[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 1906, H.R. 2818 and H.R. 3936
=======================================================================
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
SECOND SESSION
__________
April 16, 2002
__________
Serial No. 107-104
__________
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
78-733 WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
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
Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California, 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
Joel Hefley, Colorado Samoa
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland 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 16, 2002................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Hansen, Hon. James V., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Utah, Prepared statement on H.R. 3936............. 16
Mink, Hon. Patsy T., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Hawaii............................................ 6
Prepared statement on H.R. 1906.......................... 7
Radanovich, Hon. George P., a Representative in Congress from
the State of California.................................... 1
Prepared statement on H.R. 1906, H.R. 2818, and H.R. 3936 2
Simpson, Hon. Michael K., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Idaho......................................... 14
Prepared statement on H.R. 2818.......................... 15
Statement of Witnesses:
Finfer, Larry, Assistant Director for Communications, Bureau
of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, D.C............................................ 17
Prepared statement on H.R. 2818.......................... 19
Prepared statement on H.R. 3936.......................... 18
Manning, Gloria, Associate Deputy Chief for the National
Forest System, U.S. Forest Service, Washington, D.C........ 20
Prepared statement on H.R. 3936.......................... 22
Morrow, Dave, Deputy Director, Division of Parks and
Recreation, Utah Department of Natural Resources, Salt Lake
City, Utah................................................. 30
Prepared statement on H.R. 3936.......................... 31
Nielson, Bryce, County Commissioner, Rich County, Utah....... 40
Prepared statement on H.R. 3936.......................... 41
Smith, Dan, Special Assistant to the Director, National Park
Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.. 23
Prepared statement on H.R. 1906.......................... 24
Williams, Gene, Sandhills Resort, Inc., St. Anthony, Idaho... 26
Prepared statement on H.R. 2818.......................... 27
Additional materials supplied:
Maps of proposed Shoshone National Recreation Trail System
submitted for the record by The Honorable George Radanovich 3
The Wilderness Society, et al., Statement submitted for the
record..................................................... 44
H.R. 1906, TO AMEND THE ACT THAT ESTABLISHED THE PU'UHONUA O HONAUNAU
NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK TO EXPAND THE BOUNDARIES OF THAT PARK; H.R.
2818, TO AUTHORIZE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO CONVEY CERTAIN
PUBLIC LAND WITHIN THE SAND MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS STUDY AREA IN THE STATE
OF IDAHO TO RESOLVE AN OCCUPANCY ENCROACHMENT DATING BACK TO 1971; AND
H.R. 3936, TO DESIGNATE AND PROVIDE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SHOSHONE
NATIONAL RECREATION TRAIL, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
----------
Tuesday, April 16, 2002
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in room
1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. George Radanovich
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. GEORGE RADANOVICH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Mr. Radanovich. OK. Welcome to the Subcommittee hearing
today. This is the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation
and Public Lands, and we will hear testimony on three bills
today, H.R. 1906, H.R. 2818 and H.R. 3936. The first bill is
H.R. 1906, introduced by Congresswoman Patsy Mink, who is here
with us today.
Patsy--and again this would expand the Pu'uhonua O Honaunau
National Historical Park by 805 acres. This park has become a
legacy of Hawaiian culture, housing some of the most
significant artifacts of this island's early village life. It
is my understanding that the expansion would include resources
that would have been included in the park boundary when it was
established in 1955.
Our next bill is H.R. 2818, introduced by our Subcommittee
colleague, Congressman Mike Thompson. It would authorize--Mike
Simpson--and it would authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to convey approximately 10.23 acres within the Sand Mountain
Wilderness Study Area in the State of Idaho to the Sandhills
Resort to resolve occupancy encroachment dating back to 1971.
Our last bill is H.R. 3936, introduced by the Full
Committee Chairman, Congressman Jim Hansen, and would designate
and provide for the management of the Shoshone National
Recreation Trail and for other purposes. In order to compensate
for the growing demand of off-highway vehicles in northern
Utah, H.R. 3936 would designate already-existing trails as part
of the national recreational trail system.
Congressman Hansen was stranded in Utah today, but we are
going to go on with the hearing and, of course, accept his full
statement into the record.
At this time I ask unanimous consent that Congresswoman
Mink be permitted to sit on the dais following the statement.
Without objection, so ordered.
Statement of The Honorable George P. Radanovich, Chairman, Subcommittee
on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands, on H.R. 1906, H.R.
2818, and H.R. 3936
Good morning and welcome to the hearing today. The Subcommittee
will come to order. This morning, the Subcommittee on National Parks,
Recreation, and Public Lands will hear testimony on three bills, H.R.
1906, H.R. 2818 and H.R. 3936.
The first bill, H.R. 1906, introduced by Congresswoman Patsy Mink,
would expand the Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historical Park by 805
acres. This park has become a legacy of Hawaiian culture, housing some
of the most significant artifacts of the island's early village life.
It is my understanding the expansion would include resources that
should have been included in the park boundary when it was established
in 1955.
Our next bill, H.R. 2818, introduced by our Subcommittee colleague,
Congressman Mike Simpson, would authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to convey approximately 10.23 acres within the Sand Mountain Wilderness
Study Area in the State of Idaho to the Sandhills Resort to resolve
occupancy encroachment dating back to 1971.
Our last bill, H.R. 3936, introduced by the Full Committee
Chairman, Congressman Jim Hansen, would designate and provide for the
management of the Shoshone National Recreation Trail, and for other
purposes. In order to compensate for the growing demand of off-highway
vehicles in Northern Utah, H. R. 3936 would designate already existing
trails as part of the National Recreational Trails system.
Once again, I appreciate the witnesses being here to testify today
and I now turn the time over to the ranking member, Mrs. Christensen
for an opening statement.
______
[Maps submitted for the record by Mr. Radanovich follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.012
And Mrs. Christensen, Ranking Member, will not be here
today, but we will go ahead and start then with the witnesses.
Congresswoman, it is a pleasure to have you before the
Committee and please proceed.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. PATSY T. MINK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII
Mrs. Mink. Thank you very much. The bill which I am
presenting today, H.R. 1906, represents a very historic,
culturally significant establishment on the Kona coast of the
Big Island; and my bill calls for the authorization of 805
acres to be added to the Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historic
Park.
Mrs. Mink. The bill has also been introduced in the Senate.
Senator Akaka introduced S. 1057, which was passed by the
Senate, and has a reduced acreage of 397 acres. The difference
is shown in the map which I have illustrated there. The green
area marked over to the right of the map is the difference
between the Senate bill and my bill. I seek to add the
additional portion there, which is marked in green. I believe
you have this in your testimony papers.
The city of Refuge National Historic Park, which is the
Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historic Park, was authorized in
1955. It was established formally in 1961. It is a very
historic park. We believe that the historic evidence is back to
the 12th and 13th century. It was a place where native
Hawaiians could seek refuge if they were being hunted down by
someone, threatened with criminal offenses and so forth. They
could find refuge there and be saved, and at some point later
be allowed to leave the lands.
The proposed addition contains 800 cultural sites, 25
caves, a minimum of 10 heiau (the native Hawaiian temples), 20
platforms, 26 enclosures, 40 burial features, and many, many
other remnants of trails and other historic evidences of the
ancient culture. We feel that it is extremely important that
this park be extended to the areas that we have indicated.
The coastal waters are pristine class AA waters, and with
the absence of development in the area, the coast is absolutely
gorgeous. We have problems of runoff in other areas because of
development, and therefore, the extension of this park at this
time is very, very critical.
Burial sites are a particularly sensitive issue in Hawaii;
they are considered very sacred. And so the set-aside of these
lands because of the burial sites is very, very important.
The local community is in strong support of the
incorporation of the full 805 acres to the Pu'uhonua O Honaunau
National Historic Park. I would like to submit a copy of our
Hawaii County Council Resolution 149-01 in support of my bill,
H.R. 1906, and the 108-acre expansion.
I would also ask unanimous consent that the testimony of
Hawaii County Council member Nancy Pisicchio be included in the
record and in the files of the consideration of this bill,
together with some 150 communications that she has submitted to
me for inclusion in the record, if I may have your consent to
do that. Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Without objection, so ordered.
Mrs. Mink. It is, of course, my intense interest to have
all of the 800-plus acres to be included in the park. But I am
also aware that the Senate, having passed S. 1057 in October,
2001, also made appropriations available, subject to the
authorization. It is critical that a bill pass and be signed
into law or we will forfeit the amount of money that has been
set aside in the appropriations bill.
Therefore, for the purposes of this markup, Mr. Chairman, I
would ask that the bill--my bill be amended so that it would
include the precise acreage as specified in the Senate bill, S.
1057, in order to move this bill forward. I would also,
however, like to ask the Subcommittee, in the legislation, to
request that the National Park Service do a reconnaissance
study of the remaining 400 acres, which are not covered in S.
1057, in order to establish the rationale for this inclusion
which I hope we can do perhaps in the next session.
On behalf of the people of Hawaii and certainly the people
in the County of Hawaii and all the native Hawaiian
organizations, I would like to thank this Committee and
Chairman Radanovich for his interest in this matter. And I am
very grateful for whatever assistance you can provide to move
this bill forward that it may reach final passage this year.
Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Patsy, and again you
are more than welcome to join us on the dais for the remainder
of this hearing.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Mink follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Patsy T. Mink, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Hawaii, on H.R. 1906
Chairman Radanovich, Ranking Member Christensen, and Members of the
Subcommittee
First, I want to thank the Subcommittee for holding this hearing on
H.R. 1906, which authorizes the expansion of Pu'uhonua O Honaunau
National Historical Park, a unique national treasure located in South
Kona on the island of Hawaii.
I introduced H.R. 1906 with Representative Abercrombie in May 2001.
Senator Daniel Akaka also introduced a bill, S. 1057, in June 2001, to
expand the boundaries of the Park. The major difference between the
bills is amount of land authorized for expansion. H.R. 1906 authorizes
805 acres whereas S. 1057 authorizes 397 acres. I submit a map showing
the current area of the Park (180 acres), the area authorized by S.
1057 (397 acres), and the area authorized by H.R. 1906 (805 acres).
Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historical Park, formerly known as
the City of Refuge National Historical Park, was authorized by an act
on Congress on July 26, 1955 (60 Stat.376) . . . for the benefit and
inspiration of the people. . .'' The park was formally established in
1961. All the lands included within the park are listed on the National
Register of Historic Places.
The overall management goal for the historical park is for the
resources to accurately represent a slice of time ranging from pre-
contact (circa 12th - 13th century) to about 1930, when Ki'ilae village
was completely abandoned. The objectives developed to meet that goal
focus on preservation, stabilization, and restoration of the park's
cultural and natural resources.
A significant portion of the ancient Hawaiian village of Ki'ilae
lies outside of the current park's boundaries. The proposed addition of
805 acres, located within the traditional land divisions of Ki'ilae
ahupua'a 1 and Kauleoli ahupua'a, contains significant
cultural and natural resources, which complement the Park's mission of
preservation and rehabilitation of Hawaiian natural, cultural, and
historic resources. These lands contain at least 800 cultural sites,
structures, and features; at least 25 caves (or cave openings), many of
which are refuge caves; a minimum of 10 heiau (temples); more than 20
platforms; 26 enclosures; over 40 burial features (or highly probable
burials); trails and trail remnants; a minimum of 6 residential
compounds; a holua slide; several canoe landing sites; a water well;
numerous walls and wall remnants; and a wide range of agricultural
features.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ An ahupua'a is a traditional Hawaiian land division that
extends from the uplands or mountains to the sea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ancient Native Hawaiian burial sites are a particularly sensitive
issue in Hawaii. Many descendants of the Ki'ilae villagers live in the
area and want to make sure that the graves of their ancestors are
respected and that archaeological and historical sites are preserved.
There are also important landmarks and rock formations on the land,
which have been used by Native Hawaiians for generations to locate
their fishing grounds.
The area is also a place of great natural beauty and spiritual
renewal. The Pu'uhonua was a place of safety and refuge where people
who had violated kapu (taboo or sacred law) could flee to avoid what
otherwise would be certain death. After being absolved by a kahuna
(priest) they could go free. People often went to the Pu'uhonua during
times of war to avoid the conflict.
Ki'ilae Village, which is part of the area that would be added to
the park by this bill, was also an important trading place for Native
Hawaiians from the 12th century. The land provides a critical link to
Hawaii's past and protects an ancient landscape in the face of
encroaching residential sprawl along the Kona coast.
The coastal waters in this area are pristine class AA because of
the lack of development in the area and the fact that the coast is
rocky and, therefore, little soil drains into the ocean. We have
already experienced severe problems in other locations along the Kona
coast where rain runoff from soil brought in for development polluted
AA-class coastal marine resources.
The local community strongly supports incorporation of the full 805
acres into Pu'uhonua O Honaunau National Historical Park. I submit for
the record a copy of Hawaii County Council Resolution 149-01 in support
of H.R. 1906 and the 805-acre expansion. I also submit testimony from
Hawaii County Council Member Nancy Pisicchio and the more than 150
communications sent to the Council Member by her constituents over the
past two weeks in support of H.R. 1906.
Despite my desire to see the full area authorized, I would support
amending H.R. 1906 to make it identical to S. 1057, which passed the
Senate on October 17, 2001, in the hope that we will be able to
promptly send a bill to the President. S. 1057 contains an
authorization for up to 397 acres, and includes the 238-acre parcel
considered most critical for protection by the National Park Service.
Senator Akaka was successful in securing an appropriation of
$500,000toward acquisition of this parcel in Fiscal Year 2002, but we
must have an authorization before these funds can be spent. The 238-
acre parcel (Parcel A on the map) has been purchased by the Trust for
Public Land, which is holding it in trust for the National Park
Service. The owner of Parcel B (the additional lands authorized in S.
1057) has indicated a willingness to donate a major portion of these
lands to the park.
I wish to ask that this Subcommittee request the National Park
Service do a reconnaissance study of the remaining 400+ acres not
covered by S. 1057 to establish the extent of the historical, cultural,
and natural resources in the portion of Kauleoli ahupua'a south of
Parcels A and B.
On behalf of the people of Hawaii, I extend a warm aloha to
Chairman Radanovich and Ranking Member Christensen for your assistance
in holding this hearing. I would be very grateful for your continued
assistance in moving the bill through the Subcommittee and Committee
and to allow its final passage by the whole House.
Thank you.
______
(Attachments to Mrs. Mink's statement follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.002
Mr. Radanovich. Our next panel will be--I just wanted to
say, I know how to do Pu'uhonua O Honaunau, but I have a hard
time with Simpson. I apologize. But for an opening statement,
please proceed and we will go on to our next statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO
Mr. Simpson. That you, Mr. Chairman. I suggested to you
that this Subcommittee needs to have a more direct input into
this proposed expansion in Hawaii, so I am suggesting that the
Subcommittee go over and take a look at it personally and
decide what we need to do that.
Mrs. Mink. Absolutely. But don't delay passage of the bill.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for scheduling the
hearing on H.R. 2818 to convey approximately 10 acres of public
land located within the Bureau of Land Management Sand Mountain
Wilderness Study Area, located near Saint Anthony in southeast
Idaho, to the owner of the Sandhills Resort. The Sandhills
Resort will pay fair market value for the land as valued by an
appraisal.
Mr. Simpson. In 1971, Mr. Williams, who is with us today to
testify--he is the current owner of the Sandhills Resort--
purchased the 5-acre resort and existing developments, and over
the ensuing 31 years had added numerous improvements to the
property. The resort is a gateway to the Sandhills sand dunes,
a popular recreational area in southeast Idaho. The land
comprising the resort was originally conveyed out of Federal
ownership in 1953, when the BLM sold 5 acres of public lands
adjacent to the Saint Anthony Sand Dunes.
Over the years numerous improvements were made to the
property, including a bar, restaurant, dance hall and swimming
pool. When Mr. Williams purchased the land in 1971, he
converted the existing improvements to a recreational
development, catering to campers and users of the sand dunes.
Unfortunately, the 5-acre resort was inadvertently included in
the BLM's Sand Mountain Wilderness Study Area boundary, which
was established in 1981.
Mr. Williams successfully operated the resort until the
early 1990's, when the BLM began to question the location of
the resort and several facilities located on the resort. In
1995, a survey was initiated confirming that the majority of
the resort's facilities, including a portion of Mr. Williams'
house, were encroaching on public lands. Since June 1998, the
resort has operated under a Special Use, Special Land Use
Permit which temporarily authorizes Mr. Williams' use of the
public land in question and allows BLM to collect fair market
rent.
In June 1997, the BLM began to work to sell Mr. Williams'
10 acres of land in order to resolve the encroachment issue. In
September 1997, the BLM published a notice of intent to prepare
a land use plan amendment, the first step of a process that
would have adjusted the boundary of the Sand Mountain
Wilderness Study Area and allowed the BLM to sell approximately
10 acres of the Sandhills Resort. Unfortunately, the local BLM
office was not able to move forward with the plan amendment due
to concerns from the BLM Idaho State office that the proposed
sale violated the BLM's interim management policy for
wilderness study area management.
While the 10 acres in question is located within the Sand
Hill Mountains Wilderness Study Area, I would like to point out
to my colleagues when the Sand Hill Mountains Wilderness Study
Area boundary was drawn, it mistakenly included the Sandhills
Resort and a small strip of land containing roads, camping
sites, and a power line. According to the BLM, ``The
developments impair the naturalness of the wilderness study
area and should not have been included within the WSA
boundary.'' it is quite clear that the sale area, which
contains various facilities--as I said, camp sites, roads and
power lines--does not have the characteristics which make it
suitable for wilderness.
Unfortunately, until the encroachment issue is resolved,
Mr. Williams cannot gain clear title to his property,
preventing him from obtaining a loan against the property or
making improvements to the property. Furthermore, this prevents
Mr. Williams or his family from selling the resort, placing an
undue financial hardship on Mr. Williams and his family. This
common-sense legislation will allow BLM to resolve the
longstanding encroachment problems and allow Mr. Williams to
gain clear title to this property.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for holding this hearing and
the opportunity to present this legislation to the Committee.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Simpson.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Simpson follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Michael Simpson, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Idaho, on H.R. 2818
Mr. Chairman:
Thank you for scheduling this hearing on H.R. 2818.
H.R. 2818 is a simple, straightforward bill that would convey
approximately ten acres of public land located within the Bureau of
Land Management Sand Mountain Wilderness Study Area, located near St.
Anthony in southeast Idaho, to the owner of the Sandhills Resort. The
Sandhills Resort will pay fair market value for the land as valued by
an appraisal.
In 1971, Mr. Williams, the current owner of the Sandhills Resort,
purchased the five-acre resort and existing developments and over the
ensuing thirty-one years has added numerous improvements to the
property. The resort is a gateway to the St. Anthony Sand Dunes, a
popular recreational area in southeast Idaho. The land comprising the
resort was originally conveyed out of Federal ownership in 1953, when
the BLM sold five acres of public land adjacent to the St. Anthony Sand
Dunes. Over the years, numerous improvements were made to the property,
including a bar, restaurant, dance hall, and swimming pool. When Mr.
Williams purchased the land in 1971, he converted the existing
improvements to a recreational development catering to campers and
users of the sand dunes. Unfortunately, the five-acre resort was
inadvertently included in BLM's Sand Mountain WSA boundary, which was
established in 1981.
Mr. Williams successfully operated the resort until the early
1990's when the BLM began to question the location of the resort and
several facilities located on the resort. In 1995, a survey was
initiated confirming that the majority of the resort's facilities,
including a portion of Mr. Williams house, were encroaching on public
land. Since June of 1998, the resort has operated under a Special Land
Use Permit, which temporarily authorizes Mr. Williams's use of the
public land in question and allows the BLM to collect a fair market
rent.
In June of 1997, the BLM began working to sell Mr. Williams ten
acres of land in order to resolve the encroachment issue. In September
of 1997, the BLM published A Notice of Intent to Prepare a Land Use
Plan Amendment, the first step of a process that would have adjusted
the boundary of the Sand Mountain WSA and allowed the BLM to sell
approximately ten acres to the Sandhills Resort. Unfortunately, the
local BLM office was not able to move forward with the plan amendment
due to concerns from the BLM Idaho State office that the proposed sale
violated BLM's Interim Management Policy for Wilderness Study Area
Management.
While the ten acres in question is located within the Sand Mountain
WSA, I would like to point out to my colleagues that when the Sand
Mountain Wilderness Study Area boundary was drawn, it mistakenly
included the Sandhills Resort and a small strip of land containing
roads, camping sites, and a power line. According to the BLM, ``the
developments impair the naturalness of the WSA and should not have been
included within the WSA boundary.'' It is quite clear that the sale
area, which contains various facilities, camping sites, roads, and
power lines, does not have characteristics which make it suitable for
wilderness.
Unfortunately, until the encroachment issue is resolved, Mr.
Williams cannot gain clear title to his property, preventing him from
obtaining a loan against the property or making improvements to the
property. Furthermore, this prevents Mr. Williams or his family from
selling the resort, placing an undue financial hardship on Mr. Williams
and his family.
This common-sense legislation will allow the BLM to resolve the
long-standing encroachment problem, and allow Mr. Williams to gain
clear title to his property.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to bring this
legislation before the Committee.
______
Mr. Radanovich. And, again, Mr. Hansen would have an
opening statement on H.R. 3936, but he is not here. So with
there being no objection, we will submit his opening statement
for the record. There being no objection, so ordered.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hansen follows:]
Statement of The Honorable James V. Hansen, Chairman, Committee on
Resources, on H.R. 3936
Thank you Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee.
I am pleased to have Mr. Dave Morrow from the Utah Department of
Natural Resources and Mr. Bryce Nielson, County Commissioner from Rich
County, Utah with us at our hearing today. I am very appreciative of
the time and hard work that they have invested, together with other
local officials, in the introduction of this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3936 would designate approximately 337 miles of
existing trails, already open to OHV's in northern Utah, as the
Shoshone National Recreation Trail. It would also allow for the
addition of connecting and side trails, to be added administratively
through existing authority, once local counties have identified
appropriate access points and local trails through their communities.
Once these connecting and side trails are added, it is expected that
there will be over 500 miles of trails in the system.
In 1968, Congress responded to the public's desire for additional
outdoor recreation opportunities by enacting the National Trails System
Act. This Act allowed for the creation of a National Recreation Trail
system. However, despite being cited specifically in the Act, these
recreation activities have not been well represented in the trail
system. In recent years, Utah has seen a dramatic increase in the
number of registered OHV's. This growth has presented Federal and state
land managers with the difficult challenge of finding and identifying
appropriate places to ride for this growing group of recreationists.
Experience has shown that when an organized system of trails has been
identified that it becomes easier to direct these recreational
activities to appropriate places and to protect the areas where OHV
riding would not be appropriate. This bill is a proactive attempt to
channel this growing recreation activity. In fact, many who are not
generally supportive of OHV recreation have expressed their support for
this legislation because of its ability to channel these activities.
This bill will designate only those trails that are already open to
OHV use and are recognized in the local Forest Service and BLM travel
plans. However, as provided in the National Trails System Act, the
legislation allows that additional trails may be added at a future
point, through the normal process.
Prior to the introduction of this legislation, meetings were held
with locally elected officials in each affected county. Based upon
their input, meetings were held with local Forest Service and BLM
personnel to identify appropriate routes for the trail system.
Consequently, some routes under previous consideration have been
deleted. This has resulted in a system of trails with broad support
that is supported by the local counties and Federal land managers.
I believe this is a win-win proposal. It is not only a positive for
those who enjoy OHV riding as a recreation activity, but is also a
positive for those who want to ensure that OHV riding takes place in
appropriate areas and avoids sensitive locations.
Once again, thank you Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee
for the opportunity to address the merits of this legislation.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Now, thank you, Panel 2: Mr. Larry Finfer,
the Assistant Director for Communications at BLM; Ms. Gloria
Manning, Associate Deputy Chief for the National Forest
Service; and Mr. Dan Smith, Special Assistant to the Director
of the National Park Service. Welcome to the Committee. We have
a panel after you, so I ask everyone to stay within the 5-
minute warning. If you don't know the system, green means go,
yellow means hurry up, and red means stop.
Mr. Radanovich. So we will go ahead and start with Mr.
Larry Finfer.
Mr. Finfer, welcome and please begin your testimony.
STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE A. FINFER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR
COMMUNICATIONS, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Mr. Finfer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I am here to testify
on two bills, H.R. 3936, the Shoshone National Recreational
Trail Act, and H.R. 2818, an act to convey certain public lands
in the Sand Mountain Wilderness Study Area in Idaho. I
submitted statements on both, which I request be included in
the record, and I will keep my remarks brief.
Mr. Finfer. As to H.R. 3936, while the U.S. Forest Service
is the primary land manager within the proposed trail area, the
bill also encompasses existing trails on BLM-administered lands
primarily in the eastern portion of the area in question. The
administration supports this bill and looks forward to working
with the Committee and our partners in Utah on its
implementation. Once designated, the Shoshone National
Recreation Trail will provide a high-quality, interconnected
trail network in Rich, Cache, Box Elder and Weber Counties in
northeast Utah.
According to the State of Utah's department of natural
resources, the number of registered OHV users has doubled in
the State since 1990. The BLM strongly supports the provisions
in section 1(c)(2) of H.R. 3936, which promotes the use of
cooperative agreements concerning the Secretaries of Interior
and Agriculture, the State of Utah DNR, and appropriate county
governments regarding trail management. We believe it
imperative that a cooperative management plan and framework be
established that includes all parties. This cooperative effort
is consistent with Secretary Norton's ``4 C's'' principle,
which stresses consultation, cooperation, and communication,
all in the service of conservation.
We appreciate Mr. Hansen's visible recognition of the
importance of cooperative management, which he has provided in
this bill. While supportive of the bill, we have identified
some issues that need to be addressed in order to develop
appropriate trailhead and staging facilities, maintenance and
protections for resources we manage in this area and, further,
to acknowledge other land resource users.
We look forward to working with the Committee to address
these concerns, which are noted in my testimony; and I thank
you for the opportunity to comment on H.R. 3936.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Finfer follows:]
Statement of Lawrence A. Finfer, Assistant Director, Communications,
Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R.
3936
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to provide
testimony regarding H.R. 3936, the Shoshone National Recreation Trail
Act. While the U.S. Forest Service is the primary Federal land manager
within the proposed trail, the bill also encompasses 67 miles of BLM-
administered lands. The Department supports this bill and looks forward
to working with the Committee and our partners in Utah on cooperative
management strategies to implement H.R. 3936.
Bill Analysis and Background
H.R. 3936 provides for the designation and management of a 521-mile
system of trails in northeastern Utah to provide recreational access
for motorized vehicles and other users as appropriate. In addition, we
understand that the trail would serve as a ``connection'' for a number
of small communities within the region by providing economic
opportunities through services to recreational users of the trail. We
further understand that H.R. 3936 enjoys strong local support within
the State of Utah.
Once designated, the Shoshone National Recreation Trail would
provide 521 miles of scenic and high-quality interconnected trail
segments in Rich, Cache, Box Elder, and Weber Counties in Northeast
Utah. According to the State of Utah's Department of Natural Resources,
the number of registered Off- Highway Vehicles (OHVs) has doubled in
the State since 1990. H.R. 3936 will assist agencies such as the BLM in
meeting the needs of this growing user group on Federal lands.
The BLM strongly supports the provisions in Section 1 (c) (2) of
H.R. 3936 which promotes the use of cooperative agreements between the
Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture and the State of Utah
Department of Natural Resources and appropriate county governments
regarding trail management. We believe that it is imperative that a
cooperative management plan and framework be established that is
inclusive of all parties involved in the trail, whether they are land
owners or recreational users. This cooperative effort is consistent
with Secretary Norton's ``4 Cs'' principle, which stresses
consultation, cooperation and communication, all in the service of
conservation.
Management Concerns
While supportive of the concepts embodied in H.R. 3936, especially
the use of existing trails, we have identified certain issues that need
to be addressed in order to develop appropriate trail-head and staging
facilities, trail maintenance, and protections for the resources BLM
manages under the provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act (FLPMA). We look forward to working with the Committee to address
these concerns.
Among our concerns, is the language contained in Section 3 of the
bill, entitled ``Motorized and Non-motorized Use''. Section 3 states:
``Non-motorized use of the Trail may be allowed to the extent that such
use is compatible with motorized use.'' The BLM recommends that this
section be amended to reflect the provisions in current regulations
under 43 CFR 8342.1(c) which states: ``Areas and trails shall be
located to minimize conflicts between off-road vehicle use and other
existing or proposed recreational uses of the same or neighboring
public lands, and to ensure the compatibility of such uses with
existing conditions in populated areas, taking into account noise and
other factors...'' This regulation promotes compatibility among the
various uses of National Recreation Trails.
The BLM has some further concerns regarding appropriate management
of the Trail which include continued protection for lands that contain
riparian areas, fragile soil types, big game crucial winter range,
sensitive sage grouse habitat, and raptor nesting sites. To protect
these species and the associated sensitive habitats, the BLM would need
to continue the current seasonal restrictions on portions of the
proposed routes. This should not be a major conflict with Trail system
operation or deviate from the current management scenario.
Additionally, two BLM campgrounds (Little Creek and Birch Creek) are
proposed as trail heads for the system. One campground will require
renovation, the second will require additional infrastructure. These
concerns will need to be addressed through the cooperative management
framework proposed in the bill.
Conclusion
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on H.R. 3936. The BLM
looks forward to participating in the cooperative management agreements
and implementation of the Shoshone National Recreation Trail if
designated. I would be happy to address any questions you may have.
______
Mr. Finfer. I now turn my attention to H.R. 2818. The
administration supports this bill, as its enactment will
resolve a unique, longstanding problem involving the Sand
Mountain Resort. The Sand Hill Resort is located on a 5-acre
parcel in Saint Anthony, Idaho. It was established in 1971 when
the current owner purchased an abandoned resort facility
originally constructed in the 1950's. It is located within the
current boundary of the Sand Mountain Wilderness Study Area and
is completely surrounded by public lands.
When the WSA boundary was approved in 1981, it included
10.23 acres that contained, among other things, the resort's
existing access road. At the time, neither BLM nor the owner
realized that some of the resort's building utilities and
facilities were located on the 10.23 acres. When a Cadastral
survey was finally completed in 1997, it revealed that resort
facilities, including showers, restroom, storage building,
garage, camp sites and most of the owner's residence are
located on public land within the WSA.
H.R. 2818 seeks to effect a permanent solution to this
problem, thereby obviating the need to issue and review the
Special Land Use Permit under which the owner now operates. It
authorizes the Secretary to convey the 10.23 parcel for fair
market value determined by a qualified land appraisal. It also
exempts the parcel from requirements of the Interim Management
Policy for Lands Under Wilderness Review.
The owners of the resort have had a long and positive
relationship with the BLM. As I mentioned, the owner acted in
good faith in purchasing the property. Neither he nor the BLM
were aware of the boundary problems. Compounding the issue, the
area was inadvertently included in the WSA when it was
established in 1981, even though the lands in question do not
have wilderness characteristics. This chain of events makes
necessary a legislative remedy, and we appreciate Mr. Simpson's
introduction to this bill which will indeed solve the problem.
Accordingly, as H.R. 2818 will resolve the longstanding
issue and correct an inadvertent mapping area affecting
wilderness values and restore the integrity of the Sand
Mountain Wilderness Study Area, we support the bill and look
forward to any questions the Committee may have.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Finfer.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Finfer follows:]
Statement of Lawrence A. Finfer, Assistant Director, Communications,
Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R.
2818
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on H.R. 2818, an act
to convey certain public lands in the Sand Mountain Wilderness Study
Area (WSA) in the State of Idaho to resolve an occupancy encroachment
dating back to 1971. The Department supports H.R. 2818 as its enactment
will resolve a long-standing problem involving the Sand Mountain Resort
which has impacted the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) efforts to
effectively manage the lands located within the WSA. We thank
Representative Simpson for his sponsorship of H.R. 2818 and his efforts
to remedy this problem.
Background
The Sandhills Resort is situated on a 5 acre parcel located in St.
Anthony, Idaho. The Resort was established in 1971 when the current
owner purchased an abandoned resort facility originally constructed in
1953. The Resort is located within the current boundaries of the Sand
Mountain WSA and is completely surrounded by public lands. When the WSA
boundary was approved in 1981, it included 10.23 acres that contained,
among other things, the Resort's existing access road. At the time,
neither the BLM nor the Resort owner realized that some of the resort's
buildings, utilities and facilities were located within the 10.23
acres. However, a Cadastral survey was completed in 1997, which
revealed that a majority of the resort's facilities, including showers
and restrooms, storage buildings, garage, improved camp sites, and most
of the owner's residence is located on public land within the WSA.
As a result of this discovery, since June of 1998, the BLM has
issued a land use permit to the Resort. However, the permit, which must
be renewed every three years, is a temporary measure to allow for
continued operation of the Resort without unduly impacting the land
owner and his business. H.R. 2818 seeks to effectuate a permanent
solution to this problem, thereby obviating the need for issuing and
renewing the land use permit.
Bill Provisions
H.R. 2818 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to convey the
10.23 parcel of land in question to the owner of the Resort for fair
market value as determined by a qualified land appraisal. In order to
facilitate the conveyance, the bill also exempts the parcel from the
requirements of the Interim Management Policy for Lands Under
Wilderness Review of the BLM and authorizes the Secretary to require
such additional terms and conditions as the Secretary considers
appropriate to protect the interests of the United States.
Conclusion
The owners of the Resort have had a long and positive relationship
with the BLM, as do the many off-highway vehicle users that frequent
the Resort and the surrounding public lands in the Sand Mountain area.
H.R. 2818 would resolve the long-standing issue surrounding the Resorts
encroachment on public lands, would correct an inadvertent mapping
error affecting wilderness values, and would restore the integrity of
the Sand Mountain Wilderness Study Area. While H.R. 2818 has the
positive benefit of resolving long-term management issues, it also
enhances the cooperative partnerships and relationships with the
constituents that use the public lands in this area for recreation and
other approved uses.
This concludes my testimony. I would be happy to answer any
questions.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Next, Ms. Gloria Manning with the U.S.
Forest Service. Gloria, welcome and please begin your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF GLORIA MANNING, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF FOR THE
NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM, U.S. FOREST SERVICE
Ms. Manning. Thank you for inviting me to discuss H.R.
3936. It would designate a series of existing and planned roads
and trails in and around the Wasatch-Caches National Forest in
Utah as the Shoshone National Recreation Trail.
The Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the
State of Utah and local governments and other groups and
individuals have been working for some time to establish the
Shoshone Trail. Because H.R. 3936 is consistent with existing
authority that allow the Secretaries of Interior and
Agriculture to designate the existing portions of this trail
system, and with land owner approval, those portions not on
Federal lands, as a national recreation trail, we support
enactment of this bill.
H.R. 3936 would provide motorized recreational
opportunities in northern Utah by designating a system of
approximately 337 miles of off-road-vehicle roads and trails as
the Shoshone National Recreation Trail. From our viewpoint,
this makes sense. OHV is an important and increasing demand on
public lands that, when properly planned and monitored, can be
accommodated without significant resource damage. Established
OHV roads and trails meet the demand for this form of
recreation by potentially decreasing unauthorized use in more
sensitive areas.
The Forest Service, along with our Federal, State and local
partners, have been working to establish an OHV trail system.
In my written testimony, I discuss the specific trail knowledge
and ownership; those figures were based upon preliminary
estimates and do not reflect any additional miles currently
under consideration for designation. We will work with our
partners and the Subcommittee to clarify which roads and trails
will be included in the designation.
To be fully successful in this endeavor, several issues,
including public access to roads and trails that cross both
public and private lands, will need to be explored in the
coming months; and support from local communities is critical.
The good news is that the State of Utah is working closely with
the Forest Service, and the local communities have written
letters in support of the Shoshone National Recreation Trail.
Challenges for the future include providing access to the
trail from local communities. As the population of northern
Utah has grown, so has the demand for various forms of
recreation, including OHV opportunities. Many of the foothills
and private lands adjacent to the National Forest System lands
have been developed, and in many cases public lands are not
accessible.
The completed trail, as envisioned by H.R. 3936, will
require, for any future expansion, acquisitions and new rights
of way and easements.
We cannot do this alone. We must develop partnerships with
the State, county and municipal jurisdictions to ensure that
public access is secured before development of any future trail
occurs, since it often becomes impossible to acquire access
after those areas are fully developed. In addition, successful
management of this trail will require coordination with State
and local jurisdiction, especially in areas of regulation that
govern OHV use.
Mr. Chairman, we realize that the National Forest System
lands in northern Utah play a significant role in providing
outdoor recreation opportunities. However, in the context of
all land ownership, we are only a small part of the whole. A
large percentage of the land is in private ownership and close
working relationship with private landowners and local
governments would be required to fully implement the Shoshone
National Recreation Trail. We are pleased to work with members
of the Committee, other Federal agencies and officials from the
State of Utah, as well as local governments, to provide varied
recreational opportunities and to ensure that the natural
resources are managed appropriately.
We support the enactment of this bill. This concludes my
testimony, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may
have.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Ms. Manning.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Manning follows:]
Statement of Gloria Manning, Associate Deputy Chief, Forest Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, on H.R. 3936
Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me here today to discuss H.R.
3936. I am Gloria Manning, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest
System.
H.R. 3936 would designate a series of existing and planned roads
and trails on and around the Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah, as
the Shoshone National Recreation Trail. The Forest Service, Bureau of
Land Management, State of Utah and local governments, and other groups
and individuals have been working for some time to establish the
Shoshone Trail. Because H.R. 3936 is consistent with existing authority
that allows the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to
designate the existing portions of this trail system, and with
landowner approval, those portions not on Federal lands, as a National
Recreation Trail, we support enactment of this bill.
H.R. 3936 would provide motorized recreation opportunities in
northern Utah by designating 337 miles of existing OHV (Off Highway
Vehicle) roads and trails as the Shoshone National Recreation Trail.
From our viewpoint this makes sense. OHV use is an important and
increasing demand on public lands, that when properly planned and
monitored, can be accommodated without significant resource damage.
Established OHV roads and trails meet the demand for this form of
recreation while potentially decreasing unauthorized uses in more
sensitive areas.
The Forest Service, along with our Federal, State, and local
partners has been working to establish an OHV trail system. Currently
under consideration in the ongoing effort to establish the Shoshone
Trail are the 337 miles of existing roads and trails that now permit
OHV use and would be designated the Shoshone National Recreation Trail
under H.R. 3936. Lands involved include 199 miles of National Forest
System roads, all of which currently allow OHV use, Bureau of Land
Management roads, State of Utah roads, and private and county roads.
To be fully successful in this endeavor, several issues, including
public access to roads and trails that cross both public and private
lands, will need to be explored in coming months, and support from
local communities is critical. The good news is that many communities
are already working to develop motorized recreation opportunities.
Examples of on-going planning can be seen in Box Elder County in
Northern Utah, Cache County near Logan, and the Wasatch Front counties
of Weber and Davis.
Challenges for the future include providing access to the trail
from local communities. As the population of northern Utah has grown,
so has the demand for various forms of recreation, including OHV
opportunities. Many of the foothills and private lands adjacent to
National Forest System lands have been developed, and in many cases,
public lands are not accessible.
The completed trail, as envisioned by H.R. 3936, will require the
acquisition of new rights of way and easements. We cannot do this
alone. We must develop partnerships with the State, county, and
municipal jurisdictions to ensure that public access is secured before
development occurs, since it often becomes impossible to acquire access
after those areas are fully developed.
In addition, successful management of this trail may require state
and local jurisdictions to carefully consider the impact of their
regulations that govern OHV use. For example, those communities along
the Wasatch Front that become integral portals to the trail system may
also permit ATV use on city streets, as currently allowed by the
community of Richfield.
Mr. Chairman, we realize that National Forest System lands in
northern Utah play a significant role in providing outdoor recreation
opportunities. However, in the context of all land ownership, the
National Forest System is only a part of the whole. A large percentage
of the land is in private ownership and close working relationships
with private landowners and local governments would be required to
fully implement the Shoshone National Recreation Trail.
We are pleased to work with Members of this Committee, other
Federal agencies and officials from the State of Utah, as well as local
governments to provide varied recreation opportunities and ensure that
natural resources are managed appropriately.
This concludes my testimony. I will be glad to answer any questions
you may have.
______
Mr. Radanovich. We will hear from Mr. Smith and open up
the panel for questions.
Mr. Smith, welcome and again please keep your testimony to
5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I will submit testimony
in full, and I will summarize from it. Thank you for the
opportunity to present the Department of the Interior's views
on H.R. 1906, a bill to adjust the boundaries of Pu'uhonua O
Honaunau National Historical Park, and I will defer that
pronunciation to the Congresswoman and to you.
Mr. Radanovich. Patsy, he butchered it.
Mr. Smith. And I knew I was going to, Mr. Chairman.
The Department supports H.R. 1906, if amended in
conformance with this testimony. The legislation will adjust
the authorized boundary of the national historical park to
include the remainder of Ki'ilae Village and other adjoining
lands within the park.
The proposed expansion is located on lands immediately
adjacent to, but outside, the park boundary and would add
approximately 805 acres to the 182 acres already within the
park. About one-half of the proposed new acreage, about 413
acres, contains known important physical remains of the Native
Hawaiian culture associated with this national historical park.
The Department previously testified in support of S. 1057,
a similar bill that passed the Senate on October 17, 2001. That
bill would add only 238 acres to the 182 acres already within
the park and would authorize the addition of an additional 165
acres by donation if the lands were ever acquired. In light of
the National Park Service's interest in protecting the entire
Ki'ilae Village and its archeological resources, we recommend
that H.R. 1906 be amended to incorporate the language of the
Senate-passed bill.
The Congresswoman has described the historical significance
of this national historical park, and so I will not repeat
that.
In 1992, a boundary study was prepared for the park. Both
the master plan and the boundary study called for adding,
quote, ``the balance of Ki'ilae Village to the park.'' up until
last year, the property was unavailable because its ownership
was not clear. The three heirs to the property have now settled
the ownership issue thereby clearing the way for the Park
Service to acquire the land.
This bill, if amended, would allow the boundary of the park
to be expanded to protect this significant cultural resource.
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
encouraging to note the present owner of the land authorized
for acquisition in the Senate-passed bill may consider donating
one portion of the property to the National Park Service; while
the other portion would be available for purchase, and that
parcel has been appraised.
Funds to purchase this property would be subject to NPS
service-wide priorities and the availability of appropriations.
Since no development is contemplated within the boundary
adjustment area, no line item construction or significant
development costs are anticipated for this historical park,
although there would be some one-time costs after acquisition
to conduct an inventory of archeological resources and remove
non-native vegetation. We do not expect an increase to the
park's base operating budget.
There is strong local support to include these resources
within the national historical park, and it reflects a high
level of cooperation, consultation and the strong commitment of
local communities and governments toward the park. The local
support for land acquisition and the potential donation of a
portion of this land are important parts of the Department's
decisions to support this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement, and I look
forward to answering any questions the Committee may have.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Smith.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]
Statement of P. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the Director,
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 1906
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 1906, a bill to adjust the
boundaries of Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park, in the
State of Hawaii.
The Department supports H.R. 1906, if amended in conformance with
this testimony. The legislation will adjust the authorized boundary of
Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park to include the remainder
of Ki'ilae Village and other adjoining lands within the park. The
proposed expansion is located on lands immediately adjacent to, but
outside the park boundary, and would add approximately 805 acres to the
182 acres already within the park. About one-half of the proposed new
acreage contains known important physical remains of the native
Hawaiian culture associated with the Pu'uhonua o Honaunau.
The Department previously testified in support of S. 1057, a
similar bill that passed the Senate on October 17, 2001. That bill
would add only 238 acres to the 182 acres already within the park and
would authorize the addition of another 165 acres by donation if the
lands were ever acquired. In light of the National Park Service's
interest in protecting the entire Ki'ilae Village and its
archaeological resources, we recommend that H.R. 1906 be amended to
incorporate the language of the Senate-passed bill.
Ki'ilae is an ancient Hawaiian settlement dating back to the late
12th or early 13th centuries. The settlement remained active until the
1930's, making it one of the last traditional Hawaiian villages to be
abandoned. The proposed boundary adjustment consists of adding lands
containing the archaeological remains of this Hawaiian village. Lands
to be added to the park contain more than 800 archaeological sites,
structures and features. These include at least 25 caves and 10 heiau
(Hawaiian temples), more than 20 rock platforms, 26 rock wall
enclosures, over 40 burial features, residential compounds, a holua
(recreational slide used by Hawaiian royalty), canoe landing sites, a
water well, numerous rock walls and a wide range of agricultural
features.
The proposed expansion dates back to a 1957 archaeological survey
conducted by the Bishop Museum. This survey found that the greater part
of the ancient village of Ki'ilae, as well as other significant
Hawaiian archaeological resources, were left outside of the park
boundaries established by Congress in 1955. Pu'uhonua o Honaunau's 1972
Master Plan identifies Ki'ilae Village as one of the park's major
resources and the master plan graphics show village remains extending
well beyond the existing park boundaries. In 1992, a boundary study was
prepared for the park. Both the master plan and the boundary study call
for adding the ``balance of Ki'ilae Village'' to the park. Up until
last year, the property was unavailable because its ownership was not
clear. The three heirs to the property have now settled the ownership
issue, thereby clearing the way for the Park Service to acquire the
land. This bill, if amended, would allow the boundary of the park to be
expanded to protect this significant cultural resource.
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 encouraging to note that
the present owner of the land authorized for acquisition in the Senate-
passed bill may consider donating one portion of the property to the
National Park Service, while the other portion would be available for
purchase and has been appraised at $4.6 million. Funds to purchase this
property would be subject to NPS servicewide priorities and the
availability of appropriations. Since no development is contemplated
within the boundary adjustment area, no line item construction or
significant development costs are anticipated, although there would be
some one-time costs after acquisition to conduct an inventory of
archaeological resources and remove non-native vegetation. We do not
expect an increase to the park's base-operating budget.
There is strong local support to protect and include these
resources within the Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park, and
it reflects the high level of cooperation, consultation, and strong
commitment of local communities and governments toward the park. Local
support for land acquisition projects is an important part of the
Department's support for this legislation.
That concludes my testimony. I would be glad to answer any
questions that you or the members of the subcommittee may have.
______
Mr. Radanovich. And I want to thank every member of the
panel, and we will go ahead and open up for questions. Since
our ranking member is not here, Patsy, would you like to do the
first round?
Mrs. Mink. Just a question with respect to my bill. I had
understood that one portion had already been purchased by the
land trust and is being held for subsequent purchase by
National Park Service; is that incorrect information that I
have?
Mr. Smith. My understanding is that TPL is in very near
negotiations for the acquisition of that one parcel. I do not
know the exact details of that, but I know they are very
involved, and if they haven't actually done the final--they may
be waiting for action here, but they are in very serious
negotiation, and I believe they have reached agreement on the
cost.
I can provide that for the record, Mr. Chairman, if that
would be acceptable.
Mrs. Mink. Thank you very much.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Any other questions from the panel, Mr.
Simpson or Mr. Duncan?
Mr. Duncan. Mr. Smith, I noticed in your oral statement,
you left out something that is in your written statement and
that is that this property was appraised. But in your written
statement, it said appraised for 4.6 million.
Mr. Smith. That is correct. That is an old habit. I don't
believe in divulging appraisals. It comes from my time at GSA,
and until somebody signs on the bottom line--it has been
appraised at 4.6 million and that was submitted in my formal
testimony, but I decided to leave it out of my summary.
Mr. Duncan. The Senate bill only authorized 500,000, or has
authorized such sums as may be necessary, but somewhere there
is 500,000--I guess in the last appropriations bill; is that
correct?
Mr. Smith. Congressman, I do not know the details of what
the Senate bill has actually appropriated. I can find that for
the record.
Mr. Duncan. There is a big difference between 500,000 and
4.6 million is the only thing I am wondering about.
Mr. Smith. And I do not have that included in my briefing
here.
I did not testify on the Senate bill last year, and I am
not aware of what the appropriators have done on that side of
the Congress.
Mr. Duncan. All right. Thank you very much.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much.
Any other questions of this panel? I do have one question
for Ms. Manning.
Do you believe by directing OHV traffic into, you know,
designated or appropriated places, does that help with
unauthorized OHV traffic in areas that are not designated? Does
it kind of help to concentrate it?
Ms. Manning. Yes. In most of our forests we do have
designated trails, and usually the public abides by it. We have
some people, like always, who won't; but in most cases, they
just want a place to use their OHV vehicles.
Mr. Radanovich. Very good. Thank you.
And I want to thank the panel very much for your
testimonies. And we will go ahead now and move on to the last,
third panel.
Mr. Radanovich. On our third panel, we have Mr. Gene
Williams with the Sandhills Resort, Inc., in Saint Anthony,
Idaho; Mr. Dave Morrow, Deputy Director of the Division of
Parks and Recreation in the Utah Department of Natural
Resources; and Mr. Bryce Nielson, County Commissioner from Rich
County, Utah. Gentlemen, welcome.
Mr. Radanovich. Mr. Williams, we will start with you. And
again, if you could limit your testimony to 5 minutes, that
would be terrific. We appreciate the fact that you are here
today and we are anxious to hear what you have to say. You may
begin.
STATEMENT OF GENE WILLIAMS, SANDHILLS RESORT, INC., ST.
ANTHONY, IDAHO
Mr. Williams. Thank you. Gene Williams. My wife, Shirley
Williams, over here. The reason I mention that is because wives
are always the backbone of a company.
First, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to
testify today on H.R. 2818. I am in full support of H.R. 2818
as it enables me to purchase land that I have already developed
into my resort.
I own land adjacent to the Saint Anthony Sand Dunes, which
is called the Sandhills Resort. I purchased this land in 1972.
In 1981, the Bureau of Land Management conducted a wilderness
study and included portions of what I thought was my property.
When I purchased the site, the current owner and the original
owner of the land, Freemont Fulmer, who purchased the land in
1955 from the Department of the Interior, confirmed the
property boundaries. However, in 1992, a new survey was taken
and the new property lines went right through our home and
excluded our garage, the driveway, resort facilities, the
improvements to the land, telephone lines.
The Bureau of Land Management has been able to sell the
acreage--has been trying to sell the acreage in question back
to me. But because of the wilderness study area that surrounds
it, they have not been able to do that. I am unable to sell,
refinance or make improvements to the land because of
encroachment and wilderness study issues.
Here I am, without any of the things I had built for the
last 30 years of my life. My title to my property is clouded. I
cannot sell, get a loan on the property or make any
improvements, as the wilderness study area is crowding me in.
My family and I have worked all our lives to build this
resort. We have made improvements and beautified the area for
recreationalists. Under the 1992 survey, my land extends into
the middle of the sand dunes, instead of where I have built
facilities, which is entirely useless. It drops off the lava
flow and back into living sand dunes that, during this last
windstorm a couple of days ago, had to have moved at least 8 to
10 feet.
It is imperative to our livelihood and the livelihood of
this resort that I am able to purchase this land that I have
worked on, lived on and improved all my life.
This park has been in public use for many years, and due to
its location, proximity--near two rural towns and on the route
to Yellowstone and Island Park--it has become a familiar and
popular family vacation area. As you can see from the pictures,
I have maintained and improved the integrity of the park to
coincide with the wilderness surroundings. It is an easily
accessible, safe place for families to come and play on the
sand.
Again, I thank you for the opportunity to testify about the
purchase of this land. This parcel of 10.23 acres, as it now
stands, is useless as wilderness study area, but full of use
for many multiple-use recreationalists, my family and me. It is
a win-win situation for the Bureau of Land Management and the
constituents of Idaho. This land was included in the wilderness
study area of 1981 by accident, and should not be held captive
for that mistake.
I would like to make one last comment that when Fremont
Fulmer purchased this land--it is an L-shaped piece of
property--he purchased it as an ``L'' shape on purpose, the
biggest portion of the ``L'' being on top of a flat lava rock
cliff. That included the parking area and the area where I now
have all my facilities.
Off of the edge of the cliff, he built a swimming pool;
that was a little tail of the L-shaped piece of property. He
did that on purpose, rather than buying a square, because it
gave him better use of the top of the flat lava rock, and that
is the area that we no longer have. It is all out in the sand
dunes now.
Your time efforts and votes are appreciated, and I would
like to thank you for that matter. And that is the end of my
testimony. Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Williams. We
appreciate your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:]
Statement of Gene Williams, Owner and Operator of the Sandhills Resort,
St. Anthony, Idaho, on H.R. 2818
First, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify
today on H.R. 2818. I am in full support of H.R. 2818, as it enables me
to purchase land that I have already developed into my resort. I own
land adjacent to the Saint Anthony Sand Dunes, which is called the
Sandhills Resort. I purchased this land in 1972. In 1981 the Bureau of
Land Management conducted a Wilderness Study and included portions of
what I thought was my property.
When I purchased this site, the current owner and the original
owner of the land, Freemont Fulmer, who purchased the land in 1953 from
the Department of the Interior, confirmed the property boundaries.
However, in 1995 a new survey was taken and the new property lines went
right through our home and excluded our garage, the driveway, resort
facilities, and improvements to the land. The Bureau of Land Management
has been working to sell the acreage in question back to me, but
because of the wilderness study area that surrounds it they have not
been able to. I am unable to sell, refinance, or make improvement to
the land because of encroachment and wilderness study issues. I am left
without any of the things I had built for the last 20 years. The title
to my property is clouded and I cannot sell, get a loan on the property
or make any improvements due to the wilderness study area crowding me
in.
My family and I have worked all our lives to build this resort. We
have made improvements and beautified the area for recreationalists.
Under the 1995 survey, my land extends into the middle of the sand
dunes instead of where I have built facilities, which is entirely
useless. It is imperative to our livelihood and the livelihood of this
resort that I am able to purchase this land that I have worked on,
lived on, and improved all my life.
This park has been in public use for many years and due to its
location proximity near two rural towns and en route to the Island
Park--Yellowstone area, it has become a familiar and popular family
vacation area. As you can see from the pictures, I have maintained and
improved the integrity of the park to coincide with the wilderness
surroundings. It is an easily accessible safe place for families to
come and play on the sand.
Again, I thank you for this opportunity to testify about the
purchase of land. This parcel of 10.23 acres as it now stands is
useless as a wilderness study area and full of use for many multiple
use recreationalists, my family, and me. It is a win-win situation for
the Bureau of Land Management and the citizens of Idaho. This land was
included in the Wilderness Study Area of 1981 by accident and should
not be held captive because of that mistake. Your time, effort, and
vote on this matter are appreciated.
______
[A map attached to Mr. Williams' statement follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.003
Mr. Radanovich. Mr. Morrow, welcome to the Committee.
Please begin your testimony.
STATEMENT OF DAVID K. MORROW, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF
PARKS AND RECREATION, UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Mr. Morrow. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here representing the Department of Natural
Resources. And it is also nice to get out of Utah where we have
about 4 inches on the ground.
Mr. Radanovich. Welcome to 90 degrees.
Mr. Morrow. A little warmer here.
It is nice to be here because it has taken a lot of work
and a great cooperative effort between the Federal Government,
the State and the local communities to be at this point in
time.
OHV use across the country and in the State of Utah is
nothing new, but it is rapidly expanding. Clear back in 1972,
President Nixon passed an executive order that required the
establishment of policies and procedures to ensure the use of
off-road vehicles on public lands would be controlled, directed
so as to protect the natural resources. Thirty years later,
now, many of us that are in the land management business still
have not met those goals and objectives.
In the State of Utah alone there are 130 off-highway
vehicles, and that number has increased since 1997 by about 197
percent. Nationwide, they are increasing at 27 to 30 percent
annually. With the growth of OHV users, they are seeking more
and more opportunities to ride. And in the State of Utah, which
is approximately two-thirds publicly owned, those areas that
OHV users are seeking are the public lands.
In an attempt to find a proactive solution to the growing
number of OHV users, the Department of Natural Resources, the
Forest Service and local communities looked at establishing a
trail riding system in the northern part of the State. That
system is what we are hearing today before the Committee.
The system is comprised of about 337 miles of trails
already open and designated for motorized use in both BLM and
the Forest Service travel plans. There is an option for another
172 miles of trails that could be added in the future, that are
now on existing roads, but not currently open to OHV travel and
use.
The Shoshone National Recreation Trail, as proposed, is a
well-thought-out effort, and it has involved, as I indicated, a
strong degree of cooperation between Federal, State and local
agencies. We have received the endorsement of all four counties
that surround the trail system and nearly 16 communities that
would be affected by the development of this trail opportunity.
The proposed trail system is, as I mentioned, located on
existing roads already designated as motorized. We would ask
the Committee to strongly consider a favorable ruling on this
bill. It is a proactive measure to take to create both riding
opportunities and better organize existing motorized use on a
log area of the Cache National Forest.
Again, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you on
behalf of the Department of Natural Resources and ask the
Committee to consider a favorable vote on this bill. And that
concludes my testimony. Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Morrow.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Morrow follows:]
Statement of David K. Morrow, Deputy Director of Operations, Utah
Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Salt
Lake City, Utah
Mr. Chairman, Members of Congress, I thank you for the opportunity
to address you today.
The Shoshone National Recreational Trail System, a 337-mile
proposed trail system in Northern Utah, provides an excellent
opportunity to balance the needs of the area's rapidly expanding number
of off highway vehicles (OHV-ATV's and motorcycles) while at the same
time protecting the natural resources of the lands affected. Past land
use activities such as ranching, mining, and timber harvesting left
thousands of miles of old roads and trails that are being discovered by
OHV enthusiasts. Some of this use is appropriate and some is not.
This proposal will effectively identify, designate, sign and map a
trail system. It will provide outstanding riding experiences on routes
that can be managed and maintained while simultaneously provide
protection for the area's outstanding resources.
It is estimated that there is a total of 130,000 OHV's, both
registered and unregistered, for the state. Over 50 percent of
registered machines are from counties north of Salt Lake City. The
number of registered OHV's have risen 197% in Utah just since 1997. OHV
sales have increased nationally at 27-30 percent per year for the last
five years. The increase in OHV sales is increasing much faster than
the identification of appropriate riding areas.
With this growth, OHV users are seeking more opportunities. Since
approximately two-thirds of all Utah lands are publicly managed, the
riding public naturally turns to us. Results from a user survey
conducted by Utah State University for the Division Parks and
Recreation in 2001 captured these concerns:
1) LOf the more important issues affecting OHV use in Utah was
``having enough places to ride,'' followed by ``closing off too
many areas.''
2) LThe average one-way distance traveled to get to an
appropriate place to ride an OHV is about 100 miles.
3) LThe U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management
should, ``Recognize that trails and roads are an important
aspect of recreation and should be given a high priority for
inventory, signing, development of loop trails, and improving
trail access.''
4) LRemote ATV trails make special places available to many
types of individuals including children and should receive more
emphasis by Federal and state land managers.
5) LUnregulated use leads to resource degradation, user
conflicts and reduces the quality of the recreational
experience.
6) LRiding on established roads and trails is the most popular
with OHV owners.
In an attempt to find proactive solutions to these issues, the Utah
Department of Natural Resources was asked to identify motorized riding
opportunities in the northern part of the state, similar to the
opportunities that are provided by the Paiute Trail. The Utah Division
of Parks and Recreation, a division of the Department of Natural
Resources, is responsible for the administration of the state's off-
highway vehicle program and enforcement of state laws regarding use of
these vehicles, and as such the division was asked to take the lead
role.
The Paiute Trail is a motorized trail system that was developed in
central Utah in the late 1980s. The system, now recognized nationally
as a model for proactive OHV management on public lands, has 587 miles
of designated trails that link 12 communities, two state parks, the
Great Western Trail and many other points of interest. In addition
there are sixteen participating communities that are connected to the
trail system. The Paiute Trail became the model for the proposed
Shoshone National Recreation Trail System.
The Paiute Trail grew from very humble beginnings out of the very
small central Utah community of Circleville in 1988. Two friends; one
an employee of the Forest Service the other a Paiute County
commissioner, sat on the tailgate of a pickup truck talking about the
latest access challenges to their favorite hunting spots as the Forest
Service was going to close down a major access road to ATV use. The
two, not to be denied access, devised a plan to develop an alternative
to closure. Their plan was endorsed by the Forest Service, Bureau of
Land Management and later the Utah Division of Parks & Recreation. The
Paiute Trail has grown in popularity now serving over 60,000 riders
annually. The annual Paiute Trail Jamboree attracts approximately 800
participants, 60 percent from out-of state. There are many positive
things attributed to the trail, but perhaps the most important is its
role in providing a proactive solution to the mis-use of public lands
yet provides riding opportunities for a growing segment of recreational
users.
Representatives from the Utah Department of Natural Resources, U.S.
Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, OHV enthusiasts met over a
2-3 month period to identify trail riding opportunities, similar to
those experienced on the Paiute Trail. The group was also encouraged to
identify existing trails and roads, ones used but perhaps not properly
maintained for OHV use. The group focused its attention on an area of
the state that was within easy driving distance from the majority of
registered users in northern Utah and was already being utilized as a
winter snowmobile trail system.
The first conceptual plan was very promising: the group identified
337 miles of existing and open roads and trail, 172 miles of existing
routes not designated open but possibly available by agreement, and
found that only 12 miles to trail that would need to be constructed.
The majority of the proposed trail system was located on U.S. Forest
Service and Bureau of Land Management administered land, accessible to
four counties and almost sixteen communities. The Federal agencies
responsible for administering the area previously identified the
proposed routes in their travel plans and were in support of this
conceptual plan. A few modifications were made, both additions and a
few deletions that enabled the group to achieve the needed approval
from land management agencies.
A series of community meetings were scheduled in each of the four
counties adjacent to the trail: Rich, Cache, Box Elder and Weber. The
meetings allowed community leaders and interest groups to review the
conceptual plan, provide input, and voice their support. Representation
at the meetings included, county commissioners, mayors, city council
members, motorized and non-motorized trail users, environmental groups
and other state and Federal land managers. The proposal met with
unanimous support. Even those who were against OHV use, viewed the
proposed trail system as being positive. One participant commented,
``Perhaps more developed trail riding opportunities would decrease the
impact on more sensitive areas.'' A non-motorized trail user commented,
``perhaps more motorized trail opportunities would reduce conflicts
with non-motorized trail users.''
In each meeting the majority of participants viewed the creation of
the trail as a proactive way to address the growing demand for
motorized riding opportunities. The rural communities praised the plan
for its potential economic benefit, citing the rural communities
located near the Paiute Trail as positive examples of what could be
achieved. It was noted, that Marysvale, a small central Utah town, had
benefited significantly from the creation of the Paiute Trail. In the
late 1980's Marysvale had only two businesses, now with the addition of
the trail, boasts of over 20 businesses. The Marysvale Chamber of
Commerce states that, ``Because of the Paiute ATV Trail, we have become
a destination community.'' The Sevier County Travel Council boasts,
``The Paiute ATV Trail has become the most important tourist attraction
in our County. The trail not only brings thousands of ATV riders to our
area, it also provides access to some of the most beautiful recreation
areas in the state...and well over $4 million is injected into the
County annually.''
In the two weeks prior to presenting this testimony in favor of
creating the Shoshone National Recreational Trail, the Department of
Natural Resources received letters of endorsement for its establishment
from each of the four counties that are adjacent to the proposed trail.
A letter of support from the Utah State Institutional Trust Lands
Administration (SITLA), committing the use of roads and trails that
cross lands under their jurisdiction was also provided. (see
attachments provided)
The Shoshone National Recreation Trail provides a rare opportunity
to satisfy a growing segment of recreational users in a way that
assists land management agencies to better protect our natural
resources. There is no major opposition in part due to the thoughtful
and prudent manner in which the trails were identified. The majority of
the proposed routes are open to OHV use and are already identified in
Forest Service and BLM access plans. Lands identified as desired routes
but not yet approved can be added at a future date in accordance with
the National Trail System Act. If the desired additions involve private
property, the additions can only be made with the approval of the owner
of the land upon which the trail is to be located.
The Shoshone National Recreation Trail bill is one we
enthusiastically ask you to recommend favorably. Executive Order 11644
made by then President Nixon, requires the establishment of policies
and procedures that would ensure that the use of off-road vehicles on
public lands would be controlled and directed so as to protect the
resources of those lands, to promote the safety of all users of those
lands and to minimize conflicts among the various uses of those lands
(Nixon, 1972). Thirty years later, public land managers have yet to
fully address OHV use on public lands through these measures. The
National Trails System Act is an option that is consistent with the
objectives to more effectively manage OHV use. More importantly, it is
a widely supported opportunity to meet the demands on an increasingly
popular recreational activity while protecting (our) valuable resource
base.
______
[Attachments to Mr. Morrow's statement follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.009
Mr. Radanovich. Mr. Nielson, welcome; and please begin your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF BRYCE R. NIELSON, COUNTY COMMISSIONER, RICH
COUNTY, UTAH
Mr. Nielson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate the opportunity to travel from a small snow-covered
community in northern Utah to this wonderful Washington, D.C.,
to address you today.
I have been involved in local politics as a mayor and
county commissioner for the last 16 years. As a native of Utah,
lands and natural resources are part of my heritage and I love
them dearly. In our county Federal and State lands are integral
to agriculture, economy, recreation and our lifestyles.
Over my lifetime, I have seen changes in uses, attitudes
and values of these lands, and I struggle with what their
future will be. When the Division of Parks and Recreation
approached our county to consider a proposal to create the
Shoshone National Trail System, our support was immediate.
Recreation is a significant factor in Rich County. In the
winter, thousand of snowmobiles visit groomed trails and the
surrounding playgrounds. In the summer, boats and personal
watercraft utilize Bear Lake. But unfortunately the owners of
off-highway vehicles have no opportunity to ride them in a
safe, well-designated trail system.
Most OHV enthusiasts respect the environment and private
property and pay thousands of dollars in registration fees and
property taxes, but cannot use public roads. Consequently, they
end up in the wrong place at the wrong time without a trail
system, frequently impacting and damaging watersheds, harassing
wildlife and livestock, negatively affecting the recreational
experience of others. This has created a host of present and
potential problems that we, as community leaders, have not had
the ability or the funding to address.
You have been provided with an excellent overview of the
proposal and the existing OHV status, so I won't dwell on these
facts and figures. What I will focus on: As a county
commissioner, I have had the opportunity to speak to many
individuals, both elected officials and citizens, about this
proposal. You have before you letters of support from the four
counties involved in the Shoshone Trail, and I know they are
excited about the development of this system. The Rich County
Commission, after reviewing the proposed trail map, supports
the concept.
We have been assured there will be no taking of private
land without compensation. We are aware that some of the roads
may cross private property, but the county commissioners
consider them right-of-use roads and as part of the trail
system.
Grazing on Federal and State lands is critical to our
livestock industry, and with proper planning and construction
of fence crossings, the OHV riders can stay on the trail with
little impact. Improvements of the existing roads should
minimize accidents and provide for safer travel opportunities
through these lands. Increased signage and law enforcement will
impact individuals who have no regard for the environment or
other living things and hopefully they will be convinced to
change their ways.
The recreational economy of Rich County is presently
located on the shores of Bear Lake, but this trail system would
provide some excellent opportunities for economic development
in small rural communities that now only see traffic passing by
on their way to somewhere else.
Finally, with the approval of this proposal, we look
forward to involving all public interest in this planning and
development.
I sincerely hope that this Committee will provide favorable
recommendation for the Shoshone National Trail bill. It will
provide the opportunity to develop relationships between the
stewards of these lands, the resources and the entities that
are responsible for their management and protection, and our
citizens that use and cherish them.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to testify on
this bill.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Nielson. We
appreciate your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nielson follows:]
Statement of Bryce R. Nielson, Chairman, Rich County Commissioner, Rich
County, Utah
Mr. Chairman, Members of Congress, I appreciate the opportunity to
travel from a small, snow covered county in Northern Utah to Washington
D.C. to address you today.
I have been involved in local politics as the Mayor of Garden City
and as a Commissioner in Rich County, Utah for the last sixteen years.
As a native of Utah, our lands and natural resources are part of my
heritage and I love them dearly. In our county, the Federal and State
lands are integral to our agriculture, economy, recreation and
lifestyle. Over my lifetime I have seen the changes in the uses,
attitudes and values of these lands and I struggle with what their
future will be.
When the Division of Parks and Recreation approached our county to
consider a proposal to create the Shoshone National Trail System,
support was immediate. Recreation is a significant factor in Rich
County. In the winter, thousands of snowmobiles visit groomed trails
and surrounding playgrounds. In the summer, boats and PWC's utilize
beautiful Bear Lake. But unfortunately, the use of OHV's, which is
increasing dramatically with the influx of visitors, have little
opportunity to ride them in a safe, well designated trail system. Most
OHV enthusiasts respect the environment and private property and they
do pay thousands of dollars in registration fees and property taxes but
cannot travel public roads. Consequently, they end up in the wrong
place at the wrong time without a trail system, frequently impacting
and damaging watersheds, harassing livestock and wildlife, and
negatively affecting the recreational experiences of others. This has
created a host of present and potential problems that we, as community
leaders, have not had the ability or the funding to address.
You have been provided with an excellent overview of the proposal
and the existing OHV recreational status, so I will not dwell on those
facts and figures. What I will focus on is that as a County
Commissioner, I have had the opportunity to speak to many individuals,
both elected officials and citizens about this proposal. Commissioners
that live within the area covered by the Piaute Trail are happy to have
it there and state that cooperative efforts between Federal, State and
local governments and the public have resulted in positive recreational
and economic opportunities. You have before you letter of support from
the four counties involved with the Shoshone Trail. I cannot speak for
them personally, but I know they are excited about the Shoshone Trail.
Rich County, after reviewing the current proposed trail map, is
solidly behind the proposal. There were a few things we needed to be
assured of before we committed. There will be no ``taking'' of private
land without compensation to develop this system. Some roads my cross
private property but the County considers them right of use (RS2477)
roads which we will support as part of the trail system. Grazing on
Federal and State lands is critical to our livestock industry and with
proper planning and construction of fence crossings, OHV riders and can
stay where they are supposed to be. We see improvements of existing
roads that will minimize accidents and provide for safer travel
opportunities through these lands. We expect increased signage and
funding for law enforcement, so that individuals, who have no regard
for the environment or the other living things using it, will be
convinced to change their ways. The recreational economy in Rich County
is presently concentrated in Garden City on the shores of Bear Lake,
but this trail system would provide some excellent opportunities for
other rural communities that now only see traffic passing through on
the way to somewhere else. Finally, with the approval of this proposal,
we look forward to involving all the public interests in its planning
and development.
I sincerely hope that this committee will provide a favorable
recommendation for the Shoshone National Trail bill. It would provide
us the opportunity to develop relationships between the stewards of
these lands and their resources, the entities that are responsible for
their management and protection and our citizens that use and cherish
them.
______
Mr. Radanovich. We will now open up the panel for any
questions, and I will defer to Mr. Udall, if you have any.
Mr. Udall of New Mexico. I am OK.
Mr. Radanovich. Mike, did you have some questions?
Mr. Simpson. Let me first apologize for my phone going off.
I forgot to put it on vibrate.
Mr. Williams, thank you for being here today. Hopefully, we
can get this resolved after many, many years. And I understand,
as the BLM testified, they are supportive. And welcome to
Washington and I appreciate your testimony.
Mr. Nielson, let me ask you just a question that came up as
I was looking at the maps of these proposed trails and so
forth--well, three or four of the proposed trails kind of end
at the Idaho border.
Mr. Nielson. Uh-huh.
Mr. Simpson. Has there been any work with the State of
Idaho to continue those throughout?
Mr. Nielson. When we were approached by Dave's group, this
was brought out because we do a lot of cooperative stuff with
trail grooming and everything into Bear Lake County; however, I
don't believe at this point in time--and Dave can help me on
this, whether or not there has been any official contact with
Idaho on this.
Mr. Morrow. There has not. The intention was to go ahead
and create the Shoshone Recreation Trail, that we would work in
cooperation with Idaho to extend it in the future. The
Commissioner mentioned that we have a very positive
relationship in the winter months on a snowmobile trail, and we
would hope to extend the summer trail in the same manner.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Simpson.
Any other questions of the panel?
I do have two quick questions of Mr. Morrow. Has there been
a lot of input from elected leaders, local elected leaders that
are affected--let us start this over again.
Has there been any input from elected leaders from the
affected areas of this designation?
Mr. Morrow. There has. We held community meetings in each
of the four counties that are adjacent to the trail system, and
in those meetings, we had city councilmen, county
commissioners, users and representatives from the community.
And in all of those meetings we received unanimous support for
the proposed trail system.
Mr. Radanovich. It is safe to say there is extensive local
support for the project?
Mr. Morrow. There is.
Mr. Radanovich. Mr. Nielson, of this designation, are all
the local counties supportive of it as well?
Mr. Nielson. I met with all of the county commissioners
from the four counties, and they all support it and are really
quite excited about it. I think it provides some opportunities
for these counties to get some connectivity that will help the
area; and the local mayors are excited about it, and I hope to
be able to see it to fruition.
Mr. Radanovich. I want to welcome the people that have
just come here, but we are about ready to adjourn the meeting.
Forgive us, but it did go rather smoothly today.
Gentlemen, I want to thank you for your testimony and there
being no further questions, this hearing is closed.
[Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A statement from The Wilderness Society et al., submitted
for the record by The Honorable George Radanovich follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78733.014
-