    [Senate Hearing 107-722]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 107-722

                       MISCELLANEOUS NATIONAL PARKS BILLS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

                                     of the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                          ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       on

                               S. 1257                               S. 1944

                               H.R. 107                              H.R. 38

                               S. 1312                               H.R. 980

                               H.R. 2109                             H.R. 1712

                                   __________

                                 JUNE 12, 2002

                           Printed for the use of the
                   Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

                           U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    82-280                          WASHINGTON : 2002
    ___________________________________________________________________________
    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 ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                      JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman
    DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii              FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, Alaska
    BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota        PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
    BOB GRAHAM, Florida                  DON NICKLES, Oklahoma
    RON WYDEN, Oregon                    LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
    TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota            BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado
    MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming
    EVAN BAYH, Indiana                   RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
    DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California         CONRAD BURNS, Montana
    CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York         JON KYL, Arizona
    MARIA CANTWELL, Washington           CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska
    THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           GORDON SMITH, Oregon

                        Robert M. Simon, Staff Director
                          Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
                   Brian P. Malnak, Republican Staff Director
                   James P. Beirne, Republican Chief Counsel
                                     ------

                         Subcommittee on National Parks

                       DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman
    BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota        CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming
    BOB GRAHAM, Florida                  BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado
    MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          CONRAD BURNS, Montana
    EVAN BAYH, Indiana                   GORDON SMITH, Oregon
    CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York         CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska
    THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

      Jeff Bingaman and Frank H. Murkowski are Ex Officio Members of the
                                  Subcommittee

                          David Brooks, Senior Counsel
                         Nancie Ames, Bevinetto Fellow

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                                   STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page

    Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii..................     1
    Bereuter, Hon. Doug, U.S. Representative from Nebraska...........     2
    Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado........     4
    Faleomavaega, Hon. Eni F.H., Delegate from American Samoa........     9
    Graham, Hon. Bob, U.S. Senator from Florida......................     9
    Hefley, Hon. Joel, U.S. Representative from Colorado.............     3
    Meek, Hon. Carrie, U.S. Representative from Florida..............     7
    Mills, Jay, Vice-President of the Friends of Moccasin Bend,
      Chattanooga, TN................................................    42
    Nelson, Hon. Bill, U.S. Senator from Florida.....................     6
    Reid, Hon. Harry, U.S. Senator from Nevada.......................    39
    Ririe, Chairman, Silent Heroes of the Cold War National Memorial
      Committee, Las Vegas, NV.......................................    40
    Smith, P. Daniel, Special Assistant to the Director, National
      Park Service...................................................    17
    Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from Wyoming....................     4
    Wamp, Hon. Zach, U.S. Representative from Tennessee..............    12

                                    APPENDIX

    Additional material submitted for the record.....................    49

                       MISCELLANEOUS NATIONAL PARKS BILLS

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12, 2002

                                   U.S. Senate,
                        Subcommittee on National Parks,
                     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:55 p.m. in
    room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K.
    Akaka presiding.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII

        Senator Akaka. The hearing will come to order. I want to
    welcome our witnesses here, and those also in the audience, for
    your interest in this hearing. The purpose of this afternoon's
    hearing before the Subcommittee on National Parks is to receive
    testimony on six bills pending before the subcommittee.
        The bills that we are considering today are S. 1257 and
    H.R. 107, to require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a
    theme study to identify sites and resources to commemorate and
    interpret the Cold War, S. 1312 and H.R. 2109, to authorize the
    Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resources study
    of Virginia Key Beach Park, Florida, for possible inclusion in
    the National Park System, S. 1994, to revise the boundary of
    the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park and Gunnison
    Gorge National Conservation Area in the State of Colorado, H.R.
    38, to provide for additional land to be included within the
    boundaries of the Homestead National Monument of America in the
    State of Nebraska, H.R. 980, to establish the Moccasin Bend
    National Historic Site in the State of Tennessee as a unit of
    the National Park System, and H.R. 1712, to authorize the
    Secretary of the Interior to make adjustments to the boundary
    of the National Park of American Samoa to include certain
    portions of the Islands of Ofu and Olosega within the park.
        A number of these bills would protect areas constituting
    valuable additions to our National Park System, and I would
    like to say a few words about H.R. 1712, which would authorize
    an expansion of the National Park of American Samoa. This park
    was created in 1988, in a lease arrangement between the
    Secretary of the Interior and the Governor of American Samoa. I
    would like to commend Congressman Faleomavaega, who is here
    today, for his work to obtain the support of the local village
    councils to expand this important park.
        I support his efforts to bring together the National Park
    Service and the government of American Samoa to protect
    endangered species such as the hawkbill and green sea turtles
    and the rain forest habitat. This is a remarkable environment,
    and I am pleased to see that it is being protected, not only
    for American Samoans but for all Americans.
        I believe most of the bills on today's agenda are
    noncontroversial. There are management issues within the
    proposed Moccasin Bend Historic Site in Tennessee that will
    require the committee's attention, and I look forward to
    working with the bill's sponsors and Senator Thomas as we
    consider this bill.
        So let me then pass it on to Senator Thomas and ask for his
    statement.
        [The prepared statements of Congressmen Bereuter and Hefley
    follow:]
         Prepared Statement of Hon. Doug Bereuter, U.S. Representative
                                 From Nebraska
        Chairman Akaka, Senator Thomas, and members of the Subcommittee: I
    would like to begin by thanking you for the opportunity to present
    testimony regarding H.R. 38, a bill I introduced on January 3, 2001.
    During the previous 106th Congress, I introduced the same legislation.
        The Homestead National Monument of America Additions Act, H.R. 38,
    is a straightforward bill. It is also noncontroversial. The bill would
    simply adjust the boundaries of Homestead National Monument of America
    and allow a small amount of additional land to be included within its
    boundaries.
        The measure reflects the recommendations in the recently completed
    General Management Plan (GMP) calling for a minor boundary expansion
    for Homestead National Monument. Unfortunately, the current visitor
    center is located in a 100-year flood plain. The acquisition of land
    outside the existing boundaries as recommended in the GMP would allow a
    new ``Homestead Heritage Center'' to be constructed outside the
    floodplain. This would offer greater protection to the Monument's
    collections, interpretive exhibits, public research facilities, and
    administrative offices.
        As the bill makes clear, the land for the Heritage Center is to be
    acquired on a willing-seller basis. It is my understanding that all of
    the individuals who would be involved in the boundary adjustment have
    expressed a willingness to sell for a negotiated price.
        The Homestead National Monument of America commemorates the lives
    and accomplishments of all pioneers and the changes to the land and the
    people as a result of the Homestead Act of 1862, which is recognized as
    one of the most important laws in U.S. history. This Monument was
    authorized by legislation enacted in 1936. The FY96 Interior
    Appropriations Act directed the National Park Service to complete a
    General Management Plan to begin planning for improvements at
    Homestead. The General Management Plan, which was completed last year,
    made recommendations for improvements that are needed to help ensure
    that Homestead is able to reach its full potential as a place where
    Americans can more effectively appreciate the Homestead Act and its
    effects upon the nation.
        Homestead National Monument of America is truly a unique treasure
    among the National Park Service jewels. The authorizing legislation
    makes it clear that Homestead was intended to have a special place
    among Park Service units. According to the original legislation:

              ``It shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Interior to
            lay out said land in a suitable and enduring manner so that the
            same may be maintained as an appropriate monument to retain for
            posterity a proper memorial emblematic of the hardships and the
            pioneer life through which the early settlers passed in the
            settlement, cultivation, and civilization of the great West. It
            shall be his duty to erect suitable buildings to be used as a
            museum in which shall be preserved literature applying to such
            settlement and agricultural implements used in bringing the
            western plains to its present state of high civilization, and
            to use the said tract of land for such other objects and
            purposes as in his judgment may perpetuate the history of this
            country mainly developed by the homestead law.''

        Clearly, this authorizing legislation sets some lofty goals. I
    believe that H.R. 38 would help the Monument achieve the potential
    which was first described in its authorizing legislation.
        Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify in support of
    H.R. 38.
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Hon. Joel Hefley, U.S. Representative
                                 From Colorado
        Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank you for allowing me to present
    testimony today on my bill, H.R. 107; and the similar measure, S. 1257,
    introduced by Senator Reid.
        No doubt many of you remember where you were on Tuesday, September
    11 of last year. On that day America was attacked without warning by an
    unknown foe. Many of us here on the Hill were forced to improvise the
    evacuations of our staffs and ourselves. In its aftermath, we face a
    future of unexpected, devastating attacks on the general population. We
    cannot see its end . . . but we have seen it before.
        From 1946 to 1989, the United States mobilized itself against
    sudden attack by its ideological foe, the Soviet Union. For 43 years,
    we ringed our cities with Nike anti-ballistic missiles and built
    fallout shelters in the basements of our schools. We made plans then to
    evacuate not just buildings, but whole cities. Our children practiced
    ``duck-and-cover'' drills against nuclear attacks at school and laughed
    at the cartoon antics of an all-American squirrel and his moose
    sidekick against a pair of spies named Boris and Natasha. We went to
    the moon and developed the computers to get there. Along the way, we
    developed the Internet to communicate with each other.
        All of these were products of the Cold War, probably the most
    important historical movement of the latter half of the 20th Century.
        My own involvement with the Cold War theme study began in August
    2000 at a National Park Service conference in Colorado. The question
    arose as to whether there were any facets of American history which
    hadn't been covered by the Park Service and one NPS official ventured,
    ``I've always thought we ought to do a study of Cold War sites.'' I
    introduced my first version of the Cold War bill a month later.
        The Cold War ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. In
    recognition of that event, Congress included a provision in the Defense
    Appropriations Act of 1991 that mandated an inventory be completed on
    the important resources, relics and artifacts associated with this
    unique period in American history. The U.S. Air Force assumed the
    leadership role for this inventory and completed several historical
    studies that examined the physical legacy of the Cold War.
        But although the Air Force studies inventoried many resources, the
    National Park Service has never undertaken a comprehensive study of the
    feasibility of preserving and interpreting Cold War resources.While a
    joint Air Force/NPS study led to inclusion of one Minuteman missile
    complex in the Park System, no further studies have been undertaken to
    determine whether additional Cold War candidates are warranted for
    inclusion in the Park System. As more and more such resources are
    decommissioned and removed, further preservation planning becomes
    critical.
        My bill, H.R. 107, would direct the Park Service to undertake a
    three-year theme and reconnaissance study of Cold War sites across the
    United States. The resulting report would help the states and the NPS
    determine which merited protection or National Landmark status and
    Congress, whether any deserve to be park service units. Modeled in part
    after the NPS' successful Underground Railroad study, the bill also
    directs that the NPS develop a handbook to these sites.
        H.R. 107 also recognizes the past efforts of the Department of
    Defense and other state and local groups in studying Cold War sites and
    resources. At our subcommittee markup on March 22, 2001, we approved an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute that removed a prior provision
    for a Cold War Advisory Committee and instead required the Secretary of
    the Interior to consult with state historic preservation offices, state
    and local officials, Cold War scholars and others while conducting the
    Cold War study. This amendment addressed some objections by the Park
    Service over the advisory committee. Further, we felt this would
    expedite the process and avoid re-inventing the wheel.
        The amendment also required that the Secretary consider military
    and non-military sites and resources associated with the people, events
    and social aspects of the Cold War. Joseph McCarthy and the Space Race
    are as much a part of Cold War history as the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban
    Missile Crisis.
        Finally, the amendment requested that the study include
    recommendations on the feasibility for a central repository for Cold
    War artifacts. I realize there is some competition for this designation
    among a number of worthy aspirants but think that an NPS recommendation
    is the best course of action at this time. Francis Gary Powers Jr.--and
    Senators Allen and Warner--can make a good argument for placing this
    repository in Virginia. Senator Reid can, no doubt, make a good
    argument for placing it in Nevada, just as I can argue it should be in
    Colorado and other Senators, Nebraska and New Mexico. For right now, I
    think we should try to get the study underway and wait for the NPS
    recommendation on where or what it should be.
        My bill passed out of the House Resources Committee by a voice vote
    on September 28, 2001 and the full House, also by a voice vote, on
    December 18. In addition, that bill was supported by the
    Administration--with the ongoing caveat that the maintenance backlog be
    addressed first. I have no objection to that priority--even support its
    aims--but believe we should continue to identify those themes and sites
    we deem worthy of study. This is one of them.
        I have examined Senator Reid's bill and found little difference
    between his bill and my own, save for some natural interest in Nevada
    sites. His bill honors my request that the bill continue to focus on
    the study process and not become something parochial. I note his bill
    retains the advisory committee that we dropped at the subcommittee
    level. I would suggest, therefore, that the subcommittee consider using
    my bill, H.R. 107, as the legislative vehicle for this issue, amend it
    to include the sites Senator Reid has suggested, then send it back to
    the House for its concurrence and passage. This would seem the best and
    cleanest way to see that this legislation is enacted and this study
    begun.
        Other than those points, I think these bills are headed in the same
    direction and I look forward to working with you on their eventual
    passage. Again, thank you for allowing me to present this testimony for
    your consideration.

             STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS, U.S. SENATOR
                              FROM WYOMING

        Senator Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be brief so
    we can hear from our witnesses, whom I welcome here. I really
    only have a question in the one, H.R. 980, and I guess what
    concerns me as much as anything--and I think it was in 1998 we
    passed the parks bill which required a study prior to these
    things, which I think is a good idea.
        However, the park has a responsibility to study
    responsibly, and I must tell you, I am going to have to
    question this study, where it talks about it would be feasible
    for inclusion if we eliminate a number of incompatible uses,
    including a State mental hospital, a model airplane facility,
    two radio towers, a golf course, and a law enforcement training
    range.
        Well, and then they think it could be removed by 2009. You
    have a State mental hospital that probably will be where it is
    for another 35 years. It includes an $18 million cost to remove
    some of these things. I really am anxious to hear from the Park
    Service in terms of the study and how they are able to come up
    with one of this kind.
        In any event, welcome all of you here, and certainly we
    look forward to dealing with the issues that are here.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much.
        Senator Campbell.

              STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

        Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to
    welcome our colleagues from the other body, Zach Wamp and
    Carrie Meek, and Eni Faleomavaega, who I served with when I was
    on the House side. Sorry we had to keep you. We had a vote, as
    you probably know.
        I would like to take a few moments, Mr. Chairman, to speak
    in support of my bill, S. 1944, which would alter the
    boundaries of both the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National
    Park and the Conservation Area as well. The Black Canyon of the
    Gunnison is really one of the most spectacular sites I could
    possibly describe, not nearly as big as the Grand Canyon, but
    the sheer, colorful walls and the darkness of the gorge from
    which it got the name, the Black Canyon, are really something
    to behold if you are ever in our State.
        I have been personally involved with the canyon literally
    ever since I have been in public office. I introduced the first
    bill 16 years ago when I first got here to change that national
    monument to a national park. It took that many years. In fact,
    until 1999, which I reintroduced I guess about the fifth
    version, and it did finally pass, and President Clinton signed
    into law, so now it is a national park, but this S. 1944
    expands the earlier work by adding 2,725 acres.
        In fact, it adds in that one part of the park and another
    part of the park to the conservation area for a total of about
    5,700 acres, and one of the reasons is because after we
    upgraded it to a national park we found that some enterprising
    people had purchased land around the area and were talking
    about building condos and malls and all the other stuff that
    would really detract from the beauty of the park, if not
    destroy the views itself.
        Now, I understand the BLM has miscalculated the exact
    acreage that we have in the bill, and I think they will make
    some proposed changes, and we will incorporate them at an
    appropriate time.
        S. 1944 also slightly alters the grazing language of the
    1999 bill. The bill before the subcommittee would allow
    partnerships to grace their herds on parkland for the lifetime
    of any partner, and I think that is probably a step in the
    right direction, particularly since the drought in Colorado and
    the fires in Colorado have just literally devastated our
    livestock industry.
        As you know, something like 40,000 people have been put on
    notice on the outskirts of Denver, and a number have already
    evacuated. That is how bad the fires are. Over 100,000 acres
    are burned already, just in the last couple of weeks in
    Colorado. That fire season, of course, is partly due to the
    extreme drought. Our State's snow pack is less than 3 percent
    of the average, and in fact some places are recording zero snow
    level, where there would be in normal times 3 or 4 feet of
    snow.
        Most of our streams have peaked. Most of the irrigation is
    going to be cut off early to those ranchers and farmers who use
    water, so I think that section of the bill is good, but
    considering that severe drought damage, several constituents
    are worried about their ditch rights, how it could be affected
    by this bill, but in my view they probably would not be
    affected, their water rights would be safe, but I am certainly
    willing to introduce an appropriate amendment, and will at the
    appropriate time, to ensure that their rights are preserved,
    and at this time I would like to ask unanimous consent to
    submit three letters for the record that do express those
    points of view.
        Senator Akaka. Without objection.
        Thank you for your statement. Several of our colleagues are
    here this afternoon to speak on behalf of their bills. I want
    you to know that we will include your entire statement in the
    record, so please feel free to summarize as you see fit.
        I would like to call first on my colleague from Florida,
    Senator Bill Nelson, for his testimony.

              STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, U.S. SENATOR
                              FROM FLORIDA

        Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much. I hesitate
    to go ahead of Congresswoman Carrie Meek, because normally what
    we do in the political world in Florida, we always defer to
    Carrie, and I have certainly learned my lesson over the years
    that this is a lady of great wisdom, and she and I actually
    come here to the committee advocating the same thing, so I will
    just make my comments by way of introduction that she could
    then elucidate and give you the further detail, but I am
    pleased that this committee is considering the bill that Bob
    Graham and I introduced, which authorizes the Secretary of the
    Interior to conduct a special resource study of Virginia Key
    Beach for inclusion in the National Park System.
        Carrie is the sponsor in the House, and she has long been a
    champion for this legislation, and there are very specific
    reasons why you need to know about that today and why I wanted
    to come here and appear with the Honorable Congresswoman. This
    companion legislation has already passed in the House last
    April. I would like to submit a letter for the record, if I
    may, from Athley Range, the chairwoman of the Virginia Key
    Beach Park Trust, and it will give additional information, Mr.
    Chairman, and I will give that to your staff.
        Now, this is why I would submit that it is worthy of your
    consideration for inclusion in the National Park System. It is
    a unique key situated just north of Key Biscayne, and just
    south of Fischer Island. It is a 1,000-acre barrier island
    characterized by unique and sensitive natural environmental
    qualities.
        It is nonresidential, and it includes ponds and waterways,
    a tropical hardwood hammock and a large wildlife conservation
    area, but it has a particular reason in addition that you ought
    to consider, because it has a unique history that teaches us
    about the Nation's trauma and the Nation's progress toward
    racial justice, because in south Florida Virginia Key was the
    black beach.
        That was the beach that thousands of African American
    families had to use in the forties and the fifties and the
    sixties for seaside recreation, because we were a segregated
    society and, as a result, it was the site of many baptisms and
    religious services, so, Mr. Chairman, it is holy ground, and
    thus its value to our Nation, to Florida, should be recognized
    both for its natural beauty and its role in the Nation's
    ongoing struggle for equality and social justice, and I would
    urge you all to consider the adoption of this bill and again,
    it is conduct a special resource study of Virginia Key.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for that persuasive
    testimony, and I thank you for your introduction of
    Congresswoman Meek, and with that, let me ask the three of you
    here whether any of you will have to leave soon, to run. If
    not, then I will call on Congressman Faleomavaega.
        Mr. Faleomavaega. Mr. Chairman, as Senator Nelson said
    earlier, when Carrie Meek speaks, we listen. I would be happy
    to defer to her for full consideration of this legislation.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, and I thank you for
    recognizing her, and I want to call on Congresswoman Meek for
    your testimony. I have got to tell you, you had a good
    introduction.

          STATEMENT OF HON. CARRIE MEEK, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
                              FROM FLORIDA

        Ms. Meek. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and to other
    members of the committee. All of you know me, and I know each
    of you. I am pleased to be here, and I want to thank my
    Senator. I have supported him almost all of his life. He is a
    very young man, considering my chronology he is a very young
    man, so I am pleased to be here and ask this committee to look
    very carefully at this piece of legislation which the Senator
    has brought before you today.
        Virginia Key Beach is not only historically very well
    suited, but it also is environmentally very well-suited. It is
    a place of beauty. It is a place that has the community very
    much interested in it, and by my sitting before you today shows
    you how far we have come in the area of civil rights, when a
    whole area is so important and so concerned about this part of
    our history that they would want the Senate of our country to
    declare it an area, through a resource study to come and look
    at it and see many of its strong assets, and you will find that
    everything that Senator Nelson has said is correct.
        So I am pleased to be here today. Virginia Key is
    beautiful, it is significant, and it is also very important to
    our area. What I like about the Department of the Interior, you
    will hopefully make a resource study, and we are very carefully
    begging you and very carefully and positively optimistic that
    you will see fit to require this study so that we can be on our
    way to having Virginia Key made a national park.
        One other caveat of what we are doing here today is that
    historically there is a paucity of civil rights areas that have
    been preserved by the National Park Service. Research shows
    that there are very few of them out of the entire park system.
    Now the park system is trying its very best to reach segments
    of our society, and they have also noted that there is not as
    much participation that they would like to have from all
    aspects of our community. Virginia Key Beach would be a very
    good reason for helping to open this up and have the resource
    study come there.
        I do hope that Senator Nelson's S. 1312 and my bill, H.R.
    1209, that you will favor this bill very, very positively,
    because you will be making an important step toward recognizing
    that this is a special place, and it does ensure that it will
    be preserved and protected for future generations, and I want
    to thank the committee.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Meek. I will place the rest of my testimony in the
    file.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Meek follows:]
          Prepared Statement of Hon. Carrie Meek, U.S. Representative
                                  From Florida
        Chairman Akaka, Ranking Member Thomas and distinguished members of
    the committee, thank you for holding this hearing on Senator Nelson's
    bill, S. 1312, which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
    conduct a special resource study of Virginia Key Beach in Miami,
    Florida, for possible inclusion in the National Park System.
        As the sponsor of the companion House bill, H.R. 2109, I am pleased
    to tell you that the House passed my bill on April 30 of this year.
        Virginia Key Beach is an historically important and environmentally
    significant place worthy of being preserved and studied for its
    inclusion in the National Park System.
        Virginia Key Beach was the only beach in Miami where African
    Americans could go to swim in the 1940s, 1950s and early 1960s. It was
    called ``Virginia Key Beach, a Dade County Park for the exclusive use
    of Negroes'' opened on August 1, 1945. Until that time, Miami's beaches
    had been reserved for whites only. In those days of segregation,
    Virginia Key Beach was the only way blacks could legally enjoy the
    ocean in Dade County.
        Dade County created the park in response to the efforts of the
    African-American Community to integrate the beaches in Miami.
        The location of this beach was less than ideal; there was no bridge
    and the only way to get there was by taking a boat from the Miami
    River.
        Despite these impediments, African Americans made Virginia Key
    Beach a thriving center for their social and cultural activities.
    Virginia Key Beach quickly became a cherished getaway, a social
    gathering place, and even a sacred site for religious services.
        The beach was the site for baptisms, courtships and honeymoons,
    organizational gatherings, visiting celebrities and family recreation.
        Even after integration granted everyone a free choice of recreation
    areas, Virginia Key Beach remained the popular preference for many in
    the African American community.
        Mr. Chairman, this legislation is near and dear to my heart because
    I used the park frequently myself and brought my children there when
    they were young. The fact that I am in Congress today shows how much
    society has changed in the intervening years.
        Virginia Key Beach is a national treasure that stands as a monument
    to America's journey toward racial equality. As a reminder of our
    national heritage, Virginia Key Beach symbolizes the struggle of
    African Americans in the 20th Century during the era of racial
    segregation in the South and at the onset of the Civil Rights Movement.
        Mr. Chairman, there are few sites in the National Park System that
    recognize the struggle for civil rights. Out of 385 units currently in
    the Park System, only 4 have been designated to commemorate the Civil
    Rights Era. We need to do more to recognize the Civil-Rights era. It is
    important to remember that segregation affected every aspect of our
    lives--even recreation.
        In addition to representing an important part of the history of
    African Americans in the Southeastern United States, Virginia Key Beach
    also is an exceptional natural resource characterized by a unique and
    sensitive natural environment.
        The beach is part of Virginia Key, a 1,000-acre barrier island.
    Although there has been some limited development, the island is non-
    residential and includes ponds and waterways, a tropical hardwood
    hammock, and a large wildlife conservation area.
        The Key is home to more than 25 species of birds during the winter,
    while its shallow waters contain extensive grass beds that support
    manatees, young sea turtles, and many juvenile fishes.
        The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, through their Shoreline Damage
    program, is currently restoring the beach and native plants on the
    island.
        Finally, let me note Virginia Key Beach's excellent location and
    its outstanding accessibility. Other national attractions in South
    Florida, such as Everglades National Park, Big Cypress and Biscayne
    National Park are extraordinary resources, but they are not readily
    accessible for individuals without personal transportation.
        Virginia Key is accessible. There is a good Miami-Dade Metro Bus
    connection that is further enhanced by a link to South Florida's Metro
    Rail.
        Mr. Chairman, Virginia Key Beach occupies a special place in the
    heart of all of us from South Florida. Its value to the nation and to
    Florida is based not just on its natural beauty, but also as a symbol
    of the ongoing struggle of African Americans for equal rights and
    social justice.
        S. 1312, and my bill, H.R. 2109 will take an important step toward
    recognizing this special place and ensuring that it will be preserved
    and protected for future generations.
        Please move this bill to the floor and pass it as soon as possible,
    so that it can go to the President's desk before this Congress
    concludes.
        Thanks again for holding this hearing.

        Senator Akaka. I understand, Senator Nelson, that Senator
    Graham has a statement for the record, and what I will do is,
    without objection, put that in the record.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Graham follows:]
        Prepared Statement of Hon. Bob Graham, U.S. Senator From Florida
        Thank you Chairman Akaka and Ranking Member Thomas for conducting
    this hearing on S. 1312. This bill, sponsored by Senator Nelson of
    Florida, would authorize a special resource study of Virginia Key Beach
    for possible inclusion in the National Park System. A House companion
    bill, H.R. 2109, sponsored by Representative Carrie Meek, has passed
    the House with amendments.
        The National Park Service preserves our nation's cultural and
    natural heritage, and Virginia Key Beach provides us with an
    opportunity to consider adding a site significant in our nation's
    heritage.
        Virginia Key Beach was opened in August 1945, by a group of African
    American men in violation of a Dade County law. Led by Judge Lawson
    Thomas, the group staged a ``wade in'' at the whites-only Haulover
    Beach. The county decided that instead of prosecuting these men for
    this act of civil disobedience, they would establish a beach on
    Virginia Key.
        Initially, the county lived up to its commitment of ``separate but
    equal facilities'' and constructed many of the same facilities that
    were available at the whites-only park including cabanas, a carousel
    and mini-train, dance platform, snack bar, and bath houses. Although
    access to the beach was available only by ferry from a dock located on
    the Miami River, Virginia Key Beach became a very popular and important
    gathering place for South Florida's African-Americans.
        The park provided a number of entertainment and recreation
    opportunities but also played a cohesive role in the entire black
    community. African-Americans from all social classes and neighborhoods
    gathered there for baptismals, church gatherings, and community
    recreation. There is even historical evidence to suggest that it was a
    gathering place for African-Americans as early as 1918. The
    documentation for nominating the site to the National Register of
    Historic Places is currently being prepared.
        In addition, Virginia Key Beach is part of a larger natural
    ecosystem that is worthy of conservation. The beach is on the 1,000
    acre barrier island of Virginia Key. The island remains largely
    undeveloped and has a number of ponds, waterways, and forested areas.
    Virginia Key's ecosystem supports sea turtles, manatees and wide range
    of migratory birds and wildlife, and a portion of Virginia Key is
    managed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission as a Critical
    Wildlife Area.
        Virginia Key Beach provides us with the unique opportunity to
    preserve a site significant in the history of segregation and the
    struggle for civil rights in our nation, within a larger natural
    ecosystem that conserves our nation's natural heritage.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman for conducting this hearing and for
    the opportunity to submit a statement for the record.

        Senator Nelson. He is chairing the Intelligence Committee
    right now. That is why he could not be here, but he does have a
    comment for the record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Akaka. I also want to say, Senator Nelson and
    Congresswoman Meek, you may be excused if you need to go.
        Senator Nelson. Thank you so much.
        Senator Akaka. I would like to call on Congressman
    Faleomavaega from Samoa for your testimony.

               STATEMENT OF HON. ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA,
                      DELEGATE FROM AMERICAN SAMOA

        Mr. Faleomavaega. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
    you and distinguished members of this subcommittee for giving
    consideration to the bill that I had sponsored, H.R. 1712,
    which authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to make
    adjustments in the boundary of the National Park of American
    Samoa, and I certainly want to extend to you, Mr. Chairman, my
    warmest aloha, and thank you for your continued support, and I
    would be remiss if I did not also express my good wishes and
    welcome and thank you to the distinguished Senator from
    Wyoming, a dear friend, former member, and colleague of the
    House of Representatives, the other body, if you will, and
    certainly my good friend Ben Campbell from Colorado.
        As you know, Mr. Chairman, years ago Tip O'Neill had a rule
    in the House. He authorized only two members to wear Indian
    ties, and that is Ben Campbell and me, and I am still wearing
    my Indian tie right now.
        But truly, Mr. Chairman, this bill is noncontroversial. It
    has bipartisan support, and personal thanks on my part to the
    gentleman from Utah, Mr. Hansen, our chairman and the Ranking
    Democratic member, Mr. Rahall from West Virginia, for their
    full support. This legislation passed the House a couple of
    weeks ago, and now it is before your consideration.
        Mr. Chairman, 4 years ago I received a request from the
    Council of Chiefs, principally of the villages of Sili and
    Olosega, on these islands of Ofu and Olosega, to include
    portions of their village lands within the National Park of
    American Samoa. The chiefs noted the important role the park
    plays in preserving the natural and cultural resources of the
    territory, and indicated that the village councils believe
    there are significant cultural resources on village lands which
    warrant consideration for addition to the park.
        The National Park Service researchers did an excellent job
    to conduct their survey, and they discovered that on top of
    this particular island of Olosega--as you see, Mr. Chairman,
    these two islands are about 60 miles away from the main
    island--there were several acres, probably over 100 acres of
    medicinal plants that were planted by Samoans, and nowhere else
    found in the Pacific region. Those medicinal plants are found
    there as part of their conservation and use for agricultural
    and certainly for medicinal purposes, and that leads me to my
    next point, Mr. Chairman.
        The National Park in American Samoa is very unique and
    important. One of the world's most renowned ethnobotanists, Dr.
    Paul Cox, who is currently the director of the National
    Tropical Botanical Garden on the Island of Kauai in the State
    of Hawaii, conducted a series of research studies of over
    several hundred of ancient Samoan medicinal plants, and one of
    these plants, a substance called protastine now has been
    discovered. It has been found that protastine may have
    beneficial properties for the treatment of HIV/AIDS.
        About 2 months ago in my district, I was privileged also to
    host one of the world's most renowned marine ocean scientists,
    Dr. Sylvia Earl, and believe it or not Dr. Earl in her
    seventies continues to explore the ocean as a scuba diver, and
    in doing so found that one of the rarest giant clams in the
    world can only be found in the Samoan Islands.
        By the way, Mr. Chairman, one of my colleagues the other
    day introduced me as the gentleman from Somalia. Respectfully,
    it is Samoa, and not Somalia.
        Mr. Chairman, I submit the park has bipartisan support both
    from my Democratic and Republican colleagues in the House and,
    I respectfully submit, your positive and hopefully favorable
    approval of this proposal, and I want to say also that I am
    very grateful that the administration has not raised any
    serious objections to the proposed park, as I am sure my good
    friend Mr. Smith will testify to that effect.
        I gave Mr. Smith the Samoan treatment. He will be very
    positive in his presentation concerning this little park. I
    have 26 Samoan NFL players right now that will be helping Mr.
    Smith to make sure that he will give full assurances that my
    little park on the little islands out there is going to have
    the approval of the Congress as well as President Bush.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Faleomavaega follows:]
        Prepared Statement of Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, Delegate From
                                 American Samoa
        Mr. Chairman: I want to thank you for holding this hearing on H.R.
    1712--a bill which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
    make minor adjustments to the boundary of the National Park of American
    Samoa. I extend to you my warmest alohas and thank you for your
    continued support.
        I also want to thank my good friend from Wyoming, Senator Craig
    Thomas, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, for his continued
    sensitivity to the needs of American Samoa. I would also like to thank
    both the Republican and Democratic House Leadership, the gentleman from
    Utah (Mr. Hansen) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall),
    our full committee leaders, and the gentleman from California (Mr.
    Radanovich) and the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs.
    Christensen), of the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation
    and Public Lands, for their support of this legislation.
        Mr. Chairman, the U.S. Territory of American Samoa is located
    approximately 2,400 miles southwest of Hawaii. The national park in
    American Samoa is located on three separate islands: Tutuila, Ofu and
    Ta'u. The islands of Ofu and Olosega, portions of which would be added
    to the park under this legislation, are small islands which lie
    adjacent to each other.
        In 1998, I received a request from the village chiefs of Sill and
    Olosega to include portions of their village lands within the National
    Park of American Samoa. The chiefs noted the important role the park
    plays in preserving the natural and cultural resources of the
    Territory, and indicated that the village councils believed there are
    significant cultural resources on village lands which warrant
    consideration for addition to the park.
        About 2 years ago, I asked the National Park Service to conduct
    studies to determine if there were resources on the island which
    warranted inclusion in the park. The Park Service completed
    reconnaissance surveys of the island of Olosega and of a portion of the
    island of Ofu, and reported on both. The Service concluded in part:

              ``The archaeological significance of [Olosega Island] cannot
            be understated. Sites on the ridgeline and terraces may offer
            an important opportunity for the study and interpretation of
            ancient Samoa. The number and density of star mounds (31), the
            great number of modified terraces (46) and home sites (14), the
            subsistence system, and the artifacts available are all
            important findings. This is particularly significant in that
            they were recorded in only 3 days of visual surveys on only a
            portion of the island.''

        The National Park Service researchers also discovered that on top
    of this particular island of Olosega were several acres of medicinal
    plants that are found nowhere else in the Samoan islands. This leads me
    to my next point, Mr. Chairman. The national park in American Samoa is
    both unique and important.
        One of the world's most renown ethnobotanists, Dr. Paul Cox, who is
    currently the director of the National Tropical Botanical Garden on the
    island of Kauai in the State of Hawaii, conducted a series of research
    and studies of several of the ancient Samoan medicinal plants. From one
    of these plants a substance called protrastin has now been discovered.
    It has been found that protrastin may have beneficial properties for
    the treatment of HIV/AIDS.
        About two months ago, my district was privileged to host one of the
    world's most renown marine ocean scientists, Dr. Sylvia Earle. Believe
    it or not, Dr. Earle continues to explore the ocean as a scuba diver,
    and in doing so, found that one of the rarest giant clams in the world
    can only be found in the Samoan islands.
        Mr. Chairman, the National Park of American Samoa continues to grow
    in importance. Established in 1988 by Public Law 100-571, the park took
    several years to become operational. Today, however, tourists are
    visiting and school teachers are using the park as an educational
    resource to help the students learn more about Samoan history and
    culture, the environment, and ecological conservation. The park is
    preserving the area within its boundaries, but as the population
    grows--there was a 22% increase from 1990 to 2000--considerable
    pressure is being placed on other undeveloped areas.
        The additions proposed by this legislation will preserve important
    sections of the remaining natural and cultural resources of the
    Territory. Again, because of the unique and historical significance of
    this park, I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 1712.

        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your interesting
    testimony. I also want to permit you to--in case you need to
    leave, you may be excused.
        Let me call on Hon. Zach Wamp, Congressman, for your
    testimony.

           STATEMENT OF HON. ZACH WAMP, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE
                             FROM TENNESSEE

        Mr. Wamp. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. These are
    tough acts to follow here. Senator Thomas and Senator Campbell,
    and a word to the other members of the subcommittee and the
    full committee of appreciation for this opportunity. I want to
    say thank you very much.
        I was going to even say hallelujah, until Senator Thomas
    reminded me in his opening statement that there is so much
    tough lifting left to do that I should hold and reserve the
    hallelujah until a later point, but I have a written statement
    and I want to submit it for the record. I am not going to read
    it, but I hope you will, and I just want to make three brief
    points today, particularly in light of the challenges we still
    face on H.R. 980.
        First of all, I am convinced, Senator Thomas, that if all
    100 Senators could do what Park Service Director Fran Minella
    had the opportunity to do last month, and that is come and
    spend a day in Chattanooga, and I know it is not possible, but
    if they could understand the 12,000 years of human history on
    the Bend and understand the ancient burials there of people
    upon people upon people, literally stacked on top of each
    other, and understand the scope, I think they would feel the
    historical burden and obligation that I now feel to do what is
    right.
        It should have been done a long time ago, before that
    hospital was built there, but it was not, but that does not
    mean it should not be done now, and that we should not work to
    try to resolve these nonconforming uses, and I thank Director
    Minella for coming and taking the time to experience the Bend
    and understand the history of the Bend, and I hope through this
    process that Senators can come to understand it as well, as
    much as possible without going there, but I honestly believe
    that if every Senator could be there and understand this and
    feel it, and also understand that in these 900 acres the
    footprints of these, quote, nonconforming uses are the
    exception and not the rule--it is a vast area mostly of
    vegetation and wildlife and not of a lot of different physical
    problems, but they are real problems that we need to work
    through, and we are willing to negotiate and willing to
    compromise, as long as we do not run over local government.
    That is the first point.
        The second point is, this is complicated, but as the study
    says, it is so nationally significant that it calls us, I
    think, to this obligation. You are going to hear Jay Mills come
    and testify later to the anthropology and the history and the,
    really, 11 important time frames in history that this Bend
    represents, and the study clearly points out there are few
    places like this in this country where you can go back to
    Paleo-Indians and the hunting of mastodon on this very track,
    all the way through the Spanish movement and the early American
    Indians, and then the civil war being fought there, and it is
    such a collage of human history, all on this 900-acre
    footprint, that it deserves standing in our history, in our
    interpretation of who we are, and where we have been.
        And then thirdly I just want to say, this is an important
    initiative for our city. We have transformed our city in the
    last 15 years. The word Renaissance does not even come close to
    discussing what has happened in Chattanooga. That word is
    overused. You have to come to see. We have reclaimed our river.
    We have reclaimed our history. There are people on the river
    all the time.
        This addition to the National Park Service is a piece of
    our future that we have built widespread consensus for, both
    newspapers, liberal, conservative, the city council, the county
    commission, the State of Tennessee, all willing contributors of
    land and resources into this proposal, widespread public
    support, citizen action groups, but this was a process of
    taking the study, building consensus, coming up with a
    compromise plan that does phase certain things out over time,
    with a goal of trying to restore the Bend over time, without
    violating some of local government's needs, like an immediate
    closure of the hospital, which would potentially disrupt the
    services for the mental health community there, or law
    enforcement, where a lot of people who are incarcerated are
    sent there, and so, until there is another facility built in
    our county, we should not force those closures.
        So I would just appeal to the Senate to say, we got through
    the House, working through these problems and finding a way to
    make some changes which were made. The House bill was amended
    on several fronts. We would ask you to please consider
    amendments, consider reasonable compromises so that we can keep
    local government with us through this process, but also not
    miss this historic opportunity that we have worked so hard for
    over a number of years.
        Because time is of the essence, obviously, we really
    appreciate the Senate taking this bill under consideration here
    today, and I would just say in closing that where there is a
    will there is a way, and I just ask today, please, for your
    willingness to work with us to see this bill through the
    process to the Senate floor at some point this year.
        I have spoken with the administration, I have spoken with
    the President himself about this piece of legislation. I
    understand there is a moratorium, but I also understand that
    there are exceptions that might be made, including on this bill
    if we can reach a compromise in the Senate, and I am sure that
    the House will take the Senate amendments and the Senate
    compromises quickly back through the House.
        Thank you very much for the courtesy of this day, and
    Senator Thomas, I promise you we will bend over backwards to
    try to meet the concerns you have raised and that you will
    continue to have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Wamp follows:]
           Prepared Statement of Hon. Zach Wamp, U.S. Representative
                                 From Tennessee
        Chairman Akaka, Ranking Member Thomas and members of the
    Subcommittee:
        I want to thank you for this much appreciated opportunity to
    testify before you today on H.R. 980, a bill to establish the Moccasin
    Bend National Historic Site in the State of Tennessee as a unit of the
    National Park System. This bill is bipartisan and includes the nine
    House members from the State of Tennessee and Congressman Nathan Deal
    of north Georgia as original cosponsors. On October 23 of last year,
    the House unanimously passed H.R. 980 with amendments.
        The process to develop H.R. 980 has been one of consensus building
    and compromise and I expect that throughout this process it will
    continue to be. However, there has never been a point since I have been
    involved in preserving Moccasin Bend that we have had this much support
    for adding Moccasin Bend into the National Park system. I believe we
    have a good compromise that has taken all views into account throughout
    this process. This wide range of support for passage of H.R. 980
    includes the City of Chattanooga, Hamilton County, the State of
    Tennessee, the Inter-Tribal Council of the Five Civilized Tribes
    Cultural Preservation Committee, the Friends of Moccasin Bend, the
    Cherokee Nation, and both editorial boards of the Chattanooga Times
    Free Press; who seldom agree on anything.
        You may be interested to know that one year ago today, the House
    Subcommittee on Parks held the first hearing in decades on the idea of
    adding Moccasin Bend to the National Park system. This was a monumental
    move for those that have worked so diligently to see Moccasin Bend
    preserved. This is the first time in decades that a Committee has
    revisited the merits of adding Moccasin Bend into the National Park
    System. I will defer to Jay Mills, the vice-president of the Friends of
    Moccasin Bend, to explain in detail through his testimony the history
    and importance of adding this into the National Park system. However, I
    would like to point out that in 1950, Congress enacted legislation that
    authorized the Secretary of the Interior to accept a donation of no
    more than 1,400 acres of Moccasin Bend to Chickamauga and Chattanooga
    National Military Park. Then Governor Frank Clement, however, vetoed
    the $100,000 appropriation to move the proposal forward and
    unfortunately today we live with the several ``nonconforming'' uses
    that need to be transitioned over in their original condition. The site
    was also listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1984 and
    in 1986, a 956-acre area was designated as the Moccasin Bend
    Archeological District National Historic Landmark.
        In 1998, Congress appropriated funds, and the National Park Service
    conducted a feasibility study that determined that Moccasin Bend holds
    nationally significant archeological and historical resources. This
    study discussed many alternatives but only had two viable
    alternatives--leave the Bend as is or include it as a separate unit of
    the National Park System. The NPS study describes many of the ``Threats
    to the Resources'' that are included in the Bend. The two most
    controversial areas on the Bend have been the Moccasin Bend Mental
    Health Institute and the Moccasin Bend Golf Course. During ongoing
    discussions with all parties involved, I think we have brokered two
    very well thought out compromises that now receive broad support across
    the State and nation.
        Also, in H.R. 980 there are two privately owned parcels of land.
    Both the Rock-Tenn parcel and the Serodino and Klimsch property are
    owned by willing sellers that would like their property to be part of
    the park. I have and will continue to work in my capacity as a member
    of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee to include the necessary
    funding in the National Park Services Land and Water Conservation Fund
    to purchase these two properties, subject to the enactment of H.R. 980.
        I know that this Subcommittee and the National Park Service have
    some concerns about H.R. 980 since the bill doesn't include all of the
    Park Service's recommendations and that there are some other uses on
    the Bend that must also be addressed. However, I believe that as this
    bill moves through the legislative process that we can address these
    concerns adequately, to this Subcommittee and the Park Service without
    losing the local grassroots support for adding Moccasin Bend to the
    park system.
        President Bush's initiative to eliminate the deferred maintenance
    backlog should be commended. I look forward to working with this
    Administration on this initiative throughout the appropriations
    process. For the last five years on the Interior subcommittee, I have
    also worked to reduce the backlog and to find creative ways like the
    ``Fee Demonstration'' program to fund needed improvements. But the time
    to add Moccasin Bend to the park system is now. From the early native
    Americans to Hernando de Soto on his way to the Mississippi; from the
    Cherokees beginning the Trail of Tears to the brave soldiers of the
    Civil War--the history of ``The Bend'' calls us to action now. We must
    do both--preserve nationally significant places like Moccasin Bend and
    responsibly deal with the backlog of maintenance needs at our national
    treasures.
        In closing, I would urge the Subcommittee to move forward on H.R.
    980. I stand ready to work with you, Chairman Akaka and Senator Thomas,
    and the other members of the subcommittee to make sure that we perfect
    this bill as it moves through the legislative process.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look forward
    to any questions you may have.

        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Congressman Wamp, for
    your testimony.
        I was just going to ask if the other members had any
    questions.
        Senator Campbell. Mr. Chairman, I had one, maybe a couple.
    I might tell you every NFL team benefits from Samoa, not just
    the ones you mentioned, but I did hear you say the chiefs of
    two villages wanted to have their communities within the
    boundaries of this area, is that right? What if there is any
    liability problem, or access problem, or right-of-way problems
    or anything else?
        Mr. Faleomavaega. Senator Campbell, the National Park of
    American Samoa is probably the most unique park ever devised in
    the hands of the Congress. The lands in American Samoa are
    basically what are known as communal lands. There is no fee
    simple status as far as western legal standards are concerned,
    so what we have arranged when we passed this legislation in
    1988 was to allow the villages of these communal lands to be
    leased on a 55-year basis, subject to renewal by the Federal
    Government, and this is the basis of how we establish this land
    relationship between the village councils and the Federal
    Government.
        In other words, the additional acres in this land is on a
    lease basis, and that for the purpose of protection the
    villages are allowed to do farming, to do as if in the most
    traditional way, so that at the same time there is conservation
    of the makeup, and by the way, it is one of the few acres of
    the United States where the rain forest is also established in
    this area, so it is for preservation as well as for
    enhancement, and what we are hoping to see is the value of
    medicinal plants that my forefathers had used, that there could
    be some major breakthroughs where they could do agricultural
    planting of these medicinal plants that may be of value to our
    country as far as health concerns.
        Senator Campbell. I am supportive of the legislation, Mr.
    Chairman, but while I was listening to Eni speak I was reminded
    just myself that the Mesa Verde National Park, which is a big
    one in our State, there is a road that goes in the park, and
    then it loops out just for a few feet and goes through the Ute
    Indian Reservation and back into the park.
        About 8 or 9 years ago some of the tribal members decided
    that they should charge a toll, and they went out and closed
    the darned road, and boy, did that create a big headache for me
    when the phone calls started coming in that some of my brothers
    were out there with a barricade preventing people from getting
    to the national park, and so I question if there is any
    problems down the road somewhere.
        Mr. Faleomavaega. I can assure the good Senator that will
    not happen in Samoa.
        Senator Campbell. You can get some of your relatives who
    might be linemen out there to straighten it out.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you. Any questions?
        Senator Thomas. I think not. I would just say, I hope you
    enjoyed your trip to Wyoming sometime back.
        Mr. Faleomavaega. I look forward to going to Wyoming again,
    Senator Thomas.
        Senator Thomas. Wear your cowboy boots when you come.
        Mr. Faleomavaega. And I do hope to wear cowboy boots one of
    these days. As you know, Senator, I am still wearing sandals. I
    am still learning how to use suits and ties and pants and all
    of that stuff.
        Mr. Chairman, I submitted for your consideration the
    national park calendar for the members to look at the photo--
    the center photo happens to be our national park--for my
    distinguished friends to see, and Mr. Chairman, this is the
    appearance of the map where the national park boundaries are
    and what we are hoping to achieve in this legislation, and Mr.
    Chairman, if my chart and that calendar is returned, that means
    favorable consideration. If I do not get it back, that means
    you trashed it, and I will be very sad if this bill does not
    pass the Senate, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Akaka. So you want it back?
        Mr. Faleomavaega. Absolutely, but thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much. I just want to ask you,
    if I remember correctly between Ofu and Olosega there is a
    bridge that connects the two islands, is that correct?
        Mr. Faleomavaega. Yes. That very tip there is about 100
    yards, and there is a bridge that connects, and I usually go
    fishing in that area, and I invite the good Senators to join
    me. It is excellent fishing. Underground, above-ground,
    anywhere you want, you will get the fish. But that is the
    bridge that puts the two islands together.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you.
        Mr. Wamp. Mr. Chairman, let me just add, the staff has
    provided for you a picture with some of the historical
    characteristics of the Bend here which are really unique, and I
    just want to make sure you each have that. Thank you very much.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you. That is very informative.
        Senator Campbell. Zach, whose responsibility is it to
    relocate these things like the golf course and the hospital if
    all that stuff has to be moved? Does the State do that, or is
    that going to be something the Federal Government will be asked
    to do?
        Mr. Wamp. The legislation would call for the State and the
    local government that would be conveying the land free to
    actually turn it over in a clean condition, and certainly the
    State, while our State has budget problems right now and really
    does not want to address any future obligations at this moment,
    they recognize that whenever the mental hospital, for instance,
    is closed, that it would be taken down and returned to its
    original condition at the expense of the State, and that the
    local government would have a number of years to take the
    firing range and the nonconforming uses and clean them up as
    well and turn them over to the Federal Government, and it is a
    shared responsibility.
        The Federal Government would, as Senator Thomas points out,
    riprap the bank because we are losing the burial grounds to
    erosion on the Tennessee River, and make significant expenses,
    but the local government would also be making significant
    expenses, and at this point there is an indefinite agreement, I
    think the park will testify, on the golf course, that it would
    remain as a public golf course until the city no longer uses it
    as a municipal golf course, and then it can be taken by the
    Secretary of the Interior.
        That was a compromise that we struck on the House side
    through the process, where the committee made that
    recommendation and we said that is agreeable, that whatever
    time it is no longer a municipal golf course run by the city
    and the county, it can be taken by the Secretary of the
    Interior without further legislation, so there is an agreement
    or a compromise really that has been reached on all of these
    fronts, but we are willing to negotiate further on any
    reasonable recommendations that the Senate may have, and thank
    you, Senator.
        Senator Campbell. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you. If there are no further
    questions, thank you very much. You are excused. Thank you for
    your testimony.
        I would like to have Mr. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to
    the Director of the National Park Service, to come to the
    table. Mr. Smith, welcome to the subcommittee. We will include
    your written statement in the record in its entirety, so please
    feel free to summarize your remarks, and when you are ready,
    please proceed with your testimony on all of the bills and then
    we will return to you for questions.

        STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
                    DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

        Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, thank you. It is a pleasure to
    appear before your committee today on these bills, and I will
    summarize for the record, and obviously submit them in full.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of the Interior's views on S. 1257 and H.R. 107. The
    Department supports this legislation if amended in accordance
    with this testimony, as we believe that it is wholly
    appropriate for the National Park Service to undertake a study
    that will help ensure that the history of the Cold War era is
    preserved for future generations of Americans.
        However, the administration did not request funding for
    this study, or any other national historic landmark theme
    study, for the fiscal year 2003. These studies may identify
    sites that may be appropriate candidates for special resource
    studies, but the studies themselves do not evaluate sites for
    possible addition to the National Park System. Therefore, theme
    studies do not have the potential to lead directly to new
    operation, maintenance, and other costs for the National Park
    Service.
        Although S. 1257 and H.R. 107 as passed by the House are
    very similar, there are some important differences between the
    two. As introduced, both H.R. 107 and S. 1257 included a
    provision requiring the Secretary to establish a Cold War
    Advisory Committee to assist with the study. At our request,
    the House deleted this provision from H.R. 107. Whether this
    committee acts on H.R. 107 or S. 1257, we strongly recommend
    that the advisory commission be omitted. In our view, such a
    committee is unnecessary and would add greatly to the cost of a
    study and time required to complete it due to the legal
    requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
        Another difference between S. 1257 and H.R. 107 is a
    provision requiring the inclusion in the study of
    recommendations on the suitability and feasibility of
    establishing a central repository for Cold War artifacts and
    information. This provision is found in H.R. 107, but not in S.
    1157. We urge that this provision, which is section 1,
    subsection (b)(1)(C) of H.R. 107, be omitted from the
    legislation reported by this committee.
        Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement on S. 1257 and
    H.R. 107.
        On S. 1312 and H.R. 2109. These bills would authorize the
    Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study
    of Virginia Key Beach in Biscayne Bay, Florida, where a
    recreational community for African Americans flourished at a
    time when nonwhites were prohibited from using other beaches in
    the Miami area.
        The Department supports both bills, but we prefer H.R. 2109
    as passed by the House on April 30, for reasons explained later
    in this testimony. However, we did not request additional
    funding for this study in fiscal year 2003. We recommend that
    the committee approve the language used in H.R. 2109 as passed
    by the House, rather than that used in S. 1312. H.R. 2109 was
    amended by the House to change the name of the area to be
    studied from ``Virginia Key Beach,'' to ``Virginia Key Beach
    Park.''
        Although the names have been used interchangeably, using
    the term ``Virginia Key Beach Park,'' helps clarify that the
    study is focused on the 77 acre recreation site and does not
    include the entire beach of Virginia Key. It is also consistent
    with the name that is being used for the site in the nomination
    for the National Register of Historic Places.
        Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement on H.R. 2109 and
    S. 1312.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of Interior's views on S. 1944, a bill to revise the
    boundary of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park and
    Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area in the State of
    Colorado and for other purposes.
        The Department of the Interior supports S. 1944. The bill
    authorizes additions to both Black Canyon of the Gunnison
    National Park through three separate easement or exchange
    transactions, and Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area.
        The revision of the national park boundary would not
    contribute to the National Park Service maintenance backlog
    because the maintenance--excuse me, Mr. Chairman, because the
    management and operation of the land added to the boundary
    would not result in any additional facilities, increased
    operating cost, or additional staffing. One parcel would be an
    equal value exchange, another would involve the purchase of the
    conservation easement on 240 acres, and a third involves the
    transfer of 480 acres of isolated Bureau of Land Management
    land to the National Park Service, and then the exchange of
    this parcel for a conservation easement on approximately 2,000
    acres. The private landowner is expected to donate the
    difference in value as a result of this last exchange.
        S. 1944 also amends Public Law 106-76 to clarify grazing
    privileges within the park. If land authorized for grazing
    within the park is exchanged for private land, then any grazing
    privileges would transfer to the private land that is acquired.
    Also, the bill clarifies the length of time that grazing may be
    conducted on parklands by partnerships.
        S. 1944 would amend Public Law 106-76 to treat partnerships
    similarly to individual permit-holders, allowing permits to be
    renewed through the lifetime of the partners as of October 21,
    1999.
        S. 1944 also provides for the expansion of the Gunnison
    Gorge NCA, managed by the BLM. A 5,759-acre parcel of land on
    the north side of the existing NCA has been acquired from a
    willing seller through a land exchange. The legislation also
    makes some minor boundary adjustments to the NCA. In order to
    resolve these issues with the local landowners in a fair and
    equitable manner, slight boundary modifications need to be made
    so that the exchanges can be effected.
        Since S. 1944 was introduced, the BLM has discovered an
    additional trespass, and we would like the opportunity to work
    with Senator Campbell and the subcommittee to modify the map
    before markup.
        This concludes my testimony on this bill.
        On H.R. 38. This bill provides for additional lands to be
    included within the boundaries of Homestead National Monument
    of America in the State of Nebraska. The Department supports
    the enactment of H.R. 38 as passed by the House. Funding to
    acquire the privately owned properties was included in the
    fiscal year 2001 Interior Appropriations Act, and we anticipate
    that management of the acquired lands can be accomplished with
    existing park resources.
        The total amount of land to be added is approximately 33
    acres. The private landowners affected have agreed in principle
    to this proposed legislation, and the State of Nebraska has
    agreed as well to donate its lands as provided in the bill.
        Mr. Chairman, the Department supports enactment of H.R. 38,
    as passed by the House, and we thank you for the opportunity to
    testify on the bill today.
        That concludes my statement on H.R. 38.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of Interior's views on H.R. 980, which would
    establish the Moccasin Bend National Historic Site in
    Chattanooga, Tennessee as a unit of the National Park Service.
        The Department recommends that the committee defer action
    on this legislation during the remainder of the 107th Congress.
    The Department has reviewed our progress on the President's
    initiative to eliminate the deferred maintenance backlog, and
    it is clear that we need to focus our resources on caring for
    existing units of the National Park System. For this reason,
    the Department will only support new designations that involve
    no new cost or minimal cost to the Federal Government for land
    acquisition, operation, and maintenance.
        In addition, with respect to this particular proposal, the
    Department has concerns with some of the provisions of H.R. 980
    and has some recommendations for amendments to address the
    National Park Service's ability to ensure the long-term
    protection of the resources and to accommodate public use at
    Moccasin Bend. H.R. 980, as passed by the House, would
    authorize the land within the boundary of the National Historic
    Site to be acquired by donation, exchange, or purchase from
    willing sellers.
        It provides that the Secretary of the Interior may accept a
    donation of the Moccasin Bend Mental Health Institute, one of
    the two major incompatible uses at Moccasin Bend, only after
    the facility is no longer used to provide health care services,
    except for any land the State determines is excess to the needs
    of the facility.
        The legislation excludes from the boundary of the National
    Historic Site the part of the archaeological district that is
    currently leased for a golf course, the other major
    incompatible use, but it does allow the Secretary to acquire
    the golf course if it ceases to be used for that purpose.
        The study also found that the Moccasin Bend Archaeological
    District met the test of suitability for a unit of the National
    Park Service in that it represented a theme or resource that is
    not already adequately represented in the National Park System,
    nor is comparably represented and protected for public
    enjoyment by another land management entity. With respect to
    the test for feasibility, however, the study found that certain
    conditions needed to be met for the area to be considered
    feasible as a new unit of the National Park System. The
    facilities within the archaeological district that are
    incompatible with the park include the Moccasin Bend Mental
    Health Institute, a public golf course, radio towers, a law
    enforcement firearms training range, and a model airplane
    facility.
        Since H.R. 980 was first introduced, the National Park
    Service has been engaged in discussions with the legislation
    sponsor, Representative Zach Wamp, and with Senators Fred
    Thompson and Bill Frist, to address these incompatible uses in
    a way that avoids a sudden disruption in existing activities,
    yet assures that in time there would be a viable unit of the
    National Park Service at Moccasin Bend.
        Our support for H.R. 980 is contingent upon amending it to
    provide that the establishment of the site would occur only
    after certain requirements related to land transfers and
    operational issues are met. Briefly, these would include:
        One, receiving from the State the land it owns within the
    archaeological district, except that needed to operate the
    Moccasin Bend Mental Health Institute;
        Two, receiving from the State the donation in escrow of the
    remainder of the land it owns in the archaeological district
    containing the Moccasin Bend Mental Health Institute;
        Three, receiving from Hamilton County and the city of
    Chattanooga the donation of the land they own within the
    archaeological district, except for land used for the golf
    course, the law enforcement firearms training range, and the
    model airplane facility;
        Four, receiving from Hamilton County and the city of
    Chattanooga a written commitment to transfer to the United
    States the land used for the law enforcement firearms training
    range and the model airplane facility within 5 years of
    enactment of the legislation, and to transfer the golf course
    to the United States if that is no longer used for that
    purpose; and
        Five, the signing of a memorandum of agreement by the
    State, the county, the city, and the Secretary of the Interior
    that addresses issues of mutual concern operating a national
    historic site at Moccasin Bend.
        In addition, the administration has concerns about the cost
    of removal of hazardous waste and the restoration of the
    transferred land to resemble the area's 1950 appearance. We
    would like to work with the State, the county, the city, and
    this committee to address those concerns. We believe that the
    legislation should list the three primary themes that would be
    interpreted at this site, American Indian settlement, the Civil
    War Siege of Chattanooga, and the Trail of Tears.
        One option that has been raised as an alternative to
    amending the legislation as described above would be to obtain
    written commitments from the State, the county, and the city
    for these actions. The committee may want to consider that
    option and, if such commitments could be secured prior to
    reporting the legislation, the Department of the Interior would
    work with these entities to achieve that purpose.
        Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement on H.R. 980.
        Senator Akaka. Mr. Smith, if you can summarize H.R. 1712,
    we would appreciate that.
        Mr. Smith. Yes sir. H.R. 1712 will provide authority for
    the Secretary of the Interior to adjust the boundary of the
    National Park of American Samoa to include up to approximately
    1,000 acres of land on the Island of Olosega and approximately
    450 acres on the Island of Ofu, and approximately 1,500 acres
    of ocean waters off-shore of Olosega and Ofu.
        Proposed additions on Ofu contain excellent wildlife and
    coral reef habitats. The law that established the National Park
    of American Samoa does not provide the authority for the
    National Park Service to acquire parklands, but instead
    requires these lands must be leased from the Governor of Samoa.
    The park's enabling legislation places the responsibility for
    determining the rental value of lands to be leased for this and
    then with the High Court of American Samoa administering those
    fair market appraisals.
        As a reference point, the park currently leases 8,000 acres
    for $419,000 annually. The off-shore waters would be leased
    from the Government of American Samoa at no cost. No
    development is contemplated within the boundary adjustment
    area, so no construction nor significant development costs are
    anticipated in connection with H.R. 1712.
        At the House hearing on February 14, 2002, we recommended
    two technical amendments which the House included in the bill
    that passed on March 19, 2002.
        Mr. Chairman, that concludes all my testimony today. I look
    forward to trying to answer your questions.
        [The prepared statements of Mr. Smith on S. 1257, H.R. 107,
    S. 1312, H.R. 2109, S. 1944, H.R. 38, H.R. 980 and H.R. 1712
    follow:]
       Prepared Statements of P. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the
                        Director, National Park Service
                              s. 1257 and h.r. 107
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of the Interior's views on S. 1257 and H.R. 107. These bills
    would require that the Secretary of the Interior conduct a theme study
    to identify sites and resources associated with the Cold War and to
    recommend ways to commemorate and interpret that period of our nation's
    history.
        The Department supports this legislation, if amended in accordance
    with this testimony, as we believe that is wholly appropriate for the
    National Park Service to undertake a study that will help ensure that
    the history of the Cold War era is preserved for future generations of
    Americans. However, the Administration did not request funding for this
    study or any other National Historic Landmark theme study in Fiscal
    Year 2003. Theme studies are not the same as special resource studies,
    which assess the suitability and feasibility of adding a site to the
    National Park System. Theme studies may identify sites that may be
    appropriate candidates for special resource studies, but these studies
    themselves do not evaluate sites for possible addition to the National
    Park System. Therefore, theme studies do not have the potential to lead
    directly to new operation, maintenance or other costs for the National
    Park Service.
        S. 1257 and H.R. 107 would require the Secretary of the Interior to
    conduct a National Historic Landmark theme study to identify sites and
    resources in the United States that are significant to the Cold War.
    The bills specifically provide that the study consider the inventory of
    Cold War resources that has been compiled by the Department of Defense
    and other historical studies and research on various types of military
    resources. They also require the study to include recommendations for
    commemorating these resources and for establishing cooperative
    arrangements with other entities.
        In addition to authorizing the theme study, S. 1257 and H.R. 107
    would require the Secretary to prepare and publish an interpretive
    handbook on the Cold War and to disseminate information gathered
    through the study in other ways. S. 1257, but not H.R. 107 as amended,
    would also require the Secretary to establish a Cold War Advisory
    Committee to consult on the study. S. 1257 and H.R. 107 both authorize
    appropriations of $300,000 to carry out the legislation.
        The National Historic Landmarks program was established by the Act
    of August 21, 1935, commonly known as the Historic Sites Act (16 U.S.C.
    461 et. seq.) and is implemented according to 36 CFR Part 65. The
    program's mission is to identify those places that best illustrate the
    themes, events, or persons that are nationally significant to the
    history of the United States and that retain a high degree of
    integrity. Potential national historic landmarks are often identified
    through theme studies such as the one that would be authorized by this
    legislation.
        For example, in 2000, the National Park Service completed and
    transmitted to Congress a National Historic Landmark theme study on the
    history of racial desegregation of public schools, which was authorized
    by Public Law 105-356, the Act that established the Little Rock Central
    High School National Historic Site. Federal, state, and local officials
    across the country are now using this study to identify and evaluate
    the significance of numerous properties. So far, properties in nine
    states and the District of Columbia have been recommended for
    consideration as national historic landmarks. Currently the National
    Park Service is conducting several other theme studies, including one
    related to the history of the labor movement, another on the earliest
    inhabitants of Eastern North America, and another on sites associated
    with Japanese Americans during World War II.
        At the moment, the history of the Cold War has some presence in the
    National Park System and on the two lists of historic sites maintained
    by the National Park Service. The National Park System includes one
    unit related to the Cold War, the Minuteman Missile National Historic
    Site in South Dakota, which Congress established in 1999 to preserve
    and interpret the role of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles in our
    nation's defense system.
        Out of 2,341 designated national historic landmarks, five recognize
    civilian or military aspects of Cold War history, and out of nearly
    75,000 listings on the National Register of Historic Places, 17
    (including the five landmarks) are related to the Cold War. The
    relatively small number of recognized sites is due in large part to the
    fact that the Cold War has only recently been viewed as historically
    important. With or without a theme study, these numbers would likely
    increase over time, and the Department of Defense could take steps on
    its own to identify these sites under their jurisdiction.
        Although S. 1257 and H.R. 107 as passed by the House are very
    similar, there are some important differences between the two. As
    introduced, both H.R. 107 and S. 1257 included a provision requiring
    the Secretary to establish a Cold War Advisory Committee to assist with
    the study [Section 3 of S. 1257]. At our request, the House deleted
    this provision from H.R. 107. Whether this committee acts on H.R. 107
    or S. 1257, we strongly recommend that the advisory commission be
    omitted. In our view, such a committee is unnecessary and would add
    greatly to the cost of a study and time required to complete it due to
    the legal requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C.
    App.).
        National Historic Landmark program regulations already require
    consultation with Federal, state, and local governments; national and
    statewide associations; and a variety of other interested parties.
    Through partnering with a national historical organization, using a
    peer-review process, and consulting with appropriate subject experts as
    well as the general public, the National Park Service would ensure that
    the broadest historical perspectives are represented in any study it
    undertakes.
        Another difference between S. 1257 and H.R. 107 is a provision
    requiring the inclusion in the study of recommendations on the
    suitability and feasibility of establishing a central repository for
    Cold War artifacts and information. This provision is found in H.R.
    107, but not in S. 1257. Studying and developing recommendations of
    that nature would be an undertaking that is well beyond the scope of a
    theme study, and that also could consume a large portion of the
    $300,000 authorized for the legislation. We urge that this provision
    [Section 1(b)(1)(C) of H.R. 107] be omitted from the legislation
    reported by this committee.
        In addition, we have been informed by the Department of Justice
    that the provisions of the bill that would require the Secretary of the
    Interior to make recommendations to Congress concerning federal
    protection for Cold War sites appear to violate the Recommendations
    Clause of the Constitution, which reserves to the President the power
    to decide whether it is necessary or expedient for the Executive Branch
    to make legislative policy recommendations to the Congress. The
    Administration would be pleased to provide language to remedy the
    bill's constitutional defects.
                             s. 1312 and h.r. 2109
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of the Interior's views on S. 1312 and H.R. 2109. These
    bills would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a
    special resource study of Virginia Key Beach in Biscayne Bay, Florida,
    where a recreational community for African Americans flourished at a
    time when non-whites were prohibited from using other beaches in the
    Miami area.
        The Department supports both bills, but we prefer H.R. 2109 as
    passed by the House on April 30 for reasons explained later in this
    testimony. However, we did not request additional funding for this
    study in Fiscal Year 2003. Altogether, there are 37 studies pending, of
    which we hope to transmit at least 7 to Congress by the end of 2002. We
    have concerns about adding new funding requirements for new park units,
    national trails, wild and scenic rivers or heritage areas at the same
    time that we are trying to eliminate the deferred maintenance backlog.
    The Department will identify in each study all of the acquisition, one-
    time, and operational costs of the proposed site. At this time the
    costs are unknown.
        S. 1312 and H.R. 2109 authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
    conduct a special resource study of Virginia Key Beach Park in Biscayne
    Bay, Florida. The study would evaluate the site's national significance
    and the suitability and feasibility of designating it as a unit of the
    National Park System. The bill calls for the study to be completed
    under the guidelines in Section 8 of P.L. 91-383, the National Park
    Service General Authorities Act of 1970, as amended, which contains the
    criteria for studying areas for potential inclusion in the National
    Park System. The guidelines specify that studies consider other
    alternatives for protection of the subject area besides direct
    management by the National Park Service.
        Virginia Key Beach Park is a 77-acre site on the southeastern side
    of Virginia Key, an island of approximately 1,000 acres located two
    miles east of downtown Miami, Florida and about one mile southwest of
    the southern tip of Miami Beach. Although there has been some limited
    development, the island is non-residential and includes ponds and
    waterways, a tropical hardwood hammock, and a large wildlife
    conservation area.
        In the summer of 1945, at the ``whites-only'' Baker's Haulover
    Beach in north Dade County, a group of black men led by Judge Lawson E.
    Thomas staged a protest of the segregation laws that prohibited black
    persons from using the public beaches of Miami and Dade County. In
    response to the protest, county officials created a public beach for
    the black community on Virginia Key, which opened on August 1, 1945.
        The beach at Virginia Key had been used by African Americans for at
    least the two previous decades. During World War II, the Navy used
    Virginia Key Beach for training African American servicemen who were
    not permitted to train in the waters along the ``whites-only'' beaches.
    It was not until 1945, however, that the county began building
    recreational facilities there and making the beach more accessible by
    providing ferry boat service until the completion of the Rickenbacker
    Causeway in 1949 allowed access by automobile.
        Virginia Key Beach Park had bathhouses, picnic pavilions, a
    concession stand, and a carousel and other amenities. The beach
    remained segregated through the 1950's, until civil rights laws opened
    all the public beaches in the area. Still, through the next two
    decades, Virginia Key Beach remained a popular destination for many in
    the black community. In 1982, the area was transferred from the county
    to the City of Miami with the stipulation that the area be kept open
    and maintained as a public park and recreation area. However, the city
    closed Virginia Key Beach Park shortly after the transfer, citing the
    high cost of maintenance and operations. After nearly 20 years of non-
    use, the bathhouse, concessions building and other facilities have
    fallen into disrepair.
        At the present time, efforts are underway locally to promote
    recognition and restoration of Virginia Key Beach Park. In 1999, the
    City of Miami appointed the Virginia Key Park Civil Rights Task Force
    to study and make recommendations for the site, one of which was to
    establish a more permanent entity to carry on the work of the task
    force. The Virginia Key Beach Park Trust was established in January,
    2001, to implement the task force's recommendations. A nomination for
    the National Register of Historic Places is currently being prepared
    for the site. A special resource study conducted by the National Park
    Service would draw from the information compiled through these efforts
    and facilitate decisions about appropriate means to recognize and
    protect this site.
        We recommend that the committee approve the language used in H.R.
    2109 as passed by the House rather than that used in S. 1312. H.R. 2109
    was amended by the House to change the name of the area to be studied
    from ``Virginia Key Beach'' to ``Virginia Key Beach Park.'' Although
    the names have been used interchangeably, using the term ``Virginia Key
    Beach Park'' helps clarify that the study is focused on the 77-acre
    recreation site and does not include the entire beach of Virginia Key.
    It is also consistent with the name that is being used for the site in
    the nomination for the National Register of Historic Places.
                                    s. 1944
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of the Interior's views on S. 1944, a bill to revise the
    boundary of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park and Gunnison
    Gorge National Conservation Area in the State of Colorado, and for
    other purposes.
        The Department of the Interior supports S. 1944. The bill
    authorizes additions to both Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park
    (``Park''), through three separate easement or exchange transactions,
    and Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area (``NCA''). The revision
    of the national park boundary would not contribute to the National Park
    Service (``NPS'') maintenance backlog because the management and
    operation of the land added to the boundary would not result in any
    additional facilities, increased operating costs, or additional
    staffing. Costs involved with the land transactions are expected to be
    minimal. One parcel would be an equal value exchange, another would
    involve the purchase of a conservation easement on 240 acres, estimated
    to cost approximately $500,000 (although the park currently has
    approximately $300,000 in a land acquisition account that could be used
    for this transaction), and the third involves the transfer of 480 acres
    of isolated Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land to the NPS and then
    the exchange of this parcel for a conservation easement on
    approximately 2,000 acres. The private landowner is expected to donate
    the difference in value as a result of this last exchange.
        S. 1944 amends the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park and
    Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-
    76). The boundary of the park would be revised to include the addition
    of not more than 2,725 acres and the National Conservation Area (NCA)
    would also be revised. These additions are indicated on a new map,
    which supplements the boundary map referenced in P.L. 106-76.
        The bill authorizes the transfer of 480 acres of BLM land to the
    jurisdiction of NPS. The Secretary is authorized to acquire lands or
    interests in lands in accordance with P.L. 106-76 (by donation,
    transfer, purchase with donated or appropriated funds, or exchange) and
    lands cannot be acquired without the consent of the owner.
        S. 1944 also amends P.L. 106-76 to clarify grazing privileges
    within the park. If land authorized for grazing within the park is
    exchanged for private land, then any grazing privileges would transfer
    to the private land that is acquired. Also, the bill clarifies the
    length of time that grazing may be conducted on park lands by
    partnerships.
    Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park
        The boundary of the park would be expanded in three transactions.
    The first, locally referred to as Sanburg II, is located just south of
    Red Rock Canyon, one of the most scenic hiking opportunities into the
    Black Canyon of the Gunnison. The landowner agrees with the NPS that
    maintaining the rural character adjacent to the Red Rock Canyon
    trailhead is an important part of the wilderness experience and he
    would be willing to sell the NPS a conservation easement on 240-acres
    in order to maintain the rural character of the land, and to prevent
    future subdivision. The Conservation Fund, a nationally recognized land
    trust, is assisting with this effort.
        The second, the Bramlett exchange, would authorize the exchange of
    a 200-acre parcel of the Bramlett Ranch located on Grizzly Ridge, which
    overlooks the North Rim Road and North and South Rim overlooks.
    Although the landowner has proposed building cabins on the ridge top,
    he is willing to exchange this 200-acre parcel for land of equal value
    within the park and adjacent to his ranch headquarters. The equal value
    exchange would give the landowner land with easier access, and would
    add the ridgeline parcel to the park, thus protecting the natural
    landscape in that portion of the park.
        The third boundary adjustment, the Allison exchange, is located
    along the East Portal Road, on the park's south rim. The landowner
    would exchange a combination of fee simple ownership and a conservation
    easement on up to 2,000 acres in return for fee simple ownership of up
    to 480 acres of the BLM parcel that would be transferred to NPS. The
    landowner has indicated that he would protect this parcel with a
    conservation easement should he acquire it. He has also indicated that
    he would donate any value above and beyond the value represented in the
    exchange.
        The Department believes these acquisitions are important for
    several reasons. Combined with the land authorized by P.L. 106-76, the
    present and future land requirements for the park would be met. The
    present landowners are all willing sellers and in addition to them,
    this effort enjoys the support of the Montrose County Commissioners,
    the Montrose Chamber of Commerce, and local and national land trusts
    involved in the project.
        S. 1944 would also amend P.L. 106-76 regarding grazing within the
    park. P.L. 106-76 allowed for the continuation of grazing on lands
    transferred to the NPS. Permits held by individuals can be renewed
    through the lifetime of the individual permittees. However, P.L. 106-76
    requires that partnerships and corporations be treated alike regarding
    the termination of grazing permits. Partnerships and corporations now
    lose their permits upon the termination of the last remaining
    individual permit.
        S. 1944 would amend P.L. 106-76 to treat partnerships similarly to
    individual permit holders, allowing permits to be renewed through the
    lifetime of the partners as of October 21, 1999. Since the two
    partnerships affected are essentially family run ranching operations,
    the Department feels that they should be treated consistently with
    individual permit holders.
        S. 1944 would also allow grazing on land acquired in an exchange if
    the land being given up in the exchange currently has authorized
    grazing. This appears to be consistent with the intent of Congress when
    it authorized grazing in Public Law 106-76.
    Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area
        S. 1944 also provides for the expansion of the Gunnison Gorge NCA
    managed by the BLM. A 5,759-acre parcel of land on the north side of
    the existing NCA has been acquired from a willing seller through a land
    exchange. This parcel includes approximately five miles of the Gunnison
    River and provides important resource values and recreational
    opportunities. In addition, 1,349 acres of preexisting BLM-managed
    public lands on the north side of the acquisition would also be added
    to the NCA. By incorporating these federal lands into the NCA, they
    will have appropriate protection, attention, and resources devoted to
    them.
        The legislation also makes some minor boundary adjustments to the
    NCA. In the process of completing surveys of the lands designated as
    the NCA by P.L. 106-76, the BLM discovered a few inadvertent trespass
    situations on the NCA land. In order to resolve these issues with the
    local landowners in a fair and equitable manner, slight boundary
    modifications need to be made so that exchanges can be effected.
    Without the benefit of this legislation, the BLM would be forced to
    take extreme punitive measures which are not in the best interest of
    the federal government or local landowners who frequently were not
    aware of the encroachment issues.
        Since S. 1944 was introduced the BLM has discovered an additional
    trespass and we would like the opportunity to work with Senator
    Campbell and the subcommittee to modify the map before markup. Finally,
    the BLM recently discovered an error in computing acreage totals on the
    January 22 map references in the bill and would like to correct those
    before markup.
                                    h.r. 38
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of
    the Department on H.R. 38. This bill provides for additional lands to
    be included within the boundaries of Homestead National Monument of
    America in the State of Nebraska. The House passed this legislation on
    December 11, 2001.
        The Department supports the enactment of H.R. 38, as passed by the
    House. Acquisition of these additional lands has been recommended by
    the Homestead National Monument of America's 1999 General Management
    Plan, and costs to administer this boundary modification are expected
    to be minimal. Funding to acquire the privately owned properties was
    included in the Fiscal Year 2001 Interior Appropriations Act, and we
    anticipate that management of the acquired lands can be accomplished
    with existing park resources.
        Homestead National Monument of America (Monument) was established
    in 1936. The Monument's enabling legislation states that the purpose of
    the Monument is to establish ``. . . a proper memorial emblematical of
    the hardships and the pioneer life through which the early settlers
    passed in settlement, cultivation, and civilization of, the Great West
    . . .'' The legislation also specifies that the Secretary of the
    Interior will ``. . . erect suitable buildings to be used as a specific
    museum in which shall be preserved literature applying to such
    settlement and agriculture implements used to bring the western plains
    to its present state of high civilization, and to use the said tract of
    land for such other objects and purposes as in his judgment may
    perpetuate the history of this country mainly developed by the
    homestead law.''
        If enacted, the bill will add four small, but important, parcels of
    land to the Monument. These additions will allow the opportunity for
    greater protection of the Monument's primary cultural resource, will
    protect the Monument from encroaching development, and will provide the
    opportunity for improved visitor and interpretive services. The total
    amount of land to be added is approximately 33 acres. The private
    landowners affected have agreed in principle to this proposed
    legislation and the State of Nebraska has agreed, as well, to donate
    its lands as provided for in the bill.
        The four parcels to be added to the Monument and the purposes for
    the addition of each are as follows:
        THE GRAFF PROPERTY: This privately owned parcel consists of
    approximately 15.98 acres adjacent to and overlooking the Monument's
    grounds. Addition of the property would serve two purposes. First, it
    would ensure protection for the nation's second oldest restored
    prairie, which holds important educational, research, and scientific
    values. Second, this property, located on higher ground, could be used
    as an alternative location, outside of the floodplain, for the
    Monument's primary cultural resource, the Palmer-Epard cabin, as well
    as the visitor facility.
        PIONEER ACRES GREEN: This parcel consists of approximately 3 acres
    of privately owned land. Inclusion of this property in the boundary
    will provide additional protection to park resources from nearby
    development.
        SEGMENT OF STATE HIGHWAY 4: This parcel consists of approximately
    5.6 acres of Nebraska State Highway 4 and its addition will protect
    natural and archeological resources and provide a site to support
    education efforts through interpretive wayside exhibits. The State of
    Nebraska is currently examining proposals to reroute State Highway 4,
    which would allow for this existing road to serve as an access road to
    the Monument.
        STATE TRIANGLE: This parcel consists of approximately 8.3 acres and
    is bounded by the Monument on two sides and by State Highway 4 on the
    third side. The property is immediately adjacent to the site of the
    original homestead cabin and will allow for maximizing interpretive
    efforts and maintaining the integrity of the Monument's boundaries.
        At the request of the landowner, the property described in
    subsection (b)(1)--the Graff Property--must be acquired within five
    years after the date of the enactment of this Act. The family, which
    has been a strong supporter of the Monument, made this request in order
    to better plan for the future and to minimize the impacts on their
    lives. If this legislation is enacted, meeting the request should not
    be difficult since the funds for acquisition have already been
    appropriated.
        Mr. Chairman, the Department supports the enactment of H.R. 38, as
    passed by the House, and we thank you again for the opportunity to
    appear today.
                                    h.r. 980
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 980, which would establish
    the Moccasin Bend National Historic Site in Chattanooga, Tennessee as a
    unit of the National Park System.
        The Department recommends that the Committee defer action on this
    legislation during the remainder of the 107th Congress. The Department
    has reviewed our progress on the President's Initiative to eliminate
    the deferred maintenance backlog, and it is clear that we need to
    continue to focus our resources on caring for existing areas in the
    National Park System. For this reason, the Department will only support
    new designations that involve no new cost or minimal cost to the
    Federal government for land acquisition, operations, and maintenance.
        In addition, with respect to this particular proposal, the
    Department has concerns with some of the provisions of H.R. 980 and has
    some recommendations for amendments to address the National Park
    Service's ability to ensure the long-term protection of the resources
    and to accommodate public use at Moccasin Bend.
        H.R. 980, which passed the House of Representatives on October 23,
    2001, would establish a new unit of the National Park System focused on
    archeological resources that relate to the American Indians who
    inhabited Moccasin Bend for several thousands of years before Europeans
    came to North America. It would also include resources related to the
    Union's siege of Chattanooga during the Civil War and the 1838 and 1839
    removal of Cherokee Indians from their ancestral homes along the Trail
    of Tears. Most of the land that would comprise this unit is part of the
    area designated in 1986 as the Moccasin Bend Archeological District
    National Historic Landmark. The unit would also include land known as
    the Rock-Tenn property that was part of the Trail of Tears route and a
    parcel contiguous to the archeological district, the Serodino property,
    that appears to be a suitable site for a visitor center.
        The State of Tennessee and local authorities own most of the land
    within Moccasin Bend, although there are some private holdings in the
    area. H.R. 980 as passed by the House would authorize the land within
    the boundary of the national historic site to be acquired by donation,
    exchange, or purchase from willing sellers. It provides that the
    Secretary of the Interior may accept a donation of the Moccasin Bend
    Mental Health Institute--one of two major incompatible uses at Moccasin
    Bend--only after the facility is no longer used to provide health care
    services, except for any land the State determines is excess to the
    needs of the facility. The legislation excludes from the boundary of
    the national historic site the part of the archeological district that
    is currently leased for a golf course--the other major incompatible
    use--but it does allow the Secretary to acquire the golf course if it
    ceases to be used for that purpose.
        In addition, H.R. 980 provides authority for the Secretary to enter
    into cooperative agreements with other parties for the preservation,
    development, interpretation, and use of the historic site, and allows
    the Secretary to use a portion of the visitor center established for
    the historic site as an additional interpretive center for the Trail of
    Tears National Historic Trail.
        Efforts to include Moccasin Bend in the National Park System date
    back to 1950, when Congress enacted legislation that authorized the
    acquisition by donation of 1,400 acres of Moccasin Bend for addition to
    the Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park. At that time,
    Moccasin Bend was almost entirely open space. State, county, and city
    governments acquired property, but did not transfer any of the land to
    the National Park Service. Instead, a significant portion of the land
    was used for other purposes.
        The 1950 legislation was based largely on the desire to maintain
    the view from Lookout Mountain that was nearly unchanged from the Civil
    War era. Since that time, Moccasin Bend has been recognized for its
    nationally significant cultural resources. Surrounded on three sides by
    the Tennessee River, Moccasin Bend possesses a special collection of
    continuous prehistoric and historic sites that chronicle important
    aspects of human history on the North American continent, including (1)
    transitional Paleo-Archaic and Archaic sites, (2) Woodland period
    settlement sites and burial mounds, (3) fortified proto-historic
    villages, (4) Spanish exploration and settlement of the southeastern
    United States, (5) contact between native and nonnative peoples, (6)
    part of the Trail of Tears National Historic Trail, and (7) the
    location of Union earthworks, such as cannon emplacements, rifle pits,
    bivouac pads, and access roads, which were of strategic importance in
    breaking the Confederate hold on Chattanooga in the fall of 1863. The
    site was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1984,
    and 956 acres of Moccasin Bend were designated as the Moccasin Bend
    Archeological District National Historic Landmark in 1986.
        In 1998 and 1999, at the direction of Congress, the NPS prepared
    the Cooperative Management Plan/Environmental Assessment for Moccasin
    Bend in accordance with guidelines for special resource studies. This
    process followed other Moccasin Bend planning efforts in the 1990's,
    including a Chattanooga citizen involvement planning process called
    ``Revision 2000,'' and a battlefield preservation plan for Civil War
    resources within the national historic landmark prepared by the Friends
    of Moccasin Bend National Park. The study was called a cooperative
    management plan to emphasize the close working relationships that had
    developed among local, regional, state, federal, and tribal governments
    as well as the extensive public participation involved in the effort.
    As is standard procedure for special resource studies, this study
    examined the national significance, suitability, and feasibility of
    adding this site to the National Park System.
        The determination of national significance had already been
    established through the designation of the Moccasin Bend Archeological
    District National Historic Landmark in 1986 because of its significance
    to American Indian and U.S. military history. The study reconfirmed
    this significance, pointing out that the area has the best intact
    concentration of archeological resources known to exist in the entire
    main 650-mile Tennessee River valley, and that the quality, diversity,
    and broad accessibility of these resources cannot be matched in any
    other American metropolitan area. The study also found that the extant
    earthworks of the Battle of Chattanooga within the archeological
    district are the best preserved of all physical remnants of that battle
    and the only recognized unit of Union army gun emplacements, trenches,
    and support areas remaining extant from that costly campaign.
        The study also found that the Moccasin Bend Archeological District
    met the test of suitability for a unit of the National Park System, in
    that it represented a theme or resource that is not already adequately
    represented in the National Park System nor is comparably represented
    and protected for public enjoyment by another land-managing entity.
    Although American Indian archeological sites are represented in the
    National Park System, none of the designated units possess the
    extensive range of excavated archeological resources as well as
    unexcavated subsurface resources for which Moccasin Bend is
    significant. The length of continuous cultural occupation at Moccasin
    Bend--10,000 years--is not duplicated anywhere else within the National
    Park System.
        With respect to the test of feasibility, however, the study found
    that certain conditions needed to be met for the area to be considered
    feasible as a new unit of the National Park System. To be feasible for
    inclusion, an area's natural systems and/or historic settings must be
    of sufficient size and appropriate configuration to ensure long-term
    protection of the resources and to accommodate public use, and it must
    have potential for efficient administration at reasonable cost. The
    study found that unless the incompatible uses within the archeological
    district were removed and the land was restored to resemble the way it
    looked at the time of the 1950 legislation, the area would not be
    feasible as a unit of the National Park System. The study determined
    that those uses need to be removed in order to provide visitors a
    quality experience in a landscape reminiscent of its past,
    comprehensively protect archeological resources and provide for
    additional research opportunities, and attract tourists to visit
    Moccasin Bend in large numbers. So long as any of the 956 acres
    remained under the jurisdiction of entities that do not have resource
    preservation as a primary goal, there would always be a risk that
    future management actions could damage or destroy subsurface cultural
    resources.
        The facilities within the archeological district that are
    incompatible with the park include the Moccasin Bend Mental Health
    Institute, a public golf course, radio towers, a law enforcement
    firearms training range, and a model airplane facility. All of those
    facilities, except for the radio towers, are on land that is owned by
    the State or local authorities. Since H.R. 980 was first introduced,
    the National Park Service has been engaged in discussions with the
    legislation's sponsor, Representative Zach Wamp, and with Senators Fred
    Thompson and Bill Frist, to address these incompatible uses in a way
    that avoids a sudden disruption in existing activities, yet assures
    that, in time, there would be a viable unit of the National Park System
    at Moccasin Bend.
        Our support for H.R. 980 is contingent upon amending it to provide
    that the establishment of the site would occur only after certain
    requirements related to land transfers and operational issues are met.
    Those requirements would include:

              1) Receiving from the State the land it owns within the
            archeological district except for that needed to operate the
            Moccasin Bend Mental Health Institute;
              2) Receiving from the State the donation in escrow of the
            remainder of the land it owns in the archeological district
            containing the Moccasin Bend Mental Health Institute. The
            transfer of the property to the United States should occur by a
            reasonable date (preferably no later than December 31, 2015);
              3) Receiving from Hamilton County and the City of Chattanooga
            the donation of the land they own within the archeological
            district except for the land used for the golf course, the law
            enforcement firearms training range and model airplane
            facility;
              4) Receiving from Hamilton County and the City of Chattanooga
            a written commitment to transfer to the United States the land
            used for the law enforcement firearms training range and the
            model airplane facility within five years of enactment of the
            legislation and to transfer the golf course to the United
            States if it is no longer used for that purpose;
              5) The signing of a memorandum of agreement by the State, the
            County, the City, and the Secretary of the Interior that
            addresses issues of mutual concern for operating a national
            historic site at Moccasin Bend. These issues would likely
            include such matters as consulting with the National Park
            Service and American Indian groups about excavation activities
            on land remaining in the ownership of the State and local
            authorities; permitting access to each others' land for various
            purposes, and providing security for people residing and
            visiting Moccasin Bend.

        In addition, the Administration has concerns about the costs of
    removal of hazardous waste and the restoration of the transferred land
    to resemble the area's 1950 appearance. We would like to work with the
    State, the County, and the City to address those concerns.
        There are also other changes to the legislation as passed by the
    House that the Department would like to recommend to the committee at
    an appropriate time. For example, we believe that the legislation
    should list the three primary themes that would be interpreted at the
    site: American Indian settlement, the Civil War siege of Chattanooga,
    and the Trail of Tears.
        The National Park Service is currently discussing with the offices
    of Senators Frist and Thompson and Representative Wamp the means of
    obtaining commitments for the land transfers and an agreement on
    operational issues that we are seeking. One option that has been raised
    as an alternative to amending the legislation as described above would
    be to obtain written commitments from the State, the County, and the
    City for these actions. The committee may want to consider that option,
    if such commitments could be secured prior to reporting the
    legislation.
        The actions we are seeking from the State and local authorities
    before establishing a national historic site at Moccasin Bend are
    significantly less demanding than those recommended in the 1999 study
    the National Park Service conducted for the site. For example, the
    study called for the City and County to remove the golf course and
    restore the cultural landscape there by 2005, and for the State to
    remove the mental health institute facilities and restore the cultural
    landscape there by 2009. We are now recommending a course of action in
    which the local authorities would be able to maintain the golf course
    indefinitely, so long as they commit to transferring the land for the
    national historic site if the golf course is ever closed, and in which
    the State would be able to continue operating the mental health
    institute until the date of transfer, which would likely be beyond
    2009.
        These are compromises that recognize that, although there appears
    to be strong support in the Chattanooga community for establishing the
    national historic site, there is also a reluctance there to accept the
    closing of existing operations at Moccasin Bend that provide other
    benefits to the community, at least in the near term. We believe that
    the resources at Moccasin Bend are so significant, and so worthy of
    protecting and interpreting for the public, that we would be willing to
    accept this site as a unit of the National Park System under the less-
    than-ideal terms we have outlined.
        Mr. Chairman, to summarize our position on H.R. 980, we ask the
    committee to defer action on this legislation for the remainder of this
    Congress. But if the committee decides to take further action on this
    legislation, we would like to work with the committee to develop
    amendments to H.R. 980 to provide for specified transfers of land from
    the State and local authorities to the United States and an agreement
    on operational issues, unless the committee determines that a written
    commitment from State and local authorities is sufficient to assure
    that those actions will occur.
                                   h.r. 1712
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
    Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 1712, a bill to authorize
    the Secretary of the Interior to make minor adjustments to the boundary
    of the National Park of American Samoa, to include certain lands of the
    islands of Ofu and Olosega within the park, and for other purposes. The
    House passed this legislation on March 19, 2002.
        The Department does not oppose H.R. 1712. This legislation will
    provide authority for the Secretary of the Interior to adjust the
    boundary of the National Park of American Samoa to include up to
    approximately 1,000 acres of land on the island of Olosega, up to
    approximately 450 acres on the island of Ofu, and approximately 1,500
    acres of ocean waters offshore of Olosega and Ofu. The lands on the
    island of Olosega and the adjacent offshore waters will add important
    cultural, biological and marine resources to the national park. The
    lands on the island of Ofu will ensure the long-term protection of
    important and fragile coral reef resources presently within the
    national park.
        Proposed additions on Ofu contain excellent wildlife and coral reef
    habitats. Currently, only a strip of sand beach and the associated
    coral reef are within the national park boundary on Ofu. This coastal
    area contains a world-class coral reef area of remarkably high
    diversity and beauty. The proposed addition would protect the upland
    watershed so that the coral reef would not be impaired by non-park
    developments. Coastal areas on the north side of Ofu are proposed
    because of the exceptionally healthy and diverse coral communities
    found there, and because the north shores of Ofu and Olosega are
    connected and constitute a single coral reef ecosystem.
        The archeological resources found on Olosega between the 300 and
    800-foot elevations are not only important, but are unique in American
    Samoa. Unique to Olosega are the number of star mounds and what appears
    to be a remnant agro-forestry system. Archeological reconnaissance
    surveys carried out on Olosega in July 1999 by the National Park
    Service and the University of North Dakota's Department of Anthropology
    identified 31 star mounds, 46 modified terraces, 14 house platforms, an
    elevated grave site believed to be associated with the Tui Olosega
    (King of Olosega), and numerous stone tools. Star mounds are massive
    rock platforms with radiating arms built by the ancient Samomans for
    cultural and sporting events. Up until 1999, star mounds were known to
    exist only on Upolo (in Samoa) and Tutuila islands. Archeologists
    believe the agro-forestry system found on Olosega, with further study,
    could prove to be an agricultural system that existed in relative
    equilibrium with the native forest system. Most of the sites and
    artifacts found on Olosega were well-preserved.
        Also in 1999, a survey of Olosega's biotic resources by the park's
    wildlife biologist found that the unoccupied portions of the island
    provide excellent habitat for native wildlife. Large tracts of land on
    Olosega remain relatively wild and the island is free of many of the
    introduced species that compete with the native wildlife within the
    park on Tutuila. In addition, Olosega includes the presence of the
    rarer bird species that occur in American Samoa. Fiji shrikebill,
    uncommon on the other islands, were consistently seen on Olosega during
    the 1999 survey. The Friendly ground dove and the Blue-crowned lory are
    also present. The Friendly ground dove is a candidate for listing as an
    endangered species. Biologists believe the shrikebill found on Olosega
    may be a separate subspecies found only on the Manu'a Islands.
        Although Olosega shares the same fauna found on the other islands
    of American Samoa, the species composition of the forest trees is
    somewhat unique. The 1999 survey found a high concentration of Samoan
    medicinal plants. Many of these medicinal plants are disappearing from
    the native forests of Samoa. The survey also found that the area
    between the 200 and 800-foot elevation represented a traditional mixed
    agro-forestry system developed over decades of manipulation and
    cultural use. The system appeared to be relatively stable and may have
    reached a sustainable equilibrium.
        Small populations of two species of flying foxes are believed to
    exist on Olosega. Protection of these fruit-eating bats is included in
    the park's enabling legislation. In addition, there are indications
    that a few individuals of the nearly extirpated sheath-tailed bat are
    present on Olosega. This small insectivorous bat is a candidate for
    listing as an endangered species and is not currently found within the
    existing boundary of the park.
        The coastal and marine areas of Olosega contain rich coral and fish
    communities and would complement the Ofu reef currently included within
    the park boundary. Surveys have found that Olosega's offshore waters
    are among the richest and most densely populated with fish species in
    the entire Samoan archipelago. Both the endangered Hawksbill and the
    threatened Green sea turtles are present in Olosega's offshore waters.
    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries
    Service believe that the Hawksbill turtle is a species rapidly
    approaching extinction, making its protection in Olosega's reefs and
    offshore waters of vital importance.
        The law that established the National Park of American Samoa does
    not provide the authority for the National Park Service to acquire park
    lands, but instead requires that lands must be leased from the Governor
    of American Samoa. Lands within the authorized boundary expansion would
    be added to the park incrementally, based on future discussions with
    village landowners and modification of the existing lease. The park's
    enabling legislation places the responsibility for determining the
    rental value of lands to be leased for the national park with the High
    Court of American Samoa. As a point of reference, the park currently
    leases approximately 8,000 acres for $419,000 annually. The offshore
    waters would be leased from the Government of American Samoa at no
    cost. No development is contemplated within the boundary adjustment
    areas, so no line-item construction or significant development costs
    are anticipated in connection with H.R. 1712.
        In March 1998, the Olosenga Village Council noted in a letter to
    American Samoa's Congressional representative, Congressman Eni F.H.
    Faleomavaega, that the national park has contributed much to the
    preservation of Samoan culture, the rainforest and the coral reef. In
    addition, the council noted that the park has also been a positive
    factor to the economic well-being of the territory through tourism and
    lease payments to the villages in the park. The village council of
    Olosega expressed its support for expansion of the park boundaries, and
    we are pleased that this has been a grassroots effort supported by the
    community.
        Also significant would be inclusion of the coral reefs around
    portions of Olosega within the national park, which would further the
    Governor's directive to local agencies to protect 20 percent of the
    territory's coral reefs. At present, only about six percent of the
    territory's reefs are in protected areas.
        At the House hearing on February 14, 2002, we recommended two
    technical amendments, which the House included in the bill that passed
    on March 19, 2002.
        This concludes my testimony. I would be glad to answer any
    questions that you or members of the subcommittee may have.

        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Smith. I have a
    general observation and question on marine parks. H.R. 1712
    would expand the marine resources such as the coral reefs under
    Park Service management. The Service is responsible for
    increasing numbers of coastal park resources, including
    national parks in Florida, Hawaii, the Great Lakes, and a new
    monument in the U.S. Virgin Islands. We are considering two new
    marine park units in Florida, Miami Circle and Virginia Key.
    The question is, how does the Park Service intend to address
    the increasing need for protection and interpretation for such
    cultural and natural resources?
        Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, the simple answer is, it is being
    addressed, and we will not do it alone. Currently, the National
    Park Service manages approximately 2.5 million acres of
    maritime waters and almost 4,000 miles of coast in 60 parks,
    national seashores, recreation areas, and historic sites.
    Currently, the National Park Service and the Department are
    actively engaged in implementing Executive Order 13-158 on
    marine protected areas in cooperation with NOAA, the designated
    lead agency for the executive order. We are currently
    developing a national inventory of these MPA's to include
    information on maritime areas managed by the Park Service.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you for your response.
        S. 1257 and H.R. 107 require a theme study, we know, of
    Cold War sites and resources. The Park Service has expressed
    concerns about convening an advisory committee to assist in
    this study. Here is the question. Does the Park Service have
    any alternative proposals for convening a group to obtain input
    from academics and other Cold War experts?
        Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, we certainly do. The Park Service
    planning process is very involved with always utilizing the
    experts in any academic field, other government agencies,
    partners from the public-private sector, anything we can do in
    coordinating with State and local governments, so we see it as
    a very broad process that will include not only gathering
    information from people who can help us to interpret that
    theme, but also to have tremendous opportunity for public
    comment on that so that we would have time to really make sure
    the theme is being fully covered.
        This one is such a special theme, there will be a lot of
    coordination with other Federal agencies as you can imagine.
    Some things will be able to be released and some will not, but
    we will work very closely with all of our Federal partners to
    make that a very, very thorough theme study.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you for that.
        I have several questions on H.R. 980, the proposed Moccasin
    Bend National Historic Site. In the area known as Moccasin Bend
    there are currently several uses of this site. As we have
    heard, the Park Service special resource study found some of
    the uses, including the golf course and mental health
    institute, to be incompatible with the proposed new historic
    site.
        You have indicated in your testimony that a national
    historic site would be designated, and even though the mental
    health institute would remain on the site and provide service
    until 2015, or possibly even later, and the golf course might
    stay forever, and you are asking us to defer this one. How does
    the Park Service reconcile the designation of a new national
    historic site with the persistence of these uses?
        Mr. Smith. Senator, the site has been through a National
    Register of Historic Places review, and it did make the next
    highest level to become designated as a landmark in, I believe
    it was 1988.
        Mr. Chairman, if there was not 10,000 to 12,000 years of
    history that happened on this unbelievable geological feature,
    which I believe you have this map, I guess we would blink and
    say all these man-made things we put there, it is not worth
    going back to look at, but the fact that this unique area,
    under 1,000 acres, does have all of this history, which others
    who certainly know more than I do about archaeology will
    testify to later, it is there, you can see why historically it
    has had all this use by man, but then to also have the Civil
    War history there, to also have a very key interpretation of
    Native American history, you just cannot blink from a study and
    not say that this has such resources to it culturally that you
    would not want to see what we could do.
        It sounds overwhelming to remove these noncompatible uses,
    but the truth of the matter is the golf course is not
    disrupting the archaeology, so that can in time come into the
    system, and certainly the archaeology and all could be
    interpreted there.
        That mental health institute, if you could click the clock
    back you would have put it somewhere else in 1950, but again,
    eventually, time can solve that. Clean-up is an obstacle, but
    technology and some money can solve that.
        A firing range, we just removed two firing ranges out at
    Lorton facility and that area will go to recreation, so that is
    not a major item.
        The tower for communications, they might be unsightly, but
    it is not going to be a wilderness area, and so that is not
    something that is unsurmountable.
        We realize this is complex, we realize it is difficult, but
    so much of the land is under the control of local and State
    government. The fact that we think we can arrange to get these
    agreements of what we will do over a period of time, the fact
    is that of the 900 acres, so much of it is not built on, and
    does have this tremendous history which really is not
    interpreted in a current unit of the system that it is worth
    trying to work, as we have said we would like to, with the
    Congress and with the State and with the county to see if we
    can make this happen.
        I am not sitting here telling you this is not a difficult
    one, but I am telling you that because of what is there, it is
    worth the effort to see if we could move forward on it.
        Senator Akaka. Before I defer to Senator Thomas for
    questions, let me ask you one more. I understand there is
    existing legislation that already authorizes Moccasin Bend to
    be protected through additions to the nearby Chicamauga and
    Chattanooga National Military Park. The concern has been
    raised, however, that an addition to the existing military-
    oriented park might not sufficiently highlight the outstanding
    Native American archaeological resources at Moccasin Bend.
        If Moccasin Bend were added to Chicamauga instead of being
    designated as a separate park, how does the Park Service intend
    to showcase the remarkable archaeological resources at Moccasin
    Bend?
        Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, as I summarized in my statement,
    and actually had more depth in that, the reason this land was
    assembled years ago was because of that possibility of addition
    to what we call Chic-Chat unit of the National Park System.
        What I have said briefly in answering your other question
    is that the Civil War history is, in and of itself, enough to
    bring a large portion of this site into the system as an
    addition to that Civil War unit, but because of this 10,000
    years of history, and the Trail of Tears history, we really
    strongly recommend that we try to work this through so that it
    would interpret those three very major cultural and historic
    events, rather than just go back to the already-authorizing
    legislation that would make it part of a Civil War site. It is
    much more significant than that, as I think you will hear from
    the witnesses that come after me.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you for your testimony.
        Senator Thomas.
        Senator Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr.
    Smith, for your participation. I guess I want to go back
    generally to the study. I looked at the study, and the study
    basically indicated that this could be feasible for inclusion,
    but these incompatible uses had to be out of there, you said,
    by 2009. That is not going to happen. I mean, the studies are
    designed to give us some direction as to what to do. That does
    not.
        Mr. Smith. The time limits of the removal of these
    noncompatible entities is still in negotiation.
        Senator Thomas. Listen, you and I know it is not going to
    be done in 5 years.
        Mr. Smith. Senator, no. No. In fact, my next word was going
    to be, I was trying to figure out just how far out to start it
    and bring it back.
        Senator Thomas. I am talking about your study. Why did you
    say that in your study?
        Mr. Smith. I do not have a detailed answer, Senator. I can
    certainly provide that for the record.
        Senator Thomas. I think studies are very important, and I
    want to ask a couple more questions about studies. How many do
    you have pending?
        Mr. Smith. Mr. Thomas, I believe it is 37 that are
    currently pending. I think we have seven that we will get to
    the Congress this year, so 30 are going to be out there at the
    end of this fiscal year.
        Senator Thomas. And if we give more, there will be more
    than that.
        Mr. Smith. Yes, sir, and as I said in my testimony, we do
    not have funding for these studies in 2003.
        Senator Thomas. I do not understand that. I do not
    understand why you continue to take on studies that will not be
    done for 2 or 3 years and you do not ask for any money to do
    it. I do not understand that. It is easy to sit there and say
    yes, we will study it, but it does not happen for years, right?
        Mr. Smith. As anybody who deals in the budget climates we
    deal with, Senator, we do move them into play. The Park Service
    has a tremendous record of doing studies that eventually move
    things forward through suitability and feasibility, but yes,
    sir, there is a backlog in studies like there is a backlog in
    many other things the Congress has put into the system, and we
    work through the budget restraints we are under to move those
    forward as we can.
        Senator Thomas. Well, we changed the study thing just a
    couple of years ago so we would not have this kind of an
    operation going on, and unfortunately it still does. Do we have
    any sort of a criteria for what parks or what these areas ought
    to be? Basically, what do you measure it against?
        Mr. Smith. I am not expert in our planning phases, but yes,
    the Park Service does have planning criteria for almost----
        Senator Thomas. I am not talking about planning. I am
    talking about acceptance. What do you have as a criteria to
    accept it as a park? I know you cannot give me the details, but
    do you have one?
        Mr. Smith. Senator, I could tell you that I probably should
    provide a detailed answer for the record, because I am not a
    planning expert, but there are criteria. The Park Service does
    recommend--of course, most of the time we react to what
    Congress has asked us to do as far as theme studies or area
    studies, and once we put those into our planning process there
    are very definite criteria, and I can certainly provide that
    for the record.
        Senator Thomas. What is a theme study?
        Mr. Smith. Theme studies are--well, Cold War is one.
        Senator Thomas. That is what I am asking you. What does
    theme study mean?
        Mr. Smith. It means to capture the entire history of an
    event, or of actions.
        Senator Thomas. How many of those have you done?
        Mr. Smith. I could not provide that number. Many theme
    studies have been done, and I could certainly provide that for
    the record.
        Senator Thomas. Well, I wish you would.
        It seems like that is a pretty broad issue. I have a Cold
    War thing out in South Dakota. There is a number of them. I do
    not know what it involves. What is it going to mean, all the
    information work that was gathered by the CIA and so on?
        Senator Smith. It would probably be everything from the
    late forties until 1991 that reflect what, among other things,
    the Department of Defense just awarded a ribbon for.
        Senator Thomas. I have a little problem with those things
    in terms of the role of the parks. You will come and say, we do
    not have enough money to keep up the parks we have, and yet we
    have no problem undertaking all of these things that are
    deferred and they do not happen. It is really kind of tough. Do
    you understand what I am saying?
        Mr. Smith. I understand, Senator, but then again, we do
    many of these at the request of the Congress.
        Senator Thomas. Well, of course, but have you turned any
    studies down?
        Mr. Smith. I will provide that for the record also,
    Senator, although I have to tell you, I do not think so. I dare
    say, not turned them down.
        Senator Thomas. Have you ever recommended against one?
        Mr. Smith. Yes, sir. Studies do come back.
        Senator Thomas. I do not recall any.
        Mr. Smith. We will provide that for the record. I will find
    several, I can promise you that, Senator.
        Senator Thomas. And this study puts in various conditions
    which you have now changed since the study came out.
        Mr. Smith. This is a very complex piece of legislation,
    Senator, yes.
        Senator Thomas. You mentioned Virginia Beach. Is it just a
    beach, or is it also the island?
        Mr. Smith. The testimony we gave today is the 77 acres
    involved in the actual beach on Virginia Key.
        Senator Thomas. What about the 1,000-acre island?
        Mr. Smith. The 1,000 acre does have other resources, but it
    is something we would not want to include in this bill. In
    fact, from the description that Senator Nelson gave it, it
    sounds like a national wildlife refuge to me, and not a unit of
    the Park Service.
        Senator Thomas. Is it in the bill now?
        Mr. Smith. No. In the bill is the 77 acres. That is why we
    did the clarification of the park, of the beach park. It limits
    it to the 77 acres of that much larger pristine island.
        Senator Thomas. On the Black Canyon, I have to be careful
    of that one. Is some of that conservation easement on lands
    that are in the park?
        Mr. Smith. I was briefed on the map today. The exchanges
    all involve three of the four exchanges involve the park
    itself. One of these involves the BLM land, which is in the
    conservation area.
        Senator Thomas. I guess my question was, is it normal to
    have fee lands in a park with a conservation easement? Maybe
    that is not the case.
        Mr. Smith. It has not been anywhere near as normal in the
    West. In fact, we had that discussion today earlier, as I was
    briefed on the bill. It is not, but they have had tremendous
    success around Black Canyon of the Gunnison with easements,
    with willing landowners, with the various conservation groups
    that work in land trust, and in this particular unit of the
    system it is working.
        It lets families keep them in family ranching, and it
    accomplishes all of the environmental conservation needs that
    the Park Service has, and certainly provides the access for the
    public that is sought out there in some of these canyons and
    along some of those roads. It is a very unique system for the
    West, what has happened at Black Canyon of the Gunnison.
        Senator Thomas. It is very difficult to keep grazing in, I
    can tell you from experience in Grand Teton.
        Mr. Smith. I hear you, Senator, and we broached that today.
    I first testified on Black Canyon of the Gunnison in 1984,
    before this committee or the House, when it was going to have
    its first edition, and grazing rights were such a major issue
    then, and I certainly know how that works.
        Senator Thomas. I have taken too long, but this Moccasin
    Bend, that is owned now by the city, is it not?
        Mr. Smith. A combination of city and county.
        Senator Thomas. So I suppose, and I am sure the gentlemen
    will bear me down on this, but they could go ahead and do this
    themselves, make it a city park, could they not?
        Mr. Smith. They certainly have protected a tremendous
    amount of this acreage, because it is all wooded. They
    certainly do not have any other intention of building anything
    else on these lands. In other words, they are not thinking
    about any other of these, quote, incompatible uses, but it does
    have a national significance that they are trying to capture
    here also, and that would be to become a unit, but they have no
    other plans to develop it any further than it is. We have
    addressed all of the incompatible uses that are already there.
        Senator Thomas. Finally, you say in there you resist making
    recommendations as to this theme on the Cold War.
        Mr. Smith. I am sorry, Senator, I did not understand.
        Senator Thomas. You do not want to make recommendations to
    the Congress. You say, as a matter of fact, it is illegal.
        Mr. Smith. Oh, I think we are talking about, that is the
    constitutional issue, I guess, with the Eleventh Amendment of
    technically how the executive branch and the legislative branch
    of government work. It is a minor discussion in the testimony.
    Let me read exactly the Justice Department's concerns on that,
    Senator, for the record. Which bill number again, I am sorry?
        Senator Thomas. S. 1257. Well, the point is, I have a bill
    that I had sometime ago that specifically has that in there.
    The Park Service makes a recommendation to the Congress.
        Mr. Smith. Mr. Thomas, in addition we have been informed by
    the Department of Justice that the provisions of the bill that
    would require the Secretary of the Interior to make
    recommendations to Congress concerning Federal protection for
    Cold War sites appear to violate the Recommendations Clause of
    the Constitution, which reserves to the President the power to
    decide whether it is necessary or expedient for the executive
    branch to make legislative policy recommendations to the
    Congress. The administration would be pleased to provide
    language to remedy the bill's constitutional defects.
        Senator Thomas. I suggest to you it is not a constitutional
    defect. If it is, they have already done it a number of times.
    Thank you, sir.
        Senator Akaka. Senator Campbell.
        Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Smith,
    thank the folks in the administration for supporting the Black
    Canyon bill. My colleague's questions notwithstanding, you just
    keep supporting it. It is a good bill. I do not have your
    written testimony so I was jotting some notes when you were
    speaking, and on S. 1257 I think you mentioned, you said you
    recommended the deletion of the section that set up the
    advisory committee, is that correct?
        Mr. Smith. That is correct, Senator.
        Senator Campbell. What was the reason you gave for
    recommending that?
        Mr. Smith. Number 1, Senator, the time it takes to create a
    FACA type of commission, to get that through, and then to what
    it would really add as you go through the planning phase, plus,
    once you have named it, any time you want to have anything done
    on it you have to do notification in the Federal Register, you
    have to give weeks' notice that you are going to have any kind
    of a meeting on it, or whatever else, and it would slow the
    planning process, especially on something as broad as this is
    going to be. We just do not think it is necessary to conduct a
    very thorough study on Cold War era themes.
        Senator Campbell. I know most of the parks have some form
    of advisory committee, but I think most of them are set up by
    park authority. They do that, and some work very well. The one
    at Mesa Verde works very well. The one at Little Bighorn
    National Park in Montana got crossways so much with the Park
    Service they finally were disbanded, in fact, when they began
    to think they could make the decisions for the Park Service.
        Are most parks, do they have advisory commissions set up by
    legislation?
        Mr. Smith. Yes, they do, Senator. Probably of the 386
    units, or 385 units of the system, there are probably right now
    about 50 active advisory committees, and they are advisory,
    although, as you state, some think they go beyond that, but it
    is about 50 of our 385 units still have active advisory
    committees.
        Senator Campbell. So this would set a new precedent, then.
    You just do not want one at this park, is that correct?
        Mr. Smith. An advisory group to do a study would set a
    precedent.
        Senator Campbell. The Moccasin Bend bill you said that it
    would allow the Park Service to acquire the golf course when it
    is no longer used as a golf course. Is it your understanding
    that that would be like a first right of refusal to acquire it
    if it is not used as a park--excuse me, as a golf course any
    more. Could they sell it to somebody else?
        Mr. Smith. Senator, I am not sure of the exact detail on
    that. I am not sure whether that is privately owned or country
    owned. In the discussions we have had on that, it is the full
    intent of the parties we are talking about negotiating with
    that it would not be used for anything else except a golf
    course. I can get a clarification for that, if you would like.
        Senator Campbell. If you would get that. I and some people
    who really have an interest in parks always worry about some
    private land becoming a Coney Island next to the park because
    of the number of tourists the parks always draw.
        My last question of you is, has there been a cost estimate
    done at all in the movement or cleanup of the firearms range
    and the hospital, both of which I assume have some contaminated
    residue there that would have to comply with EPA standards?
        Mr. Smith. We are not at the stage where that would be
    done, but we did raise in the testimony, Senator, we do have
    concerns about what that would cost. We obviously would prefer
    that that would be transferred to the Park Service cleaned up.
    The cost for firing ranges is not that much. I believe that
    what happened out at Lorton here for the D.C. range, which had
    been used for years, was in the several hundred thousand dollar
    range. You basically just have to dig and get the lead out of
    the ground.
        For what is at that mental health hospital, I just have no
    idea, and we are certainly not at the stage to get those type
    of costs yet.
        Senator Campbell. Well, I have been around here for a
    while, and I would guess that even if it was supposed to done
    through local resources, that one way or another the process
    would end up where they came to Congress and asked for the
    money to do it, so that I would be interested in knowing what
    the cost would be for that cleanup, but you will not have that,
    obviously, for a while.
        I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your questions.
    Again, thank you very much, Mr. Smith, for your responses, and
    we look forward to any information that has been requested.
        Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and we look forward to
    answering any questions the committee does forward to us to
    answer in writing.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much. Let me introduce our
    next panel of witnesses to come forward. Mr. Steve Ririe,
    chairman of the Silent Heroes of the Cold War National Memorial
    Committee, and Jay Mills, vice president of the Friends of
    Moccasin Bend. I would like to remind each of you that your
    written testimony will be included in full in the hearing
    record, so you may summarize your remarks, and you may begin,
    Mr. Ririe, when you are ready.
        Mr. Ririe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to first
    make a comment. As requested by Senator Reid, who introduced
    this legislation last July, he is not able to attend today
    because of his duties on the Senate floor, but with the
    chairman's permission Senator Reid will offer his statement to
    be inserted into the record at a later time.
        Senator Akaka. Without objection, it will be included in
    the record.
        Mr. Ririe. I would like to also include that Senator Reid
    wanted me to mention that he feels very strongly the need to
    acknowledge the Nation's heroes of the Cold War. We visited
    several times in the past in Nevada, and he feels just as
    passionate as I do that this is legislation that would be
    appropriate and would be of value.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Reid follows:]
        Prepared Statement of Hon. Harry Reid, U.S. Senator From Nevada
        The Cold War, which lasted 50 years, was the longest war in United
    States history, and the most expensive, costing trillions of dollars.
        At its conclusion, America emerged as the only remaining superpower
    in the world.
        Because we faced an enemy with tremendous nuclear capabilities, it
    was the most dangerous conflict our country ever faced.
        The threat of mass destruction left a permanent mark on American
    life and politics.
        Those that won this war did so in obscurity.
        What is often overlooked is that hundreds if not thousands of
    Americans died during the Cold War as America built its strategic
    nuclear arsenal and flew thousands of reconnaissance missions over
    enemy territory.
        Those who gave their lives in the Cold War have never been properly
    honored.
        Last July, I introduced a bill that requires the Department of the
    Interior to conduct a study to identify sites and resources to
    commemorate heroes of the Cold War and to interpret the Cold War for
    future generations.
        My legislation directs the Secretary of the Interior to establish a
    ``Cold War Advisory Committee'' to oversee the inventory of Cold War
    sites and resources
              --for potential inclusion in the National Part System
              --as national historic landmarks
              --or other appropriate designations.
        The Advisory Committee will work closely with State and local
    governments and local historical organizations. The committee's
    starting point will be a Cold War study completed by the Secretary of
    Defense under the 1991 Defense Appropriations Act.
        Obvious Cold War sites of significance include:

       Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles
       flight training centers
       communications and command centers (such as Cheyenne
            Mountain, Colorado).
       nuclear weapons test sites (such as the Nevada test site),
            and
       strategic and tactical resources.

        Perhaps no other state in the Union has played a more significant
    role than Nevada in winning the Cold War.
        The Nevada Test Site is a high-technology engineering marvel where
    the United States developed, tested, and perfected a nuclear deterrent
    which is the cornerstone of America's security and leadership among
    nations.
        The Naval Air Station at Fallon is the Navy's premiere tactical air
    warfare training facility.
        The Air Warfare Center at Nellis Air Force Base has the largest
    training range in the United States to ensure that America's pilots
    will prevail in any armed conflict.
        In testimony before this committee, Steve Ririe will recount the
    story of 14 men who perished in a plane crash on Mount Charleston in
    Nevada nearly half a century ago.
        These men were involved in a top-secret project, developing the U-2
    reconnaissance aircraft, the most advanced spy plane the world had ever
    seen.
        Their success was critical to ensuring the United States would be
    ready to face the challenges of a destabilized world. Experts have
    credited the U-2 with avoiding World War III.
        The U-2 is still vital to the American military today, and is being
    used to protect our interests around the globe.
        This story is just one of thousands of stories of men and women who
    worked in secret to bring us safely through the Cold War conflict.
        Our nation needs to recognize the veterans of the longest war in
    United States history--a battle which also had the highest stakes.
        I urge my colleagues to support this long overdue tribute to the
    contribution and sacrifice of those Cold War heroes for the cause of
    freedom.

     STATEMENT OF STEVE RIRIE, CHAIRMAN, SILENT HEROES OF THE COLD
             WAR NATIONAL MEMORIAL COMMITTEE, LAS VEGAS, NV

        Mr. Ririe. I have a prepared statement, and I would like to
    read that at this time if I can.
        Senator Akaka. Please proceed.
        Mr. Ririe. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for the
    opportunity to speak today in support of a bill that requires
    the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a theme study to
    identify sites and resources to commemorate and interpret the
    Cold War.
        James Billington called the Cold War the central conflict
    of the second half of the 20th century, the longest and most
    unconventional war of the entire modern era, an altogether
    unprecedented experience for Americans. The Cold War was the
    turning point for America as well as for the world. The
    development and proliferation of thermonuclear technology has
    forever changed our society, our politics, our attitudes, and
    most certainly our challenges.
        Although the Cold War was the longest American war, it
    remains the least-memorialized. This is largely due to the very
    nature of the conflict itself. The Cold War was fought
    primarily in secret. Those who won the Cold War often worked in
    obscurity, unable to discuss their involvement with their
    families. Many believe the Cold War was little more than a
    series of heated verbal exchanges between two superpowers.
    However, this is a gross oversimplification and absolutely not
    true.
        Consider the reconnaissance element alone, which harbored
    very real dangers for the personnel involved. During the years
    of 1945 to 1977, a total of 40 reconnaissance aircraft were
    shot down. The secrecy of the reconnaissance programs prevented
    recognition of the slain military personnel. Thousands of other
    unknown heroes were secretly lost during the Cold War and
    remain un-acknowledged.
        Passing S. 1257 is a step in the right direction to
    acknowledge our Nation's unknown and silent heroes. This bill
    will allocate necessary funds for the identification and
    preservation of Cold War sites and resources. This bill will
    establish an advisory committee that will develop an
    interpretive handbook on the Cold War to tell the story of the
    Cold War and its heroes.
        Preserving these historic sites will aid many American
    families whose loved ones were so central to the secret efforts
    of the Cold War that the true cause of their deaths was, of
    necessity, classified information. These sites and the handbook
    will provide the much-needed closure to these families as they
    finally understand where, when, and why their loved ones died.
        Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a moment to relate a
    story of one such group of Cold War heroes. The winter of 1955
    was not unlike any other winter at its time. Children learned
    civil defense skills at school as they were instructed to duck
    and cover. At home, they watched the parade of intercontinental
    ballistic missiles towed by military trucks through Red Square
    on the evening news. Civil defense was deadly serious as the
    prospect of a nuclear conflict loomed in the mind of the
    average American.
        The morning of November 17, 1955, seemed like an ordinary
    Thursday morning. At 6:58 a.m., 14 men boarded a C-54 military
    air transport shuttle in Burbank, California, at Lockheed's air
    terminal. On board were Air Force personnel, engineers,
    scientists, and CIA officials. Their destination was a top
    secret air base and testing ground and code named Water Town.
    Today, we call this secret military facility area 51. This
    remote desert location housed one of the United States' most
    secret Cold War projects, the U-2 reconnaissance aircraft.
        Not long after take-off, the C-54 encountered an early
    winter storm. Soon they found themselves battered by high winds
    and snow flurries. Due to the restrictions flying in and out of
    area 51 they were ordered to fly low elevation. Standard
    operating procedure barred them from using navigational
    instruments or the radio in order to maintain secrecy. The crew
    felt very alone and cut off. When the situation became even
    more desperate, they decided to break radio silence and attempt
    to converse with Water Town.
        I can see my time is nearly up. I do, however, feel that it
    is important, if I can, to enter into the record the names of
    the men who died on Mount Charleston on our behalf.
        Senator Akaka. We will include it in the record, and thank
    you very much for your testimony.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Ririe follows:]
    Prepared Statement of Steve Rirer, Chairman, Silent Heroes of the Cold
                 War National Memorial Committee, Las Vegas, NV
        Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak
    today in support of a bill that requires the Secretary of the Interior
    to conduct a theme study to identify sites and resources to commemorate
    and interpret the Cold War.
        James Billington called the Cold War, ``. . . the central conflict
    of the second half of the 20th Century, the longest and most
    unconventional war of the entire modern era--an altogether
    unprecedented experience for Americans.'' The Cold War was a turning
    point for America, as well as the world. The development and
    proliferation of thermonuclear technology has forever changed our
    society, our politics, our attitudes and most certainly, our
    challenges.
        Although the Cold War was the longest American war, it remains the
    least memorialized. This is largely due to the very nature of the
    conflict itself. The Cold War was fought primarily in secret. Those who
    won the Cold War often worked in obscurity, unable to discuss their
    involvement with their families. Many believe the Cold War was little
    more than a series of heated verbal exchanges between two super powers;
    however, this is a gross oversimplification and absolutely not true.
    Consider the reconnaissance element alone, which harbored very real
    dangers for the personnel involved. During the years of 1945-1977, a
    total of 40 reconnaissance aircraft were shot down. The secrecy of the
    reconnaissance programs prevented recognition of the slain military
    personnel. Thousands of other unknown heroes were secretly lost during
    the Cold War and remain unacknowledged.
        Passing S. 1257 is a step in the right direction to acknowledge our
    nation's unknown and silent heroes. This bill will allocate necessary
    funds for the identification and preservation of Cold War sites and
    resources. This bill will establish an Advisory Committee that will
    develop an interpretive handbook on the Cold War to tell the story of
    the Cold War and its heroes. Preserving these historic sites will aid
    many American families whose loved ones were so central to the secret
    efforts of the Cold War that the true cause of their deaths was, of
    necessity, classified information. These sites and the handbook will
    provide the much needed closure to these families, as they finally
    understand where, when, and why their loved ones died.
        Mr. Chairman, I'd like to take a moment to relate a story of one
    group of cold war heroes.
        The winter of 1955 was not unlike any other winter. Children
    learned civil defense skills at school as they were instructed to duck
    and cover. At home they watched the parade of ICBM's towed by military
    trucks through Red Square on the evening news. Civil Defense was deadly
    serious as the prospect of a nuclear conflict loomed in the mind of the
    average American.
        The morning of November 17, 1955 seemed like an ordinary Thursday
    morning. At 6:58 a.m. fourteen men boarded a C-54 Military Air
    Transport Shuttle in Burbank, CA at the Lockheed's air terminal. On
    board were Air Force personnel, engineers, scientists, and CIA
    officials. Their destination was a top-secret air base and testing
    ground then code named ``Water Town.'' Today we call this secret
    military facility ``Area 51''. This remote Nevada desert installation
    housed one of the United States most secret cold war projects--the U-2
    reconnaissance aircraft.
        Not long after takeoff, the C-54 encountered an early winter storm.
    Soon they found themselves battered by high winds and snow flurries.
    Due to restrictions flying in and out of Area 51, they were ordered to
    fly low elevation. Standard operating procedure barred them from using
    navigation instruments or the radio in order to maintain secrecy.The
    crew felt very alone and cut off. When the situation became even more
    desperate, they decided to break radio silence in an attempt to
    converse with Water Town's airstrip tower. This breach in operation
    procedure would only have occurred if the pilot sensed they were in
    real trouble. Unfortunately, the storm was too fierce and radio
    transmission too poor. No return transmission was received.
        At 8:19 a.m., the C-54 made an emergency maneuver to avoid high
    terrain and slammed into a nearly 12,000 foot mountain in Nevada,
    killing all 14 on board. Not only was the flight itself classified
    ``Top-Secret'' but the crash and subsequent body recovery were also
    kept secret. The families of those who perished would have to be kept
    in the dark. It has taken over four decades for the families to learn
    the truth about their loved one's secret lives and untimely deaths.
        In closing, I believe it is appropriate to enter into the record
    the names of the men who perished on our behalf on November 17, 1955 on
    Mt. Charleston, NV. Let it be known that these individuals are Silent
    Heroes of the Cold War.
        George Manual Pappas Jr., Paul Eugene Winham, Clayton D. Farris,
    Guy R. Fasolas, John H. Gaines, Edwin J. Urolatis, James W. Brown,
    William H. Marr, James F. Bray, Rodney H. Kreimendahl, Terence J.
    O'Donnell, Fred F. Hanks, Harold C. Silent and Richard J. Hruda.
        It is my hope that in passing S. 1257, a National Memorial to the
    Cold War will one day be a reality. In conjunction with the Cold War
    Museum founded by Gary Powers Jr., son of Francis Gary Powers who was
    shot down over the former Soviet Union in 1960 the National Memorial
    and Museum will honor all those who lost their lives during the longest
    and most dangerous conflict our country ever faced.

        Senator Akaka. We would like to hear from Jay Mills, and
    following this we will have questions of both of you.

       STATEMENT OF JAY MILLS, VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE FRIENDS OF
                     MOCCASIN BEND, CHATTANOOGA, TN

        Mr. Mills. I appreciate the opportunity to come before your
    committee. My name is Jay Mills, vice president of Friends of
    Moccasin Bend National Park, and I speak on its behalf. The
    Friends is a community group dedicated to preserving,
    protecting, and interpreting one of the most outstanding and
    beautiful sites of American cultural history, Moccasin Bend.
        There is a long history to this effort. Industrial
    development threatened Moccasin Bend as early as the 1880's.
    Representing a broad coalition of community leaders, Senators
    Kefauver and Keller in 1950 initiated legislation that was
    approved by Congress and signed by President Truman authorizing
    the addition of up to 1,400 acres on Moccasin Bend to the
    Chicamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park.
        Although that effort was suspended by the failure of then
    Governor Frank Clemmon to take the final necessary measures,
    today's legislation gives new life to a decades-old effort.
    This cause is worthy, because Moccasin Bend contains one of the
    most important and rich complexes of archaeological and
    historical sites to be found inside any city in the United
    States, chronicling 10,000-plus years of human history.
        Themes included in this resource are: the peopling of the
    continent during the Paleo-Indian period, adaptation to the
    changing environment, and the emergence of regional distinct
    cultures through the archaic periods, transitioning to
    permanent settlement into the woodland period, along with long
    distance trade, the rise of politically powerful fortified
    population centers during the Mississippian period, contact
    with Spanish explorers and the consequences of academic,
    military, and economic destabilization and collapse, and the
    cultural survival of those people, the Muskogee, also known as
    the Creek, the frontier and the appearance of the Cherokee and
    their tenure of the land and their removal along the Trail of
    Tears. Chattanooga was one of the major ports of deportation.
        Moccasin Bend also played a pivotal role in the Civil War.
    Union artillery pieces on Moccasin Bend bombarded defensive
    routes across Lookout Mountain and allowed Hooker's Army and
    Sherman's Army to break the siege, join Grant, and rout the
    Confederates, turning a Union defeat at Chicamauga into a
    victory at Chattanooga, giving President Lincoln the supply
    route he needed through the mountains to press the war through
    the Atlantic States.
        As noted in the findings of the Park Service cooperative
    management plan, nowhere in the park system or State, local or
    private parks is such a diverse array of scenes significant to
    this Nation's history currently protected and interpreted.
    National park status will provide comprehensive protection and
    interpretation of these precious nationally significant
    resources and ensure their professional development into a
    highly valued and attractive asset.
        The public benefits are enormous. It would establish a 911-
    acre green space contiguous to downtown Chattanooga, as you
    will note on the map. The city is there underneath the text on
    the right, the city center. It would unlock this resource for
    recreation, education, and its economic benefits. The park
    would connect with Chattanooga's revitalized waterfront in
    downtown via the nationally renowned river walk system, and the
    interpretive center will serve as the gateway to the park, and
    the Friends strive to make the interpretive center equal in
    quality and attractiveness of the Tennessee Aquarium.
        A 1996 study by Thomas J. Martins & Associates projects
    that the Moccasin Bend National Historic Site and Interpretive
    Center will generate $29 million annually in economic benefit
    within the State of Tennessee, and $21 million of that within
    the county on an ongoing basis.
        The site is located next to downtown Chattanooga and close
    to Interstates 24 and 75, which cross in Chattanooga, making it
    highly accessible to the public for education and enjoyment.
        The Friends for the last 7 years have worked hard to lead
    an all-inclusive community census in support of the park. Both
    Hamilton County and the city of Chattanooga have passed
    resolutions requesting elected officials to work toward
    including Moccasin Bend into the National Park Service. The
    Friends have secured endorsements from over 25 community
    organizations, and petitions of over 6,000 citizen signatures.
        Additionally, the editorial staffs of both newspapers have
    strongly endorsed the project and given extensive coverage
    throughout its development. The Trust for Public Land, the
    Nature Conservancy, and the Chattanooga Area Convention Center
    and Visitors Bureau have strongly endorsed the project. The
    Friends have developed a vibrant partnership with several Creek
    and Cherokee Nations and Tribes whose heritage is at issue
    here. The development of the legislation before you today has
    been followed and shaped by their leaders and endorsed by the
    Cultural Committee of the Intertribal Council of the Five
    Civilized Tribes, that is, the Muskogee, Cherokee, Chickasaw,
    Choctaw, and Seminole Nations.
        Chattanooga in recent years has become well-known for its
    public-private partnership successes, the Tennessee River Walk,
    Coolidge Park, Tennessee Aquarium, the Creative Discovery
    Museum, and new urban schools. Now the community's leadership
    has pledged and is committed to execute a new riverfront plan
    finalized earlier this month by Hargreaves & Associates of
    Boston.
        The plan calls for mixed use redevelopment along both banks
    of nearly a mile of the downtown riverfront, anchored at one
    end by the future Moccasin Bend Interpretive Center, the
    gateway to Moccasin Bend National Historic Site. The leading
    foundations in Chattanooga, as well as individuals, have lent
    their support to bring the project to this point, and the
    Friends is expanding those efforts, knowing that it will take
    broad public-private support to develop a park and interpretive
    programming with the highest level of appeal and impact.
        The Friends continues a highly proactive effort to make
    this project a great success, and will work closely with the
    National Park Service into the future to conceive, build,
    promote, and maintain a vibrant new national historic site. I
    would like thank the entire Tennessee delegation for their
    support of this bill, and especially the leadership of Senators
    Thomas, Fred Thompson, Bill Frist, and Congressman Zach Wamp
    for their success in forging a broad consensus of support for
    the project. The Friends welcomes any suggestions or comments
    in pursuit of what we believe will be a magnificent project.
        Thank you very much for your interest in Moccasin Bend
    National Historic Site.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Mills follows:]
       Prepared Statement of Jay Mills, Vice-President of the Friends of
                         Moccasin Bend, Chattanooga, TN
        I appreciate the opportunity to come before your committee. My name
    is Jay Mills, Vice-President of The Friends of Moccasin Bend National
    Park and I speak on its behalf. The Friends is a community group
    dedicated to preserving, protecting and interpreting one of the most
    outstanding and beautiful sites of American cultural history--Moccasin
    Bend.
        There is a long history to this effort. Industrial development
    threatened Moccasin Bend as early as the 1880s. Representing a broad
    coalition of business and community leaders, Senators Kefaufer and
    McKeller in 1950 initiated legislation that was approved by Congress
    and signed by President Harry Truman authorizing the addition of up to
    1,400 acres on Moccasin Bend to the Chickamauga and Chattanooga
    National Military Park.
        Although that effort was suspended by the failure of Governor Frank
    Clement to take final necessary measures, today's proposed legislation
    gives new life to a decades old effort. This cause is worthy because
    Moccasin Bend contains one of the most important and rich complexes of
    archaeological and historical sites to be found inside any city in the
    United States, chronicling 10,500 plus years of human history. I have
    personally studied archaeology for nearly 20 years, and worked in North
    America and Africa. It's a highly significant site.
        The themes included in these resources are:

       The peopling of the continent;
       Emergence of regionally distinct cultures;
       Transition to permanent settlement;
       Long distance trade;
       Rise of politically powerful fortified population centers;
       Contact with Spanish explorers and the consequences of
            epidemic, military and economic destabilization, and collapse,
            and cultural survival;
       Frontier and Cherokee tenure including the defiant Cherokee
            Chief, Dragging Canoe, whose villages were along this section
            of the river;
       The Cherokee removal along the Trail of Tears;
       Moccasin Bend also played a pivotal role in the Civil War.
            Union artillery pieces on the Moccasin Point bombarded defense
            routes on Lookout Mountain and allowed Hooker's and Sherman's
            Army to break the siege, join Grant and route the confederates,
            turning a union defeat at Chickamauga into a victory at
            Chattanooga. This gave President Lincoln the supply route he
            needed through the mountains to press the war to the Atlantic
            States.

        As noted in the findings of the National Park Service Cooperative
    Management Plan, nowhere within the park service or in state, local or
    private parks is such a diverse array of themes significant to this
    nation's history currently protected and interpreted.
        The site, located next to downtown Chattanooga and close to
    Interstates 24 and 75, is highly accessible to the public for education
    and enjoyment.
        National Park status will provide comprehensive protection and
    interpretation of these precious, nationally significant resources and
    assure their professional development into highly valued and attractive
    assets. The National Park Service is uniquely qualified to embrace the
    full range of these responsibilities. Citizen's groups have insisted on
    that level of protection and oversight.
        More specifically, the Park Service is uniquely qualified to
    provide the strength of federal law to protect the resources from
    plunder and other threats. It also offers the greatest assurance that
    the resources are protected into perpetuity, along with the highest
    level of professionalism in planning how the park will be interpreted,
    experienced and managed. And, only through federal management is there
    the assurance that the peoples whose histories are to be interpreted
    will hereafter play a prominent role in determining how their history
    will be interpreted.
        The public benefits are enormous.
        Establishing the Unit would preserve a 911-acre green-space
    contiguous to downtown Chattanooga while unlocking it for passive
    recreation, education and its economic benefits.
        The park would connect with Chattanooga's revitalized waterfront
    and downtown via the nationally renowned river-walk system, and the
    interpretive center will serve as a gateway to the park. The Friends
    strive for an interpretive center equaling the quality and attraction
    of the Tennessee Aquarium.
        A 1996 study by Thomas J. Martin and Associates, whose estimates
    for the Tennessee Aquarium proved conservative, projects that a
    Moccasin Bend National Historic Site and Interpretive Center will
    generate $29 million annually in economic benefits within the State of
    Tennessee and $21 million annually within the county on an ongoing
    basis.
        The Friends for the last seven years has worked very hard to lead
    an all-inclusive community consensus in support of a National Park.
    Both Hamilton County and the City of Chattanooga have passed
    resolutions requesting elected officials to work toward including
    Moccasin Bend in the National Park Service. The Friends has secured
    endorsements from over 25 community and petitions with over 6,000
    citizen signatures. The editorial staffs of both newspapers have
    strongly endorsed the project and given extensive coverage throughout
    its development. The Trust for Public Land, the Nature Conservancy, and
    the Chattanooga Area Convention Center and Visitors Bureau have
    strongly endorsed the project.
        Early in the process we opened communications with the federally
    recognized tribes whose heritage is at issue here, most notably the
    several Creek and Cherokee nations and tribes, and have developed a
    vibrant partnership with them. The development of the legislation
    before you today has been followed and shaped by their leaders and
    endorsed by the cultural committee of the Inter-tribal Council of the
    Five Civilized Tribes (the Muscogee, Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw and
    Seminole Nations).
        Chattanooga has in recent years become well known for its public/
    private partnership successes: The Tennessee River Walk, Coolidge Park,
    The Tennessee Aquarium, the Creative Discovery Museum, New Urban
    Schools, etc. Now the community's leadership has pledged and is
    committed to execute a new riverfront plan finalized earlier this month
    by Hargreaves Associates of Boston. The plan calls for mixed-use
    redevelopment along both banks of nearly a mile of downtown riverfront,
    anchored at one end by the future Moccasin Bend Interpretive Center,
    the gateway to the Moccasin Bend National Historic Site. The leading
    foundations in Chattanooga, as well as individuals, have lent their
    support to bring the project to this point, and the Friends is
    expanding those efforts, knowing that it will take broad public-private
    support to develop a park and interpretive programming with the highest
    level of appeal and impact.
        The Friends continues a highly pro-active effort to make this
    project a great success and will work closely with the National Park
    Service into the future to conceive, build, promote and maintain a
    vibrant new National Historic Site. I would like to thank the entire
    Tennessee delegation for their support of this bill, and especially the
    leadership of Senators Fred Thompson and Bill Frist and Congressman
    Zach Wamp for their success in forging a broad consensus of support for
    the project. The Friends welcomes any suggestions or comments in
    pursuit of what we believe will be a magnificent project.
        Thank you very much for your interest in a Moccasin Bend National
    Historic Site.

        Senator Akaka. Thank you for your statements.
        Mr. Mills, based on your familiarity with this site, is
    there any way to mitigate the impact of the golf course, the
    mental health institute, and other uses found to be
    incompatible by the Park Service on the site's archaeological
    and other resources?
        Mr. Mills. If I understand your question correctly, is
    there a way to mitigate that, I think it is a question of the
    Friends as a group, and the community at large would like to
    have a part. We also would like to--as quickly as possible, one
    that would look like a park, one that would have these uses not
    on that property as soon as possible. I think it is a question
    of us trying to tighten down those dates and get them as soon
    as possible.
        Senator Akaka. Mr. Ririe, I previously asked Mr. Smith
    about alternative methods of public input into the Cold War
    theme study as a substitute for a formal advisory committee. Do
    you have any recommendations regarding how academics or other
    experts could be usefully involved in the theme study?
        Mr. Ririe. Actually, I do. There are several experts that I
    am aware of. There are several that have been working on Cold
    War studies in the past. Harvard has done extensive work on
    Cold War studies. Also, there is a gentleman by the name of
    Gary Powers, Jr., and he is the son of Francis Gary Powers that
    was shot down over Russia in 1960. He has been working for over
    5 years on a repository and a Cold War museum. He has done a
    lot of work, and would be an excellent addition to an advisory
    committee.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you. I will defer for further
    questions to Senator Thomas.
        Senator Thomas. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I really do not have
    many. I thank both of you for being here and for the efforts
    you make with respect to the issues you represent. I think it
    is very important that you do that.
        I might ask, on the Cold War, I guess at least part of the
    idea would be to establish, identify areas then that would be
    made some kind of Federal reserve or something.
        Mr. Ririe. Exactly. I believe that some of these areas,
    some of these sites might perhaps be a part of the Park Service
    now. I know there are others. There are missile silos, there
    are the Nike sites, there are extensive sites in different
    States. We would like to find out what those sites are,
    identify those sites, and then see about the feasibility of
    including those into the system.
        Senator Thomas. There are missile sites, 1,500 of them, as
    a matter of fact. Some of them are still active.
        Mr. Mills, thank you very much for your presentation, and
    again for all the work that obviously you have done. I hope we
    can find a way to do something that will be helpful. I suppose
    we will have to take a look at a number of different options,
    because this is a little unusual setting to come into a
    national park because of those things that are there, but
    certainly we will continue to work at it and see if we can find
    some way to help preserve it. The county and the city are not
    interested in making it a local park?
        Mr. Mills. That was looked at during the cooperative
    management plan process, and the city and the county were very
    much a part of those processes. The staff, the executive, and
    the commissioners themselves attended those meetings.
        They have restrained from allowing development of various
    sorts out there. Some have occurred, others have not, expressly
    because of the knowledge of how important it is, which has been
    growing over the years. It was only in 1984 that it was
    demonstrated that the Spanish contact material out there is of
    intact settlement. The Mississippian Village burned. Spanish
    contact materials were being reported by the people in the
    seventies who were looting the site. There was word of mouth.
        The Native American reserve force was established by
    several individuals of Native American ancestry in the
    community, and they became deputized and effectively stopped
    the looting at that time. In 1984, we became aware----
        Senator Thomas. Is the city interested, and the county, in
    doing it themselves, is what I am saying?
        Mr. Mills. I do not think they are. I think they are
    interested in seeing it turned into a park. In terms of doing
    it justice, that is what the community--all the people involved
    in the process said it would not provide the protection that
    Federal legislation would with Federal laws.
        Senator Thomas. Okay. Thank you.
        Senator Akaka. Thank you very much. I have no further
    questions. I want to thank both of you and all of the witnesses
    who have appeared before this subcommittee today. The hearing
    record will remain open for 2 weeks if anyone wishes to submit
    any comments or statements to be included in the record.
        Again, thank you very much for your testimony, and your
    responses will be helpful to the committee. The hearing is
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
                                    APPENDIX

                  Additional Material Submitted for the Record

                                  ----------

                                 Bratton & McClow, LLC,
                                              Attorneys at Law,
                                            Gunnison, CO, May 30, 2002.
    Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
    U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

    Re: NCA Boundary Language

        Dear Senator Campbell: I understand that you will be submitting, in
    the near future, a bill to revise the boundary of the Black Canyon of
    the Gunnison National Park and Gunnison Gorge National Conservation
    Area and other purposes. As you know, I have practiced law in Gunnison
    for over 40 years, with special emphasis in water rights, including
    representation of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District
    since January, 1961. I am therefore very interested in the possible
    impact of the language in this bill upon water rights in our basin. In
    particular, I would like assurance that the legislation does not
    contain any language which could interfere in any way with water rights
    in the Gunnison Basin and that any water rights that may be necessary
    for the purposes of the Act should be obtained in accordance with
    Colorado law. In particular, I would request that you include in the
    Act provisions that address the following:
        1. Nothing in the Act shall constitute an express or implied
    reservation of water for any purpose.
        2. Nothing in the Act nor the permitting authority in other
    applicable provisions of law shall affect any water rights in existence
    prior to the date of the enacting of the Act, including any water
    rights held by the United States, or access to existing facilities.
        3. Any new water rights that the Secretary determines is necessary
    for the purpose of the Act shall be established in accordance with the
    procedural and substantive requirements of the laws of the State of
    Colorado.
        If I can answer any questions you might have about this I will be
    glad to discuss it with you or a member of your staff.
                Very truly yours,
                                                    L. Richard Bratton.
                                     ______

                The Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association,
                                           Montrose, CO, June 12, 2002.
    Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
    U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
        Dear Senator Campbell: We are writing in regards to S. 1944, the
    ``Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park and Gunnison Gorge
    National Conservation Area Boundary Revision Act of 2002.'' We support
    your efforts in this regard. We would ask you to add language to this
    legislation that protects the withdrawn lands under Bureau of
    Reclamation control for the tunnel works and the Gunnison Tunnel
    operations area.
        This land is located in Sec. 10 SE1/4NE1/4 S1/2 NW1/4 S1/2. Section
    11 S1/2, Section 12 N1/2 SW1/4, Section 13, N1/2NW1/4, Section 14 N1/2
    N1/2 all in T 49 N Range W., NMPM. All lands from a line 1/4 mile north
    of Crystal Dam.
        We ask for your support in this action because the National Park
    Service does not need this area and they are not in the irrigation
    business. The Bureau of Reclamation has operated this area with
    Uncompahgre Valley Water users employees for the last 90 plus years.
    Irrigation water and head works for the delivery of irrigation water
    may be even more important now than it was in 1902. Please consider
    this request in your deliberations on the legislation.
        We would ask that in the consideration of the legislation. You
    please add language that ensures the ditches and other water supply
    facilities located within the new conservation area boundaries are not
    adversely affected by this legislation.
                Sincerely,
                                              Marcus W. Catlin.
                                     ______

                                 Board of County Commissioners,
                                     Montrose County, CO, May 29, 2002.
    Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell,
    U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
        Dear Senator Campbell: We are writing in regard to S. 1944, the
    ``Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park and Gunnison Gorge
    National Conservation Area Boundary Revision Act of 2002.'' We strongly
    support your continued efforts in this regard, but urge you to add
    language to this legislation that protects existing water rights.
        Please help ensure that ditches and other water supply facilities
    located within the new conservation area boundaries are not adversely
    affected by this legislation. As you know, irrigation water is
    critically important to Montrose County, particularly during the worst
    drought in Colorado's recorded history.
        Thank you for your consideration and for your continued support of
    Montrose County.
                Sincerely,
                                                  Leo M. Large,
                                                              Chairman.
                                     ______

                                 Virginia Key Beach Park Trust,
                                               Miami, FL, June 7, 2002.
    Hon. Bill Nelson,
    U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
        Dear Senator Nelson: On behalf of the Board of Directors of
    Virginia Key Beach Park Trust, I am submitting the following remarks to
    be read into the record during the Senate Committee hearing on
    Wednesday, June 12, 2002. We are sorry that we are unable to be present
    for this important matter and trust you too will find that Virginia Key
    Beach Park deserves your support.
        Virginia Key Beach in Miami, Florida, is one of South Florida's,
    and the nations, greatest treasures. It is situated on a 1,000-acre
    barrier island, which has remained exclusively non-residential through
    the years, and retains such unique environmental features as a tropical
    hardwood hammock and a wildlife conservation area. The 77-acre parcel
    of Virginia Key Beach itself is located on the southeast side of the
    island, along Bear Cut, which separates Virginia Key from Key Biscayne.
        This beach is as rich in scenic beauty as it is in historical
    significance. It is not only the only oceanfront property actually
    within the city limits of Miami, it is practically the only place in
    the city where a visitor can enjoy a view of the water and natural
    surroundings uninterrupted by any tall buildings. It is not surprising
    that so special a place should figure prominently in history.
        We know very little of the Parks earliest history. Extensive
    landfill and other alterations over the years have destroyed or covered
    any archaeological finds that may have been there. (A professional
    archaeological survey was performed earlier in June, 2001, which
    reached this conclusion). One of the earliest records of Virginia Key
    is of a skirmish that took place there at Bear Cut on October 22, 1838
    between U.S. Revenue Marines and a group of Seminoles who were camped
    there. However, it is the later history, in the 20th century, for which
    Virginia Key Beach is best known.
        Official records will show that the Beach was officially opened as
    a Dade County Park ``for the exclusive use of Negroes'' on August 1,
    1945. This was in direct response to a bold protest by several African
    American men led by the late Judge Lawson E. Thomas at an all-white
    Beach in northern Dade County. It was their hope to be arrested, so
    that the case would come to Court, but, precisely to avoid such an
    embarrassment, the County fathers decided to proclaim Virginia Key
    Beach, a mere half mile of shoreline out of all the miles of beaches in
    Dade County, as a ``Colored Beach''. It was an instant success, even
    though the only means of access was by boat from downtown Miami, and
    would be even more successful after the construction of the automobile
    causeway in 1949.
        Unofficially, however, the history of this extraordinary
    recreational site goes back a good bit farther than 1945. Many of
    Miami's African American community elders recall visiting ``Bears
    Gut,'' as it was then known, as youngsters as early as the 1930's.
    There was apparently an ``understanding'' whereby this particular area
    was recognized as reserved for Blacks to enjoy. Families would travel
    there by boat, and parents closely supervised their children to be sure
    that they did not venture too far into the water, with its dangerously
    swift current and sharp dropoffs. (One story holds that the drop-offs
    were deliberately excavated by rum runners who needed to bring their
    smuggling boats closer to shore to unload).
        An even earlier use of the site by African Americans is suggested
    by a notation on a United States survey map, published in 1918, of a
    survey conductod in 1916. There, just south of the ``Abandoned Military
    Reservation,'' right at Bear Cut, a rectangle is shown and indicated to
    be a ``Negro Dancing Pavilion.'' The newly constituted (January 2001)
    city of Miami Virginia Key Beach Park Trust is endeavoring to research
    this item further.
        What distinguished Virginia Key Beach during the segregation era
    from so many other ``Colored'' parks throughout the South, was that it
    was not a second-rate facility. The same amenities that had been
    provided for all-white Crandon Park, such as the carousel, were also at
    Virginia Key Beach, in addition to a wonderful mini-train amusement
    ride. Most of the buildings were well constructed, and have weathered
    both hurricanes and the forces of ``demolition by neglect'' that have
    prevailed for nearly twenty years. They still stand today, awaiting
    restoration efforts that are currently underway.
        Even more importantly, partly because of this long history, the
    Park was fully embraced by the community. Not even the sting of forced
    racial separation and all of its restrictions could dampen the
    community's enjoyment of Virginia Key Beach. ``It was a beautiful
    place.'' ``It was Paradise.'' ``It was like a trip to the Bahamas
    without ever leaving the city.'' Such quotations abound among those who
    remember the Park in its heyday, with its dance floor and outdoor
    jukebox, its famous Virginia Key Corn Dogs at the refreshment stand,
    its very popular amusements, its well-used boat ramp, and the ``lines
    all the way back to New York'' to secure a cabana on the weekends. A
    rare exception to the nonresidential character of the site was the
    ``cottages,'' a frame structure with three apartment units for
    overnight stays that served honeymooners, black celebrities, and others
    with the means to enjoy the Park for more than a day.
        Virginia Key Beach was the hub of African American life in South
    Florida. It brought together all neighborhoods and social classes, and
    attracted people from as far away as Palm Beach County. Churches and
    organizations held major functions there. Many a Miamian can recall
    that their ``full immersion'' baptism into the Christian Church took
    place right at Virginia Key Beach. Virginia Key Beach was also Lover's
    Lane for those who could get there. Most of all, it as a place of
    family fun and togetherness, and a much-need respite from otherwise
    pervasive racism, in an extraordinarily beautiful subtropical scenic
    ambience not to be found anywhere else.
        It is one of South Florida's, and the nation's great losses that a
    whole generation has come of age who did not have the opportunity to
    enjoy this wonderful treasure because it has been closed to the public
    for the better part of two decades. However, bright new hope has arisen
    for the future as a diverse group of citizens have made a commitment,
    working in cooperation with the City of Miami, to bring the Park back
    to its former glory, but this time for ALL residents and visitors. Its
    unique history and natural features make it a landmark of national and
    international importance. Indeed, much of its unique importance is
    shared with Biscayne National Park, which is comprised mainly of
    Florida Keys and reefs, and which embodies such remarkable history as
    the story of Parson Jones and his family. The invaluable asset that is
    represented by historic Virginia Key Beach is deserving of every
    available source of support, for the benefit of the nation and the
    world, as well as the residents and visitors of Miami.
        We respectfully request your support of this legislation for a
    study for inclusion of Virginia Key Beach Park in the National Park
    Service.
                Sincerely,
                                              M. Athalle Range,
                                                                 Chair.
                                     ______

      Statement of Francis Gary Powers, Jr., Founder, The Cold War Museum
        Dear Mr. Chairman: My name is Francis Gary Powers, Jr. and I am
    founder of The Cold War Museum, a 501(c)(3) charitable organization
    dedicated to education, preservation, and research on the global,
    ideological, and political confrontations between East and West from
    the end of World War II to the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
        I greatly appreciate this opportunity to provide this written
    statement in support of S. 1257 to the National Parks Subcommittee and
    would like to express my gratitude to Senator Reid for sponsoring a
    bill that aims to preserve such a vital part of our country's history.
    Last year, I testified before the House Subcommittee on National Parks,
    Recreation and Public Lands in support of H.R. 107.
        This legislation means much to me personally. As the son of a
    famous Cold War figure, I grew up with the Cold War. The Cold War
    Museum began for me as a way to honor my father, but it soon took on a
    much greater life and purpose. I am working toward a museum that will
    honor all the men and women who worked for democracy and freedom during
    the Cold War. The Cold War Museum will dedicate resources to
    commemorating those whose deeds and sacrifices furthered democracy, but
    the Museum strives for an international and objective understanding of
    the Cold War--one of the most intense periods of conflict, and most
    dangerous years in human history.
        The Cold War Museum has collected over two million dollars worth of
    artifacts, currently in storage, and last year it became an affiliate
    of the Smithsonian Institution. While the Museum does not yet have a
    permanent home, it sponsors traveling exhibits that have been displayed
    throughout the U.S. and in Norway, Germany, and Russia. In the past two
    years, more than 250,000 people have visited the Museum's website
    (www.coldwar.org). Presently, we are in negotiations with Fairfax
    County officials to establish our permanent location at the former Nike
    Missile Base in Lorton, Virginia.
        The growing popularity of the Cold War Museum underscores its
    commitment not to revive old hatreds, but rather to promote lessons
    learned. It's about teaching democracy and the pursuit of world peace.
        The Museum's distinguished Board of Directors includes experts in
    museum management, nonprofit management, and various aspects of Cold
    War history. It also has an Advisory Board, which includes Sergei
    Khrushchev, son of Nikita Khrushchev; former Eisenhower aide General
    Andrew Goodpaster; the late Ambassador Vernon Walters; and renowned
    photographic interpreter Dino Brugioni.
        Recently, the Cold War Museum developed a list of important Cold
    War sites, a focal point of both S. 1257 and H.R 107, the House-passed
    companion bill. We believe that the goal of recognizing a Cold War site
    in every state is achievable and look forward to providing any
    assistance that could be useful to the Secretary of the Interior once
    this legislation is enacted.
        We also believe that Section 3 of S. 1257, which establishes a
    ``Cold War Advisory Committee'' is an excellent provision in that it
    will make available to the Secretary a broad range of persons with
    expertise in Cold War and U.S. history, and in historic preservation.
    We strongly urge the Subcommittee to include this recommendation as a
    means of assuring that the study will have the best possible input for
    its final report.
        America has honored men and women from many wars who died for
    freedom, but whatever the reason, there has been almost no recognition
    of the Cold War, an era that lasted almost 50 years, cost thousands of
    lives, trillions of dollars, changed the course of history, and left
    America the only remaining superpower. However, the Cold War is
    virtually unknown to the current generation. This is a great disservice
    to all those who gave their lives during the Cold War.
        James Billlington, Librarian of Congress, said in a foreign policy
    speech,

              The Cold War was the central conflict of the second half of
            the 20th century, the longest and most unconventional war of
            the entire modern era and an unprecedented experience for
            Americans. We were faced for the first time in our history with
            an opponent who was both ideologically committed to overthrow
            our system and was equipped to destroy us physically.

        Journalist Charles Krauthammer, in an Op-Ed piece in the Washington
    Post, entitled ``Build a Cold War Memorial,'' had this to say:

              The Cold War did not have the dramatic intensity of World War
            II, but it was just as real and just as dangerous. Though often
            clandestine and subtle, it ranged worldwide, cost many lives,
            evoked much heroism and lasted what seemed like forever.
            Considering the stakes, the scope and the suffering, this was a
            struggle that deserves commemoration.

        Although the Cold War periodically resurfaces in the news, as is
    evident by the Hanssen spy case, many people really don't understand
    the background and the history. The Cold War Museum's web site
    testifies to the public's desire for information.
        Krauthammer said this about a proposed Cold War Monument:

              It needn't be grandiose, but it must have a small museum for
            instruction. A gallery of heroes: Truman, Marshall, Churchill,
            Reagan. A hall for the fallen: the secret agents who died
            anonymously. A tribute to allies and friends . . . and a gulag
            display, so our children will learn the nature of evil.

        We hope that the study that will be undertaken by Department of the
    Interior when this legislation is enacted will establish the value of a
    permanent Cold War Museum as the central repository for Cold War
    artifacts and information.
        Our plans include the following:

       Display Cold War photos, artwork, and artifacts.
       Establish an endowed research chair at the Cold War Museum.
       Collect biographies on key figures of the Cold War.
       Record oral and written histories to capture the human side
            of the conflict.
       Create an inventory of key technologies that resulted from
            Cold War research and development.
       Develop a comprehensive inventory of significant Cold War
            sites and resources that need to be preserved such as military
            sites, homes of key figures, laboratories, test sites, and
            historic places.
       Build a Cold War Memorial to honor our Cold War veterans and
            participants.

        I am proud to say that the Cold War Museum is already addressing
    these needs. We are working with the Smithsonian to determine which
    artifacts from their national collection can be used in Cold War Museum
    exhibits and displays. We have received offers of support from a
    variety of sources including the Holocaust Museum, Voice of America,
    and the embassies of Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, and
    Slovakia. Earlier this year, the Commonwealth of Virginia provided an
    initial grant to the museum in the amount of $28,000 and a resolution
    of support stating that the Commonwealth supports the Cold War Museum
    locating at the former Nike Missile base in Lorton, Virginia.
        The interest and support of James Billington, Charles Krauthammer,
    the Smithsonian Institution, the Voice of America, the Holocaust
    Museum, various embassies and schools, and the Commonwealth of Virginia
    provide strong evidence that this legislation will be of significant
    value in educating students, honoring Cold War veterans, and preserving
    Cold War history.
        Mr. Chairman, the Directors of the Cold War Museum and I would like
    to express our strongest possible support for the enactment of either
    S. 1257 or H.R 107, although the establishment of an Advisory Committee
    by S. 1257 makes that bill considerably more effective in our opinion.
        We believe it is vital to begin immediately to preserve these
    historical resources. Records are being lost and historical sites fall
    prey to developers every day. S. 1257 and H.R. 107 represent an
    important step in the right direction. We urge the Congress to act
    expeditiously so that efforts to preserve this important part of
    American history and its historical sites can be preserved for all
    time.
        Thank you for this opportunity to present our views.
                Very Truly Yours,
                                      Francis Gary Powers, Jr.,
                                                               Founder.