[Senate Hearing 109-28]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-28
ESTABLISH BLEEDING KANSAS NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA; CHAMPLAIN VALLEY
NATIONAL HERITAGE IN VERMONT AND NEW YORK; COLONIAL HERITAGE AREA IN
MISSOURI; AND UPPER HOUSATONIC VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA IN
CONNECTICUT AND MASSACHUSETTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on
S. 175 S. 322
S. 323 S. 429
__________
MARCH 15, 2005
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
21-332 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman
LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RON WYDEN, Oregon
RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina, TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
CONRAD BURNS, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey
GORDON SMITH, Oregon KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
Alex Flint, Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Chief Counsel
Robert M. Simon, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on National Parks
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming, Chairman
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Vice Chairman
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina RON WYDEN, Oregon
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
GORDON SMITH, Oregon JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
Pete V. Domenici and Jeff Bingaman are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
Thomas Lillie, Professional Staff Member
David Brooks, Democratic Senior Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii.................. 8
Baker, James, Historic Site Administrator, Missouri Department of
Natural Resources, Ste. Genevieve, MO.......................... 16
Billings, Judy, Senior Vice President, Lawrence Chamber of
Commerce, Lawrence Convention and Visitors Bureau, Lawrence, KS 18
Brownback, Hon. Sam, U.S. Senator from Kansas.................... 3
Cosgrove, John W., Executive Director, Alliance of National
Heritage Areas, Scranton, PA................................... 27
Cousins, Ann, Field Services Representative, Preservation Trust
of Vermont, Burlington, VT..................................... 21
Dodd, Hon. Christopher J., U.S. Senator from Connecticut......... 4
Jones, Ronald D., Chairman, Upper Housatonic Valley National
Heritage Area, Inc., Salisbury, CT............................. 23
Kerry, Hon. John F., U.S. Senator from Massachusetts............. 5
Knight, J. Peyton, Executive Director, American Policy Center,
and Washington Representative for American Land Rights
Association, Warrenton, VA..................................... 30
Lieberman, Hon. Joseph I., U.S. Senator from Connecticut......... 6
Matthews, Janet Snyder, Associate Director for Cultural
Resources, National Park Service, Department of the Interior... 9
Roberts, Hon. Pat, U.S. Senator from Kansas...................... 7
Salazar, Hon. Ken, U.S. Senator from Colorado.................... 8
Talent, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from Missouri................ 15
Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................... 1
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 37
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 39
ESTABLISH BLEEDING KANSAS NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA; CHAMPLAIN VALLEY
NATIONAL HERITAGE IN VERMONT AND NEW YORK; COLONIAL HERITAGE AREA IN
MISSOURI; AND UPPER HOUSATONIC VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA IN
CONNECTICUT AND MASSACHUSETTS
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Craig Thomas
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Thomas. I believe we'll get started. We have a
little complication today, in that voting around here
interferes with the rest of our lives, and, at 3 o'clock, we're
going to have five votes in a row, so we're going to have to
see if we can't wind up here by about 3:10, at the latest.
So thank you very much. Welcome, Janet Matthews, from the
Department of the Interior, and our other witnesses to today's
hearing.
The purpose, of course, is to receive testimony on four
Heritage Area bills that are now in the Senate: S. 175, to
establish Bleeding Kansas and Enduring Struggle for Freedom
National Heritage Area; S. 322, a bill to establish Champlain
Valley National Heritage Partnership in the States of Vermont
and New York; S. 323 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior
to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the
French Colonial Heritage, State of Missouri; and S. 429, a bill
to establish the Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage
Area.
So, as you all know, the Heritage Area--first, the Heritage
Area was created in 1986. Since that time, we've seen rather
large growth in the numbers and the density of Heritage Areas.
Currently, 27 National Heritage Areas exist, and legislation
has been introduced for another 16 in this Congress. The State
of Pennsylvania has six. The entire State of Tennessee is a
National Heritage Area. The potential exists for hundreds to be
designated, and each area expects to receive a million dollars
a year for 10 or 15 years.
And I'm a proponent of trying to establish a structured
program with criteria and a process for the study and
designation of future heritage areas, with respect to having a
national concept, as opposed to having done it in a State, or
so on. We have a bill, S. 243, and a House companion, by Mr.
Hefley, establishing such a program. I encourage my colleagues
to pass this policy, this Congress, so that then we can make
application for how it applies to the bill as proposals come
in. I'm not opposed, obviously, to the concept of National
Heritage Areas, but I think it's important that we define the
program within the context of the Park Service's mission, and
develop a structured process so we can move forward with that.
So, I want to thank my colleagues for being here today.
Senator from Hawaii, we have 35 minutes to do this job, so
we're going to ask the witnesses to take 5 minutes to put the
rest of their statement in the record, printed, and if we can
hold our questions to a minimum, why, perhaps we can get
finished.
Senator Akaka.
[The prepared statements of Senators Thomas, Brownback,
Dodd, Kerry, Lieberman, and Roberts follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Craig Thomas, U.S. Senator From Wyoming
Good afternoon. I want to welcome Janet Matthews from the
Department of the Interior and our other witnesses to today's
Subcommittee Hearing.
Our purpose for this hearing is to receive testimony on four
heritage area bills introduced into the Senate.
S. 175, a bill to establish the Bleeding Kansas and Enduring
Struggle for Freedom National Heritage Area, and for other purposes;
S. 322, a bill to establish the Champlain Valley National Heritage
Partnership in the States of Vermont and New York, and for other
purposes;
S. 323, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study
the suitability and feasibility of designating the French Colonial
Heritage Area in the State of Missouri as a unit of the National Park
System, and for other purposes; and
S. 429, a bill to establish the Upper Housatonic (``hue-sah-
tonic'') Valley National Heritage Area in the State of Connecticut and
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and for other purposes.
The first National Heritage Area was created in 1986. Since that
time we have seen a tremendous growth in the number and diversity of
heritage areas. Currently, 27 national heritage areas exist and
legislation has been introduced for another 16 in this congress. The
state of Pennsylvania has six and the entire state of Tennessee is a
National Heritage Area. The potential exists for hundreds more to be
designated and each area expects to receive a million dollars a year.
I have been a proponent of establishing a structured program with
criteria and a process for study and designation of future National
Heritage Areas. My bill, S. 243, and the House companion, H.R. 760,
introduced by Mr. Hefley establishes such a program. I encourage my
colleagues to pass the overarching National Heritage Area policy bill
this congress. I am prepared to work with them to make the necessary
improvements and get it sent to the President.
I am not opposed to the concept of National Heritage Areas, but it
is important that we define the program within the context of the
National Park Service mission and develop a structured process for
review and establishment of new areas. Without such a process, National
Heritage Areas will begin to impact other National Park Service
Programs and diminish future funding opportunities for heritage areas
themselves. At its current rate of growth up to $54 million per year of
the National Park Service budget could go to funding Heritage Areas by
the year 2016. We need to ensure that the National Park Service is
given the necessary legislative structure, such as S. 243, to
effectively implement the program.
Let me thank my colleagues from the Senate who are here to speak on
behalf of their bills and all of the witnesses for coming today. I look
forward to hearing the testimony being presented.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Brownback, U.S. Senator From Kansas,
on S. 175
Chairman Thomas and Members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to speak on behalf of a bill that I authored with Senator
Pat Roberts, Representative Jim Ryun and the Kansas Congressional
Delegation. It is with great pleasure that I speak to you not only on
behalf this bill, but on behalf of the State of Kansas in supporting
the establishment of the Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring Struggle for
Freedom National Heritage Area Act, which will serve to nationally
commemorate and educate Kansans and our nation on the significant
contributions and sacrifices Kansas has made to our nation.
The great story of Kansas can be summed up in the state motto, ``Ad
Astra per Aspera,'' to the stars through difficulties. Though only a
short phrase comprised of four words, the meaning and passion behind
the Kansas motto are as profound as they are descriptive of a state
that though smaller than some, was a catalyst for racial equality and
cultural change in this nation from the Civil War, to Reconstruction to
the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision to the present.
From inception, Kansas was born in controversy--a controversy that
helped to shape a nation and end the egregious practice of chattel
slavery that brutalized an entire race of individuals in this country.
I cannot think of a nobler or more important contribution provided to
our nation--though arguably it was one of the most turbulent and
darkest hours of, our history. Without this struggle however, the
battle to end persecution and transform our country into a symbol of
freedom and democracy throughout the world would not, have been
realized.
Last year, 2004, marked the sesquicentennial of the signing of the
Kansas-Nebraska bill which repealed the Missouri compromise, allowed
states to enter into the Union with or without slavery. This piece of
legislation, which was passed in May 1854, set the stage for what is
now referred to as, ``Bleeding Kansas.'' During this time, our state,
then a territory, was thrown into chaos with Kansans fighting
passionately to ensure that the territory would inter the Union as a
free state and not condone or legalize slavery in any capacity. At the
end of a very difficult and bloody struggle, Kansas entered the Union
as a free state and helped to spark the issue of slavery on a national
level. However, Kansas' contributions to the realization of freedom in
this nation did not stop with the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
Keeping true to our motto, to the stars through difficulties,
Kansas opened up her arms to a newly freed people after the Civil War
ended. Many African-Americans looked to Kansas for solace and
prosperity when the South was still an uncertain place. Perhaps one of
the best examples of Ad Astra per Aspera was the founding of Nicodemus,
a town in Kansas by African-Americans coming to our state to begin
their life of freedom and prosperity.
Founded in 1877, Nicodemus, which was named after a. legendary
slave who purchased his freedom, is the most recognized historically
black town in Kansas. Nicodemus was established by a group of colonists
from Lexington, Kentucky and grew to a population of 600 by 1879.
However, Nicodemus is not the only Kansas contribution that shaped a
more tolerant nation. Kansas was also one of the first states to house
an African-American military regiment in the 1800s, the Buffalo
Soldiers.
The Buffalo Soldiers were, and still are, considered one of the
most distinguished and revered African-American military regiments in
our nation's history. One of those regiments, the 10th Cavalry, was
stationed at Fort Leavenworth, KS. In July 1866, Congress passed
legislation establishing two cavalry and four infantry regiments that
were to be solely comprised of African-Americans. The mounted regiments
were the 9th and 10th Cavalries, soon nicknamed ``Buffalo Soldiers'' by
the Cheyenne and Comanche tribes. Until the early 1890s, the Buffalo
Soldiers constituted 20 percent of all cavalry forces on the American
frontier. Their invaluable service on the western frontier still
remains one of the most exemplary services preformed by a regiment in
the U.S. Army.
Finally, perhaps one of the most influential Supreme Court cases
heard was sparked by a citizen of Topeka, KS, Oliver Brown. Though
there were previous cases that challenged the legality of the separate
but equal doctrine, it was not until the now famous case, Brown v.
Topeka Board of Education, caught fire and changed the course of
America's history and the way in which we view equality in the eyes of
the law. When the Supreme Court ruled in 1954 that school segregation
laws were unconstitutional, the Court demolished the legal foundation
on which racial segregation stood. The Court's opinion, written and
delivered by Chief Justice Earl Warren, also served as a stirring moral
indictment of racial segregation, and an eloquent challenge to America
to cast off its prejudices and extend its promises of life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness to all citizens, regardless of race or
color.
Indeed, Kansas has a very special place in our nation's story and
this story should be told and should be shared with the nation. That is
why I am proud to support and help guide the Bleeding Kansas National
Heritage Area through Congress and I thank this committee for hearing
this bill today.
Already we have seen wonderful benefits in our state with the
creation of this initiative. Through the great work of the Territorial
Kansas Heritage Alliance and the chair of their planning committee,
Judy Billings, there is a renewed fervor surrounding the history of
Kansas within our state. We are seeing more coordination and networking
between our rural and urban communities, which not only strengthens the
effort to create this National Heritage Area but also strengthens these
cities as well.
Since 1999, the Territorial Kansas Heritage Alliance, which is
comprised of historians, tourism agencies as well as grass roots
organizations, have worked hard to ensure that the guidelines set
fourth by the National Park Service were reflected in every aspect of
this process, including protections for private property owners.
Additionally, since its founding, the Alliance has conducted numerous
town hall meetings around the State, one of which I was pleased to
host. Currently, the Alliance is drafting a brochure that will
highlight the initiative and begin the process of promoting this
project throughout the State. As you can see, this has been a very
transparent and inclusive process--one that has encompassed 27 counties
in our State. Furthermore, the Alliance not only worked to sustain the
Bleeding Kansas Heritage Area initiative but they also worked
tirelessly to assist in the celebration of the 150th anniversary of
Territorial Kansas.
These are just a few examples of why I am pleased to join with my
colleague from Kansas, Senator Pat Roberts, and enthusiastically
support this bill before this Committee today. Specifically, the
Bleeding Kansas National Heritage Area Act will designate 24 counties
in Kansas as the ``Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring Struggle for
Freedom National Heritage Area.'' Each of these counties will be
eligible to apply for the heritage area grants administered by the
National Park Service.
The Heritage Area will add to local economies within the State by
increasing tourism and will encourage collaboration between interests
of diverse units of government, businesses, tourism officials, private
property owners, and nonprofit groups within the Heritage Area.
Finally, the bill protects private property owners by requiring that
they provide in writing consent to be included in any request before
they are eligible to receive federal funds from the heritage area. The
bill also authorizes $10,000,000.00 over a 10 year period to carry out
this act and states that not more than $1,000,000.00 may be
appropriated to the heritage area for any fiscal year.
Indeed, Kansas has much to be proud of in our history and it is
vital that this history be shared on a national level. By establishing
the Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring Struggle for Freedom National
Heritage Area, we will ensure that this magnificent legacy lives on and
serves as a stirring reminder of the sacrifices and triumphs that
created this nation--a nation united in freedom for all people.
I again thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of this
bill and look forward to working with you in order to move this bill
through the Senate.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Christopher J. Dodd, U.S. Senator
From Connecticut, on S. 429
Chairman Thomas, Vice Chairman Alexander, Ranking Member Akaka and
members of the Subcommittee on National Parks, I welcome the
opportunity to offer my support of S. 429, the Upper Housatonic Valley
National Heritage Area Act. I was pleased to join with my friend and
colleague, Senator Lieberman, who introduced this bill last month.
Senators Kerry and Kennedy have cosponsored this legislation and
Representatives Nancy Johnson and John Olver have introduced companion
legislation in the House.
As you may know, Senator Lieberman and I introduced legislation
back in 2000 to authorize a feasibility study and at a May, 2000
hearing, the National Park Service, Department of Interior, gave its
stamp of approval to that legislation. In 2003, the National Park
Service concluded that the upper Housatonic Valley met all criteria for
establishing a national heritage area. We introduced legislation to
designate the upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area last
Congress, but it was not enacted before Congress adjourned.
The Upper Housatonic area is world-renowned for its cultural
contributions. It is home to such literary notables as Edith Wharton,
Nathaniel Hawthorne, Herman Melville, and the Tanglewood Performing
Arts Center. The 29 towns in Connecticut and Massachusetts located in
the Upper Housatonic Valley are home to numerous sites on the National
Register of Historic Places and National Historic and Natural
Landmarks. The churches and meeting houses provide a window into New
England's small-town past, the small family farms still operate and
lakes and rivers provide recreational possibilities.
The people of the Upper Housatonic Valley also made significant
contributions in the industrial age. Cannons and other supplies were
made here for General Washington's army. In the late 19th century, the
finest railroad car wheels were produced here. More than 40 blast
furnaces dotted the landscape until the 1920's when westward expansion
led to the decline of the iron industry there.
Heritage Corridors have been a successful public-private
partnership and they encourage grassroots efforts to preserve historic
and environmental treasures while promoting economic development.
The upper Housatonic Valley has a distinctive history and culture
and an abundance of local support for its designation as a Heritage
Area. I would like to welcome Ronald Jones, the chairman of the Upper
Housatonic Valley National Heritage area, to today's hearing. He has
done extraordinary work over many years and we would not be here today
without his dedication and commitment.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for moving expeditiously with a hearing
on S. 429. I am confident of the merits of this legislation and I hope
that members of the Committee will support it here and on the Senate
floor. I know that you have many challenges ahead this year and I thank
you for your consideration of the Upper Housatonic Valley National
Heritage Area Act.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. John F. Kerry, U.S. Senator
From Massachusetts, on S. 429
Thank you, Chairman Thomas and Ranking Member Akaka, for this
opportunity to testify before the National Parks Subcommittee. I am
here today in support of S. 429, a bill to establish the Upper
Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area in Connecticut and my home
state, Massachusetts.
The Upper Housatonic Valley runs along the western border of
Massachusetts and Connecticut. It is bounded to the east by the
commerce and development of the Connecticut River and to the west by
the Hudson River. It is area of 950 square miles and some 29
communities.
Thanks to the support of this Committee, we passed legislation 5
years ago asking the National Park Service to study whether or not the
Valley warranted designation as a National Heritage Area. It examined
several criteria to evaluate the area's significance, suitability and
feasibility for the heritage area designation.
The Park Service concluded that the Valley contains ``nationally
important resources and represents important national themes.'' It said
the Valley is a ``singular geographical and cultural region that has
made significant national contributions through its literary, artistic,
musical, and architectural achievements, its iron, paper, and
electrical equipment industries, and its scenic beautification and
environmental conservation efforts.''
The Park Service highlighted four themes in the Valley that
exemplify our national heritage. They are culture, the land itself,
industry and our Revolutionary War and democratic government. And it
found that no other national heritage area in the nation interprets
this unique set of themes.
In other words: No place in America tells quite the same story
about America, and it is a story well-worth telling.
The Committee has the Park Service report, and I know the Members
are very busy this week with the Budget on the Senate floor, so I will
not recite each and every reason why I hope the Congress acts to create
the Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area.
I will simply say that it is a very special place and highlight
some of its unique characteristics. It has been home to artists,
educators and thinkers. People like Nathaniel Hawthorne, Herman
Melville, Edith Wharton, W.E.B. DuBois and Norman Rockwell. Great music
and theater can be heard and seen at Tanglewood, Music Mountain and the
Shakespeare & Company.
For decades, the people of the Valley have treasured its beautiful
landscape of a meandering river, woods, small farms and rolling hills.
Through cooperation and a conservation ethic they have sought to
cleanup industrialized lands and reforest cut lands.
For many years the valley was an engine in the iron, paper and
electric industries. Iron production thrived from 1734 to 1923, drawing
high grade Salisbury ore found along the Taconic range. Iron was first
worked into tools used in farming and building. Cannons used by General
Washington's Army were cast and drilled at a blast furnace in the
Valley. Its iron fed the Springfield Arsenal and Whitney arms factory
in New Haven. And later cast iron railroad wheels produced in the
Valley were delivered to the nation and as far away as South America
and Europe.
And of course, the Valley has its own place in our nation and our
democracy with its contribution to freedom's cause in the Revolutionary
War, events like Shays' Rebellion and the writings of Nathaniel
Hawthorne and others. This history is so unique it has been called the
``Fourteenth Colony.'' Pieces of that history--in homes, buildings, and
the land itself--remain preserved today in the Valley for visitors and
residents to see and explore and to learn a unique chapter in American
history.
I also want the Committee to know that a wide range of groups--
historical societies, town governments, museums and historical sites,
civic clubs and others--have expressed strong support for the
establishment of a National Heritage Area. The support for this effort
is broad and deep. I am pleased that we have made it this far in the
process--and I want to give all the credit for that to the local
leaders in the Valley who have worked hard for their cause.
The Upper Housatonic Valley is a microcosm of the history of the
nation, from the Native Americans and European settlement through its
frontier days, the industrial revolution and the more recent growth in
cultural, conservation and recreational activities.
The National Heritage designation is a means of heightening
appreciation of the region, preserving its natural and historic
resources, improving the local economy and quality of life, controlling
sprawl, and promoting the cleanup of the Housatonic River.
I hope the Committee will support it.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman, U.S. Senator
From Connecticut, on S. 429
Thank you Mr. Chairman, for convening this hearing to discuss S.
429 and the designation of the nationally significant Upper Housatonic
Valley. This area embodies important pieces of our history and heritage
as Americans and I hope you will see the value in designating it a
National Heritage area.
In 2000, congress established criteria clarifying the requirements
for designation of a National Heritage Area. The area must encompass
cultural, natural, and historical heritage of national significance. It
must have broad public support, and a qualified entity to manage the
area. The Upper Housatonic Valley has all of these. In fact, the Park
Service cites the Upper Housatonic Valley as the best example of how to
go about becoming a National Heritage Area. We hope today that we can
move the Upper Housatonic Valley toward being an example of more than
just the process, but of actually being a successful National Heritage
Area.
The Upper Housatonic Valley is a unique cultural and geographical
region that encompasses 29 towns in the Housatonic River watershed,
extending 60 miles from Lanesboro, Massachusetts to Kent, Connecticut.
The valley has made significant national contributions through
literary, artistic, musical, and architectural achievements. It was the
backdrop for many important Revolutionary War era events, the cradle of
the iron, paper, and electrical industries, and the home to key figures
and events in the abolitionist and civil rights movements. It includes
five National Historic Landmarks and four National Natural Landmarks.
All of these are well documented in the Feasibility study that was
completed in 2003.
The Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area Act would
officially designate the region as part of the National Park Service
system. It would also authorize funding for a variety of activities
that conserve the significant natural, historical, cultural, and scenic
resources, and that provide educational and recreational opportunities
in the area. The Upper Housatonic Valley is part of our national
identity. Making it a National Heritage Area will preserve and develop
the experiences that connect us to our history and heritage as
Americans.
Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage area, Inc., the non
profit group that has been working on development of the area, has
already done much to raise awareness of the beauty and historical value
of this area. By coordinating with other groups they have put together
an illustrated Iron Heritage Trail brochure, sponsored an October
weekend of Heritage walks, organized a summer artistic/environmental
painting event, and developed a graduate course for local school
teachers on the culture, natural, and industrial heritage of the area.
Through this broad, flexible and locally led initiative, the states
of Connecticut and Massachusetts will be able to make real progress in
protecting the river and its heritage and in guiding regional economic
development. Making the Upper Housatonic Valley a heritage area will
facilitate locally led and truly voluntary programs that will help
protect the river for future generations and strengthen the economies
of these small towns by developing regional tourism.
The Upper Housatonic Valley is a precious part of America's
heritage. I am sure you will see how much value the Upper Housatonic
Valley has for maintaining our national heritage and sharing it with
generations to come. I strongly support S. 429 and the designation of
the Upper Housatonic Valley as a National Heritage Area.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Pat Roberts, U.S. Senator From Kansas,
on S. 175
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for holding this hearing on what
I believe is an important piece of legislation designating the Bleeding
Kansas and the Enduring Struggle for Freedom National Heritage Area.
This project has joined communities throughout eastern Kansas in an
effort to document, preserve and celebrate Kansas' significant role in
the political struggle that led to the Civil War and in other historic
struggles for equality that took place in our state.
Designated by Congress, National Heritage Areas are places where
natural, cultural, historic and recreational resources combine to form
a complete and distinct landscape. Our state, which has a proud
heritage and compelling story, will benefit from this national
designation that helps preserve and celebrate America's defining
landscapes. By enhancing and developing historic sites throughout
eastern Kansas, we will ensure that the traditions that evolved there
are preserved.
This bill, and this chapter in our nation's history, are of
particular importance to me. My great grandfathers were Mr. A. G.
Patrick and Mr. John Wesley Roberts. They were Kansas pioneers,
frontier newspapermen and political rabble-rousers during the mid
1800s.
In 1856, John Wesley Roberts was an Ohio weekly newspaper editor.
He championed the candidacy of John Fremont and the newly formed
Republican Party, both through his newspaper and through a monthly
magazine ``for family literary reading.''
Standing with his son on the northern banks of the Ohio River, Mr.
Roberts looked south into Kentucky where slaves worked the fields. It
was a powerful and moving sight. ``Fired with interest in the struggle
to make Kansas Territory a free state,'' as one historical account put
it, Mr. Roberts shipped a flatbed press by rail and steamboat to Ft.
Leavenworth, where it was taken by wagon to Oskaloosa. The Independent
survives today as the state's second oldest newspaper, published
through three generations of the Roberts family.
Mr. Roberts knew fear and lived with violence. Guerillas and
bushwhackers bent on exterminating free-state men threatened daily.
When Quantrill sacked Lawrence in 1863, John Wesley and his family
watched smoke darken the sky. When he and other riders arrived in
Lawrence, it was a terrible sight that his son, my grandfather, never
forgot.
Though far from the main campaigns, this massacre made Bleeding
Kansas a prominent symbol in the fight for the freedom of all people,
and the state would become a battleground over the question of slavery.
Meanwhile, Mr. Patrick, who arrived in Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, in
1856 by way of Indiana and Kentucky, was also caught up in the fight
against slavery. Mr. Patrick was the son of American Revolutionary
printers. When he caught the pro-slavery men of Leavenworth stuffing
the ballot box, he sent a graphic account to newspapers in Indiana,
which wired them back to newspapers in Leavenworth. He later joined
Captain Wright's Stranger Creek Company of free-staters.
Mr. Patrick and Mr. Roberts were united in their efforts, their
idealism, and their vision of the future. Together, and with thousands
of others like them, they built Kansas and molded their communities.
They saw the frontier not as it was, but as the promised land it could
be. It is this struggle, and those of generations to come, that deserve
to be linked through designation of the Bleeding Kansas and the
Struggle for Enduring Freedom National Heritage Area.
I'd like to thank Judy Billings, who is with the Lawrence
Convention and Visitor Bureau, who has worked diligently on this
effort, along the Lawrence City Commission, the Douglas County
Commission, and the Lawrence Chamber of Commerce.
Again, I'd like to thank the committee for holding this hearing and
I encourage the committee's swift passage of this important piece of
legislation.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, U.S. SENATOR
FROM HAWAII
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And, as
you know, I'm delighted to have been working with you, and look
forward to that.
Although all four of the bills we are hearing this
afternoon were included in an amendment last Congress as a part
of a multi-title Heritage Area package which was passed by the
Senate, only one, the French Colonial Heritage Study, in
Missouri, has been the subject of a previous hearing in this
committee. The other bills would designate Heritage Areas in
the Champlain Valley in Vermont and New York, the Upper
Housatonic Valley in Connecticut and Massachusetts, and the
Bleeding Kansas and Enduring Struggle for Freedom Heritage Area
in Kansas.
Two dozen Heritage Areas have already been designated. At
least that many have been proposed. While I believe the
Heritage Area concept is a sound one, I think we need to
carefully consider how to allow for future expansion of the
Heritage Area program without overwhelming it with too many new
designations.
I think Senator Thomas' bill to establish criteria and a
formal process for new designations is a good start. I'm
interested whether other policy changes should be adopted to
help ensure that if a new Heritage Area is designated, it has
not only local support, but also strong organizational
planning. For example, under the current process, after a new
Heritage Area is established, there is a requirement for the
local management entity to prepare a management plan for the
area. Perhaps we should consider requiring the management plan
to be prepared before the area is designated, instead of
afterwards. Such a requirement might help differentiate areas
with strong local support and planning from other areas,
helping to reduce the number of new areas, without shutting
down the program. While I am not committed to any specifics, I
think it is important to have a wide variety of proposals to
help ensure that the National Heritage Area Program remains a
success.
Mr. Chairman, I have a scheduling conflict today, and,
unfortunately, I will be unable to stay here for the entire
hearing. However, I look forward to working with you and the
bills' sponsors to resolve any outstanding issues so that we
can move these bills through the Committee process as early as
possible.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Thomas. Thank you, sir.
Senator Salazar, I just said that we're going to have to be
through here at about 3:10. So I'm going to ask the witnesses
to take 5 minutes. And if you have a comment, why, we'd be
happy to hear from you.
STATEMENT OF HON. KEN SALAZAR, U.S. SENATOR
FROM COLORADO
Senator Salazar. My comment is, I just think all these four
bills are great bills, and I look forward, Mr. Chairman, to
continuing to work with you and the rest of the members of the
committee on these important issues.
Senator Thomas. Okay, thank you very much.
Ms. Matthews, we'll start with you.
STATEMENT OF JANET SNYDER MATTHEWS, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR
CULTURAL RESOURCES, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR
Ms. Matthews. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the subcommittee, for this--for your committee's
strong leadership and support of the National Park Service
programs and this opportunity to present the Department of the
Interior views on S. 175, S. 322, S. 323, and S. 429.
While feasibility studies have found the Champlain Valley,
Upper Housatonic, and Bleeding Kansas areas appropriate for
designation, we recommend that the committee defer action on
all three bills until program legislation is enacted
establishing guidelines and a process for designation of
National Heritage Areas.
Last year, the administration sent to Congress a
legislative proposal to establish such guidelines and a process
for designation. Absent enactment of such program legislation,
we will look at a number of options, including consideration of
potential offsets within the National Heritage Area's grants
programs. Given current fiscal constraints, any discussion of
particular National Heritage Areas should be consistent with
the President's budget.
The Department supports authorization of the fourth bill,
S. 323; however, we request that any funding appropriated be
first directed to studies previously authorized by the
Congress.
S. 175 would establish the Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring
Struggle for Freedom National Heritage Area. The entry of
Kansas into the Union as a free State was a legacy of
struggles, triumphs, a catalyst for racial equality in our
national. The core area includes, already, seven national
historical landmarks, 32 national registered properties, three
Kansas registered properties, seven properties on the National
Underground Railroad Network to Freedom. The bill designates
the Territorial Kansas Heritage Alliance as the management
entity.
S. 322 establishes the Champlain Valley National Heritage
Partnership in the States of New York and Vermont. In the 1933
Special Resource Study for Champlain Valley, the National Park
Service concluded that the Champlain Valley clearly merits
designation.
S. 429 establishes the Upper Housatonic Valley National
Heritage Area in the state of Connecticut and the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts. S. 429 encompasses 29 communities, a singular
geographic culture region characterized by significant national
contributions in literature, art, music, architecture, and
industrial achievements, including the National Historical
Landmark Home of W.E.B. DuBois and Daniel Chester French, who
produced the ``Seated Lincoln,'' who sits to our west within
the Lincoln Memorial. The Appalachian Scenic National Trail
follows, parallels, the length of the valley.
S. 323 authorizes the Secretary to study the suitability
and feasibility of designating the French Colonial Heritage
Area in the State of Missouri as a unit of the National Park
system. The Department supports, with a minor clarification
provided in this testimony, but believes any funding requested
should be directed toward completing previously congressionally
authorized studies. The area contains some of our nation's only
existing examples of the French Colonial period. The Department
would like to work with the Committee to clarify some
potentially confusing language relative to terminology.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my summary remarks, and I
welcome your questions.
Thank you so much.
[The prepared statements of Ms. Matthews follows:]
Prepared Statement of Janet Snyder Matthews, Associate Director for
Cultural Resources, National Park Service, Department of the Interior
ON S. 175
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the Department of the
Interior's views on S. 175, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior to establish the Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring Struggle for
Freedom National Heritage Area.
While a feasibility study has found the Bleeding Kansas area
appropriate for designation, we recommend that the Committee defer
action on S. 175 until program legislation is enacted that establishes
guidelines and a process for designation of national heritage areas.
Last year, the Administration sent to Congress a legislative proposal
to establish such guidelines and a process for designation. This year,
the Administration is working on a similar legislative proposal, and we
look forward to continuing to work with Congress on this very important
issue. Absent enactment of such program legislation establishing
guidelines and a process for designation, we will look at a number of
options, including consideration of potential offsets within the
National Heritage Area Grants Program. Another reason we are
recommending deferral is that given current fiscal constraints, any
discussion of particular national heritage areas should be consistent
with the President's budget. Funding in the FY 2006 President's Budget
for the National Heritage Area program combined with funding from the
First Lady's Preserve America program, the Save America's Treasures
program, and historic preservation grants will go a long way toward
supporting local efforts to preserve cultural, historical, natural, and
recreational resources that reflect our nation's heritage.
S. 175 would establish the Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring
Struggle for Freedom National Heritage Area. The entry of Kansas into
the Union as a ``free'' state was marked by a legacy of struggles,
sacrifices, and triumphs that provided a catalyst for racial equality
in our nation. The core area is defined by 23 counties in eastern
Kansas. They are geographically assembled and thematically related as
areas that provide unique frameworks for understanding the great and
diverse character of the United States and the development of
communities and their surrounding areas. There are seven National
Historic Landmarks, 32 National Register properties, three Kansas
Register properties, and seven properties listed on the National
Underground Railroad Network to Freedom.
The bill designates the Territorial Kansas Heritage Alliance, a
non-profit organization established in the State of Kansas, as the
management entity for the Heritage Area and outlines its duties. It
also authorizes the development of a management plan and authorizes the
use of Federal funds to develop and implement that plan. If the plan is
not submitted within four years of enactment of this Act, the Heritage
Area becomes ineligible for Federal funding until a plan is submitted
to the Secretary. Additionally, the Secretary may, at the request of
the management entity, provide technical assistance and enter into
cooperative agreements with other public and private entities to carry
out this purpose. The use of Federal funds may not be used to acquire
real property or interests in real property.
S. 175 would protect private property rights by requiring that
owners provide, in writing, consent to be included in any request
before they are eligible to receive Federal funds from the area. The
private property owner in the Heritage Area would not be required to
permit public access (including Federal, State, or local government
access) to his or her property, or to participate in or be associated
with the Heritage Area. The management entity would be an advocate for
land management practices consistent with the purposes of the Heritage
Area; however, S. 175 provides that nothing in the Act would impose any
additional burden on any property owner.
There is already a foundation of stewardship, appreciation, and
high public interest in the project with a broad array of public
support and opportunity for private, foundation, and community partners
to be involved in heritage activities. S. 175 would allow all Federal
partners and state and local groups to participate in the management of
the major facilities and resources and allow the core areas to be
eligible for grants to be administered by the National Park Service.
``Bleeding Kansas'' is the popular phrase describing the conflict
over slavery that became nationally prominent in Kansas during the time
of the American Civil War. The region was part of the Louisiana
Purchase in 1803, and the site of a series of struggles for freedom. It
was the first ``official'' Indian Country because woodland Indians
removed from the east were forced to learn how to live in this semi-
desert landscape. Many of the non-Indian settlers were starting over by
either fleeing slavery, taking a stand for or against slavery,
homesteading or remaining there when they could go no further on any of
the pioneer trails. Pro-slavery settlers from the south and anti-
slavery activists from the north came to the territory because it was
located at the intersection of northern and southern expansion.
The Missouri Compromise had excluded slavery from that part of the
Louisiana Purchase. The original intent behind the Kansas-Nebraska Act
of 1854 was to continue the balance of power between the free states
and the slave states. By dividing the Nebraska Territory, it was
assumed the northern part, Nebraska, would automatically be a free
state, and Kansas, to the south and bordered by the slave state of
Missouri, would automatically be a slave state. In Kansas, however,
communities were burned and lives were taken as the slavery conflict
continued escalating. Kansas had two capitals, one as a free state and
one as a slave state. Additional challenges included the harsh
conditions of the landscape and the wide mix of views and people who
lived there, including abolitionists, proslavery advocates, former
soldiers, religious colonies, pioneers, homesteaders, Native Americans,
including displaced Indian nations, and African-Americans.
A feasibility study was commissioned by the Territorial Kansas
Heritage Alliance with the support of the Bleeding Kansas National
Heritage Area Planning Committee, two grassroots organizations and
completed on January 30, 2004. The study process included an outline of
the chronology of events, a selection of unifying themes, and a
comparison of potential management strategies. A review of the
extensive literature on the events that occurred in the Kansas
Territory also was conducted. In addition, the study incorporated the
statewide tourism strategy, in recognition that establishment of a
national heritage area could help rural economic development. Numerous
public meetings were held and local participants were included in the
study process. Based on information collected and analyzed in this
study, the area meets all ten interim criteria that the National Park
Service has developed for national heritage areas to be eligible for
designation.
For many people, Kansas symbolized the struggle for freedom, and
the designation of a national heritage area would ensure the
commemoration of this legacy. Designation also would provide increased
opportunity for resource protection, education, interpretation,
recreation, heritage celebration and community involvement in telling
the inspirational story of Kansas. Local economies also would benefit
by the increased heritage tourism as well as collaboration between
diverse units of Government, businesses, tourism officials, private
property owners, and nonprofit groups.
The proposed area is historically unique based on the cultural
themes and resources that are represented in its publicly and privately
owned properties and landscapes. The events, landscapes, and cultural
resources of the area are representative of major social movements that
have had a significant impact on the formation of our national society.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
ON S. 322
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the Department's
views on S. 322, a bill to establish the Champlain Valley National
Heritage Partnership in the States of New York and Vermont.
While a feasibility study has found the Champlain Valley area
appropriate for designation, we recommend that the Committee defer
action on S. 322 until program legislation is enacted that establishes
guidelines and a process for designation of national heritage areas.
Last year, the Administration sent to Congress a legislative proposal
to establish such guidelines and a process for designation. This year,
the Administration is working on a similar legislative proposal, and we
look forward to continuing to work with Congress on this very important
issue. Absent enactment of such program legislation establishing
guidelines and a process for designation, we will look at a number of
options, including consideration of potential offsets within the
National Heritage Area Grants Program.
Another reason we are recommending deferral is that given current
fiscal constraints, any discussion of particular national heritage
areas should be consistent with the President's budget. Funding in the
FY 2006 President's Budget for the National Heritage Area program
combined with funding from the First Lady's Preserve America program,
the Save America's Treasures program, and historic preservation grants
will go a long way toward supporting local efforts to preserve
cultural, historical, natural, and recreational resources that reflect
our nation's heritage.
S. 322 would establish the Champlain Valley National Heritage
Partnership. This area includes communities containing thematically
related resources across the States of New York and Vermont as defined
by the linked navigable waterways and associated lands of the Champlain
Valley. Specifically, this region encompasses the waterways of Lake
Champlain, Lake George, the Champlain Canal, and portions of the upper
Hudson River. The associated lands include portions of Grand Isle,
Franklin, Chittenden, Addison, Rutland, and Bennington Counties in the
State of Vermont, and portions of Clinton, Essex, Warren, Saratoga, and
Washington Counties in the State of New York. The bill also would
designate the Lake Champlain Basin Program as the management entity for
the national heritage area.
In 1609, Samuel de Champlain arrived on the shores of the lake that
the Abenaki people called ``the waters between.'' As the name suggests,
the waterways formed the territorial boundary between the Western
Abenakis and the Iroquois. Confederacy. Champlain's initial encounter
with Native Americans marked the beginning of European exploration,
settlement, and conflicts that intensified over the next two centuries.
These conflicts, waged on and along the Champlain waterways, included
territorial battles among Native Americans, the Seven Years (or French
and Indian) War, the Revolutionary War, and the War of 1812. The
conclusion of the War of 1812 largely brought peace to the region and
enabled the Champlain waterways to support peaceful pursuits and serve,
as they had long before the wars, as a trading route between regions.
On July 6, 1909, President William Howard Taft, speaking at Fort
Ticonderoga, summed up the importance of the Champlain Valley saying:
``This was the passageway, and here were fought the battles contended
for two hundred years, and as we may now say, never to recur.''
In the 1999 special resource study for Champlain Valley, the
National Park Service concluded that ``the Champlain Valley clearly
merits designation of a national, or arguably international, heritage
corridor.'' The main reasons for the study's conclusions, based on
interim national heritage area criteria, are outlined below. In
addition, the public review period for the special resource study
revealed public support for designation of a national heritage area. A
clear majority of the written comments (72%) stated support for
designation of a national heritage corridor, citing such advantages as
greater support for preservation, improved coordination, better
education, and economic gains resulting from heritage tourism.
The area's key themes, ``Making of Nations'' and ``Corridor of
Commerce'' are reflected by resources that are outstanding in both
quantity and quality. The considerations that gave the Champlain Valley
its exceptional strategic importance prevailed over an extended period.
This created a layering of history, a profound accumulation of physical
record in the great fortifications, such as Fort Ticonderoga, and in
the exceptional collection of historic shipwrecks found in the cold
depths of the waterways. The most notable of the thematically related
resources possess exceptional integrity. One is a unit of the National
Park System, Saratoga National Historical Park, which encompasses the
lands where the two battles of Saratoga were fought and the British
invasion was halted, an event considered to be the turning point of the
American Revolution. Eight resources have been designated as National
Historic Landmarks: Fort Crown Point, Fort St. Frederic, Fort
Ticonderoga, the Land Tortoise, Plattsburgh Bay, Valcour Bay, Mount
Independence, and Ticonderoga Steamboat. Numerous other important sites
are found throughout the region and are opened to the public as state
historic sites or as private museums.
Due to their cold, fresh water, Lake Champlain and Lake George
contain what is considered to be the finest collection of shipwrecks in
North America. Lake George contains the remains of numerous bateaux,
plus the French and Indian War radeau, Land Tortoise, described as the
oldest intact warship in North America. Lake Champlain contains the
remains of Benedict Arnold's last unexplored gunboat. The remnants of
the British and American fleets from the 1814 Battle of Plattsburgh Bay
rest near Whitehall, with other relics still lying in Plattsburgh Bay.
Outstanding examples of shipwrecks representing the commercial era
include: a horse-powered ferry believed to be the world's only
surviving example; the steamboat Phoenix, considered to be the oldest
surviving steamboat hull in the world; and the Water Witch, considered
to be the oldest completely intact commercial vessel in America.
The resources of the Champlain Valley are best managed through
public/private partnerships due to the multiplicity of ownership and
the fact that they are distributed over a large geographic area.
Because of the importance of Lake Champlain and Lake George to the
region, numerous federal, state, local, and nonprofit organizations are
involved in various aspects of managing and planning for the natural,
cultural, historic, recreational, and heritage tourism resources of the
region, including the Lake Champlain Basin Program, the Lakes to Locks
Passage initiative, and the Champlain Valley Heritage Network. Plus,
there are over 60 nonprofit organizations and historical societies in
the Champlain Valley active in the areas of historic preservation,
education, planning, and stewardship of historic sites.
The area reflects traditions, customs, beliefs, and folkways of a
number of native and immigrant groups who peopled the region over the
last several centuries. These groups included: the Abenaki and
Iroquois, French lumberjacks and fur trappers, New England Yankee
settlers, Quakers, French Canadian and Irish mill workers, Lithuanian
and Ukrainian iron mine workers, and Swedish forge operators. The
stories of the Native Americans and the many immigrant groups who came
to this area for different reasons provide a glimpse into the process
of early migration, settlement, and assimilation that characterizes the
region.
The public education and heritage tourism potential for the
Champlain Valley is immense. Almost three-quarters of a million people
live in the region, and millions more live within a day's drive. The
region contains over 400 properties listed on the National Register of
Historic Places, 18 of which are designated as National Historic
Landmarks, as well as eight National Natural Landmarks. These important
sites, along with the region's numerous museums offer an enormous
potential to provide in-depth educational opportunities through
thematic linkages. The education potential of this region is
complemented by its proximity to the Hudson River Valley National
Heritage Area and the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor,
creating additional opportunities for linking educational programs. In
addition, Lakes Champlain and George are recognized as preeminent
recreational resources. The lakes and their shores offer a wide range
of easily accessible recreational opportunities. On Lake Champlain
alone, there are over 100 public boat-launching areas, nearly 50
commercial marinas, and nearly 70 public beaches. Plus, there are over
30 major parks, forests, and recreation areas within the region.
This concludes my testimony on S. 322. I would be happy to answer
any questions that you or any of the members of the subcommittee may
have.
ON S. 323
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department's views on S. 323, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the
French Colonial Heritage Area in the State of Missouri as a unit of the
National Park System.
While the Department is supportive of S. 323, with the minor
clarification provided in this testimony, we believe that available
funding should be first directed toward completing previously
authorized studies. Currently, 31 studies are in progress, and we hope
to complete and transmit 19 to Congress by the end of calendar year
2005.
S. 323 would authorize the Secretary to complete a study on the
suitability and feasibility of designating the French Colonial Heritage
Area as a unit of the National Park System. The French Colonial
Heritage Area (Area) includes the Bequette-Ribault, St. Gemme-
Amoureaux, and Wilhauk homes, and the related and supporting historical
assets in Ste. Genevieve County, Missouri. The Area contains some of
the only existing examples of the French Colonial Period settlement,
including two of the five poteaux-en-terre (post-in-the-ground)
vertical log French buildings remaining in North America, dating from
circa 1785, in addition to several other important historical
resources. The Area is located within the expanded boundaries of Ste.
Genevieve National Historic District (District), a National Historic
Landmark. No current National Park System unit has comparable historic
features providing the cultural backdrop required to adequately
interpret the story of the early French in the New World.
In April 1980, the Midwest Regional Office of the National Park
Service completed a brief Reconnaissance Report of Ste. Genevieve
Historic District. The Reconnaissance Report reviewed the District's
cultural, natural, scenic, and recreational resources as well as
ownership patterns and possible threats to the District. The
Reconnaissance Report will provide valuable background information
should this legislation be enacted authorizing a more in-depth study of
suitability and feasibility, which includes a review of management
alternatives.
The Department would like to work with the Committee to clarify
some potentially confusing language in the bill. While the bill
authorizes a study on the suitability and feasibility of designating a
new unit of the National Park System, it also identifies the study area
as the ``French Colonial Heritage Area.'' A national heritage area
differs from a unit of the National Park Service in a number of
different ways, most notably is that a national heritage area is
locally driven and does not include management by the National Park
Service, whereas a unit is managed wholly or in part by the National
Park Service.
If the intent of the bill only is to study the area for potential
designation as a national heritage area, we recommend amending the bill
to authorize a feasibility study to examine such designation. If the
intent is to study the area for potential inclusion as a new National
Park System unit, or if it is unclear which type of designation is
desired, the bill should be clarified by eliminating the references to
the term ``heritage area''. A suitability and feasibility study to
designate an Area as a unit will examine a range of alternatives,
including whether a national heritage area designation is more
appropriate than creating a new unit. We will be happy to work with the
subcommittee to develop clarifying language prior to enactment of this
legislation.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
ON S. 429
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the Department's
views on S. 429, a bill to establish the Upper Housatonic Valley
National Heritage Area in the State of Connecticut and the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts.
While a feasibility study has found the Upper Housatonic Valley
area appropriate for designation, we recommend that the Committee defer
action on S. 429 until program legislation is enacted that establishes
guidelines and a process for designation of national heritage areas.
Last year, the Administration sent to Congress a legislative proposal
to establish such guidelines and a process for designation. This year,
the Administration is working on a similar legislative proposal, and we
look forward to continuing to work with Congress on this very important
issue. Absent enactment of such program legislation establishing
guidelines and a process for designation, we will look at a number of
options, including consideration of potential offsets within the
National Heritage Area Grants Program.
Another reason we are recommending deferral is that given current
fiscal constraints, any discussion of particular national heritage
areas should be consistent with the President's budget. Funding in the
FY 2006 President's Budget for the National Heritage Area program
combined with funding from the First Lady's Preserve America program,
the Save America's Treasures program, and historic preservation grants
will go a long way toward supporting local efforts to preserve
cultural, historical, natural, and recreational resources that reflect
our nation's heritage.
S. 429 would establish the Upper Housatonic Valley National
Heritage Area, encompassing 29 communities in western Massachusetts and
northwestern Connecticut, extending 60 miles through the watershed of
the upper Housatonic River, from Kent, Connecticut to Lanesboro,
Massachusetts. The bill would also identify the Upper Housatonic Valley
National Heritage Area, Inc. as the management entity for the national
heritage area.
The Upper Housatonic Valley, sometimes referred to as ``the
fourteenth colony'' is a singular geographical and cultural region that
is characterized by significant national contributions in literature,
art, music, and architectural achievements; its iron, paper, and
electrical equipment industries; and scenic beautification and
environmental conservation efforts. The region contains five National
Historic Landmarks including the homes of W.E.B. DuBois, Edith Wharton
and Herman Melville. Over 120 sites and 18 historic districts on the
National Register of Historic Places dot the landscape. It was home to
Nathaniel Hawthorne, painters Norman Rockwell and Jasper Johns, and
sculptor Daniel Chester French, who sculpted the ``Seated Lincoln'' at
the Lincoln Memorial. Among the Upper Housatonic Valley's early iron
masters was Ethan Allen, the hero of Fort Ticonderoga and an early
mercantile activist. Important events related to the Revolutionary War,
Shays' Rebellion, and early civil rights activism also took place in
the area. The region's performing arts centers--the Boston Symphony
Orchestra's summer home at Tanglewood, Music Mountain, Norfolk Chamber
Music Festival, Jacob's Pillow Dance Festival, Berkshire Theatre
Festival, and Shakespeare & Company--are internationally known.
The Upper Housatonic Valley contains a myriad of natural resources
and has been the beneficiary of a long history of innovative
environmental conservation initiatives that have been influential
across the country. These include pioneering state parks and private
nature preserves and the first village improvement society in America,
the Laurel Hill Association, of Stockbridge, Massachusetts. Four
National Natural Landmarks including unique bogs and an old growth
forest have been designated here. The Appalachian National Scenic Trail
follows the length of the Upper Housatonic Valley.
The region was the site of pioneering endeavors in the iron, paper,
and electrical generation industries. The iron industry, which was
responsible for manufacturing 75% of the cannons used by the
Continental Army during the American Revolution, was active from 1735
until 1923. The first mill in America to make paper from wood pulp was
located in Stockbridge, Massachusetts.
Tied together by the Housatonic River, the region offers extensive
opportunities for resource preservation, education, and heritage
tourism. The heritage area designation would link together several
existing historic sites, such as protected iron smelting sites, to
strengthen the understanding of the regional historical significance of
the valley. The area also reflects the rich traditions and folkways of
the Mohican Indians, Shakers, Yankee farmers, African-Americans, and
European immigrant groups. The educational and preservation value of
the valley to residents was a major point of public support for
designation.
There is extensive citizen involvement in heritage activities in
the Upper Housatonic Valley involving a broad array of municipalities,
private organizations, and individuals. The non-profit organization,
Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area, Inc., has a broad-based
membership and a strong track record in organizing heritage
initiatives. Comments at public meetings, and those received as the
draft feasibility study concluded, indicate strong public support for
national heritage area designation.
The Department's Feasibility Study for the Upper Housatonic Valley
National Heritage Area found that the Upper Housatonic Valley meets the
Department's ten interim criteria for designation of a national
heritage area. The Upper Housatonic Valley is distinctive for having a
landscape that includes a blend of industrial innovations,
environmental conservation initiatives, and cultural achievements of
national significance.
This completes my testimony. I would be happy to answer any
questions that you or any members of the subcommittee may have.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much. I think we'll
generally try to submit questions for the record, rather than
take our time now.
Senator Talent, we're trying to get through here in half an
hour. Did you have a statement?
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. TALENT, U.S. SENATOR
FROM MISSOURI
Senator Talent. Well, in view of that, Mr. Chairman, I'll
just say welcome to Jim Baker, who's here from Ste. Genevieve
to testify on the second panel, and I'll go ahead and submit my
statement for the record.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Senator Talent follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. James M. Talent, U.S. Senator From Missouri,
on S. 323
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for holding this hearing on S.
323, a bill to authorize a feasibility study regarding the future of
historically French area in Ste. Genevieve, Missouri. And, thank you to
Jim Baker, the Site Administrator in Ste. Genevieve for coming to
Washington to testify in support of this legislation.
The Ste. Genevieve is located on the west bank of the Mississippi
River, just 1 hour south of St. Louis. The community contains many
wonderful historic buildings and sites that are historic and cultural
assets that tell the story of the significance of French culture and
settlement of the United States.
Although numerous French historic and cultural assets exist
throughout the country, few sites explore the vast influence of the
French presence in the Midwest prior to the Louisiana Purchase. The
historic homes and buildings are the only original French Colonial
Village left in the United States.
These remarkable historic resources in Ste. Genevieve are unique,
but most people outside Missouri haven't visited the area. This bill,
S. 323, would authorize the National Park Service to do a feasibility
study to see if the area would qualify to become a unit of the Park
Service, or a National Heritage Area.
The homes and buildings dating back to the late 1700's are
currently managed by the State Department of Natural Resources and
enjoy wonderful support from the local community. This feasibility
study will mark the beginning of a local, state and federal
partnership.
Thank you so much for including S. 323 in this hearing and I look
forward to statements from Mr. Baker and the National Parks Service.
______
French Heritage Society,
New York, NY, March 9, 2005.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Thomas: I am writing in support of Senate Bill 323,
the `French Colonial Heritage National Historic Site Study Act of
2005'. The value of the historic resources described in the text of the
bill is immense, and the scope of their significance truly ranks them
on a national level. Our organization, the French Heritage Society,
fully supports the legislation intended to study the suitability and
feasibility of designating this area as a unit of the National Park
System.
The French Heritage Society, established in 1982, is dedicated to
the preservation of French architectural patrimony in the United States
and France. Our membership in 16 chapters throughout the country
provides support for scores of significant historic buildings and
gardens, as well as sponsoring cultural and educational programs for
French and American curators, architects, students, and artisans.
The architectural and historic resources of Ste. Genevieve deserve
the close examination that would be accomplished as part of the
National Park Service study described in Senate Bill 323. Their
inclusion in the National Park System would allow the preservation and
interpretation of these remarkable, nationally-significant treasures.
Sincerely,
Jane Bernbach,
Executive Director.
Senator Thomas. All right. Thank you very much.
Just in summary, then, the Department, of course, has a
study in one, supports the other three; however, suggests that
they be held back until we get more clearly defined where we're
going with Heritage Areas. Is that right?
Ms. Matthews. Yes, sir.
Senator Thomas. Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Matthews. Thank you.
Senator Thomas. Okay, can we have our second panel, please?
This panel consists of Mr. James Baker, historic site
administrator, Missouri Department of Natural Resources; Judy
Billings, senior vice president, Lawrence Chamber of Commerce,
Lawrence Convention and Visitors Bureau, also from Kansas;
Ronald Jones, chairman, Upper Housatonic Valley Heritage Area,
in Connecticut; and Ann Cousins, field representative,
Preservation Trust of Vermont.
Thank you all.
Mr. Baker, we'll start with you.
STATEMENT OF JAMES BAKER, HISTORIC SITE ADMINISTRATOR, MISSOURI
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, STE. GENEVIEVE, MO
Mr. Baker. Thank you.
Chairman Thomas, members of the committee, my name is James
Baker, and I serve as site administrator of the State-owned
historic properties in Ste. Genevieve, Missouri. I'm here to
testify on behalf of the State of Missouri in support of S.
323, legislation to authorize an assessment of the significance
of our French Colonial resources as a national historic site. I
will present the key issues that justify this study. And I also
bring letters of support from Ste. Genevieve and other
organizations interested in this unique area of our Nation.
Although numerous French historic and cultural assets
remain throughout our country, few sites are able to reveal the
vast influence of the French presence in the center of our
continent prior to the Louisiana Purchase. The remarkable
French Colonial resources in Ste. Genevieve are unique, but
they're not widely known or represented in our national
interpretive efforts. We have an opportunity to tell the story
of this cultural identity at one of the most significant places
in this country, an area proposed as the French Heritage Area.
The site proposed for study in the legislation includes two
of the only five remaining poteaux-en-terre, or posts-in-the-
ground, vertical log houses known to survive in North America,
the Bauvais-Amoureux House, circa 1792, and the Bequette-
Ribault House, circa 1808, still stand together on their
original sites, silent witnesses to an earlier time and
culture.
In addition, there is an opportunity to acquire adjoining
land from willing private sellers to make the proposed French
Heritage National Historic Site a reality. This site can
interpret the Colonial settlement of the mid-Mississippi River
Valley and draw attention to this unique area of our country.
The cultural identity forged in this region during the 18th
century is a story of national significant well beyond the
ability of any State or local interpretive facility to present
in an appropriate manner. The study authorized in S. 323 is the
vehicle that can apply a national focus to these resources and
create an integrated, interpretive approach to correct this
problem.
The historic region around Ste. Genevieve focuses on a
corridor of French Colonial settlement along the Mississippi
River, including resources at Cahokia, Fort de Chartres,
Kaskaskia, Old Mines, and the St. Louis region. This rich
collection of resources includes Ste. Genevieve's National
Historic Landmark District, which preserves a significant
number of 18th century French Colonial structures.
Local archeological resources include the original sites of
Ste. Genevieve and New Bourbon, as well as the salt-producing
settlement at the Saline Creek and the rich agricultural
resources of Le Grand Champ.
We believe this framework of historic and cultural assets
can provide the basis from which to tell an integrated and
comprehensive story of the significance of French culture and
settlement on the national character and fabric of the United
States.
Interpretive themes of national significance can be further
developed to enhance the understanding of the region's
resources. These include French Colonial exploration and
settlement of the mid-Mississippi River Valley, French Colonial
influences on the social, architectural, and economic history
of the region, significance and impact of the Louisiana
Purchase on the existing settlements, cross-cultural
experiences between the French, English, black, and Native-
American populations, and the ongoing French influence in this
area of our country. We feel the proposed assessment will
confirm our belief in the national scope of these historic
resources of this region.
In summary, an untapped set of national assets in the
region begs to be assessed and integrated within an overall
interpretive plan. An opportunity to bring these national
assets together as the proposed French Heritage National
Historical Site can provide a place where the French experience
can come to life while promoting the ongoing protection and
visitation to the region's historic resources.
S. 323 is legislation that is timely and needed, providing
the opportunity to properly assess these resources and
interpretive themes, and to chart an appropriate course of
action. Therefore, the State of Missouri and its Department of
Natural Resources are in full support of the legislation
introduced by Senator Talent.
I'm available for any questions. Thank you.
Senator Thomas. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you for
completing. You've got 50 seconds left.
[Laughter.]
Senator Thomas. This is your State, Senator. Do you have
any comment?
Senator Talent. Well, I sure don't want to exceed the 50
seconds, Mr. Chairman.
This is a wonderful area. And if we can unify it, this
study shows that we can make it available to more people in a
more coherent way. It's going to be great for everybody,
preserve a part of history that just is not accessible or
available in other places, and also be a tremendous asset to
Ste. Genevieve and Missouri. And I applaud the Department on
your foresight in seeking the study.
And I appreciate your holding the hearing so expeditiously.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Ms. Billings.
STATEMENT OF JUDY BILLINGS, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, LAWRENCE,
KANSAS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU,
LAWRENCE, KS
Ms. Billings. I'll try to be as short.
Chairman Thomas, members of the committee, my name is Judy
Billings. I'm senior vice president of the Lawrence, Kansas
Chamber of Commerce, and I serve as chair of a planning
committee made up of representation from 27 counties in eastern
Kansas to establish Bleeding Kansas National Heritage Area. We
appreciate the opportunity to make a presentation to you today.
We began the process toward establishing a National
Heritage Area in 1999 by forming a 501(c)(3) management
organization, with the goal of interpreting and promoting our
shared heritage to commemorate the Sesquicentennial of the
establishment of the Kansas Territory after the passage of the
Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1954.
Public meetings determined that the Bleeding Kansas story
and all its underlying themes of the struggle for American
freedom have had a significant impact on the development of our
Nation. Activities undertaken by volunteers over the past 4
years have brought us here today. We've followed the critical
steps and suggested criteria defined by the National Park
Service in a process that has been public and has fully
informed key constituents, including governments, industry,
private and nonprofit organizations, in addition to interested
citizens. There has been full support from our Kansas
congressional delegation.
A suitability study demonstrating the significance of our
story and its related themes--and I have it with me today--was
funded through contributions by 52 entities, matched by our
Kansas Department of Commerce.
From its creation, Kansas found itself at the center of the
storm brewing over slavery. The original intent behind the
Kansas-Nebraska Act was to continue the balance of power
between the free States and the slave States. Popular
sovereignty gave the determining voice to local voters. The
Kansas question became a focus of the Lincoln-Douglas debates,
and ``Bleeding Kansas'' was a moniker that was popularized by
Eastern newspapers describing the activities in Kansas.
The core question that led to the Civil War was played out
on the Western frontier in a series of heated and frequently
deadly encounters. Kansas was an intersection of Northern and
Southern expansion. It was freedom's frontier.
Native Americans, African-Americans, women, free-staters,
pro-slavers, and the government all had their own struggles in
Kansas. Each of these groups had members who viewed Kansas as a
``Promised Land,'' where they would live in freedom and fight
for their rights.
Events in Kansas were significant to the evolving story of
American freedom. The Battle of Black Jack in 1856 was the
first time two forces on opposing sides of the slavery issue
met in open battle. In much the same way that the Battles of
Lexington and Concord sounded the opening shots of the
Revolutionary War, John Brown's victory at the Battle of Black
Jack in Kansas was the first in the long Civil War over
American slavery that would end at Appomattox Courthouse.
Subsequent events echoed the early history of the area.
Haskell Indian Nations University began in 1884 as a boarding
school dedicated to destroying Indian culture. Its mission
today includes the preservation of Indian traditions and the
adaptation to current needs.
The modern civil-rights movement played out in the landmark
case Brown versus Board of Education now commemorated in a
national historic site recently dedicated in Topeka, our
capital city.
Willing partners of all types in rural and urban areas have
discovered links among our communities and our quest to share
stories. We have a collective resolve to preserve, conserve,
and share our interconnected stories, and we want to educate
the youth of Kansas to generate a sense of place and pride and
a shared heritage that gives them a desire to make Kansas their
permanent home.
Federal designation is compatible with our economic
development initiatives, and will provide credibility for our
work to enhance the inherent strengths of our rural communities
based on heritage. We have considered and protected the impact
on private-property rights, as written into our legislation.
Thank you, again, for the opportunity to speak to you
today. I ask for your support of S. 175 to establish the
Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring Struggle for Freedom National
Heritage Area.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Billings follows:]
Prepared Statement of Judy Billings, Senior Vice President, Lawrence
Chamber of Commerce, Lawrence, KS
Chairman Thomas and Members of the Committee, my name is Judy
Billings. I am Sr. Vice President of the Lawrence, Kansas, Chamber of
Commerce & Convention and Visitors Bureau, serving as Chair of a
planning committee, made up of representation from 27 counties in
eastern Kansas, to establish Bleeding Kansas and the Enduring Struggle
for Freedom National Heritage Area. We appreciate the opportunity to
make a presentation to you today.
We began the process toward establishing a national heritage area
in 1999 with the formation of a 501C3 organization called Territorial
Kansas Heritage Alliance (TKHA). This grassroots group of historians
and tourism agencies was successful in completing a series of
activities and projects in commemoration of the 150th anniversary of
the Kansas Territory established as a result of events that took place
after the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854.
After much research of the heritage area movement and consultation
with representatives of the National Park Service as well as with
existing heritage areas, a facilitated Heritage Summit was held in
January 2003 with 75 people in attendance representing various
organizations and communities in the area. As a result of the Summit,
the group determined that the Bleeding Kansas story and all the
underlying themes of an Enduring Struggle for Freedom have had a
significant impact on the development of our nation and that we should
bring these heretofore hidden stories forward in a more comprehensive
and collaborative way. The current grassroots planning committee was
launched with a goal to gain federal designation during the
Sesquicentennial Year of the Kansas Territory, an ambitious goal!
Activities undertaken by volunteers over the past four years have
brought us here today.
We have conscientiously followed the critical steps and suggested
criteria as defined by the National Park Service in a process that has
fully informed key constituents including governments, industry,
private and non-profit organizations in addition to interested
citizens. There has been tremendous public involvement and support
including from our Kansas Congressional delegation and staff.
All partners have been fully and equally engaged in contributing
important information to be included in the required suitability/
feasibility study compiled by a local historic preservation consultant
and funded through the contributions by 52 entities ranging from $25 to
$15,000 that was matched by the Kansas Department of Commerce. The
study (show study) demonstrates the significance of our story and
identifies major themes with national significance unique to this area.
The study also demonstrates the widespread support of this effort.
There are many layers in our story of the struggle for freedom.
With the route of Lewis and Clark along the eastern boundary of the
Bleeding Kansas Heritage Area and the path of the California, Oregon
and Santa Fe Trails through several counties in the defined area,
stories reflect the significant impact of those who came, those who
stayed and their struggles that endure even today in this sparsely
populated part of the country.
From its creation Kansas found itself at the center of the storm
brewing over Slavery. The original intent behind the Kansas-Nebraska
Act was to continue the balance of power between the Free States and
the Slave States. Popular Sovereignty gave the determining voice to the
local voters. The determination that Kansas would enter the union as a
free state was not without tremendous struggle. ``The Kansas Question''
became a focus of the Lincoln-Douglas debates and ``Bleeding Kansas''
was a moniker that was popularized by Eastern newspapers describing the
activities in Kansas. The core question that led to the Civil War,
which would ultimately redefine the identity of the nation, was played
out on the western frontier in a series of heated and frequently deadly
encounters. Kansas was an intersection of Northern and Southern
expansion.
Native Americans, African-Americans, Women, Free-Staters, Pro-
slavers, and the Government all had their own struggles in Kansas. For
example, immigrant Native American tribes forcibly relocated from the
Southeast and Eastern Woodlands experienced the challenge for survival
in a move from well wooded lands with a decent supply of game to the
drier areas of Kansas. African Americans were brought in as slaves by
Missionaries, government employees and later purchased by some Native
Americans. Each of these groups had some members who chose to seek
freedom by escaping bondage while viewing Kansas as a ``Promised Land''
where they could live in freedom if they reached the right area through
the Underground Railroad. Women saw the Kansas Territory as a fertile
site to fight for their rights and Free-Staters were the first
opposition group in Kansas to rebel against voter fraud and the attempt
to force Kansas in as a Slave state.
Events in Kansas have been significant to the evolving story of
American freedom. The Battle of Black Jack in southern Douglas County
was the first time two forces, on opposing sides of the slavery issue,
met in open battle. In much the same way that the Battles of Lexington
and Concord sounded the opening shots of the Revolutionary War, John
Brown's victory at the Battle of Black Jack was the first in the long
Civil War over American slavery that would end nearly a decade later at
Appomattox Courthouse.
Subsequent events echoed the early history of the area. Haskell
Indian Nations University began as a boarding school dedicated to
destroying Indian culture by removing children from their homes and
families, and trying to force them to abandon their traditions.
Ironically, the school developed into a focal point for the creation of
an inter-tribal Native American identity. Haskell today is the
country's only four year Indian university which accepts students from
all the federally recognized tribes, and its mission includes the
preservation of Indian traditions and their adaptation to modern needs.
The modern civil rights movement has been played out to a
significant degree in our area as well. The landmark case Brown vs the
Board of Education is commemorated in a national historic site recently
dedicated in Topeka, our capital city.
The process we have followed has already brought rural areas
together with urban areas. We have found willing partners of all types
and discovered links among our communities in our quest to share our
stories. There are at least 7 National Historic Landmarks, 32 National
Register properties, 3 Kansas Register properties and 7 properties
listed on the National underground Railroad Network to Freedom that
contribute to our heritage area as well as other significant properties
that have not been designated at this time.
We have a collective resolve to preserve, conserve and share our
interconnected stories with Kansas citizens as well as visitors from
around the world with great potential for recreational and educational
opportunities. We want to educate the youth of Kansas to generate a
sense of place and pride in a shared heritage and to give them a reason
to make Kansas their permanent home.
A heritage area designation for our state is compatible with our
economic development initiatives and is needed in order to expand the
existing cooperative framework to achieve key preservation, education
and other significant goals. Federal designation will provide
credibility in enhancing inherent strengths of small towns and rural
communities--close-knit communities, strong local business networks,
and a tradition of entrepreneurial activity based on our heritage.
Private property rights are important in our state and we have
considered and protected the impact on private property rights as
written into our legislation.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak to you today. I ask
for your support of S. 175 to establish the Bleeding Kansas and the
Enduring Struggle for Freedom National Heritage Area.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Ms. Cousins.
STATEMENT OF ANN COUSINS, FIELD SERVICES REPRESENTATIVE,
PRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT, BURLINGTON, VT
Ms. Cousins. Chairman Thomas, members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity, on behalf of the Cultural
Resources Heritage Organizations and the American and traveling
public that will benefit from enactment of the Champlain Valley
National Heritage Partnership Act.
Looking at a map of Eastern North America, it is not hard
to imagine the significance of the 350-mile-long water corridor
formed by Lake Champlain and its linked waterways. Formed from
receding glaciers 15,000 years ago, this inland waterway became
one of the most strategic north/south transportation corridors.
Paleo-Indians arrived in the Champlain Valley not long
after that last glacier receded, and, in 1609, European
explorers first ventured into the region: Henry Hudson,
traveling north on the river that now bears his name to what is
now Albany, and Samuel de Champlain venturing south, on behalf
of France, to the lake that also has his name, Lake Champlain.
The valley served as trapping and hunting grounds to feed
the European fur trade. When competition led to Iroquois raids
on those French posts, the French built a series of
fortifications and allied themselves with the Algonquians. This
rising tension coincided with the British takeover of New
Netherlands and their penetration into the Champlain Valley.
This meeting of nations resulted in a 150-year struggle for
control, and the Champlain Valley became a theater for a series
of bloody conflicts, including inter-tribal wars, the French
and Indian War, the American Revolution, and concluding with
the War 1812.
Two battles, in particular, help to illustrate the national
significance of this area. But for events on Lake Champlain,
the outcome of the War for Independence would like have had a
very different outcome. In 1776, Benedict Arnold's hastily
built Champlain fleet, America's first, engaged the Royal Navy
at what has become known as the Battle of Valcour Island.
Today, that site is a national historic landmark.
One historian described it best 100 years ago, ``The little
navy on Lake Champlain was wiped out, but never has any force,
large or small, lived to better purpose or died more
gloriously. That the Americans were strong enough to impose a
capitulation of the British Army at Saratoga was due to the
year delay secured by their little navy on Lake Champlain.''
With history repeating itself, strategic consideration
again placed Lake Champlain in the center of the War of 1812. A
series of raids and bungled invasions brought little
consequences to the first 2 years of that war, but, in 1814,
the British mounted a major invasion of the American colonies
by water and land. Thomas Macdonough led the American fleet to
victory in the pivotal, nationally significant Battle of
Plattsburgh Bay, and the British Army, without its naval
support, retreated back to Canada. As a result, in December
1814, the Treaty of Ghent brought lasting peace between Great
Britain and the United States.
Peace in the Champlain Valley ushered in an era of commerce
and industry. That regional prosperity was directly related,
again, to the transportation corridor. Transportation of goods
going north into Canada, south to New York via the Champlain
Canal that was built, in 1823, and the Chambly Canal, in 1943.
By the mid-19th century, Lake Champlain bustled with
trading schooners and sloops, sailing canal boats, barges,
steamboats, even horse-powered ferries, moving everything
produced in the Champlain Valley and bringing back everything
needed.
Today, these storied waterways are enjoyed by countless
visitors. Tourism is vital to the region's economy. Champlain
Basin visitors spend 1.4 billion on goods and services
annually.
Senators, our stories can be read in history books and
experienced at the heritage sites, like Fort Ticonderoga and
Mount Independence, but there are over 150 organizations in the
region working in heritage-related activities. We have almost
an embarrassment of riches and a tremendous need.
State and local museums have long stewarded our nationally
significant artifacts. Now they look to this act to help
protect and share that legacy. Enactment of the Champlain
Valley Heritage Partnership Act will provide them with a
coordinating structure. The bill is rightfully called a
partnership. It brings Federal financial and technical
experience to benefit local publicly and privately owned and
managed sites. It builds on the strength of existing
initiatives. It does not--this protection does not include land
acquisition or top-down management. The program does not
delineate a boundary, yet it creates unifying themes that local
communities and organizations can choose to opt into, or not.
The act responds to public sentiment.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is a strong constituency poised
to take advantage of this act in appropriate ways.
I thank you for your consideration.
Senator Thomas. Mr. Jones.
STATEMENT OF RONALD D. JONES, CHAIRMAN, UPPER HOUSATONIC VALLEY
NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, INC., SALISBURY, CT
Mr. Jones. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
committee, for the privilege of appearing before you in support
of S. 429.
I am Ronald Jones, of Lakeville, Connecticut, and I am the
chairman of the Upper Housatonic Valley Heritage Area, Inc. We
would hope to add the word ``national'' in there. And we have
worked for many years to become a National Heritage Area;
indeed, since 1999.
Pursuant to the 2000 legislation directing a study of our
area, the National Park Service did study and found that we met
all the criteria for designation. I should note that those
criteria are essentially identical to those criteria in the
generic heritage bill that you have proposed. We are living
test of the working of that process that you set forth in the
generic bill.
Our area, with its small towns, ancient mountains, flowing
streams, has, as the National Park Service recognized, a very
special cultural and natural and historical heritage of
national significance. We have very broad public support for
our program, from the cultural and conservation organizations,
schools, businesses, the rotary clubs, the chambers of
commerce, the local governments, the State governments, and
many others. Indeed, in 6 years that I've been working on this,
no one has risen in opposition to the designation; and, indeed,
I have never heard anyone say, ``Gee, that's a crazy idea.
That's a bad idea.'' That is very rare, in my experience.
Earlier on, we were told that if we wanted to be designated
as a Heritage Area, we should start acting like one. And we
have five ongoing efforts that we are doing. We're working on a
shoestring, but we are undertaking some heritage trail--we have
a heritage trail brochure, we have a graduate course in--for
high-school teachers, we have other--we have annual heritage
walks. We are trying to act like a Heritage Area to show that
we deserve to get the designation.
We think it is a great, great program. It's a wonderful
Federal/State partnership. And we hope that our bill will be
considered by your Committee.
I thank you, and the green light is still on.
[Laughter.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ronald D. Jones, Chairman, Upper Housatonic
Valley National Heritage Area, Inc., Salisbury, CT, on S. 429
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am Ronald D. Jones and
I am appearing in support of S. 429, the Upper Housatonic Valley
National Heritage Area Act. I am Chairman of the proposed Management
Entity, Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area, Inc.
(``UHVNHA'') I am also past-President of the Falls Village-Canaan (CT)
Historical Society, Secretary of Friends of Beckley Furnace, Trustee of
the Salisbury Association and a former Member of the Connecticut
Humanities Council. I appreciate the opportunity to present our
thoughts on the proposed legislation.
S. 429 proposes to designate the Upper Housatonic River Valley as a
National Heritage Area and to establish guidelines, standards and
requirements for the Area. UHVNHA would be designated as the management
entity for the Heritage Area, to work with the National Park Service
and the many local heritage organizations.
Pursuant to the Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area
Study Act of 2000, P.L. 106-470, the National Park Service conducted an
extensive feasibility study and earlier this year issued a ninety one
page report concluding that our area meets all of the criteria included
in the Study Act. The Report concludes that the Area does have a
cultural, natural and historical heritage of national significance,
that the Area's organizations, local governments and residents strongly
support designation and that UHVNHA is qualified and suitable to be the
management entity. Pursuant to the 2000 Act, the National Park Service
submitted the Report to the House Committee on Resources.
The Report and the subsequent National Park Service Brochure
identify these four major heritage themes:
1. Artists, Writers and Musicians of yesterday and today have made
the Area a unique cultural area within the United States,
2. The Area has a renowned scenic landscape, much of it reclaimed
from the 18th century iron and other industrial activity,
3. The Iron, Fine Paper and Electric Industries all developed a
nationally significant presence in the Area, and
4. From Ethan Allen and Shays' Rebellion to W.E.B. DuBois and
today's leaders, the Area has played a nationally significant role in
the development of democracy.
The Report also identified further heritage themes, including the
Mohican Indians, the Shakers and the many historic Towns. I will not
restate all of this material, but will provide my thoughts on the main
points.
THE UPPER HOUSATONIC AREA HAS A DISTINCTIVE HISTORY, HERITAGE AND
CULTURE WORTHY OF IDENTIFICATION AND PRESERVATION
In the early days of our country the upper Housatonic valley was
often referred to as the ``Fourteenth Colony'' because of its
distinctive history and culture. The 950 square mile area, located in
northwestern Connecticut and western Massachusetts, is a quiet area
bounded by commerce and development along the Connecticut River to the
east and the Hudson River to the west. The valley contains many small,
old towns, with the largest cities being Pittsfield (population 41,000)
at the northern end and Great Barrington (population 7,600) in the
central part. Farms still dot the countryside, homes from the 1700's
and 1800's stand throughout the area.
An iron production industry thrived in the upper Valley from 1734
to 1923, drawing on the high grade Salisbury ore found along the
eastern side of the Taconic range. The iron activity had no use for
state boundaries and provided a heritage common to northwestern
Connecticut and western Massachusetts. Similarly, artists, authors and
actors have ignored the state boundary in developing the cultural
community that thrives to this day. Developing this common heritage by
incorporating parts of the two States will ensure the maximum support
and coordination.
THE VALLEY'S STORY IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR NATIONAL HERITAGE
The upper valley iron industry played an important part in the
nation's history, beginning with the early tools, artifacts and anchors
forged in the mid-1700's. During the Revolutionary War, cannons were
cast and drilled at the blast furnace in Lakeville, Connecticut.
Because of their quality and since the British troops never reached the
remote northwest corner, some 75 % of all of the cannons made in the
states for General Washington's army were produced at the Lakeville
Furnace.
Salisbury iron was turned into weapons in time of war and into the
structures, tools and artifacts necessary for the westward growth of
the country. Salisbury iron was used at the Springfield Arsenal for the
manufacture of muskets and at the Whitney arms factory in New Haven for
rifles. From the mid 1800's into the twentieth century, the major
product was cast iron railroad wheels. Because of their quality,
advertised as being the best in the world, the wheels had a broad
market throughout the country and many were exported to South America
and Europe. From beginning to end, the Valley's ironworks were closely
related to the development of the United States. The landmark remains
are our present and future heritage.
The Valley's history as a cultural retreat from the Boston and New
York areas provides both past and current riches for the country. Since
the 1930's visitors from all over have come to hear the music at
Tanglewood, Music Mountain and Norfolk, see the paintings at the Norman
Rockwell Museum, watch serious theater at Stockbridge and musical
treats at Sharon. Today's local authors draw on a long tradition going
back to the 19th century, when Herman Melville, Nathaniel Hawthorne and
Edith Wharton lived and wrote here. The Upper Housatonic Area,, with
its remoteness from but ties to the large cities, occupy a special
niche in our national culture.
The remaining small family farms in the Valley are a reminder of
similar farms once so common throughout New England. These early farms
established the concepts, methods and traditions for those who later
moved to the more fertile lands to the west. Population increases,
commercial growth and land economics have eliminated many farms
throughout New England, but those of the Valley retain the rural
heritage.
Our country is proud to be the ``melting pot'', with its population
drawn from many countries and continents. Thanks to the iron industry
activity, the Valley is a special example of this. Chard Powers Smith,
in his classic 1946 book ``The Housatonic'', called his subject the
``Puritan River'' after the culture of the early settlers. And indeed,
many residents trace their families back to those days. But, especially
with the coming of the blast furnaces in the 1800's, arrivals came from
all over--charcoal makers from France and Spain, miners from Wales and
Scotland, stone workers from Italy and Switzerland and iron workers
from Ireland. African Americans came to the Valley, some as free men
and some making their progress along the underground railroad. Local
Native Americans show up on the early payrolls, as they joined in the
hard and fiery tasks. All of this has given today's Valley a very
special heritage.
The Valley would not have been very pretty back in the iron era,
with the hills and valleys denuded of trees for the charcoal making and
the forges, furnaces and charcoal pits emitting fire and smoke. But all
has changed and today's Litchfield Hills and Berkshires are known for
their beauty. The Appalachian Trail and many other walking trails and
country roads provide opportunities for hiking and backpacking, while
the many rivers and streams provide excellent fishing. Wildlife is
abundant, as I watch deer, wild turkeys and the occasional fox cross my
front lawn in Lakeville. People from around the country come in October
for the pleasure of watching the red, gold and copper turning of the
leaves while sharing a night or a meal at one of the many historic
country inns. Our citizens and visitors recognize that the Valley's
heritage has a very special national interest.
THE UPPER HOUSATONIC VALLEY PRESENTS GREAT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE
PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE HERITAGE
The world of the Housatonic Valley has not moved at the pace of
surrounding areas, providing a great opportunity, if we all move
expeditiously, for preservation and development of the special heritage
The Valley has one of the largest concentrations of structures on the
National Register of Historic Places, but many need technological and
funding help if they are to survive. The tristate Iron Heritage Trail
is an official project of the federal ``Save America's Treasures''
program. Our Iron Heritage Committee has identified more than a hundred
sites of iron era historic importance with the potential for either
preservation or, at the least, being the site of educational historical
markers. Many other existing sites and structures symbolize the farms,
industry, commerce and homes through the centuries.
The 1847 Beckley Iron Furnace is an example of what can be
accomplished. The Furnace ceased operation in 1918 and the surrounding
buildings were removed, leaving the furnace tower. The State of
Connecticut acquired it in 1946, designating it as its first, and still
only, ``Industrial Monument''. Receiving only minimum care over the
next fifty years, the Furnace was ready to collapse by 1996, when
several of us decided to take action. Realizing that public awareness
and interest were vital, we organized programs and other events,
distributed more than 5,000 copies of an Iron Trail brochure, published
a 136 book on the iron era heritage, including a detailed tristate
heritage trail, and sold more than 100 autographed lithograph prints of
an A.N. Wyeth painting of the Furnace. Responding to this the State
carried out a $ 250,000 stabilization program and has acquired an
adjacent 1869 structure that we have converted into an educational
center. We work closely with the State on this and will continue to do
so in the future.
But other furnaces remain in all sorts of disrepair, as do the mine
sites, forge sites and the many charcoal pits found throughout the
revived forests. The Sharon Historical Society was recently able to
restore a 19th century lime kiln, another reminder of the area's
heritage. Other business structures, including landmark railroad depots
and 19th century industrial buildings, can be found in the small
communities. Many 18th and 19th century homes remain, some the large
homes of the well to do and others the homes of the workers who came to
the Valley. As we enter the new century, the Valley provides a great
potential for preserving our special heritage.
That heritage extends to our natural heritage, as the old
industrial sites have been restored to today's beautiful scenery. But
this requires constant maintenance and preservation. All of this will
benefit the residents as well as the many visitors who come to the
area.
BROAD SUPPORT EXISTS FOR THE PROPOSED NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STUDY
A wide range of groups--historical societies, town governments,
museums and historical sites, civic clubs and others have expressed
strong support for the establishment of a National Heritage Area. Our
local State legislators are enthusiastic about the potential for
celebration and preservation of the heritage. Attachment A lists more
than two hundred official supporters, including regional and local
heritage organizations, local governments, schools and individuals.
Many of our supporters have gathered for our several heritage
events, including a Shays Rebellion History Fair and our annual October
Weekend of Heritage Walks. Last year we, with our participating
heritage organizations, offered 46 well attended walks celebrating our
natural, historical and cultural heritage.
Our efforts will tie in with the local economy. We have the support
of and are working with the Area's Rotary Clubs and Chambers of
Commerce, the Northwest Connecticut Travel Council and the Berkshire
Visitors Bureau. All see this as an opportunity to improve our rural
economy.
We have distributed more than 30,000 copies of the NPS Brochure
throughout the Area, drawing favorable comment from the readers.
Especially important, no one has come forward to oppose us, to
denigrate or complain about what we are doing.
Every year more people come to enjoy the pleasures and heritage of
this special area, people who share the goal of seeing this it will
still be there for their children.
WE ARE ORGANIZED TO FULFILL OUR PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
OBLIGATIONS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
The Tri-Corners History Council was organized in 1995 to work with
local groups to preserve, develop and celebrate the heritage of
northwestern Connecticut, southwestern Massachusetts and the adjoining
area of New York, roughly the area at the core of the Upper Housatonic
Valley National Heritage Area. In 1999 the Council established the
``Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area Assembly'' as an
initial step towards becoming designated as a National Heritage Area.
An Advisory Board was established, with every supporting group
authorized to designate a member.
As an outgrowth of the Assembly, UHVNHA was organized in 2000 as a
not-for-profit corporation to coordinate with the National Park Service
in its Feasibility Study and to begin the development as a Heritage
Area. Working through a ten member Board of Directors and a fifty
member Advisory Board, we have sought to be all inclusive in
participation, activities and planning. We are now setting standards
for making heritage grants and will establish a totally non-
discriminatory, objective approach to this process. We are also
evolving to best carry out the responsibilities of the management
entity as described in the Act.
UHVNHA has a Section 501(c) (3) tax exempt status with the Internal
Revenue Service. All Board members are volunteers and we anticipate
employing a part-time Executive Director in the future.
We currently have five projects already underway:
1. An Iron Heritage Trail, with a comprehensive brochure issued in
October, 2004.
2. A Graduate Level Heritage Course for local teachers.
3. A regional African-American Heritage Trail
4. An arts/environmental celebration--Housatonic River Summer 2005
5. Our 4th annual October Weekend of Heritage Walks.
In summary, the Upper Housatonic Valley Heritage Area is an
important, well defined part of our national heritage, with three
centuries of history of a very hard working people. We urge you to
consider and approve H.R. 4312, the Heritage Area Study Act of 2000. We
thank the Committee for this opportunity to present our story and I
will be happy to answer any questions.
NOTE: Appendix A. ``Official Supporting Entities'' has been
retained in subcommittee files.
Senator Thomas. Good job.
Well, thank all of you. And I apologize for us being kind
of in a sweat to get it done today.
So, at any rate, thank you, and we'll call on our next
panel: Mr. John Cosgrove, the executive director of the
Alliance for National Heritage Areas, and Mr. Peyton Knight,
executive director, American Policy Center, and Washington
representative for the American Land Rights Association.
Mr. Cosgrove. Start right in, Mr. Chairman?
Senator Thomas. Start right in, Mr. Cosgrove.
STATEMENT OF JOHN W. COSGROVE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALLIANCE OF
NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS
Mr. Cosgrove. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, my
name is John Cosgrove, and I am the executive director of the
Alliance of National Heritage Areas, an organization whose
membership includes, among others, the 27 congressionally
designated National Heritage Areas.
I very much appreciate the opportunity to appear before the
committee today to discuss National Heritage Areas and their
emergent reputation for effectively improving the quality of
life in regions across the country today.
Heritage Areas can be fostered by the philanthropy of an
individual or by the collective involvement of foundations,
businesses, governments in a regional project. Our latest
estimate indicates that Heritage Areas have sprouted in more
than 150 places throughout the United States. This position in
the preservation industry has become the catalyst for the
creation of investment in economic development strategies in a
number of states through the Federally-sponsored initiatives
with the National Park Service and many other Federal agencies,
departments, and partners.
The evidence of the positive impact of heritage development
is becoming more and more clear. Just in the year of 2004, over
42.9 million people visited Heritage Areas. Volunteers worked
very near 220,000 hours in Heritage Areas. Heritage Areas
awarded 341 grants, which leveraged over $44 million in
additional funds. National Park Service Heritage Partnerships
Programs funding leverage 83.6 million in other Federal, State,
local, and private dollars. That's a ratio of one to six.
National Heritage Areas are renowned for their
entrepreneurial practices in encouraging private-sector
development while protecting significant historic and cultural
resources. They are recognized more and more for their
creativity in fostering regional partnerships that expand
economic development and increase tourism opportunities in
communities all over America.
National Heritage Areas are effective clearinghouses, where
citizens are comfortable in coming together to voice their
opinions, to rigorously debate or simply to express concerns
over very real issues facing their regions. Critical issues
like regional planning, cultural conservation, private-property
rights, economic vitality, educational excellence, and
environmental stewardship are all part of regional project
deliberations. And the goal is to reach consensus and accord.
And that is the centerpiece of true heritage development.
On behalf of the Alliance of National Heritage Areas and
all of our members, I want to thank the committee and all of
our partners in the National Park Service and beyond who have
diligently labored with us to craft a genuine partnership of
creativity, openness, and common purpose in improving the
quality of life in regions all across the United States.
Mr. Chairman, I truly appreciate the opportunity to testify
before the Committee today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cosgrove follows:]
Prepared Statement of John W. Cosgrove, Executive Director,
Alliance of National Heritage Areas
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, my name is
John W. Cosgrove. I am the Executive Director of the Alliance of
National Heritage Areas, an organization whose membership includes,
among others, the 27 congressionally designated National Heritage
Areas. I very much appreciate the opportunity to appear before the
Committee today to discuss National Heritage Areas and their emergent
reputation for effectively improving the quality of life in regions all
across the country today.
For over 20 years, heritage areas have grown from a vague and
imprecise concept to a genuine and commanding national movement.
Heritage areas span a wide spectrum of community-based activities. They
can range from a singular endeavor to save a group of historic
buildings to a wide-ranging and comprehensive approach to regional
conservation, preservation, tourism and economic revitalization.
Heritage areas can be made up of a cluster of neighborhoods, or they
can be multi jurisdictional, crossing the boundaries of counties,
regions and even states.
Heritage areas can be fostered by the philanthropy of an
individual, or by the collective involvement of foundations, businesses
and governments in a regional project. Our latest estimate indicates
that heritage areas have sprouted in more than 150 places throughout
the U.S. This position in the preservation industry has become the
catalyst for the creation of investment and economic development
strategies in a number of states and through the federally-sponsored
initiatives with the National Park Service and many other federal
agencies and departments.
In the year 2004:
Over 42,900,000 people visited heritage areas, and
volunteers worked very near 220,500 hours in heritage areas.
Heritage areas formalized relationships with 1,274 partners,
and 3,639 informal relationships with partners.
Heritage areas and their partners managed over 550
educational programs and over 735,000 people participated in
those educational programs.
Heritage areas awarded 111 grants to National Register-
eligible structures, and contributed to 113 enhancements
projects.
Heritage areas awarded 341 grants which leveraged $
44,488,296 in additional funds.
Heritage areas awarded 66 grants for recreation trails,
assisting in the creation and enhancement of 85 miles of trails
and 83 trails projects.
NPS Heritage Partnerships Program funding leveraged
$83,691,954 in other Federal, state, local, and private
dollars, a ratio of 1:6.
HISTORY OF NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS
The development of National Heritage Areas dates to the 1980s, and
the history of their development is a study of politics at the grass
root levels of American society. The first NHAs designated by the
Congress were experiments in new conservation efforts that involved
local constituencies as the primary stewards for the protection of
resources. This new conservation strategy was a clear departure from
the Department of Interior, and specifically the National Park Service,
from owning and operating the historic and natural resources that made
up the NHA. In the ensuing years Congress created a handful of other
NHAs.
In the mid-1990s, the idea of NHAs as a ``new'' approach to a
comprehensive conservation and community development strategy began to
emerge. Pushed in part by the emergence of several state heritage
programs, local efforts sprouted in many states, with the majority
found in the eastern United States. Of these, several sought
congressional designation as NHAs.
Legislation was proposed to create a group of NHAs, along with a
program, to exist within the National Park Service. Following several
attempts, the programmatic legislation failed. At the eleventh hour of
the second session of the 104th Congress, the program language was
stripped from the National Heritage Area bill, and the proposed NHAs
were packaged within a larger omnibus parks bill that ultimately passed
Congress and was signed into law. Consequently, the lack of successful
passage of programmatic legislation reinforced the process under which
NHAs are currently designated.
Today, 27 NHAs have been created by the Congress.
From New England to the deep south, through the mid-west and now
advancing to the far west--citizens have come together to conserve
their heritage, create recreational resources and protect greenways.
These very citizens are working to conserve and to interpret their
heritage in order to develop a sense of place that works to increase
the value of their property and to improve the quality of life in their
neighborhoods and communities.
Not every National Heritage Area is the same. NHAs are as unique as
the resources they work to conserve. Each NHA, does however, share a
fundamental philosophy to achieve five specific goals:
to conserve historic and cultural resources
to conserve natural and enhance the development of
recreational resources
to develop educational and interpretative resources
to help stimulate heritage tourism and economic development
to establish partnerships to help steward the advancement of
the heritage area
According to what the regional citizenry identifies through often
exhaustive and strategic public engagement, each NHA might prioritize
these goals in different ways.
HOW NHAS WORK
National Heritage Areas are special places in America, merging
community resources to promote conservation and community and economic
development--or heritage development.
NHAs harness a wide range of community assets and interests--from
historic preservation, outdoor recreation, museums, performing arts,
folk life and crafts, and scenic and working landscapes, to grassroots
community-building activities--that when combined--create a sum greater
than its parts.
NHAs celebrate the special character and culture of places, and
have a strong sense of place and identity. They are neither urban nor
rural and often include communities and sites throughout a region.
Typically, NHAs work to protect historic and cultural resources while
encouraging development for tourism and other economic opportunities.
NHAs illuminate the history and culture of a region so those people
within that region feel proud of their heritage and so those who visit
that region come away with a deeper appreciation of that region's
culture and its resources.
Few government programs can point to such accomplishment and to
such broad and expanding levels of success as National Heritage Areas.
At their very creation, hardly anyone would have predicted that NHAs
would be as popular as they are today. NHAs are often held up as
paramount examples of just how government and local communities can
work effectively together as partners.
In September of 2004, the National Trust for Historic Preservation
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation presented the
National Park Service and the Alliance of National Heritage Areas with
the prestigious National Trust-ACHP Award for Federal Partnerships in
Historic Preservation.
NPS Director Fran Mainella and ANNA Chairman Augie Carlino received
the award on stage before an audience of thousands of preservation
professionals and advocates. The ceremony, broadcast nationally by Home
and Garden Television, featured a video presentation highlighting the
partners' activities at the national and local levels. Featured in the
nomination for this prestigious award were specific examples of the
extraordinary partnerships that illustrate the amazing collaboration
between the National Park Service and heritage areas across the nation.
NHAs are renowned for their entrepreneurial practices in
encouraging private sector development while protecting significant
historic and cultural resources. They are recognized for their
creativity in fostering regional partnerships that expand economic
development and increase tourism opportunities in communities all over
America.
At a White House ceremony held on May 3, 2004, two National
Heritage Areas were honored by President and Mrs. Bush as recipients of
the first annual Preserve America Presidential Awards. Lackawanna
Heritage Valley in northeastern Pennsylvania and the Blue Ridge
Heritage Initiative each received recognition for their exemplary
heritage tourism efforts. President Bush presented the award
certificates in the Oval Office of the White House. A public reception
in the State Dining Room and a program in the East Room followed
featuring presentations by Mrs. Laura Bush, Secretary of the Interior
Gale Norton and Chairman of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation John Nau.
National Heritage Areas are effective clearinghouses where citizens
are comfortable in coming together to voice their opinions, rigorously
debate, or simply to express concerns over real issues facing their
regions. Critical issues like regional planning, cultural conservation,
private property rights, economic vitality, educational excellence, and
environmental stewardship are part of regional project deliberations
with the goal of reaching consensus and accord as the centerpiece of
true heritage development action.
National Heritage Areas are grass roots efforts that--by their very
nature--demand inclusive planning by all facets of the community.
This has been a watershed year for heritage development in our
nation and a significant year of growth for the Alliance of National
Heritage Areas. We are grateful for our strong partnership with the
National Park Service and our other valued federal partners, the many
state heritage development programs with whom we work, private
industry, foundations, corporations, and educators who are so generous
in sharing with us their expertise, guidance, and resources.
On behalf of the Alliance of National Heritage Areas and our
members, I want to thank the Committee and all of our partners in the
National Park Service, who have diligently labored with us to craft a
genuine partnership of creativity, openness, and common purpose.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I truly appreciate the opportunity to testify
before the Committee, and I am happy to answer any questions that you
have.
Senator Thomas. Thank you. And all of your statement will
be put in the record.
Mr. Cosgrove. Thank you.
Senator Thomas. Mr. Knight.
STATEMENT OF J. PEYTON KNIGHT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN
POLICY CENTER, AND WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE FOR AMERICAN LAND
RIGHTS ASSOCIATION, WARRENTON, VA
Mr. Knight. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
My name is Peyton Knight. I am executive director of the
American Policy Center, in Warrenton, Virginia, and Washington,
D.C., representative for the American Land Rights Association.
Both organizations promote the protection of private-property
rights, free markets, and limited government.
I also have the distinct pleasure of being the only witness
appearing today who is not asking you for any money. And that
is important, because, at last check, the Federal debt is
approaching $8 trillion. But extreme fiscal irresponsibility
aside, National Heritage Areas embody a more sinister
characteristic. Though billed by those who hope to cash in at
Federal trough as nothing more than innocuous designations
bestowed upon local communities for the purposes of national
recognition and tourism seed money, Heritage Areas are actually
Federal land-use mandates foisted upon local communities. Quite
simply, Heritage Areas have boundaries, and those boundaries
have consequences for the property owners unfortunate enough to
reside within them.
Incredibly, proponents argue that Heritage Areas do not
influence local zoning or land-use planning. Yet, by
definition, this is precisely what they do. In each of the
three Heritage Area bills before us today, the management
entity specifically directed to restore, preserve, and manage
anything and everything that is naturally, culturally,
historically, and recreationally significant to the Heritage
Area. This sweeping mandate ensures that virtually every square
inch of land within the boundaries is subject to the scrutiny
of the Park Service and their managing partners.
The late Representative Gerald Solomon of New York strongly
warned his colleagues against Heritage Area schemes several
years ago. In a letter to his colleagues, he wrote, ``I urge
you to defend property rights and strongly oppose the American
Heritage Area Participation Program. The environmentalists
advocating this bill have Federal land-use control as their
primary objective.'' And the rest of his letter is included in
my written testimony.
Little has changed in the years since Congressman Solomon
warned his colleagues about the imprudence and danger of a
National Heritage Areas Program. The advocates of this program
still have Federal land-use control as their primary objective.
Heritage Areas still waste tax dollars that would better be
spent on a Park Service maintenance backlog that now numbers in
the billions of dollars. And the Secretary of the Interior
still has the ultimate say over the management and land-use
plans of each Heritage Area, these present bills included.
Clearly, National Heritage Areas are nothing less than Federal
land-use policy.
Representative Bob Smith, years ago, also penned a letter
to Congressman Richard Pombo warning him about the inherent
dangers of National Heritage Areas, calling them ``a
significant threat to property rights.'' And, again, the rest
of that letter is in my testimony.
In reality, National Heritage Areas are nothing more than
land targeted by the National Park Service for future natural
parks, historic sites, landmarks, and land acquisition. This is
evidenced today by S. 323, which intends to make the French
Colonial Heritage Area in Missouri a permanent unit of the Park
Service and a national historic site.
The Rivers of Steel area in Pennsylvania has existed almost
exclusively as a Park Service lobby outwardly campaigning for
Federal land-acquisition authority and national park status. In
fact, just yesterday, Arlen Specter, introduced legislation
that would create that 38-acre national historic site within
the Rivers of Steel Heritage Area.
Federal Government owns almost one-third of America's total
land mass. National Park Service is assigned to caring for much
of this property. At present, the Park Service is running a
multi-billion-dollar deferred-maintenance backlog. If it can't
handle its current responsibility, how on earth does it make
sense to give it more?
A very wise man once observed, ``The Federal Government
continues to acquire greater amounts of land throughout the
nation. In almost every State, officials are saying it is time
to address existing public-lands needs before we swell the size
of the Federal Government. It's time for Congress to promote
the rights of private-property owners and instill some common
sense into Federal land acquisitions.''
These words were spoken only last Friday by our good
Chairman Thomas, upon the introduction of his No Net Loss of
Private Lands Act. And, if I may say so, it's a brilliant bill,
rooted in sound principle.
Proponents of Heritage Areas also claim they are locally
driven projects, but nothing could be further from the truth.
Landowners within the boundaries of proposed Heritage Areas are
left in the dark throughout the entire process. Why? Because
each and every Heritage Area bill refuses to include simply
written notification to property owners. Seemingly, the Park
Service and their management partners are not too eager to
share all the good news with the local citizenry. If these
National Heritage Areas were truly driven by local enthusiasm,
we wouldn't even be here today. Instead, local enthusiasm would
have attracted and generated local funding to create local
heritage areas. Such locally supported heritage areas are
plentiful across the Nation. Instead, the National Heritage
Areas depend on Federal tax dollars because they lack local
interest, something that lack throughout their entire infinite
lives.
Proponents claim Heritage Areas are merely seed grants, and
that, sooner or later, they will attain self-sufficiency and no
longer need Federal funding, yet National Heritage Areas almost
never meet their funding sunset triggers. Once created, they
are permanent units of the National Park Service and always
dependent on increased Federal funds. Indeed, National Heritage
Areas are the 40-year-old child still living in mommy and
daddy's basement. Some day, they swear, they'll grow up and
move out on their own. Yet that day never comes.
In fact, there's a bill before this very Congress, H.R.
888, that would extend the Federal life of nine existing
Heritage Areas until the year 2027, and double their funding.
It certainly appears that Junior has no plans to leave the
basement.
In conclusion, National Heritage Areas are a worse idea now
than they were 10 years ago. Experience shows they not only
become a----
Senator Thomas. Can you sum here now?
Mr. Knight. Yeah.
Senator Thomas. I've got to leave.
Mr. Knight. Okay.
The real beneficiaries of National Heritage Areas are
conservation groups, preservation societies, land trusts, and
the National Park Service, organizations that are in constant
pursuit of Federal dollars, land acquisition, and restrictions
of private-property rights.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Knight follows:]
Prepared Statement of J. Peyton Knight, Executive Director, American
Policy Center, and Washington D.C. Representative for the American Land
Rights Association, on S. 175
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. My name is Peyton Knight. I am
executive director of the American Policy Center in Warrenton,
Virginia. The Center is a nonprofit grassroots organization dedicated
to advancing the principles of private property rights, free markets,
and limited government. In addition, I am the Washington, D.C.
representative for the American Land Rights Association (ALRA). ALRA
promotes the protection of property rights and the wise use of our
nation's resources. I have the distinct pleasure of being the only
witness appearing today who is not asking you for any money.
And that is important, because at last check, the federal debt is
approaching eight trillion dollars. Extreme fiscal irresponsibility
aside, National Heritage Areas (NHAs) embody a more sinister
characteristic. Though billed by those who hope to cash-in at the
federal trough as nothing more than innocuous designations bestowed
upon local communities for the purposes of national recognition and
tourism-seed money, Heritage Areas are actually federal land use
mandates foisted upon local communities. Quite simply: Heritage Areas
have boundaries, and those boundaries have consequences for property
owners unfortunate enough to reside within them.
Funding and technical assistance for NHAs is administered through
the National Park Service (NPS), a federal agency with a long history
of hostility toward private landowners. The recipient of these funds
and NPS direction is a management entity, which typically consists of
strictly ideological special interest groups and local government
officials. This public/private ``partnership'' then imposes its narrow
vision of land use planning on unsuspecting landowners within a
Heritage Area's boundaries. The result is a top-down, federal approach
to zoning that is not responsive to the local citizenry.
Incredibly, proponents argue that National Heritage Areas do not
influence local zoning or land use planning. Yet by definition this is
precisely what they do. In each of the three Heritage Area bills before
us today (S. 175, S. 322, and S. 429), the management entity is
specifically directed to restore, preserve, and manage anything and
everything that is naturally, culturally, historically, and
recreationally significant to the Heritage Area. This sweeping mandate
ensures that virtually every square inch of land within the boundaries
is subject to the scrutiny of Park Service bureaucrats and their
managing partners.
The late Representative Gerald Solomon (R-NY) strongly warned his
colleagues against the Heritage Area scheme. In a letter dated
September 19, 1994, Solomon wrote:
I urge you to defend property rights and strongly oppose the
American Heritage Area Participation Program . . . The
environmentalists advocating this bill have FEDERAL LAND USE
CONTROL as their primary objective.
The bill wastes tax dollars that could be more appropriately
spent on maintaining our national parks . . . Property rights
defenders have legitimate concerns about the provision in the
bill requiring localities to obtain approval by the Secretary
of Interior for land use plans . . .
WHY SPEND $35 MILLION ON NON-FEDERAL HERITAGE AREAS WHEN OUR
NATIONAL PARKS DESPERATELY NEED FUNDS FOR MAINTENANCE AND
REPAIR?
Again, I ask you to defend property rights and oppose this
bill.
(The emphasis is Rep. Solomon's--not mine.)
Little has changed in the ten years since Congressman Solomon
warned his colleagues about the imprudence and danger of National
Heritage Areas. The advocates of this program still have federal land
use control as their primary objective. Heritage Areas still waste tax
dollars that would be better spent on a Park Service maintenance
backlog that now numbers in the billions of dollars. And the Secretary
of Interior still has the ultimate say over the management and land use
plans of each Heritage Area, these present bills included. Clearly,
National Heritage Areas are nothing less than federal land use policy.
Also on September 19, 1994, Rep. Bob Smith (R-OR) penned a letter
to fellow Congressman Richard Pombo, warning him about the inherent
dangers of National Heritage Areas:
Dear Richard,
On Tuesday, the House will consider legislation that I
consider to be the most significant threat to private property
rights I have seen during my twelve years in Congress.
This legislation . . . will threaten private property by
authorizing a broad new program of federal land use controls,
extending from coast to coast. There are nearly 100 Heritage
Areas currently under consideration and it's likely that your
constituents will be impacted by these incredible restrictions
on private property.
This program is based on the existing Columbia Gorge Scenic
Area in Oregon and Washington. The management plan for the
Gorge regulates nearly every detail of private property use,
including the color landowners can paint their homes and the
species of trees they can plant in their own yard. Your
constituents, like mine, will be outraged at this gross abuse
of government over-regulation if this bill is enacted. Believe
me, you do not want to be part of a town hall meeting after
masses of your constituents learn the federal government has
the final say over what they can do on their own property.
In reality, National Heritage Areas are nothing more than land
targeted by NPS for future national parks, historic sites, landmarks,
and land acquisition. This is evidenced today by S. 323, which intends
to make the French Colonial Heritage Area in Missouri a permanent unit
of the Park Service and a National Historic Site. The Rivers of Steel
Heritage Area in Pennsylvania has existed almost exclusively as a NPS
lobby--outwardly campaigning for federal land acquisition authority and
national park status.
The federal government owns almost one-third of America's total
land mass. The National Park Service is assigned to caring for much of
this property. At present, the Park Service is running a multi-billion-
dollar deferred maintenance backlog. It can't handle its current
responsibility. How on Earth does it make sense to give it more? A wise
man once observed:
The federal government continues to acquire greater amounts
of land throughout the nation. In almost every state, officials
are saying it is time to address existing public lands' needs
before we swell the size of the federal government . . .
It's time for Congress to protect the rights of private
property owners and instill some common sense into federal land
acquisitions.
These words were spoken only last Friday by our good Chairman
Thomas upon the introduction of his ``No-Net-Loss of Private Lands
Act'' (S. 591). If I may say so, it is a brilliant bill rooted in sound
principle.
Proponents of NHAs also claim that they are ``locally driven''
projects. Nothing could be further from the truth. Landowners within
the boundaries of proposed Heritage Areas are left in the dark
throughout the entire process. Why? Because each and every Heritage
Area bill refuses to include simple written notification to property
owners. Seemingly the Park Service and their management ``partners''
are not too eager to share all the good news with the local citizenry.
If these National Heritage Areas were truly driven by local
enthusiasm we wouldn't even be here today. Instead, local enthusiasm
would have attracted and generated local funding to create local
Heritage Areas. Such locally supported Heritage Areas are plentiful
across the nation. Instead, National Heritage Areas depend on federal
tax dollars because they lack local interest--something they lack
throughout their entire infinite lives. Proponents claim NHAs are
merely seed grants, and that sooner or later, they will attain self-
sufficiency and no longer need federal funding. Yet National Heritage
Areas almost never meet their funding sunset triggers. Once created,
they are permanent units of the National Park Service and always
dependent on increased federal funds. Indeed, National Heritage Areas
are the 40-year-old ``child'' still living in mommy and daddy's
basement. Someday, they swear, they'll grow up and move out on their
own. Yet that day never comes.
In fact, there is a bill before this very Congress (H.R. 888) that
would extend the federal life of nine existing National Heritage Areas
until the year 2027, and double their funding! It certainly appears
that Junior has no plans to leave the basement. Life on the dole suits
him fine.
In conclusion, National Heritage Areas are a worse idea now than
they were ten years ago. Experience shows that they not only become
federal funding albatrosses, but also public/private conglomerates that
quash property rights and local economies through restrictive federal
zoning practices. The real beneficiaries of National Heritage Areas are
conservation groups, preservation societies, land trusts, and the
National Park Service--essentially, organizations that are in constant
pursuit of federal dollars, land acquisition, and restrictions on
property rights.
True private property ownership lies in one's ability to do with
his property as he wishes. Zoning and land use policies are local
decisions to be made by locally elected officials who are directly
accountable to the citizens they represent. National Heritage Areas
corrupt this inherently local procedure by adding federal dollars,
federal oversight, and federal mandates to the mix.
Thank you again for inviting me to testify on this very important
issue. I would be happy to answer any questions that of the
subcommittee may have.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Again, I apologize for having to hurry things up, but, you
hear, the bell's ringing.
So, thank you all for being here, and we will move forward
with these bills as soon as we can.
[Whereupon, at 3:15 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Department of the Interior,
Office of the Secretary,
Washington, DC, March 15, 2005.
Hon. Pete V. Domenici,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Enclosed are responses prepared by the Bureau of
Land Management to questions submitted following the February 8, 2005,
oversight hearing before the Subcommittee Public Lands and Forests on
the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this material to the
Committee.
Sincerely,
Jane M. Lyder,
Legislative Counsel.
[Enclosure.]
secure rural schools hearing
Question 1. List all BLM-approved Title II projects that involve(d)
the sale of merchantable material.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implement in Fiscal
Project Name BLM District Year of Approval Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Southern Flame Density Management.... Salem.................. 2002 & 2003............ 2006 or 2007
Thomas Creek LSR Young Stand Salem.................. 2003 & 2004............ 2005 or 2006
Management.
Thomas Creek LSR Variable Density Salem.................. 2002 & 2003............ 2005 or 2006
Thinning.
Matchbox............................. Lakeview............... 2003................... 2004
Boaz Forest Health & Small Diameter 2002................... 2003...................
Utilization Medford.
Beck Road White Oak Release.......... Salem.................. 2002*.................. 2003 or 2004
Galesville LSR Enhance./Small Dia. Medford................ 2002 & 2003............ 2004
Removal.
Upper Umpqua Forest Habitat Roseburg............... 2003................... 2004
Improvement.
Smith River Stream Habitat Roseburg............... 2003................... 2004
Improvement.
Shivley Creek LSR Habitat Improvement Roseburg............... 2003................... 2004 or 2005
Penny Stew (aka Scattered Apples).... Medford................ 2004................... 2005
Nestucca Jane Creek Restoration...... Salem.................. 2004................... 2005 or 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The project was not recommended by the RAC for Phase II (Implementation)
Question 2. Which of the projects referred to above utilized
separate contracts for the harvesting or collection of the merchantable
material, and for the sale of such material?
Answer. Matchbox, Galesville LSR Enhancement, and Smith River
Stream Habitat Improvement (in bold) were selected as BLM Title II--
Pilot Projects where separate contracts were utilized to harvest and
sell the merchantable material.
Questions From Senator Thomas
Question 1. National Heritage Areas are not units of the National
Park System, but the purpose of your bill, S. 323, is to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of the suitability and
feasibility of designating the French Colonial Heritage Area as a unit.
Is your intent to seek designation as a National Heritage Area or some
other classification such as a park, historic site, or landmark?
Answer. The intent of S. 323 is to consider the suitability and
feasibility of designating the properties described within the text of
the bill as a national historic site. The confusion regarding its
designation as a National Heritage Area seems to be a result of a
working title used locally for the collective properties under
discussion. The use of the phrase ``French colonial heritage area'' in
the text of the bill should not constitute a reference to a National
Heritage Area.
Question 2. What do you consider the National importance of the
proposed French Colonial National Heritage Area?
Answer. The colonial history of a vast central portion of our
country traces its roots to the 18th century French settlements that
developed throughout the mid-Mississippi River valley. The cultural
identity forged in this region during the colonial era is a
fascinating, but largely unrecognized facet of our national identity.
This vibrant French culture left its mark in many ways still evident
today in numerous historic places throughout the mid-west.
The historic village of Ste. Genevieve preserves a remarkable
number of buildings from this French colonial culture. These resources,
including the vertical-log, poteaux-en-terre structures identified in
S. 323, constitute an unparalleled, architectural history of this
colonial era.
Question 3. If a more structured set of criteria were in place for
National Heritage Areas, would this have assisted you in pursuing
designation of the French Colonial National Heritage Area?
Answer. While the original intent of S. 323 seeks designation as a
national historic site, further information and criteria regarding
National Heritage Areas would be a welcome addition to the efforts to
seek solutions to preserve and interpret these remarkable, national
treasures.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Statement of Hon. Nancy L. Johnson, U.S. Representative From
Connecticut
NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA AND PARKS BILLS
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for inviting
me to testify today on S. 429, a bill to establish the Upper Housatonic
Valley National Heritage Area in the state of Connecticut and the
commonwealth of Massachusetts. I have introduced identical legislation
in the House and wish to focus on the substantial impact a heritage
area designation will have on my constituents and the region.
The Upper Housatonic Valley is a singular geographical and cultural
region that has made significant national contributions through its
literacy, artistic, musical, and architectural achievements, its iron,
paper, and electrical equipment industries and its scenic
beautification and environmental conservation efforts. The heritage
area has broad support throughout the region, from historic and civic
organizations, local businesses and governments, and our state
government. It also has inspired the development of a local
organization that has already begun hosting hiking events and historic
visits.
Congress established criteria in our 2000 legislation that
clarifies that designation requires a cultural, natural and historical
heritage of national significance, must have broad public support and a
qualified entity to manage the Area. The Park Service agreed that the
Upper Housatonic Valley meets the Department's ten interim criteria for
designation of a national heritage area and cite us as the best example
of how to go about becoming a National Heritage Area.
The Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area would extend
from Lanesboro, Massachusetts 60 miles South to Kent, Connecticut. This
region of New England was home to the nation's first industrial iron
sites from the 1730's to the 1920's. The first blast furnace was built
in 1762 by Ethan Allen and supplied the iron for the cannons that
helped George Washington's army to make other weapons for soldiers of
the Revolutionary army. While most of the furnaces, mine sites and
charcoal pits have been lost to development and time, the few that
remain are in need of refurbishment. The Beckley Furnace in Canaan,
Connecticut was designated an official project by the Millennium
Committee to Save America's Treasures and now has been well restored.
The Valley's history as a cultural retreat from the Boston and New
York areas provides both past and current riches for the country. Since
the 1930's visitors from all over have come to hear the music at
Tanglewood, Music Mountain and Norfolk, see the paintings at the Norman
Rockwell Museum, watch serious theater at Stockbridge and musical
treats at Sharon. Today's local authors draw on a long tradition going
back to the 19th century, when Herman Melville, Nathaniel Hawthorne and
Edith Wharton lived and wrote here. The Upper Housatonic Area, with its
remoteness from, but ties to large cities, occupy a special niche in
our national culture.
The Housatonic Valley is also rich with environmental and
recreational treasures. The Housatonic River, just below Falls Village,
Connecticut, is one of the prized fly-fishing centers in the Northeast
and is enjoyed by fisherman from not only Connecticut and Massachusetts
but the entire eastern seaboard. Olympic rowers have trained in this
river as children have learned to swim, boat and fish and value its
ecosystem.
Through this broad, flexible and locally led initiative, the states
of Connecticut and Massachusetts will be able to make real progress in
protecting the river and its heritage and in guiding regional economic
development. Rather than depending on the federal bureaucracy, states
will be able to facilitate locally led, and truly voluntary programs
that will help protect the river for future generations and strengthen
the economies of these small towns by developing regional tourist
attraction.
This legislation has broad bipartisan support, I would like to
thank the Energy and Natural Resources Committee for bringing it
forward and I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.
______
Central Missouri State University,
Department of History and Anthropology,
Warrensburg, MO, March 9, 2005.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chair, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Thomas: I am writing to endorse Senate Bill 323
``French Colonial Heritage National Historic Site Study Act of 2005''
authorizing a National Park Service study concerning the feasibility of
designating the Amoureux-Bequette-Ribault site in Ste. Genevieve,
Missouri, as a National Historic Site. Obviously the number of valuable
historic properties in the United States deserving of consideration for
this elevated status far exceeds what current resources available to
the NPS can support, but notwithstanding current fiscal constraints, I
am confident that a judicious assessment of this particular site will
sustain the case for making it an exception and adding it to the elite
list of National Historic Sites.
While in the popular imagination New Orleans' historic French
quarter embodies America's French colonial roots, the tiny town of Ste.
Genevieve, Missouri boasts structures older and more representative of
that tradition than any of the Crescent City's extant buildings.
Several years ago in his acclaimed documentary series on America,
Alistair Cooke made that very point in an episode introducing France's
historical contributions to American development. Ste. Genevieve, while
thirty some years younger than New Orleans, had the good fortune to
escape the ravages of fire and economic development that destroyed the
Louisiana city's oldest buildings. A scattering of in tact French
colonial structures dating to the late eighteenth century, make
Missouri's quaint Mississippi River town a bona fide national treasure.
The Amoureux and Bequette Ribault dwellings under consideration in this
legislation are two of only five known poteaux-en-terre or post-in-
ground houses remaining in North America. The third of those rare
architectural specimens also stands nearby in Ste. Genevieve, along
with numerous other exemplary structures representative of French
Creole building techniques in the Mississippi Valley.
Given their location on their original site, overlooking ``Le Grand
Champ'' (the big field where early inhabitants owned land for
agricultural purposes), with its still unimpeded view of the
Mississippi, the Amoureux and Bequette-Ribault dwellings afford
visitors an opportunity to relate to the earliest days of settlement in
the Mississippi Valley in a way that cannot be replicated anywhere else
in the entire United States. Five decades ago pioneering architectural
historian Charles Peterson, who inaugurated the Doric American Building
Survey for the NPS, That called attention to the importance of these
valuable historic structures, and the wisdom of his judgment remains no
less true today. I urge the members of your committee to give favorable
consideration to this piece of legislation.
Sincerely,
William E. Foley,
Professor Emeritus of History.
______
State of Missouri,
Department of Natural Resources,
Jefferson City, MO, March 10, 2005.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chair, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Thomas: As Director of the Missouri Department of
Natural Resources, I am writing to express my support for Senate Bill
323, `French Colonial Heritage National Historic Site Study Act of
2005'. Our department believes that the historic resources described in
the bill merit further study by the National Park Service. Such a study
would provide a national perspective to the unique cultural and
architectural history of Ste. Genevieve.
Missouri's state park system has operated a state historic site in
Ste. Genevieve since 1970, and has provided the public with an
outstanding opportunity to experience the French cultural history of a
region settled in the mid 18th century. We have expanded our state
historic site to include a number of significant buildings, broadening
our interpretive and preservation goals for the site. We have
discovered that the richness and significance of the resources in Ste.
Genevieve demand an even larger viewpoint than we are able to provide.
We are confident the National Park Service study will discover that the
important resources in Ste. Genevieve deserve the nation's devotion to
their preservation and interpretation.
Please contact me at 573/751-4732 or P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City,
Missouri 65102, if you require further information. Thank you for your
consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Doyle Childers,
Director.
______
Upper Housatonic Valley Heritage Area, Inc.,
Salisbury, CT, April 22, 2005.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chair, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Re: S. 429--Designation of Upper Housatonic Valley
Dear Senator Thomas: As we continue to evolve as regional heritage
area we are happy to respond to the four questions in your April 4
letter. During the past week we met with fifty members of the Tri-
States Chamber of Commerce, receiving unanimous support, and with a
recently retired industrial executive who is the new Chairman of our
major regional charitable foundation. It is we who thank you for the
opportunity to appear at the hearing and submit this additional
information.
1. Potential Impact on Private Property Owners:
a. With a total population of 109,000 and numerous second home
owners, our area has an estimated 50,000 private property owners.
b. During the ten years we have been working on this project no one
has expressed concerns about the potential loss of property rights nor,
indeed, registered any sort of adverse concern. After the March 15
hearing I did hear from a gentleman who had read the adverse testimony
of Mr. J. Peyton Knight and asked how it applied to us. The gentleman,
who did not indicate where he lives, expressed a strong antipathy for
the National Park Service and governmental activity in general. After I
described our basic structure he responded positively, noting that our
effort will preserve the ``cultural and asthetic (sic) texture of your
community'' and provide a benefit to those ``lucky enough to live
there''. His sign-off was ``Good luck and keep me posted''.
c. Our powers as a National Heritage Area would provide very little
opportunity to affect private property rights, other than, by
increasing awareness of our heritage, increasing their value. We
ourselves will not own property and have no powers to acquire property
rights by force. We will only be working with willing organizations and
individuals, who to date include everyone in the area that we have
heard from. We plan to continue a very transparent mode of operation,
as in recent years we have had more than a hundred public meetings and
presentations. Our grants program will similarly be unbiased and
transparent.
d. No property owners have asked to be excluded from our proposed
National Heritage Area. One property owner just outside the area has
asked to be included at some point and we are working with him on
several events, including hosting one of our annual heritage walks.
2. The National Park Service study found four major heritage themes
of national importance--our culture as home to writers, artists and
musicians, our reclaimed natural beauty, our heritage as a cradle of
industry and our contribution to the development of the nation's
democracy--as well as several additional themes to be developed. We
have already issued a brochure on the 1734-1923 iron industry that
supplied cannons and arms for the Continental and American armed forces
as well as peacetime artifacts and equipment for the country's growth,
including high quality railroad wheels that enabled the Union Pacific
to cross the Rocky Mountains. We are researching and developing
materials on the region's distinct African-American heritage, a
detailed modem look at an aspect of our national heritage.
3. We support the Committee's desire for a generic bill setting
forth procedures and criteria for being designated as a National
Heritage Area and note that those set forth in S. 243 essentially
embody, in many cases word-for-word, those included in our 2000
legislation directing a study of the area. The National Heritage Area
concept is a winner on all sides--more bang-for-the-buck for the
Federal government and the enrichment of the lives of the area's
citizens. But, as we have learned, its success rests on having a
heritage of national significance, broad public support and a
management entity able to do its share. These should properly be the
focus of an unbiased study before any designation is considered. We
consider ourselves a test case for the workability of the proposed
procedures and criteria.
4. Our mission is to enrich the lives of our citizens and visitors,
coordinate and assist the many local heritage activities and the local
economy and see that future generations will experience the very
special heritage of the area. We hope than this will provide an
incentive for more jobs and for youths to remain in the area to take
those jobs.
We have already found a role in coordinating local heritage
activities, finding that the area's whole is substantially greater than
the individual parts. We are an area of many small communities, so this
is especially important.
We plan to continue to evolve in our operations so that we will be
ready, at the end of the ten year sunset period to continue on our own.
Federal designation and support is a necessary key to getting into the
mainstream, our efforts will lead to a long term role once we are
there.
Sincerely,
Ronald D. Jones,
Chairman.
______
The Foundation for Restoration of Ste. Genevieve,
Ste. Genevieve, MO, March 9, 2005.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chair, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Thomas: I am writing this letter in support of Senate
Bill 323. The Foundation for Restoration of Ste. Genevieve is a
community based historic preservation organization. Part of our mission
is to `perpetuate and cherish the memory and spirit of the men and
women who achieved the early settlements of the Mississippi River and
established Ste. Genevieve' Our members have personal interests in the
history of the area and a passion for the preservation of this history.
We would like to ask you to support the bill that will authorize
the study that will lead to the inclusion of Ste. Genevieve in the
National Park System on the French Colonial Heritage National Historic
Site Selection list for 2005. Thank you for your consideration in this
matter.
Cordially,
Mickey Koetting,
President.
______
Southeast Missouri State University,
Center for Regional History,
Cape Girardeau, MO, March 9, 2005.
Mr. Jim Baker,
Historic Site Administrator, Felix Valle State Historic Site, Ste.
Genevieve, MO
Dear Mr. Baker: I write in support of the development and
designation of a French Colonial Heritage Area in the Ste. Genevieve
region of Missouri. Senator Talent's bill, S. 323, is designed to
establish the ``French Colonial Heritage National Historic Site Study
Act of 2005'' as a unit of the National Park System.
This project will do much to enhance the understanding and
interpretation of American history. The identified area has wide
regional recognition, but is deserving of greater national attention.
This act will establish the basis for a national appeal. It can, and
should, develop into a major tourism attraction in the Mississippi
Valley, promoting the economic growth of Ste. Genevieve, southeast
Missouri, and all of Missouri. Such an attraction would further enhance
many of the hidden but rich historic resources of the region, providing
more opportunities for all of us to do a better job of teaching history
to our young people.
The Ste. Genevieve area is a historic ``gold mine.'' There are so
many historic dimensions to the community and region. In this small
riverfront community one can study prehistoric Native Americans; the
early history of the Mississippi River and Valley; the great levee and
river control system of the Mississippi; the early French explorers;
John J. Audubon; the Bois Brule Levee District; the world of the
colonial French; American and French architectural history; lead
mining; salt mining; lime mining; the French landscape patterns; early
American fur trapping; the American frontier; and early American
economic development. These topics, as well as others, can be studied
and interpreted within the immediate vicinity of this small community.
What a rich and diverse history exists here.
But, it is the heritage of the French colonial period that is the
most vital historic dimension of this area. This specific designation
will call attention to the unique vertical log French homes in Ste.
Genevieve, the beautiful historic downtown of Ste. Genevieve, the
French long-lots along the Mississippi, and other historic French
structures. There is no other community like this in the United States,
The maintenance of these vital properties is difficult for a small
community to maintain. Incorporation into the National Park Service
will provide assurance of the historic preservation of one of the most
historic communities in the Mississippi Valley. Incorporation into the
National Park Service will provide assurance of the historic
preservation of THE most important French Colonial Heritage Areas of
North America. Without this I fear eventual compromise and loss.
Thank you for your consideration of this important project.
Dr. Frank Nickell,
Director,
Center for Regional History.
______
City of Ste. Genevieve,
Ste. Genevieve, MO, March 10, 2005.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chair, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Thomas: As Mayor of the City of Ste. Genevieve, I am
writing to express my encouragement for Senate Bill 323, the ``French
Colonial Heritage National Historic Site Study Act of 2005''. On behalf
of the City of Ste. Genevieve, I believe that the historic resources
described in the bill merit further study by the National Park Service
and such a study would provide a national perspective to the unique
cultural and architectural history of Ste. Genevieve.
The City of Ste. Genevieve is very dedicated to Historic
Preservation in the area with the great historical significance our
City enjoys, I am asking for your support of this bill. Authorization
of this bill will lead to the addition of Ste. Genevieve in the
National Park System on the French Colonial Heritage National Historic
Site Selection list for 2005. This addition would allow the
preservation of these remarkable significant homes.
Sincerely,
Richard Greminger,
Mayor.