[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 37, H.R. 640 and H.R. 1000
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
April 26, 2001
__________
Serial No. 107-21
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
house
or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
_______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
71-929 WASHINGTON : 2002
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska, George Miller, California
Vice Chairman Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Jim Saxton, New Jersey Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Elton Gallegly, California Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Samoa
Joel Hefley, Colorado Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Ken Calvert, California Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Scott McInnis, Colorado Calvin M. Dooley, California
Richard W. Pombo, California Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Adam Smith, Washington
George Radanovich, California Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Islands
Carolina Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Mac Thornberry, Texas Jay Inslee, Washington
Chris Cannon, Utah Grace F. Napolitano, California
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Tom Udall, New Mexico
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Mark Udall, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Mark E. Souder, Indiana James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
Greg Walden, Oregon Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho Hilda L. Solis, California
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Brad Carson, Oklahoma
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Betty McCollum, Minnesota
C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana
Allen D. Freemyer, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeff Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado, Chairman
DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands Ranking Democrat Member
Elton Gallegly, California Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Samoa
George Radanovich, California Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Tom Udall, New Mexico
Carolina, Mark Udall, Colorado
Vice Chairman Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Mac Thornberry, Texas James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
Chris Cannon, Utah Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Hilda L. Solis, California
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Betty McCollum, Minnesota
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on April 26, 2001................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Bereuter, Hon. Doug, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Nebraska.......................................... 4
Prepared statement on H.R. 37............................ 5
Christensen, Hon. Donna, a Delegate to Congress from the
Virgin Islands............................................. 3
Gallegly, Hon. Elton, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California........................................ 11
Prepared statement on H.R. 640........................... 12
Letters submitted for the record......................... 14
Hefley, Hon. Joel, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Colorado.......................................... 1
Prepared statement on H.R. 37, H.R. 640 and H.R. 1000.... 2
Portman, Hon. Rob, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Ohio.............................................. 6
Letters from Dr. Carol Kerlakian and Michael Costantini
submitted for the record............................... 9
Sherman, Hon. Brad, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California........................................ 20
Press release submitted for the record................... 21
Statement of Witnesses:
Berger, Hon. Michael, Chairman, Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy, Newbury Park, California...................... 49
Prepared statement on H.R. 640........................... 50
Hearty, Patrick, National Trails Committee Chair, National
Pony Express Association, Inc., South Jordan, Utah......... 46
Prepared statement on H.R. 37............................ 47
Stevenson, Katherine H., Associate Director, Cultural
Resource Stewardship and Partnerships, National Park
Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC... 25
Prepared statement on H.R. 37............................ 26
Map A................................................ 28
Map B................................................ 29
Prepared statement on H.R. 640........................... 30
Prepared statement on H.R. 1000.......................... 31
Watson, Jeanne H., Oregon-California Trail Association,
Orinda, California......................................... 42
Prepared statement on H.R. 37............................ 43
Watson, William C., Oregon-California Trail Association,
Orinda, California......................................... 37
Prepared statement on H.R. 37............................ 38
H.R. 37, TO AMEND THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT TO UPDATE THE
FEASIBILITY AND SUITABILITY STUDIES OF FOUR NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAILS
AND PROVIDE FOR POSSIBLE ADDITIONS TO SUCH TRAILS; H.R. 640, TO ADJUST
THE BOUNDARIES OF SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES; AND H.R. 1000, TO ADJUST THE BOUNDARY OF THE
WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE IN THE STATE OF OHIO, TO
AUTHORIZE AN EXCHANGE OF LAND IN CONNECTION WITH THE HISTORIC SITE, AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
----------
Thursday, April 26, 2001
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to other business, at 10:05
a.m., in Room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Joel
Hefley [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOEL HEFLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO
Mr. Hefley. Now on to other Committee business. This
morning the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and
Public Lands will hear testimony on three bills: H.R. 37, H.R.
640, and H.R. 1000.
The first bill, H.R. 37, was introduced by Congressman Doug
Bereuter of Nebraska. This bill would amend the National Trails
System Act to authorize the Secretary of Interior to study a
number of specific routes and cutoff trails that may be
suitable and appropriate for designation as components of the
Oregon National Historic Trail, first; and, number two, the
Pony Express National Historic Trail; and, number three, the
California National Historic Trail; and, number four, the
Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail.
Congressman Bereuter, we notice that a lot of trails went
through Nebraska but no one wanted to stay; they just kept
moving on.
[Laughter.]
The second bill, H.R. 640, was introduced by our Committee
colleague, Elton Gallegly, and Congressman Brad Sherman of
California. This bill would adjust the northern boundary of the
Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area by adding some
3,000 acres of public and private lands to enhance a wildlife
corridor between the Simi Hills and the Santa Monica Mountains.
The third bill, H.R. 1000, was introduced by Congressman
Portman of Ohio. This bill would authorize the Secretary of
Interior to adjust the boundary of the William Howard Taft
National Historic Site by acquiring a parcel of adjacent
private property of less than one acre and exchanging it for a
parcel of National Park Service property of less than one acre
located nearby. It would also authorize a boundary expansion
and for the acquisition of an additional parcel of property
adjacent to the Taft site.
I would like to thank Congressman Bereuter, Congressman
Portman, Congressman Gallegly, and Congressman Sherman, and all
of our witnesses, for being here today to testify on these
bills. And I would like to also mention that the two witnesses
scheduled to testify in support of H.R. 1000 had to withdraw
due to scheduling conflicts.
At this point I would ask unanimous consent that
Congressman Bereuter be permitted to sit on the dais following
his statement to participate in the hearing. Is there any
objection to that? Hearing none, so ordered.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Hefley follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Joel Hefley, Chairman, Subcommittee on
National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands
This morning, the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and
Public Lands will hear testimony on three bills - H.R. 37, H.R. 640,
and H.R. 1000.
The first bill, H.R. 37, was introduced by Congressman Doug
Bereuter of Nebraska. This bill would amend the National Trails System
Act to authorize the Secretary of Interior to study a number of
specific routes and cutoff trails that may be suitable and appropriate
for designation as components of the (1) Oregon National Historic
Trail; (2) the Pony Express National Historic Trail; (3) the California
National Historic Trail; and (4) the Mormon Pioneer National Historic
Trail.
The second bill, H.R. 640, was introduced by our Committee
colleague Elton Gallegly and Congressman Brad Sherman of California.
This bill would adjust the northern boundary of the Santa Monica
Mountains National Recreation Area by adding some three thousand acres
of public and private lands to enhance a wildlife corridor between the
Simi Hills and the Santa Monica Mountains.
The third bill, H.R. 1000, was introduced by Congressman Portman of
Ohio. This bill would authorize the Secretary of Interior to adjust the
boundary of the William Howard Taft National Historic Site by acquiring
a parcel of adjacent private property of less than one acre and
exchanging it for a parcel of National Park Service property of less
than one acre located nearby. It would also authorize a boundary
expansion and for the acquisition of an additional parcel of property
adjacent to the Taft Site.
I would like to thank Congressman Bereuter, Congressman Portman,
Congressman Gallegly, Congressman Sherman, and all of our witnesses for
being here today to testify on these bills. I would also like to
mention that the two witnesses scheduled to testify in support of H.R.
1000 had to withdraw due to scheduling conflicts.
At this point, I would like to ask unanimous consent that
Congressman Bereuter be permitted to sit on the dais following his
statement to participate in the hearing. Is there any objection?
Hearing none, so ordered.
I now turn the time over to the Ranking Member, Ms. Christensen.
______
Mrs. Christensen?
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DONNA CHRISTENSEN, A DELEGATE TO
CONGRESS FROM THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
Mrs. Christensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
welcome our colleagues this morning.
We are going to hear testimony on three unrelated bills.
The first, H.R. 37, would amend the National Trails System Act
to update previously completed studies of three trails, and the
purpose of these updates would be to examine additional routes
and cutoffs that were not considered in the initial studies of
those trails.
The second measure before us today, H.R. 640, would adjust
the boundary of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation
Area near Los Angeles to include an additional 3,697 acres, and
the purpose of that addition is to facilitate wildlife
migration between the Santa Monica Mountains and several other
mountain ranges to the north.
There has been some concern expressed that the addition of
this acreage will place a number of parcels of private property
within the boundary of the NRA. However, it is our
understanding that relevant property owners are aware of the
proposed boundary change and no opposition to this measure has
developed, and hopefully today's hearing will resolve this
issue completely.
Finally, I am not sure if we have any panelists remaining
on H.R. 1000, but it would authorize the National Park Service
to exchange a parcel of Federal land at the William Howard Taft
National Historic Site in Cincinnati for a parcel owned by a
nearby charter school. If completed, the exchange will allow
visitors to park closer to the Taft home and facilitate a
planned expansion of the charter school.
In addition, the bill would alter the existing boundary of
the Taft site to include another parcel of private property
near the original Taft estate. The National Park Service has
requested that the property be included within the boundary so
that the land could be acquired if the owner ever decides to
sell the land.
We look forward to learning about this site and the other
proposed changes from today's witnesses, and again, welcome to
the Committee.
Mr. Hefley. Thank you very much. I think we will start with
Mr. Bereuter and Mr. Portman. Mr. Chairman, if you decide you
want to stay, we will invite you to sit up here as well, to
participate in the hearing.
Congressman Bereuter?
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DOUG BEREUTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA
Mr. Bereuter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Delegate
Christensen, members of the Subcommittee. I thank you for this
opportunity to testify.
My first two terms in Congress were on this Subcommittee,
and I thought it was an immensely enjoyable experience. I am a
co-chairman of the Trails Caucus, which has been operating and
growing in strength for the last three Congresses, and I
encourage all of you to participate if you are not already
members.
A little good-natured banter, I assume it is good-natured,
from the Chairman on the Colorado-Nebraska issue there, as
usual. I would like to point out, a lot of people did stay in
Nebraska. It was the survival of the fittest. The hardiest
people stayed.
[Laughter.]
Actually, people in a 16-county part of Nebraska, including
most of my district, have the longevity record for people that
live longest. That is literally true, except that La Jolla has
recently passed us in longevity. It is a survival of the
fittest. But one of my smart-aleck colleagues from California
suggested that people really don't live longer in Nebraska, it
just seems longer.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Hefley. Please accept my apologies. Obviously, I
misspoke.
Mr. Bereuter. This legislation, as you can see and imagine
from the number, was introduced the first day of this Congress,
and I introduced it in the previous Congress. The bill is
necessary, and I hope noncontroversial. It is a straightforward
effort to provide for a one-time feasibility study updating
four national historic trails: Oregon, California, Mormon
Pioneer, and Pony Express.
The measure simply recognizes the fact there are additional
routes and cutoffs which may deserve inclusion in the National
Trails System. In some cases, many cases, for example in the
Platte River Valley, these trails really took the same course
or were on both sides or one or the other side of the river,
and they have not been designated as such but have only one
designation. This would provide, if the Park Service chooses,
an opportunity to designate several trails using the same
route.
During the update period, the National Park Service will
work with the appropriate trails groups and other interested
parties to develop information on any new segments of trail, in
an effort to determine if it meets the criteria, they meet the
criteria for addition to the system. No condemnation of private
lands or Federal leases is to be contemplated to add any of
these routes to the trail, and I think the legislation makes
that clear.
Although the National Park Service is supportive of efforts
to examine these additional routes, it has determined that
legislation is needed to provide that authorization. That is
the purpose of H.R. 37, and you will be hearing from the Park
Service shortly.
All four trails covered in this legislation were
instrumental, of course, in opening the American West, but each
has its unique story to tell. The California Trail enabled
70,000 people to follow their dreams to the Golden State
between 1849 and 1850. The Oregon Trail made it possible for
fur traders, settlers, and others to reach the Pacific
Northwest.
Although it lasted only 18 months, the Pony Express
achieved a cherished role in American lore. Its daring riders,
which included Buffalo Bill Cody and Wild Bill Hickok, were
able to deliver mail from St. Joseph, Missouri to Sacramento,
California in 10 days. The Mormon Pioneer Trail, of course,
marks the route used for church members as they headed West in
search of religious freedom.
These trails all follow, at least in part, the Platte River
in Nebraska, and we are pleased to have as one of our nicknames
the ``Historic Trails State.''
I was pleased to note that during the 102nd Congress,
legislation which I introduced to designate the California
National Trail and the Pony Express Trail as components of the
National Trails System, which moved of course through this
Subcommittee, was enacted. The bill being discussed today will
build on that effort and enable even greater recognition of
these contributions made by these bold and courageous pioneers.
Those who used the trails endured hardships that are
difficult to imagine. Of course they survived hazards such as
wild animals, blizzards, floods, as well as scarcity and
disease. To those who bravely made it to their destinations and
those who died along the way, I think we owe a huge debt of
gratitude. I believe that H.R. 37 will help to give proper
recognition to the many historic and heroic individuals who
played such an important part in the settling of the American
West.
I would also like to take this opportunity to express my
appreciation to the many dedicated volunteers who have been so
supportive of the National Trails System in general, but also
to these particular trails. I would like to thank Bill and
Jeanne Watson with the Oregon-California Trail Association; Pat
Hearty with the Pony Express Trail Association; Ron Anderson
with the Mormon Trail Association; and Loren Horton with the
Iowa Mormon Trail Association. The efforts to preserve and
provide recognition for these trails are truly a grassroots
labor of love involving thousands of individuals, and the
people I have named epitomize those individuals.
So again, thank you for holding the hearing and giving me
an opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 37. I would
appreciate the Subcommittee's favorable consideration of the
bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bereuter follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Doug Bereuter, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Nebraska, on H.R. 37
Chairman Hefley, Delegate Christensen and Members of the
Subcommittee: I would like to begin by thanking you for the opportunity
to present testimony regarding H.R. 37, a bill I introduced on January
3, 2001. During the past 106th Congress, I introduced the same
legislation.
This bill is necessary and should be non-controversial. It is a
straight-forward effort to provide for a one-time feasibility study
update for four national historic trails--Oregon, California, Mormon
and Pony Express.
The measure simply recognizes the fact that there are additional
routes and cutoffs which may deserve inclusion in the National Trails
System. During the update period, the National Park Service will work
with the appropriate trails groups and other interested parties to
develop information on any new segment of trail in an effort to
determine if it meets the criteria for addition to the system. No
condemnation of private lands or Federal leases is to be contemplated
to add any of these routes to the trails.
Although the National Park Service is supportive of efforts to
examine these additional routes, it has determined that legislation is
needed to provide the authorization. That is the purpose of H.R. 37.
All four trails covered in this legislation were instrumental in
opening the American West, but each has its own unique story to tell.
The California Trail enabled 70,000 people to follow their dream to the
Golden State in 1849 and 1850. The Oregon Trail made it possible for
fur traders, settlers and others to reach the Pacific Northwest.
Although it lasted only about 18 months, the Pony Express achieved
a cherished role in American lore. Its daring riders, which included
Buffalo Bill Cody and Wild Bill Hickok, were able to deliver mail from
St. Joseph, Missouri to Sacramento, California in 10 days. The Mormon
Pioneer Trail allowed the church members an opportunity to head west in
search of religious freedom.
These trails all follow at least part of the Platte River and
Nebraska is proud to have as one of its nicknames the ``Historic Trails
State.'' Many used the route through Nebraska to reach their goal
further west. Those with more foresight decided to settle in Nebraska.
I am pleased to note that during the 102nd Congress I introduced
the legislation which was enacted to designate the California National
Historic Trail and the Pony Express National Historic Trail as
components of the National Trails System. The bill being discussed
today will build on that effort and enable even greater recognition of
the contributions made by these bold and courageous pioneers. Those who
used the trails endured hardships that are difficult to imagine. They
survived hazards such as wild animals, blizzards and floods as well as
scarcity and disease.
To those who bravely made it to their destination and those who
died along the way we owe a huge debt of gratitude. I believe that H.R.
37 will help to give proper recognition to the many heroic individuals
who played such an important role in settling the American West.
I would also like to take this opportunity to express my
appreciation to the many dedicated volunteers who have been so
supportive of these national trails. In particular, I would like to
thank Bill and Jeanne Watson, with the Oregon-California Trail
Association, Pat Hearty with the Pony Express Trail Association, Ron
Anderson with the Mormon Trail Association, and Loren Horton with the
Iowa Mormon Trail Association. The efforts to preserve and provide
recognition for these trails is truly a grassroots labor of love
involving thousands of individuals.
Again, thank you for holding this hearing and giving me the
opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 37. I would appreciate the
Subcommittee's favorable consideration of this legislation.
______
Mr. Hefley. Thank you, Mr. Bereuter. You have really been
one of Congress' champions of the Trails System, and you are to
be commended for that.
Mr. Portman?
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROB PORTMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Mr. Portman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I just
want to say that it may seem like people live longer in
Nebraska. However, in Cincinnati, about the time of William
Howard Taft's life, Mark Twain observed that he had hoped to be
in Cincinnati when the world ended because everything happens
10 years later there.
[Laughter.]
So your longevity figures may not be accurate because you
can add 10 years to Cincinnati's.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Christensen,
other members of the Subcommittee, for being here this morning
to hear us talk about these relatively small issues on the
national front that are very important to us locally. Mine is
H.R. 1000, well described by both the Chairman and Ranking
Member, and provides for a land transfer and boundary
adjustment by the William Howard Taft National Historical Site
in Cincinnati.
William Howard Taft, as you know, is the only person who
served as both President of the United States and as Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court. The Taft family, of course, is
very well known here in Washington. Robert Taft is still our
Governor in Ohio, and we have had two distinguished Senators as
part of the family.
William Howard Taft, the Senior, was Solicitor General,
Governor of the Philippines and Secretary of War before he
became President. He was elected President, incidentally, by an
electoral vote of 2 to 1, and the legacy of his administration
is still very much a part of our American life.
In 1921 he realized his true lifelong dream when President
Warren Harding named him 10th Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court of the United States. He was extremely proud. In fact,
later he was quoted as saying, ``I'm not sure I remember having
been President.''
In any case, his boyhood home, you have talked about Ronald
Reagan's boyhood home, his boyhood home is in Cincinnati, and
he lived there until he was married. It is located in a very
historic but urban community in Cincinnati. There is not much
land left in that area, and it is very important that this land
transfer take place to provide for adequate use of the
property.
It is now administered by the National Park Service, which
has an excellent relationship, Mr. Chairman, with our
community. In fact, the volunteerism of the community is
noticeable there. They hold many events. There is a very active
group that helps out and supports financially many of the
activities that take place around the boyhood home.
As again it has been well described, this provides for a
land transfer between the Park Service and a charter school
called the SABIS International School, Cincinnati. It is very
beneficial for the Taft home because it allows visitors to park
next to the site rather than parking on a very busy street or
in a parking lot that is quite a ways away from the Taft
center, and we really believe this is one reason we haven't had
higher visitation, which I know all of us in the Congress and
on this Subcommittee would like to see at our national park
sites.
The land the Park Service would receive in the transfer is
not only much more convenient, helps attract a lot more
visitors, but it also helps the Park Service to revert a
portion of this area to green space. This green space would be
consistent with the way the land looked back when William
Howard Taft was growing up there, so it makes it more
authentic. It is also very beneficial to the school. It turns
out this charter school would like to expand, and the two plots
of land they own are located directly across the street from
each other. So it is a win-win situation.
I have been working very closely with members of the
school, and I am pleased to say they are fully supportive of
this land transfer. This is not a Federal land grab. This is
something that they support. And, Mr. Chairman, with your
permission I would very much like to submit to the record a
statement from the leadership of the SABIS School for the
record this morning.
Mr. Portman. Finally, the bill also expands the park's
boundaries, as was noted, to include a building that has about
40 apartments in it. I understand the owners of this building
also are very supportive of being included within the boundary.
They have an excellent relationship with the Park Service. In
fact, the Park Service currently rents office space in that
building, and its parking lot is already part of the historical
site, so the parking lot for the apartment building is already
part of the boundary.
The owner and managing partner of the apartment building
could not be here, as you said, this morning. However, he also
has a strong statement of support I would like to submit for
the record, with your permission.
[The letters submitted for the record by Mr. Portman
follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.012
Mr. Portman. The cost to the Federal Government, as I
understand it, would be zero or minimal, because these two
pieces of land have been appraised and are of equal value, so
it is my understanding there is no need for an appropriation
for the exchange that this legislation would permit. As a
result, the legislation does not authorize any new spending.
I understand the Park Service may be interested in amending
this bill, perhaps this morning. In the hearing, this will come
up. They would like to allow use of some appropriated funds to
purchase, should it be made available, this apartment building.
And I am certainly willing to work with you, Mr. Chairman, and
other members of the Subcommittee, Mrs. Christensen and others,
as well as with the Park Service, to come to the appropriate
agreement on this issue.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would also like to thank
your staff. Tod Hull has done a great job, as has Rob Howarth
of your staff, in bringing this to this point. Again, I know
that you are dealing with much bigger issues in the
Subcommittee. This may seem relatively minor, but it is very
important to our area and to the full use of this very
important historic landmark in the Cincinnati community.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Subcommittee.
Mr. Hefley. Thank you, Mr. Portman.
Mr. Gallegly?
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ELTON GALLEGLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and
Subcommittee members, for holding this hearing today.
Mr. Chairman, the Santa Monica Mountains Recreation Area,
which stretches from West Hollywood in California's Los Angeles
County to Point Mugu in my district in Ventura County, was
established in 1978 and run by the National Park Service. It is
home to 26 distinct natural communities, from freshwater
aquatic habitats to oak woodlands. It is a critical haven for
more than 450 animal species, including the Golden Eagle. It is
considered unique among the National Park Service's holdings,
and is easily accessible to 12 million people in Ventura and
Los Angeles Counties.
My bill, H.R. 640, which I introduced with my colleague and
friend from the San Fernando Valley, Congressman Brad Sherman,
would adjust the boundaries of the Santa Monica Mountains
Recreation Area to enhance and protect the principal wildlife
corridor between the Simi Hills to the north and the Santa
Monica Mountains.
It adds nearly 3,700 acres of public and private lands to
the recreation area at no cost to the taxpayer. Of that, 2,797
acres donated to the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, a
State agency, will be transferred to the Parks Service. Another
570 acres is publicly and privately owned open space. The rest,
about 330 acres, is comprised of developed residential areas in
the Cities of Calabasas and Agoura Hills.
I want to stress that the recreation area designated would
have no impact on the ability for either the cities or private
property owners to develop their lands according to the
applicable State laws and local ordnances. It does, however,
give property owners greater access to Park Service assistance
to environmentally enhance their properties if they so choose.
That is why homeowner associations representing the communities
that would be included in the designation and the Cities of
Agoura Hills and Calabasas support this bill.
I have attached with my testimony copies of letters from
the cities and homeowner associations impacted by this
legislation. Also attached is a letter from the State agency
that is transferring its land to the Park Service.
Protecting the wildlife corridor will promote greater
ecosystem health and diversity to the Santa Monica Mountains,
particularly for larger mammals like bobcats, badgers and
mountain lions. It is hard to think that that is a part of the
City of Los Angeles, isn't it?
The 3,700 acres represent the last remaining open space
parcels connecting the Santa Monica Mountains and the Simi
Hills across the 101 Freeway. It is an important addition to
the recreation area, and enjoys widespread support from all the
communities. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 640, Mr.
Chairman, and with that I would yield back the balance of my
time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gallegly follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Elton Gallegly, a Representative in Congress
from the State of California
Thank you Mr. Chairman and subcommittee members for holding this
hearing today.
Mr. Chairman, the Santa Monica Mountains Recreation Area, which
stretches from West Hollywood in California's Los Angeles County to
Point Mugu in my district of Ventura County, was established in 1978
and is run by the National Park Service. It is home to 26 distinct
natural communities, from freshwater aquatic habitats to oak woodlands.
It is a critical haven for more than 450 animal species, including the
golden eagle. It is considered unique among the National Park Service's
holdings, and is easily accessible to 12 million people in Ventura and
Los Angeles counties.
My bill, H.R. 640, which I introduced with my colleague Congressman
Brad Sherman, would adjust the boundaries of the Santa Monica Mountains
Recreation Area to enhance and protect the principal wildlife corridor
between the Simi Hills to the north and the Santa Monica Mountains. It
adds nearly 3,700 acres of public and private lands to the Recreation
Area at no cost to the taxpayer.
Of that, 2,797 acres donated to the Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy, a state agency, will be transferred to the Park Service.
Another 570 acres is publicly and privately owned open space. The rest,
about 330 acres, is comprised of developed residential areas in the
Cities of Calabasas and Agoura Hills. I want to stress that the
Recreation Area designation would have no impact on the ability for
either the cities or private property owners to develop their lands
according to applicable state laws and local ordinances. It does,
however, give property owners greater access to Park Service assistance
to environmentally enhance their properties, if they so choose.
That is why homeowners associations representing the communities
that would be included in the designation and the Cities of Agoura
Hills and Calabasas support my bill. I have attached with my testimony
copies of letters from the cities and homeowners associations impacted
by this legislation. Also attached is a letter from the state agency
that is transferring its land to the Park Service.
Protecting the wildlife corridor will promote greater ecosystem
health and diversity in the Santa Monica Mountains, particularly for
larger mammals like bobcats, badgers and mountain lions. The 3,700
acres represent the last remaining open space parcels connecting the
Santa Monica Mountains and Simi Hills across the 101 Freeway.
It is an important addition to the Recreation Area and enjoys
widespread support from the communities. I ask my colleagues to support
H.R. 640 and yield back the balance of my time.
______
[Letters submitted for the record by Mr. Gallegly follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.006
Mr. Hefley. Mr. Sherman?
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BRAD SHERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Mr. Sherman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Christensen. My friend and colleague Elton Gallegly I think has
set forth the case quite well. I will try to be as brief as
possible.
The Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, as he
points out, is accessible to well over 10 million people. It
draws over 33 million visitors each year to its beaches and its
mountains. It contains so many species that you are just not
going to see in the more urbanized parts of Los Angeles County.
And this acquisition would provide a critical wildlife
corridor, so that we can have sustainable populations of
various mammals, and so that our furry friends will no longer
have to date their cousins.
The bill would add some 3,700 acres to the park. Most of
those acres, as Elton pointed out, are already in government
ownership. Many of the other acres are already dedicated open
space. The 900 acres that is privately owned will not be
adversely affected, the rights of the property owners will not
be adversely affected in any way. Land use planning will
continue to be under the jurisdiction of the City of Calabasas,
the City of Agoura Hills, or for the unincorporated area, Los
Angeles County.
We have letters of support not only as Elton mentioned, but
also from the relevant State legislators, the county
supervisor, and both of the two cities involved. What is more,
and this is highly unusual, not a single person has come to me
in opposition to this, and that is extraordinary because I
represent some very opinionated people in the 24th
Congressional District.
In fact, every organization that could be called upon to
support this bill, supports it. Yes, there are those private
property owners, but they are represented by the Saratoga Hills
Homeowners Association, the Saratoga Range Homeowners
Association, the Liberty Canyon Homeowners Association, all of
which support this bill, in large part because the bill will
enhance the park, which is accessible to them, and will have no
effect on the land use planning decisions for the use of their
private property.
I should also point out that with me here is Art Eck, the
superintendent of the park, who informs me that this bill will
not require any additional appropriations either for land
acquisition, because the bill makes it clear that the only way
the Federal Government will acquire land is through donation,
nor for operations, because his current budget will allow him
to operate these additional acres.
I should point out that also with me is Michael Berger, who
is Chair of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy which
currently owns, as an agency of the State government, much of
the land that will be donated to the Federal Government if this
bill is adopted. Also here from Saratoga Hills is Norman
Buring, who has taken upon himself to get hundreds of
signatures on a petition in support of this bill. The very
possibility that this bill might be contentious has immediately
galvanized support in my district there, and has galvanized no
opposition whatsoever.
[A press release submitted for the record by Mr. Sherman
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.010
Mr. Hefley. Thank you very much. Are there any questions of
this panel of witnesses?
Mr. Bereuter, do you have any opposition in the State of
Nebraska to expanding the Trails System, if that would be what
the study would decide was appropriate? Has there been any
organized opposition against that?
Mr. Bereuter. Mr. Chairman, no, none that we are aware of
at all. In fact, we don't think it is a major expansion. It is
the redesignation of certain areas as multiple, in multiple
names mostly, but there might be a few cutoffs that would be
added by the Service. But we have heard no opposition to it
from Nebraska or elsewhere at this point.
Mr. Hefley. Are the trails that are designated at the
present time, are they actually trails now that can be used by
people to hike or horseback or whatever on, ride bikes?
Mr. Bereuter. In most parts of the country they are not,
Mr. Chairman. They use public right-of-ways for the most part,
and are simply designations across what is farmland or
rangelands, but mostly it is on public right-of-ways that you
find the designation.
Mr. Hefley. Do you find in Nebraska as we do in Colorado--I
mean, we are probably drier than you are, but our eastern
plains are very dry, and we still have the tracks of the Oregon
Trail and the Santa Fe Trail. Do you find that in Nebraska as
well?
Mr. Bereuter. Yes, as a matter of fact, in a number of
cases in the Platte Valley, and they have been preserved by,
for example, the State Game and Parks Commission or by local
entities. They are particularly pronounced in a few areas where
the sod has never been changed, particularly in the rangeland
of western Nebraska.
For example, near Kimball you will find, right adjacent to
I-80, the ruts, and they have now placed giant prairie schooner
wheels in those ruts to give people an idea that something is
significant there. So you can walk 100 yards from the rest stop
and actually see the trail there near Kimball.
Mr. Hefley. Mr. Portman, you seem to have a win-win
situation for everybody. I think as the bill is written, there
is--it is designated that the Park Service can acquire that
additional apartment building, the additional space to expand
it, by donation, and you indicated that they might be wanting
to amend that. Are you amenable to an amendment that would
allow them to use appropriated funds to buy that?
Mr. Portman. Mr. Chairman, I think it probably makes sense.
As I understand it, it would be a right of first refusal. It is
to avoid the possibility that that property could be sold to
another owner if the Park Service thought it was appropriate
for them to have it.
It is right next to the visitor center, and if you look at
it, it is almost--there is a whole front part of a block that
is the home and then some green space, the visitor center,
hopefully we will have that parking lot closer now, and then
there is the apartment building sitting right next to it. So it
probably makes sense to have that option.
I don't frankly understand what the other concerns of the
Subcommittee might be in terms of putting in an authorization
bill such language. I assume that would be an appropriations
issue. But I am supportive of the concept of letting the Park
Service have sort of a right of first refusal to that property,
and apparently the owners are fine with it. They think that is
a good idea, too. They have already got their parking lot as
part of the Park Service boundary.
Mr. Hefley. Thank you. Mr. Sherman and Mr. Gallegly, I am
having a little trouble understanding the need for your bill.
Most of the property we are talking about is already public
open space land. It is owned by somebody. So that corridor, if
there is a migration corridor for wildlife, it is there.
The other part of it, the private land, is part of cities.
It is subdivisions, and you are telling me that this will not
make any difference to those private subdivisions or city land
use planning. So I guess either you or your witnesses need to
explain to me the need for the bill in light of what I have
just said.
Mr. Sherman. Mr. Chairman, if I can respond, then Art Eck,
the superintendent of the park, can probably respond better
than I can, and Elton Gallegly may be able to respond better
than either one of us.
This is really simply who will manage these lands which are
part of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.
They are currently, for the most part, owned by and managed by
the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, which is a special
organization of State government really designed to acquire
lands quickly, and then transfer them in many cases to the
Santa Monica Mountains National Recreational Area, where the
National Park Service can do a better job of managing,
particularly with its expertise in dealing with the endangered
and threatened species in the area.
So the real effect of this bill is to transfer ownership,
control, management, to the agency that has the greatest
expertise in being able to deal with this property,
transferring it from Mr. Berger's agency to Art Eck's
stewardship.
Mr. Gallegly. That is right.
Mr. Sherman. It is relatively simple. I don't know if my
colleague has a comment, and perhaps Art.
Mr. Gallegly. If the gentleman would yield, and trying just
to follow up on what Brad has said, and I really think that the
Park Service could probably explain it in greater detail, but
it would be too administratively complex to manage and
understand. And with the Chairman's concurrence, maybe we could
hear from the Park Service on that, because of the complexity
of tying it all together and managing it.
Mr. Hefley. We are going to hear from the Park Service in a
panel here, so we will let them testify.
All right. I have no further questions. Does the Committee
have any questions?
We thank this panel, and I again would welcome you, if you
have time to stay, to participate in the rest of the hearing.
In any case, we are delighted to have you here.
The second panel will be composed of Ms. Kate Stevenson,
Associate Director for Cultural Resources, Stewardship and
Partnerships for the National Park Service in Washington, D.C.,
who will speak on each of the bills.
Ms. Stevenson, if you will, we ordinarily have the
witnesses, put them on a 5-minute clock, but you have three
bills to talk about, so if you need a little more time than
that, don't worry about it.
STATEMENT OF KATHERINE H. STEVENSON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,
CULTURAL RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP AND PARTNERSHIPS, NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ACCOMPANIED BY ART ECK,
SUPERINTENDENT, SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS NATURAL RESOURCE AREA;
AND KEVIN McMURRAY, ACTING SUPERINTENDENT, WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT
NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
Ms. Stevenson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think I can do it
within the 5 minutes. That will allow you to ask whatever
questions you might have.
For H.R. 37, the trail amendment bill, the department
supports this bill in concept, mindful of course of the
budgetary constraints that the department and the Federal
Government are under. This bill would update the feasibility
and suitability studies of the Oregon, California, Pony
Express, and Mormon Trails, and would study the routes and
cutoffs not in the original designation.
As you well know, being from Colorado, it is not that it is
a single highway type trail. People used cutoffs and routes all
around the main arteries, and those were not included in the
original bill in some cases, and we want to make sure that any
eligible portions are included within the trail system. Some of
those, of course, are on top of other portions of other trails,
but we want to make sure that they are designated as
appropriate to the trails they are named.
We commit to working closely with other Federal agencies,
with the States, with local and tribal governments and with
landowners during the studies and after designation, should you
authorize the bill.
For H.R. 1000, the adjustment of the William Howard Taft
National Historic Site, the department supports this bill with
amendments. This, as has been said previously, would redraw the
boundary to include two parcels contiguous to the site to allow
access and interpretation. The first is a parking lot, which
would be exchanged with a school for a parking lot closer to
the home, and the second is the apartment building immediately
adjacent to the home, which would allow us to acquire in the
future, should the owner decide to sell.
The bill does preclude, as has been discussed earlier,
appropriated funds being allowed for purchase. This is a
commercial property. We see no reason that the owner should be
precluded from selling the property to us and us acquiring it
with appropriated funds--we don't want to put any strictures on
him--and allow him to make a sale that is profitable to him.
Finally, H.R. 640, which is the Santa Monica Mountains
bill, the department again supports this bill. This would allow
the adjustment of the authorized boundary to encompass a very
important wildlife corridor and to protect key watersheds. If
the private lands were to be left out, this would leave
basically a hole in the donut of the boundary, and particularly
the wildlife portions are very, very significant to protect the
variety of wildlife, as several people have mentioned here.
The acquisition would be by donation only, thus bringing
the Federal Government very large contributions of land. There
are 3,700 acres proposed to expansion. As has been said
earlier, 2,800 of those are owned by the State agency mentioned
earlier here. That would only leave 900 acres that are not
owned by the Conservancy, and one-third are in neighborhoods,
in two neighborhoods, and I think you have already heard about
the letters of support.
It is much easier to explain the boundaries to people and
to do educational programs for them and have public awareness
if we have a consistent, constant boundary without holes in it.
We would continue to have no land requirements on non-Federal
land, as we have for the many years that Santa Monica Mountains
Recreation Area has been in existence.
That concludes my remarks. I have with me the two
superintendents, Art Eck, Superintendent of Santa Monica
Mountains, and Kevin McMurray, who is Acting Superintendent of
the William Howard Taft National Historic Site. If you have any
questions, I would be happy to answer them, or with your
permission invite them up to address any questions you might
have. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statements of Ms. Stevenson on H.R. 37, H.R.
640, and H.R. 1000 follow:]
Statement of Katherine Stevenson, Associate Director, Cultural
Resources Stewardship and Partnerships, National Park Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior, on H.R. 37
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 37. This bill would amend
the National Trails System Act to update the feasibility and
suitability studies of the Oregon, California, Pony Express and Mormon
Pioneer National Historic Trails (NHT).
H.R. 37 would update the feasibility and suitability studies
through the examination of additional routes and cutoffs not included
in the initial studies of all four trails. The Secretary of the
Interior would determine if some or all of these routes and cutoffs are
eligible as additions to the four NHTs at the completion of these
studies. Further, it would authorize the Secretary to make designations
of any of these additional routes and cutoffs that she found eligible.
The Department supports this legislation in concept, but will not
consider requesting funding for updating the studies in this or the
next fiscal year. Furthermore, in order to better plan for the future
of our National Parks, we believe that any such studies should
carefully examine the full life cycle operation and maintenance costs
that would result from each alternative considered. We caution that our
support of this legislation does not mean that the Secretary will make
the recommended designations of additional routes upon completion of
the studies. When the studies are completed, the Department will
evaluate its progress on the President's Initiative to eliminate the
deferred maintenance backlog and determine whether new designations are
appropriate at that time.
The feasibility study for the Oregon NHT was completed in 1977, the
study for the Mormon Pioneer NHT in 1978, and the one for the
California and Pony Express NHTs in 1987. Since those studies have been
completed, dozens of additional routes and cutoffs have been identified
which may qualify as integral parts of these trails. The National
Trails System Act makes no provision by which such additional routes
and cutoffs may be evaluated and added to national historic trails.
The Oregon NHT, authorized in 1978, commemorates the ``primary
route'' used by emigrants beginning in 1841 between Independence,
Missouri and Oregon City, Oregon. Traveled by thousands, the trail
contained many routes and cutoffs used through the years. These
secondary routes had substantial emigrant traffic over several decades
that demonstrate historical significance and are thus worthy of being
examined in an updated study at the appropriate time.
The authorization of the Mormon NHT in 1978 commemorates the
journey of the pioneer party in 1846-1847 from Nauvoo, Illinois to Salt
Lake City, Utah. As with the Oregon NHT, emigrant traffic occurred on
many additional routes during the Mormon migration westward. Similarly
with the other trails, these routes are more often than not coincident
or shared with one another. As discussion ensued about the routes and
cutoffs to be studied for possible addition, advocates of the Mormon
Pioneer and Pony Express NHTs called attention to even more routes that
needed to be reviewed. Preliminary data indicate traffic along those
routes during the historic period and thus there are significant
additional routes to be studied for these two trails.
Authorized in 1992, the California NHT commemorates the gold rush
to the Sierra Nevada. Dozens of routes and cutoffs were traveled by
thousands of pioneers, but no single route dominated.
The Pony Express NHT was included in the same authorizing
legislation as the California NHT. It commemorates the efforts of this
nation struggling to establish a system of communication across the
Trans-Missouri west. The trail primarily follows routes beginning at
St. Joseph, Missouri and ending in San Francisco, California. The firm
of Russell, Majors, and Waddell, a western Missouri freighting company,
set up and operated the Pony Express for one and a half years before it
fell on hard times and ceased to exist. A short section of the trail,
from the Missouri River into Kansas, also appears worthy of study and
is included in H.R. 37.
All four trails overlap one another in many locations and several
of the routes and cutoffs proposed for study in H.R. 37 are already
part of designated trails. These shared routes are prominent where the
trails depart from various points along the Missouri River,
particularly in the Kansas City, St. Joseph, Nebraska City, Council
Bluffs and Omaha areas. Several other shared locations include routes
in western Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada and
California. Study and multiple designation at the appropriate time of
several routes and cutoffs would assure greater historical accuracy
along the trails.
The National Trail System Act requires that studies of lands
proposed for trails be made in consultation with federal, state, and
local agencies, as well as nonprofit trail organizations, the entities
that form the core of any partnership for national historic trails.
Between 1994 and 1999, the National Park Service--in collaboration with
the Bureau of Land Management, USDA Forest Service, trail advocacy
groups and others--completed the Comprehensive Management and Use Plan
and Environmental Impact Statement (1999) for the four trails. This was
the initial plan for the recently established California and Pony
Express NHTs as well as a revision of the plans for the earlier
established Oregon and Mormon Pioneer NHTs. During the planning effort,
trail advocacy groups pointed out that the feasibility studies for all
four studies had failed to recognize many significant alternate routes
and cutoffs. Consideration was given to including some of these routes
in the comprehensive management plan, but they could not be, since they
were not within the scope of the various trail feasibility studies,
and, hence, not official parts of the trails. H.R. 37 would allow for
the consideration of these additional alternates and cutoffs by
authorizing an update of the original studies done for these four
trails to see which ones are eligible for designation as NHT segments.
During the study process authorized by H.R. 37, the Department of the
Interior would work closely with federal agencies, state, local and
tribal governments, local landowners and other interested parties, as
well as trail advocacy groups to assure their interests are addressed.
Historic trails cross public and private lands and the intent of
the National Trails System Act is one of respecting private property
rights. In so doing, the development of strong partnerships is critical
to administering and managing the historic trails and achieving
preservation of trail resources and interpretation of the trail to the
public. The four national trails included in this legislation
demonstrate the results of this type of effort.
This concludes my testimony. I would be happy to respond to any
questions that you or members of the subcommittee may have.
______
[Map A and Map B follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1929.008
Statement of Katherine H. Stevenson, Associate Director, Cultural
Resource Stewardship and Partnerships, National Park Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior, on H.R. 640
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 640, a bill to adjust the
boundaries of Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.
The Department supports H.R. 640. This legislation will adjust the
authorized boundary of Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area
to encompass an important wildlife corridor and provide for the
protection of a key watershed. The legislation requires that
acquisition of lands within the expansion area be accomplished only
through donation, a provision that reflects the high level of
cooperation and strong commitment of local communities and governments
toward the park.
Furthermore, in light of the President's commitment to reducing the
backlog of deferred maintenance needs within the National Park System
before incurring additional financial burdens, it is important to note
that this legislation authorizes the lands within the boundary
adjustment area to be acquired by donation only. Therefore, no public
funds will be required for land acquisition. In addition, life cycle
operational and maintenance costs are expected to be minimal. The park
anticipates providing only minimal facilities such as trails,
emphasizing habitat preservation for wildlife movement. Since no
development is contemplated within the boundary adjustment area, no
line item construction or related operational funding will be required.
Within the 3,697-acre expansion zone, three parcels of land
totaling about 2,800 acres are owned by the Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy, an agency of the California Resources Department that was
established in 1981 to complement and assist with the establishment of
the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. The three parcels
are the 2,300-acre Las Virgenes Canyon Dedication, the 390-acre Liberty
Canyon tract, and the 107-acre Abrams property. These lands are held by
the Conservancy on behalf of local governments, principally the
governments of Ventura County and Los Angeles County, and are slated to
be donated to the National Park Service once they have been included
within the authorized boundary of the recreation area. H.R. 640 adjusts
the boundary in order to accomplish this purpose.
Acquisition of these lands is important in order to protect
critical habitat required for the free movement and migration of
wildlife between the Santa Monica Mountains and the Simi Hills, thereby
preventing local extinction of species in the park. Together with
existing National Park Service lands, the three parcels form the only
remaining wildlife corridor in the region to connect with national
forest lands to the north.
In addition, this legislation enables the protection of a
significant portion of Upper Las Virgenes Creek, which is part of the
Malibu Creek Watershed, the largest freshwater system within the
recreation area. The quality and condition of this watershed is of
critical concern because it drains into Santa Monica Bay. The beaches
of Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, surrounding the Bay
and running west from the Santa Monica Pier for 45 miles along the
Malibu coastline, are principally managed by the Los Angeles Department
of Beaches and Harbors and the California State Parks. In all, this
complex of beaches supports in excess of 30 million recreation visits
annually, which suggests that it is one of the most valuable recreation
assets in California.
Within the existing boundary of Santa Monica Mountains National
Recreation Area, some 70 governmental jurisdictions operate and work
together. Unlike many park areas where lands within the authorized
boundary are almost entirely in federal ownership, there exists an
extremely complex mosaic of publicly and privately owned lands within
the recreation area's boundary. The entire city of Malibu, as well as
portions of the Cities of Agoura Hills, Calabasas, Los Angeles,
Thousand Oaks, and Westlake Village are within the current park
boundaries. The National Park Service works cooperatively with other
governments and private landowners, and shares its resource management
knowledge with the local communities. The National Park Service,
however, does not regulate land use on private or non-federal parklands
within the park.
In addition to the 2,800 acres that are owned by the Conservancy,
approximately 900 acres of private and non-federal public lands are
located within the expansion zone, including two neighborhoods that are
situated within the Cities of Agoura Hills and Calabasas. The two
neighborhoods comprise roughly 330 acres. The two cities, as well as
the homeowner associations representing the neighborhoods concerned,
are longtime supporters of the park and this legislation. We understand
that letters in support the boundary enlargement have been provided to
the subcommittee from each of these governments and associations. Under
the classification process used by the park, the neighborhoods are
designated as ``developed areas,'' where the National Park Service will
not acquire lands.
There are also lands within the expansion zone under the
jurisdiction of Los Angeles County that are largely undeveloped, or
held by the county to support operations such as the Calabasas
landfill. The legislation would permit the National Park Service to
accept these lands, only by donation, if it were determined that they
could further park purposes.
Mr. Chairman, we are pleased to support this proposal. In all, the
lands reserved through the efforts of local communities and governments
for transfer to the National Park Service may be worth as much as $60
million under current market conditions. The legislation before you
today is a testament to the cooperation and commitment of the citizens,
local governments, and the park agencies in the Santa Monica Mountains.
That concludes my testimony. I would be glad to answer any
questions that you or the members of the subcommittee may have.
______
Statement of Katherine H. Stevenson, Associate Director, Cultural
Resource Stewardship and Partnerships, National Park Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior, on H.R. 1000
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the
Subcommittee to present the position of the Department of the Interior
on H.R. 1000, a bill to adjust the boundary and authorize an exchange
of certain lands at William Howard Taft National Historic Site located
in Cincinnati, Ohio. The Department of the Interior supports this bill
with the amendments outlined in this testimony.
The William Howard Taft National Historic Site, situated in a
designated Historic District of the Mount Auburn section of Cincinnati,
Ohio, is the only memorial to William Howard Taft, the nation's 27th
President and 10th Chief Justice of the United States. William Howard
Taft lived at the property that became the historic site from his birth
in 1857 until his marriage to Helen ``Nellie'' Herron, in 1886. The
Taft family sold the property in 1889.
This unit of the National Park System was established by Public Law
91-132 on December 2, 1969. The site was established specifically to
``preserve in public ownership historically significant properties
associated with the life of William Howard Taft.'' Prior to the
establishment of the historic site the William Howard Taft Memorial
Association began efforts to acquire and restore the Taft family home.
In 1963 the association leased part of the house and began to restore
it. In 1968 the association bought the property. In 1969 the home and
its 1/2 acre of land was transferred to the United States Government.
In 1972 an additional 1/3 acre of adjacent land was cleared of an
existing apartment building and also donated to the Government by the
William Howard Taft Memorial Association.
H.R. 1000 would redraw the boundary of the Taft historic site to
include two parcels of land that are presently contiguous to the site.
The inclusion of these tracts within the site would benefit park
visitors by giving them easier access to the site, and by enabling the
Park Service to better tell the story associated with the site. In
addition, H.R. 1000 would benefit the local community of Mount Auburn,
as it would authorize the National Park Service to transfer a tract of
land to a leading private educator of Cincinnati, the SABIS
International School of Cincinnati (SABIS). This tract would enable
SABIS, which operates a school across the street from the site, to
better carry out its educational mission.
The Taft Historic Site is bordered by Southern Avenue on the north,
Auburn Avenue on the west, Young Street on the east, and Bodman Avenue
on the south. The primary attractions for visitors are the Taft Home,
and the Taft Education Center, which are both accessed from Auburn
Avenue. However, to reach the Home or the Education Center, visitors
must park along either heavily trafficked Auburn Avenue, or at the NPS
parking lot, which is at the other end of the block, at the corner of
Young Street and Southern Avenue. This lot is situated between two
tracts owned by SABIS, and across the street from other land owned by
SABIS. Thus, the lot is far more convenient for faculty, and parents of
students attending the SABIS school, than it is for Taft site visitors.
H.R. 1000 would enable the National Park Service to transfer this
land to SABIS, which would enhance SABIS's ability to serve the
community. In exchange, SABIS would transfer to the National Park
Service a tract of land that it owns along Southern Avenue. The
National Park Service would then develop part of this land into a
parking lot, which would enable visitors to park one-half block closer
to the Taft Home and Education Center than the present lot allows. The
National Park Service would allow another part of this land to revert
to the same character it possessed during the Taft years of 1857 to
1899--green space. The National Park Service would also develop a
handicapped accessible walking trail connecting to the site on part of
this land to give visitors a better feel for how this land influenced
the life of William Howard Taft. The bill also provides that if a real
estate appraisal shows the NPS tract to be of a different value than
the SABIS tract, additional funds or land may be used to equalize the
transaction.
H.R. 1000 would also bring within the park's boundary another
tract, approximately three-fourths of an acre that is located at the
intersection of Southern and Auburn Avenues. This property presently
contains a residential building with 40 apartments. For the past 18
years the National Park Service has rented administrative office space
in this building. The parking lot for this building, which includes a
Park Service easement, was brought within the boundary of the park by a
1981 boundary modification. Over the last 15 years, this tract has come
up for sale on two occasions. Both times the NPS wanted to acquire the
property, but was unable to submit an offer because the property was
not within the park boundary. This property has been identified in the
master plan for the park as land that would further the mission of the
park. While the National Park Service does not have a definitive plan
for the use of this property at present, the tract could be used for a
variety of purposes that would further the park mission. In determining
the best use for this tract we would examine several alternatives,
including using it to improve access to the site because of its
location as a corner lot, and its potential for parking spaces; using
it to aid us in telling the William Howard Taft story, as at least part
of it could be restored to a condition similar to that which existed
during the Taft years; and using at least part of it for administrative
space, which would help the park carry out its business. H.R. 1000
would give the National Park Service the authority to buy this property
when it goes on the market in the future. Any potential modifications
to the property would be accomplished only after consultation and
collaboration with all identified stakeholders.
While the two tracts of land that would be brought into the
historic site by H.R. 1000 were not part of the original Taft estate,
their acquisition would be consistent with the historic site's enabling
legislation, which provides that the purpose of the site is to
``preserve in public ownership historically significant properties
associated with the life of William Howard Taft.'' These tracts are
portions of land that was contiguous to the Taft property during the
time William Howard Taft resided at the site, and are therefore
historically significant properties associated with the life of William
Howard Taft. In addition, these properties take on even greater
significance in light of the fact that a large piece of the original
Taft estate that fronts Bodman Avenue will in all likelihood never be
available to the Park Service. Hamilton County constructed several
buildings on this site in 1995, which it uses for a juvenile detention
center. Thus, the acquisition of the tracts involved in H.R. 1000 may
represent the last chance the Park Service has to deal with encroaching
urban development that impedes its ability to carry out its mission at
the historic site. Their acquisition is also consistent with the park's
1981 Master Plan, which provides for the preservation of ``those
elements from the historic period'', and states that the park shall
``provide the appropriate opportunities for visitor use'' and
``coordinate area planning and management activities with those of
neighboring communities to attain mutual objectives''.
The costs to the treasury associated with the two land transactions
involved in H.R. 1000 are expected to be minimal. The annual operating
costs that the Park Service would incur in taking over the SABIS
parking lot would be offset by the costs the Park Service would forgo
as a result of conveying the parking lot at Young Street and Southern
Avenue to SABIS. The Park Service would incur nominal costs in
developing a parking lot and walking trail along this property of
approximately $65,000. Additionally, the government would not incur any
significant cost in carrying out this land exchange, as the both
properties are substantially equal in value.
The property at Southern and Auburn Avenues has been assessed at
$505,000. The level of operational costs associated with this site is
unclear at this time because we do not have a definitive plan for the
use of this property.
We recommend some amendments to the language of H.R. 1000. As
written, the bill would allow the National Park Service to purchase
land by donation, by purchase with donated funds, or by exchange. This
would preclude the National Park Service from using appropriated
funds--including land and water conservation funds--to acquire the
property located at Southern and Auburn Avenues. We are concerned that
this prohibition could thwart the intention of the bill. This tract is
commercially viable, and we have no indication that its owner would
donate it to the National Park Service. Similarly, we are unaware of
any third parties that might have resources readily available to
acquire this property and donate it to the National Park Service. Nor
are we aware of any exchange lands that might be available to
facilitate the exchange. The National Park Service would not want to
lose a third opportunity to acquire this property, which, as noted
above, has been identified in the master plan for the park as land that
would further the mission of the park and, as a corner lot, would round
out the park. For these reasons, we urge that the bill be amended to
allow the National Park Service to acquire this property with
appropriated funds.
We also propose two technical amendments to the bill. These are
attached to this testimony.
This concludes my testimony. I would be happy to answer any of your
questions.
Proposed Amendments to H.R. 1000:
On page 2, line 12, strike ``448/80,225'', and insert `` 448/
80,025''.
On page 2, line 24, strike ``United States of America'', and insert
``USA''.
On page 3, line 18, strike ``only''.
On page 3, line 19, insert ``or appropriated'' after ``donated''.
______
Mr. Hefley. Why don't you have them join you, if they would
like to?
Ms. Stevenson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hefley. Regarding H.R. 37, you stated in your testimony
that the administration supports the concept of the bill but
will not consider requesting funding for updating the studies
in this or the next fiscal year. Moreover, you stated, ``In
order to better plan for the future of our national parks, we
believe that such studies should carefully examine the full
life cycle of operation and maintenance cost that would result
from each alternative considered.''
Is this another way of saying that the administration
opposes any studies until the maintenance backlog for the
National Park System has been better addressed?
Ms. Stevenson. No, sir. In the case of this bill, we have
commitments for 2002, and the first time we think we could take
care of this would be 2003, in study money. We are not opposed
to having studies. We believe very strongly in your bill that
passed, is now a law, that requires us to do studies
beforehand. We think that is a great addition to the process,
and we look forward to working on this study.
Mr. Hefley. Well, first of all, let me ask Mr. Gallegly if
he would have questions of this witness or the superintendents.
Mr. Gallegly. Mr. Chairman, I just have one brief question
for Ms. Stevenson, with the Chair's concurrence.
Ms. Stevenson, have all of the private property owners in
the, what is it, 570 acres of publicly and privately owned
land, been notified that they would be incorporated in this
boundary extension?
Ms. Stevenson. They have not been notified individually. We
have done a very strong public process, including newspaper
articles and public announcements, as part of the general
management plan and in subsequent meetings. We have had
individual meetings, not one-on-one but meeting with groups, to
explain the process, explain what is going on. So in that
sense, yes.
Mr. Gallegly. Congressman Sherman mentioned that he had
heard no opposition, and there was quite a broad divergence of
philosophical priorities in that region in the years past. I
represented that portion that Mr. Sherman represents now in the
time prior to 1992, and I can attest to that.
I have not had any comments to my office, as a result of
this legislation, in a negative vein. Congressman Sherman has
voiced the same thing. Has the Park Service had any concerns
voiced or any opposition by any entity, public or private?
Ms. Stevenson. May I ask Superintendent Eck to answer that
question, please?
Mr. Eck. Mr. Gallegly, I can assure you we have received no
expression of opposition from any quarter.
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hefley. Would you explain to me, whoever wishes to do
that, how it would work? You have got, right kind of in the
middle of this corridor, you have got two cities or portions
thereof. How would that work in terms of the Park Service, and
how would that work in terms of the cities and the property
owners there, if you would share that with me?
Mr. Eck. Yes, I would be honored to share that with you.
First of all, let me explain the Santa Monica Mountains
National Recreation Area, when it was established in 1978,
really is a cooperative effort of both the National Park
Service, the State of California and its local governments, as
well as private property owners.
One of the things that is interesting about the park is
that really the private homeowners within the National
Recreation Area care every bit as much about the protection of
those mountains as we do. You might be interested to know that
the entire City of Malibu, for example, is within the National
Recreation Area. There are probably, and I haven't seen the
latest census figures, but there are probably over 50,000
people living within the National Recreation Area. They will
always live there. A portion of the Recreation Area, since the
park was envisioned and established in 1978, it has always been
understood that it would be private property.
Jurisdiction in the Santa Monica Mountains National
Recreation Area is exercised on the basis of ownership. Our
jurisdiction extends to lands that we own. The State of
California, for example, State park rangers, their jurisdiction
extends to the State parklands that they control.
As far as the significance, why this area needs to be
added, this is the one wildlife corridor that ensures the
perpetuation of the wildlife resources in the Santa Monica
Mountains, along the whole 50-mile length of Highway 101 that
forms pretty much the northern boundary of the Santa Monica
Mountains, this is the one open wildland corridor that connects
the Santa Monica Mountains to the mountains to the north.
Mr. Hefley. Any other questions? Jimmy?
Mr. Duncan. I am just curious. I don't really understand
exactly what limitations there are, if any, on these private
landowners, the 330 acres of developed residential areas, and
some of the other parts, too. If a homeowner wanted to cut down
all the trees in their back yard, and the neighbors around it
objected and came to the Park Service, what would happen?
Mr. Eck. Well, I think we would tell them that they would
need to go somewhere else with their concern, because it is not
within our jurisdiction.
Mr. Duncan. So there are no restrictions or limitations
that you can think of, big or small, on these homeowners?
Mr. Eck. Not from the National Park Service. Now, Los
Angeles County or the city government--
Mr. Duncan. No, I am not talking, I am not worried about
that. That is--
Mr. Eck. Right.
Mr. Duncan. But no restrictions, no limitations?
Mr. Eck. Absolutely.
Mr. Duncan. They can sell their property? They can sell
their home if they want to?
Mr. Eck. They do every day, yes.
Mr. Duncan. And they can do anything that is legal under
local laws?
Mr. Eck. That is correct.
Mr. Duncan. All right. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hefley. That is a good course of questioning, because
that is one of the problems I have with having the cities in
here.
I think it is the National Parks and Conservation
Association, which I read a letter by one of their officials
recently which indicated that one of the goals that we should
have for our National Park System is to have all motorized
vehicles taken out of the parks. Now, that doesn't mean just
skimobiles and personalized watercraft, but that means cars and
everything.
If that idiotic idea were to prevail, what would that mean
to something like this, which is a unit of the park system but
you have got the whole City of Santa Monica and you have these
other cities. What would that mean?
Ms. Stevenson. If I may, NPCA I am sure has the best of
intentions in terms of motorized vehicles, but it is clear that
that would never prevail in a park like this and should not
prevail in a park like this.
Mr. Hefley. Would you agree that that should not prevail in
many of our national parks, such as Yellowstone and those kind
of parks? And I am not talking about the issue of snowmobiles,
I am talking about people being able to drive in and see the
park.
Ms. Stevenson. Some parks do have too many cars at some
times of the year, and we are very anxious to find ways to
transport people in ways that they like, while preserving the
environment and allowing them the access that they need. And I
don't think we know all the answers at this point, so I am not
in a position to say yes or no, but it is not our goal to ban
all cars from all parks.
Mr. Hefley. Thank you very much.
Mr. Duncan. Can I ask, there is a provision in this
legislation that says this recreation area, that the purpose
for the recreation area is ``to manage the area in a manner
that will preserve and enhance its scenic natural and historic
setting while providing for the recreational and educational
needs of the visiting public.''
Now, obviously all over the country there has been a lot of
disagreement about what is scenic, and every inch of land in
this country could be called historic. It has been there long
before any of us got here. And what I am wondering about, once
again, is if a private landowner wants to sell his property for
some type of commercial development, say to put up a
McDonald's, would you all have any ability to come in there
under this legislation and stop that?
Mr. Eck. No, we would have no ability.
Mr. Duncan. In other words, if it is all right under local
zoning laws--
Mr. Eck. Right.
Mr. Duncan. --then it is all right with you?
Mr. Eck. Right.
Mr. Duncan. Even if the whole neighborhood said, ``This
McDonald's'' or this whatever ``is going to disrupt the scenery
in this recreation area.''
Mr. Eck. Well, I want to be clear, we have the same
standing as any other private property owner, whether they own
a quarter of an acre of land or 15 acres or whatever. So, I
mean, conceivably we might write a letter to the planning
commission and express, you know, reservations that we might
have.
Mr. Duncan. Well, I have got no problem with that--
Mr. Eck. Right.
Mr. Duncan. --because anybody in this country, whether they
work for the Federal Government or not, should be allowed to
express their opinion.
Mr. Eck. Right.
Mr. Duncan. But it would still be up to the local
authorities.
Mr. Eck. That is absolutely right. That is absolutely
right.
Mr. Duncan. All right. And the motorized vehicles that the
Chairman was talking about, is there anything in this
legislation that would restrict what they call off-road
vehicles?
Mr. Eck. No, and with respect to general motorized
vehicles, I might just point out, through this area is Highway
101, and it has 130,000 daily automobile trips through that
very gap in that area, so it would be quite unfeasible to
contemplate limiting motorized vehicles.
Mr. Duncan. All right. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hefley. Well, in general terms I think the Park Service
does a wonderful job of managing units such as this, and
managing most of your units, as a matter of fact. But I would
just emphasize something that Mr. Duncan stated, and that is,
there are two charges of the Park Service, and one is to
protect the resource and the other is provide for the enjoyment
of the public of that resource.
I hope we remember that and keep it in balance. I don't
think it was always kept in balance by some members of the last
administration, and I would hope that we would keep that in
balance because that is very, very important. My childhood
memories of experiences in the national park are some of my
most cherished memories, and I would not want us to shut future
generations out.
So, any further questions? If not, I thank the panel and
appreciate your being here.
Our next panel will be made up of Mr. Bill Watson, the
Oregon-California Trail Association; Jeanne Watson, the Oregon-
California Trail Association; Patrick Hearty, National Pony
Express Association; and Mike Berger, Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy. I would assume it is not accidental that we have
two Watsons on the panel. There may be some relation there.
Mr. Watson. Only 47 years, sir.
Mr. Hefley. Forty-seven years?
Mr. Watson. Yes.
Mr. Hefley. Well, congratulations.
Mr. Watson. Thank you.
Mr. Hefley. Do you have an order you would like to speak,
or shall I just start over here at the left, Mr. Watson, with
you?
Mr. Watson. Whatever you would like.
Mr. Hefley. Why don't you go ahead, then?
Mr. Watson. All right, sir.
Mr. Hefley. And we will move down the line.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM C. WATSON, OREGON-CALIFORNIA TRAIL
ASSOCIATION
Mr. Watson. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for this
third opportunity--
Mr. Hefley. Excuse me. We will try to keep the statements
to 5 minutes, if you can, and then we will have time for
questions.
Mr. Watson. Yes. Thank you.
This is the third opportunity I have had to address this
distinguished Subcommittee. In 1989 and 1991 it was under the
heretofore Chairman, then Bruce Vento, who was very supportive,
and that was to authorize the establishment of the California
and the Pony Express Trails. In 1991 when we were here, the
bill was sponsored by a good supporter, Congressman Bereuter
from Nebraska. In that bill, by the way, we did agree that
there would be no condemnation and no condemnation of Federal
land leases, and at that point the House bill was accepted by
the Senate and in 1992 became law. We appreciate your support.
Our Oregon-California Trails Association is about 19 years
old. We now have 4,200 members. Last year they donated over
56,000 volunteer hours plus volunteered expenses, for a total
value of about $1 million, to our trails. So we have active
people working to help preserve the trails.
But the question has been raised about all of these routes,
and I would like to call your attention to the Park Service
maps A and B. The lines, red, green, blue and so forth,
identify routes to be studied. But the important thing is, as
mentioned by Congressman Bereuter, the yellow shows that these
are routes already part of a National Historic Trail.
For example, the Cherokee has been proposed for study. It
is endorsed by the Cherokee Nation. It was endorsed last year
by the Governor of Oklahoma. Three hundred and fifty miles of
it is already part of the Santa Fe National Historic Trail. So,
for a lot of these, it is not a matter of adding miles to the
trails system but adding additional trail logos to represent
the other trails that used this same corridor, and we have
asked for a slight change in the wording of H.R. 37 to reflect
this situation.
In Congressman Bereuter's ``Dear Colleague'' letter and
also in his testimony, he pointed out concerns about
condemnation of private land, no condemnation of private lands
or Federal land leases. And we have worked regularly with
private landowners, and the Trails Act offers them a site
certification and access limits process, where a private
landowner can say, ``We agree to participate,'' and ``they can
close the land for no public access, have unlimited access, or
even 1 day a year and specify what date.'' And many of the
people along the trails, the Oregon and California Trails, are
doing that today.
Our KANSA Chapter in north central Kansas is working on a
Park Service project with four ranch families to do
nonobtrusive archaeological research of four grave sites on
private land, and this has been well received. We had a slight
problem with equipment freezing, but we expect to have results
soon, and the landowners are delighted because this has been
part of their heritage for 150 years.
We have worked in South Pass with Exxon, as I testified in
'91. We are now working with Wolverine Gas & Oil on a drilling
process, and have a joint venture going with them on how to
minimize the impact on the trail, and I guess it is working
because the president of Wolverine just joined our Oregon-
California Trails Association.
So with that, I would like to ask you to support this H.R.
37 and thank you for your time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Watson follows:]
Statement of William C. Watson, Co-Chair, Trails Liaison Committee,
Oregon-California Trails Association, on H.R. 37
Chairman Hefley, Ranking Member Christian-Christensen and other
Subcommittee members and guests, thank you very much for this third
opportunity to testify before your distinguished Subcommittee. November
7, 1989, and April 11, 1991, Chairman Bruce Vento invited us to testify
in support of legislation to create the California and Pony Express
National Historic Trails. It is nice to see a few familiar faces from
our previous visits.
Today, the Oregon-California Trails Association, National Pony
Express Association, Mormon Trails Association and Iowa Mormon Trails
Association jointly urge you to approve H.R. 37, authorizing the Update
Feasibility Study for our trails.
I would like to re-emphasizing several key points made in
Congressman Doug Bereuter's March 13, 2001, Dear Colleague letter (copy
attached) encouraging support and co-sponsorship of H.R. 37:
``This legislation should be non-controversial, as it would
simply recognize the fact that there are additional routes and
cutoffs which may deserve inclusion in the National Trails
System.''
``No condemnation of private lands or Federal leases is to be
contemplated to add any of these routes to the trails.'' This
agreement was made in 1992, before the trails were authorized,
to satisfy landowners & leaseholders concerns.
``Although the National Park service is supportive of efforts
to examine these additional routes, it has determined that
congressional legislation is needed to provide the
authorization.''
We recognize that not every route proposed for study may meet the
criteria of the National Trails Act and qualify for inclusion in the
National Trails System. The Oregon and California routes proposed for
study represent thousands of volunteer hours researching and retracing
them. We request a slight change in H.R. 37 to recognize study routes
shared with an established National Historic Trail. See yellow lines on
Maps A&B.
OCTA/PRIVATE LANDOWNER COOPERATION
Quoting from my April 10, 1991 testimony before this Subcommittee:
``We also work with private landowners, calling attention to the
importance of the overland trails, obtaining permission to mark trail
ruts and emigrant graves, and requesting access to trail sites for
special occasions.'' Any activities on private land are with the
concurrence of the land owner/manager.
The National Trails Act provides private landowners a opportunity
for Site Certification. If the landowner elects Certification, an
agreement is signed with the National Park Service which specifies
public access: every day; one day a year and what date; no public
access. Many private landowners have participated in Certification
since the 1986 designation of the Oregon Trail and 1992 designation of
the California & Pony Express Trails.
Our KANSA Chapter in northeast Kansas is working with private
landowners and the National Park Service using side-scan radar to do
archaeological research of four emigrant grave sites without disturbing
the ground. Like many private landowners, these ranch families have
protected these graves for 160 years. At the end of the first day, the
ranchers hosted a team pot luck dinner and KANSA members hosted the
next night. Unfortunately, some equipment froze during this November
trial, so this study will be completed after the spring thaw.
The Oregon-California Trails Association's 19th annual convention
will be in Casper, Wyoming, from August 15-18. Each year we meet at a
different place along the trail. Two days are devoted to speakers on
trail related subjects. Two more days are devoted to trail tours. Then,
there are pre and post convention trail tours, many requiring 4-wheel
drive. Wyoming chapter members working closely with private and public
landowners make this year's tours possible. It is always a thrill to
have local families show us the trail remnants across their land and to
hear their history.
OCTA/ENERGY INDUSTRY COOPERATION
Again quoting from my April 10, 1991, testimony before this
Subcommittee: ``Over the last eight years (now 18 years), OCTA has
worked with major corporations, such as EXXON and the Altamont Pipeline
Co., to insure that the Overland Trails are disturbed as little as
possible when public needs for energy resources require crossing routes
of the pioneers.'' OCTA's cooperative efforts with EXXON and the
resulting minimum impact on our four trails was featured in EXXON's
corporate magazine.
Last month, BLM, NPS, OCTA, Wyoming SHPO and Wolverine Gas & Oil
representatives met in Rock Springs, Wyoming, to discuss proposed
exploratory drilling of 3 wells near the Sandy Crossing and South Pass
on BLM lands adjacent to the Oregon, California, Mormon Pioneer and
Pony Express National Historic Trails.
Over lunch, the Wolverine President and our National Preservation
Officer discussed mutual concerns including a group of protest letters
written by local fourth graders about this planned drilling. Wolverine
plans to do lateral drilling at least one-quarter mile from the trail.
OCTA and the NPS urged them to use an accordion approach in this
rugged land so that the drilling is behind natural formations and not
on top of them. Plans are to use an existing BLM road across the trail
to move equipment and supplies. If a pipeline is required, hopefully,
it will be under that BLM road.
Our Preservation Officer met with the fourth graders that afternoon
and told them not to blame Wolverine for working in historic South Pass
because they were helping solve America's energy problem. He shared
their concerns about protecting the trails and assured them that all
participants in the morning meeting will be working together to
minimize the trails impact of that work. By the way, the Wolverine
President is now an OCTA member.
Early day fur trappers and traders named the South Pass they used
when crossing the Continental Divide at this location. On August 22,
1843, Theodore Talbot (with the Fremont 2nd Expedition) wrote: ``Today
we set foot in Oregon Territory, the land of promise. As of yet, it
only promises an increased supply of sagebrush and sand.'' Elizabeth
Dixon Smith's July 31, 1847, journal entry reads: ``Passed over one
mountain and camped at the foot of South Pass. Here we found some
gooseberries.'' And, August 1 she noted: ``Passed over the Rocky
Mountains, the backbone of America.''
As our Preservation Officer Dick Ackerman noted: ``These early
travelers over this dirty, dusty rocky ribbon of a trail made a
difference. They were settling the Pacific frontier and with these
settlements made our country the ocean to ocean Nation that it is
today. Today's travelers can share the pioneer experience. They can
stand there and look both ways and try to imagine what it was like for
those early travelers. This is why we need to do our best to keep it
looking the same.''
Last year, OCTA CA/NV chapter members worked with the U.S. Senate
staff and the Nevada BLM to plan and create the Black Rock/High Rock
National Conservation Area legislation that protects the California and
Oregon Trails through that area while allowing continued multiple use
of those lands. Today, OCTA chapter members continue their work with
the BLM to plan and implement this National Conservation Area.
CALIFORNIA NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL
MISSOURI VALLEY ROUTES
The 1987 California Trail Feasibility and Desirability Study
assumed that: ``Most of theses ruts and traces are west of Casper,
Wyoming, ...'' Subsequent extensive diary research plus ground searches
by Oregon-California Trail Association members located numerous swales,
ruts, remanent of river and creek crossings, etc., in the Missouri
Valley. Many of these sites are on private land and have been preserved
for 160 years as part of these proud landowners' family heritage.
OCTA's research identified 19 Missouri Valley routes, shown in
green, that are proposed for study under H.R. 37. Most will be multi-
use shared routes. For instance, OCTA/NPEA research indicates that Fort
Leavenworth to Big Blue River Route was used by Oregon and California
bound emigrants and Pony Express riders.
CENTRAL ROUTES
Seven Central Routes proposed for study, shown in green, include
the Cherokee Trail which has not been designated a National Trail.
Because of its significance, the Cherokee is marked and preserved in
Wyoming by the BLM and OCTA volunteers.
Last year, at the request of the Wyoming BLM, OCTA contributed
$5,000 toward BLM purchase of new concrete markers for the Cherokee
Trail. This spring OCTA and the BLM will install those markers. So if
the Cherokee Trail qualifies as a California trail route, it will not
significantly increase the number of trail miles on Wyoming BLM land.
The Cherokee Trail was under study and included in the draft
California Trail Comprehensive Management Plan until a Solicitor's
Opinion dropped it from the CMP. While under study, the Governor of
Oklahoma wrote a letter to NPS Director Bob Stanton supporting the
designation of the Cherokee Trail as a branch of the California
National Historic Trail.
The Cherokee Trail was used by native Americans, Anglos and blacks
from Oklahoma Territory who went west for the California gold rush. The
Cherokee Trail segment from Rawlins, WY, to Fort Bridger received heavy
use by Mormon pioneers during the 1860s, making this a shared route.
One segment of the Cherokee Trail shares one part of the Santa Fe
National Historic Trail.
A few weeks ago, we represented the Oregon-California Trails
Association during the sixth Trails Advocacy Week. Mary Tidwell from
the Trails Of Tears Association announced the Cherokee Nation's support
for H.R. 37 and the inclusion of the Cherokee Trail as a route on the
California Trail. Their support is greatly appreciated.
WESTERN ROUTES
Eight Western routes, shown in green, are proposed for study under
H.R. 37. Most of them were excluded from the original Feasibility Study
or were ordered deleted from the Comprehensive Management Plan.
For example, 1991 testimony noted the 150th anniversary of the
Bidwell-Bartleson route which was deleted by Solicitor's Order from the
final California Trail Comprehensive Management Plan.
``On May l2, l85l, the Bidwell-Bartleson Company left from the
Kansas City area. They did not have a map showing the way to
California, because none existed. Thirty-one men, one woman (Mrs. Nancy
Kelsey) and her infant daughter began their journey by following the
Oregon Trail, traveling west with other emigrants. About 560 miles
beyond Fort Laramie, they left the established Oregon Trail to find a
route across the unknown territory stretching to California. After
leaving their wagons in the desert and wandering lost for days, the
Bidwell-Bartleson party finally reached the Sierra Nevada mountains.
They crossed somewhere near present day Sonora Pass and arrived in
California on October 30, 1891. The accomplishments of the Bidwell-
Bartleson company, including those of Nancy Kelsey, who became the
first white woman to cross the Sierras, will be widely celebrated this
year.''
The year 2001 is an excellent time to pass H.R. 37 and recognize
the 160th anniversary of the first overland pioneers to reach
California.
The Carson Route is an authorized branch of the California Trail.
It was developed from west to east by the Mormon Battalion as an easier
route over the Sierras than the Truckee/Donner Route.
A 71 mile long portion from Genoa, Nevada to Union House,
California is a High Potential Segment where today's travelers can
still share some of the emigrant experience. Our family has worked on
preserving and interpreting about half this segment for 30 years. In
Hope Valley, the Big Trees Route (proposed for study) cuts southwest
from the Carson. It was used by many gold seekers headed for the
southern mines.
After the Carson Route crosses the Sierra it cuts northwest to
Union House near Tragedy Spring. The Volcano Road study route continues
west from the Carson to the Volcano gold rush town where Union
sympathizers used a cannon to protect gold bullion from possible
seizure by Confederate sympathizers.
Our family works every summer as Forest Service Adopt-A-Trail
volunteers marking and maintaining the top 2 1/2 miles of this segment
from Emigrant Valley (elev. 8,000 ft.) up to Covered Wagon Summit and
West Pass (elev. 9,600 ft.) In late June, we again will have three
generations working on our adopted trail.
The segment from Caples Lake up to Emigrant Valley is maintained by
Kirkwood Mountain Resort Homeowners. The segment west from ours, used
by high clearance vehicles since the late 1940s, is maintained by a
Four Wheel Drive Club.
A joint Forest Service/Kirkwood Mountain/OCTA plan will soon:
LEstablish additional ski runs without impairing the
trail, including the new Emigrant (ski) Run down our trail;
LInstall trail interpretative signs on lift towers and the
snack bar;
LCreate a new off-the-ruts wild flower trail for hikers &
horses;
LProvide for new mountain bike trails off the Carson
Route.
Jeanne and I lead trail hikes for Kirkwood guests and employees and
give public trail talks at Kirkwood and Kit Carson Lodge. A Kirkwood
employee volunteer work day helped mark most of our Adopt-A-Trail
segment.
SHARED CALIFORNIA & OREGON NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAILS
California was the first designated multi-route National Historic
Trail. Oregon was designated a point-to-point National Historic Trail
with two alternate routes. Seven routes are proposed for study under
H.R. 37.
The Comprehensive Management Planning process, determined that
seven designated California NHT Routes were shared by emigrants bound
for Oregon. Plans to identify these shared Oregon Routes, shown in red
and yellow, were barred by a Solicitor's Opinion. If authorized, no
route miles would be added and the Oregon NHT marker would be installed
by volunteers.
The Applegate Route of the California NHT illustrates the problems
created by the Solicitor's Order. The Applegate was used during the
California gold rush and also was the Southern route to Oregon. It
traverses over 300 miles through Southern Oregon, yet can not have
Oregon NHT markers.
Our Oregon OCTA members urge: ``Please pass H.R. 37 so we can put
an Oregon NHT marker on the interpretive sign outside the Oregon State
House in Salem.'' Today it just reads ``California National Historic
Trail''. Designation of these Shared Routes would add trail logos and
not significantly increase management costs.
CENSUS OF EMIGRANT DOCUMENTS (COED)
Oregon-California Trails Association members developed the Census
Of Emigrant Documents (COED) database which currently contains
information from 2,263 emigrant diaries, letters and reminiscences
about their trips along these trails. The research and entry data
documentation was done by OCTA members and historical society
volunteers. Some 64,271 emigrant names are currently contained in
OCTA's COED database. This database is already being searched to begin
producing emigrant quotes about the routes proposed for study under
H.R. 37.
FOUR TRAILS GIS DATABASE
Utah University is developing and operating the Oregon, California,
Mormon Pioneer and Pony Express Trails GIS Database under contract with
the National Park Service Long Distance Trails Office in Salt Lake
City.
Ninety-five percent of the initial Four Trails GPS mapping was done
by volunteers using a variety of equipment, requiring different
calibrations and adjustments, which complicated the University of
Utah's development of this GIS Database.
Even so, during last year's extreme fire emergency, this Database
provided computer map files identifying our Four Trails routes,
significant sites and segments for use by the Interagency Fire Control
Center in Boise, ID. To our knowledge, none of the significant sites
and segments identified for our four trails were damaged by fire. A
number of wooden BLM Cherokee Trail markers were destroyed by wild
fire. But, this route is not yet eligible for inclusion in the Four
Trails GIS Database.
OCTA contributed $5,000 toward cement replacement markers to be
installed this spring by Wyoming OCTA volunteers and the BLM. Passage
of H.R. 37 and completion of the study should allow the California
National Historic Trail logo to be added on these BLM Cherokee Trail
markers.
OCTA is using National Park Service Challenge Cost Share dollars to
purchase sophisticated GPS units and provide volunteer training on
their use. This new input will allow the Four Trails GIS Database to
pinpoint the location of Significant Sites and Segments, interpretive
signs and kiosks, and even the location of installed trail markers for
tracking purposes.
In conclusion, we urge this House Resources Subcommittee on
National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands to endorse H.R. 37. Thank
you for your time. If you have any questions, we will gladly try to
answer them or get answers for you.
______
Mr. Hefley. Thank you.
Mrs. Watson?
STATEMENT OF JEANNE H. WATSON, OREGON-CALIFORNIA TRAIL
ASSOCIATION
Mrs. Watson. Thank you, Chairman Hefley and members of the
Committee. I am speaking today on the Oregon National Historic
Trail, which when it was designated in 1978, was considered a
point-to-point route from Independence, Missouri to Oregon
City. Well, not exactly.
There are 11 other routes that were used by pioneers to the
Oregon Territory. Two of these 11 routes go through the State
of Washington, taking pioneers to the Puget Sound and Tacoma
regions. There are three trails in Idaho that are considered by
the BLM as part of the Oregon Trail. And in 1995 the Oregon
State Legislature designated five of the trails in Oregon as
important alternates to the Oregon Trail.
It is ironic that the first trail to Oregon, opened in
1836, has never been part of any National Historic Trail. This
is the Whitman Mission Route, where the Whitmans and the
Spauldings arrived to set up a mission with the Indians.
Narcissa Whitman, wife of Dr. Marcus Whitman, wrote in 1840,
``We are emphatically situated on the highway between the
States and the Columbia River.'' In those days it was the
Oregon Trail. And the Whitman Mission is today a national
historic place, but yet the trail bypassed it after 1843 and
44, so this route needs to be picked up and added to the Oregon
Trail.
Another one of the interesting examples is the Applegate
route. It is listed only as part of the California National
Historic Trail, yet it is the trail to southern Oregon and
cannot be so marked. You can imagine how the Oregonians have
reacted to this, when the sign for the Applegate Trail in front
of the State House in Salem lists only ``California Trail.''
This occurred because in 1992 nothing was done to add trails to
the Oregon National Historic Trail designation.
The trail was opened in 1846 from west to east,
intersecting the California Trail on the Humboldt River in
Nevada. Today this segment is part of the newly established
High Rock-Black Rock National Conservation Area that was passed
and approved at the end of the last session of Congress.
Californians using this route turned left and went into
northern California, while the Oregonians went into the
southern part of their State. So this needs to be rectified,
and there are two branches of the Applegate route that led into
northern California in the Gold Rush era, that are also
included for addition in the California section of H.R. 37.
To quickly cite just one more example, in Idaho the Goodale
cutoff leads from Fort Hall to the Boise Valley, and in 1862
there were more than 1,000 wagons with 900-plus men and 300
women and children who made that crossing, opening this route
for further traffic. It was used right up to 1904, until the
railroad made it possible to abandon wagon travel into Idaho.
So all of these routes, including the others of the 11 that
I have not named and which are in my written testimony, deserve
to be studied for inclusion in the National Historic Trails,
and we are asking for your support for this study, for H.R. 37.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Watson follows:]
Statement of Jeanne H. Watson, Co-Chair, Trails Liaison Committee,
Oregon-California Trails Association (OCTA) and U.S. Forest Service
Adopt-A-Trail Volunteer
Historic Trails to the ``Oregon County''
In 1978 when the Oregon Trail was designated as a National Historic
Trail it was generally considered to be a point-to-point route. Not
exactly . . . . there are two alternates, one in Idaho and the other in
Oregon, but another eleven pioneer trails to the Oregon Territory have
been overlooked.
In 1995 Oregon House Bill 2966 recognized five routes as
``alternates'' of the Oregon Trail. Also listed separately in this bill
is the ``Applegate (California) National Historic Trail'', designated
in 1992 as part of the California National Historic Trail.
Two other routes, used by pioneers crossing Oregon to settle in
present-day Washington State, may be eligible for National Historic
Trail designation. Three additional routes in Idaho are also considered
cross-country segments of the Oregon National Historic Trail.
Passage of H.R. 37 will allow studies of these eleven routes for
possible addition to the Oregon National Historic Trail.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
(1-OR) It seems rather ironic that the route of the first Oregon
pioneers has not been designated as part of the Oregon Trail. For years
the Whitman Mission Route, first traveled in 1836, was THE Oregon
Trail. As Narcissa Whitman wrote in 1840: ``We are emphatically
situated on the highway between the States and the Columbia River.''
Narcissa and her husband, Dr. Marcus Whitman, along with the Rev. Henry
Spaulding and wife, Eliza, were Presbyterian missionaries from upper
New York State. Narcissa and Eliza, the first white women to cross the
Rocky Mountains, are remembered with a special marker at South Pass.
Their company took a two-wheel cart to Oregon, proving wheeled vehicles
could make the trip successfully. The Whitman Mission Route served as
the main stem of the Oregon Trail during the earliest years of the mass
overland migrations but later bypassed by the route in 1978 designated
as the Oregon National Historic Trail.
The Whitman Mission National Historic Site at Walla Walla, WA,
interprets this trail story and its link with Native Americans as do
signs by the Oregon Trail Coordinating Council. Exhibits also interpret
this history at Tamastslikt Cultural Institute on the Umatilla Indian
Reservation near Pendleton, OR.
(2-OR) In 1843-44 the Upper Columbia River Route became the only
trail to the Willamette Valley. A day's horseback journey west of the
Whitman Mission, it started at a Hudson Bay Company post, where
emigrants built rafts to float down the river to The Dalles, a
treacherous trip with loss of lives and belongings. The Applegate
family experienced such tragedy in 1843 when the river claimed the
lives of two 10-year-old cousins and another family member as a boat
upset in a whirlpool.
Emigrants could avoid the river by traveling along the bank,
negotiating steep cliffs and rocky shorelines. In 1844 Oregon emigrants
found a way to bypass the Whitman Mission completely by following the
Umatilla River to the Columbia, saving several days' travel. By the
late 1840s use had declined as emigrants followed new trails across the
desert south of the river.
Oregon Trail Coordinating Council signs interpret this route at two
kiosks and it is included in exhibits at the Columbia Gorge Discovery
Center in The Dalles.
(3-OR) Although listed as part of the California and Pony Express
National Historic Trails in 1992, the Applegate Route has never been
included as part of Oregon National Historic Trail. Although also known
as the Southern Route to Oregon, it can only be marked with California
Trail signs, including one near the State Capitol in Salem, Oregon.
Oregon pioneers traveling this southern route left the Oregon Trail at
the Raft River to continue towards California before going north across
Nevada to Oregon.
The Applegate route, opened in 1846 by brothers Jesse and Lindsay
Applegate to avoid the Columbia River, served as an alternate southern
route; opened from west to east it met the California Trail along the
Humboldt River. Jesse Applegate lead the first company of 200 Oregon
pioneers with nearly 100 wagons. The route was used by both Oregon
pioneers and California-bound emigrants, who turned off to reach
northern California. After the 1848 discovery of gold, Oregonians
followed the Applegate Route to reach the northern California mines via
the Lassen Cutoff. Peter Burnett (later governor of Oregon) led 150
pioneers with 50 wagons from Oregon City, taking the first wheeled
vehicles to Peter Lassen's ranch in the Sacramento Valley.
Although used for a decade, the Burnett Cutoff is not designated as
part of any National Historic Trail. Neither is the 1852 trail, which
leads from the Applegate route south of lower Klamath Lake to the Yreka
(CA) area. As ``shared routes,'' the Applegate Trail and these cutoffs
should be marked as part of both the Oregon and California National
Historic Trails.
The Applegate Trail winds through the newly established Black Rock
Desert and High Rock Canyon National Conservation Area in Nevada.
Interpretation also includes 18 signs placed along the route in Oregon
by the Applegate Trail Coalition with support from the Oregon Trails
Coordinating Council to complement existing signs, exhibits and
commemorative markers. Museums and historical societies in southern
counties of Oregon have cooperated in publication of a trail guide for
this Southern Route.
(4-OR) The Oregon Legislative Assembly proclaimed 1995 as the
``Year of the Meek Cutoff Trail,'' opened 150 years earlier by 1,000
persons with 200 wagons. This route, named for leader Stephen Meek,
crossed the middle of Oregon through high desert to the central Cascade
mountains. It is the most infamous of Oregon Trail route because the
company became lost and could not find water; at least 23 persons died
during the 52-day ordeal. Rescue parties were sent from The Dalles,
with help from mountain man Moses ``Black'' Harris.
The Meek Cutoff has been interpreted with several Oregon historical
markers and BLM signs along the route and an exhibit at the High Desert
Museum in Bend, OR.
(5-OR) An Oregon Trail route used from 1848 to 1884, this 1847
Cutoff to the Barlow Road made it easier for emigrants to cross the
Cascades to Oregon City. The Cutoff saved 100 miles as well as a week
of travel time but could require three days to cross the Deschutes
River before a bridge was built in 1852. (The Barlow Road section of
the Oregon National Historic Trail provided an alternative route around
Mount Hood.)
This Cutoff is interpreted with BLM signs, an Oregon Trails
Coordinating Council kiosk and Oregon historic markers as well as
driving tours and brochures by the Sherman County Historical Society.
(6-OR) The Free Emigrant Road, opened in 1853, followed part of the
Meek cutoff before turning south and then west to continue north to
settlements at Eugene City. The Elijah Elliott train with 215 wagons
successfully crossed the desert in 1853 but became stranded in the
Cascade Mountains. A 70-mile waterless stretch followed by October snow
and freezing mountain temperatures required rescue by a relief party.
In 1854 William Macy succeeded in leading 121 wagons across both the
desert and the Cascades following the newly completed Free Emigrant
Road, so named because no toll was charged (unlike the Barlow Road).
The road continued to be used through the 1860s with nearly 500 wagons
and 2,500 persons traveling to the Willamette Valley.
To date no interpretive facilities exist. As Charlotte Pengra
commented in 1853 ``all are afraid to try it'' because at that time
nothing was known about the route.
(7-WA) Established in 1845, the Cowlitz River Route led from the
river's headwaters to the southern tip of Puget Sound. Among early
settlers were the first black emigrants to the Pacific Northwest,
including the founder of the present-day Centralia.
Ezra Meeker, who followed this trail in 1852, became the first
Oregon Trail preservationist when he realized in 1906 the pioneer trail
was fast disappearing. He found an old wagon (now on exhibit at the
Washington State Museum in Tacoma) and began retracing the trail with
an ox team. Meeker presented programs and put up commemorative markers,
with school children often contributing pennies. Many of his markers
still survive including one at South Pass. Upon reaching the east cost
Meeker drove his wagon down Wall Street in New York City and later
parked on the lawn of the Capitol in Washington DC. His preservation
efforts to save the trail also included trips along the Oregon Trail by
car, train and airplane. Today these markers still provide
interpretation of this trail.
(8-WA) Connecting Fort Walla Walla (site of the Whitman Mission) to
the Puget Sound, the Naches Pass Trail was opened in 1853. It bypassed
both the Columbia River and the Willamette Valley and was known as the
``Walla Walla to Steilacoom Pioneer Citizen's Trail.'' Although it
required 68 river crossings, it saved 200 miles of travel. The existing
trail was improved for wagon travel in 1853 when Congress appropriated
$20,000 and Captain George McClellan (future Civil War general)
supervised clearing it for military use. Ezra Meeker, who traveled the
Oregon Trail six times, followed this route in 1854.
In 1910 the Washington and Oregon Historical Societies joined to
mark the Naches Pass Trail. Other interpretive activities include
signing programs at various sites.
(9-ID) The Northside Alternate followed the north side of the Snake
River from the vicinity of Fort Hall, passing Shoshone Falls, to the
Thousand Springs area where it connected with the North Alternate
Oregon Trail (see 10-ID). The first Bishop to Oregon followed this
route in 1847 on horseback, while his wagons took the trail south of
the river to Three Island Crossing. In 1852 Dr. Thomas White found by
going along this northwest route to Fort Boise the distance could be
``shortened nearly in half'' and also had better grass and water.
In 1993 a BLM and Idaho State Historical Society trails publication
stated additional research was needed to determine trail usage but
surface evidence plus early township survey plats indicate heavy wagon
use.
(10-ID) In 1852 a ferry established above Salmon Falls made it
possible for emigrants to cross the Snake River to the north side. At
Teapot Dome this route followed the main trail to Boise. Known as the
North Alternate, in 1847 the Northside Alternate (9-ID) connected with
it while in 1869 Kelton Road, a freight and stage route, used it. The
North Alternate avoided a dry and difficult stretch of the Oregon Trail
from Salmon Falls across the desert to Three Island Crossing, where it
became the main northern route.
The North Alternate is interpreted at Malad Gorge State Park with
additional segments marked by the Hagerman Historical Society. BLM
white posts also mark this route, determined to be eligible for listing
on the National Register of Historic Places. The story of the Oregon
Trail in this region is also interpreted by a BLM site and park at
Bonneville Point.
(11-ID) The Goodale Cutoff began on the north side of the Snake
River at Ft. Hall and rejoined the Oregon Trail south of Boise Valley
on the north side of the Snake River. It crossed the Lost River and
Camus Prairie following a traditional Shoshone Indian route, avoiding
an Oregon Trail loop along the Snake River. It was named for Tim
Goodale, a trader in the Snake Country, who lead a large combined wagon
train in 1862 across this route [known as the Jeffrey Cutoff but used
only in 1853-54]. According to Nellie Slater the 1862 company consisted
of 1,238 wagons with 998 men and 300 women and children.
This Cutoff required a ``dreaded drive'' through ankle-deep dust
before reaching good water and feed on the Camus Prairie, according to
Julius Merrill in 1864. It followed the perimeter of Craters of the
Moon National Monument Area and is included in the National Register of
Historic Places. Wagons followed the Goodale Cutoff as late as 1904.
Later Goodale opened a north-west continuation of his Cutoff, crossing
the Powder River to join the Oregon Trail below Flagstaff Hill near
Baker City, Oregon.
Preservation includes granite highway markers plus marking on
public lands by BLM and the OCTA-Idaho chapter. It is included on the
1990 official Idaho highway map and in 1994 covered wagons rolled along
this route during a re-enactment, as occurred along several Oregon
Trail routes during the 1993-94 sesquicentennial celebrations.
SOURCES
Oregon Historic Trails Report, Oregon Trail Coordinating Council,
1998;
An Initiative for Significant Historic Trail Routes in Oregon and
Washington, Oregon Trail Coordinating Council and OCTA - Northwest
Chapter, 1995
Emigrant Trails of Southern Idaho, Bureau of Land Management and
Idaho State Historical Society, 1993
Routes of the Oregon Trail in Idaho, Bicentennial Commission Idaho
Historical Society and Idaho Transportation Department, 1976
Overland Journal, OCTA, 1990 and 1996
______
Mr. Hefley. Let the record show that I don't think Mrs.
Watson used notes to do that. You are quite a historian, and we
appreciate that. That is very, very interesting.
Mrs. Watson. Well, I came from New Jersey after 25 years
there, and as Rush Holt will tell you, I can name New Jersey
and Maryland pioneers as well, at the drop of a hat.
Mr. Hefley. Great. Mr. Hearty?
STATEMENT OF PATRICK HEARTY, NATIONAL PONY EXPRESS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Hearty. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, distinguished members
of the Subcommittee, and friends. Unlike the Watsons, I am a
rookie here, and unlike Mrs. Watson, I cannot do this
unprompted.
But I would also like to speak on behalf of bill H.R. 37,
which will impact the four long distance National Historic
Trails, which are specifically the Oregon, California, Mormon
Pioneer, and the Pony Express Trails. And in the time that I am
allotted, I would like to offer three thoughts regarding this
bill which are largely in concert with the statements of my
trail colleagues.
First I would like to emphasize the importance of this bill
to expand the scope of the National Historic Trails. The Mormon
Pioneer National Historic Trail, as presently authorized, was
put together in the same fashion as the Oregon Trail, as a
point-to-point trail. It includes only the 1846 and 1847 route
followed by Brigham Young with the initial party called the
Vanguard Company.
Subsequent groups of Mormon pioneers crossing Iowa traveled
well to the north on trails that were mostly shared by other
westward immigrants, thereby avoiding major problems with mud
along the original trail. Also, the routes of the handcart
companies, which are largely across Iowa, are similarly not
included in the National Historic Trail as it presently exists.
Further west in Wyoming, the trail of the wagon trains sent out
from Great Salt Lake City in the 1860's to pick up emigrants
from the railhead--they were called the ``down and back''
companies--this trail also is not recognized as part of the
Historic Trail.
An estimated 70,000 members of the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter Day Saints traveled the emigrant trails to Utah
Territory prior to 1869, when the railroad was completed, the
transcontinental railroad. The present Mormon Pioneer National
Historic Trail adequately tells the story of less than 200 of
these.
Second, I wish to reassure you that the establishment of
the National Historic Trails is in no way detrimental to the
rights of private landowners along these trails. The National
Pony Express Association, which I represent, goes to great
lengths to maintain good relations with both the private and
public landowners and managers.
We conduct an annual horseback reenactment along the Pony
Express Trail, wherein a leather mail pouch or ``mochila''
which is filled with commemorative letters is relayed nearly
2,000 miles between St. Joseph, Missouri and Sacramento,
California, and a significant number of the participants, of
over 500 participants in this re-ride, are farmers and ranchers
who own land along the trail.
For example, in western Utah three generations of the David
Bagley family ride and carry the mail at Willow Springs Ranch
in Callao, Utah, where there stands the remains of an original
Pony Express station. They pass the mail to Rex Claridge, owner
of Six Mile Ranch a little bit further to the west. Out in
Nebraska, farmers like Scott Wolf and Leonard Hilton and many
others are leaders within the Association. They and others have
been known to literally shut off the tractor, saddle a horse to
take part in the re-ride, then put up the horse and return to
the tractor, and these examples are repeated up and down the
trail during our re-ride in the month of June. The Pony Express
National Historic Trail is and should be a source of pride to
those who work and live on the land where the history was made.
Finally, I would like to remind you of the critical
importance of preserving our heritage through vehicles such as
the National Historic Trails. In an increasingly hectic and
fast-paced world, there is a need and a yearning to connect
with simpler times. This connection can be found on the trails
of our pioneer forebears.
Many young people in our society seem to lack a sense of
where they belong in the world in terms of time and place, and
some turn to violent and self-destructive behavior in their
search for identity. The historic trails can offer them an
opportunity to learn through experience and feeling what has
gone before, and hopefully help them to gain an understanding
of who they are and where they are going.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to speak today. I
also respectfully request your favorable consideration for H.R.
37, to preserve and to protect these National Historic Trails.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hearty follows:]
Statement of Patrick Hearty, National Trails Committee Chair, National
Pony Express Association, Inc.,on H.R. 37
Chairman Hefley and distinguished members of the House Subcommittee
on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands, I am grateful for the
opportunity to testify in favor of H.R. 37, a bill which would amend
the National Trails System Act to allow an update of the feasibility
and suitability studies of four long distance National Historic Trails,
providing for possible additions to these trails. The National Pony
Express Association is pleased to support this legislation.
H.R. 37 would allow study of the feasibility and suitability of
additional routes and variants of the four long distance National
Historic Trails administered by the National Park Service Long Distance
Trails Office in Salt Lake City, Utah. The trails affected are the
Oregon, California, Mormon Pioneer, and Pony Express National Historic
Trails. The effect of this legislation would be to provide the
Secretary of the Interior with information regarding the
appropriateness of inclusion of additional routes and cutoffs as part
of the officially designated National Historic Trails.
The origins of the problems with these trails as presently
designated have been documented elsewhere and will not be reiterated
here (see the testimony of Jere L. Krakow, Superintendent of the NPS
Long Distance Trails Office). I would first like to discuss the
commitment of the National Pony Express Association to commemoration
and marking of the Pony Express National Historic Trail, and to the
promulgation of the history of the great enterprise we know as the Pony
Express.
The National Pony Express Association (NPEA) was incorporated in
California in 1978, ``organized for the perpetuation and recognition of
the historical running of the Pony Express.'' Our major activity each
year is a horseback re-enactment of the Pony Express, wherein a leather
mail pouch, or ``mochila,'' is relayed over approximately 2000 miles
between St. Joseph, MO, and Sacramento, CA. Participants come primarily
from the eight states crossed by the Pony Express Trail, but also
include members who reside in other states and several foreign
countries. Each state division also participates locally in parades and
fairs, provides programs for school and civic groups, and is engaged in
maintenance and marking projects on the trail itself.
NPEA has received national and international recognition while
carrying U.S. mail on horseback around a highway-closing mudslide in
American River Canyon, CA, in 1983, and while participating in the
Olympic Torch Relay in Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, and Missouri, prior
to the 1996 Summer Olympic Games in Atlanta, GA. Our members have been
invited to ride in the Tournament of Roses Parade in Pasadena, CA, and
in the ``We the People'' Parade in Philadelphia, PA, in 1986. We have
enjoyed numerous other high-profile opportunities to share our pride in
the history and heritage of the American West.
During the year 2000, NPEA members donated over 25,000 volunteer
hours, valued at over $350,000, and traveled more than 204,000 miles in
support of the Pony Express National Historic Trail. This volunteer
effort, valued at more than $411,000, comes from an organization of
approximately 800 members, having an annual operating budget of
$14,000. This time and effort are directed toward a wide variety of
projects, such as trail construction and clearance of storm damage in
California, marking the National Historic Trail across portions of
Nevada, and delivery of Christmas cards by Pony Express to hospitalized
children in Utah. Assistance with interpretive displays is being
provided for the Trails Interpretive Center in Casper, WY, and for the
Platte River Arch in Nebraska. In Julesburg, CO, a new bronze statue
honoring the riders of the Pony Express is being built. Trail marking
and scholarship programs in Kansas, and educational initiatives in
Missouri are helping the public to enjoy the story of the Pony Express,
and to know where significant events took place.
The National Pony Express Association works closely with our
Federal partners, the National Park Service, which has administrative
responsibility for the Trail, and the Bureau of Land Management and
National Forest Service, whose lands contain major portions of the
Trail in the western states. The association has cooperative agreements
and memoranda of understanding with the BLM and the Forest Service,
covering our activities on public lands under their jurisdiction. Park
Service Challenge Cost Share Grants are being used for projects in
several states, the largest being a $13,600 grant to our California
Division to help build a bridge and otherwise improve public access to
the Pony Express Trail. We are extremely grateful for the work done by
dedicated employees of these agencies, and we are proud to be the
primary volunteer organization with whom they work on matters
pertaining to the Pony Express National Historic Trail.
The NPEA also strives to maintain an excellent rapport with
ranchers and local land owners whose lands are crossed by the Pony
Express Trail. The 1992 legislation authorizing the Pony Express
National Historic Trail leaves all private property rights firmly in
the hands of the land owners. Sites and trial segments may be certified
and recognized by the National Park Service, at the request of the
landowner, but such certification provides no guarantee of access to
the general public, or to members of the managing agencies or volunteer
groups. All decisions regarding access, trail marking, interpretation,
etc., are left to the owner. A number of our members and re-ride
participants are, however, ranchers and farmers who are proud to
commemorate the important historic events which crossed their land.
Examples include Gary Barker, who serves as ride captain in Wyoming,
leading a group of riders across his family ranch on Yellow Creek,
south of Evanston, WY. Three generations of the Anderson family, owners
of Willow Springs Ranch in western Utah, take part in the re-ride, and
offer hospitality and a tour of a Pony Express station to members
during the annual re-enactment. Near Seneca, Kansas, a Pony Express
silhouette is being placed on property owned be Robert Runback. Many,
many other examples exist of ranch families and land owners to whom
NPEA activities offer an opportunity to show their pride in their
heritage.
It is my hope that the preceding description of the dedication and
depth of involvement of the members of the National Pony Express
Association will help you to understand how highly we value our
National Historic Trails. Federal dollars invested in the historic
trails are leveraged many times over by volunteer groups such as NPEA.
Your support of H.R. 37, as well as other legislation and initiatives
benefiting our historic trails makes our effort seem worthwhile.
I have also been asked to speak on the importance of H.R. 37 to the
Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail. I hope that my status as a
native Utahn, and past chairman of the Utah Historic Trails Consortium
will serve as adequate credentials. Information for this testimony has
been provided by the Mormon Trails Association in Utah, and by the Iowa
Mormon Trails Association.
The Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail, as authorized in 1978,
recognizes only the 1846-47 route followed by Brigham Young's group,
known as the Vanguard Company. In the subsequent years prior to 1869,
when the railroad was completed, a number of other routes were followed
by Mormon emigrants on their way to Utah Territory. Most of those
leaving Nauvoo in later companies traveled across Iowa on trails well
north of Brigham Young's ``Vanguard'' route. Another significant
example, also found in Iowa., is the route followed by the ``Handcart
Pioneers.'' A total of 2,962 people traveled west using handcarts, most
in the years 1856 and 1857. In the words of Loren Horton of the Iowa
Mormon Trails Association, ``The significance of this number of people
making a journey of that distance using such equipment is unparalleled
in the history of the frontier development in the United States.--
In the years 1864-67, approximately 6500 westbound Mormon emigrants
used what is called the ``Nebraska City Cutoff'' across eastern
Nebraska, as they left the Missouri River to begin the westward trek.
In central Wyoming in the late 1860's Mormon pioneers traveled on a
portion of the Cherokee Trail. On their final approach to Great Salt
Lake City, many followed Parley P. Pratt's ``Golden Pass Road,''
roughly along the route of modern-day Interstate 80. For details of the
trail routes proposed for further study, please refer to Maps A and B,
provided by the National Park Service. A complete listing of Mormon
emigrant routes traveled, and frequency of use has been compiled by
Mormon Trail scholar Ron Andersen.
Most of the Mormon Trail cut-offs and variants proposed for further
study were also used by Oregon and California bound pioneers. Some are
already designated as portions of the California National Historic
Trail. It is important that these shared routes receive recognition as
part of each National Historic Trail to which they pertain, so that a
more complete story of the westward migration can be told along the
trails. Inclusion of the appropriate shared routes will not add massive
numbers of miles to the trails. It will add greatly to the ability of
the Federal managers and volunteer groups to provide the public with a
more full an accurate picture of the opening of the West.
As with NPEA, the Mormon Trails Associations contribute massively
to the trails. The estimated contributions to the Mormon Pioneer Trail
for the year 2000 were 35,350 hours, 106,500 miles traveled, and out of
pocket expenses of $26,700. The total value of these contributions is
calculated at over $553,000. Once again, the federal dollars allocated
for the National Historic Trails are matched many times over by the
efforts of dedicated volunteers who work closely with the federal
partners in support of the trails.
As has been explained regarding the Pony Express Trail,
authorization of additional segments of the Mormon Pioneer National
Historic Trail will have no undesired effect on private lands. Land
owners will have complete control over visitation and access. No
wording regarding condemnation of private property is contained in the
original 1978 authorizing legislation, and none is sought in the
current bill.
The stories of the trails tell the history of the westward
expansion of our nation in the nineteenth century, of reaching out to
grasp the ``manifest destiny'' foreseen by the founding fathers. The
stories of adventure, the tales of sacrifice and hardship, need to be
remembered and retold, as do the stories of injustices and broken
promises. There are lessons for each of us in the chronicles of those
times. The public today seems to have an unprecedented interest in
trail history. In the fast-paced world in which we live, there exists a
great yearning to connect with a simpler time. There is also a great
desire to learn of our ancestors, to know where they traveled, what
they did and what they built. We can follow the trails they followed,
and maybe see some of the things they saw, maybe know some of the
feelings they felt. These opportunities must be preserved for the
future.
Perhaps the paramount reason for preserving the trails and their
history lies with the youth. Too many young people in our society grow
up with no sense of who they are, or where they fit in terms of time
and place. They seek to compensate for their lack of direction by
indulgence in violent or self destructive behavior. Connecting with
Historic Trails could help young people to see history as a story on
the land, rather than merely a list of dates and places in a book. By
finding out where they come from, they may begin to grasp a sense of
who the are and where they are going.
Once again, I respectfully request your favorable consideration for
H.R. 37. Our lives and those of our posterity will be immeasurably
enriched by the preservation of the National Historic Trails. Thank
You.
______
Mr. Hefley. Thank you, Mr. Hearty.
Mr. Berger, on a different subject.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL BERGER, CHAIRMAN, SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS
CONSERVANCY
Mr. Berger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Committee members,
for allowing me to address H.R. 640, which is a bill to extend
the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. I have
personally worked in the--well, I am the Chair of the Santa
Monica Mountains Conservancy, and I have worked over 15 years
with open space recreation and education issues in the southern
California area. I have lived there 31 years, but I have been
directly involved with this type of thing for the last 15-plus.
I feel this addition to the National Recreation area is
important because, one, the wildlife corridor issue. In the
early 1990's this wildlife corridor concept became known. The
connection of this area of the Santa Monica Mountains to an
area called the Simi Hills is critical for major mammal
populations, and then the Simi Hills go on and connect with the
Angeles National Forest and the Las Padres National Forest,
which are rather large national forest areas which allow for
biological diversity. So that becomes rather critical for
things like bobcats, mountain lions. They need to get a little
different genes in there.
It is the watershed of the Malibu Creek, which is within
that Santa Monica Mountains zone. This bill would also allow
private landowners in the area to work more closely with the
National Park Service. And then it would also provide access
for residents of Los Angeles and Ventura County for hiking,
biking and equestrian trails. Even though we live in a very
urban area, we have horses, and so they are out on the trails
quite commonly.
I would like to point out that the Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy does not hold land. We buy land and give it to
other agencies. For example, we have transferred Zuma Canyon,
Circle X Ranch, Peter Strauss Ranch, also called Lake
Incantanto, Palo Comadal Canyon, those have all been
transferred to the National Park Service through the Santa
Monica Mountains Conservancy.
The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy has acquired the
land in question, as far as the land we that we own, with the
purpose, the intent of transferring it over to another agency.
We like to transfer them to agencies that know how to run them.
In other words, our job is to buy them, buy the land, and then
we find the person or the group that can best run that land.
So H.R. 640 would enable the legal boundaries to reflect
the true topographical and biological boundaries in that area,
and I would ask your support, and thank you for letting me
speak on it.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Berger follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Michael Berger, Chairperson, Santa Monica
Mountains Conservancy, on H.R. 640
Chairman Hefley and Members of the Subcommittee:
My name is Michael Berger, I have the honor to chair the Santa
Monica Mountains Conservancy; my appointing authority to the
Conservancy is the Ventura County Board of Supervisors. I also serve as
an elected director of the Conejo Recreation and Park District which
serves the greater Thousand Oaks community in Ventura County, and I am
a member and the immediate past chair of the Mountains Recreation and
Conservation Authority, a joint powers agency comprised of the Santa
Monica Mountains Conservancy and the Conejo and Rancho Simi recreation
and park districts. The Mountains Recreation and Conservation
Authority, although a separate legal entity, functions as the
operations arm of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and when
referring to the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy in this testimony
such reference will be inclusive of the Authority as well.
The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy is the principal agency of
the State of California charged with the protection of the natural
resources of the Santa Monica Mountains Zone. Since its establishment
in 1980, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy has acquired almost
50,000 acres of public open space and parkland in the Santa Monica
Mountains and surrounding mountain ranges in Los Angeles and Ventura
Counties. Under California law, the Conservancy succeeds to and is
vested with the responsibility previously vested in the Santa Monica
Mountains Comprehensive Planning Commission for the maintenance and
enforcement of the Santa Monica Mountains Comprehensive Plan that was
prepared pursuant to Section 507(n) of the National Parks and
Recreation Act of 1978 and approved by the Secretary of the Interior.
We are pleased to appear before you today in support of H.R. 640,
the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment
Act. This measure would expand the boundary of the Santa Monica
Mountains NRA by the addition of the ``Wildlife Corridor Expansion
Zone'' consisting of the Liberty Canyon wildlife corridor at its
critical transition between the Simi Hills and the Santa Monica
Mountains and the headwaters of Las Virgenes Creek in the Simi Hills.
All of these areas are within the larger watershed of Malibu Creek
within the Santa Monica Mountains Zone as identified in the Santa
Monica Mountains Comprehensive Plan.
The addition of the ``Wildlife Corridor Expansion Zone'' is a
necessary expansion of the Santa Monica Mountains NRA boundary to take
into consideration the scientific knowledge we have gained since the
SMMNRA legislation was first enacted in 1978.
In the early 1990's two studies were conducted of the biological
interrelationships between the Santa Monica Mountains ecosystem and the
adjacent mountain ranges to the north. The work of Dr. Michael Soule,
one of the founders of conservation biology in this country, done for
the National Park Service, and a study done by Paul Edelman for the
Nature Conservancy conclusively showed that the Santa Monica Mountains
are a part of a much larger regional ecosystem consisting not only of
the Santa Monica Mountains, but also of the Simi Hills, the Santa
Susana Mountains, and ultimately leading into the great ``genetic
reservoirs'' of protected land in the Los Padres and Angeles National
Forests. The original boundary of the SMMNRA acknowledged this
connectivity by extending the NRA north of the Ventura Freeway (US 101)
to encompass Palo Comado and Cheesebro Canyons. The Soule and Edelman
studies demonstrated that the actual connectivity between the Simi
Hills and Santa Monica Mountains ecosystems was best achieved in
Liberty Canyon and in the upper Las Virgenes Creek watershed.
These scientific findings motivated a land acquisition policy by
the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy that emphasized protection of
the Liberty Canyon wildlife corridor and upper Las Virgenes Canyon to
the extent of acquiring more than 3,330 acres by purchase or dedication
since 1991. Starting with the Liberty Canyon purchase of over 400
acres, greatly added by the Ahmanson Ranch dedication of over 2600
acres in the upper Las Virgenes Creek watershed, and finally
culminating in acquisition of the connecting properties between Malibu
Creek State Park and the Liberty Canyon ownership north of the Ventura
Freeway (U.S. Highway 101). The most recent of these acquisitions, the
106 acre Abrams parcel, was just dedicated last month in a ceremony
that recognized the great cooperation between all levels of government
that characterizes the Santa Monica Mountains NRA. The Abrams property
is the key connection between the Santa Monica Mountains and Simi
Hills, the narrow point in the hour glass, if you will, between these
two ecosystems. It was acquired by the Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy using funds provided by the Los Angeles County Sanitation
Districts as part of a landfill permit mitigation required by the
National Park Service.
Unfortunately, although forming an indispensable connection between
the Simi Hills and the Santa Monica Mountains, this wildlife corridor
is outside the boundary of the Santa Monica Mountains Recreation Area.
H.R. 640 would remedy this situation.
H.R. 640 provides that land within the Wildlife Corridor Expansion
Zone can be acquired by the National Park Service only by donation or
expenditure of donated funds. The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
has a long history of land transfers to the National Park Service.
Indeed, some of the most beautiful portions of the National Recreation
Area--including Zuma Canyon, Circle X Ranch, Peter Strauss Ranch, even
Palo Comado Canyon itself--were transactions where the Santa Monica
Mountains Conservancy had first acquired the property.
The Conservancy expects to continue this policy upon enactment of
H.R. 640. The Liberty Canyon parcels, both north and south of Highway
101 would be donated to the park service immediately upon request. The
upper Las Virgenes Creek watershed (Ahmanson Ranch dedication) would be
transferred at an appropriate time once the Conservancy's continued
responsibilities with respect to this property have been fulfilled.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 640 is an important piece of legislation. At
this stage in the history of the SMMNRA, nothing is more important than
establishing legal boundaries for the Recreation Area that reflect the
true topographical and biological relationships that define this unique
unit of the National Park System.
I am happy to respond to any questions the subcommittee may have.
______
Mr. Hefley. Thank you very much. I am particularly
impressed with the quality of testimony of all of you. You are
very helpful to our deliberations on this.
Let me ask, do you have any questions?
Mr. Souder. May I make a brief comment?
Mr. Hefley. Yes, go right ahead.
Mr. Souder. I am anxious to learn more about the Santa
Monica area. That is part of the Ronald Reagan Museum Trail
from the museum to the coast, which those of us who are Reagan
fans have done a number of times, including me. So I know it is
a very beautiful area, and I think it would make a great
addition, and look forward to working with you on that.
I wanted to express a reservation and then hear a comment
on the national trails question, because in looking at the map
we were provided, and I am a history buff but I also admit to,
like many other history buffs, liking to see, preferring to see
history in a more simplistic version than all the different
cutoffs going every which direction.
And I think that a lot of the concept of the Oregon Trail,
the Mormon Trail, the Santa Fe Trail and so on, is that there
was a clear, basic path that was different than what we saw in
the Midwest and East. And when you start adding tons of cutoffs
to that, that were comparatively minor compared to the major
trail, and don't have some kind of a clear statement in it that
differentiates the central trail from the cutoffs, you have
less that a compelling case of why that trail is nationally
significant.
For example, my family was Amish. My great-great, probably
great grandfather was one of the first Amish settlers in
Indiana in 1846, and there was a distinct pattern of how they
moved from Philadelphia, Lancaster, to north Pennsylvania, to
Ohio, and up to the northwest part, and then Indiana, and they
walked it. But of course other immigrant groups in Indiana
followed other trails.
New Jersey, you could do all kinds of cutoffs depending on
what groups came in and how they went to different areas. And
we literally, almost every road in America at one point was a
trail or a cutoff to a trail where somebody said, ``Let's go
form this town.'' Sometimes it was walking, sometimes it was
horseback, sometimes it was canal, sometimes it was railroad,
later auto. And in reality our highways are modern forms of
trails.
Were you proposing a system that would make, in this study,
a very clear differentiation between what is a main trail and a
cutoff, or are you saying that the cutoffs were used almost as
frequently as the main trail, which in my opinion would
undermine the concept of the Pony Express, Oregon, Mormon
Trails?
Mr. Watson. First of all, we recognize that not every
proposed route may meet the standards of the Park Service and
qualify for addition. What happened was, when the California
Trail was initially studied, the assumption was that there was
almost no marking of the trail, no remnants left, until you
reached about Casper, Wyoming. Our 4,200 members have proved,
they have found traces, they have found river crossings that
were heavily used, and that is what we are asking to study.
Furthermore, we have, if I might for just a moment, we have
a census of immigrant documents that has been built by our
members. It has 2,200, I think it is, documents in it, diaries,
reminiscences, with 65,000 names of immigrants that crossed,
but it makes reference to points on the trail. And this
material will be used to help substantiate the need for adding
these routes.
Mr. Souder. Well, I would ask for the record that we
certainly sustain the concept of the primary and the secondary.
Santa Fe clearly had a split, Bent's Fort and the Cimmaron
Cutoff, but what I see in that drawing is so much proliferation
as almost to obscure the concept of a primary trail, and I
think that we need to make sure we do that when we work through
the trail system.
Thank you very much for your interesting testimony from all
of you today.
Mr. Hearty. And if I can offer a little clarification, as I
think Jeanne already mentioned, many of these routes are
already designated as California National Historic Trail where
they were also used by Mormon pioneers and also used by Oregon-
bound emigrants, and this will largely allow us to tell a more
complete story, to say that there was more than just--that
other people were on that trail, other than just the
California-bound group.
Mrs. Watson. And part of the reason for H.R. 37, to allow a
study, is to prove or disprove which were routes that were used
by a large number of pioneers and which may have been only used
1 year by 10 wagons. Nobody is saying that every one of these
routes will qualify, but that we need to study them to make
sure we tell the complete story of the westward movement.
Mr. Hefley. Thank you very much for those comments. Let me
ask, I know that a lot of these trails are designated by a sign
on the highway and so forth. Through southern Colorado, the
Santa Fe Trail is like that in a lot of places. But is it your
goal to open up as many of these as possible to actually trails
again, to make them trails that people can enjoy? Is that the
goal?
Mrs. Watson. We don't build trails like the scenic trails
can do. We walk in the ruts and mark the ruts. And in the
national forest in California, up in the Amador Ranger
District, our family has spent 30 years clearing brush, marking
trail, working with friends, families and volunteers, including
volunteers from the Kirkwood Mountain Ski Resort, to identify
the trail.
In fact, this year they have just put up Burma Shave style
labels on the ski lift, so skiers will know that they are
crossing the trail, and there will be a run called Emigrant
Trail where they can ski in winter on top of the snow. Our
problem at this point is, how do you mark that area above the
tree line?
But these trails do exist. We are not going to be building
trail. If it doesn't exist, there is a gap in it, and that is
usually where you pick it up on the highway and go to the next
access spot, whether it is a visitor's center, a kiosk, a
private landowner letting you on, or a national forest or BLM
land. And you can actually walk in pioneer ruts.
Mr. Hefley. Thank you. For this corridor that you testified
about, Mr. Berger, is it your contention also that there is no
opposition out there to doing this--cities, counties, people?
Mr. Berger. I have heard no opposition. Fran Pavley, who is
a State Assembly person, used to--I am a school principal--she
used to be a teacher under me, and she has expressed support of
this, and she was mayor of the City of Agoura, which is in this
area, and she has not heard of any complaints that I know of,
either. I have heard no complaints on this. It allows them to
work more closely with the National Park Service. A good
relationship there, very good relationship.
Mr. Hefley. Any other questions or comments?
Well, we appreciate the testimony. The Watsons, we
appreciate your family for doing this. Private people who are
interested in maintaining our history I think is very, very
important.
My great-grandfather was in the Civil War in the Fourth
Illinois Cavalry, I believe it was, and was captured early in
the war. And that was the time when they traded prisoners back
but then you couldn't fight anymore, so since he couldn't fight
anymore, he went to California, and I would be interested to
know which of these trails he followed to California.
But in the process he was walking behind the wagons--I have
never known exactly why my family couldn't afford a horse--but
he was walking behind the wagons, and the wagon turned up a
knife. And it was with a bone handle, and it was a knife, and
that is still in the family. It was used down through the years
with the family, and now I have that knife, which I cherish.
And I look at it, and you wish that knife could talk to
you. Who owned that knife before our family got hold of it? It
would be wonderful to know, and I guess there is no way we will
ever know because I don't think there was any written history
kept of it, as to how he got to California, but he did. So I am
very interested in what you all do.
Yes, Mr. Watson?
Mr. Watson. If we could, if we can get that name, we will
run a search of our computer database, and it can turn up names
and then gives information on where. Because one of the things
that happened--see, we have roughly 2,200 diaries, etcetera,
but they mention 65,000 names because they say, ``Well, we were
camped next to,'' or what have you. So if we can get your
ancestor's name, we will get a quick scan made.
Mr. Hefley. I had no idea, and we will do that. I would
love for you to do that. That would be very, very interesting.
Well, thank you very much. If there are no further
questions, if I can find a hammer here to be official, the
Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]