economy and a little over 6 million jobs
according to the Outdoor Industry Association. It's
particularly important to the Hawaii tourism economy which has
helped to drive our unemployment below 5 percent. More broadly,
outdoor recreation, and I know chairman, that you know this,
nature conservation and historic preservation contribute a
total of about $1,000,000,000 trillion annually to the economy
supporting more than 8 million jobs.
So I thank the Department of the Interior and the National
Park Service for their collaboration on this matter.
I thank the subcommittee chair and ranking member and all
of the members, in advance, for their favorable disposition.
Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Schatz, for your
leadership.
Thank you for also reminding us that our parks not only add
to our quality of life, but are key economic drivers. Both
Senator Portman and I are intrigued with the 5 percent
unemployment rate. That's close to where historically it has
been in our country. We all would like to see it maybe at 3
percent or maybe zero percent.
But that's some very good news. It speaks, again, to the
importance of protecting these natural landscapes.
Thank you. We look forward to working with you.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
Senator Udall. Let me recognize the Ranking Member, Senator
Portman.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROB PORTMAN, U.S. SENATOR
FROM OHIO
Senator Portman. Thank you and I'll be brief.
Sorry that I was detained on the Floor.
It was good to have Senator Bennet before us. I understand
he testified on the National Park's--or the National Trail
System's Act and wants a study on incorporating Pike Trail
which I'm sure the chairman has some interest in too, into the
National Park System. So--or the National Trail System.
I look forward to hearing about many of the bills today. We
have 24 before us. So we've got a busy agenda. There are a
couple that I have particular interest in.
One, I want thank the Chairman for including in that is the
Ohio and Erie Canal bill, S. 1339. This is a heritage area.
Ohio and Erie Canalway, that I supported when I was in the
House and was established to acknowledge the Ohio/Erie Canals
historical contribution to the region.
It's become quite an attraction for outdoor enthusiasts in
our area. I think there's about an 81 mile tow path now running
through the heart of the canalway. Having recently bicycled on
it myself with my family, I can attest to the fact that it's a
valuable resource. It was full of other bikers. It's become
quite a popular area in a highly populated part of our country.
Another bill on the agenda that I've introduced again this
year, this time with Senator Landrieu, with Senator Lieberman
last year is the bill S. 1044 which is the World War II
Memorial Prayer Act. It's a bipartisan bill that would allow a
plaque to be at the World War II memorial. Some of you, I'm
sure, have visited the World War II memorial.
Mr. Chairman, it's a terrific tribute to our World War II
generation, including my dad. He used to love to go down there.
But frankly, I think, it could use some more interpretation.
This is one of the things that I think would add to it.
On D-Day, June 6, 1944, President Roosevelt gave an
incredibly powerful message to the Nation in the form of a
prayer that helped bring the country together. That plaque or
inscription we'd like to see on the World War II memorial would
commemorate that prayer.
I've worked with the Park Service on this over the last
couple years. We're not trying to disrupt the memorial, or
bypass the Commemorative Works Act process which governs
monuments in Washington.
So this would be assigned to a commemorative works approval
and review process. It makes it consistent with how the
legislation has been passed by previous Congresses. I've had
good conversations with Secretary Jewell regarding this
legislation, actually on the 69th anniversary of D-Day earlier
this year.
So I hope this ever gets the same reception here as it did
in the House last year where a companion legislation,
introduced by Congressman Bill Johnson, overwhelming passed by
a vote of 386 to 26. After 70 years this prayer still has the
power to bring us together and to remind us that although we
may have our differences there's also a lot that unites us as a
country. So, again, I hope my colleagues will join us in
encouraging that this extraordinary prayer, this example of
faith in our nation's history, be added to the memorial.
I want to thank the witnesses who are before us today.
Again, we have a number of different bills I look forward to
hearing more about.
Again, apologize for my tardiness and look forward to
getting into the specific bills before us.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Portman.
Dr. Toothman, if you would come forward. I think you will
be joined by Mr. Spisak as well. We look forward to hearing
your testimony.
Dr. Stephanie Toothman is the Associate Director for
Cultural Resources, Partnerships and Science at the National
Park Service.
Dr. Toothman, we will include for the full written--we will
include your full written statement for each of the bills in
the hearing record. So it would be helpful if you could briefly
summarize the Interior Department's views on each of the bills.
Then after you finish summarizing we'll begin a round of
questions.
Welcome. Thank you for being here.
STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL
RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS AND SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Ms. Toothman. I'll start again.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear
before the subcommittee to present the Department of the
Interior's views on the 25 bills on today's agenda.
I am accompanied by Tim Spisak, who is the Bureau of Land
Management's Deputy Assistant Director for Minerals and Realty
Management. He will be happy to answer any questions regarding
S. 974, as they relate to lands managed by the Bureau of Land
Management.
I would like to submit as requested our full statements on
each of these bills for the record and summarize the
Department's views.
The Department supports the following 10 bills.
S. 524, which would authorize a study of the Pike National
Historic Trail.
S. 618, which would authorize special resource studies at 5
Pacific island locations, although we have some concerns about
the Midway Island study as outlined in our testimony.
S. 702 would rename the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers
Valley National Heritage Area as ``The Last Green Valley
National Heritage Corridor.''
S. 781, which would modify the boundary of Yosemite
National Park.
S. 782, which would revise the boundaries of Gettysburg
National Military Park.
S. 925, which would expand the Lower East Side Tenement
National Historic Site.
S. 995, which would authorize the establishment of a
National Desert Shield and Desert Storm commemorative work in
the District of Columbia.
S. 1328, which would authorize a special resource study of
the New Philadelphia site in Illinois.
H.R. 674, which would authorize a special resource study of
sites on the Island of Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands.
H.R. 885, which would expand the boundary of San Antonio
Missions National Historical Park.
H.R. 1033 and S. 916, which would expand the American
Battlefield Protection Act to include Revolutionary War and War
of 1812 battlefields.
The reasons for our support for these bills are explained
in our full statements. For several of these bills we are
requesting amendments. Explanation of these amendments are
contained in our full statements. We would be happy to work
with the committee on them.
The Department could only support if amended S. 1071. This
bill would allow the National Park Service to use existing
funds to make improvements to support facilities for National
Historic Sites that meet certain criteria. However, we know of
only one site, the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site,
that meets these certain criteria. We believe it is better for
Congress to provide specific authority to individual parks on a
case by case basis.
The Department recommends amending S. 1138, S. 1151, S.
1157, S. 1186 and S. 1339 which would extend the authorization
for Federal funding for 8 National Heritage Areas: Hudson River
Valley, American's Agricultural Heritage Partnership, Rivers of
Steel, Lackawanna Valley, Delaware and Lehigh, Schuylkill River
Valley, Essex, and Ohio and Erie. We recommend Congress only
authorize funding until an evaluation and report has been
completed for each of the Heritage Areas and reviewed by
Congress, and until National Heritage Areas Program legislation
has been enacted.
The Department recommends deferring action until the
studies are complete on the following 3 bills.
S. 869, which would establish the Alabama Black Belt
National Heritage Area.
S. 1252, which would designate certain sections of the
Missisquoi and Trout River in Vermont as Wild and Scenic
Rivers.
S. 1253, which would designate certain sections of the
Farmington River and Salmon Brook in Connecticut as Wild and
Scenic Rivers.
The Department does not oppose S. 398, which would
establish a commission to study and report on the potential
creation of a national woman's history museum. The amendment we
are requesting is described in our prepared testimony. We ask
that the bill be amended by deleting the specific location
within the reserve as a potential site for the museum.
Regarding S. 1044, which would direct the Secretary to
install in the area of the World War II Memorial, a plaque or
an inscription with President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's D-Day
prayer. The Department supports retaining the Commemorative
Works Act as the vehicle for siting and designing the plaque or
inscription.
The Department does not oppose, if amended, H.R. 1158. The
bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to continue stocking
fish in certain lakes in the North Cascades complex. We ask
that the bill be amended to allow rather than require the
stocking of fish.
Regarding S. 974, the Las Vegas Valley Public Land and Tule
Springs Fossil Beds National Monument Act, the Department
supports some of the provisions of the bill and has concerns
about others as explained in our prepared testimony.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. Deputy Assistant
Director Spisak and I would be pleased to answer any questions
you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Toothman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Stephanie Toothman, Associate Director, Cultural
Resources, Partnerships, and Science, National Park Service, Department
of the Interior, on S. 398
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
398, a bill to establish the commission to study the potential creation
of a National Women's History Museum, and for other purposes.
The Department does not oppose S. 398, but recommends the amendment
discussed below.
S. 398 would establish a Commission to study and report on the
potential creation of a national women's history museum. S. 398 directs
the Commission to submit to the President and Congress a report
containing recommendations on the availability and cost of collections
to be acquired and housed in the museum, the impact the museum may have
on regional women's history-related museums, possible locations within
Washington, D.C. or its environs, whether the museum should be part of
the Smithsonian Institution, the governance and organizational
structure from which the museum should operate, how to engage women in
the development and design of a museum, and the cost of constructing,
operating, and maintaining the museum.
The Commission, consisting of 8 members appointed by the
congressional leadership, would convene a national conference on the
museum no later than eighteen months after its appointment and submit
recommendations for a plan of action for the establishment and
maintenance of a museum no later than eighteen months after their first
meeting.
Section 4(a)(2)(C) of S. 398 directs the Commission to recommend
potential locations, including the location on land bounded by
Independence Avenue SW., 14th Street SW., 15th Street SW., and
Jefferson Drive SW., in Washington, D.C. This area has several
constraints. First, it is located on the Washington Monument grounds,
an area treasured for its open space and natural setting. Second, the
museum's development potential will likely be significantly constrained
by the area's size and configuration. Third, this location is also
within the Reserve as defined by the Commemorative Works Act (CWA), 40
U.S. Code, Section 89 (Section 8908(c)). In the 2003 Amendments to the
CWA, Congress declared the Reserve a ``substantially completed work of
civic art,'' where no new memorials may be located. The Reserve
continues to protect the National Mall's historic open space character
enjoyed by millions of Americans and visitors. Museum development on
this site is also precluded in the 2001 Memorials and Museums Master
Plan (Chapter 3, page 32), which continues to guide the location of new
memorials, museums, and related structures in the Nation's Capital.
This plan was the result of a multi-year effort by the National Capital
Planning Commission, the US Commission of Fine Arts, the National
Capital Memorial Advisory Commission and the National Park Service. We
recommend amending the bill by deleting this specific location as a
potential site for the museum. There are a number of sites within the
monumental core that are worthy of consideration for a museum of this
importance, as identified in the Monumental Core Framework Plan which
identifies preferred sites for new museums.
We support, in concept, the proposal to further the education and
interpretation of significant segments of American history and culture.
However, we feel strongly that this Commission move forward in a way
that does not contravene the CWA.
We appreciate the opportunity to testify on S. 398. We would like
the opportunity to work with the subcommittee to address our proposed
amendment, and we urge the subcommittee to consult with other relevant
agencies as the bill moves forward.
on s. 524
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today and present the Department's
views on S. 524, a bill to amend the National Trails System Act to
provide for a study of the Pike National Historic Trail.
The Department supports S. 524. However, we feel that priority
should be given to the 30 previously authorized studies for potential
units of the National Park System, potential new National Heritage
Areas, and potential additions to the National Trails System and
National Wild and Scenic Rivers System that have not yet been
transmitted to Congress.
S. 524 would amend Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act
by directing the Secretary to conduct a study of the Pike National
Historic Trail for consideration for inclusion in the National Trails
System. We estimate the cost of this study to be approximately
$800,000.
The Pike National Historic Trail is a series of routes extending
approximately 3,664 miles, which follows the route taken by Lt. Zebulon
Montgomery Pike during the 1806-1807 Pike expedition that began in Fort
Bellefontaine, Missouri, extended through portions of the States of
Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas, and ended in
Natchitoches, Louisiana.
U.S. Army General James Wilkinson launched the 1806-1807 Pike
expedition to provide an escort for Osage Indians traveling from St.
Louis back to their villages, make contact with Native American groups
on the plains, explore the headwaters of the Arkansas and Red Rivers,
and collect information about the Spanish along the southwestern border
of the Louisiana Purchase. Lt. Pike and his men explored the headwaters
of the Arkansas and Platte Rivers in Colorado before crossing the
Sangre de Cristo Mountains, near both the present-day Great Sand Dunes
National Park and Preserve, and the headwaters of the Rio Grande River.
Pike's group built a small stockade near modern-day Alamosa, Colorado,
where they were captured by the Spanish and taken back to Mexico. Pike
and the majority of his men were returned to U.S. territory at
Natchitoches, Louisiana, on June 30, 1807. While not as famous as the
Lewis and Clark expedition, the Pike expedition was the first American-
led effort to explore the Rocky Mountains and is an important part of
the history of Colorado and the American Southwest.
A study produced by the National Park Service would not only look
at the national significance and eligibility of the trail, but also its
feasibility and suitability as a unit of the National Trails System. We
envision the Pike National Historic Trail study to focus on exploring
recreational opportunities, defining historical aspects of the trail,
and establishing methods for a working relationship with partners in
order to identify facilities on adjacent lands that would contribute to
the purposes of the trail.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be happy to
answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have.
on s. 618
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's testimony regarding S. 618, a bill to
require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct certain special
resource studies.
S. 618 requires that the Secretary conduct special resource studies
at five Pacific island locations: the Ka'u Coast on the island of
Hawaii, Hawaii; the northern coast of Maui, Hawaii; the southeastern
coast of Kauai, Hawaii; historic sites on Midway Atoll; and the island
of Rota in the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianna Islands (CNMI).
The legislation also requires an update to a prior special resource
study on World War II sites in the Republic of Palau.
The Department supports conducting the new studies with the
exception of the study of historic sites on Midway Atoll. We also
support updating the existing special resource study on World War II
sites in the Republic of Palau. We recommend one technical amendment to
the Rota study authorized in this legislation.
Section (3)(a)(A) of S. 618 requires the Secretary to conduct a
special resource study of the Ka'u Coast on the big island of Hawaii.
The National Park Service (NPS) conducted a reconnaissance survey of
the Ka'u Coast in 2006. The survey indicated that significant cultural
features, geological forms and coastal-marine natural resources of the
study area are each represented to some extent within other national
parks in the state of Hawaii. However, in no other location do these
features coexist in such a long and uninterrupted coastal landscape
with continuous scenic, interpretive, and recreational integrity.
Compared to existing coastal managed areas within the state, it is
uniquely wild, yet accessible.
Based upon the significance of the resources in the Ka'u study
area, and the current integrity and intact condition of these
resources, the reconnaissance survey resulted in a preliminary finding
of national significance and suitability. The Department supports a
special resource study of the Ka'u coast.
Section (3)(a)(B) of S. 618 requires the Secretary to conduct a
special resource study of the north coast of the island of Maui. The
NPS has not conducted a reconnaissance study of that area, and
therefore, has a limited understanding of the resources. Clarification
of the extent of the area to be examined would be helpful prior to
undertaking this study. In order to better understand the resources of
the area and their significance to our nation, the Department supports
a special resource study of Maui's north coast.
Section (3)(a)(C) of S. 618 requires the Secretary to conduct a
special resource study of the southeastern coast of the island of
Kauai. In 2006, the NPS conducted a reconnaissance survey of Mahaulepu
and nearby areas of Kauai. Mahaulepu is a historic Hawaiian land
division and watershed stretching from Kauai's Haupu mountain range to
the island's southeast shore. This preliminary survey indicates that
there are nationally significant resources within the study area that
are suitable for inclusion within the framework of the National Park
System (System), and that are not otherwise adequately preserved
elsewhere in the nation. Furthermore, the study area's significant
natural and cultural resources are of a collective size and
configuration that they could be feasibly managed for resource
protection and public enjoyment, and could be potentially administered
at a reasonable cost if managed under a partnership arrangement.
The Department supports conducting a special resource study of the
Mahaulepu area, including Kauai's southeast coast, to determine
feasibility for its inclusion in the System, and that focuses on non-
traditional management alternatives that include options for continued
farm and ranch operations on private agricultural lands.
Section (3)(a)(D) of S. 618 requires the Secretary to conduct a
special resource study of the historic sites on Midway Atoll. The
cultural resources on Midway Atoll were previously evaluated for
National Historic Landmark (NHL) designation. A portion of the islands
associated with the battle of Midway was designated as the World War
II--Military Facilities Midway Island NHL Other protections are also in
place for Midway Atoll. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages
Midway Atoll National Wildlife Refuge, and like all Federal agencies is
subject to the provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act.
FWS has prepared an historic preservation plan that addresses the
preservation of the islands' cultural resources. In addition, as a
result of Presidential action in July 2007, the Refuge was included as
part of the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument.
Considering these designations already covering Midway Atoll, the
Department does not support conducting a special resource study of the
area for inclusion in the System.
Finally, Section (3)(a)(E) of S. 618 requires the Secretary to
conduct a special resource study of the island of Rota in the Northern
Mariana Islands. The NPS completed a reconnaissance survey of certain
natural and cultural resources on Rota in September 2005. The
reconnaissance survey found that certain natural and cultural resources
of the island of Rota are significant to island residents, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), and the entire
nation, and merit protection. The survey also made a preliminary
finding that these resources are likely to be suitable and feasible for
inclusion in the System.
Rota was the only major island in the Mariana Archipelago to be
spared the destruction and large-scale land use changes brought about
by World War II and its aftermath. The best remaining examples of this
island chain's native limestone forest are found on Rota. Rota is also
regarded as the cultural home of the indigenous Chamorro people and
contains the most striking and well-preserved examples of their three
thousand-year old culture. The Department supports a special resource
study to provide a public process to determine the suitability and
feasibility of designating prehistoric, historic, and limestone forest
sites on Rota, CNMI, as a unit of the System.
We recommend a technical amendment to Section 3(a)(E) to clarify
the study would cover prehistoric, historic, and limestone forest sites
instead of the entire island of Rota. Similar language is found in H.R.
674, which is also the subject of this hearing.
Section 3(b) of S. 618 also requires an update of the special
resource study conducted on World War II sites in the Republic of
Palau. In 2003, the NPS conducted a special resource study of sites
related to the Battle of Peleliu, the major battle fought in the Palau
Islands during World War II. The study found that the Peleliu
battlefield met significance and suitability criteria for inclusion
within the System, but there were other obstacles that made such
inclusion infeasible at the time. Additionally, this study did not
include public scoping or other essential components of the National
Environmental Policy Act.
It is our understanding, based in part on communication from the
Republic of Palau to the Department in 2012, that the obstacles to
feasibility may no longer be present. Additionally, there has been a
substantial shift in support by the local people for the site becoming
a unit of the System and an updated study would allow for a
reexamination of the findings of the previous study. In light of these
changes, the Department supports conducting a revised and more thorough
special resource study of World War II sites in the Republic of Palau
to include public scoping and an environmental assessment.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
answer questions that you or other members of the committee might have.
on s. 702
Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
S. 702, a bill designate the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley
National Heritage Corridor as ``The Last Green Valley National Heritage
Corridor.''
The Department supports enactment of S. 702. This legislation would
change the name of the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National
Heritage Corridor to ``The Last Green Valley National Heritage
Corridor.'' It has been proven over the years that the current name of
the heritage corridor is both difficult for people to remember and to
spell. This change would help improve the identification of the
corridor for the many partners involved with the heritage area and
would be consistent with how the area is promoted in and beyond the
region.
The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage
Corridor was designated a National Heritage Area by Congress in
November 1994 through P.L. 103-449. At that time, Congress recognized
that the valley represents one of the last traditional upland farming
and mill village communities in the Northeastern United States. In
1999, Congress passed P.L. 106-449 to enlarge the corridor to include
river valley towns in both Massachusetts and Connecticut. Now forest
and farmland make up 78 percent of its 695,000-acres, yet it lies only
an hour from three of New England's four largest urban areas. This
relatively undeveloped rural island, in the midst of the most urbanized
region in the nation, makes it a resource of local, regional, and
national importance.
The Department first became involved in the area in 1992 when the
National Park Service (NPS) undertook a feasibility study. The name
``The Last Green Valley'' was coined by a NPS historian and was later
used in a NPS brochure. People in the area have been associating the
river corridor with the term ``The Last Green Valley'' ever since.
The NPS has provided technical assistance and managed an agreement
with the management entity of the heritage area from the time it was
designated, and continues to do so today. That management entity
started using the name, The Last Green Valley, informally in 2001, and
the board decided to officially change the name of its nonprofit
through the Secretaries of State in both Massachusetts and Connecticut
in November 2008.
Changing the name of the corridor through this bill will be
consistent with how people in the region refer to the area and with the
name of the management entity with which the NPS has an official
agreement--The Last Green Valley, Inc.
Mr. Chairman that concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have.
on s. 781
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the National Park Service on S. 781,
a bill to modify the boundary of Yosemite National Park, and for other
purposes.
The Department supports S. 781, with an amendment to update the map
reference. S. 781 would adjust the boundary of Yosemite National Park
(park) by 1,575 acres. The modification would help the National Park
Service (NPS) protect the western boundary from potential development
and also help to preserve the scenic and biological resources of these
properties.
The proposed modification includes 793 acres of land owned by the
Pacific Forest Trust (PFT) adjacent to the western boundary of the park
and near the Yosemite West Subdivision. The 793 acres includes two
tracts: the 713-acre Ransome Ranch and the 80-acre Sparling tract. In
2004, the PFT purchased the parcels with the intent to add them back
into the park.
It also includes 782 acres of land, adjacent to the PFT properties,
owned by Yosemite West Associates, the original developers of the
Yosemite West Subdivision. The Yosemite West Associates have indicated
to the PFT that they would also like to participate in the boundary
adjustment, and eventually sell their property to the federal
government for inclusion in the park.
The PFT and the Yosemite West Associates parcels were originally
part of the park from 1890 until 1905, when the park's western boundary
was adjusted eastward. The parcels remained in federal ownership as
part of the Sierra National Forest until they were patented out to the
Yosemite Lumber Company in 1916.
The acquisition of these parcels would allow for continuous
protection of forests, meadows, and rocky ridges with the Sierra and
Stanislaus National Forests. The area is prime habitat for many rare
species that include the Pacific Fisher, Sierra Nevada Red Fox,
Goshawk, and Great Grey and Long-eared Owls as well as rare plant
species such as Congdon's Woolly Sunflower, Congdon's Lewisia, and
Yosemite Popcorn Flower. Acquisition of these properties would help to
preserve the headwaters of Indian and Zip creeks, which flow into the
main stem and the south fork of the Merced River, a National Wild and
Scenic River. It would also help conserve key winter and spring
migratory corridors used by large predatory species such as mountain
lion and bear.
This acquisition would open up the area to recreational uses that
are currently inaccessible to the public. Located midway between
Yosemite Valley and Wawona, the area would provide an alternative
destination for those seeking to avoid highly congested areas in the
park. The property could relieve some of the visitation in Yosemite
Valley, Wawona, and Tuolumne Meadows by providing an alternative, high-
quality, destination with recreational opportunities. The properties
are in close proximity to existing infrastructure (roads, utilities,
etc.), which would reduce the cost of development of future campgrounds
or other visitor service facilities.
Because an appraisal of these properties has not been completed, we
do not have an estimate of acquisition costs. The costs of immediate
improvements will be minimal as existing logging roads could be adapted
for horseback riding, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, and mountain
biking and reestablished trails would connect visitors to the Sierra
National Forest trail system and its recreational services. The
properties could also provide rustic or dispersed camping opportunities
by adding new areas for backpacking, horse camping, and group campsites
that are currently in high demand in the park. The tracts have numerous
outstanding viewpoints for sightseeing, photography and picnicking.
Lastly, the unique habitat would provide visitors with bird-watching
and other wildlife-viewing opportunities.
The PFT properties are adjacent to the Yosemite Environmental
Education Campus (EEC), which is currently under construction at the
intersection of Wawona Road and Henness Ridge Road. The project is a
partnership between the NPS and NatureBridge; NatureBridge is funding
the construction with outside donors through a capital fundraising
campaign. The EEC would benefit from the boundary expansion and land
acquisition as it would allow increased accessibility to recreational
resources that would greatly enhance the educational opportunities for
students.
The boundary modification is supported by the Mariposa County Board
of Supervisors, members of the California State Assembly, the
California State Senate and the Governor.
The Department recommends that the map reference in Sec. 3(1) be
updated to reference the map entitled ``Yosemite National Park Proposed
Addition,'' numbered 104/113,969A, and dated May 2013.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be glad to
answer any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may
have.
on s. 782
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
S. 782, a bill to amend Public Law 101-377 to revise the boundaries of
the Gettysburg National Military Park to include the Gettysburg Train
Station, and for other purposes.
The Department supports S. 782 with amendments described later in
this statement. This legislation would revise the boundary of
Gettysburg National Military Park to include two distinct sites: the
historic Gettysburg Train Station, and 45 acres of an environmentally
important tract of land at the base of Big Round Top.
Gettysburg National Military Park protects major portions of the
site of the largest battle waged during this nation's Civil War. Fought
in the first three days of July 1863, the Battle of Gettysburg resulted
in a victory for Union forces and successfully ended the second
invasion of the North by Confederate forces commanded by General Robert
E. Lee. Historians have referred to the battle as a major turning point
in the war--the ``High Water Mark of the Confederacy.'' It was also the
Civil War's bloodiest single battle, resulting in over 51,000 soldiers
killed, wounded, captured, or missing.
The Soldiers' National Cemetery within the park was dedicated on
November 19, 1863, when President Abraham Lincoln delivered his
immortal Gettysburg Address. The cemetery contains more than 7,000
interments including over 3,500 from the Civil War. The park currently
includes nearly 6,000 acres, with 26 miles of park roads and over 1,400
monuments, markers, and memorials.
Gettysburg's Lincoln Train Station was built in 1858 and is listed
on the National Register of Historic Places. The station served as a
hospital during the Battle of Gettysburg, and the wounded and the dead
were transported from Gettysburg through this station in the aftermath
of battle. President Abraham Lincoln arrived at this station when he
visited to give the Gettysburg Address.
Gettysburg National Military Park's 1999 General Management Plan
called for expanding cooperative relationships and partnerships with
the Borough of Gettysburg and other sites ``to ensure that resources
closely linked to the park, the battle, and the non-combatant civilian
involvement in the battle and its aftermath are appropriately protected
and used.'' In particular, the plan stated that the National Park
Service would initiate ``cooperation agreements with willing owners,
and seek the assistance of the Borough of Gettysburg and other
appropriate entities to preserve, operate and manage the Wills House
and Lincoln Train Station.''
The Borough of Gettysburg Interpretive Plan called for the Lincoln
Train Station to be used as a downtown information and orientation
center for visitors--where all park visitors would arrive after coming
downtown--to receive information and orientation to downtown historic
attractions, including the David Wills House. This is the house where
Lincoln stayed the night before delivering the Gettysburg Address. The
Interpretive Plan also called for rehabilitation of the Wills House,
which was added to the park's boundary through Public Law 106-290 in
October 2000, and is now a historic house museum in the borough and an
official site within Gettysburg National Military Park. The David Wills
House is currently operated jointly by the Gettysburg Foundation and
the National Park Service.
The Lincoln Train Station is next to the downtown terminus of
Freedom Transit, Gettysburg's shuttle system, which started operations
in July 2009 with a grant from the Federal Transit Administration in
the Department of Transportation.
In 2006, the Borough of Gettysburg completed rehabilitation of the
Lincoln Train Station with funds from a Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
grant. Due to a lack of funds, however, the borough has been unable to
operate a visitor information and orientation center there. Through
formal vote of the Borough Council, the Borough of Gettysburg has asked
the National Park Service to take over the ownership and operations of
the train station. While the borough originally intended to sell the
train station to the National Park Service, the Gettysburg Foundation
is currently in negotiations to acquire the property, which would in
turn be donated from the Foundation to the National Park Service.
The park has a preliminary commitment from the Gettysburg
Convention and Visitor Bureau (CVB) to provide all staffing
requirements for operations of an information and orientation center in
the train station, thereby avoiding staff costs for the park.
Anticipated National Park Service operating costs for the train station
are limited to utilities; the rest would be paid by the Gettysburg CVB.
In the event that the Gettysburg CVB is unable to provide staffing and
funding for operations, the National Park Service would seek another
park partner to cover these costs and requirements.
This legislation would also add 45 acres near Big Round Top along
Plum Run in Cumberland Township, Pennsylvania, to the boundary of the
park. The 45-acre tract of land is adjacent to the Gettysburg National
Military Park and is within the Battlefield Historic District. The land
is at the southern base of Big Round Top at the southern end of the
Gettysburg battlefield. There were cavalry skirmishers in this area
during the Battle of Gettysburg in July 1863, but the real significance
is environmental. The tract contains critical wetlands and wildlife
habitat related to Plum Run. Wayne and Susan Hill donated it to the
Gettysburg Foundation in April 2009. The Gettysburg Foundation plans to
donate fee title interest in the parcel to the National Park Service
once it is within the park boundary. It abuts land already owned by the
National Park Service.
We recommend that the committee amend S. 782 to reference an
updated map of the two properties proposed for inclusion in the park
boundary. In addition, we would recommend providing the usual language
requiring that the map referenced in the bill be on file and available
for inspection in the appropriate offices of the National Park Service.
We would be happy to provide the committee with recommended language
for these amendments.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or members of the committee may have.
on s. 869
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the views of the
Department of the Interior on S. 869, a bill to establish the Alabama
Black Belt National Heritage Area, and for other purposes.
The Department recommends deferring action on S. 869 until the
National Park Service (NPS) completes a final review of the feasibility
study for the proposed Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area. The
NPS has reviewed the current feasibility study, submitted by the Center
for the Study of the Black Belt at the University of West Alabama, and
determined that there are nationally significant resources and stories
associated with the Alabama Black Belt. However, the study needs to be
revised before the NPS can determine that it meets the interim criteria
for designation as a national heritage area. We recommend that the
Center for the Study of the Black Belt continue to work with the NPS
National Heritage Area Program to refine the statement of national
importance, contributing resources, supporting themes, and boundary for
the proposed heritage area, as well as other key sections of the study
associated with these assessment topics.
In addition, the Department recommends that Congress enact program
legislation that establishes criteria to evaluate potential qualified
national heritage areas and a process for the designation, funding, and
administration of these areas before designating any additional new
national heritage areas.
Geographically, Alabama's Black Belt is part of a larger crescent-
shaped area known as the Southern Black Belt, which extends from
Virginia to Texas. The term refers to the fertile black soil of the
region. This soil drew pioneers to settle the lower-central portion of
Alabama in the 1820s and 1830s where they established and operated a
network of cotton plantations using the labor of enslaved African
Americans. During the Antebellum era, the Alabama Black Belt became one
of the wealthiest and most politically powerful regions in the United
States.
Throughout the Twentieth Century, this area gained fame as the site
where the Tuskegee Airmen trained during World War II, and as a center
of the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Montgomery County
was the site of the 1955-56 bus boycott that challenged segregation of
public transportation. Highway 80 in Dallas, Lowndes, and Montgomery
counties shaped the route taken by participants of the historic march
for equal rights from Selma to Montgomery in 1965. The Lowndes County
Freedom Organization, later the Black Panther Party, was an outgrowth
of that march.
S. 869 would establish the Alabama Black Belt National Heritage
Area within nineteen counties in the State of Alabama. The Center for
the Study of Black Belt would be designated as the Heritage Area's
local coordinating entity, and the bill defines the duties of the
Center for the Study of Black Belt, including the preparation and
implementation of a management plan. S. 869 also provides a process for
review and approval of the management plan by the Secretary of the
Interior.
If the committee decides to move forward with S. 869, we would like
to work with the committee to provide the appropriate map reference for
the national heritage area and to ensure that the language of the bill
is consistent with previously enacted national heritage area
designations.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or any members of the subcommittee
may have.
on s. 925
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today to present the Department of the Interior's views on S. 925, a
bill to improve the Lower East Side Tenement National Historic Site,
and for other purposes.
The Department supports enactment of S. 925, which would add a
nearby property to the Lower East Side Tenement National Historic Site.
The Lower East Side Tenement at 97 Orchard Street in New York City
was designated a national historic site and made an ``affiliated site''
of the National Park System on November 12, 1998 (Public Law 105-378).
The Lower East Side Tenement is owned and operated by the Lower East
Side Tenement Museum, a nonprofit organization. Similar to many other
affiliated areas of the National Park Service, the Lower East Side
Tenement National Historic Site receives financial and technical
assistance from the National Park Service, as authorized by law.
After being shuttered for over 50 years, the property at 97 Orchard
Street was carefully restored by the museum to depict the lives of
immigrants who lived in the five-story tenement between 1869 and 1935.
The Lower East Side Tenement is the continuation of the story of the
experience of immigrants after they arrived in the United States. It
explains what happened once after they were processed at Ellis Island
and, before that, at Castle Clinton. Many immigrants lived in dwellings
in New York's Lower East Side similar to 97 Orchard Street. The
museum's efforts to expand the stories it tells that represent the
contemporary immigrant experience complement the interpretive work the
National Park Service is doing at the Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island,
and Castle Clinton.
S. 925 would revise the national historic site's 1998 designation
to include 103 Orchard Street, which the museum purchased in 2007 to
serve as a visitor center and provide exhibition and classroom space.
The need for the kinds of administrative functions and visitor services
that would be addressed by adding a property to the national historic
site was recognized in the General Management Plan that the National
Park Service prepared for the site in 2006. The bill would not provide
any funding authority beyond that which current law already provides.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
respond to any questions you or members of the committee may have.
on s. 916
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 916
and H.R. 1033, to authorize the acquisition and protection of
nationally significant battlefields and associated sites of the
Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 under the American Battlefield
Protection Program.
The Department supports S. 916 and H.R. 1033 with an amendment
described later in this statement. This legislation would expand the
American Battlefield Protection Program to include both the War of 1812
and Revolutionary War battlefields in addition to Civil War
battlefields, which are covered under the current program. It would
authorize a total of $10 million in grants for the American Battlefield
Protection Program for both Civil War battlefield sites and
Revolutionary War and War of 1812 battlefield sites, for each of fiscal
years 2014 through 2018.
In March 2008, the National Park Service transmitted the Report to
Congress on the Historic Preservation of Revolutionary War and the War
of 1812 Sites in the United States, which identified and determined the
relative significance of sites related to the Revolutionary War and the
War of 1812. The study assessed the short and long-term threats to the
sites. Following the success of the 1993 Civil War Sites Advisory
Commission Report on the Nation's Civil War Battlefields, this study
similarly provides alternatives for the preservation and interpretation
of the sites by Federal, State, and local governments or other public
or private entities.
The direction from Congress for the study was the same as for a
Civil War sites study of the early 1990s. As authorized by Congress for
this study, the National Park Service looked at sites and structures
that are thematically tied with the nationally significant events that
occurred during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. The result
was a more thorough survey that represents twice the field effort
undertaken for the Civil War study.
Building upon this recent study, S. 916 and H.R. 1033 would create
a matching grant program for Revolutionary War and the War of 1812
sites that closely mirrors a very successful matching grant program for
Civil War sites. The Civil War acquisition grant program was first
authorized by Congress in the Civil War Battlefield Protection Act of
2002 (Public Law 107-359), and was reauthorized by the Omnibus Public
Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11). That grant fund has
been tremendously successful in allowing local preservation efforts to
permanently preserve Civil War battlefield land with a minimum of
Federal assistance.
With the release of the Report to Congress on the Historic
Preservation of Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 Sites in the
United States, communities interested in preserving their Revolutionary
War and the War of 1812 sites can take the first steps similar to those
taken by the Civil War advocates 20 years ago. If established, this new
grant program can complement the existing grant program for Civil War
battlefields and, in doing so, become a benefit to the American people
by providing for the preservation and protection of a greater number of
sites from the Revolutionary War and War of 1812.
The NPS is currently finalizing its update to the 1993 Civil War
Sites report, which reviews the conditions of 383 Civil War
battlefields, and which we plan to transmit to Congress in 2013. As
currently drafted, S. 916 and H.R. 1033 require another update of the
condition of these same Civil War battlefields in five years, in
addition to an update of the 677 sites of the Revolutionary War and the
War of 1812 identified in the Report to Congress on the Historic
Preservation of Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 Sites in the
United States. The NPS feels that updating information for all of these
sites, most of which are not within the National Park System itself,
will not be feasible in five years. Therefore, the NPS suggests one
change in the reporting language of the bill so that the reporting
requirement for the Civil War update is not later than 10 years after
the date of enactment.
The Department recommends an amendment to S. 916 and H.R. 1033 to
include language for combined funding of $20 million for both the Civil
War and the Revolutionary War and War of 1812 acquisition grant
programs in each of fiscal years 2014 through 2018. Under current law,
$10 million is authorized for the Civil War battlefields alone. With
the addition of the Revolutionary War and War of 1812 battlefields to
the program, we believe that a $20 million annual authorization would
be appropriate. We would be happy to provide language for this
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
respond to any questions from you and members of the committee.
on s. 995
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's testimony regarding S. 995, a bill to
authorize the National Desert Storm Memorial Association to establish
the National Desert Storm and Desert Shield Memorial as a commemorative
work in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
The Department supports S. 995 with an amendment.
S. 995 would authorize the National Desert Storm Memorial
Association to establish the National Desert Storm and Desert Shield
Memorial as a commemorative work, on Federal land in the District of
Columbia. This memorial would commemorate and honor the members of the
Armed Forces who served on active duty in support of Operation Desert
Storm or Operation Desert Shield. This bill also prohibits the use of
federal funds to establish this memorial, and directs the Association
to be solely responsible for accepting contributions for, and paying
the expenses of, the establishment of the memorial.
On August 2, 1990, Iraqi forces invaded and occupied Kuwait.
Fearing an Iraqi invasion of Saudi Arabia and a loss of control of
Saudi oil fields, the United States launched Operation Desert Shield on
August 7, 1990. This defensive buildup was intended to deter further
Iraqi aggression and to persuade Iraqi forces to leave Kuwait. After
diplomatic efforts failed, U.S. and other coalition forces began
military actions against Iraq on January 17, 1991, in what is known as
Operation Desert Storm. The aerial bombardment and the ensuing ground
invasion of Iraq resulted in the destruction of Iraqi forces and their
retreat from Kuwait, and hostilities concluded on February 28, 1991. A
total of 294 Americans lost their lives over the course of the
conflict, including 114 from enemy action. There is currently no
national memorial to Operations Desert Shield or Desert Storm.
The National Desert Storm Memorial Association is a 501(c)(3)
corporation organized under the laws of the State of Arkansas whose
mission is to establish a national memorial to these conflicts.
The Department notes that Section 3(b) of this bill requires the
establishment of the memorial to comply with Chapter 89 of Title 40,
United States Code, commonly known as the ``Commemorative Works Act''.
The Commemorative Works Act establishes a process for the establishment
of new memorials on certain Federal lands within the District of
Columbia.
On November 7, 2012, the National Capital Memorial Advisory
Commission (NCMAC) reviewed the previous version of this bill, H.R.
5914, which was introduced in the 112th Congress. On December 20, 2012,
after confirming with the Department of Defense that Operations Desert
Shield and Desert Storm were major military operations, the Commission
informed the House Natural Resources Committee of its unanimous support
for the proposal.
Although S. 995 provides for the deposit of excess funds, the
Department recommends that Section 3(d) of the bill be amended to
clarify the disposition of excess funds should the authority to
establish the memorial lapse. We would be glad to work with the
Subcommittee to amend the existing language.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
answer questions that you or other members of the committee might have.
on s. 1044
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
1044, a bill which directs the Secretary of the Interior to install in
the area of the World War II Memorial in the District of Columbia a
suitable plaque or an inscription with the words that President
Franklin Delano Roosevelt prayed with the United States on D-Day, June
6, 1944.
The Department appreciates the importance of faith in the lives of
Americans across this country, the leadership of President Roosevelt,
and the courage and sacrifices of Americans during World War II and
today. The World War II Memorial recognizes a period of unprecedented
national unity during the defining moment of the twentieth century, and
is devoted to the service, commitment, and shared sacrifice of
Americans.
The Department appreciates the efforts by the sponsor, Senator Rob
Portman, to work with the National Park Service (NPS) on this
legislation. S. 1044 proposes adding a commemorative work in the area
of the existing World War II Memorial. We support the continued
application of the Commemorative Works Act (CWA). Section 2 of this
bill states that the Secretary of the Interior shall design, procure,
prepare, and install the plaque or inscription, thus allowing the NPS
to determine the placement and design of the plaque. However, section 3
of the bill requires a different method of designing and locating the
plaque or inscription than is provided in the CWA. The CWA process
incorporates important design reviews and public consultation. We
support retaining the CWA as the vehicle for siting and designing this
plaque or inscription.
The World War II Memorial was authorized on May 23, 1993, by Public
Law 103-32. In 1994, Congress approved its placement in the area
containing the National Mall in Public Law 103-422. Its location at the
site of the Rainbow Pool was approved in 1995 by the NPS on behalf of
the Secretary of the Interior, the Commission of Fine Arts (CFA), and
the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC). In July 1997, the CFA
and the NCPC reaffirmed prior approvals of the Rainbow Pool site in
recognition of the significance of World War II as the single-most
defining event of the 20th Century for Americans and the world. Even
so, there were challenges to the establishment of this memorial. The
design we see today was painstakingly arrived upon after years of
public deliberations and spirited public debate.
The National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission (NCMAC) reviewed
a proposal similar to the one before the committee today at its meeting
on September 14, 2011, and determined that no additional elements
should be inserted into this carefully designed Memorial. The American
Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC), charged by the Congress in Public
Law 103-32 to design and build the World War II Memorial, is
represented on the NCMAC, and thus concurred with that determination.
If directed by Congress pursuant to this legislation, the NPS will
work to find an appropriate location for the plaque in accordance with
the CWA process, as directed in section 3 of this legislation.
That concludes our prepared testimony on S. 1044, and we would be
happy to answer any questions you may have.
on s. 1071
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department on S. 1071, a bill
to authorize the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to make
improvements to support facilities for National Historic Sites operated
by the National Park Service (NPS), and for other purposes.
The Department could only support this legislation if amended to
apply specifically to Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site. The
bill as introduced would apply to any national historic site that meets
certain criteria. We are only aware of one site, Sand Creek Massacre
National Historic Site, to which this bill could apply. We believe it
is better for Congress to provide specific authority to individual
parks on a case-by-case basis, rather than to appear to provide broad
authority that only applies to one unit of the National Park System and
that could have unintended consequences.
This legislation would authorize the Secretary to make improvements
to a non-Federal support facility, including a visitor center, at a
national historic site operated by the NPS if the project is: (1)
conducted using amounts included in the budget of the NPS in effect on
the date on which the project is authorized; (2) subject to a 50
percent non-federal cost-sharing requirement; and (3) conducted in an
area in which the NPS was authorized by law in effect before the date
of enactment of this Act to establish a support facility.
This bill would only allow the NPS to use existing funds to make
improvements to support facilities at national historic sites that meet
these criteria at the time that the bill is enacted. The bill would not
authorize any new appropriations, and Federal spending would not
increase as a result of the enactment of this legislation.
S. 1071 would also authorize the Secretary to operate and use all
or part of such a support facility to carry out duties associated with
operating and supporting the national historic site, but only in
accordance with an agreement between the Secretary and the unit of
local government in which the support facility is located.
This legislation would allow national historic sites that meet the
bill's criteria to partner with State and local governments to leverage
non-Federal funding to improve facilities that are mutually beneficial
to the National Park Service and to the local community. For example,
Kiowa County, Colorado, purchased a historic building in 2007. They
plan to use a portion of this building as a senior citizens center. The
remainder of the building would be an ideal location for a visitor
center and administrative facility for the nearby Sand Creek Massacre
National Historic Site. The local community has already raised matching
funds for renovations, and would like to partner with the NPS to make
improvements to the building so that it can be used as both an NPS
facility and a senior citizens center for the local community.
The Department recognizes the need to use Federal funds responsibly
and we believe that national parks should, on a case-by-case basis, be
authorized and allowed to partner with State and local governments to
make capital investments in a non-Federally owned building that
directly benefits the park, the local community, and the American
people. In this case, allowing the NPS to partner with Kiowa County to
make improvements to this support facility would provide much needed
facilities for the park. In other cases, however, NPS could be expected
to use its limited capital improvement resources for improvements that
do not directly benefit the park.
The legislation that established Sand Creek Massacre National
Historic Site (Pub. L. 106-465) authorizes a support facility to be
located outside the park boundary, in Kiowa County, Colorado. We urge
the committee to amend that provision to allow Federal funds to be used
to make improvements to a facility for that purpose. We would be happy
to work with the committee to develop the appropriate amendments.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be happy to
answer any questions you or any other members of the subcommittee may
have.
on s. 1138
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
S. 1138, a bill to reauthorize the Hudson River Valley National
Heritage Area.
The Department recognizes the important work of the Hudson River
Valley National Heritage Area to preserve heritage resources in the
Hudson River Valley between Yonkers and Troy, New York. We recommend
that S. 1138 be amended to authorize an extension for heritage area
program funding until we have completed an evaluation and report on the
accomplishments of the area and the future role of the National Park
Service; and until national heritage area program legislation is
enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding for designated
national heritage areas. Consistent with congressional directives in
the FY 2009 and FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Acts, the
Administration proposed, in the FY 2014 budget, focusing most national
heritage area grants on recently authorized areas. The Department would
like to work with Congress to determine the future federal role when
national heritage areas reach the end of their authorized eligibility
for heritage program funding. We recommend that Congress enact national
heritage legislation during this Congress.
There are currently 49 designated national heritage areas, yet
there is no authority in law that guides the designation and
administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a
much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas,
offering guidelines for successful planning and management, clarifying
the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing
timeframes and funding for designated areas.
S. 1138, as introduced, would extend the authorization of federal
funding for the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area for an
additional 9 years. The Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area was
established in 1996 by Public Law 104-333. The national heritage area
includes 250 communities in ten counties bordering the Hudson River for
154 miles of tidal estuary along with three million acres of the Hudson
Highlands, the Catskill Mountains, rolling farmland and compact
villages, as well as small cities and hamlets. The region extends from
the confluence of the Mohawk and Hudson Rivers, south to the northern
border of New York City.
The mission of this national heritage area is to recognize,
preserve, and promote the natural and cultural resources of the Hudson
River Valley. This is accomplished through a voluntary partnership with
communities and citizens, and local, state, and federal agencies
emphasizing public access, economic development, regional planning, and
interpretive programs.
Public Law 104-333 designated the Hudson River Valley Greenway
Communities Council and the Greenway Heritage Conservancy, Inc., as the
local coordinating entities for the national heritage area. The
heritage area local coordinating entities facilitate public private
partnerships for the preservation of heritage resources and work
closely with National Park Service staff at Roosevelt-Vanderbilt
National Historic Sites. The national heritage area's work focuses on
regional initiatives for heritage programming, interpretation, and
education, preservation and resource stewardship, heritage development
and infrastructure, and planning and design.
During its 16 years of existence, the Hudson River Valley National
Heritage Area has a significant record of achievement and, with
government funding assistance since its establishment, has shown
significant success in working with partners and the federal government
to preserve, interpret, and promote the significant resources in their
local areas. Every federal dollar has been matched with non-federal
funds. In total, Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area has
received nearly $9 million in federal funding, and every federal dollar
has been matched at least once with non-federal funds.
The Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area has taken the lead
on numerous initiatives to engage the public. One such initiative,
Heritage Weekend, gives visitors the opportunity to discover--or
rediscover-many historic, architectural, and natural treasures in the
state. The national heritage area staff also works tirelessly to
connect sites and schools to create unique place-based curriculum; this
curriculum can be replicated and used by others through a website that
provides academic resources regarding the heritage and culture of the
Hudson River Valley. Moreover, the staff facilitates the creation of
region-wide ``shows'' focusing on nature and culture sub-themes. On a
more fundamental level, the staff prints map and guides, and advances a
graphic identity at partner sites. The staff also continues to help
communities and trail groups establish a system of trails that link
cultural and historic sites, parks, open spaces, and community centers.
This trail system provides public access to the Hudson River as well.
We recommend a technical amendment to the long title of the bill to
make it clear that the bill would extend the authorization for federal
funding for the national heritage area instead of reauthorizing the
national heritage area. While the Hudson River Valley National Heritage
Area faces a sunset for its Federal funding, its national heritage area
designation will not sunset.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have.
on s. 1151
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
S. 1151, a bill to reauthorize the America's Agricultural Heritage
Partnership in the State of Iowa.
The Department recognizes the important work of the America's
Agricultural Heritage Partnership, better known as the Silos and
Smokestacks National Heritage Area, in northeast Iowa. We recommend
that S. 1151 be amended to authorize an extension for heritage area
program funding until Congress has had time to consider the recently
completed evaluation and report on the accomplishments of the heritage
area and the future role of the National Park Service that was recently
transmitted to Congress this past month; and until heritage area
program legislation is enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding
for designated national heritage areas. Consistent with congressional
directives in the 2009 and 2010 Interior Appropriations Acts, the
Administration proposed, in the FY 2014 budget, focusing most national
heritage area grants on recently authorized areas. The Department would
like to work with Congress to determine the future federal role when
heritage areas reach the end of their authorized eligibility for
heritage program funding. We recommend that Congress enact national
heritage area legislation during this Congress.
There are currently 49 designated national heritage areas, yet
there is no authority in law that guides the designation and
administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a
much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas,
offering guidelines for successful planning and management, clarifying
the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing
timeframes and funding for designated areas.
The Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area was established in
1996 by Public Law 103-333 to interpret farm life, agribusiness and
rural communities, past and present. It preserves and tells the story
of American agriculture and its global significance through
partnerships and activities that celebrate the land, people, and
communities of the area. The heart of America's agricultural revolution
still exists in the region, and the national heritage area is telling
the breadth and scope of this story in a compelling, meaningful way.
The heritage of American agriculture and its influence on the
global agricultural revolution was considered to be nationally
distinctive and met the criteria for national heritage area
designation. American agriculture is one of the primary sources of this
country's wealth and world leadership and should be preserved and
interpreted. The Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area preserves
and interprets a rich cultural landscape that includes family farms,
historic industrial architecture, and rural communities across a 37-
county region in northeast Iowa covering over 20,000 square miles. This
broad agrarian landscape is rare in today's pattern of urban and
suburban expanding into rural areas.
The national heritage area is managed by the America's Agricultural
Heritage Partnership (Partnership), this local coordinating entity
facilitates public private partnerships for the preservation and
interpretation of heritage resources. The Partnership's work focuses on
regional initiatives for heritage programming, interpretation and
education, preservation and resource stewardship, heritage development
and infrastructure, and planning and design.
During its 16 years of existence, the Silos and Smokestacks
National Heritage Area has a significant record of achievement. It has
worked closely with the regional business community, county and state
governments, and multiple non-governmental organizations to build a
network of partner sites dedicated to preserving and interpreting the
past, present, and future of America's agricultural story. Working
together, the network has developed a successful public information and
way-finding program for promoting tourism that welcomes visitors along
the major highway corridors surrounding the region and identifies the
more than 100 partner sites in the heritage area. The new signs serve
as a connecting thread for this network of sites, while letting
visitors know they can discover a piece of America's agricultural story
being preserved at the site. This way-finding program has not only
helped visitors find tourism destinations within the Silos and
Smokestacks National Heritage Area, but has also helped the heritage
area develop a regional identity.
The bedrock of the National Heritage Area concept has always been
building partnerships for achieving goals. The Silos and Smokestacks
National Heritage Area, with minimal government funding assistance
since its establishment, has shown significant success in working with
partners and the federal government to preserve, interpret, and promote
the significant resources of northeast Iowa. Since its establishment,
the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area has received almost
$9.5 million in federal funding, and every federal dollar has been
matched at least once with non-federal funds.
S. 1151, as is written now, would extend the authorization for
federal funding for the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area
for an additional 10 years. The Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage
Area is one of the nine heritage areas evaluated by the National Park
Service pursuant to Public Law 110-229. The completed evaluation for
the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area was recently
transmitted to Congress this past month, and included recommendations
on the future role of the National Park Service in the area.
We recommend a technical amendment to the long title of the bill to
make it clear that the bill would extend the authorization for federal
funding for the heritage area instead of reauthorizing the heritage
area. While the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area faces a
sunset for its federal funding, its national heritage area designation
will not sunset.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have.
on s. 1157
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
S. 1157, a bill to reauthorize the Rivers of Steel National Heritage
Area, the Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area, the Delaware and
Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, and the Schuylkill River Valley
National Heritage Area.
The Department recognizes the important work of the four national
heritage areas to preserve historic, cultural, natural, and
recreational resources in Pennsylvania. We recommend that S. 1157 be
amended to authorize an extension for heritage area program funding
until we have completed an evaluation and report on the accomplishments
of the national heritage areas and the future role of the National Park
Service; and until program legislation is enacted that standardizes
timeframes and funding for designated national heritage areas.
Consistent with congressional directives in the 2009 and 2010 Interior
Appropriations Acts, the Administration proposed, in the FY 2014
budget, focusing most national heritage area grants on recently
authorized areas. The Department would like to work with Congress to
determine the future federal role when national heritage areas reach
the end of their authorized eligibility for national heritage program
funding. We recommend that Congress enact national heritage area
legislation during this Congress.
There are currently 49 designated national heritage areas, yet
there is no authority in law that guides the designation and
administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a
much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas,
offering guidelines for successful planning and management, clarifying
the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing
timeframes and funding for designated areas.
All four areas have lengthy records of leadership and
accomplishment. All four are recognized for their important histories
and rich and distinctive historic and natural resources. At each,
numerous partner organizations and local, state, and federal agencies
work together through the singular opportunity for collaboration that
the national heritage area model provides. Each area developed a
thoughtful plan with the community and has made enormous strides in
saving historic resources, developing trails, preserving open space,
building community pride, enhancing education, and promoting economic
development that responds to these essential elements of their quality
of life.
Created by Public Law 104-333 in 1996, the Rivers of Steel National
Heritage Area (Rivers of Steel) is made up of eight counties in
southwestern Pennsylvania known for their significant contributions to
the steel industry in America. The mission of Rivers of Steel is to
preserve and interpret the history of the region and share the dynamic
story of the evolution of southwestern Pennsylvania from a small
colonial settlement to the flourishing of the steel industry in the
area.
The Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area (Lackawanna) was
established by Public Law 106-278 in 2000. The Lackawanna includes four
counties in northeastern Pennsylvania with historical ties to the
anthracite coal industry. These counties preserve nationally
distinctive resources related to Pennsylvania and America's industrial
history, including the history of major labor unions and the struggle
to improve working conditions of mine workers. The architecture, ethnic
traditions, and infrastructure of the anthracite region tell the story
of the Lackawanna Valley and its role in the industrial development of
the United States. The mission of the Lackawanna is to conserve,
interpret, and develop the historical, cultural, natural, recreational,
and economic development resources associated with the area's
significant history.
The Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor (Delaware and
Lehigh) was established by Public Law 100-692 in 1988, the third
National Heritage Area created by Congress. The 150-mile spine of the
Delaware and Lehigh is the historic Delaware Canal and Lehigh
Navigation Canal through five counties in eastern Pennsylvania. The
Delaware and Lehigh commemorates the historic routes of rivers, canals,
and railroads-and the people and communities involved-that brought
anthracite coal from the mines to market in the early nineteenth
century, fostering the development of vibrant towns and culture. The
purpose of the Delaware and Lehigh is to provide an integrated
management structure that facilitates preservation, recreation,
education, and economic development.
The Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area (Schuylkill
River Valley) was established by Public Law 106-278 in 2000. The
Schuylkill River Valley conserves, interprets, and develops the
historical, cultural, natural, recreational, and economic resources
related to the heritage of the area, encompassing five counties in
southeastern Pennsylvania, including Philadelphia. The area is rich in
Revolutionary War history, and the anthracite, charcoal, iron, and
textile industries of the region grew here.
The bedrock of the national heritage area concept has always been
building partnerships for achieving goals. All four of these non-profit
national heritage areas, with government funding assistance since their
establishment, have shown significant success in working with partners
and the federal government to preserve, interpret, and promote the
significant resources in their local areas. In total, Lackawanna has
received approximately $6.7 million in Federal funding, Rivers of Steel
has received about $13.4 million in Federal funding, Delaware and
Lehigh has received almost $12.7 million, and Schuylkill River Valley
has received nearly $5.9 million in Federal funding, and every federal
dollar has been matched at least once with non-federal funds.
S. 1157, as drafted, would extend the authorization for federal
funding for these four heritage areas for an additional ten years.
Currently, the Evaluation and Report required by Public Law 110-229 is
being completed for Rivers of Steel and we anticipate the evaluation
will be transmitted to Congress this year. The NPS and the Delaware and
Lehigh completed an evaluation for the Delaware and Lehigh; however,
this evaluation did not include recommendations on what the future role
of the National Park Service should be in the area. The National Park
Service will take another look at the evaluation and include
recommendations on the future role of the National Park Service prior
to transmitting it to Congress in order to be consistent with the other
reports.
We recommend a technical amendment to the long title of the bill to
make it clear that the bill would extend the authorization for federal
funding for the four heritage areas instead of reauthorizing the
heritage areas. While the four heritage areas face a sunset date for
their federal funding, their national heritage area designation will
not sunset.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have.
on s. 1186
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
S. 1186, a bill to reauthorize the Essex National Heritage Area.
The Department recognizes the important work of the Essex National
Heritage Area to preserve heritage resources in Essex County,
Massachusetts. We recommend that S. 1186 be amended to authorize an
extension for heritage area program funding until Congress has had time
to consider the completed evaluation and report on the accomplishments
of the area and the future role of the National Park Service that was
recently transmitted to Congress during this past month; and until
heritage area program legislation is enacted that standardizes
timeframes and funding for designated national heritage areas.
Consistent with congressional directives in the 2009 and 2010 Interior
Appropriations Acts, the Administration proposed, in the FY 2014
budget, focusing most national heritage area grants on recently
authorized areas. The Department would like to work with Congress to
determine the future federal role when heritage areas reach the end of
their authorized eligibility for heritage program funding. We recommend
that Congress enact national heritage legislation during this Congress.
There are currently 49 designated national heritage areas, yet
there is no authority in law that guides the designation and
administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a
much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas,
offering guidelines for successful planning and management, clarifying
the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing
timeframes and funding for designated areas.
Essex National Heritage Area was established in 1996 by Public Law
103-333. This national heritage area was established to recognize,
preserve, promote, and interpret the historic, cultural, and natural
resources of the North Shore and lower Merrimack River valley in Essex
County, Massachusetts. The early settlement history, maritime history,
and the imprint of the early industrial era on the landscape, in
particular, were considered to be nationally distinctive and met the
criteria for national heritage area designation. Essex National
Heritage Area preserves and interprets a rich cultural landscape that
includes historic homes, small family farms, and historic industrial
architecture. Additionally, it contains an array of scenic and natural
resources such as rocky coasts and harbors, marshlands, and rivers.
Essex National Heritage Area spans 500 square miles in northeastern
Massachusetts, and includes 34 cities and towns.
The Essex National Heritage Area is managed by the Essex National
Heritage Commission (Commission), which facilitates public private
partnerships for the preservation of heritage resources and works
closely with National Park Service staff at Salem Maritime National
Historic Site and Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site, both of
which are within the boundary of the national heritage area. The
Commission's work focuses on regional initiatives for heritage
programming, interpretation, and education, preservation and resource
stewardship, heritage development and infrastructure, and planning and
design.
During its 16 years of existence, Essex National Heritage Area has
a significant record of achievement. The national heritage area has
worked closely with National Park Service staff at Salem Maritime and
Saugus Iron Works on a variety of educational and interpretive programs
to educate visitors and students about local heritage resources. One
successful example is the Trails & Sails weekend, a county-wide event
that involves more than 50 host organizations at over 140 locations in
Essex County in providing interpretive tours, hikes, walks, sail trips,
and special events at no charge to participants. The Essex Local
History In a National Context program has also successfully brought the
main themes of the Essex National Heritage Area into area classrooms.
The national heritage area has played a significant role in local
communities in helping to inventory and research historic resources.
Working with the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and
Recreation, the Essex National Heritage Area created a catalog of
heritage landscapes that communities had identified as being valuable
and worthy of protection. In all, communities identified 1,320
resources in 24 of the 34 municipalities included within the boundary
of the national heritage area. Additionally, the inventory articulated
strategies for preserving these historic resources and landscapes.
Essex National Heritage Area has also implemented a successful
public information and wayfinding campaign for promoting tourism. More
than 80 directional highway signs have been installed within the
national heritage area that point visitors toward regional visitor
centers and historic and natural visitor destinations. These signs not
only have helped visitors find tourism destinations within Essex
National Heritage Area, they have also helped create a regional
identity for the national heritage area. Essex National Heritage Area
also plays a significant role in leveraging federal dollars. In total,
Essex National Heritage Area has received approximately $13.2 million
in federal funding, and every federal dollar has been matched at least
once with non-federal dollars.
S. 1186, as written, would extend the authorization of federal
funding for Essex National Heritage Area for an additional 15 years and
increase the authorization of appropriations by $10 million. The Essex
National Heritage Area is one of the nine national heritage areas
identified for evaluation by the National Park Service pursuant to
Public Law 110-229. The completed Essex National Heritage Area
evaluation was recently transmitted to Congress this past month. The
evaluation report includes recommendations on the future role of the
National Park Service in the area.
We recommend a technical amendment to the long title of the bill to
make it clear that the bill would extend the authorization for Federal
funding for the heritage area instead of reauthorizing the heritage
area. While the Essex National Heritage Area faces a sunset for its
federal funding, its national heritage area designation does not
sunset.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have.
on s. 1252
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee today to present the views of the Department of the Interior
on S. 1252, a bill to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate
certain segments of the Missisquoi River and the Trout River in the
State of Vermont, as components of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
The Department has preliminarily determined through the National
Park Service's draft study of the Upper Missisquoi and Trout rivers
that the segments proposed for designation under this bill are eligible
for inclusion into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. However,
the study report is only in the preliminary internal review stage. We
recommend that the committee defer action on S. 1252 until the study is
completed, which is consistent with the Department's general policy on
legislation designating additions to the Wild and Scenic Rivers System
when a study of the subject is pending.
S. 1252 would designate two segments of the Upper Missisquoi River
totaling 35.1 miles and the entire mainstem of its tributary, the Trout
River, totaling 11 miles, as part of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System,
to be administered by the Secretary of the Interior as recreational
rivers. The segments would be managed in accordance with the Upper
Missisquoi and Trout Rivers Management Plan (March 2013) prepared as a
part of the study, with the Secretary coordinating administration and
management with a locally based management committee, as specified in
the plan. The bill would authorize the Secretary to enter into
cooperative agreements with the State of Vermont, the adjoining
communities, and appropriate local planning and environmental
organizations. The legislation follows the model of other recent New
England Wild and Scenic River designations based on a ``partnership''
model emphasizing locally based management solutions and a limited
federal role.
S. 1252 would exclude from designation the property and project
boundaries associated with the Troy and North Troy hydroelectric
projects, both of which are small, run-of-river projects that have
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) exemptions-permanent
authority to operate under existing terms. A third hydroelectric
facility, the Enosburg Falls project, lies immediately downstream of
the lower endpoint of the Missisquoi mainstem proposed designation. The
Department does not view these projects as being in conflict with the
proposed designation.
S. 1252 also contains language that would allow the Secretary to
designate an additional 3.8 mile segment at the headwaters of the
Missisquoi within the Town of Lowell, subject to a finding of
sufficient local support. This provision would allow the Town of
Lowell, which did not support designation at its March 2013 Town
Meeting, to opt into the designation at some future point without the
need for additional congressional action.
The study of the Upper Missisquopi and Trout was authorized by P.L.
111-11, the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009. The National
Park Service has conducted the study in close cooperation with the
adjoining communities, the State of Vermont, the Missisquoi River Basin
Association, and other interested local parties. Technical assistance
provided as a part of the study made possible the development of the
Upper Missisquoi and Trout Rivers Management Plan (March 2013). This
plan is based primarily around local partner actions designed to guide
the management of the Upper Missisquoi and Trout rivers with or without
a National Wild and Scenic River designation. Although the Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act requires the development of a comprehensive river
management plan within three years of the date of designation, it has
become the practice of the National Park Service to prepare this plan
as part of a study of potential wild and scenic rivers when much of the
river runs through private lands. This allows the National Park Service
to consult widely with local landowners, federal and state land
management agencies, local governments, river authorities, and other
groups that have interests related to the river prior to any
recommendation for designation. Early preparation of the plan also
assures input from these entities as well as users of the river on the
management strategies that would be needed to protect the river's
resources.
While the study has not been finalized, the data collected and
presented in the preparation of the Management Plan support the
conclusion that the segments proposed for designation by S. 1252
exhibit free-flowing character and the presence of outstandingly
remarkable natural, cultural and recreation resource values consistent
with Wild and Scenic River eligibility. The study process, which
culminated in town meeting votes supporting both the Management Plan
and Wild and Scenic River designation, has also demonstrated strong
local, state and partner support crucial to successful long-term
management and protection of partnership-based Wild and Scenic Rivers.
Resource values of note include the Northern Forest Canoe Trail which
utilizes a portion of the Upper Missisquoi, and is developing
substantial momentum as a regional and national canoe route. Big Falls
State Park on the Missisquoi is home to Vermont's largest undammed
falls and is one of numerous spectacular falls and gorges exhibited by
the river and its tributaries. The Trout River in Montgomery is also
the location of a collection of National Register-listed covered
bridges considered one of the most significant assemblages in the State
of Vermont.
If S. 1252 is enacted, the Upper Missisquopi and Trout would be
administered as a partnership wild and scenic river, similar to several
other designations in the Northeast, including the upper Farmington
River and the Eightmile River in Connecticut, and the Lamprey River in
New Hampshire. This approach emphasizes local and state management
solutions, and has proven effective as a means of protecting
outstandingly remarkable natural, cultural, and recreational resource
values without the need for direct federal management or land
acquisition.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy
to answer any questions you or other committee members may have
regarding this bill.
on s. 1253
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee today to present the views of the Department of the Interior
on S. 1253, a bill to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate
certain segments of the Farmington River and Salmon Brook in the State
of Connecticut as components of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and
for other purposes.
The Department has preliminarily concluded through the National
Park Service's draft study of the Lower Farmington River and Salmon
Brook that the segments proposed for designation under this bill are
eligible for inclusion into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
However, we recommend that the committee defer action on S. 2286 until
the study is completed, which is consistent with the Department's
general policy on legislation designating additions to the Wild and
Scenic Rivers System when a study of the subject is pending. Our
process is nearly complete, and final transmittal to Congress is likely
in the very near future.
S. 1253 would designate 35.3 miles of the Farmington River and the
entire 26.4 miles of its major tributary, Salmon Brook, as part of the
Wild and Scenic Rivers System, to be administered by the Secretary of
the Interior. The segments would be managed in accordance with the
Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan (June 2011)
with the Secretary coordinating administration and management with a
locally based management committee, as specified in the plan. The bill
would authorize the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements with
the State of Connecticut, the adjoining communities, and appropriate
local planning and environmental organizations. S. 1253 would also make
an adjustment to the upper Farmington Wild and Scenic River, which was
designated in 1994, by adding 1.1 miles to the lower end of that 14-
mile designation.
S. 1253 would complete the wild and scenic river designation of the
Farmington River in Connecticut by designating all of the mainstem
Farmington River segments found to meet the criteria of eligibility and
suitability. At the same time, S. 1253 would provide for the continued
operation of one existing hydroelectric facility-Rainbow Dam in
Windsor-and allow for potential ydroelectric development of existing
dams in the Collinsville stretch of the river, which is currently the
subject of an active Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
licensing proceeding sponsored by the Town of Canton. However, we have
concerns regarding the potential future FERC licensing of Rainbow Dam.
If the committee acts on this legislation, we would like to ensure that
if operations were to be changed, wild and scenic river values upstream
and downstream of the hydro project would be protected. We would be
pleased to provide recommended language to the committee to address
this issue.
P.L. 109-370, the Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Study Act
of 2005, authorized the study of the segments proposed for designation
in S. 1253. The National Park Service conducted the study in close
cooperation with the adjoining communities, the State of Connecticut,
the Farmington River Watershed Association, the Stanley Black & Decker
Corporation (owner of Rainbow Dam) and other interested local parties.
Although the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires the development of a
comprehensive river management plan within three years of the date of
designation, it has become the practice of the National Park Service to
prepare this plan as part of a study of potential wild and scenic
rivers when much of the river runs through private lands. This allows
the National Park Service to consult widely with local landowners,
federal and state land management agencies, local governments, river
authorities, and other groups that have interests related to the river
prior to any recommendation for designation. Early preparation of the
plan also assures input from these entities as well as users of the
river on the management strategies that would be needed to protect the
river's resources.
Technical assistance provided as a part of the study made possible
the development of the Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook
Management Plan (June 2011). This plan is based primarily around local
partner actions designed to guide the management of the Lower
Farmington River and Salmon Brook with or without a National Wild and
Scenic River designation.
While the study has not been transmitted to Congress, it has
preliminarily concluded that the proposed segments of the Lower
Farmington River and Salmon Brook are eligible and suitable for
inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System because of
their free-flowing nature and outstandingly remarkable geology, water
quality, biological diversity, cultural landscape, recreation values
and local authority to protect and enhance these values. These findings
substantiate the widely held view of the Farmington River as
Connecticut's premier, free-flowing river resource for a diversity of
natural and cultural values, including one of New England's most
significant whitewater boating runs, regionally unique freshwater
mussel populations, and outstanding examples of archaeological and
historical sites and districts spanning Native American, colonial and
early manufacturing periods. Salmon Brook is, in its own right, highly
significant for outstanding water quality and significant cold water
fishery.
If S. 2286 is enacted, the Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook
would be administered as a partnership wild and scenic river, similar
to several other designations in the Northeast, including the upper
Farmington River and the Eightmile River in Connecticut. This approach
emphasizes local and state management solutions, and has proven
effective as a means of protecting outstandingly remarkable natural,
cultural and recreational resource values without the need for direct
federal management or land acquisition.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be happy to
answer any questions you or other committee members may have regarding
this bill.
on s. 1328
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to
provide the Department of the Interior's views on S. 1328, a bill to
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource
study of the archeological site, and surrounding land of the New
Philadelphia town site in the State of Illinois, and for other
purposes.
The Department supports enactment of S. 1328. However, we believe
that priority should be given to the 30 previously authorized studies
for potential units of the National Park System, potential new National
Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the National Trails System
and National Wild and Scenic River System that have not yet been
transmitted to the Congress.
S. 1328 authorizes a special resource study to evaluate the
national significance of the New Philadelphia, Illinois town site and
to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the
archaeological site and the surrounding land as a unit of the National
Park System. The bill directs the Secretary, in the course of the
resource study, to also consider other alternatives for the
preservation, protection and interpretation of the archeological site
of New Philadelphia, Illinois and the surrounding land by Federal,
State or local government entities, private nonprofit organizations or
any other interested individuals. We estimate the cost of the resource
study to range from $200,000 to $300,000, based on similar types of
studies conducted in recent years.
The New Philadelphia town site, located near Barry, Illinois, was
founded in 1836 by Frank McWhorter, an enslaved man from Kentucky, who
bought his own freedom and the freedom of 15 family members. New
Philadelphia is the first known town platted and officially registered
by an African-American before the Civil War. The rural community
situated near the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers flourished at first,
but later fell into decline when the railroad bypassed the community in
1869; it was eventually dissolved in 1885. The New Philadelphia town
site is a 42-acre archeological site with no visible above-ground
evidence. It was designated a National Historic Landmark on January 16,
2009.
In 2012, the National Park Service completed a reconnaissance
survey of the New Philadelphia town site. The survey found that the
site is nationally significant and would likely meet the criteria for
suitability to be added to the National Park System. The survey also
found, however, that the New Philadelphia town site is not likely to be
feasible for addition to the National Park System due to the challenges
of providing for public enjoyment, including associated operation and
staffing costs. However, a special resource study also would examine
alternatives to National Park Service management for the preservation
and interpretation of the New Philadelphia town site.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be
happy to answer any questions that you or other committee members may
have regarding this bill.
on s. 1339
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
S. 1339, a bill to reauthorize the Ohio & Erie National Heritage
Canalway.
The Department recognizes the important work of the Ohio & Erie
National Heritage Canalway to preserve heritage resources in northeast
Ohio from Cleveland to New Philadelphia and its role in linking
Cuyahoga Valley National Park to the residents of Cleveland, Akron, and
other communities through the preservation and maintenance of the
canal's towpath that runs through the heart of the park. We recommend
that S. 1339 be amended to authorize an extension for heritage area
program funding until we have completed an evaluation and report on the
accomplishments of the area and the future role of the National Park
Service; and until national heritage area program legislation is
enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding for designated
national heritage areas. Consistent with congressional directives in
the FY 2009 and FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Acts, the
Administration proposed, in the FY 2014 budget, focusing most national
heritage area grants on recently authorized areas and reducing and/or
phasing out funds to well-established recipients to encourage self-
sufficiency. The Department would like to work with Congress to
determine the future federal role when national heritage areas reach
the end of their authorized eligibility for heritage program funding.
We recommend that Congress enact national heritage legislation during
this Congress.
There are currently 49 designated national heritage areas, yet
there is no authority in law that guides the designation and
administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a
much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas,
offering guidelines for successful planning and management, clarifying
the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing
timeframes and funding for designated areas.
S. 1339, as introduced, would extend the authorization of federal
funding for the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway for an
additional 9 years. The Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway,
originally called the Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor, was
established in 1996 by Public Law 104-333. This national heritage area
includes the counties of Cuyahoga, Summit, Stark, and Tuscarawas in
northeast Ohio. The region extends from Lake Erie along the Erie Canal
through Cleveland to New Philadelphia.
The mission of this national heritage area is to preserve and
interpret and celebrate the rails, trails, landscapes, towns and sites
that grew up along the first 100 miles of the Ohio & Erie Canalway that
helped Ohio and our nation grow. This is accomplished through a
voluntary partnership with communities and citizens, and local, state,
and federal agencies emphasizing public access, economic development,
regional planning, and interpretive programs.
Public Law 104-333 designated the Ohio & Erie Canal Association as
the management entity for the national heritage area. The heritage area
management entity facilitates public private partnerships for the
preservation of heritage resources and works closely with National Park
Service staff at Cuyahoga Valley National Park. The national heritage
area's work focuses on regional initiatives for heritage programming,
interpretation and education, preservation and resource stewardship,
heritage development and infrastructure, and planning and design, all
linking the canal communities together through the canal's towpath
trail.
During its 16 years of existence, the Ohio & Erie National Heritage
Canalway has a significant record of achievement and, with government
funding assistance since its establishment, has shown significant
success in working with partners and the federal government to
preserve, interpret, and promote the significant resources of the local
communities along the Ohio & Erie Canalway. In total, the Ohio & Erie
National Heritage Canalway has received almost $13.3 million in federal
funding, and every federal dollar has been matched at least once with
non-federal funds.
The Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway has taken the lead on
initiatives such as the development of 73 miles of the multi-use
recreational Towpath Trail from Cleveland to New Philadelphia, Ohio,
that is used by thousands of visitors each year. The management entity
has worked tirelessly to connect sites, communities and parklands,
resulting in the creation of thousands of new national park and towpath
trail users. They continue to help communities and trail groups
establish a system of county trails and green spaces, with over 400
miles of trails that link cultural and historic sites, parks, open
spaces, and community centers as well as providing public access to the
Ohio & Erie Canalway.
We recommend two technical amendments to the long title of the bill
to make it clear that the bill would extend the authorization for
federal funding for the national heritage area instead of reauthorizing
the national heritage area and to correct the name of the Ohio & Erie
National Heritage Canalway. While the Ohio & Erie National Heritage
Canalway faces a sunset for its federal funding, its national heritage
area designation will not sunset.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have.
on h.r. 674
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's testimony regarding H.R. 674, a bill to
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and
feasibility of designating prehistoric, historic, and limestone forest
sites on Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, as a unit
of the National Park System.
The Department supports H.R. 674 with a technical amendment.
Priority should be given, however, to the 30 previously authorized
studies for potential units of the National Park System, potential new
National Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the National Trails
System and National Wild and Scenic River System that have not yet been
transmitted to Congress.
H.R. 674 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to complete
a Special Resource Study of sites on the Island of Rota for potential
inclusion in the National Park System. We estimate that this study will
cost approximately $250,000--$300,000.
Rota, where the indigenous Chamorro and Carolinian people have
retained their cultural heritage in its natural environment, is the
southernmost island of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
(CNMI). Spared the population displacement of other colonial islands
and largely bypassed during World War II, Rota preserves striking
examples of the three thousand-year-old Chamorro culture surrounded by
the best remaining expanse of this island chain's native limestone
forest.
The Mochon Latte Village, the Chugai Pictograph Cave, the Taga
Latte Stone Quarry, and the Alaguan Bay Ancient Village prehistoric
sites include architectural features unique to the ancient Chamorro
culture and represent outstanding examples of the territory's cultural
resources. These sites possess a high degree of integrity in location,
materials, workmanship and association.
The limestone forests of Rota are the most intact and most
extensive examples of primary, native limestone forest remaining on any
island in the Mariana Archipelago. The forest provides and sustains
habitat for endangered bird species, a threatened species of fruit bat,
and numerous species of invertebrates that are proposed for listing as
threatened or endangered. Several of these species are endemic to Rota.
The significance of this unique biotic community cannot be overstated.
Rota's residents and legislative delegation have demonstrated an
extraordinary commitment to the protection of the island's environment,
including establishment of marine protected areas on Rota. In 2004,
Senator Diego M. Songao, Chairman of the Rota Legislative Delegation of
the Fourteenth Commonwealth Legislature, formally requested planning
assistance from the National Park Service (NPS).
In response to this request, the NPS completed a reconnaissance
survey of Rota's natural and cultural resources in September of 2005.
The reconnaissance survey found that the natural and cultural resources
of the island of Rota are significant to island residents, the CNMI,
and the entire nation and merit protection. It also made a preliminary
finding that these resources are likely to be suitable and feasible for
inclusion in the park system.
At present, the people of Rota and their political leaders find
themselves at a crossroads regarding the uses to which their lands are
being put. Major land use changes are continuing to take place in the
form of residential and agricultural lots being subdivided out of the
island's public lands and transferred into private ownership.
Congressional authorization to conduct a Special Resource Study
will provide a public process to determine the suitability and
feasibility of designating prehistoric, historic, and limestone forest
sites on Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, as a unit
of the National Park System. The NPS would be pleased to actively
engage organizations, residents and others in discussions of how best
to preserve Rota's significant cultural and natural resources.
The NPS recommends a technical correction to clarify the intent of
section 2(a)(2) of the bill. We interpret this section to apply to
areas identified as suitable and feasible for designation as a unit of
the National Park System. It is possible, however, to read this section
more broadly to imply that the National Park Service should examine
alternatives for management of the entire island of Rota. We would like
to work with the committee to clarify the intent of this section.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
answer questions that you or other members of the committee might have.
on h.r. 885
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to provide the views of the Department on H.R. 885, to
expand the boundary of San Antonio Missions National Historical Park
(Park), and for other purposes.
The Department supports H.R. 885 with amendments described later in
this statement.
H.R. 885 would expand the boundary of the Park by approximately 137
acres, all of which are currently being managed by the National Park
Service (NPS). Of the 137 acres, 102 acres are either owned by the
United States and managed by the NPS or are being managed by the NPS
under a cooperative agreement and are in the process of being donated
to the Park. Nineteen acres are currently, and will continue to be,
managed through a cooperative agreement with the landowners, the city
of San Antonio and Bexar County that protects the cultural landscape,
ensures public access, and provides for greater interpretation of the
historical and architectural values of the Park. The additional 16
acres will continue to be managed by Bexar County.
The Park's authorizing legislation allows for the acquisition of
new lands outside the Park boundary and allows the Park to enter into
cooperative agreements to preserve historic properties and provide for
visitor access and interpretation. However, the Park has only limited
authority to revise the Park boundary to include additional lands,
which is why this legislation is necessary. Because the park currently
manages 121 acres of the lands that would be included in the new
boundary and Bexar County will continue to manage the additional 16
acres, H.R. 885 will not result in increased operational costs.
The Park preserves a significant link to Mexico and Spain that has
influenced the culture and history of the United States since before
its inception. San Antonio, Texas, is now the seventh-largest, third-
fastest growing city in the United States. The city grew 68 percent
between 1980 and 2007 and now almost entirely surrounds the Park with
urban development, threatening areas that contain significant Spanish
colonial resources historically associated with the Park. Based on the
Park's General Management Plan and Land Protection Plan, which found
that numerous areas containing significant Spanish colonial resources
historically associated with the Park were outside the boundary, the
Park acquired the additional lands that now need to be included in the
boundary.
This legislation enjoys the support of officials from Bexar County,
Wilson County, the City of San Antonio, the City of Floresville, the
San Antonio River Authority, the San Antonio Conservation Society, Los
Compadres, and others. It would help guarantee the preservation,
protection, restoration, and interpretation of the missions for current
and future generations.
The Department recommends that the bill be amended to address the
bill's park boundary, land acquisition, and buffer zone provisions: As
passed by the House, H.R. 885 prohibits acquisition by condemnation of
any land or interests in land within the boundaries of the park. The
NPS has consistently opposed changing a park's existing land
acquisition authority when boundary adjustments are made. While
condemnation is rarely used, it can be a critical tool during a
friendly condemnation, where the value of the land is in dispute, or
when title to the property is in doubt or cannot be cleared. If the
intent of this legislation is to prohibit the acquisition by
condemnation of the new 137 acres that would be included in the park
boundary, we recommend amending the bill to eliminate the general
prohibition on condemnation, and to provide specifically that
acquisition of the 137 acres brought within the boundary by this
legislation may not be accomplished through condemnation.
The bill makes the establishment of the expanded boundary subject
to the written consent of the owners of properties that would be
included within the new boundary. This places landowners, rather than
Congress or the Administration, in the position of determining the
boundary of a federal park, which we believe is inappropriate. This
provision has the potential to create legal and practical confusion
over the boundary since it is possible that a landowner could give
consent, then change his or her mind and withdraw consent or convey the
property to another owner who withdraws consent. If the intent of this
language is to ensure that only willing sellers convey lands to the
NPS, we recommend amending the language to include such a provision,
instead of investing members of the public with the ability to
determine park boundaries.
The bill also includes language that says that an activity outside
the boundary shall not be precluded because it can be heard or seen
inside the park boundary. The Department has concerns about this
language. It is misleading, as it suggests that the NPS may have
authority to preclude activities outside the boundaries, which it does
not. Of even greater concern, however, is that the language could
discourage park managers from addressing threats to park resources from
external sources. Even though the NPS does not control what happens
outside of its boundaries, park managers have a responsibility under
the NPS Organic Act and other laws to work with owners of properties
outside of park boundaries to resolve problems that could negatively
impact the resources the NPS is responsible for protecting. Therefore,
we recommend removing paragraph (4) on page 3 of the bill by striking
lines 1 through 15.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of
the Administration.
on h.r. 1158
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to provide the
Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 1158, a bill to direct the
Secretary of the Interior to continue stocking fish in certain lakes in
North Cascades National Park, Ross Lake National Recreation Area, and
Lake Chelan National Recreation Area (hereafter referred to as ``North
Cascades Complex'').
The Department does not oppose H.R. 1158 if amended in accordance
with this testimony.
The National Park Service collectively manages North Cascades
National Park, Ross Lake National Recreation Area, and Lake Chelan
National Recreation Area as North Cascades National Park Service
Complex. All of the 245 mountain lakes in the North Cascades Complex
area were naturally fishless. Fish stocking in this area began in the
late 1800s. During this period, approximately 91 lakes were stocked at
one time or another and 154 lakes were never stocked. This fish
stocking provided the opportunity to fish in these mountain lakes. The
issue of continued fish stocking arose in 1968 when the proposal to
create the park was introduced. Although the enabling legislation does
reference the requirement for a Washington state fishing license, it is
silent regarding fish stocking. Stocking continued after the park was
established. However, concerns over the ecological impacts of fish
stocking in naturally fish-free waters continued. Soon after the park
complex was created, the National Park Service policy regarding fish
stocking was revised to provide that fish stocking in naturally fish-
free waters should not occur. Fish stocking was phased out in many
national parks across the country to restore natural conditions and to
preserve native species. In 1988, Congress designated ninety-three
percent of the North Cascades as the Stephen Mather Wilderness, and 90
of the 91 lakes that had historically been stocked are within the
wilderness area. At the time the wilderness was designated, Congress
did not address the issue of stocking the lakes.
The 2006 Management Policies of the National Park Service (NPS)
allow for the management of fish populations when necessary to restore
resources to their natural state or reestablish a native species that
has been extirpated. Stocking of other plants or animals is also
allowed under certain circumstances. Specifically, the policies provide
that ``In some special situations, the Service may stock native or
exotic animals for recreational harvesting purposes, but only when such
stocking will not unacceptably impact park natural resources or
processes and when:
the stocking is of fish into constructed large reservoirs or
other significantly altered large water bodies and the purpose
is to provide for recreational fishing; or
the intent for stocking is a treaty right or expressed in
statute, applicable law, or a House or Senate report
accompanying a statute. The Service will not stock waters that
are naturally barren of harvested aquatic species.''
The NPS appreciates the collaborative partnership with the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) at North Cascades
Complex and throughout the State of Washington. Despite this strong
working relationship, a number of challenges have historically arisen
when trying to reconcile the missions and policies of the WDFW and NPS
on this stocking program. However, multiple attempts have been made to
negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome on this issue. For example, in
1987 the Assistant Secretary of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife and
Parks negotiated an agreement allowing fish stocking to continue in
certain lakes while research into the ecological impacts of stocking
was conducted. In a 1991 Consent Decree resolving litigation
challenging the fish stocking program, NPS agreed to conduct research
into the ecological impacts of fish stocking at North Cascades and a
National Environmental Policy Act review of the stocking of naturally
fish-free lakes.
A decade of research, conducted in the North Cascades Complex
through Oregon State University and the USGS Biological Resources
Division, documented lakes where fish had been stocked in low numbers
and could not reproduce. No statistically significant ecological
effects to native aquatic species were detected. However, in self-
sustaining populations, non-native trout can have significant effects
on native aquatic organisms such as amphibians and zooplankton.
In 2002, the NPS in collaboration with WDFW began development of a
comprehensive Mountain Lakes Fishery Management Plan/Environmental
Impact Statement (Plan/EIS). The purpose of the planning effort was to
apply the results of the research and resolve the longstanding conflict
over fish stocking in the mountain lakes.
On November 26, 2008, the NPS issued a Record of Decision for the
final Plan/EIS and selected the preferred alternative, which would stop
stocking and remove fish from lakes where significant impacts were
occurring (49 lakes) but allow stocking of non-reproducing fish at low
densities to continue in up to 42 lakes, subject to additional
monitoring. The EIS found that such stocking would not unacceptably
impact park natural resources or processes in those lakes.
However, the Record of Decision (ROD) also notes that fish stocking
in the Stephen T. Mather Wilderness does not meet the minimum
requirements analysis conducted under section 4(c) of the Wilderness
Act. In addition, the ROD recognizes that the NPS would need legal
authority to implement the preferred alternative. The ROD further
provides that if such legal authority was not provided to the NPS by
July 1, 2009, the NPS, consistent with NPS policy, would discontinue
the stocking program in its entirety and work to restore the natural
ecology of all the mountain lakes. In the majority of lakes this would
be accomplished through continued fishing without further stocking.
Over time, natural mortality would remove the remainder. In lakes where
naturally reproducing populations were found, the NPS would work to
remove these fish. Realistically, at least ten lakes are so large that
no known removal techniques will work and fish populations will remain
for the foreseeable future.
The NPS is interested in ensuring that any legislation regarding
fish stocking is guided by science and an understanding of the impact
that such policy decisions would have on park resources. We note that
the bill directs the Secretary to continue monitoring the impacts of
fish stocking in order to determine if further adjustments are needed
to protect aquatic resources.
Fish stocking has not occurred in any lakes within the North
Cascades Complex since 2007. During that time, there have been no
requests for additional stocking from either the public or from the
WDFW, as they no longer consider fish stocking a priority.
Since non-native fish removal efforts began in 2009, we have seen
an almost immediate return of native amphibians, which is an indicator
of a more resilient ecosystem. With our improved awareness of the
negative resource impacts of climate change, we now understand the
importance of eliminating environmental stressors, such as non-native
fish species. Thus, we feel that NPS needs the management flexibility
to respond to changing environmental conditions, including climate
change.
To ensure the NPS has the management flexibility to respond
appropriately should monitoring and scientific research indicate
negative impacts to resources from fish stocking, we strongly recommend
one amendment. We ask that Section 3 (a) be amended to read as follows:
``Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary may authorize the stocking
of fish in lakes in the North Cascades National Park Service Complex.''
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
Statement of the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior,
on S. 974
Thank you for inviting the Department of the Interior to testify on
S. 974, the Las Vegas Valley Public Land and Tule Springs Fossil Beds
National Monument Act. The Department generally supports S. 974 and
would welcome the opportunity to work with the Sponsor and Committee on
modifications to provisions of the bill.
Background
The Las Vegas Valley is home to nearly 2 million people, the famous
Las Vegas Strip, spectacular desert landscapes, and historic, cultural,
and paleontological treasures. Balancing the protection of these
important natural, cultural, and scientific resources with economic
development and growth is a challenge embraced by Senator Reid and the
Nevada delegation. Over the last 20 years, a number of laws have been
enacted to help maintain that balance. Among these are: the Red Rock
Canyon National Conservation Area Establishment Act (P.L. 101-621); the
Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (P.L. 105-263); and the
Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act
(P.L. 107-282), several of which are the subject of today's hearing.
S. 974
Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Monument (Section 2)
S. 974 would designate a new unit of the National Park Service
(NPS)--the Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Monument. This bill would
transfer administrative jurisdiction of approximately 22,650 acres of
public land from the Bureau of Land Management to the National Park
Service. The bill would establish the Tule Springs Fossil Beds National
Monument Advisory Commission to provide guidance for the management of
the Monument.
The Department supports the establishment of the Tule Springs
Fossil Beds National Monument and the Advisory Council. The NPS does
not currently have a park designated specifically to protect and
interpret Pleistocene fossils and the creation of this site would
comprise the most significant Pleistocene paleontological resources in
the American southwest. However, since a special resource study has not
been completed, there are many outstanding questions regarding the most
efficient and effective means for managing this area.
The NPS completed a Reconnaissance Report for the Upper Las Vegas
Wash/Tule Springs area in June 2010. Preliminary findings from this
report indicated that the resources in this area appeared to be
nationally significant and suitable for inclusion in the national park
system but further study would be needed to compare the resources of
Tule Springs to other similar areas that represent nationally
significant resources of the late Pleistocene epoch. Preliminary
findings also indicated that the area is potentially feasible but that
the initial determination would greatly benefit from a full study of
alternatives that would more fully examine site issues such as
vandalism, unauthorized removal of fossils, and ORV use that may affect
future options for management and protection of the area. Additionally,
the report recommends an analysis of operational costs, particularly
those associated with an active paleontology management program
involving the preparation and curation of fossils, such as collection
storage equipment, materials and supplies, dedicated curation space,
and staff time to prepare fossils.
Section 2(d)(5)(B)(IV) directs the NPS to include a travel
management plan for the national monument that may include existing
public transit. Although it is unclear what is being proposed by this
language, this proposed monument is on the border of the cities of Las
Vegas and North Las Vegas and transit options for existing residents
will be taken in account during the planning process.
Finally, section 2(e) provides for a renewable energy transmission
corridor to be managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on the
north side of the new National Monument. The BLM recommends that this
narrow strip of land be withdrawn from the mining and mineral leasing
laws, and that access to these lands be limited to administrative uses
in order to avoid incompatible activities.
Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area Additions (Section 3)
First established by an Act of Congress in 1990, the 196,000-acre
Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area (NCA) is located 17 miles
west of the Las Vegas Strip. The NCA welcomes over one million visitors
annually who are looking to explore the natural wonders beyond the
traditional Las Vegas experience. The Red Rock Canyon NCA offers
opportunities for hiking, rock climbing, horseback riding, biking, and
photography. A 13-mile scenic drive provides an up close look at this
spectacular desert landscape.
The BLM supports the provisions of S. 974 (Section 3) which propose
to expand the boundaries of the NCA by approximately 1,540 acres. We
would like to work with the Sponsor and the Committee on some minor
boundary modifications to improve manageability of the NCA addition.
Conveyances to the Cities of North Las Vegas & Las Vegas (Sections 4 &
5)
S. 974 (Sections 4 & 5) provides for the conveyance of public lands
to the city of North Las Vegas (645 acres) and the city of Las Vegas
(660 acres) respectively at no cost. The lands proposed for conveyance
are within the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA)
(P.L. 105-263) boundary established by Acts of Congress. Under these
provisions of the bill, the two local governments would then be able to
sell, lease, or otherwise convey these lands at fair market value to
third parties. All revenues derived from these conveyances would be
distributed consistent with direction under SNPLMA as if the
conveyances had been undertaken by the BLM under its existing
authorities. Additionally, the bill would allow these governments to
retain some of the lands for uses consistent with those allowed under
the Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act, such as for schools,
parks and fire stations. All costs related to the initial transfer of
land to the city governments or from them to third parties would be the
responsibility of the cities of North Las Vegas and Las Vegas.
SNPLMA identified these lands for disposal, and specified the use
of the proceeds from the sale of these lands. By transferring the lands
to the cities of North Las Vegas and Las Vegas, the bill will allow
those communities to determine the development of the lands within
their boundaries, while requiring fair market value for subsequent
conveyances. The BLM does not oppose these transfers, but recommends
amending this section to eliminate the leasing option. Such leases are
difficult to oversee and manage; by only allowing reconveyance by the
cities through sale or R&PP conveyance, we can better protect the
integrity of the process.
Expansion of Police Shooting Range (Section 6)
The Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources
Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-282) transferred 176 acres of BLM-managed public
land to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department for a shooting
range. S. 974 (Section 6) would transfer an additional 80 acres of BLM-
managed lands to the Las Vegas Police Department.
The BLM supports this conveyance, which will allow the Police
Department to establish long-range shooting and training facilities. We
recommend that the legislation specify that the transfer will be
subject to valid existing rights.
Spring Mountain National Recreation Area Withdrawal (Section 7)
The Department of the Interior defers to the Department of
Agriculture on the Spring Mountain National Recreation Area provisions
of S. 974 (Section 7), which affect lands administered by the U.S.
Forest Service.
SNPLMA Boundary Modification (Section 8)
The SNPLMA, as amended, was designed to provide for the responsible
disposal of BLM-managed public land within the Las Vegas Valley. Under
the Act, funds generated from the sale of these lands are deposited
into a special account to be expended consistent with the provisions of
the Act. Funds from SNPLMA lands sales have been used for a variety of
purposes as stipulated by the Act, including: acquisition of high value
environmentally-sensitive lands; establishment of parks, trails, and
natural areas; creation of new conservation initiatives; and a number
of other projects. To date, nearly 45,000 acres have been conveyed out
of Federal ownership under the provisions of SNPLMA, and approximately
39,500 acres remain to be considered for disposal under SNPLMA.
S. 974 (Section 8) proposes to modify the SNPLMA disposal boundary
by removing approximately 9,950 acres of public land currently inside
the boundary and by adding approximately 6,795 acres of public land
currently outside the boundary, resulting in a net reduction of lands
within the SNPLMA boundary of approximately 3,158 acres. Total public
land acres within the SNPLMA boundary would be 36,890 acres if S. 974
is enacted. The acres proposed for removal are lands that S. 974 would
transfer (Section 2) to the National Park Service for inclusion in the
Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Monument. The acres proposed for
addition to the boundary are primarily on the northeast and northwest
sides of the Las Vegas Valley, and the most significant current uses
are for the mining of aggregate materials for construction. The BLM
supports section 8 of S.974.
Conveyances to Nevada Colleges & Universities (Section 9)
The Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE), a subdivision of the
State of Nevada, provides for the education for over 125,000 students
throughout the state at eight different colleges and universities. The
NSHE is seeking to expand the capacity of three of those schools in
southern Nevada in order to improve higher education opportunities.
S. 974 (Section 9) provides for the conveyance of three parcels of
public land for three of these colleges and universities in southern
Nevada at no cost and for uses consistent with those allowed under the
Recreation & Public Purposes Act (R&PP). All costs associated with the
transfers would be paid by the NSHE. The three conveyances include
approximately 285 acres for the Great Basin College in Pahrump, Nevada,
41 acres for the College of Southern Nevada, and 1,886 acres for the
University of Nevada-Las Vegas (UNLV).
The R&PP Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to lease or
convey public lands at nominal costs for recreational and public
purposes, including for educational facilities. The BLM generally
supports appropriate legislative conveyances at no cost if the lands
are to be used for purposes consistent with the R&PP Act, and if the
conveyances have a reversionary clause to enforce this requirement.
The BLM supports these conveyances for higher education in S. 974
and would like to work with the Sponsor and the Committee on minor and
technical modifications to these provisions. Specifically, we recommend
the addition of a clause allowing the Secretary to add reasonable terms
and conditions to the transfer. For example, the lands proposed for
transfer for the Great Basin College are adjacent to the BLM's Pahrump
Fire Station. In the conveyance documents we may want to include
building height restrictions in areas closest to the helipad to ensure
safe aerial fire activities. The addition of a ``terms and conditions''
clause would allow the agency to address this and similar situations.
Ivanpah Airport Conveyance (Section 10)
The Ivanpah Valley Airport Public Lands Transfer Act (P.L. 106-362)
provided for the sale of approximately 5,750 acres of public land to
Clark County for the construction of a future airport. The completion
of the sale of the land and construction of the airport is contingent
on a number of factors, including approval by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA). S. 974 (Section 10) provides for the conveyance,
at no cost, of approximately 2,350 acres to the east of the proposed
airport for flood mitigation projects related to the airport. The land
would not be conveyed unless and until the FAA approves the airport
project.
S. 974 also reserves to the Federal government the mineral estate
(potentially valuable sand and gravel) of the 2,350 acres to be
conveyed for the airport, except that the County may construct flood
control facilities and remove aggregate following flood events under
the bill. The BLM supports these provisions. However, provisions
providing that the County pay all costs associated with this transfer
and a terms and conditions clause (similar to those in Section 9 of S.
974) should be added to this section as well.
Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area Release (Section 11)
The Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area (ISA) lies to the east of
Las Vegas. The 9,700-acre area has been managed by the BLM to protect
these lands for possible future wilderness designation as required by
law. Over the last decades, and most recently in 2009, the Congress has
legislatively released portions of the Sunrise Mountain ISA from those
protections, but the BLM does not have the independent authority to
release the remaining acres.
The BLM supports the provisions of S. 974 (Section 11) which would
release the entire Sunrise Mountain ISA from interim protected status,
thereby allowing the consideration of a full range of multiple uses.
The Sunrise Mountain ISA does not possess significant wilderness
characteristics. Furthermore, it is the assessment of the BLM that this
area is appropriate for the expansion of high-voltage transmission
lines, including those for renewable energy transmission, as well as a
possible interstate natural gas and water pipelines.
Nellis Dunes Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Recreation Area (Section 12)
The Nellis Dunes OHV area is a popular recreation area with over
100,000 visits annually. S. 974 (Section 12) would promote the further
development of this area as a destination OHV site. OHV use is a
popular and growing activity in Nevada and across the West. The BLM
welcomes opportunities to support this type of recreation in
appropriate locations.
Studies conducted by the UNLV at the request of the BLM have
indicated that there are high levels of naturally occurring arsenic in
the Nellis Dunes area. While the area is presently open to OHV use, the
BLM makes visitors aware of these potential health concerns. Currently,
the UNLV is conducting a health risk assessment of the area in
accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency's human health risk
assessment processes and protocols. The BLM expects to receive a
completed study by late 2014, and believes that it is premature to make
permanent decisions about the Nellis Dunes area prior to receiving the
final report. Therefore, the BLM recommends deferring sections 12(a),
(b), and (c) until the final report is available.
However, if Congress elects to move forward with these provisions
of S. 974, the BLM recommends a number of substantive modifications.
The bill (Section 12) allocates uses in Nellis Dunes in three parts.
First, it establishes a BLM-managed Nellis Dunes Off-Highway Vehicle
Recreation Area on approximately 10,000 acres of public land. Second,
it transfers approximately 960 acres of public land to Clark County for
a more intensively managed OHV Recreation Park. Third, it establishes
an ``Economic Support Area'' adjacent to the other two areas.
The BLM could support the establishment of the Nellis Dunes OHV
Recreation Area if our safety concerns are appropriately addressed.
Likewise, we could support the transfer of land to Clark County for an
OHV Recreation Park if the transfer and management of those lands is
done consistent with the R&PP Act, and if the transfer addressed issues
outlined in our discussion of Section 9 regarding similar no cost
conveyances. Finally, the BLM does not object to the establishment of
an Economic Support Area; however, we strongly urge that these 290
acres be sold to the County at fair market value, rather than setting
up a system of revenue sharing between the County and Federal
government for private enterprises on these lands. The BLM does not
typically participate in commercial activities such as these and we do
not believe that it would be appropriate in this case.
The BLM would like to work with the Sponsor and Committee on
perfecting these sections of S. 974, provided the human health risk
assessment determines that establishing an OHV park in this area is
appropriate.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Dr. Toothman for that concise and
also substantive summary.
Let me recognize myself for 5 minutes for a first round of
questions.
It wouldn't surprise you, I want to turn to 1071, my bill,
which would authorize the Park Service to make improvements to
support facilities at certain National Historic Sites.
As you've noted in your testimony, the specific situation
in Colorado that the bill addresses is the proposed shared
visitor's center and park administrative facility that would be
located outside the boundary of the Sand Creek Massacre
National Historic Site. That is located in Kiowa County.
I'd like clarification on one point in the Park Service's
testimony. I introduced this bill to help the Park Service
locate its park offices and visitor center in a shared use
building outside the park boundary. With the remote location of
the Sand Creek site it's my understanding that the Park Service
wanted to be able to enter into a shared use agreement with
Kiowa County.
Is there any concern that the bill does not give the Park
Service the authority that it needs to accomplish this?
Ms. Toothman. The Park Service does believe it gives us the
authority to accomplish it. We strongly support being given
that authority. Our concern is the precedent being set by a
bill that's somewhat ambiguous in terms of its application to
more than one park. We're concerned about that precedent.
But we do support giving Sand Creek Massacre National
Historic Site that authority.
Senator Udall. We want to work with you to clarify and
simplify the approach so that it doesn't set a precedent, but
it also doesn't potentially run afoul of rules in the House, in
particular, as in the House of Representatives.
Ms. Toothman. We're happy to continue working with you
because we do believe it's important.
Senator Udall. This is a very important site. We want to
take the steps necessary to encourage more people to be able to
visit it, learn from it. It was a tragic event, but it's one
from which we can learn a great deal.
In the process help Kiowa County which is a wonderful part
of the Eastern Plains of Colorado.
Ms. Toothman. I look forward to seeing it someday.
Senator Udall. Will you come out and visit?
Ms. Toothman. I would love to.
Senator Udall. Alright.
We will invite Senator Campbell who played a key role in
the designation of this site as well.
Let me turn to S. 398, the National Women's History Museum
Commission. The bill would establish a commission to study the
feasibility of a National Women's History Museum right here. I
understand from your testimony that your concern with the bill
is that it authorizes the commission to evaluate a potential
site for the museum near the Washington Monument which is an
area where new memorial museum construction is prohibited by
the Commemorative Works Act.
If the bill was amended to remove that particular site
would that address the Park Service's concerns?
Ms. Toothman. Yes, it would.
Senator Udall. It would.
Alright, let me move next to S. 869, the Alabama Black Belt
National Heritage Area. Your testimony recommends that the
committee defer action on the bill until the Park Service
completes a final review of the feasibility study which
apparently needs to be revised.
Can you give us an estimate of when the revised study will
be completed and will you please inform the committee when the
Park Service has finished its review including your
recommendations of whether the area is appropriate for a
National Heritage Area designation?
Ms. Toothman. Yes. We do believe that the area contains
some very significant, nationally significant sites. We are
working very closely with the center right now to review their
present submission and identify some of the issues that remain
in terms of their current draft. We anticipate getting them the
actual written comments after we've had a pretty thorough
discussion by mid to late August.
As soon as they've made their revisions we're committing to
a very quick turnaround so that we can move this forward.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that update. I look forward to
the further update.
Ms. Toothman. OK.
Senator Udall. Let me turn next to Desert Storm/Desert
Shield memorial, S. 995. Your testimony recommends that the
bill language should be clarified regarding the disposition of
funds if legislative authority expires before the memorial is
built.
What does the Park Service recommend should happen to any
funds that have been raised in support of the memorial if the
legislative authority expires?
Ms. Toothman. Our recommendation would be to follow
previous precedent and that would be to deposit the money
that's not used in an account with the National Park Foundation
to benefit the protection and preservation of all of the
monuments on the Mall.
Senator Udall. OK.
Then the final question before I turn to my friend and
Ranking Member. This is a general question about memorials and
other commemorative works relating to intellectual property
rights.
It's my understanding that on at least one occasion the
artist designing a memorial or the group which was authorized
to construct a memorial has asserted that it owns the copyright
to the memorial design. That the United States can't use images
of the memorial without its permission and presumably some kind
of compensation.
When commemorative works are constructed and transferred to
the National Park Service does the Park Service have the right
to produce images of the memorial for its own use and to allow
park concessioners and operating associations to sell
authorized merchandise with images of the memorial?
If I could I'm going to throw two more questions at you.
Ms. Toothman. OK.
Senator Udall. Related to this.
Then are all the memorials that are currently on the
National Mall considered to be in the public domain?
Then a third question.
Should we consider including provisions in authorizing
legislation that would require the intellectual property for
the memorial to be held by the Federal Government or otherwise
be in the public domain?
Ms. Toothman. It's my understanding that, before the
Commemorative Works Act was passed, memorials that were
transferred to the National Park Service did come with their
intellectual property rights. So that would include memorials
such as the Lincoln and the Jefferson memorials and the
Washington Monument.
Under the Commemorative Works Act as presently written, the
transfer to the National Park Service is of the physical
property but not the intellectual property rights. So there are
several memorials that have been transferred under the CWA that
did not transfer the intellectual property rights, the Martin
Luther King Memorial, for example, did not.
So we would strongly support any effort by the Congress to
clarify that situation.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that.
Let me turn to Senator Portman for his questions.
Senator Portman.
Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Toothman, I have a number of questions for you about
some of the bills you just talked about.
Starting with the modifying boundaries or expanding
boundaries. We had a good discussion here in this committee,
full committee, last week regarding some of the deferred
maintenance issues at the parks. The question is to whether we
should be expanding boundaries at a time when we're having a
difficult time finding the funding to maintain the parks for
proper stewardship of the parks is been a focus of Senator
Udall and myself.
We have a few bills here that expand boundaries or modify
them. There's the San Antonio Mission National Historic Park
that's H.R. 885 then S. 781 which is Yosemite, S. 782, which is
Gettysburg. These all expand these park units.
I wonder if you could answer these questions.
How much of the land involved in these proposed expansions
are currently in private ownership versus public ownership?
Ms. Toothman. I don't have the specific acreage in that
case. I can say that with Gettysburg those properties are in
the process of being acquired by the Gettysburg Foundation from
a willing seller. In the case of the train station from the
community with their full support.
In the case of Yosemite, which again, I would have to get
back to you on the specific acreage.
Ms. Toothman. But the land that is being considered is
largely in the hands of non-profits, some of which would be
donated, most of which would have to be acquired.
Let me ask you again on San Antonio Mission, we're already
have the authority under the San Antonio legislation to work
collaboratively to manage properties outside of our boundary.
At least that's my understanding of the legislation, so that by
expanding the boundaries we're clarifying that but we're not
taking on additional costs beyond what we're already expending
there.
Excuse me, what was the fourth one?
Senator Portman. That was it, just San Antonio, Yosemite
and Gettysburg.
Mr. Toothman. OK.
Senator Portman. So you're saying with regard to San
Antonio there's no additional cost that's incurred. With regard
to Gettysburg and Yosemite, will expanding the boundaries
require additional costs? Will it require additional personnel?
Ms. Toothman. I've been advised for Gettysburg that they'll
be no acquisition costs because they'll be donated by the
Foundation and that there will be minimal operational costs in
the case of the train station. The community is committed to
continuing to run that operation. So that additional
operational costs will be minimal.
The addition to, I think it's Little Round Top, that's
already immediately adjacent to our boundaries. So the
additional operational costs would be pretty minimal.
Senator Portman. Any sense of how many additional personnel
will be required at Yosemite and Gettysburg?
Ms. Toothman. My recollection is in terms of the briefing
that I had on it is that because it's again, immediately
adjacent to the park and primarily back country area that the
costs would be minimal.
Senator Portman. OK. We talked about the maintenance
backlog earlier. Any sense of whether this encourages further
backlog in terms of deferred maintenance?
Ms. Toothman. In the case of the Gettsburg train station
you are acquiring a building but it is in excellent condition.
It was recently rehabilitated. So there wouldn't be, other than
normal maintenance costs.
In the case of Yosemite, I'm not aware that there's any
structures within those boundaries. But we can certainly check
that.
Senator Portman. OK.
Ms. Toothman. In the case of San Antonio we're already
involved in working with the city and other owners--and again I
would have to get back to you in terms of what structures would
be within that boundary.
Senator Portman. On 647, do you have any sense there of
what the deferred maintenance cost increases might be?
Ms. Toothman. I'm sorry, which one is 647? I don't have
that.
Oh, I have 674?
Senator Portman. I'm sorry, I mean 674.
Ms. Toothman. For the Rota National Park Study?
Senator Portman. Yes.
Ms. Toothman. There's an estimate of cost in my briefing of
just the special resource study. Until we know what resources
we're looking at it would be difficult to estimate.
We do already have a presence in CNMI at the American
memorial and a little further away at Guam, so that there would
be, very likely, a sharing of administrative costs.
Senator Portman. OK. That would be interested for the
Committee to know just so we have a sense of what maintenance
costs there might be.
Senator Portman. On the amending the National Wild and
Scenic River System legislation there's 2, I guess, S. 1252 and
S. 1253. How many of those additions go through public land? Do
you have the answer to that?
How much of the addition flows through private land?
Ms. Toothman. I don't have that. I will have to get that
back to you.
Ms. Toothman. I do know that the study has gone through
extensive public review and is supported by the communities
along the course of those rivers.
Senator Portman. Do you have any sense, if it's on private
land, whether it will affect any of the proposed uses of the
river or the surrounding area?
Ms. Toothman. Those would be outlined in any authorization,
but no, not normally. It wouldn't affect private uses of their
lands.
Senator Portman. You wouldn't mind getting back to us on
that just so we know the answer to that?
Ms. Toothman. Yes.
Senator Portman. These were not included, these 2 areas, in
the original Wild and Scenic Rivers designation. If we could
also--if you could also let us know in the process of
researching that why those weren't included in the original
designation.
Ms. Toothman. OK.
Senator Portman. On the protecting and authorizing the
acquisition of Revolutionary War and War of 1812 sites, it
would be H.R. 1033 and S. 916.
Ms. Toothman. Yes.
Senator Portman. Do you have any sense of how that land is
being utilized now? How that acquisition by the Park Service
might change the use of that land?
Ms. Toothman. At this point we would be conducting and we
are in the point of completing, I believe, for the
Revolutionary War sites, evaluations similar to what we did at
your request, Congress' request, for the Civil War sites. So I
would have to go back to the battlefield group and ask where
they are on those studies and get back to you.
Senator Portman. OK. That would be very helpful for the
committee as well.
Senator Portman. Go back to the chairman for a couple other
questions. But I'm over my 5 minutes.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Portman.
I have a couple of questions. Then a comment and I'll turn
back to Senator Portman for the remainder of his questions.
Before I do begin I wanted to, for the record, include
statements from Senator Reid of Nevada, Senator Gillibrand,
Senator Warren, Senator Kane and Senator Sanders. Without
objection we'll include those in the record.
Senator Udall. Dr. Toothman, I assume Senator Portman will
want to discuss this as well, his bill, S. 1044. Has the Park
Service checked with the Justice Department and if so, were
there any Constitutional issues or concerns with legislation to
authorize the specific prayer be included at a national
memorial?
Ms. Toothman. We don't have a formal opinion from them. But
their basic consensus is that any time you raise an issue of
separation of church and State that you always have the
possibility of a law suit.
Senator Udall. Again, I ask that question with no
particular point of view and implicitly. I just think it's
important. I know Senator Portman will explore this further.
Your testimony noted that the National Capitol Memorial
Advisory Commission had already considered this proposal. Then
they decided not to add the plaque. Do you know why the
Commission declined to add the plaque to the memorial?
Ms. Toothman. I don't have the minutes of the meeting. So
we would have to get back to you on that.
Ms. Toothman. But I believe it has to do with the CWA's
statement that the memorials within the reserve are considered
completed works of art so that they regularly will take a
position against adding anything to it.
With Congressional direction we'll continue to work with--
under the CWA to find an appropriate place.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that insight. Again, I know I
look forward to Senator Portman's further questions that he has
and any other commentary on this because I know it's important
to Senator Portman. I felt he made a very strong statement
about the power of what one of our venerated and greatest
Presidents did at a very important time in our history.
Let me move to the North Cascades, H.R. 1158. It would
require the Park Service to resume stocking fish in certain
lakes in the North Cascades National Park.
Now your testimony asked for an amendment to allow rather
than require----
Ms. Toothman. Yes.
Senator Udall. The Secretary of the Interior to stock fish
in the North Cascades lakes. Why is that change necessary?
Could you explain that to us?
Ms. Toothman. We believe the management decision involved
there should be based on the best and most current science.
This has been a long standing issue. There's been several
research projects done where we've seen some of the lakes
thathave not been stocked recently and are beginning to show
significant recovery of other species.
So we think it would be best to allow the best science to
govern that decision.
Senator Udall. Are those species that are recovering
indigenous species or would these studies explore the nature of
those species that are being recovered and are expanding?
Ms. Toothman. My understanding is that the species that are
recovering are indigenous species. But I would be happy to get
back to you with more specific information.
Senator Udall. OK.
Senator Udall. Before I turn back to Senator Portman I did
want to comment on the question that he was asking you with
some regulatory and consistency which is one of the maintenance
costs of additional land additions.
Ms. Toothman. Right.
Senator Udall. I think that those are very important
questions to ask in a time of constrained budgets. I would
imagine that the Park Service has a set of formulas at hand
when land exchanges are considered or suggested to understand
the long term caring costs of those lands. Of course if you buy
lands or transfer lands that have infrastructure, roads,
buildings, water treatment systems, those sorts of things, you
certainly are going to have maintenance obligations.
If you buy open space, pristine lands, lands that aren't
developed, my gut tells me they would be less expensive to
maintain. But my gut is one thing, the numbers are another
thing. I think, as the committee moves forward on this very
important discussion of LWCF and the centennial of the Park
Service and our National Parks on which Senator Portman, by the
way, served on that commission. He's very well informed and
very passionate about the National Parks.
It would be really important to have those tools at hand so
we can make informed decisions. We all want to preserve and
protect our parks wherever they are and whatever units they're
carried in. So again, I appreciate Senator Portman's interest
in this because we want to see the parks thrive for many, many
decades, if not centuries to come. We have some important
decisions to make right now about the future of the parks.
Again, thank you for your attendance today.
Let me recognize the Ranking Member, Senator Portman.
Senator Portman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, I think as the centennial approaches we're looking for
ways to ensure that the backlog can be improved, hopefully
cleared at a lot of these great facilities. That we can provide
some more resources particularly through this innovative
public/private partnerships and, you know, following on some of
the work of the Centennial Challenge and the Centennial match
ideas. This again was debated here in this committee just last
week and we had a good conversation.
On the fish stocking, I had some questions about that too.
Most of them have been answered by my friend, Senator Udall.
But my sense is that as you've written the bill you're not
mandating that the Park Service stock the fish. You are making
it discretionary.
Ms. Toothman. That would be our recommendation, yes.
Senator Portman. OK.
Is that adequate to override the park management laws that
might otherwise prohibit, you know, stocking with fish that
would be taken into some of these high mountain lakes?
Ms. Toothman. We're supporting the bill with the amendment
that we're recommending. So, yes.
Senator Portman. I know this is a result of a lot of years
of study saying that the low population density of these fish
in carefully selected lakes would not lead to impairment of the
park resources. Does that mean that there is just no ecological
impact at all that's negative?
Ms. Toothman. I'm not in a position to say there's no
ecological impacts. But this has been reviewed by my
counterparts in natural resources. I'm a historian. They're the
biologists.
As I said, we support the bill as written with the
amendment that would give us the discretion to apply the best
science and to operate within our management policies.
So I think having been proximate to the North Cascades
through many years of residence in Seattle, it is one where we
have built some--a body of knowledge that would help us make
good decisions that wouldn't impair the resource.
Senator Portman. You have to be careful because you're
talking to a Golden Trout fly fisherman to my right which is
only found in high mountain lakes as I understand. Native that
is, Golden Trout.
On S. 1044 you said in your testimony the National Park
Service supports continued application of the Commemorative
Works Act which regard to the World War II memorial. Let me ask
you this. I'm sure you've read it. Section III of the bill, as
you know, intends to address that by subjecting design and
placement of the proposed plaque to the Congressional Works Act
process. Is that your understanding of the legislation?
Ms. Toothman. Yes.
Senator Portman. That again is something we've worked on
for a couple years with the Park Service to ensure that it does
go through the proper process. We appreciate your clarification
of that position. In terms of a religious significance to the
President's statement that day, certainly there is, as there
was in S. 57, which just passed out of the committee by
unanimous consent. That's the Distinguished Flying Cross
memorial, Senator Boxer's bill which has religious
connotations.
If you've been to the Mall in the vicinity of what we're
talking about and been to the Jefferson Memorial you've
probably seen some other prayers.
Ms. Toothman. Yes.
Senator Portman. Of religious significance or for that
matter walking further down to the Lincoln Memorial and seeing
his references. So it's certainly not something that would be
unusually there for the Mall or other commemorations.
So I do appreciate the fact that Secretary Jewell has, you
know, spoken positively about this. You have spoken positively
about it today. I do think it's something that would add, in my
view, a little more context to that beautiful memorial. We do
want to work, of course through the proper commemorative works
process because that's valuable real estate along that Mall.
I know that those works of art, which is what they are, as
you said, have to be maintained and preserved. So I appreciate
you getting back to us with some of the questions we asked
today. Again, we just want to be in a position to understand
better what the implications are, clearly, of the additions to
any Park Service unit or any change in the boundaries.
We appreciate your service, both of you and thank you for
being here today.
Ms. Toothman. Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Portman.
Before we conclude I want to thank Dr. Toothman for your
testimony. I think this may have been a record for the number
of bills----
Ms. Toothman. That is my understanding.
Senator Udall. a witness has had to testify on.
Ms. Spisak, we apologize for not drawing on your great
wisdom and knowledge. But we will try and do better next time
you're here.
As I bring the hearing to a close I want to let everyone
know that some members of the committee may submit additional
questions in writing. If so, we may ask you to submit answers
for the record.
We'll keep the hearing record open for 2 weeks to receive
any additional comments.
Senator Udall. The subcommittee is adjourned.
APPENDIX
Additional material submitted for the record
----------
Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
Washington, DC, September 16, 2013.
Hon. Mark Udall,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman:
At the July 31,2013, hearing on National Park Service-related
legislation, during which Dr. Stephanie Toothman provided testimony for
the Department of the Interior, several requests were made for
additional information. This letter provides that requested
information.
Senator Portman asked how much of the Missisquoi River and the
Trout River proposed for Wild and Scenic River designation run through
public lands and how much through private lands, and whether the
designation will affect the private use ofland. The Missisquoi River
and the Trout River flow through mostly private lands. Since there are
no plans for federal land acquisition and the Wild and Scenic River
designation does not confer any authority for land-use control to the
National Park Service, private landowners and the use of private lands
should not be impacted. Private lands will continue to be governed by
existing local and state authorities, as they are without the
designation.
Senator Portman also asked how much ofthe Farmington River and the
Salmon Brook proposed for Wild and Scenic River designation run through
public lands and how much through private lands, whether the
designation will affect the private use of the land, and why these
additional miles were not included in the original designation. Similar
to the Missisquoi and Trout Rivers, the Farmington River and the Salmon
Brook flow through mostly private lands. Since there are no plans for
federal land acquisition and the Wild and Scenic River designation does
not confer any authority for land-use control to the National Park
Service, private landowners and the use of private lands should not be
impacted. Private lands will continue to be governed by existing local
and state authorities, as they are without the designation. Regarding
the question about the original designation, 14 miles of the Upper
Farmington River were designated in 1994 based on the findings of a
congressionally authorized study (P.L. 99-590) of the segment ending at
the New Hartford-Canton town line. A second congressionally authorized
study (P.L. 109-370) assessed the remainder of the Farmington River and
Salmon Brook. S. 1253 is based on the findings of this subsequent
study.
Senator Portman asked how battlefields and associated sites of the
Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 are being used now and how that
would change if any of the lands were acquired under the American
Battlefield Protection Program. At this time, it is unknown which
properties would be acquired; therefore, we cannot say how the land is
currently being used nor how it would change after being acquired.
However, any lands that would be acquired are those lands that have
been identified for protection under the American Battlefield
Protection Program and must have retained its historic character and
integrity. The purpose of a Battlefield Protection grant is to preserve
the historic landscape. This is done by purchasing the land in fee
simple or purchasing the development rights and placing a protective
easement on the property. Once the property or interest is purchased,
the land use is frozen to the current use at the time of purchase. The
property may still be in private ownership, but if it is a farm, it
would remain a farm; and if it is open space, it would remain open
space. Land purchased in fee simple may be restored to a more historic
appearance.
Senator Portman asked how much of the land involved in three park
boundary expansion bills is private, and how much is public. All of the
land proposed to be included in the boundary of San Antonio Missions
National Historical Park under H.R. 885 is publicly owned, either by
the National Park Service or by local governmental entities. All of the
land proposed to be included in the boundary of Yosemite National Park
under S. 781 is in private ownership, with 793 of the acres owned by
the Pacific Forest Trust and 782 acres owned by West Yosemite
Associates to be transferred through fee simple acquisition. Regarding
the land proposed to be included in the boundary of Gettysburg National
Military Park under S. 782, the 45 acres at the base of Big Roundtop
are privately owned (by the Gettysburg Foundation), and the Gettysburg
Train Station is publicly owned (by the Borough of Gettysburg) but is
expected to be purchased by the Gettysburg Foundation in the near
future. The Gettysburg Foundation plans to donate both properties to
the National Park Service if S. 782 is enacted.
Senator Portman also asked if the three park expansion bills will
add to the maintenance backlog. They will not add to the maintenance
backlog. The San Antonio Missions bill will not result in additional
lands being owned or managed by the National Park Service; therefore,
there will be no new maintenance costs associated with the boundary
adjustment. The land that would be added to Yosemite National Park is
undeveloped and expected to remain undeveloped. Of the land that would
be added to Gettysburg National Military Park, the 45-acre tract at the
base of Big Roundtop would remain undeveloped and the historic
Gettysburg Train Station is in excellent condition and so will only
require normal maintenance.
You asked why the National Capitol Memorial Advisory Commission
(NCMAC) declined to endorse adding President Franklin D. Roosevelt's D-
Day Prayer to the World War II Memorial. During the NCMAC meeting on
September 14, 2011, the Commission members voiced a concern for the
proliferation of plaques at the memorial and stated that, as designed,
the memorial accomplishes very w ll its mandate to pay tribute to the
Armed Forces' service and sacrifice. At that meeting, the Commission
voted unanimously that the World War II Memorial is a completed work of
civic art and that no additional elements should be added into the
design. You also asked if the species recovering in the lakes that were
previously stocked with fish in the North Cascades National Park
Complex are indigenous. Yes, the species recovering are indigenous.
Since nonnative fish removal efforts began in 2009, we have seen a
return of native amphibians in those lakes.
We appreciate having the opportunity to respond on these matters.
Sincerely,
Jonathan B. Jarvis,
Director.
______
Statement of Jeremy Fancher, International Mountain Bicycling
Association, on S. 364
The International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA) is
submitting additional testimony to express our support for the proposed
Rocky Mountain Front Heritage Act (S.364). This proposal permanently
protects 275,000 acres through Wilderness and a Conservation Management
Area that provides continued access to historically important bicycle
trails in the Lewis and Clark National Forest. The proposed bill also
authorizes the agency to conduct a study to improve non-motorized
recreation trail opportunities including mountain biking on lands
within the Lewis and Clark National Forest. In contrast to S.37 Forest
Jobs and Recreation Act, this bill was crafted by local communities and
in the interest of local communities. The result is a land protection
bill that balances conservation and recreation.
We greatly appreciate the concerted effort by Senator Baucus to
include IMBA and local mountain bicycling interests in the development
of this proposal. We have participated in numerous meetings and
conversations with the Senator over the last few years where we have
worked collaboratively to provide input about mountain bike trails that
may be impacted by the wilderness protections in the proposal. There
has been a genuine effort to address access issues we have referenced
with the proposal and we are excited to support the final outcome.
______
The Mountaineers,
Seattle, WA, August 1, 2013.
Hon. Ron Wyden,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Lisa Murkowski,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Doc Hastings,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Ed Markey,
U.S. House of Representative, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Wyden, Chairman Hastings, Ranking Member Murkowski
and Ranking Member Markey,
On behalf of The Mountaineers, I am writing to express our support
for H.R. 908/S. 404, the Green Mountain Lookout Heritage Protection
Act, introduced earlier this year by Representatives DelBene and Larsen
and Senators Murray and Cantwell.
For nearly forty years, The Mountaineers has worked to preserve and
maintain Washington's historic fire lookouts. Our Everett Branch
Lookout and Trail Maintenance Crew dedicates hundreds of hours of
skilled labor each year to three primary lookouts: Three Fingers,
Pilchuck and Heybrook. In addition to the ongoing roofing, glazing,
custom wood milling painting and general repairs performed at these
lookouts, our volunteers have contributed labor and technical
assistance to the maintenance of over 30 fire lookouts across the
Pacific Northwest, including the Green Mountain Lookout.
H.R. 908/S.404 would allow for the continued presence and
maintenance of the Green Mountain fire lookout and we urge you to
support this bill. During a time when lookouts are being removed or
closed to the public due to disrepair, the recently-restored Green
Mountain fire lookout offers an increasingly rare opportunity for
hikers and equestrians to experience an important part of Washington's
history.
The Green Mountain lookout provides an educational destination for
visitors to the Glacier Peak Wilderness and its preservation will serve
to bolster support for wilderness areas across the state. We urge you
to ensure passage of the Green Mountain Lookout Heritage Protection Act
to ensure the permanent preservation of this important resource. Thank
you for your leadership.
Sincerely,
Leann Arend,
Interim Executive Director.
______
City of Las Vegas Nevada,
Las Vegas, Nevada, July 30, 2013.
Hon. Ron Wyden,
Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources, 221 Dirksen Senate Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Lisa Murkowski,
Ranking Member, Energy and Natural Resources, 709 Hart Senate Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Wyden and Ranking Member Murkowski:
On behalf of the city of Las Vegas, I write to whole-heartedly
support the Las Vegas Valley Public Land and Title Springs Fossil Beds
National Monument Act of 2013 (S.974/H.R. 2015). We worked closely with
the Nevada Congressional Delegation to designate the Tule Springs area
as a National Monument in the 112th Congress, and we look forward to
moving the bill forward in this Congress.
As you may know, this legislation enjoys broad support in Southern
Nevada and would result in many mutually beneficial outcomes. The city
of Las Vegas supports swift passage of S.974/H.R.2015 as it is
imperative to protect paleontological and sensitive plant resources. We
also believe that the legislation would create opportunities for
economic development and job creation while providing for responsible
urban development of adjacent lands, and allowing for necessary
infrastructure to service existing developed areas.
Again, we strongly support S.974/H.R.2015 and look forward to its
successful passage.
Respectfully,
Carolyn G. Goodman,
Mayor, City of Las Vegas.
______
Statement of Chris Long, President of Ohio Christian Alliance and
Christian Alliance of America, Akron, Ohio, on S. 1044
Chairman Udall and distinguished Members of the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks:
We are honored to submit this letter of support for S. 1044,
legislation that will include FDR's D-Day Landing Prayer at the WWII
Memorial in Washington, D.C. We would like to express appreciation to
Senator Rob Portman, sponsor of this legislation.
Sixty-nine years ago, on the morning of June 6, 1944, as Allied
forces were landing on the beaches in Normandy, President Roosevelt
went to the airwaves and prayed with our nation for God's blessing and
protection upon our brave fighting men. He prayed, ``Almighty God: Our
sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a
struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization,
and to set free a suffering humanity . . . ''
President Roosevelt's prayer articulated the great crusade that was
underway to liberate millions suffering under tyranny. He honored the
war effort and paid tribute to the fallen and those veterans who fought
courageously in the conflict. It is only fitting that succeeding
generations learn of this prayer that was offered at that most poignant
moment in our nation's history. We are encouraged by the support that
this legislation is receiving. Veterans and veterans groups across the
nation are in support of adding FDR's D-Day Landing Prayer to the WWII
Memorial in Washington, D.C. This prayer represents an important piece
of American history. Historians indicate that President Roosevelt hand
wrote the prayer which was an inspiration to a nation engaged in a
great world war of which the outcome was still very much uncertain. The
prayer gave hope to millions of Americans and to those listening on the
radio in occupied Europe anticipating the Allied advance.
We therefore urge members of the U.S. Senate to support the FDR D-
Day Prayer inclusion and pass the legislation that will allow its
placement at the WWII Memorial in Washington, D.C. We commend Senator
Portman and the Senate co-sponsors of this historic legislation.
______
Statement of Americans United for Separation of Church and State,
(AUSCS), on S. 1044
Founded in 1947, Americans United is a nonpartisan educational
organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of
church-state separation as the only way to ensure true religious
freedom for all Americans. We fight to protect the right of individuals
and religious communities to worship as they see fit without government
interference, compulsion, support, or disparagement. Americans United
has more than 120,000 members and supporters across the country.
We submit this written statement to express our objections to S.
1044, which calls for the installation of a plaque or inscription with
a prayer at the World War II Memorial in the District of Columbia,
which was dedicated in May 2004. We believe that inserting the prayer
acts contrary to the Memorial's goal of uniting Americans, and it
defies the designers' judgments, which were reached through a rigorous
process.
It is true that ``each visitor views the memorial through their own
experience, which sometimes results in their questioning aspects of the
design.''\1\. But this questioning, no matter how heartfelt, should not
reopen the design process. For example, since the Memorial's
dedication, soldiers have requested amendments to add the Battles of
Cassino, Bougainville, and New Georgia; asked for changes to recognize
the Canal Zone; and advocated for the inclusion of campaign ribbons.\2\
These requests were denied.\3\ As explained in a letter written in 2006
by the American Battle Monuments Commission, ``The government agencies
for the design of the memorial . . . consider it complete, recognizing
that the full story can never be captured in a memorial.''\4\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Letters from Michael G. Conley, Director of Public Affairs, The
American Battle Monuments Commission, Complaint letters to The American
Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC) from the public and/or members of
Congress concerning battle monuments 3, http://www.governmentattic.org/
docs/ABMC_ComplaintLetters_2006-7.pdf (ABMC Response Letters).
\2\ Id. at 3, 25, 37, 50.
\3\ Id.
\4\ Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inserting This Prayer Contradicts the Main Message of the Memorial-
Unity.
One of the main themes of the World War II Memorial is unity: ``The
memorial serves as a timeless reminder of the moral strength and the
awesome power of a free people united in a common and just cause.''\5\.
Adding a prayer to the completed Memorial, however, does not serve the
theme of unity. Instead, it introduces an element to the design on
which many Americans disagree-religion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Thomas B. Grooms, U.S. General Services Administration's Design
Excellence Program in the Office of the Chief Architect,World War II
Memorial Online Book 25 (2004), http://www.wwiimemorialfriends.org/
docs/WWII_Memorial_Book_Completed.pdf (WWII Memorial Online Book); see
also id. at 56 (explaining that the Memorial design was chosen because
it ``created a strong sense of unity-the bringing together the nation-
with the two colonnades representing the states); id. at 65 (during the
design process, ``overall, the peers sought to keep the site as `green'
as possible while ensuring the integrity of the design vision,
particularly the theme of national unity . . . '').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Senator Rob Portman and Senator Joseph Lieberman introduced
the identical bill last Congress, they both spoke on the House floor
and noted the religious significance of adding the prayer. Senator
Portman explained that the new inscription will be a ``permanent
reminder of . . . the power of prayer through difficult times.''.\6\
And Senator Lieberman stated his belief that the prayer will ``remind
us that faith in God has played a pivotal role in American history
every day since the Declaration of Independence.''.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Portman Commemorates D-Day with WWII Memorial Prayer Act on
Senate Floor,'' June 6, 2012, http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=SsTPINh9WHY; see also ``Portman Renews Effort to Commemorate
FDR's D-Day Prayer with the National at the WWII Memorial,'' Press
Release, May 23, 2013, http://www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/
2013/5/portman-renews-effort-to-commemorate-fdr-s-d-day-prayer-with-
the-nation-at-the-wwii-memorial (We should not underestimate the power
of prayer through difficult times, and I encourage the Senate to take
it up and pass it quickly.'').
\7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But America's military, like the nation itself, is extraordinarily
religiously diverse. Our veterans-like our currently serving troops-
come from many different religious traditions and some follow no
spiritual path at all. Indeed, a 2009 report by the Department of
Defense ``tracks 101 faiths for active-duty personnel'' and noted that
``almost 281,710 claim[ed] no religion.''.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Bob Smietana, Buddhist Chaplain is Army First, USA TODAY, Sept.
8, 2009, http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-09-08-buddhist-
chaplain--N.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adding a prayer that represents some, but not all veterans and
members of the military, defies the theme of unity, making many feel
unrepresented by the Memorial. The current Memorial represents all 16
million service members who served in our armed forces during World War
II. There is no need to alter the Memorial to depict one particular
view of God, which would cause some veterans to feel excluded.
The Designers of the Memorial Called for Fewer Inscriptions, Not More.
The process of choosing the inscriptions for the World War II
Memorial was exhaustive and done with expertise, and should not be
reopened. In 2011, Robert Abbey, the director of the Bureau of Land
Management, testified at a House subcommittee hearing that ``the design
we see today was painstakingly arrived upon after years of public
deliberations and spirited public debate.''.\9\ Indeed, ``the
inscription selection and review process involved two American Battle
Monuments Commissions (one appointed by President Clinton, one
appointed by President Bush), the Memorial Advisory Board, military
service and civilian historians, the Library of Congress, the National
Park Service, and the Commission of Fine Arts.''.\10\During this
process, ``the number, locations, words, and authors to be represented
[on the memorial] changed often.''.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Hearing on H.R. 1980, H.R. 2070, H.R. 2621, and H.R. 3155
Before the Subcomm. on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands of the
H. Comm. on Natural Resources, 112th Congress (2011) (testimony of
Robert Abbey, Director of the Bureau of Land Management).
\10\ ABMC Response Letters at 3.
\11\ World War II Online Book at 76-79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of the inscription approval process, the American Battle
Monuments Commission created a Review Commission, whose membership
included historians and retired Army Generals, to review proposed
inscriptions for the monument.\12\ This Review Commission called for
``Fewer Words-Less Inscriptions.''.\13\ The Review Commission ``decided
to reduce the number of inscription locations from 25 to 20 and to
emphasize evocative quotations from World War II participants-including
Roosevelt, Truman, Marshall, Eisenhower, MacArthur, and Nimitz.''.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Id. at 76-79.
\13\ Id. at 76.
\14\ Id. at 79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adding additional inscriptions to the monument, therefore, goes
against the vision, expertise, and design of those who designed the
Memorial. And, it surely contradicts the Commission's goal to have
``Fewer Words-Less Inscriptions.''
The Commemorative Works Act
S. 1044 defies the Commemorative Works Act (CWA). The original
design process included ``more than two dozen public reviews,'' and
``numerous informal design review sessions with members of the
evaluation board and design competition jury.''.\15\ And, as explained
above, the inscriptions themselves were also subject to significant
review. Adding additional inscription disrespects the original process
and the current design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Id. AT 65.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
That S. 1044 calls for the design of the new inscription or plaque
to also go through the CWA process does not undo the fact that the
Memorial's design is being reopened and altered or that the painstaking
decisions made in the original process are being overruled. The bill
demands that a specific inscription be added. Even if the exact
location and the font of the inscription will be reviewed under the
CWA, it does not cure the fact that the insertion of the plaque
violates the original design process and, at a minimum, the spirit of
the CWA.
Changing the Content of Such a Prominent Monument a Decade after Its
Dedication is Nearly Unprecedented.
Redesigning critical aspects of a Memorial more than a decade after
its dedication is nearly unprecedented. Proponents of S. 1044 claim
that adding the prayer to the World War II Memorial is akin to Congress
choosing to add an inscription at the Lincoln Memorial to commemorate
Martin Luther King Jr.'s ``I Have a Dream Speech.'' They also claim it
is similar to adding a plaque to the World War II Memorial to thank
Former Senator Bob Dole for his ``tireless support of'' the Memorial.
But adding these plaques was wholly different.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ In addition, actions to fix spelling errors and misquotes or
to add names to the Vietnam Memorial are also easily distinguishable.
Also clearly different is eliminating an incorrect quote from the
Memorial to Martin Luther King Jr., which was dedicated in 2011.
Indeed, the Department of the Interior chose to remove an inaccurate
quotation from the Memorial to Martin Luther King Jr., rather than add
the full quotation to ``ensure that the structural integrity of the
monument was not compromised.'' Secretary Salazar Provides Update on
Resolution to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial, Press Release,
Dec. 11, 2012, .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The plaque added at the Lincoln Memorial merely commemorated that
spot as the site for an important historical event. In just a few
words, the inscription commemorated Martin Luther King, Jr.'s speech:
the inscription includes the words ``I HAVE A DREAM,'' and acknowledges
the speaker, the event, and the date. It does not add, detract, or
change any aspects of the monument that reflect upon Lincoln.
The plaque honoring Bob Dole also does not change any reflections
upon World War II. It was not even embedded into the World War II
Memorial. Instead, it was placed at the Memorial's visitor center,
approximately 25 yards away from the World War II Memorial itself.
Indeed, you must turn away from the Memorial to even see the plaque.
Neither the King nor the Dole plaque changed the content and
message of the Memorial to which they were added: they did not alter,
remove, or add language, images, or emblems relating to the honoring of
President Lincoln or World War II Veterans. Neither second guessed the
designers, historians, architects, or public input regarding the best
way to honor Lincoln or veterans at the memorials. Instead, they left
the memorials intact.
Inserting the prayer at the World War II Memorial, in contrast,
alters the content of the memorial and the message of the monument
itself.
Conclusion
Our forefathers were wise when they called for our nation to
separate church and state. It protects the autonomy of religious
institutions and ensures that Americans have the right to believe-or
not-as they choose without government intrusion or influence. A quick
search on the internet on S. 1044 demonstrates why passing legislation
imposing civil religion is dangerous for religious liberty-articles,
blogs, and emails are riddled with inflammatory statements challenging
the religion of government officials who opposed changing the Memorial
and demonizing some as anti-prayer and anti-Christian.\17\ Even when
unintended, such results are neither good for religious freedom nor our
nation as a whole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ In 2004, false information was also spread that the designers
of the World War II Memorial purposefully deleted the words, ``so help
us God'' from a sentence inscribed on the Memorial. In truth, the
sentence from the speech that included those wordswas never even
included on the Memorial and so claiming the words were omitted is
misleading and false. ABMC ResponseLetters at 46 (``The inclusion or
exclusion of religious references was never an issue, nor was it ever
discussed''). But that falsehood is still being circulated today and is
used to disparage certain officials as anti-religious, and hostile to
God. Unfortunately, some of this rhetoric is being mixed into the
messages pushing for the prayer inscription.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Memorial, as designed, is purposely short on words yet
certainly evokes a powerful message of unity.\18\ And, in contrast to
some of the rhetoric that is being generated by this debate, the
monument already acknowledges that faith was important to many soldiers
during the war.\19\ There is no need to take extraordinary steps to
reopen the Memorial to add a prayer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Its goal ``was supposed to be a memorial to inspire, not a
museum to teach.'' World War II Online Book at 66.
\19\ The monument quotes Walter Lord: ``Even against the greatest
of odds, there is something in the Human Spirit-a magic blend of skill,
faith, and valor-that can life men from certain defeat to incredible
victory.'' World War II Online Book at 97 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),
July 29, 2013.
Hon. Mark E. Udall,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy & Natural
Resources, 304 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Robert J. Portman,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy &
Natural Resources, 304 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Portman:
We, the undersigned organizations, write to express our concerns
about S. 1044, the ``World War II Memorial Prayer Act of 2013.'' This
bill would require the Secretary of the Interior to add an inscription
of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's D-Day prayer to the WWII Memorial.
Religious freedom is a fundamental and defining feature of our
national character. Given our robust, longstanding commitment to the
freedom of religion and belief, it is no surprise that the United
States is among the most religious, and religiously diverse, nations in
the world. Our religious diversity is one of our nation's great
strengths.
This bill, however, shows a lack of respect for this great
diversity. It endorses the false notion that all veterans will be
honored by a war memorial that includes a prayer proponents
characterize as reflecting our country's ``Judeo-Christian heritage and
values.''\1\ In fact, Department of Defense reports show that nearly
one-third of all current members of the U.S. Armed Forces identify as
non-Christian.\2\ Likewise, many of our veterans and citizens come from
a variety of religious backgrounds, or have no religious belief; thus,
it is inappropriate to honor the ``power of prayer''.\3\ in a national
memorial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Misc. National Parks Bills Hearing Before the Subcomm. on
National Parks of the S. Comm. Energy & Natural Resources, 112th Cong.
(2012) (Statement of Senator Rob Portman) available at http://
www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-
meetings?ID=a64e4f88-18d3-4489-96a0-b1a89b2b51e6 (86:15).
\2\ Religious Diversity in the U.S. Military, Military Leadership
Diversity Comm'n, Issue Paper No. 22 (June 2010).
\3\ Press Release, Sen. Rob Portman, Portman Renews Effort to
Commemorate FDR's D-Day Prayer with the Nation at the WWII Memorial
(May 23, 2013), http://www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2013/5/
portman-renews-effort-to-commemorate-fdr-s-d-day-prayer-with-the-
nation-at-the-wwii-memorial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Memorials are designed to bring our country together in a unified
reflection of our past. Indeed, the WWII Memorial's stated purpose is
national unity.\4\ Instead of uniting us as we remember the sacrifice
of those who served, the inclusion of this prayer on the memorial would
be divisive: It would send a strong message to those who do not share
the same religious beliefs expressed in this prayer that they are
excluded and ```not full members of the . . . community.'''\5\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ American Battle Monuments Commission (AMBC), National WWII
Memorial, Facts, http://www.wwiimemorial.com/
default.asp?page=facts.asp&subpage=intro (``Above all, the memorial
stands as an important symbol of American national unity, a timeless
reminder of the moral strength and awesome power that can flow when a
free people are at once united and bonded together in a common and just
cause.'').
\5\ Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 309-10 (2000)
(quoting Lynch v. Donnelly, 465, U.S. 668, 688 (O'Connor, J.,
concurring); see also, e.g., Trunk and Jewish War Veterans v. City of
San Diego, 629 F. 3d 1099, 1124-25 (9th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 567
U. S. (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The memorial, as it currently stands, appropriately honors those
who served and encompasses the entirety of the war. The World War II
Memorial Commission and the American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC)
carefully chose the thirteen inscriptions already included on the
memorial. The inscriptions contain quotes spanning from the beginning
of U.S. involvement in the war following the attacks on Pearl Harbor to
the war's end, and already include a quote about D-Day and two quotes
from President Roosevelt.\6\ These commissions thoroughly deliberated
which inscriptions to include, selecting quotations that honor those
who served and commemorate the events of World War II.\7\ As the
National Park Service explained at a hearing on this legislation in the
112th Congress, ``The design we see today was painstakingly arrived
upon after years of public deliberations and spirited public
debate.''.\8\ The ABMC and National Capital Memorial Advisory
Commission, which was designated by Congress to consult on the design
of the Memorial, have stated that ``no additional elements should be
inserted into this carefully designed Memorial.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ AMBC, National WWII Memorial Inscriptions, http://
wwiimemorial.com/archives/factsheets/inscriptions.htm.
\7\ National Parks Service, World War II Memorial Inscription
Controversy, http://www.nps.gov/wwii/photosmultimedia/upload/
WWII%20Memorial%20Inscription%20Controversy%20web.pdf.
\8\ Legislative Hearing on H.R. 1980, H.R. 2070, H.R. 2621, and
H.R. 3155 Before the Subcomm. on National Parks, Forest and Public
Lands of the H. Comm. on Natural Resources, 112th Cong. (2011)
(Statement for the Record from National Park Service, U.S. Department
of the Interior) available at http://www.doi.gov/ocl/hearings/112/
HR2070_110311.cfm.
\9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The First Amendment affords special protections to freedom of
religion. Because of these protections, each of us is free to believe,
or not believe, according to the dictates of our conscience. The effect
of this bill, however, is to co-opt religion for political purposes,
which harms the beliefs of everyone.
Thank you for allowing us to share our concerns with S. 1044.
Sincerely,
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),
American Jewish Committee (AJC),
Americans United for Separation of Church and State,
Hindu American Foundation,
Interfaith Alliance.
______
Statement of Faith & Freedom Coalition, Deluth, GA, on S. 1044
In a letter to his wife Abigail, John Adams wrote these words
regarding what we now call Independence Day, ``I am apt to believe that
it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great
anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of
Deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.'' Those words
were written in 1776 when the founders were convinced that, through the
hand of God, they had delivered this fledgling nation from a great
tyranny. We were to be a nation dedicated to the God of the Word, and
the Word of God. Our Founding Fathers, and Statesmen that followed,
emphasized the importance of religious obedience to a thriving and
successful nation.
`` . . . reason and experience both forbid us to expect that
national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious
principle.'' George Washington
`` . . . Religion and good morals are the only solid
foundations of public liberty and happiness.'' Samuel Adams
``The great pillars of all government and social life are
virtue, morality, and religion . . . '' Patrick Henry
``We have no government armed in power capable of contending
in human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . our
Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It
is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.'' John
Adams
This statement by John Adams is powerful. He acknowledges the
corrupting influence of power and the only force strong enough to
curtail those passions as being morality and religion.
Where do we stand today? Have we clung to the only power and
authority our founders acknowledged would prosper and protect our
nation? On the other hand, have we fallen into the trap we were warned
of, abandoning God, abandoning his principles and still expecting His
blessing and protection? A quick glance at any day's headlines gives us
the obvious answer. An honest look at today's culture tells us the
results.
Christianity is deeply engrained America's history, from the
founding of the nation through today. Prior to the invasion of Normandy
by American, British, and Canadian forces on June 6, 1944, President
Franklin D. Roosevelt empowered the country with this prayer. The
burdens of war remain unchanged between generations; President
Roosevelt's prayer for the troops and their families continues to serve
as a reminder that American is a blessed nation that will unwaveringly
stand resolute in the face of adversity. Its enduring message should be
recognized.
______
Statement of Kelly Damerow, Director of Federal and State Affairs,
Secular Coalition For America, on S. 1044
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony on the behalf of the Secular Coalition
for America and the 25 million nontheistic Americans the Secular
Coalition represents. We have grave concerns about S. 1044, which would
direct the Secretary of the Interior to install in the area of the
World War II Memorial an inscription with President Franklin D.
Roosevelt's prayer on D-Day, June 6, 1944.
According to the American Battle Monuments Commission, the
preeminent purpose of the WWII Memorial is to ``stand as an important
symbol of American national unity.'' The inscriptions currently etched
into the memorial reaffirm this notion, celebrating our country's
collective efforts and sacrifices in conquering tyranny and defending
liberty.
Rebuffing the unifying purpose of the monument, the prayer this
bill proposes to add is inherently divisive. The defining
characteristic of our religious freedom is not our unity, but our
diversity. We are proudly a religiously pluralistic society. The
freedom to make our religious choices is our own and the vast majority
of Americans agree that ``religion is a private matter that should be
kept out of public debates.''
There is no secular motivation behind this bill. It does not seek
to correct inaccuracies or further the unifying purpose of the
monument. The 13 inscriptions were thoughtfully chosen by experts for
their historical significance and this prayer was not one of them. Even
with a professor and expert on Judaic studies on the advisory board, no
religious quote was chosen. Overruling this carefully weighed decision
by a panel of experts would send a strong message. The impact of
returning to a finished monument to add this prayer would clearly be
granting special treatment for religious statements.
The unnecessary addition of a religious prayer shows great
disrespect for our current military service members and veterans who
come from a variety of religious backgrounds, many with no religious or
theistic belief. Currently, nontheistic servicemembers are the largest
non-Christian religious affiliation, and 23% of servicemembers indicate
no religious preference. The permanent and unnecessary action this bill
proposes only solidifies to these servicemembers the discrimination
they continue to face on a daily basis.
If this monument stands to renew faith, let it renew our faith that
this legislative body will respect the growing religious diversity of
its constituents and servicemembers.
If this monument stands to reaffirm belief, let it reaffirm our
belief in the constitutional principles that separate religion and
government as the best guarantee of freedom for all.
Thank you.
______
Statement of the Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area,
on S. 1157
I am pleased to offer these comments in support of S. 1157 which
will reauthorize the Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area
until September 30, 2022. First authorized by Public Law 106-278 on
October 6, 2000 and operating under a management plan entitled Living
with the River approved by the National Park Service in 2003, the
Schuylkill River Heritage Area is eager to continue our work in five
counties of southeastern Pennsylvania. Our Heritage Area uses
conservation, recreation, education, cultural and historic
preservation, and tourism as tools for community revitalization and
economic development. In keeping with our management plan, the
Schuylkill River Heritage Area has developed three major initiatives:
The Schuylkill River Sojourn, our signature event; the Schuylkill River
Trail, our signature project; and The River of Revolutions Interpretive
Center which is part of the Schuylkill River Academic and Heritage
Center being developed in partnership with Montgomery County Community
College and the Borough of Pottstown, Pennsylvania.
The Schuylkill River Sojourn: Our Signature Event
The Schuylkill River Sojourn has been our signature event since it
was initiated in 1999 in partnership with the PA Department of
Conservation and Natural Resources. Since its inception, participants
have traveled from 20 states, Washington, D.C. and two provinces in
Canada to paddle the river and over 3,000 people have registered for
this weeklong, 112-mile guided paddle. In addition, the Schuylkill
River Heritage Area engages more than 70 partners each year to provide
food, educational programming, entertainment and funding. The sojourn's
popularity has grown steadily over the years. In 2013, we had a record
number of people (59) make the full trip, and 226 for the entire trip.
The sojourn addresses the multiple goals of the SRHA management
plan: educating people about the region, encouraging recreational use
of the river, instilling an appreciation for nature, facilitating
community revitalization and promoting heritage tourism.
The sojourn spawned the publication of a Schuylkill River Water
Trail Map and Guide, which improved paddling safety and directly led to
the river's designation as an American Canoe Association Recommended
Water Trail. It has also attracted a great deal of media attention,
raising awareness of the river as a valuable recreational resource and
as a source of drinking water for over 1.5 million people through both
regional and national media platforms. Since it incorporates
educational programs that are open to the public at evening campsites,
it has taught thousands of non-sojourners to value of the river, as
well.
The Schuylkill River Trail: Our Signature Project
Development of a 130-mile Schuylkill River Trail from Philadelphia
to Pottsville has been a primary goal of our organization since the
Schuylkill River Greenway Association was founded in 1974. Our
motivation in building the trail has always been about bringing people
to the river, so that they value and conserve its resources.
Early on, our role consisted of supporting a vision, in partnership
with others, of a trail that ran the length of the river. In 1991, the
Schuylkill River Greenway Association officially acquired 10.5 miles of
abandoned Pennsylvania Railroad right-of-way in southern Berks County
and formulated a plan to build a 19-mile trail from Pottstown to
Reading. Gradually, through a variety of funding sources and
partnerships, we built that entire 19 miles, filling a major gap in
2005 with the completion of the Lancaster Avenue Bridge in Reading, and
closing the final gap in 2008 by constructing a .68-mile piece in
Birdsboro. A four mile section remains as a signed, on-road trail. In
2006, the Heritage Area received a two-year, $600,000 grant from the
William Penn Foundation and became the lead organization in unifying
the trail's various sections, creating a uniform sign system and
improving accessibility. In 2007, we completed 6.5 miles of trail from
Hamburg to Auburn, and in 2010 we posted signs for a 20-mile on-road
Route from Reading to Hamburg. Our work with the trail is on-going as
we regularly reprint and distribute trail maps and maintain a website
dedicated to the trail.
Today, more than 56 miles of the Schuylkill River Trail has been
built by a number of partners. Of this, the Heritage Area operates and
maintains, through volunteers, 28 trail miles without the benefit of
state, county or local funds. We are currently working towards building
an off-road trail from Reading to Hamburg, and have begun using the
trail as an economic development tool with our Heritage Towns and Tours
program, which assists communities in linking the trail to downtowns
and attractions.
River of Revolutions Interpretive Center
It has been a long-term goal of the Schuylkill River Heritage Area
to create a visitors center for the entire region. In 2012 we achieved
that goal, opening the River of Revolutions Interpretive Center in our
Pottstown headquarters. The center features interactive exhibits, maps,
videos, informative wall panels, and family-friendly displays to tell
the fascinating history of the Schuylkill River region through the
American, Industrial and Environmental Revolutions. It also includes
brochures and maps that encourage visitors to explore the region's many
historic and recreational sites.
The River of Revolutions Interpretive Center has been well received
by visitors of all age groups and backgrounds. It will eventually be
part of the Schuylkill River Academic and Heritage Center that the
Heritage Area is creating in partnership with Montgomery County
Community College. Plans call for revamping a 5,000-square-foot
undeveloped section of the building which houses our offices and
transforming it into an environmental education center for the college,
with four classrooms, a lab and office space. When the college facility
is complete, the site will become a regional hub for river education,
history and recreation.
Since being authorized by Congress in 2000, the Schuylkill River
Heritage Area has undertaken many additional projects. The following
list is a sampling of dozens of initiatives, projects and programs we
have presented to the region.
The Schuylkill River Water Trail was designated a National
Recreation Trail by the United States Department of the
Interior, the first in Pennsylvania.
The Schuylkill River National Heritage Area Management Plan
was approved by the Secretary of the Interior.
Completed a master sign plan, to help brand the Schuylkill
River Heritage Area and to provide visitors and residents with
a uniform sign system for the Schuylkill River Land and Water
Trails.
Reprinted The Schuylkill, by J. Bennett Nolan in partnership
with the Martin Foundation. This long out-of-print book, first
published in 1951, is considered the premier source of
historical information on the Schuylkill River.
The Schuylkill River Water Trail was selected by the
American Canoe Association as a Recommended Water Trail, then
one of only 12 water trails in the US and Canada to receive
that designation.
Organized the first Scenes of the Schuylkill Juried
Exhibition, featuring 31 original works by artists celebrating
the beauty of the Heritage Area. This year we will host the
10th annual exhibition, which includes 83 works.
Entered into an agreement with Exelon Nuclear to establish
the Schuylkill River Restoration Fund. To date, Exelon has
donated over $1.4 million for projects that improve water
quality in the river and its tributaries.
Participated in several Upward Bound programs introducing
high school students from inner city areas to kayaking,
bicycling and lessons about the Heritage Area.
Produced a full color brochure of the Schuylkill River
Heritage Area aimed at encouraging people to explore the
region's cultural and recreational attractions.
Received a $735,000 two-year grant from the William Penn
Foundation for projects that increase public awareness and
accessibility to the Schuylkill River Trail.
Published Along the Schuylkill River, a pictorial history of
the river that featured over 200 vintage photographs of the
Schuylkill River, the canal and the communities along it.
Premiered a new PBS documentary, The Revolutionary River,
about the history of the Schuylkill River to enthusiastic
audiences at several events. The film was also broadcast on
WHYY.
Introduced the Heritage Towns and Tours program, providing
municipalities along the Schuylkill River Trail with grant
funding and how-to information on making their towns into
destinations for trail users.
Produced and distributed a new full-color brochure for the
Schuylkill River Trail that includes a map of the entire
trail--the first of its kind produced as a handout--and
information on key towns along the trail.
Received a $719,000 grant from the William Penn Foundation
to improve the Schuylkill River Trail and strengthen its
economic development potential.
Worked in partnership with the Pottstown Health and Wellness
Foundation to assume management of Pottstown's free bike share
program, Bike Pottstown, and expanded it to Phoenixville and
Hamburg, where it is known as Bike Schuylkill. The community
bike share program has been remarkably successful-in Pottstown
alone over 350 bikes are shared per month at no cost to the
user.
The Heritage Area received national publicity when two short
films about the Schuylkill River Heritage Area were produced by
American Milestone as part of a short-form documentary series.
Organized the Schuylkill River Trail Bike Tour Series
featuring an annual bike ride on the Schuylkill River Trail to
introduce riders to historic assets and community resources
easily accessible via the trail.
We introduced a new lecture series with a talk and book
signing by local writer Chari Towne, whose book, A River Again,
focused on the mid-20th century cleanup that saved the
Schuylkill River. Additional lectures have been held throughout
the year on a variety of topics of regional interest.
Installed 19 Gateway Information Centers at popular
destination sites throughout the five-county Heritage Area.
Gateway Centers are information booths designed to educate
people about the region's cultural and historic significance.
The Schuylkill River Heritage Area has developed an excellent
network of regional funders that have provided matching support for our
federal appropriation. Matching funds have been as high as five dollars
for every one dollar of federal support. Collectively these funds have
supported jobs, as monies are invested in community projects. Since
2000, $5.2 million in matching support has come from the Pennsylvania
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and $2.5 million from
the William Penn Foundation. Another $1.6 million from the Exelon
Corporation and $400,000 from the Philadelphia Water Department has
been given in support of the Schuylkill River Restoration Fund
established by our organization. We have also received generous support
from the Pottstown Health & Wellness Foundation, the Wyomissing
Foundation, the Martin Foundation, Chester, Montgomery, Berks and
Schuylkill Counties and increasing support from businesses and
individuals.
Should we be reauthorized by Congress until 2022, we are well under
the $10,000,000 that was authorized to be appropriated to the
Schuylkill River Heritage Area in Public Law 106-278--October 6, 2000
and every indication we have suggests continued matching support from
the funders noted above.
As a National and State designated Heritage Area, we are fortunate
to be able to partner with three National Parks that are located in our
area, Valley Forge National Historical Park, Independence National
Historical Park and Hopewell Furnace National Historic Site. We have
installed Gateway Information Centers about the Schuylkill River
Heritage Area and have provided for public educational programming
through a variety of events at each of these sites. In the past, the
National Park Service has provided programming for our Schuylkill River
Sojourn; and next year we are sponsoring a three-day bicycle ride on
the Schuylkill River Trail that begins at Hopewell, stops at the
Heritage Area River of Revolutions Interpretive Center, camps at Valley
Forge and tours Independence. The National Park Service has a
representative on our Board of Directors and is recognized on all
Heritage Area literature and our website with the iconic National Park
Service arrowhead logo. The Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage
Area is implementing our management plan, leveraging federal funding,
partnering with our National Parks, restoring the Schuylkill River,
building the Schuylkill River Trail and promoting numerous visitor
attractions in the region as we use conservation, recreation,
education, cultural and historic preservation and tourism as tools for
community revitalization and economic development.
We respectfully request your support for S.1157 which will
reauthorize the Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area until
September 30, 2022.
Thank you.
______
Statement of Annie C. Harris, Chief Executive Officer, Essex National
Heritage Commission, on S. 1186
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank
you for opportunity to submit written testimony for S. 1186--the Essex
National Heritage Area Reauthorization Act.
The Essex National Heritage Area is the 500 square mile region
located north of Boston, Massachusetts. For nearly four hundred years,
this region has played a very important role in American history, and
many of the sites and resources from the founding of our Nation still
survive intact today. The National Heritage Area was established in
1996 by Public Law 103-33 to recognize, preserve, promote and educate
the public about three nationally significant themes: early settlement,
maritime history and the early industrial era. The Essex National
Heritage Area has within its boundaries the first integrated ironworks
in North America, the oldest continuously operating museum, the oldest
working boat shop, the oldest cultivate fruit tree, and much more.\1\
The area is rich in manmade and natural resources including 9,968 sites
on the National Register of Historic Places, 73 National Register
Historic Districts, 26 National Historic Landmarks, 86 historical sites
and museums open to the public, 400 farms, 9 state parks, 2 units of
the National Park Service and 1 National Wildlife Refuge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site, Saugus, is the
site of the first integrated ironworks manufacturing complex in North
America. The Peabody Essex Museum, Salem, was established by Salem sea
captains in 1799, and it is considered by most historians to be the
oldest continuously operating museum in the United States. Lowell's
Boat Shop, Amesbury, is the Nation's oldest working boat shop and the
birthplace of the famous Gloucester stackable fishing dory. The
Endicott Pear Tree, Danvers, (also known also as the Endecott Pear) is
the oldest known cultivated fruit tree in North America having been
brought by Governor John Endecott from England on the Arbella in June
1630.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Essex National Heritage Commission (ENHC) is the regional, non-
profit organization that manages the activities of the National
Heritage Area. ENHC works to conserve and promote the nationally
significant stories and resources of the region. At the ENHC, we
support a robust network of public and private partnerships that rely
on the heritage resources and stories to revitalize communities and
strengthen the local economy. We promote cultural tourism sites and
programs, and contribute to supporting the state's tourism economy
which is the third largest job producing industry in Massachusetts. We
provide grants in conservation and resource stewardship that not only
preserve the historic fabric of our region, but also create jobs in
construction and tourism. Currently, it is estimated that we have
created nearly 1,500 jobs through our grant programs, and for the past
5 summers we have provided 103 jobs for disadvantaged youths. We
develop trails and bikeways for recreation, healthy living and clean
transportation. Twenty-eight miles of trail were recently completed and
are now providing safe recreational opportunities, and another eighteen
miles are currently under design. We create regional events that build
community pride, and last year alone we assisted in attracting 1.3
million visitors to the region. Appreciating that our future lies in
engaging residents and visitors of all backgrounds and interests, we
have increased our educational programming to include the Latino
community and other English language learners. This summer, in
partnership with our local university and the National Park Service, we
presented two teacher workshops in place-based learning and a summer
enrichment program for 40 students for whom English is their second
language.
In the Essex National Heritage Area, as in the other National
Heritage Areas, we accomplish our work by leveraging the public
investment with private funding, volunteer time, in-kind donations, and
local and state contributions. We successfully match the federal
dollars invested in our area many times over. As documented in the
Evaluation of the Essex National Heritage Area Commission Findings
Document, ``between 1998 and 2008, ENHC received $9,327,437 in federal
funds which were match with $19,702,891 from non-federal sources.''\2\
We promote the principles of conservation and preservation from the
grassroots by involving residents in long-term, multi-partnership,
landscape and community conservation projects. Our projects like Trails
& Sails and the Essex Coastal Scenic Byway engage hundreds of people in
multiple communities. We accomplish our work in harmony with the goals
of the National Park Service and without requiring public ownership for
our success. The value of the Essex National Heritage Area and our
fellow heritage areas lies in our ability to connect with the area's
historic, cultural and natural sites and to utilize these indigenous
resources to create jobs, and revitalize communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Evaluation of the Essex National Heritage Commission Findings
Document; prepared by the Center for Park Management for the National
Park Service; November 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is our experience that heritage preservation and jobs go hand-
in-hand. Strong economies occur in places where there is deep community
pride and dedicated stewardship. Our accomplishments in preservation
and economic development in the Essex National Heritage Area are
supported by the findings of TrippUmbach, a nationally recognized
consulting firm, engaged by the National Park Service to study the
economic impact of the National Heritage Areas across the United
States. In their study on The Economic Impact of National Heritage
Areas (February, 2013), they conclude that the annual national economic
effect of the National Heritage Areas is ``$12.9 billion in economic
activity which supports approximately 148,000 jobs and $1.2 billion
annually in Federal taxes.''\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Economic Impact of National Heritage Areas: A Case Study
Analysis of Six National Heritage Area Sires in the Northeast Region of
the United States and Projections on the National Impact of All
National Heritage Areas. TrippUmbach. February 18, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Heritage Areas, also, enhance the capacity of the National
Park Service to meet its mission. Within the Essex National Heritage
Area, we work closely with two national parks--Salem Maritime National
Historic Site and Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site. We support
these park units with programs, community projects, and fundraising. As
diversity and youth engagement have become ever more important, we
regularly assist our local national parks in their efforts to reach out
to our region's underserved youth and to engage diverse audiences.
The National Heritage Areas are acknowledged by the leadership of
the National Park Service to be one of NPS's most effect external
programs. Director Jon Jarvis states in Policy Memorandum 12-01 (March
14, 2012), ``the Service also manages programs that reach beyond
national park boundaries. (and) they form a vital part of the NPS
mission and help sustain and enhance the quality of life throughout
America. These programs rely on a spirit of partnership and
cooperation, which I believe must be the hallmark of the NPS in the
decades that lie ahead. And nowhere is that spirit of partnership and
cooperation more fully displayed than in the National Heritage Areas.''
He explains that ``The National Heritage Areas Program expands on
traditional approaches to resource stewardship by supporting large-
scale, community centered initiatives that connect local citizens
through preservation, conservation, and planning processes.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ United States Department of the Interior, National Park
Service; Policy Memorandum 12-01; Director Jon Jarvis; March 14, 2012.
Emphasis is provided by A. Harris.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The value of ENHC's work is substantiated by a recently released,
independent evaluation. On May 8, 2008, Congress enacted Public Law
110-229 requiring that the nine NHAs established by PL 104-333 be
evaluated to assess the progress they have made on accomplishing the
purposes of their authorizing legislation and achieving their
management plans, to analyze the investments made in these areas, and
to review their management structure. The legislation then directed the
Secretary of the Interior to submit a report to Congress which ``shall
include recommendations for the future role of the National Park
Service, if any, with respect to the National Heritage Area.'' The
first three of these evaluations along with the Secretary of the
Interior's recommendations were submitted to Congress on April 12,
2013. The Evaluation of the Essex National Heritage Area Commission
Findings Document--(the Essex Evaluation)\5\ was one of the three
transmitted to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and
the House Committee on Natural Resources. The evaluations were
performed by the Center for Park Management and Westat, consultants to
the Secretary of the Interior and the National Park Service. Based on
these independent findings, the Secretary of the Interior states in the
letter of April 12 that the Essex National Heritage Area ``contributes
to the mission of the NPS''. ``successfully engages citizens who work
in heritage and conservation agencies all across the region''. ENHC's
``work demonstrates the ability to successfully provide formal
technical assistance and work collaboratively to assist with long-term
resource protection''. and has ``more than doubled the requirement for
annual matching contributions.'' In summary, the Secretary of the
Interior concludes that ``losing federal assistance would have a
significant negative impact on the resources, partners, and the NPS''
and states that ``ENHC is fulfilling its legislative mandate'' and
``recommends a future role with the Essex National Heritage Area.''\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Evaluation of the Essex National Heritage Commission Findings
Document; November 2010
\6\ Letter by Rachel Jacobson, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Office of the Secretary, US Department
of the Interior; dated April 12, 2013; transmitted to the Honorable Ron
Wyden. the Honorable Lisa Murkowski, the Honorable Doc Hastings, the
Honorable Edward Markey, the Honorable Elizabeth Warren, the Honorable
William Cowan, the Honorable Niki Tsongas and the Honorable John
Tierney. Emphasis is provided by A. Harris.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By enacting S. 1186, the Senate will gain the time it needs to
review the evaluation of the Essex National Heritage Area and consider
the recommendations of the US Department of Interior. The Senate will,
also, allow a successful program to continue until the Senate can give
due consideration to the comprehensive national heritage area
legislation currently filed in the House as H.R. 455--National Heritage
Area Act of 2013. Comprehensive National Heritage Area legislation has
been recommended for many years--including by the National Park System
Advisory Board in 2006 in Charting a Future for the National Heritage
Areas\7\ and in 2009 by the National Parks Second Century Commission
Report--Advancing the National Park Idea\8\ and most recently by the
Secretary of the Interior--National Park Service's spokesperson
Stephanie Toothman, Associate Director, Cultural Resources,
Partnerships, and Science in her testimony regarding the sun-setting
National Heritage Areas before this committee on March 7, 2012 and
again on July 31, 2013. Lastly, in the current era of fiscal constraint
and slow job growth, the Essex National Heritage Area, along with the
other established National Heritage Areas, has demonstrated the
important part we play in regional economic development. As confirmed
by NPS Director Jon Jarvis, ``National Heritage Areas are places where
small (public) investments pay huge dividends, providing demonstrable
benefits in communities across the county and in partnership with our
national parks.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Charting a Future for the National Heritage Areas: A Report by
the National Park System Advisory Board, Douglas P. Wheeler, Chairman,
2006; page 25.
\8\ Advancing the National Park Idea: National Parks Second Century
Commission Report; Howard H. Bakers, Jr. and J. Bennett Johnston, Co-
Chairs; 2009; page 43.
\9\ Policy Memorandum 12-01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Statement of Margaret Miner, Executive Director, Rivers Alliance of
Connecticut, Litchfield, CT, on S. 1253
Rivers Alliance of Connecticut is the statewide, non-profit
coalition of river organizations, individuals, and businesses formed to
protect and enhance Connecticut's waters by promoting sound water
polides, uniting and. strengthening the state's many river groups, and
educating the public about the importance of water stewardship. Our 450
members include almost all of the state's river and watershed
conservation groups, representing many thousand Connecticut residents.
We much appreciate your care for our country's great natural
resources. In Connecticut, the Farmington River is probably the most
beautiful, beloved, and used of all our waterways. I may be prejudiced,
since Rivers Alliance was founded on the banks of the Farmington. But
people come from all over the state (and the world, actually) to fish,
boat, tube, and swim in the river; and to hike, run, and bicycle on the
pathways along the river. Meanwhile, the river serves to supply
drinking water and to treat wastewater for the entire Hartford region.
The Wild and Scenic designations, both existing and now pending,
are richly deserved and much needed. We are a densely populated state
ih which open space and high-quality rivers are keenly appreciated. I
am familiar with the fine work done by the Wild and Scenic Study
Committee in uniting the ten area towns for a plan of stewardship and
management that will maximize the ecological and economic benefits of
the river. One reason forthis municipal enthusiasm is the excellent
track record of the community-based Farmington River Coordinating
Committee, which serves the Upper Fairmington Wild & Scenic area.
People in the Farmington region are ever willing to work for their
river, and saving its varied natural habitat and clean, cold water is a
priority. We look forward to enhancing the partnership with the federal
government, and respectfully ask you to support Senate Bill 1253.
______
Statement of Eileen Fielding, Executive Director, Farmington River
Watershed Association, Inc., Simsbury, CT, on S. 1253
On behalf of the Farmington River Watershed Association (FRWA), a
non-profit citizens' group founded in 1953, whose mission is to
preserve, protect, and restore the Farmington River and its watershed
through research, education, and advocacy, I thank you for the
opportunity to submit the following comments in support of S. 1253.
In the 1980s and 1990s, FRWA led the campaign to have the West
Branch of the Farmington River designated a Wild & Scenic River. At the
time, the Partnership model for Wild & Scenic rivers was un- tried and
some feared the designation as a threat to local autonomy. But since
achieving the designation 1994, FRWA and the towns along the West
Branch have had no regrets or doubts about its value. The Coordinating
Committee that was formed to implement the Wild & Scenic management
plan on the West Branch brought together diverse public and private
partners to work on projects of joint interest. The Committee's
activities enhanced communication, combined resources and expertise in
a productive way, and even mellowed deep antagonisms among
stakeholders. Federal funding for the W&S management plan attracted
local matches of cash, goods, services, and volunteer help for river
stewardship. Designation helped promote the river as a destination,
thus supporting local tourism and recreation-based businesses, as well
as enhancing real estate values and general quality of life.
This success is not unique. In 2007, the National Park Service
reported that, of all grades of Wild & Scenic Rivers, the Partnership
Rivers did best at meeting legislative mandates, external coordination,
policy guidance, staff training, and resource protection. That same
year, the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation at
Harvard's JFK School of Government named Partnership Wild & Scenic
Rivers in the top 50 government innovations linking citizens with
important public services.
It's important to understand the nature of the public service. It
does not come from large infusions of federal money or top-down river
management. Modest funding, and access to techni al and advisory
resources of the National Park Service, suffice to catalyze local
initiatives. As demonstrated on the Farmington's West Branch, the
Partnership Wild & Scenic model fosters communication, taps multiple
funding sources, and leads to creative solutions tailored to local
circumstances.
With S. 1253 we hope to extend these benefits to the rest of the
Farmington River in Connecticut and to one of its most ecologically
valuable tributaries, Salmon Brook. Findings in the Lower Farmington
Management Plan and Study Report fully support the river's eligibility
for designation. So do the ten towns and many stakeholder organizations
along the lower river. FRWA is fully committed to implementing the
management plan in collaboration with all the other stakeholders who
had a part in producing it. In fact, we have not passively waited for
designation-we have already raised considerable local funding and have
begun to work with our partners on projects recommended in the
management plan. Even the promise of designation has inspired our
communities to action.
We realize the difficulty of defining the Wild & Scenic reach in a
way that protects the river's outstanding resource values while
allowing for the operation and possible FERC permitting of a pre-
existing hydroelectric facility at Rainbow Dam. If it proves necessary,
we will support continued effort to draft language that protects the
hydro facility's ability to do needed upgrades, but also supports the
National Park Service mandate to protect the reaches upstream and
downstream of the facility in a way that's consistent with W&S
designation.
In conclusion, we strongly support S. 1253 as providing a proved,
sensible, and important means for the citizens of Connecticut to take
care of one of their most beautiful and valuable rivers.
Respectfully submitted,
______
Statement of William Case, President, Farmington Valley Chapter of
Trout Unlimited, on S. 1253
As President of the Farmington Valley Chapter of Trout Unlimited, I
respectfully request the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources to act favorably on S 1253, the bill to des-ignate the lower
Farmington River and Salmon Brook as a partnership Wild and Scenic
river under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
Trout Unlimited is an organization with 150,000 members in 400
chapters across 35 states whose mission is to conserve, protect and
restore cold water fisheries and their watersheds. The Farmington
Valley Chapter is the largest of eight chapters in Connecticut with
over 600 members.
I am not sure it is possible to convey to you the passion and
devotion anglers have for this riv-er. It is also not only a world-
class trout stream, but a source of great enjoyment for thou-sands of
other Connecticut residents and visitors. We enthusiastically support
any effort that would provide much needed coordination and resources
that will positively benefit the Farm-ington and its tributaries.
Farmington Valley Trout Unlimited has the greatest respect for the
groups who act to protect our valuable resource, and we hope that you
will support the extensive effort put forth by the lower Farmington
River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic Study Committee by awarding the
lower portion of the river this designation.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.
Sincerely,
______
Statement of Sally S. Rieger, Lower Farmington River/Salmon Brook,
Simsbury, CT, on S. 1253
As the volunteer chairman of the Lower Farmington River and Salmon
Brook Wild and Scenic Study Committee, on behalf of the Study Committee
I respectfully urge the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources to act favorably on S 1253, the bill to designate the lower
Farmington River and Salmon Brook as a partnership Wild and Scenic
river under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
A 14 mile segment of the upper Farmington River was designated as
Wild and Scenic in 1994. The lower river and Salmon Brook towns that
are involved in the current Wild and Scenic Study want their part of
the watercourses designated as well, The ten Study area towns have
formally endorsed designation because they would like to enjoy the
economic and conservation benefits for their portion of the rivers
which a Wild and Scenic designation would bring.
In addition to requiring such community support, the National Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act requires that designated rivers have at least one
Outstandingly Remarkable Value of regional or national significance.
The lower Farmington and Salmon Brook surpass that standard, sharing
five such values, Geology, Water Quality, Biodiversity, Cultural
Landscape and Recreation. These are documented, along with priorities
for their protection and enhancement, in the Management Plan developed
by the Study Committee. Development of a Management Plan, a guidance
document available for public and private use, is yet a third
requirement for Wild and Scenic designation. Designation would put into
action a volunteer advisory group that works on implementing the
Management Plan priorities for the watercourses as whole rather than on
a town by town basis as individual municipalities do. This would result
in better coordinated river protection and more coordination of river
related economic development efforts.
The Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic Study
has brought together more than thirty river stakeholders including
volunteers from the ten study area towns, and from local community and
conservation organizations as well as representatives from Stanley
Black and Decker, Inc, and the Connecticut Department of Energy and
Environmental Protection. The Study Committee's work in documenting
river resources, in determining potential opportunities to enhance
river protection, and in promoting a better understanding and
appreciation of the ecological and economic value of a healthy river
has made a strong contribution to our local communities. The Study
Committee seeks designation for the lower Farmington and Salmon Brook
with the hope that the work it has completed will lead to an ongoing
and successful community-based effort to protect the watercourses for
today's citizens and for future generations.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.
Sincerely
______
Gila County Board of Supervisors,
July 26, 2013.
Hon. Jeff Flake,
U.S. Senate, B85 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. John McCain,
U.S. Senate, 241 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support for S. 1300 to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of
2003 to provide for the conduct of stewardship end result contracting
projects.
Dear Senators Flake and McCain;
Gila County has been a stakeholder in the effort to develop and
implement landscape scale forested ecosystems restoration for the last
decade and has been involved in the creation of the White Mountains
Stewardship Project; the Arizona Governor's Forest Health Council's
Statewide Strategy for Restoring Arizona Forests; the collaborative
Analysis of Small-Diameter Wood Supply in Northern Arizona; and the
Four Forest Restoration Initiative.
The value and effectiveness of the Stewardship Contracting
Authority for forested ecosystems and watersheds restoration has been
repeatedly demonstrated across the nation over the last 10 years, and
particularly in Arizona through the accomplishments of the White
Mountains Stewardships Contract and the collaborative work of the Four
Restoration Initiative.
Simultaneously, Gila County has been deeply involved in addressing
and resolving for the Four Forest Restoration Initiative first analysis
area contract the cancellation ceiling obligation currently required in
Stewardship Contracts. Gila County also understands and appreciates the
need to align the stewardship contracting fire liability provisions
with those of other contracting tools available to the U.S. Forest
Service.
Gila County is therefore pleased to write in strong support of S.
1300 to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 to provide
for the conduct of stewardship end result contracting projects,
introduced by Senators Jeff Flake and John McCain, and wants to express
its appreciation as a means to prevent catastrophic forest fires, and
landscape scale forested ecosystems and watershed ecological
restoration.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
Tommie Martin,
District 1 Supervisor.
______
The Nature Conservancy Arizona Chapter,
July 31, 2013.
Hon. John McCain,
Member, U.S. Senate, 241 Russell SOB, Washington, DC.
Hon. Jeff Flake,
Member, U.S. Senate, 368 Russell SOB, Washington, DC.
Dear Senators McCain & Flake:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Stewardship
Contracting Reauthorization and Improvement Act, S. 1300 (hereinafter
the ``bill''). The Nature Conservancy deeply appreciates the leadership
shown by both of our Arizona Senators. The reauthorization of
Stewardship Contracting is a top priority for the Conservancy and
action on this issue is urgently needed. We cannot afford to lose this
critical forest management tool, which will expire on September 30,
2013 without Congressional action and support the objectives of this
bill.
As you know, The Nature Conservancy is an international, nonprofit
organization dedicated to the conservation of biological diversity. Our
mission is to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends.
Our on-the-ground conservation work is carried out in all 50 states and
in more than 30 foreign countries and is supported by approximately one
million individual members. We have helped conserve nearly 15 million
acres of land in the United States and Canada and more than 102 million
acres with local partner organizations globally.
The Conservancy owns and manages approximately 1,400 preserves
throughout the United States-the largest private system of nature
sanctuaries in the world. We recognize, however, that our mission
cannot be achieved by core protected areas alone. Therefore, our
projects increasingly seek to accommodate compatible human uses, and
especially in the developing world, to address sustained human well-
being.
As members of the stakeholders group of the Four Forest Restoration
Initiative, known as 4FRI, we know firsthand of the importance of
Reauthorization of the Stewardship Contracting authority. Specifically,
allowing forest managers to continue using innovative contracting
methods to achieve forest management objectives, increase and diversify
job opportunities, and provide certainty for contractors with multiyear
agreements while building strong partnerships invested in the future of
the forest and community. Treatments completed under the Stewardship
Contracting Authority promote healthy forests and reduce fire hazards,
increase watershed resilience, and expand business and job
opportunities.
Stewardship Contracting is a particularly important tool in Arizona
where rebuilding a robust and multi-faceted forest industry is critical
to achieving the large scale restoration and community protection goals
embodied in 4FRI and other collaborative forest management projects. It
is essential that we be able to attract forest industry investment that
is equal to the scale of our forest management challenge and
Stewardship Contracting plays a key role in this equation.
Again, we thank you for your leadership and great concern over this
very important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have
any questions.
Sincerely,
Patrick Graham,
State Director.
______
Statement of Jonathan M. Nez, Chairman of the Board, Navajo County
Board of Supervisors, on Navajo County Board of Supervisors, S. 1300
Navajo County has been a stakeholder in the effort to develop and
implement landscape scale forested ecosystems restoration for the last
decade and has been involved in the creation of the White Mountains
Stewardship Project; the Arizona Governor's Forest Health Council's
Statewide Strategy for Restoring Arizona Forests; the collaborative
Analysis of Small-Diameter Wood Supply in Northern Arizona; and, the
Four Forest Restoration Initiative.
The value and effectiveness of the Stewardship Contracting
Authority for forested ecosystems and watersheds restoration has been
repeatedly demonstrated across the nation over the last 10 years, and
particularly in Arizona through the accomplishments of the White
Mountains Stewardship Contract and the collaborative work of the Four
Forest Restoration Initiative.
Simultaneously, Navajo County has been deeply involved in
addressing and resolving for the Four Forest Restoration Initiative
first analysis area contract the cancellation ceiling obligation
currently required in Stewardship Contracts. Navajo County also
understands and appreciates the need to align the stewardship
contracting fire liability provisions with those of other contracting
tools available to the U.S. Forest Service.
Navajo County is therefore pleased to write in strong support of S.
1300 to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 to provide
for the conduct of stewardship end result contracting projects,
introduced by Senators Jeff Flake and John McCain, and wants to express
its appreciation to the Senators for their continued involvement and
leadership in addressing the issues of fuel reduction as a means to
prevent catastrophic forest fires, and landscape scale forested
ecosystems and watershed ecological restoration.
Thank you for your consideration.
______
Arizona's Payson Cool Mountain Town,
Payson, AZ, July 29, 2013.
Hon. Joe Manchin,
Chairman, Public Lands, Forests, and Mining Sub-Committee, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, 304 Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Manchin and Ranking Member Senator John Barrasso:
As the Mayor of Payson Arizona, in the heart of the largest
Ponderosa Forest in the country, I write to encourage your support for
S.B. 1300, the ``Stewardship Contracting Reauthorization and
Improvement Act, a bill to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of
2003 to provide for the conduct of stewardship end result contracting
projects.
First, I also want to express my appreciation to you for holding
this hearing and to Senators FLAKE, MCCAIN, CRAPO, RISCH, and HELLER
for introducing this important and timely piece of legislation.
The Town of Payson has formally voted to support the Healthy Forest
Initiative, 4-FRI and other measure to improve Forest Health and
minimize fire hazards. More importantly we have supported efforts of
the Congress and the US Forest Service to protect and preserve our
beautiful western forests. Stewardship contracting is one tool the
Forest Service can use to treat forests and reduce fuel loads to
protect forested communities. It allows a variety of land-management
goals to be used to reduce wildfire threats by combining timber
harvesting with beneficial public goals such as forest thinning.
The Cancellation Ceiling provision will allow one more tool for
proper financial accounting and accountability.
Thank you for your continued service to our communities and the
Country at large.
Respectfully,
Kenny Evans,
Mayor.
______
City of Scottsdale,
July 26, 2013.
Hon. Ron Wyden
Chairman, Committee on Energy & Natural Resources, 221 Dirksen Senate
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Lisa Murkowski,
Ranking Member, Committee on Energy & Natural Resources, 709 Hart
Senate Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Wyden and Senator Murkowski,
As the Mayor of the City of Scottsdale, I am writing you today to
express my strong support of S. 1300, the Stewardship Contracting
Reauthorization and Improvement Act. I would also like to commend
Senator Jeff Flake for introducing this important bill and thank the
bill's co-sponsors.
The City of Scottsdale is Arizona's sixth largest city and is home
to approximately 220,000 residents. Scottsdale's municipal boundaries
encompass 185 square miles and it abuts the Tonto National Forest on
our northern boundary.
As you likely know, the current forest health problem is endemic
and is affecting watershed management, wildlife habitat and increasing
the dangers to human life and property from catastrophic wildfire
events. The poor forest health conditions and resulting catastrophic
wildfires are having an impact on the City of Scottsdale, which is made
evident when we experience a reduction of watershed utility, increased
water treatment costs due to silt and other fire contaminants or the
loss of tourist visitation to Scottsdale and the great State of
Arizona.
Scottsdale is not alone from being impacted by poor forest health.
Families and businesses in rural Arizona communities face severe
economic hardship and displacement when fire destroys surrounding
forested lands. These wildfires create a great and unnecessary risk to
the health and safety of the community residents especially the brave
firefighters who battle these blazes each year. Tools to restore forest
health and reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfires are much needed
and should be recognized as a national priority.
One of the most important forest restoration tools at this time is
stewardship contracting established by the Congress to enable the U.C.
Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to enter into long-
term contracts with external partners to meet forest health objectives.
Stewardship contracts put into place restoration efforts that
produce improvements to forest health and the associated benefits to
our communities. I believe it is essential that we continue the proper
use of this effective and efficient tool which will help to better
manage our national forests, reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires
and offset the costs to taxpayers for forest treatments by utilizing
partnerships with the private sector.
Without the passage of S. 1300, the stewardship contracting
authority will expire on September 30, 2013. Again, I want to emphasize
the importance of this forest health tool and feel it is essential that
the authority not be allowed to expire. I want to thank you for your
consideration of S. 1300 and respectfully ask for your support.
Sincerely,
W.J. ``Jim'' Lane,
Mayor.
______
Salt River Project,
July 29, 2013
Hon. Ron Wyden,
Chairman, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Washington,
DC.
Hon. Lisa Murkowski,
Ranking Member, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee,
Washington, DC.
Re: Support for S. 1300, Stewardship Contracting Reauthorization and
Improvement Act
Dear Chairman Wyden and Ranking Member Murkowski:
I appreciate your continued leadership on forestry issues and write
today in support of the Stewardship Contracting Reauthorization and
Improvement Act (S. 1300). The Salt River Project (SRP) delivers about
1 million acre-feet of water to agricultural, urban and municipal water
users and serves nearly 1 million electric customers in Central
Arizona. Our water supply originates from a 13,000 square mile
watershed that encompasses the Salt and Verde Rivers.
Dating back to the early part of the 20th century, the hydrologic
values associated with healthy forests were recognized by the SRP and
the federal government, and were a fundamental reason forest lands were
initially set aside in Arizona. Today, 59% of SRP's watershed lies
within U.S. National Forests, which is vital to protecting a renewable
water supply for the State. However, fire suppression and other
management practices on National Forest lands in the last hundred years
has resulted in unnatural forest conditions whereby the forests have
become dense and overgrown, resulting in unhealthy trees that are more
prone to insect infestation and disease, and the persistent and
increasing threat of catastrophic wildfire. Deteriorating forest health
and catastrophic wildfires damage our watersheds, ultimately impacting
the quality and sustainability of our water supply.
Restoring the health of our forests and improving future management
practices is critical, and successful efforts in this regard hinge upon
the forging of strong public and private partnerships. However,
attracting private capital investments are protected from unnecessary
administrative burdens.
The Stewardship Contracting Reauthorization and Improvement Act (S.
1300) addresses these concerns by outlining practical solutions to
ensure forest restoration can be accomplished expediently, and reducing
the administrative and financial burdens for the Forest Service.
In addition to improving watershed health, forest restoration also
helps protect SRP investments in facilities and infrastructure,
including C.C. Cragin reservoir, power lines and rights of way, and
communication sites. For these reasons, SRP supports S. 1300 and urges
prompt consideration of the bill. The health of our watersheds,
National Forests, and local communities ultimately results in a
stronger economy for the Salt River Valley and the state of Arizona,
and I look forward to continuing to work with you on this important
issue.
Sincerely,
John Sullivan,
Associate General Manager and Chief Resources Executive.
______
Graham County Board of Supervisors,
July 26, 2013.
Hon. Jeff Flake,
U.S. Senate, B85 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. John McCain,
U.S. Senate, 241 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support for S.1300 to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of
2003 to provide for the conduct of stewardship end result contracting
projects.
Dear Senators Flake and McCain;
Graham County has been a stakeholder in the effort to develop and
implement landscape scale forested ecosystems restoration for the last
decade and has been involved in the creation of the White Mountains
Stewardship Project; the Arizona Governor's Forest Health Council's
Statewide Strategy for Restoring Arizona Forests; the collaborative
Analysis of Small Wood Supply in Northern Arizona; and, the Forest
Restoration Initiative.
The value and effectiveness of the Stewardship Contracting
Authority for forested ecosystems and watersheds restoration has been
repeatedly demonstrated across the nation over the last 10 years, and
particularly in Arizona through the accomplishments of the White
Mountains Stewardship Contract and the collaborative work of the Four
Forest Restoration Initiative.
Simultaneously, Graham County has been deeply involved in
addressing and resolving for the Four Forest Restoration Initiative
first analysis area contract the cancellation ceiling obligation
currently required in Stewardship Contracts. Graham County also
understands and appreciates the need to align the stewardship
contracting fire liability provisions with those of other contracting
tools available to the U.S. Forest Service.
Graham County is therefore pleased to write in strong support of
S.1300 to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 to provide
for the conduct of stewardship end result contracting projects,
introduced by Senators Jeff Flake and John McCain, and wants to express
its appreciation to the Senators for their continued involvement and
leadership in addressing the issues of fuel reduction as a means to
prevent catastrophic forest fires, and landscape scale forested
ecosystems and watershed ecological restoration.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
Drew John,
Chairman of the Board Graham County Board of Supervisors.
______
Eastern Arizona Counties Organization,
Show Low, AZ, July 26, 2013.
Hon. Jeff Flake,
U.S. Senate, B85 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC.
Hon. John McCain,
U.S. Senate, 241 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Support for S. 1300 to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of
2003 to provide for the conduct of stewardship end result contracting
projects.
Dear Senators Flake and McCain;
The Eastern Arizona Counties Organization is a local government
organization created in 1993 by joint resolutions of the Boards of
Supervisors and an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Counties of
Apache, Gila, Graham, Greenlee and Navajo to implement Presidential
Executive Order 12372 Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs
related to the clearinghouse process for review of Federal programs
which affect the custom, cultures and economic well-being of the
Counties. The Eastern Arizona Counties Organization member counties
have been appointed by Arizona Governor Executive Order as County
Official Reviewers in the Procedures for Arizona Single Point of
Contact implementing Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.
The Eastern Arizona Counties Organization has been a stakeholder in
the effort to develop and implement landscape scale forested ecosystems
restoration for the last decade and has been involved in the creation
of the White Mountains Stewardship Project; the Arizona Governor's
Forest Health Council's Statewide Strategy for Restoring Arizona
Forests; the collaborative Analysis of Small-Diameter Wood Supply in
Northern Arizona; and, the Four Forest Restoration Initiative.
The value and effectiveness of the Stewardship Contracting
Authority for forested ecosystems and watersheds restoration has been
repeatedly demonstrated across the nation over the last 10 years, and
particularly in Arizona through the accomplishments of the White
Mountains Stewardship Contract and the collaborative work of the Four
Forest Restoration Initiative.
Simultaneously, the Eastern Arizona Counties Organization has been
deeply involved in addressing and resolving for the Four Forest
Restoration Initiative first analysis area contract the cancellation
ceiling obligation currently required in Stewardship Contracts. The
Eastern Arizona Counties Organization also understands and appreciates
the need to align the stewardship contracting fire liability provisions
with those of other contracting tools available to the U.S. Forest
Service.
The Eastern Arizona Counties Organization is therefore pleased to
write in strong support of S. 1300 to amend the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act of 2003 to provide for the conduct of stewardship end
result contracting projects, introduced by Senators Jeff Flake and John
McCain, and wants to express its appreciation to the Senators for their
continued involvement and leadership in addressing the issues of fuel
reduction as a means to prevent catastrophic forest fires, and
landscape scale forested ecosystems and watershed ecological
restoration. Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
On behalf and with the approval of the Board of Directors,
Pascal Berlioux, Ph.D. MBA,
Executive Director.
______
Arizona State Senate,
July 23, 2013.
Hon. Ron Wyden,
Chairman, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S.
Senate, 221 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Wyden,
It's with great urgency and alarm that I write to urge your support
of S1300, the Stewardship Contracting Reauthorization and Improvement
Act.
For an understanding of why this legislation is critically
important to the State of Arizona and the western United States, I have
one simple recommendation:
Come to Arizona.
For the last ten years, the people of Arizona have endured an
unprecedented series of catastrophic wildfires that have destroyed
hundreds of homes, burned over a million areas of forest, and cost
taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. From the 470,000-acre Rodeo-
Chediski Fire in 2002 to the 538,000-acre Wallow Fire in 2011,
Arizona's tragic experience with large-scale, destructive wildfires on
federal land is both expensive and well-documented.
As a result of these fires, large swaths of rural Arizona are now
charred landscapes standing in mute testimony to the catastrophic
ineffectiveness of federal forest management policies.
Unfortunately, my hometown and the district I represent are the
latest casualties in this struggle. The Doce Fire, which burned 6000
acres, including critical habitat for a number of species, and the
Yarnell Hill Fire, which claimed the lives of 19 courageous members of
the Prescott Fire Department, both burned within my district, affecting
the landscape and lives of my constituents for decades to come.
It's time for a change.
S.1300, sponsored by Arizona Senators Jeff Flake and John McCain,
is a significant first step in towards changing the way that federal
agencies manage the forest to prevent wildfire. The bill would extend
federal agencies' authority to enter into forest stewardship contracts
to reduce the risk of wildfire. The bill also includes significant
improvements to the stewardship program to help agencies treat the
forests on larger scales.
The importance of these stewardship contracts was vividly and
unmistakably demonstrated in the summer of 2011 when the 537,000-acre
Wallow Fire swept through eastern Arizona. In spite of hostile weather
conditions and unfavorable terrain, the Fire did not burn through
several forested communities in its path-communities around which the
Forest Service had conducted thinning as part of the White Mountain
Stewardship Contract.
Alpine, Springerville, Eager, and Nutrioso were all largely spared
because the woods around those communities had been treated by a
stewardship contract.
Significantly, S1300 would also grant the Forest Service and Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) flexibility when holding funds in reserve to
cover the cost of cancelled contracts-a reform that proponents of
proactive forest management have been advocating for years. Typically,
these agencies must hold in reserve the full amount of the contract for
its duration. This requirement has been a serious impediment to the
kind of long-term contracts that are necessary to conduct landscape-
scale treatments of the forest.
The urgency of Senator Flake and McCain's legislation is
underscored by the loss of Arizona firefighters in the Yarnell Hill
Fire. While this specific tragedy was not the result of federal forest
management policies since the fire occurred on state, not federal land,
the incident is nevertheless a dramatic reminder of the potential for
these fires to cause significant loss of life and property.
In addition to expressing support for S1300, I would like to make a
personal appeal for federal fire aviation resources to be permanently
positioned at Forest Service Fire Centers, such as the Prescott Fire
Center and Aviation Facility. Doing so would ensure that critical
assets are pre-positioned to quickly respond when local fires erupt, as
they surely will.
As a native Arizonan and lifelong rancher, I have personally
witnessed the federal government's neglect of Arizona's national
forests and the tragic consequences of that neglect. Just a few weeks
ago, I stood on my front porch and watched slurry bombers desperately
work to contain the Doce Fire, which burned only 8 miles from the Town
of Prescott and a few miles from my ranch.
The current policies governing forest management in the United
States have proven effective at only one thing-promoting wildfires in
greater frequency and larger scales. If the federal government does not
change these policies, there will come a day when the fires stop.
But only because there are no more trees left to burn.
I ask for your support of S.1300.
Sincerely,
Steve Pierce,
Senator, District 1.
______
Statement of John W. Moore, Mayor, City of Williams, on S. 1300
Those of us who are fortunate enough to live, work or play in or
near Arizona's awesome forests know or have experienced the devastation
resulting from wildfires. Keeping our forests healthy and our
communities and firefighters safe are our responsibilities as good
stewards of our natural resources.
Allowing the Forest Service more flexibility and authority to enter
into forest stewardship contracts that use private timber companies to
thin our forests and sell the harvested wood as compensation would seem
to be a major component in addressing the above-noted concerns as well
as serving as an economic stimulus for the private timber companies and
their employees.
The Mayor and Council Members of Williams strongly support the
passage of S. 1300 by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee so
that these issues may be better addressed.
______
Statement of James A. Allen, Ph.D., Policy Chair, Southwest Sector of
the Southwestern Society of American Forests, on S. 1300
The Southwestern Society of American Forestry (SAF), a scientific
and educational organization representing more than 350 forestry
professionals in Arizona and New Mexico, is writing to express our
thanks to the Committee for considering The Stewardship Contracting
Reauthorization and Improvement Act (S. 1300) during the July 30th
Committee Hearing. We also thank Senators Flake, McCain, and Baucus for
their leadership in promoting timely action on the reauthorization of
Stewardship Contracting.
We cannot afford to lose this critical forest management tool,
which will expire on September 30, 2013 without Congressional action.
Reauthorization of the Stewardship Contracting Authority is urgently
needed to ensure the USDA Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management
can continue to use this essential tool to foster healthy forest
ecosystems and provide stability and employment to rural communities.
Stewardship Contracting helps address the critical need for
restoration activities in our national forests by encouraging the
collaboration and long-term commitments among agencies, contractors,
local communities, and other interested stakeholders. In Arizona and
New Mexico, rural communities and forests benefit from treatments
completed under the Stewardship Contracting Authority to promote
healthy forests and reduce fire hazards, increase watershed resilience,
protect wildlife habitat, and help improve local economies. Stewardship
Contracts and Agreements are an effective and important complement to
traditional timber sales. The efficacy of these instruments is being
amply demonstrated in our region--examples include the White Mountain
Stewardship Contract, Pinaleno Ecosystem Restoration Project, Bluewater
Stewardship Agreement and the Four Forest Restoration Initiative, Phase
I Integrated Resource Service Contract.
Reauthorization of the Stewardship Contracting authority will allow
forest managers to continue using innovative contracting methods to
achieve landscape-scale forest management objectives, increase and
diversify job opportunities, and provide certainty for contractors with
multiyear projects while building strong partnerships invested in the
future of our forests and communities of the Southwest.
As stakeholders, we are concerned that time is short and definitive
action has not yet been taken to ensure the long-term availability of
Stewardship Contracting Authority. We urge careful consideration of
this and related legislation that would reauthorize and make permanent
this critical forest management tool. Stewardship Contracting Authority
enjoys the endorsement of SAF and a wide range of forest and
conservation groups, as well as bi-partisan support in Congress.
______
Statement of Elizabeth C. Archuleta, Chair, Coconino County Board of
Supervisors, on S. 1300
On behalf of Coconino County, we are writing to express our support
of S. 1300, Stewardship Contracting Reauthorization and Improvement
Act. S. 1300 will extend stewardship contracting for another ten years.
As you are aware, stewardship contracting has been successfully
implement in Arizona, and is a very valuable tool to promote healthy
forests and to reduce wildfire risks. Large-scale treatment projects
are necessary to maintain the health of our forests and this
legislation will provide the authority for large projects, such as the
Four Forests Restoration Initiative, to move forward.
Expanding the stewardship contracting authority will also allow the
ability to include improvements to the stewardship program that would
help agencies treat larger areas of our forests. The legislation also
provides the United States Forest Service and the Bureau of Land
Management with flexibility in establishing cancellation ceilings and
also reduces barriers to stewardship contracting that could prove
useful for future restoration initiatives.
While the county is supportive of expanding stewardship contracting
authority, we would be remiss if we did not relay a request from
counties to extend traditional receipt sharing to counties, as it
currently exists through timber sales. With the decline in receipts and
the expiration of the Secure Rural Schools and Self Determination Act,
counties are looking for ways to continue funding critical needs,
including road maintenance. We request you address this issue as the
legislation moves forward.
Thank you again for introducing S. 1300. Coconino County has seen
first-hand the devastation that wildfires can bring and the subsequent
aftermath. Proper forest management and allowing the Forest Service
every tool is of utmost importance to the health of our forests and of
the citizens of Coconino County and the State of Arizona.
______
Statement of Charlotte King, Director of the New Philadelphia
Association National Parks
Thank you, Chairman Udall and Members of the Subcommittee. My name
is Charlotte King and I am a Director of the New Philadelphia
Association, a grass roots organization dedicated to preserve and
commemorate the historic town site of New Philadelphia, Illinois, its
residents and founder Frank McWorter. I appreciate your time and the
opportunity to address the Subcommittee.
I hope that by the end of my testimony you will agree that the
historic town site of New Philadelphia, Illinois qualifies for a place
in history as a unit of the nation's cultural crown jewels--the
National Park Service (NPS). Senator Mark Kirk and Senator Richard
Durbin's legislation, S. 1328, would start the process to do just that.
It is my hope, and the Association's hope, that this Committee will
move forward with Senator Durbin and Senator Kirk's bill.
New Philadelphia, Illinois, is the first known town in our nation
platted and officially registered by an African American.
Born enslaved in South Carolina and moved to Kentucky by his
enslaver, town founder Frank McWorter purchased freedom for his wife in
1817, thus ensuring their soon to be born child and future children
would be born free. McWorter purchased his own freedom in 1819 and
subsequently freed an additional fourteen family members from slavery.
McWorter earned the funds for freedom through various money making
ventures, including being allowed by his enslaver to keep a portion of
his earnings as a hired hand to other pioneers while enslaved in
Kentucky and by mining caves for crude niter to produce saltpetre, a
component used to manufacture gunpowder--vital for life on the frontier
and for the War of 1812.
With his additional earnings, McWorter also acquired a plot of land
in Pike County, Illinois, and moved there in 1830 with his wife, three
free-born children and a son known as Young Frank. The son Young Frank
escaped slavery by fleeing to Canada in 1826. Father Frank McWorter
exchanged his lucrative saltpetre operation for Young Frank's freedom
in 1829. He purchased an additional plot of land and, in 1836, founded
New Philadelphia with the intention of applying proceeds earned through
lot sales to free children and grandchildren who remained in bondage.
McWorter called the town he founded Philadelphia and sold lots to
African and European Americans. An integrated town, New Philadelphia,
as it came to be known, was a place where free-born and formerly
enslaved African Americans lived alongside European Americans in a
region and era of intense racial strife. Archaeological investigations
conducted at the site through two 3-year National Science Foundation
grants found little difference in the material culture of town lots
occupied by African and European Americans.
Situated on fertile prairie land between the Illinois and
Mississippi Rivers and near major transportation networks, the town
grew from a small settlement with three dwellings in the 1840s, and
peaked in the 1860s with as many as 160 residents. However, when the
Hannibal to Naples Railroad bypassed the town in 1869, New Philadelphia
fell into a decline from which it could not recover. Although a few
families remained, most of the population moved away by the late 1940s.
The once thriving town is now an archaeological site with only a few
building foundations visible on the landscape. Three structures
currently located at the town site date to the era of New Philadelphia
but are not original to the site. The structures were re-located from
nearby towns to illustrate how the buildings of New Philadelphia may
have appeared.
New Philadelphia was listed on the National Register of Historic
Places in 2005 for its archaeological potential to provide nationally
significant information about the lifeways and relationships of African
Americans and European Americans in a pioneer setting. In 2009 the town
site was designated a National Historic Landmark for its potential to
yield information of major scientific importance and to affect
archaeological theories, concepts and ideas. New Philadelphia was
included in the National Park Service National Underground Railroad
Network to Freedom Program in 2013 for its participation in the
movement to resist and end slavery by concealing, harboring and
sometimes accompanying runaway African Americans seeking freedom to
Canada.
As a unit of the National Park Service, New Philadelphia would
further enhance the rich historical significance of the geographic
corridor extending from Hannibal, Missouri, to Pittsfield, Illinois.
Hannibal is famed for its association with Samuel Clemons, who wrote as
Mark Twain and lived in the town from 1839 to 1845, the early years of
New Philadelphia's development. Attorney, Abraham Lincoln traveled the
route of the old Illinois' 8th Judicial Circuit Court representing
clients in the county seat of Pittsfield, only fourteen miles distant
from New Philadelphia, at the time New Philadelphia was growing into a
substantial community. New Philadelphia's recent acceptance in the
National Park Service National Underground Network to Freedom Program
links the site to Quincy, Alton and Jacksonville and further
contributes to the significance of this historical area.
In addition to contributing to the historical significance of the
region, New Philadelphia's inclusion in the National Park System could
provide a source of revenue to benefit the economic prosperity of the
area. Outdoor enthusiasts as well as visitors attracted by historical
attractions would generate funds for local businesses, such as
restaurants, places of lodging, shops and other services required by
tourists.
Management by the National Park Service could attract visitors from
across the nation and around the world through the widely distributed
promotional material available through the NPS and its access to a
variety of media. The high standards demanded for representation and
protection by the National Park Service have earned worldwide respect
and attention. The historic properties included in the National Park
System are regarded as our nation's cultural crown jewels. As a unit of
the NPS, New Philadelphia would be among these prestigious sites and
benefit from the association.
At New Philadelphia, lack of above ground features does not
diminish the impact of the national significance of this remarkable
historic site. New Philadelphia's excellent archaeological integrity
presents a unique opportunity to understand pre-Civil War integrated
communities. Comparable sites are not adequately preserved, interpreted
or represented in the National Park System.
As at New Philadelphia, there are no physical remains present at
the Sand Creek Massacre site in Colorado, where more than 150 American
Indians were killed. Nor are physical remains present at the African
Burial Ground in New York's Manhattan, where more than 400 freed and
enslaved African Americans buried in the 17th and 18th centuries were
unearthed during construction of a building at the site. The recovered
remains were re-interred elsewhere; a monument now memorializes the
site. At Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where United Airlines Flight 93
crashed during the terrorist attack on our country in 2001, markers
commemorate the bravery of the passengers and crew. Many battlefield
sites protected and preserved by the National Park Service are situated
in remote areas and lack physical remains.
The site's current setting looks much as it did during its
existence as a thriving community: rural, agricultural and somewhat
remote. The historic town site and the gently rolling hills of the
surrounding terrain are covered with prairie grasses, agricultural
crops and timber. The New Philadelphia town site retains excellent
integrity of location, setting and feeling.
An information kiosk is currently being constructed at the New
Philadelphia site, funded by a grant from the Illinois Rural Electric
Cooperative and in collaboration with local businesses and the nearby
John Woods Community College. The open-sided kiosk is scheduled for
completion in autumn 2013 and will shelter metal interpretation panels,
National Park Service recognition plaques and informational materials.
A self-guided walking tour through the historic portion of the site
will also be completed by autumn 2013. In addition, plans are underway
to develop a Smartphone application for information and a self-guided
walking tour of the site.
Maintenance costs of New Philadelphia as a unit of the NPS could be
minimized by sharing supervision staff with other nearby NPS sites.
Sharing oversight responsibility would also reduce the need to
construct extensive facilities.
New Philadelphia's designation as a unit of the National Park
System will guarantee preservation of the historical significance of
this unique place to inspire current and future generations with themes
important to all Americans: the struggle for freedom and opportunity.
By including New Philadelphia among the national treasures designated
units of the National Park Service, of which currently less than 5% are
predominantly associated with African-American history, the story of
our country would be more complete and accurate and would give
recognition to the accomplishments and contributions of African
Americans to the development of our country.
Thank you again, Chairman Udall and Subcommittee Members, for the
opportunity to address you.
______
Statement of Kyle A. Moore, Mayor of the City of Quincy, Quincy, IL,
on S. 1328
I am pleased to endorse the legislation you and Senator Richard
Durbin introduced to the U.S. Senate, S. 1328, The New Philadelphia
Study Act, a feasibility study to determine the qualifications of New
Philadelphia, Illinois for inclusion as a unit of the National Park
Service for its exceptional national historic significance. As a place
where formerly enslaved individuals, free born African Americans, and
European Americans lived together in a region and an era of intense
racial strife, a National Park unit at New Philadelphia will inspire
current and future generations and commemorate themes important to all
Americans: the struggle for freedom and opportunity.
Free Frank McWorter, the founder of New Philadelphia, was
remarkable not only for his vision of establishing a racially-
integrated community in West-central Illinois during the early
nineteenth century, but also for purchasing freedom for himself, his
wife and more than a dozen additional family members. Despite lllinois'
Black Codes, the slave state of Missouri on Illinois' border to the
west, and intense racial discrimination that persisted well after the
Civil War, the town of New Philadelphia survived until the beginning of
the twentieth century. The enduring public memory ofNew Philadelphia
continues today in West-central Illinois nearly a century after most of
its residents moved away.
Archaeological investigations of the town site since late in 2002
have demonstrated that long-forgotten architectural foundations,
cellars, cisterns, wells, and refuse deposits have survived
agricultural activities and other ground surface modifications. New
research methods are being applied as ways of locating these
archaeological resources. National Park status will ensure that the
unique opportunity to study nineteenth-century race relations within a
small multi-racial community setting will be protected by the federal
government for the good of the American people.
By including New Philadelphia among the national treasures
designated as National Parks, we have the opportunity to contribute to
a more complete and accurate account of the people, events, and
cultural interactions that shaped our nation's character. Therefore,
Iam pleased to support the nomination of the New Philadelphia Town Site
for designation as a National Park.
______
Statement of John Hayden, Mayor, City of Pittsfield, Pittsfield IL,
on S. 1328
Dear Senator Kirk:
I am pleased to endorse the legislation you and Senator Richard
Durbin introduced to the U.S. Senate, S. 1328, The New Philadelphia
Study Act, a feasibility study to determine the qualifications of New
Philadelphia, Illinois for inclusion as a unit of the National Park
Service for its exceptional national historic significance. As a place
where formerly enslaved individuals, free born African Americans, and
European Americans lived together in a region and an era of intense
racial strife, a National Park unit at New Philadelphia will inspire
current and future generations and commemorate themes important to all
Americans: the struggle for freedom and opportunity.
Free Frank McWorter, the founder of New Philadelphia, was
remarkable not only for his vision of establishing a racially-
integrated community in West-central Illinois during the early
nineteenth century, but also for purchasing freedom for himself, his
wife and more than a dozen additional family members. Despite Illinois'
Black Codes, the slave state of Missouri on Illinois' border to the
west, and intense racial discrimination that persisted well after the
Civil War, the town of New Philadelphia survived until the beginning of
the twentieth century. The enduring public memory ofNew Philadelphia
continues today in West-central Illinois nearly a century after most of
its residents moved away.
Archaeological investigations of the town site since late in 2002
have demonstrated that long-forgotten architectural foundations,
cellars, cisterns, wells, and refuse deposits have survived
agricultural activities and other ground surface modifications. New
research methods are being applied as ways oflocating these
archaeological resources. National Park status will ensure that the
unique opportunity to study nineteenth-century race relations within a
small multi-racial community setting will be protected by the federal
government for the good of the American people.
By including New Philadelphia among the national treasures
designated as National Parks, we have the opportunity to contribute to
a more complete and accurate account of the people, events, and
cultural interactions that shaped our nation's character. Therefore, I
am pleased to support the nomination of the New Philadelphia Town Site
for designation as a National Park.
