[Senate Hearing 110-73]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-73
MISCELLANEOUS NATIONAL PARKS BILLS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on
S. Con. Res. 6 S. 444
S. 126 S. 500
S. 257 S. 637
S. 289 S. 817
S. 443 H.R. 512
__________
MARCH 20, 2007
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
36-341 PDF WASHINGTON : 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)
512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202)512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
RON WYDEN, Oregon CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado BOB CORKER, Tennessee
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
JON TESTER, Montana MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
Robert M. Simon, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
Frank J. Macchiarola, Republican Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Republican Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on National Parks
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey BOB CORKER, Tennessee
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
JON TESTER, Montana MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
Jeff Bingaman and Pete V. Domenici are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
David Brooks, Senior Counsel
Thomas Lillie, Republican Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Carlino, August R., President and CEO, Steel Industry Heritage
Corporation and the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area,
Homestead, PA.................................................. 37
Enzi, Hon. Michael, U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................... 6
Esparza, Moctesuma, Film Producer, Los Angeles, CA............... 29
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., U.S. Senator from Massachusetts......... 5
Lopez, Dennis J., on behalf of the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area, Alamosa, CO..................................... 42
Martinez, Hon. Mel, U.S. Senator from Florida.................... 26
Menendez, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator from New Jersey.............. 4
Nichols, Gary E., Director, Park County Tourism and Community
Development Office, Fairplay, CO............................... 48
Ostermiller, Jerry, President, Columbia River Maritime Museum,
Astoria, OR.................................................... 35
Sakura, Dan, Director of Government Relations, The Conseration
Fund, Arlington, VA............................................ 31
Salazar, Hon. Ken. U.S. Senator from Colorado.................... 1
Smith, Hon. Gordon H., U.S. Senator from Oregon.................. 3
Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................... 3
Wenk, Daniel N., Deputy Director, National Park Service,
Department of the Interior..................................... 8
APPENDIX
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 59
MISCELLANEOUS NATIONAL PARKS BILLS
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2007
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ken Salazar
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KEN SALAZAR, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO
Senator Salazar. I'm calling to order the subcommittee
hearing on National Parks this afternoon, and want to, with
Senator Craig Thomas, welcome everyone who's here, including
the witnesses who have traveled from so far to testify on these
bills today.
I'm going to give an opening statement, and then turn it
over to Senator Thomas to give whatever opening statement he
has, and then we'll proceed with the panel, starting with Mr.
Wenk, then following him we'll have the witnesses testify on
the specific bills that we're talking about today.
The purpose of today's hearing is to receive testimony on
several bills that are pending before the Subcommittee on
National Parks. Senator Akaka who is the subcommittee
chairperson was not able to be here today, and asked that I
chair the meeting for him. I thank him for scheduling the
hearing, and for giving us the opportunity to move these bills
through the committee in a timely manner.
The bills we will be considering this afternoon include the
following: S. 126, which is to modify the boundaries of the
Mesa Verde National Park; S. 257, which is to direct the
Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of establishing the Columbia-Pacific National
Heritage Area in the States of Oregon and Washington; S. 289,
to establish a journey through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area; S. 443, to establish the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado; and S. 444, to
establish the South Park National Heritage Area in the State of
Colorado; S. 500, and a companion measure, H.R. 512, to
establish a Commission to study the potential creation of the
National Museum of the American Latino, and to develop a plan
of action for the establishment and maintenance of a National
Museum of the American Latino in Washington, D.C.; S. 637, to
direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability
and feasibility of establishing the Chattahoochee Trace
National Heritage Corridor in Alabama and Georgia; S. 817, to
amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996
to provide additional authorizations for certain National
Heritage Areas; and, finally, S. Con. Res. 6, which expresses
the sense of Congress that the National Museum of Wildlife Art
in Jackson, Wyoming should be designated as a National Museum
of Wildlife Art in the United States.
I would like to take a minute to briefly talk about a few
of these bills. S. 443 and S. 444 would designate two National
Heritage areas in Colorado, the Sangre de Cristo and South Park
areas. I would like to extend a special welcome to Gary
Nichols, and Dennis Lopez who will be testifying on these
bills. Gary has traveled from Fairplay, Colorado and Dennis,
from my native San Luis Valley. Dennis is a principal of Sierra
Vista High School in Blanca, and I hope that his students are
watching the hearing today over the Internet.
These two National Heritage area bills are the product of
years of work in Colorado communities that are fighting to
protect their culture, their landscapes, and their history. I
am a fifth-generation native of the San Luis Valley, home of
the proposed Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area. Since
people first settled in the San Luis Valley, over 11,000 years
ago, the cultures, lifestyles and cosmologies of the Valley's
settlers have converged, conflicted, and coalesced through the
centuries.
The Region was dubbed, long ago, ``The Land of the Blue Sky
People,'' in honor of the Yutes, the oldest continuous
residents of what is now Colorado.
Seventeenth-century Spanish is still spoken today by about
35 percent of the population of the Region, which testifies to
the strong influence of the Hispanic settlers of the Narrow
Gauge rails of the Rio Grande Railroad, we call America's Era
of Westward Expansion.
Like the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area, the
proposed South Park National Heritage Area also reflects years
of work among local citizens, to protect one of the most
stunning landscapes and important historical legacies of the
American West. The 900 square-mile proposed South Park National
Heritage Area encompasses the South Park Basin, the Mosquito
Range, and portions of the Pikes National Forest.
The Heritage Area provides unparalleled opportunities for
nature-based recreation. You can climb four 14,000 foot peaks
in a single day, you can fish for trophy trout on 45 miles of
gold metal streams. You can watch one of the largest herds of
Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep in Colorado, or you can bird-watch
in the rich, mineral-fed wetlands in the Valley floor.
The third Colorado bill before the committee today is S.
126, the Mesa Verde National Park Boundary Expansion Act of
2007, which has been introduced by Senator Allard, and co-
sponsored by myself. I want to welcome Dan Sakura from the
Conservation Fund, who will be testifying on this bill.
Finally, I want to welcome Moctesuma Esparza, an award-
winning filmmaker and businessman who is here to testify in
support of the proposal to create a Presidential Commission to
study the creation of a National Museum of the American Latino,
in Washington. This bipartisan legislation has been introduced
for the past several years, and it was one of the first bills
to pass out of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 110th
Congress.
At this point, I would like to recognize the ranking member
of the subcommittee, Senator Craig Thomas, my neighbor to the
North, for any statements he might care to make.
STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS, U.S. SENATOR
FROM WYOMING
Senator Thomas. Thank you, Senator Salazar, for holding
this hearing.
Congratulations, Mr. Wenk for your new career as Deputy
Director of the National Park Service, we're delighted to have
you here, and it's good to have somebody with your experience
from the West.
We have a full agenda, as has been pointed out here, S.
Con. Res. 6 is to name the Wildlife Museum in Jackson as a
National Museum of Wildlife. I'm personally familiar with this,
of course, and so I think it's a remarkable treasure.
The majority of the bills are studies, designations or
reauthorizations for National Heritage Areas. The concept of
Heritage Areas is a way to recognize and promote unique areas
have been designated, and in some cases, helped local
economies, but they're not units of the National Park System.
When designated, the authorizing legislation holds funds to
$10 million, and a time limit of 15 years for receiving Federal
funding. That should be sufficient money and time for each to
get up and running. I'm concerned that some of these areas have
not found a way to be self-sufficient, and the one bright spot
is in S. 817, where areas will not be extended beyond the 2012
sunset.
So, at any rate, I have sponsored legislation to designate
National Heritage Areas, it's passed the Senate unanimously a
couple of times, we'll try it again and see if we can define a
little more clearly what they are in the future.
So, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time.
Senator Salazar. Senator Smith, would you like to make an
opening statement?
STATEMENT OF HON. GORDON H. SMITH, U.S. SENATOR
FROM OREGON
Senator Smith. I would, Mr. Chairman.
I thank you, Senator Salazar, for holding this hearing, and
also include Senator Thomas, and my appreciation for including
S. 257 on today's docket.
I also want to extend a warm welcome to Jerry Ostermiller
who is here from Oregon. He's played a large role in the
development of the bill, and is here today to testify.
The concept of having a National Heritage Area on the Lower
Columbia River came on the coattails of the Lewis and Clark
bicentennial. In the years leading up to that event, this
committee and Congress expanded Fort Clatsop National Memorial
to include additional sites in both Oregon and Washington. My
colleagues might remember that Fort Clatsop was the winter
encampment of the Corps of Discovery sent by President Thomas
Jefferson and the Congress to explore the Louisiana Purchase,
and find a passageway to the Pacific Ocean.
Coinciding with the bicentennial, Congress also
appropriated funds for the acquisition of land around Fort
Clatsop. This allowed the construction of a trail from the Fort
to the Pacific Ocean, so that now, today, visitors can trace
Lewis and Clark's steps, and repeat the famous words from
Captain Clark's journal, ``Ocean in view, oh the joy.''
The Lewis and Clark bicentennial spurred a renewed interest
in the history of the region. My staff and I worked with local
stakeholders to broaden the focus across the two centuries of
history, since the rainy 106 days of the Corps of Discovery
spent at Fort Clatsop, as well as the millennia beforehand.
The findings section of my bill lay out some of the
themes--the 6,000 years of habitation by Native Americans,
early exploration by Sir Francis Drake, and Captains Cook and
Robert Grey, whose ship became the namesake of the Columbia
River. The settlement by John Jacob Astor, for whom the city of
Astoria is named, and there's a hotel in New York City, the
Waldorf-Astoria, that also bears that family name.
Lighthouses and shipwrecks, the Coast Guard and its top gun
training centers in the area, the long history of timber and
fish harvest--these are but a few of the brushstrokes across
the historic canvas of the Columbia Region of Oregon and
Washington.
I'm pleased with this bill, and specifically to have the
support of Senators Murray, Wyden and Cantwell as co-sponsors
of my bill. Congressman Barrett has introduced a companion
legislation in the House, and so I hope we're able to move this
quickly on, so we can designate this area.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Senator Smith.
Senator Menendez.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ, U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate
your including in today's hearing S. 500, which of course
you're the lead sponsor of, I'm proud of co-sponsoring with
you, and I appreciate the agenda before the committee.
You know, S. 500, the National Museum of the National
Museum of the American Latino Community Commission Bill is
something that I am incredibly proud to be a co-sponsor of. I
feel the bill is critical to recording and preserving the role
that Latinos have played in our Nation's rich and diverse
history.
We have been a part of this history in the United States
for quite some time. Latinos have founded some of the oldest
cities in America--St. Augustine, Florida in 1565, Santa Fe,
New Mexico in 1598. During the American Revolutionary War,
General Washington's Army was successful at Yorktown, in part,
because of support from troops led by Bernardo de Galves. So,
those are parts of the early history.
But often, we see that history not recognized in the
critical elements of what children from across the country
learn, and the critical opportunities as we visit the Nation's
capitol. We almost see that that part of American history is
just simply not etched as well as we have seen other parts of
American history.
And so, I think this is an incredibly important
opportunity, to have an American Latino--a National Museum of
the American Latino Community. I would note that not only have
the three U.S. Senators of Latino descent serving in the Senate
co-sponsored the bill, but so have 21 other Senators from both
sides of the aisle, and of course, the House of Representatives
passed the same bill just last month, so I believe the
bipartisan nature of this bill speaks to the importance of
celebrating and acknowledging the contributions Latinos have
made to American life, in art, culture and industry.
It's a community that today numbers almost 44 million, with
the buying power of, not a million, not a billion, but nearly a
trillion dollars in domestic marketplace spending. That is
growing exponentially, in terms of its entrepreneurship of more
than 2 million Hispanic-owned businesses, with Latino-owned
firms being the fastest rate of growth in the country.
And it's hard to imagine what our arts and entertainment
industry would look like without entertainers such as Gloria
Estefan, Marc Anthony, George Lopez, or artists such as Julia
Alvarez and designers like Oscar de la Renta, and what baseball
would be without Pedro Martinez, Alex Rodriguez, and Hall of
Famer Roberto Clemente, just to mention a few.
We also play a vital role in the Armed Forces of the United
States. We have more than 22,000 of our sons and daughters
fighting to protect our freedoms, and accounting for nearly 10
percent of the total forces serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, Latinos have received
more Purple Heart medals in our Nation's history than any other
ethnic group. Taken together, these numbers speak of a long-
term commitment to our country. And I think it's an appropriate
opportunity to take a long-term commitment to the realization
of that community's participation in the lifeblood of America,
in its past and its present, and its future.
And I look forward to having your bill become a reality,
and being a strong supporter of it, and moving forward and
looking forward to the day in which we open the doors of that
museum, and being part of the life stream of America that we
have been, be recognized by all.
Senator Salazar. Thank you very much, Senator Menendez.
Our first witness today is Dan Wenk, the--let me, I have
one minor thing to do before I actually call on you, Mr. Wenk,
and that is--we received statements on two of the bills, on S.
817 from Senator Kennedy, and from Senator Enzi on S. Con. Res.
6, and they will be included in the record.
[The prepared statements of Senators Kennedy and Enzi
follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Edward M. Kennedy, U.S. Senator
From Massachusetts
I commend Chairman Akaka and Senator Thomas for holding this
hearing. Earlier this month, Senators Voinovich, Brown, Casey, Graham,
Kerry, Specter and I introduced S. 817, and I appreciate the
opportunity to state my strong support for it.
Our bill authorizes a $5 million increase in funds for Heritage
Areas in four states--Massachusetts, Ohio, Pennsylvania and South
Carolina--which are approaching their funding ceiling. These Areas
include some of the nation's most historic, scenic and culturally
significant sites, and it's vital to preserve them. The bill also
requires an evaluation of each Area to assess its progress in
implementing its management plans and to make recommendations on the
level of federal assistance in the future. The increased authorization
paired with an evaluation of each Area is a balanced approach that will
produce the best outcome for these national treasures and the most
effective use of federal funds.
I'm a strong believer in Heritage Areas, which now include more
than 500 national historic landmarks and 13,000 national register
properties. Their impact on the federal budget is a fraction of other
units of the Park Service, since a basis responsibility of each Area is
to leverage other sources of funding, rather than rely solely on
federal aid.
Over the last decade, Heritage Areas have had remarkable success in
attracting non-federal funding. They've built strong partnerships in
states and regions to protect nationally-significant resources.
I'm particularly proud of the work of the Essex National Heritage
Commission in Essex County, Massachusetts. Essex National Heritage Area
is among the Heritage Areas that would receive a funding increase and
be evaluated under the bill. So far, the Essex Commission has leveraged
nearly two dollars for each dollar from the Park Service.
Essex National Heritage Area includes some of the nation's most
historic sites. Lowell's Boat Shop in Amesbury is the oldest
continuously operating boat-building shop in the nation. The Peabody
Essex Museum is the oldest continuously operating museum in the nation
and the fourth largest museum in New England. Saugus Ironworks National
Historic Site is the oldest integrated ironworks site in the nation,
and the Schooner Adventure is the last of the Gloucester fishing
schooners. Essex County was also home to some of the nation's greatest
writers, including Nathaniel Hawthorne and John Greenleaf Whittier.
I urge the Committee to approve S. 817, so that these magnificent
Heritage Areas won't lose their leveraging power, and can continue to
strengthen existing partnerships and build new ones to care for these
important parts of the nation's history.
I thank the Committee for scheduling this hearing and for the
opportunity to testify in support of S. 817, and I look forward to
working with the Committee to enact these important measures.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Michael B. Enzi, U.S. Senator From Wyoming
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding today's hearing and allowing me
to submit a statement for the record about S. Con. Res. 6. I am
testifying in support of a resolution that I introduced that provides a
national designation to the National Museum of Wildlife Art in Jackson,
Wyoming. As it should, a national designation signifies something
unique that belongs to all of the people of our nation. Just as
President Theodore Roosevelt recognized the uniqueness of Devils Tower
in Wyoming when he proclaimed it to be the first national monument, my
resolution recognizes the uniqueness of the National Museum of Wildlife
Art in Jackson, Wyoming. Wildlife museums are not unusual in the United
States. Art museums are not unusual in the United States. This museum,
however, sets itself apart from all the others as it focuses on
wildlife art. This interdisciplinary approach fosters education as the
museum uses art to teach people about wildlife and encourages wildlife
lovers to explore art. The museum's educational focus is clear in their
motto ``bringing people, wildlife and fine art together.''
To date, I have not found another National Museum of Wildlife Art
that would object to this designation. However, Congress through its
committee hearings and deliberation can explore the justification for
providing a national designation to the National Museum of Wildlife
Art.
The first question should be, ``Is this a reputable museum?'' The
strongest voice answering ``yes'' to this question is the museum's
accreditation from the American Association of Museums. Any serious
museum strives for this accreditation and the National Museum of
Wildlife Art is the only museum specifically focused on wildlife art
that is accredited by the AAM. In addition, the designation accurately
represents the museum. They have a broad, comprehensive, and national
collection that considers the entire history of wildlife art in America
and does not focus on any one type of animal.
This resolution is not an attempt to covertly provide an avenue for
federal appropriations to the museum. I do not intend to seek funding
for the museum to accompany the designation. However, this designation
will ensure the national reputation, awareness, and future of the
museum. The designation would be significant on the state, national and
international levels because it would mean that no other institution
can claim the name National Museum of Wildlife Art. It is currently the
premier museum dedicated to enrich and inspire public appreciation and
knowledge of fine art related to nature and wildlife. The museum's
mission is to explore humanity's relationship with nature by collecting
fine art and presenting exceptional exhibitions and educational
programs. The national designation would acknowledge that a major
museum in Wyoming is the most important museum in the nation of its
kind.
The National Museum of Wildlife Art was founded in 1987 with a
private gift of a collection of art and is accredited with the American
Association of Museums. The National Museum of Wildlife Art features a
collection of over 2,000 pieces of art portraying wildlife. Dating from
2000 B.C. to the present, the collection chronicles much of the history
of wildlife in art, focusing primarily on European and American
painting and sculpture. The collection of American art from the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries is particularly strong, recording
European exploration of the American West. Many of these works predate
photography, making them vital representations of the frontier era in
the history of the United States.
Using the collection as a base, the central themes to the museum's
programming are connections between people, wildlife and fine art. Even
before this designation, people from across the United States had
discovered the National Museum of Wildlife Art. Since its inception, it
has become an American West destination attraction with an annual
attendance of 92,000 visitors from all over the world and an award-
winning website that receives more than 10,000 visits per week.
These visitors find wildlife on the walls of the museum, but also
outside of its doors. The National Museum of Wildlife Art is housed in
an architecturally significant and award-winning 51,000 square foot
facility that overlooks the 28,000 acre National Elk Refuge and is
adjacent to the Grant Teton National Park. The museum displays and
interprets this wildlife art in one of the few remaining areas of the
United States where native wildlife roams abundantly.
The works in the museum are united by their subject and their
quality. The permanent collection of the National Museum of Wildlife
Art has grown to more than 3000 works by important historic American
artists including Edward Hicks, Anna Hyatt Huntington, Charles M.
Russell, William Merritt Chase, and Alexander Calder, as well as
contemporary American artists Steve Kestrel, Bart Walter, Nancy Howe,
John Nieto, Jamie Wyeth, and others.
The National Museum of Wildlife Art seeks to educate a diverse
audience through collecting fine art focused on wildlife, presenting
exceptional exhibitions, providing community, regional, national, and
international outreach, and presenting extensive educational
programming for adults and children. A national designation presents a
great opportunity to use the invaluable resources of the National
Museum of Wildlife Art to teach the Nation's school children, through
on-site visits, traveling exhibits, classroom curriculum, on-line
distance learning, and other educational initiatives.
I look forward to officially recognizing the renown of the National
Museum of Wildlife Art through this resolution.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Salazar. Our first witness today is Dan Wenk. Dan
is the Deputy Director of the National Park Service and he
appears here today to testify on behalf of the administration.
Previously, Dan was a Director of the National Park
Service's Denver Service Center in my State of Colorado. I
understand that this is Dan's first appearance before the
subcommittee since having been named Deputy Director for
Operations earlier this month. We congratulate you, Dan, on
your promotion, and we welcome you to the subcommittee today.
Since you're testifying on several of the bills before us,
I'd ask you to summarize your remarks on each bill as much as
possible. Your full statement will be included as part of the
record. Please proceed with your comments on all of the bills,
and then we'll have a round of questions from the committee.
Mr. Wenk.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Wenk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the
Interior on eight bills in today's hearing agenda. I have
submitted my written testimony on each bill, and will summarize
the Department's position for the committee.
Three of the bills would designate new National Heritage
Areas--S. 289, the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area across the States of Virginia, Maryland,
Pennsylvania and West Virginia; S. 443, the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado, and S. 444,
the South Park National Heritage Area, also in the State of
Colorado.
Feasibility studies were completed on each of the three
entities by a local entity, and in each case, the study found
the area to be appropriate for designation, based on the
criteria.
However, we recommend that the committee defer action on
all proposed Heritage Area designations, until program
legislation is enacted that establishes guidelines, and a
process for the designation of National Heritage Areas.
If the committee chooses to move forward with the
designation of these bills, the Department would recommend that
each of the bills be amended to include an additional
requirement for an evaluation of each Heritage Area, to be
conducted by the Secretary 3 years prior to the cessation of
Federal funding.
Two of the bills on today's agenda would authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to conduct studies to determine the
feasibility of establishing National Heritage Areas. S. 257
will study the Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area in the
States of Washington and Oregon, and S. 637 would study the
Chattahoochee Trace National Heritage Corridor in the States of
Alabama and Georgia.
The Department supports the enactment of the two study
bills, with some amendments to S. 257, but would again state
that the Department believes that it would be beneficial to
have program legislation that establishes guidelines for
studies and a process for designation of National Heritage
Areas.
S. 817 is a bill to amend the Omnibus Parks and Public
Lands Management Act of 1996, to provide additional
authorizations for certain National Heritage Areas, to rename
the Ohio and Erie National Heritage Corridor, to authorize a
new management entity for the Delaware and Lehigh National
Heritage Corridor, and to expand the Rivers of Steel National
Heritage Area, and several other provisions.
The Department has no objection to most of the provisions
of S. 817, with several recommended amendments described in the
written testimony. However, the Department is still considering
its position with regard to the increase in the authorization
ceiling for the four heritage areas, and the extension of
funding for Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor.
We are disappointed that the Heritage Areas that are
nearing the end of their authorization period, or that are
approaching their authorization ceiling did not better plan for
this eventuality.
We appreciate that the sponsors of the bill recognize this
concern by requiring the preparation of a report to examine
what role Federal funding should play in the future of these
Heritage Areas.
I will now move on to some non-Heritage bills. S. 126 is a
bill that would modify the boundary of Mesa Verde National
Park. This bill would adjust the boundary of the Park by adding
approximately 360 acres, located near the Park entrance. This
land is adjacent to the current Park boundary, and in full view
from the entrance road into the Park.
The land is also in the foreground of the view of Point
Lookout, the promontory which Congress added to the Park in
1931. The Department supports S. 126.
Finally, S. 500 and H.R. 512 are bills to establish the
Commission to study the potential creation of the National
Museum of the American Latino Community in Washington, D.C. The
Department has no objection to the concept of establishing a
Commission to study the potential creation of a National Museum
for the American Latino Community, and we suggest several
technical corrections be made to the bill, as outlined in the
written testimony.
The location for a museum is of paramount importance to all
Federal agencies, including the Department of the Interior.
Congress adopted amendments to the Commemorative Works Act to
preclude future memorials or museums from being located in the
Reserve--an area described as the great cross-axis of the
National Mall, extending from the U.S. Capitol to the Lincoln
Memorial, and from the White House to the Jefferson Memorial.
The amendments also preclude commemorative works, which are
primarily designed as museums, from being located in the
parkland, on parkland in Area 1, or East Potomac Park.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my oral statement, I'd be
happy to answer any questions you or other committee members
may have on these bills.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wenk follows:]
Prepared Statement of Daniel N. Wenk, Deputy Director, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior
S. 126
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. 126 a bill to modify the boundary of Mesa Verde
National Park.
The Department supports S. 126. This bill would adjust the boundary
of Mesa Verde National Park (park) by adding to the park a total of
approximately 360 acres, located near the park entrance. This land
includes 324 acres currently owned by the Henneman family and 38 acres
owned by the Mesa Verde Foundation. The Secretary is authorized to
acquire the land by donation, purchase from a willing seller with
donated or appropriated funds, or by exchange.
We estimate that $45,000 would be required for closing and survey
costs for the Henneman property. Acquisition is estimated to cost
approximately $1.5 million. At this time, operational costs are
estimated to be minimal and are not expected to exceed approximately
$20,000 per year. This acquisition would have to compete with other
Park Service priorities for funds.
Mesa Verde was authorized as our nation's tenth national park in
1906 and currently includes 52,122 acres. The resources preserved at
Mesa Verde include more than 4,000 known archeological sites, three
million objects in the park's collections, and natural resources that
provided a rich environment and supported the lives of the Ancestral
Puebloans who lived there for more than 700 years.
The Henneman and Mesa Verde Foundation properties are adjacent to
the current park boundary and in full view from the entrance road into
the park. The property forms the foreground of the view of Point
Lookout, the promontory which Congress added to the park in 1931. In
addition to its strategic position at the park's entrance, the Henneman
property possesses Ancestral Puebloan sites, a several-hundred-year-old
pinyon-juniper forest, a major wildlife corridor and important winter
habitat, and the largest recorded population of the globally imperiled
Gray's Townsend daisy, a few of which are found within the current park
boundary.
The Hennemans approached Mesa Verde National Park in 2002 with
their desire to protect their property through its inclusion in the
park. Currently, the Henneman property could be developed and is zoned
for subdivision into 10-acre lots and the Hennemans have received
written offers from a developer interested in constructing a high-end
RV park and convention center on the property. Rather than selling for
development, the Hennemans have entered into a contract to sell their
property to The Conservation Fund by November 15, 2007, contingent upon
passage of this boundary legislation and the availability of funds to
acquire the property.
The Mesa Verde Foundation has been working with the park to provide
a visitor information center adjacent to the collections facility being
designed by the National Park Service for construction. The facility
will be located in part on the Foundation property. The Foundation
intends to donate their 38-acre parcel to the park, but cannot do so
until the land has been included within the park boundary.
We understand that the Hennemans have discussed their desire to
include their property in the park with the Montezuma County
Commissioners. The commissioners' position was neutral, stating that
this is a landowner-initiated project, and it is the right of the
landowner to exercise their property rights as they desire. They have
also talked with their neighbors about the proposal and no opposition
has been voiced.
We recommend one amendment to correct the map reference in the
bill. In section 3, paragraph 1 strike ``entitled `2006 Proposed Mesa
Verde National Park Boundary Adjustment'.'' and insert ``entitled `Mesa
Verde National Park Proposed Boundary Adjustment' numbered 307/80,180,
and dated March 1, 2007.''
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be happy to
answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee might
have.
S. 257
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to provide the
Department of the Interior's views on S. 257, a bill to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility of establishing the Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area
in the states of Washington and Oregon.
The Department supports enactment of S. 257 with amendments that
are described later in this statement. These amendments would make the
study requirements in S. 257 fully consistent with the criteria for
National Heritage Area studies that were included in the
Administration's proposal for National Heritage Area program
legislation that was transmitted to Congress last July. Bills were
introduced in the 109th Congress (S. 243, H.R. 760 and H.R. 6287) that
incorporated the majority of the provisions of the Administration's
proposal, and S. 243 passed the Senate. During the 110th Congress, a
similar heritage area program bill, S. 278, has been introduced, and we
look forward to continuing to work with Congress on this very important
issue.
While the Department supports the authorization of this study, we
also believe that any funding requested should be directed first toward
completing previously authorized studies.
With 37 national heritage areas designated across 27 states, and
more heritage area legislative proposals in the pipeline, the
Administration believes it is critical at this juncture for Congress to
enact national heritage area program legislation. This legislation
would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national
heritage areas, offering guidelines for successful planning and
management, clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties,
and standardizing timeframes and funding for designated areas. Program
legislation also would clarify the expectation that heritage areas
would work toward self-sufficiency by outlining the necessary steps,
including appropriate planning, to achieve that shared goal.
Where the mighty Columbia River meets the Pacific Ocean, a unique
confluence of American history unfolds. For many millennia, the broad,
fog-shrouded, and dangerous Columbia River served as the home to the
Chinookan people. Over the years, the Chinook, Clatsop, Willapa,
Wiakakum and Cathlamet people developed a rich and complex society
based upon trade and the use of the abundant natural resources. These
people continue to live and work to keep their culture alive throughout
the region.
The entrance yielded to 18th Century maritime and continental
explorers after Captain Sir Frances Drake and Captain Cook sailed off
the coast in search of the fabled Northwest Passage. In 1792, the first
ship under United States command in the Pacific Ocean, the Columbia
Rediviva, was the first non-native ship to enter the mouth of the great
river of the west. Captain Robert Gray named the four-mile-wide river
after his ship. Two months later, one of British Captain George
Vancouver's ships sailed up the Columbia River and claimed both banks
of the river for England. This created international tensions over
disputed territory that would remain unresolved for over 50 years.
International commerce flourished as American and European ships
sought to trade with the Chinook for furs. Ships would travel around
Cape Horn, trade for furs along the Columbia, then sail to China where
the furs would be traded for silk, spices, porcelain, and other goods.
In 1805, thirteen years after Captain Gray first entered the
Columbia River, the Lewis and Clark Expedition made the first overland
journey to the mouth of the Columbia, reaching their destination of the
Pacific Ocean. The Expedition wintered at Fort Clatsop and successfully
returned home. The Corps of Discovery's arrival and stay is
commemorated at the sites of the Lewis and Clark National Historical
Park and at state park sites in Washington and Oregon, which are
working in partnership with the National Park Service to preserve and
interpret the Corps of Discovery story.
In 1811, John Jacob Astor established the first permanent American
settlement west of the Rocky Mountains, in Astoria. At the outbreak of
the War of 1812, Astoria was sold to the British Hudson's Bay Company
and was not returned to America until the late 1820's. After more than
50 years of contentious British and American ownership, possession of
the region was not resolved until both banks of the Columbia became
undisputed United States territory in 1846. Today, Astoria is known for
its Historic Districts with Victorian and Craftsman-style homes stacked
along its steep hillsides with an active working waterfront.
The natural geography of the Columbia River provided a ready-made
homeland defense for Native Americans. At the start of the Civil War,
the United States Army followed the example of the native people and
constructed forts and coastal defenses at the mouth of the Columbia.
Fort Stevens, Fort Columbia and Fort Canby (at Cape Disappointment)
remained in continuous operation guarding the Columbia River entrance
from the Civil War through the end of World War II.
The confluence of the Columbia River and Pacific Ocean has become
known as the ``Graveyard of the Pacific.'' Hundreds of ships lay
wrecked at the entrance and along the nearby coast. In order to further
trade and commerce, the United States has worked for nearly 150 years
to make navigation of the Columbia River safe for mariners. Today, the
United States Coast Guard serves as the sentinels of the river, where
every year they protect thousands of lives and millions of dollars in
property.
For the last 200 years, people from all over the world have settled
in communities of the region to work in the industries in the area--
fishing, canneries, ship outfitting, timber harvesting, milling and
transportation, and international trade. These resource-based
industries have played and will continue to play a significant role in
the region's heritage.
The rich history of this region is set against a backdrop of rugged
scenic beauty. It includes the headlands at Ecola and Cape
Disappointment State parks, old growth forests in the Willapa National
Wildlife Refuge, abundant wildlife in the Lewis and Clark and Julia
Butler Hansen National Wildlife Refuges, and miles of gentle beaches on
the Long Beach Peninsula and at Seaside, Oregon.
The study authorized by S. 257 would cover four counties close to
the confluence of the Columbia River and the Pacific Oceans where there
is a strong, broad-based local support for protecting and promoting
these resources. It is estimated to cost between $200,000 and $300,000.
S. 257 contains most, but not all, of the criteria for National
Heritage Area studies that the National Park Service believes is
essential for evaluating the feasibility of designating a National
Heritage Area. The bill omits criteria related to the identification of
a local coordinating entity and its roles and responsibilities. It also
omits criteria related to development of a conceptual boundary map. We
would be pleased to work with the committee to develop amendments that
would address these matters.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the committee may have.
S. 289
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
289, a bill to establish the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area.
While a national heritage area feasibility study by the Journey
Through Hallowed Ground Partnership has found the Journey Through
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area appropriate for designation, we
recommend that the committee defer action on S. 289 and all other
proposed heritage area designations until program legislation is
enacted that establishes guidelines and a process for the designation
of national heritage areas. Last year, the Administration sent to
Congress a legislative proposal to establish guidelines and a process
for designation. Bills were introduced in the 109th Congress (S. 243,
H.R. 760 and H.R. 6287) that incorporated the majority of the
provisions of the Administration's proposal, and S. 243 passed the
Senate. During the 110th Congress, a similar heritage area program
bill, S. 278, has been introduced, and we look forward to continuing to
work with Congress on this very important issue.
With 37 national heritage areas designated across 27 states, and
more heritage area legislative proposals in the pipeline, the
Administration believes it is critical at this juncture for Congress to
enact national heritage area program legislation. This legislation
would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national
heritage areas, offering guidelines for successful planning and
management, clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties,
and standardizing timeframes and funding for designated areas. Program
legislation also would clarify the expectation that heritage areas
would work toward self-sufficiency by outlining the necessary steps,
including appropriate planning, to achieve that shared goal.
The proposed Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area
would span a region of approximately 175 miles along Route 15 and part
of Route 20, from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania through Maryland and West
Virginia to Charlottesville, Virginia. The region is rich in historic
and natural resources including the homes of Presidents Thomas
Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, and Dwight David Eisenhower,
and includes significant Revolutionary and Civil War sites.
Revolutionary War sites include Willow Grove, the temporary
headquarters of Generals Wayne and Muhlenberg; Point of Fork Arsenal;
Castle Hill, home of colonial leader Dr. Thomas Walker; and the Hessian
Barracks, used as a prison for British soldiers. Civil War sites
include the battlefields of Gettysburg, Monocacy, Antietam, Brandy
Station, and Chancellorsville, among others. The region is also crossed
by numerous historic trails and byways relating to the Civil War and
other scenic resources. All told, there are an estimated 7,000
buildings in the area listed on the National Register of Historic
Places, 13 National Historic Landmarks, and two World Heritage Sites.
S. 289 would establish the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area and designate the Partnership as the management entity.
The Partnership is a nonprofit corporation that has conducted a
significant number of public meetings, an important requirement for
evaluating local support for the designation of a national heritage
area. The bill prescribes the duties of the management entity, requires
the development of a management plan by the Partnership to be approved
by the Secretary, and includes a 15-year authorization for up to $1
million dollars per year not to exceed a total of $10 million. As this
proposed heritage area would transverse four states, we strongly
encourage the Partnership to represent the interests of all four
states.
If the committee chooses to move forward with this bill, the
Department would like to work with the committee on some technical
corrections to the bill. In addition, the Department would recommend
that the bill be amended to include an additional requirement for an
evaluation to be conducted by the Secretary, three years prior to the
cessation of federal funding under this act. The evaluation would
examine the accomplishments of the heritage area in meeting the goals
of the management plan; analyze the leveraging and impact of
investments to the heritage area; identify the critical components of
the management structure and sustainability of the heritage area; and
recommend what future role, if any, the National Park Service should
have with respect to the heritage area.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony and I am prepared to
answer any questions that you or other members of the committee might
have at this time.
S. 443
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. 443 a bill to establish the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado.
Two grassroots organizations, the Los Amigos Caminos Antiguos
Scenic and Historic Byway and the Sangre de Cristo NHA Steering
Committee, collaborated on a 2005 study which found the Sangre de
Cristo region appropriate for designation. Nevertheless, we recommend
that the committee defer action on S. 443 and all other proposed
heritage area designations until program legislation is enacted that
establishes guidelines and a process for the designation of national
heritage areas. Last year, the Administration sent to Congress a
legislative proposal to establish guidelines and a process for
designation. Bills were introduced in the 109th Congress (S. 243, H.R.
760 and H.R. 6287) that incorporated the majority of the provisions of
the Administration's proposal, and S. 243 passed the Senate. During the
110th Congress, a similar heritage area program bill, S. 278, has been
introduced, and we look forward to continuing to work with Congress on
this very important issue.
With 37 national heritage areas designated across 27 states, and
more heritage area legislative proposals in the pipeline, the
Administration believes it is critical at this juncture for Congress to
enact national heritage area program legislation. This legislation
would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national
heritage areas, offering guidelines for successful planning and
management, clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties,
and standardizing timeframes and funding for designated areas. Program
legislation also would clarify the expectation that heritage areas
would work toward self-sufficiency by outlining the necessary steps,
including appropriate planning, to achieve that shared goal.
S. 443 would establish the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area
(NHA) to recognize the outstanding and nationally significant natural,
cultural, scenic and recreational resources found within the San Luis
Valley of Colorado. The Department testified, in a hearing before this
subcommittee, on S. 2037, a similar bill, in the 109th Congress.
S. 443 contains safeguards to protect private property, including a
prohibition on the use of federal funds to acquire real property. The
bill proposes no new restrictions with regard to public use and access
to private property and does not convey any water right or water
restrictions to the federal government.
S. 443 designates the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area Board
of Directors as the management entity and outlines their duties. The
Board represents a broad spectrum of the valley's residents,
organizations, and agencies that were involved in the planning for the
NHA. The bill also authorizes the development of a management plan
within three years of enactment and authorizes the use of federal funds
to develop and implement that plan. If the plan is not submitted within
three 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.
Exceeding 7,700 feet in elevation, the San Luis Valley is flanked
by the Sangre de Cristo and San Juan Mountains and the geology and
climatology within the valley have contributed to the formation of
America's tallest Sand Dunes, part of Great Sand Dunes National Park
and Preserve.
The Rio Grande, the second largest river in North America, has its
headwaters within the proposed NHA and twists its way through the San
Luis Valley on a 1,900-mile journey, offering outstanding scenic and
recreational opportunities, including trout fishing, rafting, and
tubing. The availability of water in this largely arid and alpine
environment tends to concentrate the abundant wildlife in highly
visible and public preserves creating exceptional wildlife and bird
watching opportunities.
The area's rich natural resources include one National Park, three
National Wildlife Refuges, one National Forest, two National Forest
Wilderness Areas, six Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
administered by the Bureau of Land Management, and 15 State Wildlife
Areas. The cultural resources associated with the proposed national
heritage are equally impressive. The San Luis Valley with its abundant
natural resources may have been inhabited by native peoples including
the Ute, Navajo, Apache, Tiwa, Tewa, Comanche, Kiowa, and Arapaho for
more than 12,000 years.
More recently, the San Luis Valley served as a crossroads for
European exploration and settlement. Spanish explorers and Franciscan
priests first entered the valley in 1776 in an attempt to strengthen
Spain's weak hold on her remote empire. Captain Zebulon Montgomery Pike
camped in the shadows of the Sangre de Cristo Range along the banks of
the Conejos River and was captured by Spanish soldiers, arrested for
trespassing on Spanish soil, and escorted to Mexico for questioning.
His campsite is commemorated as a National Historic Landmark along with
22 other properties that are listed on the National Register of
Historic Places.
Extensive Mexican land grants triggered the initial settlement of
the area as families from northern New Mexico found enough water to
support their sheep and water their crops. The proposed NHA contains
the oldest continuously occupied town in Colorado, (San Luis), the
oldest parish (Our Lady of Guadalupe), the oldest church (San Acacio),
and the first water right (San Luis People's Ditch).
The Hispanic cultural traditions associated with this first wave of
European settlement can still be found in this isolated and
predominantly agricultural region of Colorado where a version of 17th
century Spanish is still spoken by about 35% of the population.
The feasibility of recognizing the area's impressive cultural and
natural resources as a national heritage area was the subject of a
study produced in 2005 by two grassroots organizations, the Los Amigos
Caminos Antiguos Scenic and Historic Byway, in conjunction with the
Sangre de Cristo NHA Steering Committee.
The feasibility study was largely based upon the results of a
symposium held in the fall of 2002 where scientists, historians, and
anthropologists from interested colleges as well as local ranchers,
community leaders, and tribal elders presented papers on the history,
natural resources and local culture of the San Luis Valley. The
feasibility study identified four interpretive themes for the NHA and
addressed the ten interim criteria that the National Park Service has
developed for designation of national heritage areas. The study
concluded that the area's cultural and natural resources met those
criteria.
All local governments within the proposed area have passed
resolutions in support of the establishment of the proposed NHA.
Moreover, State and federal land managers within the proposed NHA have
expressed a willingness to work with the management entity in
accomplishing their congressionally authorized conservation and
education responsibilities.
If the committee chooses to move forward with this bill, the
Department would recommend that the bill be amended to include an
additional requirement for an evaluation to be conducted by the
Secretary, three years prior to the cessation of federal funding under
this act. The evaluation would examine the accomplishments of the
heritage area in meeting the goals of the management plan; analyze the
leveraging and impact of investments to the heritage area; identify the
critical components of the management structure and sustainability of
the heritage area; and recommend what future role, if any, the National
Park Service should have with respect to the heritage area.
We also recommend that the bill be amended to remove paragraph
5(d)(2) which would require 100 percent federal funding prior to
completion of the management plan and to change the termination
authority in Section 11 to expire 15 years after enactment. In
addition, we would like to work with the Subcommittee to ensure that
the management planning process is coordinated with the affected
federal land management entities. These amendments would make S. 443
consistent with other, similar, national heritage area establishment
bills.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
S. 444
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. 444, a bill to establish the South Park National
Heritage Area in the State of Colorado.
Park County, Colorado prepared a feasibility study for the South
Park National Heritage Area that determined that the South Park region
is appropriate for designation. The Park Service is reviewing this
feasibility study. Nevertheless, we recommend that the committee defer
action on S. 444 and all other proposed heritage area designations
until program legislation is enacted that establishes guidelines and a
process for the designation of national heritage areas. Last year, the
Administration sent to Congress a legislative proposal to establish
guidelines and a process for designation. Bills were introduced in the
109th Congress (S. 243, H.R. 760 and H.R. 6287) that incorporated the
majority of the provisions of the Administration's proposal, and S. 243
passed the Senate. During the 110th Congress, a similar heritage area
program bill, S. 278, has been introduced, and we look forward to
continuing to work with Congress on this very important issue.
With 37 national heritage areas designated across 27 states, and
more heritage area legislative proposals in the pipeline, the
Administration believes it is critical at this juncture for Congress to
enact national heritage area program legislation. This legislation
would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national
heritage areas, offering guidelines for successful planning and
management, clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties,
and standardizing timeframes and funding for designated areas. Program
legislation also would clarify the expectation that heritage areas
would work toward self-sufficiency by outlining the necessary steps,
including appropriate planning, to achieve that shared goal.
S. 444 would establish the South Park National Heritage Area to
recognize the outstanding and nationally significant assemblage of
natural, scenic, recreational and cultural resources found within South
Park, which encompasses the largest mountain shortgrass grassland ever
documented.
S. 444 contains safeguards to protect private property owners,
including a prohibition on the use of federal funding to acquire real
property or any interest in real property. The bill imposes no new
provisions to provide for public use and access to private property or
any new liabilities to property owners. The bill also does not modify
or enlarge the authority of the federal, State, or local governments to
regulate land use.
S. 444 would designate the Park County Tourism and Community
Development Office, in conjunction with the South Park National
Heritage Area Board of Directors as the management entity and outlines
their duties. The Park County Tourism and Development Office has played
a key leadership role in the conservation and interpretation of South
Park's resources since the area was designated a Colorado State
Heritage Area in 1997. The Board of Directors represents a broad
spectrum of individuals, agencies, organizations and governments who
have been actively engaged in the planning for the NHA. The bill
authorizes the development of a management plan for the NHA within
three years of the enactment of this Act, or risk becoming ineligible
for federal funding until a plan is submitted to the Secretary.
A feasibility study for the South Park National Heritage Area has
been prepared by Park County, Colorado, which addresses the ten interim
criteria used to assess National Heritage Area designations. That study
determined that the area is appropriate for designation.
South Park, a high mountain valley, or park, averages 9,000 feet in
elevation and rises to more than 14,000 feet in the surrounding
Mosquito and Tarryall Mountain ranges. These mountain ranges contain
some of the most extensive bristlecone pine forests in North America
and 41 rare plant species, three of which are found no where else in
the world. The Tarryall Mountains also contain the Lost Creek Scenic
Area National Natural Landmark, where geological forces have sculpted
natural spires, pinnacles, narrow gorges, and subterranean channels
that cause Lost Creek to disappear and reappear at least nine times on
its cascading journey through the park.
The mountainous region in the southwest corner of South Park also
includes Porcupine Cave, one of the richest and most diverse
paleontological sites in North America. At an elevation of 9,400 feet,
Porcupine Cave contains a vertebrate faunal collection from the Middle
Pleistocene Era in North America.
Entering South Park from 10,000 foot Kenosha Pass, visitors
experience one of the most dramatic and scenic views within the Rocky
Mountains. Encompassing nearly 1 million acres, this unique high
elevation steppe constitutes the most extensive montane shortgrass
grassland ever recorded. South Park also contains a unique wetland
ecosystem containing 15 rare plants, nine rare insects, and two
globally rare plant communities
Evidence of Native American habitation can be traced back nearly
11,000 years to the end of the last ice age. South Park's high
mountains, clear streams, expansive grasslands, and abundant wildlife
also attracted pioneering settlers westward.
South Park represented one of the last frontiers in the settlement
of the continental United States, with hopeful prospectors arriving in
the mid-19th century. Between 1859 and 1949, more than $250 million in
gold and silver were produced within the Fairplay-Alma Mining District.
At 14,157 feet, the Present Help is the highest mine ever to operate in
the United States. Numerous other historic sites, mining towns, mills,
and cultural landscapes exist within South Park including the Snowstorm
Dredge, the last intact gold dredge in Colorado, currently on the list
of Colorado's Most Endangered Places.
Ranchers soon followed the miners into South Park, hoping to graze
their cattle on the rich grasslands and capitalize on the hearty
appetites of the miners. Many followed the famous Goodnight-Loving
Trail up from Young County, Texas and eastern Colorado. The highest
concentration of historic ranches can be found along the Tarryall River
Corridor where a recent survey identified more than 32 historic sites
associated with frontier ranching.
An hour's drive from the Denver Metro area, South Park also offers
abundant recreational opportunities. The South Park basin contains
portions of two wilderness areas--Lost Creek and Buffalo Peaks--located
on the Pike and San Isabel National Forests. The towering Mosquito
Mountain range offers the only place in the United States where
climbers can ascend four peaks above 14,000 feet in a single day. In
addition, South Park contains over 45 miles of Gold Medal Trout streams
available to anglers. At least six different driving tours have been
developed to help travelers learn more about the cultural and natural
heritage of South Park. Park County has identified four interpretive
themes to assist communities and other partners with their education
programs.
Support for the South Park National Heritage Area comes from a
broad spectrum of local, State and national governmental and non-profit
organizations. In addition, all State and federal land management
agencies with operations within South Park have endorsed the NHA and
stated their willingness to work collaboratively with the management
entity. In addition, a National Heritage Area Partnership has been
established, including 21 distinct entities such as the Central
Cattleman's Association and all local governments in Park County, to
help achieve the Congressionally authorized conservation and education
responsibilities.
If the committee chooses to move forward with this bill, the
Department would recommend that the bill be amended to include an
additional requirement for an evaluation to be conducted by the
Secretary, three years prior to the cessation of federal funding under
this act. The evaluation would examine the accomplishments of the
heritage area in meeting the goals of the management plan; analyze the
leveraging and impact of investments to the heritage area; identify the
critical components of the management structure and sustainability of
the heritage area; and recommend what future role, if any, the National
Park Service should have with respect to the heritage area.
We also recommend that the bill be amended to remove paragraph
6(a)(2) which would authorize the management entity to use federal
funds to acquire conservation easements, paragraph 6(d)(2) which would
require 100 percent federal funding prior to completion of the
management plan, and to change the termination authority in Section 11
to expire 15 years after enactment. In addition, we would like to work
with the Subcommittee to ensure that the management planning process is
coordinated with the affected federal land management entities. These
amendments would make S. 444 consistent with other, similar, national
heritage area establishment bills and would allow the management entity
to use the limited funds available for purposes other than acquiring
potentially costly land interests.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
S. 500 and H.R. 512
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. 500 and H.R. 512, bills to establish the
Commission to Study the Potential Creation of a National Museum of the
American Latino Community (Commission) to develop a plan of action for
the establishment and maintenance of a National Museum of the American
Latino Community in Washington, D.C.
The Department has no objection to the concept of establishing a
commission to study the potential creation of a national museum for the
American Latino community, and we suggest that a technical correction
be made to S. 500 to make it consistent with the House-passed companion
bill, H.R. 512. We note that other agencies, such as the Smithsonian
Institution, may be able to provide more insight on the benefits as
well as the significant budget implications of establishing and
operating a separate museum in this time of constrained budgets. We
suggest that the General Services Administration (GSA) rather than the
Department of the Interior provide the administrative support, since it
is our understanding that the GSA has an office set up to provide such
services for other commissions.
S. 500 and H.R. 512 would establish a Commission to study and
report on the potential creation of a museum, the availability and cost
of collections to be acquired and housed in the museum, possible
locations, the organizational structure from which the museum should
operate, and how to engage the American Latino Community in the
development and design of a museum. The Commission would consist of 23
voting and non-voting members appointed by the President and
Congressional leadership. The legislation would require that the
Commission convene a national conference on the museum no later than 18
months after the commission members are selected and submit
recommendations for a legislative plan to create and construct the
museum based on the findings of its study no later than 24 months after
the date of the Commission's first meeting. The bill would require the
Secretary of the Interior to provide administrative services,
facilities, and funds necessary for the operation of the Commission
with funds made available prior to any meetings of the Commission.
We suggest that S. 500 and H.R. 512 be amended to drop the
requirement that the Secretary of the Interior provide administrative
services, facilities, and funds necessary for the operation of the
Commission as well as determine the daily rate of compensation for
Commission members. The Department does not have available funds to
provide such support. We suggest, alternatively, that the General
Services Administration (GSA) provide such administrative support. We
recommend a technical correction be made to S. 500 to specify the
Committees to receive the report containing the Commission's
recommendations for a plan of action and the report on issues.
We appreciate that both S. 500 and H.R. 512 have been improved over
the past versions of the legislation by providing the Commission with a
full opportunity to consider a wide variety of potentially appropriate
and worthy locations for the museum and directing the Commission to
consult with the National Capital Planning Commission and the
Commission of Fine Arts during such consideration. This requirement
supports the purpose and follows guidelines provided by the ``Memorials
and Museums Master Plan,'' described further below. Previous proposals
contained provisions limiting the study to specific sites to be
considered including locations on or near the National Mall.
The location for a museum is of paramount importance to all federal
agencies, including the Department of the Interior, the National
Capital Planning Commission, and the Commission of Fine Arts. In
September 2001, the Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital
Planning Commission, and the Department of the Interior through the
Secretary's National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission, adopted the
Memorials and Museums Master Plan (2M Plan) to guide the location of
new memorials, museums, and related structures in the Nation's Capital.
The 2M Plan states that future memorials and museums should be
precluded from being located in ``The Reserve,'' an area described as
the great cross-axis of the National Mall extending from the United
States Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial and from the White House to the
Jefferson Memorial. Congress concurred with the need to protect The
Reserve from overdevelopment, calling this area ``a substantially
completed work of civic art,'' and, on November 13, 2003, with
enactment of amendments to the Commemorative Works Act, The Reserve was
established by statute. The amendments also preclude commemorative
works which are primarily designed as museums from being located on
parkland in Area I or in East Potomac Park. In addition, the National
Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts, in
partnership with the National Park Service and other key federal and
local agencies, are developing a National Capital Framework Plan that
will facilitate use of some of the 2M Plan sites for nationally
significant museums and memorials. Both the 2M Plan and the National
Capital Framework Plan will provide useful guidance to the new
Commission.
The National Park Service is proud to be the steward of monuments
along Virginia Avenue to commemorate Spanish General Bernardo de
Galvez, ally to the American colonies during the American Revolution,
and four South American heroes, Simon Bolivar, Jose de San Martin,
Benito Pablo Juarez, and Jose Gervasio Artigas. All five statues were
memorial gifts to the people of the United States from the people of
Spain, Venezuela, Argentina, Mexico and Uruguay to recognize these
liberators of Bolivia, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela, Argentina,
Mexico, and Uruguay. These memorials celebrate the bonds between our
nations; and while American Latinos have the opportunity to trace their
ancestry back to these origins, there is no permanent historical
context in Washington, D.C. that provides an opportunity to focus on
the significant cultural events and contributions representing these
citizens of the United States.
We support, in concept, the proposal to further the education and
interpretation of significant segments of American history and culture,
however, we feel strongly that this Commission move forward in a way
that does not contravene the thoughtful and comprehensive plans
undertaken to govern the growth of the Nation's Capital or weaken the
protections which Congress has provided to the National Mall.
If the subcommittee decides to move S. 500 instead of H.R. 512, we
recommend that the technical correction be made to S. 500 to make it
consistent with the House-passed companion bill, H.R. 512. Mr.
Chairman, this concludes my prepared testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have.
S. 637
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to provide the
Department of the Interior's views on S. 637, a bill to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to determine the
suitability and feasibility of establishing the Chattahoochee Trace
National Heritage Corridor in the states of Alabama and Georgia.
The Department supports enactment of S. 637. Last year, the
Administration sent to Congress a legislative proposal to establish
guidelines and a process for designation. Bills were introduced in the
109th Congress (S. 243, H.R. 760 and H.R. 6287) that incorporated the
majority of the provisions of the Administration's proposal, and S. 243
passed the Senate. During the 110th Congress, a similar heritage area
program bill, S. 278, has been introduced, and we look forward to
continuing to work with Congress on this very important issue.
With 37 national heritage areas designated across 27 states, and
more heritage area legislative proposals in the pipeline, the
Administration believes it is critical at this juncture for Congress to
enact national heritage area program legislation. This legislation
would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national
heritage areas, offering guidelines for successful planning and
management, clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties,
and standardizing timeframes and funding for designated areas. Program
legislation also would clarify the expectation that heritage areas
would work toward self-sufficiency by outlining the necessary steps,
including appropriate planning, to achieve that shared goal.
The study would focus on an area known as the Chattahoochee Trace,
which lies in the lower Chattahoochee Valley in the states of Alabama
and Georgia. This area includes eighteen counties, seven in Alabama and
eleven in Georgia, which are located near or adjacent to the
Chattahoochee River in the lower halves of the two states. The
Chattahoochee Trace has an abundance of cultural, natural,
recreational, and scenic resources. Much of the area's history revolves
around the Chattahoochee River, which has long served as a food source,
transportation route, and an engine for commerce. Centuries before the
arrival of European settlers, the lower Chattahoochee Valley was
inhabited by Native Americans that relied on the river for everyday
life. The abundance of prehistoric archaeological sites indicates that
humans lived along the banks of the river and its tributaries dating
back thousands of years. From approximately 350 to 600 A.D., Kolomoki,
near the present day town of Blakely, was one of the most populous
settlements north of Mexico. Today, the seven mounds at Kolomoki are
one of the impressive archeological sites that reflect upon the
Chattahoochee Trace's ancient past.
The area is layered with many other facets of American history. In
the late seventeenth century Spanish monks built the mission and fort
of Apalachicola on the west bank of the Chattahoochee River, in present
day Russell County, Alabama, about fifteen miles south of Columbus,
Georgia. In the early eighteenth century, merchants from French
Louisiana began trading with the Native Americans in the lower
Chattahoochee Valley, ushering in an era of great economic activity. In
the years that followed, commercial enterprises flourished, including
cotton plantations, textile mills, and riverboat companies. In the
antebellum period, the river-borne cotton trade led to the emergence of
a prosperous agricultural economy that was, regrettably, dependent on
slave labor for its growth. During this era, the river served as the
lower Chattahoochee Valley's outlet to the world, connecting the
plantations in the region with the international cotton market via New
Orleans and ultimately Liverpool, England.
Heading into the twentieth century, hydroelectric power, which was
first used in Columbus in 1882, emerged as an important industry in the
lower Chattahoochee Valley. By the 1920s, dams on the Chattahoochee
River near Columbus were providing electricity to thousands of
customers, and the area quickly came to be recognized for its role in
power generation. Columbus was so well-known for its hydroelectricity
industry that it was dubbed the ``electric city'' in the early 1900s.
One turbine at the Eagle and Phenix Mills powerhouse, installed in
1898, still produces electricity today.
The scenic beauty of the river has been showcased in such places as
Columbus and Phenix City, Alabama, where recent redevelopment projects
have emphasized a reorientation towards the river. A significant period
of urban renewal and revitalization began in the mid 1990s and
continues today. With these improvements, residents and businesses
began moving back to formerly blighted areas. Examples of such
municipal projects include the construction of the Columbus Riverwalk
Park, the new Port Columbus Civil War Naval Museum, and the initial
implementation of Phenix City's riverfront revitalization plan.
Swimming, fishing, scenic drives, and strolls on the riverbank are
just a few of the many recreational activities available to visitors to
the Chattahoochee Trace. In the twentieth century, the creation of
large lakes along the river further enhanced the Chattahoochee River's
recreational opportunities. For example, Lake Eufaula, near Fort
Gaines, Georgia, features 640 miles of shoreline. Last year, the lake
attracted approximately 4.5 million visitors that engaged in such
popular activities as camping, hunting, boating, and trophy fishing.
The lake is managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and features
several adjacent protected lands, including the Eufaula National
Wildlife Refuge, Lakepoint State Park in Alabama, and Florence Marina
and George T. Bagby State Parks in Georgia.
Since 1970, the Historic Chattahoochee Commission (Commission) has
been responsible for administering a variety of programs throughout the
Chattahoochee Trace. For the first eight years of its existence, the
Commission operated as an agency of the State of Alabama. In 1978, the
Georgia General Assembly and the Alabama Legislature passed identical
legislation to establish an interstate compact for operation of the
Commission. Among its many functions, the Commission is responsible for
promoting tourism, historic preservation, and recreational development
throughout the Chattahoochee Trace. Through the years the Commission
has undertaken a number of important projects to further its goals,
including a historical markers program, development of theme-based
tours, a photographic folk life project, production of educational
materials, historical architectural surveys, and the distribution of
preservation grants.
The study that would be conducted under S. 637 is estimated to cost
between $200,000 and $300,000. Mr. Chairman that concludes my
testimony. I will be pleased to answer any questions you or other
members of the committee may have.
S. 817
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
817, a bill to amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act
of 1996 to provide additional authorizations for certain National
Heritage Areas, and for other purposes. The Department supports the
enactment of S. 817, but would like to work with the committee on
several amendments to the bill.
S. 817 has four main provisions. First, the bill expands the Rivers
of Steel National Heritage Area by an additional county. Second, the
bill makes several technical corrections to the Ohio & Erie Canal
National Heritage Corridor including a name change for the area and the
deauthorization of the Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor
Committee, whose duties have already been assumed by a non-profit
management entity. Third, the bill names a new local coordinating
entity for the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, it
reauthorizes federal funding for the area for an additional five years,
and gives the Secretary of the Interior several new authorities.
Fourth, the bill increases the authorization ceiling for four existing
national heritage areas by $5 million each and requires the Secretary
to conduct an evaluation of each area three years before the cessation
of federal funding.
Currently, there are 37 National Heritage Areas designated across
27 states with over 61 million people residing within one of these
heritage areas. Responding to continued community and congressional
interest in studying and designating new national heritage areas, the
National Park System Advisory Board reviewed the program and prepared a
report on the appropriate role of the National Park Service in
supporting these areas. The Advisory Board's 2006 report, Charting a
Future for National Heritage Areas, recognized the important role of
national heritage areas in expanding conservation stewardship and in
identifying and preserving significant historic resources. The report
also recognized that national heritage areas need a legislative
foundation that establishes a clear process for designation,
administration, and evaluation.
Among the Advisory Board's specific recommendations for program
legislation was a provision to address the future of national heritage
areas after an area reaches the end of its authorized funding level or
time limits for funding. Before the publication of the Advisory Board
report, most of the discussions on program legislation focused on the
need to establish criteria for designating new areas and managing
existing areas. The Advisory Board recognized that the National Park
Service needed to take a more proactive approach by assisting national
heritage areas in envisioning and planning for a sustainable future.
For this reason, the report included a recommendation that the
legislative foundation for the program require that ``three years prior
to cessation of federal funding authority, a study be conducted to
recommend the appropriate level of future National Park Service
involvement in the National Heritage Area including but not limited to
future federal funding''.
In July 2006, the Administration transmitted to Congress a
legislative proposal for national heritage area program legislation
that included many of the recommendations of the Advisory Board's
report. This proposal, which was introduced in the 109th Congress as
H.R. 6287, incorporated the requirement for a study three years before
cessation of funding in a slightly different format stating that the
areas should ``conduct an evaluation and prepare a report on the
accomplishments, sustainability, and recommendations for the future . .
.''. The National Heritage Area Partnership Act (S. 243) introduced by
Senator Craig Thomas during the 109th Congress and passed by the
Senate, and a similar version of the bill (S. 278) recently introduced
during the 110th Congress, also contain similar language. The
Administration is currently working on a similar proposal for heritage
area program legislation to be transmitted to Congress.
In keeping with this recommendation for an evaluation, S. 817
provides additional funding authorization for the Essex National
Heritage Area, the Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor, the
Rivers of Steel National Heritage Corridor, and the South Carolina
National Heritage Corridor, four areas that have almost reached their
authorized $10,000,000 funding limit. Although the bill would not
provide the areas with an extension of time beyond their sunset date of
2012 for financial assistance, it would authorize an additional $5
million per area. This extension of federal funding would allow for the
continued operation and management of these national heritage areas,
while providing the Secretary the necessary time to undertake an
evaluation to assess the progress of the area in achieving its
legislative purpose.
These four national heritage areas have a commendable track record
of partnership and project accomplishments. The Essex National Heritage
Area commemorates 400 years of seafaring history and tradition and has
enabled the Salem Maritime National Historic Site, a National Park
Service unit that is only 9 acres in size, to play a far more prominent
role in the region by harnessing the energy of volunteers in
interpretation and fundraising.
The Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor preserves 110
miles of towpath canal, historic communities, and what has been
described as a ``biological mosaic of forest, marshes, streams, and
lakes.'' Cuyahoga National Park, which encompasses 22 miles of the
corridor, has taken advantage of the heritage area as a framework for
large-scale regional collaboration to build partnerships and conserve a
range of resources.
The Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area celebrates the region's
industrial legacy through its rich folklife traditions, opening doors
to the past with driving tours, audio CDs, a local radio series,
exhibits, and publications. This area celebrates a portrait of people
working in one of the most important industries at the turn of the
century, which helped form the economy of this country and continues to
preserve this regional culture for the next generation.
The South Carolina National Heritage Corridor helps rural
communities thrive by promoting their place-based resources. For
example, a new Heritage Corridor Farmers Association supports the
agricultural heritage of the area by sponsoring regular promotions,
tours and preservation initiatives.
The proposed evaluation process would document these and other
accomplishments and would give the areas the opportunity to develop a
long-term plan for reducing or eliminating the future financial role of
the National Park Service without penalizing the areas that were
established in 1996 for changes in the agency's approach to evaluating
the program.
S. 817 has several other provisions. It would provide for a new
local management entity for the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage
Corridor, replacing the existing Federal commission that has served as
the local coordinating entity with a nonprofit corporation, the
Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, Incorporated. It also
authorizes the new corporation to receive an additional five years of
financial assistance. This recommendation comes in part from a 2006
National Park Service technical assistance study entitled Connecting
Stories, Landscapes and People: Exploring the Delaware & Lehigh
National Heritage Corridor Partnership, which analyzed the strengths
and challenges of the heritage area including critical ingredients for
sustained success in the corridor. It identified options for the future
including alternatives for a new management entity, the involvement of
state, county and municipal governments, and the involvement of the
National Park Service.
The Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor has a strong
record of accomplishments including the development of the 165-mile D&L
Trail that forms the spine of the corridor, the innovative Corridor
Market Towns program, the Two Rivers Landing project, which is a model
of sustainable economic development, and the award-winning Lehigh Gap
Wildlife Refuge reclamation project. We believe that the legislative
language for the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor should
be amended to parallel that of the other four areas reauthorized in S.
817. We also believe that the area should build on the existing study
to develop recommendations on the role the National Park Service should
play in the future including the reduction and elimination of federal
funding.
The Administration has no objection to the other provisions in the
bill relating to a name change for the Ohio and Erie National Heritage
Corridor and the deauthorization of the Ohio & Erie Canal National
Heritage Corridor Committee, the addition of a county to the Rivers of
Steel National Heritage Area, and other technical corrections to
existing national heritage areas laws.
The Department would welcome the opportunity to work with the
committee to make some technical corrections to section 4 of the bill
relating to the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor. In
addition, the Department would like to work with the committee on
amending this bill to include a new section to make some conforming
amendments to the National Coal Heritage Area that were inadvertently
left out last Congress when S. 203 was enacted.
In conclusion, the Administration notes the critical need for
program legislation to establish a framework for the designation of
national heritage areas and a process to evaluate the success of
heritage areas in carrying out their approved management plan while
also planning for their future as they approach the limits of their
funding authorizations.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony and I am prepared to
answer any questions that you or other members of the committee might
have at this time.
Senator Salazar. Thank you very much, Mr. Wenk. What we'll
do is we'll have rounds of questions for up to 5 minutes each.
Let me ask you, first, a question with respect to the
National Heritage Areas and this is specifically with respect
to S. 443 and S. 444, the Sangre de Cristo and South Park
National Heritage Areas.
You have recommended in your testimony that we defer action
on these two heritage areas, as well as other heritage areas,
based on the need--as you assert--for the programmatic
legislation which Senator Thomas has proposed, and which we
passed unanimously in the Senate last year. And let me
parenthetically say that I appreciate the leadership that
Senator Thomas has shown on National Parks issues over the
years.
But what we have done with respect to, at least, these two
pieces of legislation, is mirror the language that was used in
the Thomas legislation, which we passed last year. In so doing,
it was our hope that we would be able to get the Department of
the Interior's NPS in support of our legislation. Do you have a
problem with the language that was included in our legislation
that mirrors the language that Senator Thomas proposed last
year in his legislation?
Mr. Wenk. We do not have a problem with the language that
was included--our concern is that overall, programmatic
language that would guide the, the studies and the
establishment of Heritage Areas would be a useful tool in the
future, as we move forward with evaluating Heritage Areas for
inclusion into that system.
Senator Salazar. Now, Mr. Wenk, last year I supported
Senator Thomas's bill, we were able to get it through the U.S.
Senate, unanimously. It is our hope that we'll be able to get
that same legislation through the House of Representatives this
year. And so, in the interim time, if we have that legislation
moving, and we have this legislation moving, that essentially
is consistent with each other--don't you think that that
consistency there should impale the conclusion that they should
be supported if the proposed Heritage Areas have the merit that
would meet the standard of the National Park Service?
Mr. Wenk. We recognize that you may choose to designate
these areas, I think it does provide the consistency, we are
hopeful that they will move in parallel, and that we will have
overall programmatic legislation, as well.
Senator Salazar. Thank you.
As drafted, the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area
bill requires that Federal funds be matched with local dollars
after completion of the plan, but the area is a very poor area.
Conejos and Costilla Counties on the southern part of this
great valley--the San Luis Valley--are two of the four poorest
counties in the United States of America.
And so, my question to you is, given the economic realities
of the San Luis Valley, and the economic circumstance relating
to those counties, is it feasible--do you think--for the
Department to take a second look at the matching fund
requirement, prior to completion of the management plan?
Mr. Wenk. We believe that the--currently, the way that the
bills are established--we have potential for Federal funding
over a 10-year period of time. During that 10-year period of
time, it's our goal to collaborate with the management entity,
and to look to have them reach a self-sufficiency.
We're also looking in the program legislation to have an
opportunity for a study within 3 years of that period of time,
to see how we're doing, to look at how we're leveraging the
money, to look at how we're using the funds that are coming in
to assure that we--what the partnership will look like in the
future, as we move forward.
Certainly, it's in everyone's best interest if we
established areas for them to be successful, and that's our
intention--to work with the local community and the heritage
area to make it successful.
Senator Salazar. On the South Park National Heritage Area,
you say in your testimony that the management entity not be
allowed to use Federal funds to acquire conservation easements.
Why is the Park Service recommending that this useful tool that
has been so constructive in conserving lands across the West
not be used here?
Mr. Wenk. National heritage areas do not use Federal funds
for the purchase of property rights. That's been a longstanding
part of National Heritage Areas. And we believe that, they're
set up to preserve the conservation, cultural heritage values,
and that, we think that's the determinate that can be made by
local communities and organizations through their work within
the conservation or the Heritage Area, and that Federal funds
should not be used for that purpose.
Senator Salazar. And conservation easement sent from the
point of view of the National Park Service is, would fall
within that umbrella prohibition of using Federal funds for the
acquisition of private property rights?
Mr. Wenk. If you'll allow me to turn and make--to affirm
that, I will. That's a correct statement. Conservation funds
would be considered a property right that Federal funds cannot
be used for.
Senator Salazar. Okay.
Thank you, Mr. Wenk.
Senator Thomas.
Senator Thomas. Thank you. The Mesa Verde boundary
adjustment S. 126, what is the estimated cost of the 360 acres,
do you know?
Mr. Wenk. The 360 acres is in two parts, 324 of those acres
are owned by, privately owned by the Henneman family, estimated
cost is about $1.5 million for those. The other 38 acres,
approximately, are owned by the Mesa Verde Foundation, those
would be donated to Mesa Verde National Park.
Senator Thomas. So, about a million and a half dollars.
Mr. Wenk. Correct.
Senator Thomas. Okay. How long do you estimate it will take
to complete the study for the Columbia-Pacific National
Heritage Area?
Mr. Wenk. Typically, a study will take 2 to 3 years, and
cost $200,000 to $300,000.
Senator Thomas. Do you know how many studies the Park
Service has conducted for National Heritage Areas? And how many
times have you designated, or recommended non-designation?
Mr. Wenk. I know that there's 35 studies that are currently
underway, I know there has been the occasion where we have done
a study, and it did not meet the criteria, but I believe that's
five or less?
We can submit it for the record, but there has been
occasion where we have not recommended.
Senator Thomas. Thirty-five you've just completed, or----
Mr. Wenk. There's 35 studies that are underway.
Senator Thomas. Do you know how many you've done over the
years?
Mr. Wenk. There are now 37 heritage areas that are--that
have been designated.
Senator Thomas. I see. Okay.
Is there space on the Mall for the Latino Museum? Is that
where it's being talked about? Or, what's the basis for that?
Mr. Wenk. The determination had been made that the Axis
that I talked about, the Reserve, from the White House to the
Jefferson, the Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial, is basically a
completed work of civic art. Certainly, we would recommend that
areas be studied that do not include that Reserve for the
museum, that is in response to the legislation that was enacted
by Congress.
Senator Thomas. So, it might still be on the Mall, though,
is that what you're saying?
Mr. Wenk. There are, the National Park, or, excuse me--the
National Capitol Planning Commission, the Commission on Fine
Arts, the National Park Service and others are all concerned
about the location of facilities on the Mall. I know there have
been other museums that have been recommended recently that
have included recommendations for the Mall, I don't know what
the final disposition of those recommendations are going to be.
Senator Thomas. Okay.
Mr. Wenk. But we're recommending it not be considered for
the Mall.
Senator Thomas. The Edison Electric Institute submitted a
statement requesting legislation be allowed in the Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area for the potential for
infrastructure installation and upgrades. Should the
legislation be amended to allow for utilities and road
construction? If so, can you provide specific language for that
modification, or how would you handle that?
Mr. Wenk. I'm not aware that the legislation would preclude
those kind of developments. Those would have to be approved
through, I believe, by local regulatory agencies that would
look at those developments. I'm not aware, and if I'm in error,
but I don't believe that's precluded within the designated
area.
Senator Thomas. So, it would be a local decision.
Mr. Wenk. That's correct.
Senator Thomas. I see.
The National Heritage Reauthorization, S. 817, how does the
National Park Service determine the amount of money that's
necessary each year?
Mr. Wenk. We try to balance the amount that is
appropriated, we try to look at not only the historical
allocations, but the work that they're doing, the requests that
are made. We try to look at the totality of the circumstance of
the National Heritage Area, as well as all of the other
Heritage Areas that are in competition for that funding.
Senator Thomas. But you don't know what's going to be
allocated during the year, or----
Mr. Wenk. Well, we try to make that decision at the
beginning of each appropriations cycle, where we would
designate the funds for each of the Heritage Areas.
Senator Thomas. Yes.
Mr. Wenk. It was based on previous funding, and how that
funding's been used, and their request for new funds.
Senator Thomas. If the bill authorizes it without study, it
could be un-funded, is that right?
Mr. Wenk. I may have misunderstood your question, I'm
sorry, sir.
Senator Thomas. If a bill sets it up for that year, that
sets it up without being studied, then what do you do for the
dollars?
Mr. Wenk. The bills we are supporting for National
Heritage, all have met the criteria of a National Heritage
Area. The two other bills that are recommending studies, we
have not, we have no determination of whether or not those meet
the criteria of a National Heritage Area at this time.
Senator Thomas. It's been known that they pass whether the
Park Service recommends them or not.
[Laughter.]
Senator Thomas. Okay, well, in any event, would there be
any cost to changing the name of the museum in Jackson Hole?
Mr. Wenk. It does not affect the National Park Service, we
don't have a position on that.
Senator Thomas. Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Salazar. Mr. Wenk, let me ask a couple of follow-up
questions on the National Heritage Areas in Colorado.
First, with respect to the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area--that's S. 443--that bill came through this
committee last year, went through the Senate Energy Committee,
and it was extensively commented on by the National Park
Service at the time. As I recall, the testimony from the
National Park Service is that it was a great proposal, or words
similar to that.
My question to you on the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area is whether it meets the suggested criteria for
designation, as outlined by the Park Service.
Mr. Wenk. We believe it meets the criteria, yes.
Senator Salazar. I'll ask you the same question with
respect to the South Park National Heritage Area--does it meet
the suggested criteria of the National Park Service?
Mr. Wenk. Yes, we believe it meets the criteria, as well.
Senator Salazar. Thank you.
Let me ask a question on the S. 126, the Mesa Verde
expansion. I understand that the Park Service sees the
acquisition of the Henneman property as a high priority. I also
know there may be a short window of opportunity to complete the
acquisition. If this bill passes, and I think you may have
responded to the question that Senator Thomas asked you on this
question already, but just to reinforce it--how much funding is
needed in fiscal year 2008 to complete the acquisition of the
Henneman property?
Mr. Wenk. The estimated cost of the Henneman property is
$1.5 million. There's an additional cost of about $45,000 in
closing costs that would be estimated, as well.
Senator Salazar. Are there opportunities for the Park
Service to re-program existing funds to begin the process of
acquisition?
Mr. Wenk. We would look at this acquisition in terms of
priorities of our land--or of the lands within the land
acquisition funds that are provided in the overall priorities
of the National Park Service.
Senator Salazar. And within that process, is there a
possibility that the funds could be identified to begin the
acquisition?
Mr. Wenk. The possibility is there, but I can not commit to
that today, sir.
Senator Salazar. Let me ask you a question with respect to
the Latino Commission Museum build, S. 500. I understand that
your only recommendation is to have the General Services
Administration provide support for the Commission, instead of
the Department of the Interior, my question is, why is that?
And have you checked with the General Services Administration,
and are they willing to assume that responsibility?
Mr. Wenk. The reason is that, the GSA, or General Service
Administration is, in fact, staffed, and provides that service.
I have not checked with them, you know, specifically, if
they're willing to take this on, but they have an office that,
in fact, works with organizations to look at this, this
opportunity.
Senator Salazar. Has the Department of the Interior, in the
past, provided those services with respect to other museums
that have been established, such as the African-American
Museum, or other museums on the Mall?
Mr. Wenk. I know specifically, we did with the African-
American Museum.
Senator Salazar. So, why is the National Park Service
approaching this in a different position then it would, it did
in the past, with respect to the other museums?
Mr. Wenk. I'm not sure we didn't make the same
recommendations, but I can get that for the record. We may have
made the same recommendation at that time.
The reason is, is we're not--that's not a, GSA has an
office and a function that does that. We don't, obviously we
have done it, and we can. But they're equipped to do it, and we
believe that it may be a better way to proceed.
Senator Salazar. You also said that at this point in time
you were not recommending that a site be examined for this
museum on the Mall. It's my understanding that the position
that is vacant is one that had been contemplated for the
National Arts and Industry Building, as a potential location.
There were other museums, the African-American and Culture
Museum, for example, that looked at that site, and decided to
move elsewhere. So, is it possible that the Latino Museum could
be located on the Mall?
Mr. Wenk. I assume that is possible. We're recommending
that it not be in the Reserve area. But, depending on the
actions of Congress----
Senator Salazar. And, is this a recommendation of the
National Park Service and the Department of the Interior and
Secretary Kempthorne?
Mr. Wenk. The Department of the Interior had a Secretary's
National Capitol Memorial Advisory Commission, they adopted the
memorials and museum plan that was to guide the location of new
memorials, museums and related structures on the Nation's
Capitol. That plan states that the future memorials and museums
should be precluded from being located on the Reserve, and I
described the area previously. So, I believe that is the
position of the Department, yes.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Wenk.
Senator Martinez.
STATEMENT OF HON. MEL MARTINEZ, U.S. SENATOR
FROM FLORIDA
Senator Martinez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you
holding this hearing today. Do I have a minute or two for me to
say something? Or do you want to go----
Senator Salazar. Whatever you want to do would be fine.
Senator Martinez. Well, I think it's terribly important
that you hold this hearing, and I appreciate it very, very
much. I want to express my very strong support for S. 500, I
was proud to co-sponsor the legislation with you last Congress,
and I'm proud to do it again this Congress. The idea of
creating a National Museum of American-Latino Heritage is an
important one for our Nation.
I would say that our history is one in which it would be
difficult to overlook the significance of that history--
certainly your family is part of that history. My State is part
of that history. The native State of your family is part of
that history. And so, from the people of European descent who
were the first to come into this continent--they were Spanish--
my State of Florida was a Spanish possession for many, many
years, as I know New Mexico was, as well.
And so, our history going back for many years has been
there, but then now we have the more recent contributions of
Hispanics who now constitute the largest minority group in this
country, and I think recognition of that would be very, very
important and fitting.
I'm very proud to co-sponsor this with some excellent
people on the House side, who have worked very diligently to
see this happen as well, and I should also just take a moment
here to highlight the significance of the fact that I'm proud
to serve with you, Senator Salazar, in the Senate, you and I
came in the Senate at the same time--I believe the first time
in history that two Hispanics have been serving in the Senate
at the same time. And now, shortly thereafter, we were joined
by Senator Menendez. I'm very proud to serve with both of you,
and I'm very proud to work with you on this important bill.
Coincidentally, and interestingly enough, all three of us
serve on this very committee, so at least we ought to get three
votes out of the committee for it. So that should help.
But I think it is something whose time has come. I'm
looking forward to working with you, and others, to ensure its
passage. Thank you.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Senator Menendez--or, Martinez.
Menendez, Martinez, Salazar--let me just say that I, too, am
equally proud of having the opportunity and privilege to walk
on that blue carpet of the U.S. Senate floor with you, and to
be able to refer to you as my good friend, and my colleague.
And, I know your history well, too, and it's an important part
of our history that we need to celebrate in terms of the
diversity of America, and I appreciate all of the--your
history, and the ability that you have brought to the U.S.
Senate, as well, and I look forward to working with you on this
bill.
Senator Thomas.
Senator Martinez. If I can just say one more thing, I'll
never forget the first moments that you and I were on the
Senate floor together, and we were kind of looking around in
awe at that moment, that opportunity, but also reflecting on
the significance to those who share our heritage at that moment
we shared, so I'll always remember that.
Senator Salazar. I remember, too, that both of us were
assigned the corner desks--you in your caucus, and me in my
caucus, I was number 100, and you were the most junior in your
caucus, so in that big chamber, both of us had the corner
desks. And since 2 years ago, we've moved up a little bit, so.
That's the life of seniority in the Senate.
Senator Thomas.
Senator Thomas. No, thank you, I'm being left out of this
conversation a little bit, so----
[Laughter.]
Senator Thomas. I have no more questions, thank you.
Senator Salazar. Let me tell you that Wyoming will never be
left out of the conversation, because there are ways in which
we can hook you up to the diverse contributions that Hispanics
have made into Wyoming, including the days where, I know
families who were up there sheep herding for generation after
generation in Wyoming, so--thank you, Senator Thomas.
I have a couple of more questions for you, Mr. Wenk. I will
check with Secretary Kempthorne with respect to this
recommendation on the GSA versus the National Park Service
being involved, it seems to me to be a difference in terms of
how we've approached this, these possibilities in the past. At
least my initial reaction is that it's not the right way to go
on such a major initiative.
Let me ask you a couple of other questions, if I may, Mr.
Wenk, are there other museums or memorials located in
Washington, D.C. that you are aware of that celebrate and
commemorate the Hispanic history here in the United States?
Mr. Wenk. Yes, there are. They're not on the Reserve.
There's a, I believe, a total of five along Virginia Avenue,
the Spanish de Goa Galvez, ally to the American Colonies during
the American Revolution, and then for South American hero,
Simon Bolivar, Jose de St. Martin, Juanito Pablo Juarez, and
Jose Gervaso Artiguez.
All five statues were memorial gifts to the People of the
United States from the People of Spain, Venezuela, Argentina,
Mexico and Uruguay to recognize their contributions.
Senator Salazar. Are statues like that the same as museums,
memorials or parks in the language of the National Park
Service?
Mr. Wenk. No, they're not the same. These memorials
celebrate the bonds between our Nations. While they may provide
an opportunity for American-Latinos to trace their ancestry
back to these origins, there's no permanent historical context
in Washington, D.C.
Senator Salazar. Okay. If this Commission is established by
this Congress, and the legislation is signed by the President,
what kind of technical assistance would this Commission be able
to expect from the National Park Service?
Mr. Wenk. I will have to provide that for you. I may have
it here in my notes, but I can't locate it quickly. But,
certainly we would assist with the establishment, the
management, the oversight and the work of the Commission, but I
can provide you with a specific answer.
Senator Salazar. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wenk.
On Senator Warner's bill on the Journey Through the
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area, once again, can you
please clarify with respect to this particular bill--does the
creation of the Heritage Area here, create new legal
impediments to the construction of the new electric power
lines, or other electric transmission facilities?
Mr. Wenk. I believe that all of those things are still left
to the State, local communities and regulatory agencies that
would be involved.
Senator Salazar. Okay. Mr. Wenk, if there are no other
questions from either Senator Thomas or Senator Martinez, I
think we are finished with your testimony.
Mr. Wenk. Thank you for the opportunity.
Senator Salazar. We very much appreciate you appearing
before our committee, thank you very much, and we look forward
to working with you on all of these bills.
Mr. Wenk. Thank you.
Senator Salazar. Thank you.
At this point, what I'd like to do is to call up the next
panel of witnesses, and while they are coming up, I will go
ahead and just continue with the hearing by introducing them.
I'd like to call the next panel of witnesses, they include
Moctesuma Esparza, Dan Sakura with The Conservation Fund, Jerry
Ostermiller with the Columbia River Maritime Museum, Augie
Carlino with the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area, Dennis
Lopez with the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area Steering
Committee, and Gary Nichols, the director of tourism and
community development in Park County, Colorado.
I'd like to ask each of you to please limit your remarks to
no more than 5 minutes, your lights will go on with yellow, the
yellow light that tells you, you have about 1 minute remaining,
and then when the light turns red, that means that your time is
up.
Your complete statement will be included as part of the
record, so you don't have to worry about not getting through
your entire statement.
I previously mentioned the two Colorado witnesses who will
testify on this panel, and that's Gary Nichols and Dennis
Lopez. I'd like to take a minute to introduce Moctesuma
Esparza, who is here today to speak on behalf of the National
Latino Museum.
I have co-sponsored that bill with 24 of my colleagues, Mr.
Esparza, here in the U.S. Senate, and they have included both
the chairman of this committee, Senator Bingaman, and the
ranking member of this committee, Senator Domenici. Perhaps it
is of no surprise to anyone watching this hearing, because they
both come from New Mexico, that Land of Enchantment.
Mr. Esparza was born and raised in Los Angeles, Moctesuma
has dedicated much of his career to promoting and documenting
the American-Latino experience. I commend his efforts, and that
of countless others. With over 45 million Latinos now residing
in our Country, I believe it is time to have an institution in
our Nation's Capitol, dedicated to honoring the rich, diverse
National heritage, including the contributions of Latinos.
And, with that, why don't we just move through the panel,
starting with you, Mr. Esparza, and then we'll move from, to
Mr. Sakura, and Ostermiller, Carlino, Lopez, and end up with
Mr. Nichols.
STATEMENT OF MOCTESUMA ESPARZA, FILM PRODUCER,
LOS ANGELES, CA
Mr. Esparza. Thank you very much, Chairman Salazar, ranking
member Thomas, and Senator Martinez. I can't tell you what a
pleasure it is to me to mention the names Martinez, Salazar,
here in the U.S. Senate, and I know that Senator Menendez was
here a moment ago, and it gives me great pleasure that we have
now, representatives of American Latinos in this distinguished
body.
I'm very pleased to speak to you today. As has been
mentioned, my name is Moctesuma Esparza, a wonderful American
name, and by background, I'm a movie producer. I produce movies
like the Milagro Beanfield War, Celina, Gettysburg, Gods and
Generals, Introducing Dorothy Dandridge, Salma, Lord, Salma,
Teddy Roosevelt and the Rough Riders, and a host of other
movies about American history, and the heroes of America.
I'm from Los Angeles, native of east Los Angeles, and I
attended public schools there, graduating with a Master's from
UCLA.
I became involved in the film industry because I was
extremely concerned about the negative images that were
portrayed from Hollywood about Latinos. And I made a commitment
that I would devote my life to transforming the image of
Latinos to that of three-dimensional human beings that could be
understood and appreciated, and certainly movies and television
shows and books and other media are very important, so that
Americans and American-Latinos can appreciate our contributions
and who we are.
However, I believe that a National institution that has the
prestige and standing that is available to the millions of
tourists who come to Washington is critical and fitting and
something that must come to pass.
By passing the National Museum of American-Latino Community
Commission Act of 2007, Congress will take a very first step
towards making that institution a reality. The bill will
establish a Commission to study the potential creation of a
National Museum of American-Latino Community. Those Commission
members, selected by the President, members of Congress, will
be tasked with studying the impact of that museum, developing a
plan, fundraising plan, and prefacing the recommendations for
action by Congress.
The lack of Latino-focused institutions located in our
Nation's Capitol has been a great concern to our community.
While these museums that are here now purport to reflect the
history, culture and achievements of the people of the United
States, it is true that very few of them have ever had any
permanent exhibits--or even temporary ones--representing the
American-Latino community's role in our history, and
participation. And I can say that, also, having been a member
of the Smithsonian's Institute Latino Advisory Board, and I saw
the meager support that was provided that center.
Currently, in Los Angeles, and many parts of the country
there are many thriving cultural and historic institutions that
are laying down the groundwork for what can be a future,
National museum. These local and regional institutions--I
happen to be the chairman of the board of the Latino Theater
Company that is planning a cultural center in Los Angeles--have
gathered support from their local communities and governments,
and my work with HBO, I've witnessed, firsthand, the
willingness of corporations and mainstream entities to bring
attention to the diverse American experience.
As we engage in this discussion, I think it's important to
highlight the interests of corporate America, who I know will
support this museum.
Even with the many challenges and opportunities facing
Latino community, the importance of a proper representation of
Latinos and their contributions in our Nation's foremost
institutions cannot be underestimated.
Given the continuing crisis in educational attainment for
American-Latinos, and that we are the largest minority in this
country, providing a National venue highlighting our
contributions to the creation and the building of our country
would be inspirational to our youth, and foster appreciation
and goodwill from the rest of Americans.
A little known fact is that the very birth of the United
States was made possible by the military and financial
contribution of 9,000 Hispanic-American troops--a larger
contingent than George Washington had in the Continental Army,
who fought under the command of Edward Bernardo de Galves,
defeating the British throughout the Mississippi River Valley,
past St. Louis to St. Joseph and Lake Michigan, and also in
Mobile, Pensacola and Baton Rouge.
The French Navy in Lafayette were operating under Galves'
direct command, and millions of dollars that funded General
Washington in the final push, came from Latinos. Twenty-five
hundred dollars were collected in Los Angeles by Father Hanupa
Lucera, who sent that money to George Washington.
The final victory at Yorktown was made possible by
Hispanics, who shed their blood and gave their money to found
this Country. Money was collected by Cuban women in Havana, who
gave their jewelry for George Washington's troops. Troops came
from throughout Latin America, from what is now the United
States, the Southwest, Mexico--this country is ours, we are its
founders, we gave our money and blood.
Little is known of American-Latino's contribution to the
creation of 21st century American society. Our contribution to
women's rights--far before the Suffrage Movement--the Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo gave equal property rights to all women. The
California Constitution of 1849 propounded by Latinos gave
equal citizenship, irrespective of race. Equal public schools,
irrespective of race was the product of the desegregation
school suit of Mendes v. Westminster in 1945, years before
Brown v. Board of Education. The defeat of anti-miscegenation
laws with the case of Perez v. Sharp in 1949--all of these
things--thank you very much--are the product of our
contribution, and these are just a few facts.
I believe that this legislation will play an important role
in American history, and it will prevent the kind of tremendous
miscarriage that is about to occur--Ken Burns is about to make
a 14-hour mini-series of the second World War--where we sent
half a million soldiers--and there will not be one mention of
American-Latino contributions to the second World War. Were
there a museum like this, that kind of an oversight could not
have occurred.
I greatly encourage you to pass this, and I greatly support
this effort. Thank you very much.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Esparza.
Mr. Sakura.
STATEMENT OF DAN SAKURA, DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, THE
CONSERVATION FUND, ARLINGTON, VA
Mr. Sakura. Mr. Chairman, ranking member Thomas, members of
the subcommittee--thank you for the opportunity to testify
today in support of S. 126, the Mesa Verde National Park
Boundary Expansion Act.
My name is Dan Sakura, I serve as the director of
government relations for The Conservation Fund, a National non-
profit land conservation organization, dedicated to protecting
America's land and water legacy for current and future
generations.
The Conservation Fund works with landowners, Federal and
State agencies, non-profit organizations, businesses, and other
partners to conserve historic sites, fish and wildlife habitat,
working landscapes, and community open space.
Mr. Chairman, The Conservation Fund expresses our
appreciation to you and Senator Allard, for your strong
leadership and vision to help pass S. 126, to expand the
boundary of Mesa Verde National Park to include two critically
important tracts of land.
By expanding the Park boundary by approximately 360 acres
at the park entrance, S. 126 will enable the Park Service to
protect a 324 acre tract of privately-owned land, with
important archeological and natural resources along the Point
Lookout Road Corridor, the main access for the Park.
In conjunction with the Mesa Verde Foundation, S. 126 will
also authorize the Park Service to accept a donation of a 38-
acre tract of land as a site for a new collection and research
center, and visitor information center. These facilities will
provide the public with expanded opportunities to learn about
the parks internationally significant cliff dwellings, and the
rich cultural heritage of the ancestral Puebloan people.
I am very pleased that Mr. Justin Estoque, a board member
of the Colorado-based Mesa Verde Foundation, is in attendance
today. Mr. Estoque is available to answer questions that you,
or the subcommittee may have, regarding the Foundation's work,
and support for this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I ask that a letter of support from the
Foundation be included in the record.
The Conservation Fund is working very closely with the
Henneman family to conserve their 324-acre tract, which is
located outside of the Park boundary, adjoining parklands, and
the 38-acre Foundation property. The Henneman's cherish their
land. They have served as great stewards of the cultural and
natural resources on their property, and they wish to have
their lands conserved for future generations as part of the
park.
Because of the land's proximity to U.S. Highway 160, it
faces significant development threats, including possible
development of their property as a recreational vehicle park.
For several years, the family has been working closely with the
Park Service to sell their land for inclusion within the park.
Because of financial reasons, unfortunately, the family must
sell the property this year. Accordingly, The Conservation Fund
has entered into a contract to acquire the tract by the end of
the year, contingent upon the passage of boundary expansion
legislation, and the availability of funding.
Because of the short time period required to complete this
acquisition, we respectfully request that Congress approve S.
126 as soon as possible. Besides preserving the heritage of
ancestral Puebloan peoples, and Mesa Verde's rich natural
resources, S. 126 would conserve the park's outstanding scenery
on the approach into the park, and along the Point Lookout
Road.
Our Congress added land in 1931, ``for the purpose of
protecting the scenery along the Point Lookout Road.'' In
keeping with the decades of partnerships between the National
Park Service and non-profits, the Mesa Verde Foundation
launched an effort to address critical needs at the park, to
better manage the park's collection of priceless artifacts, and
to provide the public with expanded opportunities to learn
about the park's rich history.
Several years ago, the Foundation committed to donating a
38-acre tract to the Park Service for a new building to house a
new federally-funded collections and research center, and a new
Foundation-funded visitor center at the entrance of the park.
The proposed new visitor center will provide visitors with
improved opportunities to learn about Mesa Verde, plan their
trip in the park, and purchase tickets for guided tours.
Because S. 126 would allow the Foundation to donate the
land to the park to support the construction of the building
components, the bill is--your bill, with Senator Allard, is a
critical step forward--for both the collections and research
center, and visitor center.
Mr. Chairman, this past year, Mesa Verde National Park
celebrated the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the
park. Over 575,000 people visited the park last year to mark
its Centennial. With the bipartisan leadership of Colorado's
congressional delegation, and the support of this committee,
many more visitors will be able to experience the same sense of
awe, respect and wonder.
S. 126 is in keeping with over 100 years of congressional
leadership to conserve Mesa Verde, and it will set the stage
for the next 100 years for the park to be at the forefront of
our Nation's commitment to honor our past by conserving our
heritage for future generations.
Mr. Chairman, I urge the committee and the Congress to pass
this important piece of legislation, I would be pleased to
answer your questions and provide additional information to
you. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sakura follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dan Sakura, Director of Government Relations,
The Conservation Fund
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify in support of S. 126, the Mesa Verde National
Park Boundary Expansion Act.
I serve as the Director of Government Relations for The
Conservation Fund, a national, non-profit land conservation
organization, dedicated to protecting America's land and water legacy
for current and future generations. We work with landowners, federal
and state agencies, non-profit organizations, businesses and other
partners to conserve historic sites, wildlife habitat, working
landscapes, recreational areas and community open space.
Mr. Chairman, The Conservation Fund (TCF) expresses our
appreciation to you and Senator Allard for your strong leadership and
vision to pass S. 126 to expand the Mesa Verde National Park boundary
to include two critically-important tracts of land in the Park. By
expanding the boundary by approximately 360 acres at the Park entrance,
S. 126 will enable the National Park Service (NPS) to protect 324 acres
of privately-owned land with important archeological and natural
resources along the Point Lookout Road corridor.
In conjunction with the vision and work of the Mesa Verde
Foundation, S. 126 will also authorize the NPS to accept a donation of
a 38-acre tract of land as the site for a new Collection and Research
Center and Visitor Information Center. These facilities will provide
the public with expanded opportunities to learn about the Park's
internationally significant cliff dwellings and the rich cultural
heritage of the ancestral Puebloan people.
I am pleased that Mr. Justin Estoque, a board member of the
Colorado-based Mesa Verde Foundation, is in attendance today. The Mesa
Verde Foundation is a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting
the mission of Mesa Verde National Park. Mr. Estoque is available to
answer questions that you or the Subcommittee may have regarding the
Foundation's work and support for this legislation.
Thanks to the support of Colorado's Congressional delegation, TCF
has had the opportunity to work with landowners, the NPS and other
partners to conserve lands at the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National
Park, the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site, Rocky Mountain
National Park and other sites in Colorado.
Today, we are grateful for the opportunity to work in partnership
with the Henneman family and NPS to conserve the family's 324 acres of
land at Mesa Verde National Park for future generations. The Henneman
tract is located outside the Park boundary, near the Park entrance, and
adjoins Park lands and the 38-acre tract owned by the Foundation.
The Henneman family has owned this tract for over 30 years. The
Hennemans cherish their land and have served as excellent stewards of
its archeological and natural resources and scenic values. Their land
features important wildlife corridors for mule deer and other species,
unique pinon juniper forests and the largest known colony of Gray's
Townsend daisy, a globally imperiled species.
Because of the land's proximity to U.S. Highway 160, it faces
significant development threats, as Montezuma County has zoned the
property for ten acre lots. While the family has not subdivided the
property, it has received an offer from a third party to buy the
property for development as a commercial recreational vehicle park.
Unfortunately, the Henneman family faces a difficult dilemma. For
several years, the family has been working to sell the land to the NPS.
Because of financial reasons, the family must sell the property this
year. Accordingly, TCF has entered into a contract to acquire the tract
by the end of the year, contingent upon passage of boundary expansion
legislation and the availability of funding.
By authorizing the NPS to acquire the property, S. 126 provides a
solution for the family to conserve their property as part of the Park.
This legislation gives the family another option, besides selling the
property to a developer. Because of the short time period to complete
the acquisition, we respectfully request that the Congress approve S.
126 as soon as possible. This will provide Congress with the
opportunity to appropriate the necessary funds for the project this
year and enable the NPS to acquire the property.
If enacted, S. 126 will provide the public with substantial
benefits. It would further the Park's mission to preserve and protect
the heritage of ancestral Puebloan peoples along with Mesa Verde's
wildlife and other natural resources. In addition, it would provide
Park visitors with an opportunity to enjoy the scenery on the approach
into the Park and along Point Lookout Road, once inside the Park.
Visitors traveling west on U.S. 160 towards the Park can see Point
Lookout, one of the Park's most prominent features. Because the
Henneman tract is located at the base of Point Lookout, a commercial
development would negatively impact the view looking towards the Park.
Upon entering the Park, visitors proceed on Point Lookout Road to
the Mancos Valley Overlook. Over 75 years ago, Congress added lands in
this area to the Park ``for the purpose of protecting the scenery along
the Point Lookout Road.'' Thus, S. 126 would further a Park purpose to
protect the scenery along the road corridor. This legislation would
also promote the local economy by ensuring continued opportunities for
high quality visitor experiences at the Park.
For over one hundred years, Mesa Verde's rich cultural history has
captured the public's imagination and generated strong support in
Congress and the non-profit community. The discovery of Mesa Verde's
cliff dwellings, in the 1880s, and the ensuing publicity about the loss
of priceless archeological treasures prompted the Colorado Federation
of Women's Clubs and the Colorado Cliff Dwellings Association to lead a
successful campaign to establish the Park. Soon after Congress passed
the Antiquities Act of 1906, Congress passed legislation to establish
Mesa Verde National Park as America's tenth National Park and the
nation's first Park dedicated to preserving archeological resources.
In keeping with decades of partnerships with the non-profit sector
to preserve the Park's resources, the Mesa Verde Foundation launched an
effort to address a critical need at the Park to better manage the
Park's collection of artifacts and to provide the public with expanded
opportunities to learn about the Park's history and story of Native
Americans who lived at Mesa Verde centuries ago and who live in the
Four Corners region today.
Several years ago, the Foundation committed to donating a 38-acre
tract to the NPS for a new building to house a new federally-funded
Collections and Research Center and a new Foundation-funded Visitors
Center at the entrance to the Park. As a result of this commitment,
both components are currently under design in anticipation of the
donation. The Foundation plans to donate the land when construction
funds for the Collections and Research Center are appropriated in
future fiscal years. The proposed new Visitors Center will provide
visitors with improved opportunities to learn about Mesa Verde, plan
their trip in the Park and purchase tickets for guided tours.
Currently, visitor information facilities are located 15 miles inside
the Park at the Far View Visitor Center.
Unfortunately, the NPS does not have the authority to accept the
donation of the land, which is outside the Park boundary. S. 126 would
allow the Foundation to donate the land to the NPS to support the
construction of both federal and Foundation building components. S. 126
is a critical step forward in the process for the both the Collections
and Research Center and the Visitor Center, which will provide for the
protection of the Park's collection and introduce visitors to this
magnificent Park.
Mr. Chairman, this past year, Mesa Verde National Park celebrated
the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the Park. Over 575,000
visitors enjoyed the Park last year. With the bipartisan leadership of
Colorado's Congressional delegation for this bill, millions more
visitors will be able to experience the same sense of awe, respect and
wonder.
S. 126 is in keeping with over 100 years of Congressional foresight
to pass legislation to conserve Mesa Verde, one of our nation's and the
world's richest archeological and cultural treasures. This legislation
will set the stage for the next 100 years for Mesa Verde to be at the
forefront of our nation's commitment to honor our past by conserving
our heritage for future generations.
Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to answer your questions and
provide additional information to you and the Subcommittee.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Sakura.
Mr. Ostermiller.
STATEMENT OF JERRY OSTERMILLER, PRESIDENT, COLUMBIA RIVER
MARITIME MUSEUM, ASTORIA, OR
Mr. Ostermiller. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of
this committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide
testimony on S. 257.
I, and the communities I represent, want to respectfully
urge the Senate to pass this legislation. Mr. Chairman, for
nearly 20 years, I have served as the executive director of the
Columbia River Maritime Museum, a 501(c)(3) educational
institution, which was the first nationally-accredited maritime
museum on the west coast.
I am a past president of the National Council of American
Maritime Museums, a member of the Oregon State Heritage
Commission, a member of the Oregon State Sesqua Centennial
Commission, and an accreditation reviewer for the American
Association of Museums.
Serving in these capacities has given me national
perspectives regarding the significance of historical sites,
and living and working in the Northwest has convinced me that
the Columbia-Pacific Area is a spectacular and unique part of
this country. Breathtaking in its physical beauty, and
nationally significant in its history, and worthy of a National
Heritage Areas designation.
I'm here today to respectfully ask that Congress authorize
a feasibility study to determine if a Columbia-Pacific National
Heritage Area should be established in the region where the
Great River of the West meets the Pacific Ocean.
I am representing more than 100 organizations, businesses
and citizens of our communities who have voiced support, or
written to both the Oregon and Washington congressional
delegations requesting this legislation.
The list of Oregon supporters is extensive, and includes
State Governor Kulongoski, the cities of Astoria, Seaside,
Warrenton, Gearhart, the government of Clatsop County, Oregon
State Parks and Recreations, Port of Astoria, the Astoria-
Warrenton Chamber of Commerce, Seaside Chamber of Commerce, and
strong regional businesses, such as Astoria Builder's Supply,
New Northwest Broadcasters, and the Bank of Astoria.
The supporters from the Washington side of the Columbia
River, include the cities of Long Beach, Ilwaco, Ocean Park,
Cathlamet, the Port of the Peninsula, the Washington State
Historical Society, Washington State Parks and Recreation
Commission, and leading businesses, such as Sentry Markets and
Shorebank Pacific.
The designation as a National Heritage Areas is highly
regarded by our communities as it signals national recognition.
The many community supporters I'm here to represent, believe
our heritage is of such National significance that the
Columbia-Pacific region will easily qualify for designation as
a National Heritage Area.
This designation will certainly attract entrepreneurs,
investors, and business owners, as well as vacationers, family
groups and retirees, all of which will enhance our local,
sustainable economic development.
But more importantly, it will allow us to celebrate and
share the area's diverse cultural, and historical significance,
as well as the awesome natural beauty and grandeur of the
Columbia-Pacific, with all of the citizens of the Nation.
This idea began as a conversation among a few community
leaders, and quickly advanced into frequent discussions at
rotary clubs, city council meetings, chambers of commerce
boards and visitor bureau's meetings. The momentum for this
study has launched growing enthusiasm and the personal
involvement of the people who live in our towns and surrounding
communities, as they realize the merits of this designation.
Their pride and enthusiasm has inspired a major commitment,
to pursue the rigorous process of a thorough feasibility study.
To move us closer to this goal, in early March 2007, our
steering committee, ``Destination: the Pacific,'' hosted a
multi-community, bi-State workshop, where virtually every
community, business and civic leader in three counties came
together. For 2 days, 80 community leaders all worked as
neighbors and partners to develop plans that would encourage
the retention of community character, and would enhance
connections to our cultural and natural resources. Eleven teams
representing seven communities and three large counties in the
two adjoining States, along with the National and State parks,
now have plans for the future that embrace the concepts and
themes consistent with a National Heritage Area. More
importantly, we have developed an even greater pride and
appreciation for the National significance of the Columbia-
Pacific Region.
For over 6,000 years, the Columbia River has served as a
major conduit for commerce on the west coast, and today, 80
percent of all of the grain that is exported from the United
States to feed the world, is shipped by this great river. The
location of the confluence of the Columbia River and the
Pacific Ocean was the last great strategic mystery of the New
World, sought by Russia, Spain, and Great Britain, but it was
first discovered and claimed by American Captain Robert Gray
and named after his ship, Columbia Rediva in 1792.
It is here at the mouth of the Columbia River that the
focus of President Thomas Jefferson's greatest ambition to
expand the new country to the Pacific Ocean was expressed by
the Lewis and Clark Expedition when he established Fort Clatsop
in 1805.
The Columbia River was the economic engine that jumpstarted
our newly-emerging Nation, following the Revolutionary War,
when ship owners of Boston created the Golden Triangle of
Trade, trading first from this region, shipping them to China,
and then bringing porcelain, silks, tea and other riches back
to New England.
Astoria became the oldest American city west of the Rockies
when John Jacob Astor established a foothold that ultimately
resulted in a present, international boundary between the
United States and Western Canada, and it is no wonder, then,
that NASA named the first great ship of our Nation's space
shuttle fleet Columbia in honor of the National significance of
the great river in its role of fulfilling America's destiny in
the Pacific.
In conclusion, the communities of the Columbia-Pacific
Region are respectfully asking that Congress--both the House
and Senate--pass this legislation so that the President can
sign it into law.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony, and I, too, will
be happy to answer any questions.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Ostermiller.
Mr. Carlino.
STATEMENT OF AUGUST R. CARLINO, PRESIDENT AND CEO, STEEL
INDUSTRY HERITAGE CORPORATION AND THE RIVERS OF STEEL NATIONAL
HERITAGE AREA, HOMESTEAD, PA
Mr. Carlino. Mr. Chairman, Senator Thomas, and other
distinguished members of the subcommittee, my name is August
Carlino, and I am president and chief executive officer of
Steel Industry Heritage Corporation. We are the management
entity of the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area based in
Homestead, Pennsylvania.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony to the
committee today, and I urge your passage of S. 817. In the
audience today are four of my colleagues who have language in
this legislation, and ask permission for their testimony to be
submitted to the record.
I want to thank, also, Senators Voinovich, Kennedy and
Specter and their staffs for their leadership in drafting this
legislation, and your staff which worked with them. I also wish
to thank the other co-sponsors of the bill.
Each National Heritage Area in S. 817 has been designated
with its own organic act, and their management plans are the
cornerstone document for how they function, and how their
programming is carried out. With these management plans, there
is often limited timeframes focusing on a period of time, but
they are not meant to be interpreted as the limitation of
funding for the NHA. While the NHA is authorized in perpetuity,
the management plan sets the stage for work to be accomplished
over a finite period of time.
In 2006, the National Park System Advisory Board issued a
report, ``Charting the Future for National Heritage Areas.''
The Advisory Board stated, ``National Heritage Areas represent
a significant advance in conservation and historic
preservation,'' and made several recommendations including the
need of legislative foundation, and the development of policies
and performance measures to evaluate NHAs. It stressed the need
for long-term commitment to NHAs, saying that a permanent home
for them should be created within the National Park System.
Overall, the Advisory Board recognized that National
Heritage Areas are new, innovative conservation and
preservation strategies, that encourage partnerships fostered
by each NHA.
This was a groundbreaking achievement. Up to that point,
NHAs were looked at as being unwanted orphans of the National
Park Service, misunderstood, and considered financial burdens.
This attitude might have historic roots with the Park Service,
which has always viewed new programs as problems, before fully
embracing them.
Other than the grand Parks like Yellowstone, Yosemite or
the Grand Canyon, early in the Park Service life, it did not
include other nationally-significant places in America. Yet
Congress and past Presidents have expanded and evolved the role
of the NPS and its system into what it is today.
Each change in the system, whether adding new National
battlefields, National scenic highways or cultural heritage
sites was met with resistance. They are feared, not only as
financial drains on the Park Service, but also as thinning of
the blood.
At times, that same terminology has been used to describe
National Heritage Areas, that is, until of the publishing of
the Advisory Board Report.
S. 817 takes components of the Advisory Board's
recommendations, and couples them with other language
introduced in past bills that have proposed program
legislation. I believe the bill, if passed, will represent the
beginning of the institutionalization of steps necessary for
evaluations and for reauthorization. Without S. 817, these five
NHAs could most likely go out of business. Moreover, Congress
will have permitted these NHAs to expire based on an arbitrary
deadline, not on the effectiveness or performance of their
work.
S. 817 also establishes an evaluation and an analysis
process, as called for in the Advisory Board's report. The Park
Service has developed an evaluation process that is used with
other Heritage Areas, including the Delaware and Lehigh
National Heritage Corridor, and the other four Heritage Areas
in the legislation will move forward with the Secretary,
through the Conservation Study Institute of the Park Service,
and complete a report that will be submitted to Congress.
This is an important step in establishing the long-term
need for NHAs, creating a process by which all other National
Heritage Areas could follow. This report will evaluate the
effectiveness of the NHA and the National Park Service and
provide an analysis of future activities.
Finally, S. 817 makes reauthorization for the NHAs a
possibility with the completion of a favorable evaluation.
Despite the 10-year vision of the management plan for the NHAs,
there is often much more work that needs to be completed.
Moreover, the National significance of the NHA does not end
after 10 years. This language recognizes there is a long-term
commitment to the NHAs and that historic and cultural resources
will be protected.
In closing, when the first National Heritage Area was
designated in 1984, it was an experiment. Today, NHAs are no
longer experiments, they're tried and tested strategies to be
embraced as a permanent part of the National Park System. NHAs
represent a new conservation ethic, and with the designation of
their permanent establishment, and the management entity, long-
term funding, they can carry out their congressionally-mandated
responsibilities of conserving and promoting historical and
cultural resources.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for providing me this
opportunity today, and I'm happy to answer any questions you or
the other Senators may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Carlino follows:]
Prepared Statement of August R. Carlino, President & Chief Executive
Officer, Steel Industry Heritage Corporation and the Rivers of Steel
National Heritage Area
Mr. Chairman, Senator Thomas and other distinguished member of the
subcommittee, my name is August R. Carlino and I am President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Steel Industry Heritage Corporation. SIHC is
the management entity of the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area,
based in Homestead, Pennsylvania. I appreciate the opportunity to
provide testimony to the Subcommittee today on S. 817, a bill to amend
the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to provide
additional authorizations for certain National Heritage Areas, and for
other purposes. In the audience today are four of my colleagues, each
representing one of the National Heritage Areas included in S. 817. I
know they have testimony, and I ask permission for a copy of their
testimony to be submitted to the record of this subcommittee. I want to
thank Senator Voinovich, Senator Kennedy and Senator Specter and their
staffs for their leadership in drafting this legislation with the staff
of the Subcommittee. I wish to also thank to Senator Brown, Senator
Casey, Senator Graham and Senator Kerry for cosponsoring S. 817.
Over the past six years this Subcommittee, and the House
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, has examined
National Heritage Areas. There is no doubt of the critical role they
play in conserving the nation's historic and cultural resources. Today
there are 37 National Heritage Areas. Thirty-one were designated in the
past 12 years, including four of the five NHAs addressed in S. 817.
Fourteen of those 31 NHAs were designated within the past six years.
Clearly Congress recognizes the significance and the important role of
NHAs in the conservation strategy of the United States.
I should point out that Congress has also reauthorized National
Heritage Areas during this time. The John H. Chafee Blackstone River
Valley National Heritage Corridor and the Illinois & Michigan Canal
National Heritage Corridor have each been reauthorized twice. The
Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, the Southwestern
Pennsylvania Heritage Preservation Commission and the Quinebaug and
Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor were reauthorized
once before. Under S. 817, Delaware & Lehigh will be reauthorized a
second time while Essex National Heritage Area, Ohio & Erie National
Heritage Corridor, South Carolina National Heritage Area, and Rivers of
Steel National Heritage Area each will be reauthorized for the first
time.
Each National Heritage Area in S. 817 has been designated with its
own organic act, specific to the needs and priorities of the region of
the country for which it was established. While there are similarities
in philosophy, our management plans are the cornerstone document for
how our NHAs function and how we conduct programming. Each management
plan is a vision of what the NHA will strive to be, a snapshot looking
into the future. While these management plans often have limited
timeframes, focusing on a period of time over 10 to 16 years hence,
they are not meant to be interpreted as the limitation of the life or
funding of the NHA. While the NHA is authorized in perpetuity, the
management plan sets the stage for the work to be accomplished over a
finite period of time.
In 2006 the National Park System Advisory Board issued the report
Charting a Future for National Heritage Areas.\1\ The Advisory Board
stated that ``National Heritage Areas represent a significant advance
in conservation and historic preservation'' and made several
recommendations. Upon examining the role and work of NHAs, the Advisory
Board found that NHAs:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The report may be viewed at www.nps.gov/policy/NHAreport.htm.
involve the diverse people of this nation to tell their
stories with integrity and authenticity;
weave together nature and culture and provide an integrated
approach to conserving resources;
work beyond park boundaries by offering the National Park
Service a new strategy to meet their stewardship mission;
conserve landscapes and traditions and make them available
for the enjoyment of future generations;
engage youth and people of all ages in our future by
providing them with opportunities for place-based education and
a forum for public engagement; and,
build new constituencies for the NPS and stay relevant by
examining issues not just in the past, but in the present and
in the future.
The Advisory Board made several recommendations in its report,
including the need for the establishment of a legislative foundation
for National Heritage Areas, and the development of policies and
performance measures to evaluate NHAs. The Advisory Board stressed the
need for a long-term term commitment to National Heritage Areas, saying
that a permanent home for National Heritage Areas should be created
within the National Park System. Overall, the Advisory Board recognized
that National Heritage Areas are new, innovative conservation and
preservation strategies that encourage partnerships fostered by each
NHA.
This document was a groundbreaking achievement. Up to that point,
NHAs were looked upon as being unwanted orphans of the NPS,
misunderstood and considered financial burdens. This attitude might
have historical roots within the National Park Service, which has often
viewed new, cutting-edge programs as problems before fully embracing
them. When the National Park Service was established in 1916, the focus
of its conservation was on large-scale natural wonders like Yosemite,
Yellowstone and the Grand Canyon. The system did not include other
nationally significant places in America. Yet Congress and past
Presidents have expanded and evolved the role of NPS and its system to
what is today, as described by Dr. Lisa Benton-Short's testimony to
this Committee as ``the world's leading system for designating, and
protecting heritage at the national level.'' \2\ Each change in the
system, whether adding national battlefields, national scenic byways,
or cultural heritage sites, was met with resistance within the system.
They were feared as not only a financial drain on the National Park
Service, but also as thinning ``. . . the blood of the Park System,''
\3\ in the words of a past NPS Director. At times, this same
terminology has been used to describe National Heritage Areas, until
the publishing of the Advisory Board report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Dr. Lisa Benton-Short, ``Testimony of Dr. Lisa Benton-Short'',
Oversight Hearing on National Heritage Areas, March 30, 2004, Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, 108th Congress,
http://energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=
Hearings.Witness&WitnessID=3202.
\3\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. 817 takes components of the Advisory Board's recommendations and
couples them with other language introduced in past bills that have
proposed program legislation for NHAs. I believe S. 817, if passed,
will represent the beginning of the institutionalization of steps
necessary for evaluation and reauthorization of NHAs. Without S. 817,
these five NHAs will most likely go out of business. Moreover, Congress
will have permitted these NHAs to expire based upon an arbitrary
deadline, not on the effectiveness or performance of their work.
Each of the National Heritage Areas contained within S. 817 have
existed for at least 10 years. Delaware & Lehigh in existence since
1988, is the oldest. Each NHA has a remarkable track record of
accomplishment, conserving historic and cultural resources. They have
created partnerships with federal, state, local and private
organizations, and raise funds to match the federal investment of the
National Park Service money invested into the NHA. They create heritage
development projects that help tell the story of America.
An example of this work of the National Heritage Areas contained in
this bill include:
the development of 73 miles of the multi-use recreational
Towpath Trail from Cleveland to New Philadelphia, Ohio in the
Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor;
the Market Towns program of the Delaware & Lehigh National
Heritage Corridor, a technical assistance initiative designed
to stimulate economic investment in the small historic towns
along the canal. The program became a model of the
Pennsylvania's Department of Community and Economic Development
and was recognized statewide as a model economic revitalization
program;
a system of Discovery Centers in the South Carolina National
Heritage Corridor located throughout the NHA, greeting
visitors, interpreting local history and directing tourists to
nearby historic and cultural destinations;
an annual ``Trails & Sails'' event in the Essex National
Heritage Area, featuring a weekend full of walking and water-
based excursions attracting thousands of visitors to museums,
trails, historic towns and sites;
the annual Heritage Area grants program of the Rivers of
Steel National Heritage Area, that has invested in more than
290 projects, including folk arts, educational and interpretive
exhibits in seven counties in southwestern Pennsylvania.
National Heritage Areas build trails, protect historic buildings
through restoration projects and National Register designations. They
conserve cultural and living traditions, develop educational programs
with schools and through interpretive exhibits at museums. NHAs
contribute to a quality of life in communities where heritage becomes a
building block for revitalization and tourism. In almost every
instance, the NHA plays a role as the initiator, seeding projects that
might never be funded in more traditional community or regional
investment strategies. An NHA looks to use its unique heritage of a
project as the foundation for its economic strategy. We often hear that
historic preservation and economic development cannot coexist. I am
here today to tell you that is not the case in National Heritage Areas.
Some of our best partners are developers and property owners looking
for ways to incorporate heritage resources into their plans.
The investment strategy of NHAs is to pool money to make grants in
heritage development projects that fit within the scope of the
management plan. The initial, and most critical investment, comes from
the appropriation that Congress provides each year to the NHAs. Without
this investment from the National Park Service, the question that begs
to be asked is: why would any other financial partner sit at the NHA
table without the primary NHA partner? The Advisory Board recognized
this as a part of its field visits to National Heritage Areas. It is
the reason why the recommendation is made for a long-term commitment to
NHAs.
In the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area, managed by the Steel
Industry Heritage Corporation which I direct, considerable progress has
been made over the past 10 years since our designation in 1996. Like
Delaware & Lehigh, Rivers of Steel is one of Pennsylvania's six NHAs
that also received state heritage area designation. The viability of
our National Heritage Area depends upon the permanence of the NHA
designation and the funding we receive with it. Without the NPS funds,
other financial partners would have less incentive to participate, and
our grants program would be severely reduced. Our 10 year report,
Momentum, shows the results: with the 8.645 million dollars of National
Heritage Areas funds received though our annual appropriations, more
that 28 million dollars in additional funds have been raised and
invested into projects by the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area. I
assure you this would not be the case if our authorization did not
exist and funding were not provided. This is the story for each of the
NHAs in S. 817. With the difficult budget decisions this Congress
faces, it would seem logical to embrace programs like the NHAs with
their successful record of leveraging federal investment. This report
may be viewed at http://vvww.riversofsteel.com/pdffrenYearReport.pdf.
S. 817 also establishes an evaluation and analysis process, as
called for in the Advisory Board report. Building off the work that the
Conservation Study Institute of the National Park Service has developed
for the evaluation of the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor,
the other NHAs in the legislation will move forward with the Secretary
of Interior, through CSI, and complete a report that will be submitted
to the Congress. This is an important step in establishing the long-
term need of the NHAs in the bill, creating a process by which all
other NHAs will follow. This report will evaluate the effectiveness of
the NHA and NPS and provide an analysis of future activities. Given the
intent of the legislation, I wish to point out that Section 5 (2) (D)
might work better if placed under the Required Analysis, Sec. 5 (3) of
the legislation. This will guarantee that the future role of NPS will
be analyzed, along with the NHA.
Finally, the S. 817 makes future, long-term reauthorizations of the
NHAs a possibility with the completion of a favorable evaluation.
Despite the 10 year vision of the management plan for the NHA, there is
often more work to be completed. The national significance of the NHA
will not end after 10 years. This language recognizes there is a long-
term commitment to the NHA. Historic and cultural resources will be
conserved and protected for generations to come.
In closing, when the first National Heritage Area was designated in
1984, it was an experiment with a vision for public and private
stewardship of nationally significant resources within the living
landscape of the Illinois & Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor.
Today, National Heritage Areas are no longer experiments. They are
tried and tested strategies to be embraced as a permanent part of the
National Park System. NHAs represent a new conservation ethic, one
where the National Park Service is the principle partner. With the
National Heritage Area designation permanently established, the
management entity, with long-term funding from the federal government,
will carry out its congressionally-mandated responsibilities of
conserving and promoting historic and cultural resources.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again, for providing me this opportunity to
testify today. I am happy to answer any questions that you or the other
Senators might have.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Carlino.
Mr. Lopez.@
STATEMENT OF DENNIS J. LOPEZ, ON BEHALF OF THE SANGRE DE CRISTO
NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, ALAMOSA, CO
Mr. Lopez. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am
Dennis Lopez, and I am here to testify in support of the Sangre
de Cristo National Heritage Area. I am a member of a steering
committee that developed a feasibility study, and which is
cited in S. 443.
I wish to thank the committee for inviting me to testify at
this hearing. The bill to designate the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area is of vital importance to the three-
county region that lies at the southern end of the great San
Luis Valley of southern Colorado.
As part of today's testimony, I would like to emphasize the
overwhelming local and regional support for designation of the
identified area as a National Heritage Area. From the
inception, our efforts have sought the support of the local
residents, organizations, and governments. Those efforts began
in 2002, with public meetings in each county as the first step
in the process of developing the steering committee. The
steering committee has been responsible for most of the work
that has been done so far on the National Heritage Area
designation efforts, and in the development of the feasibility
study.
Several of the original members of the steering committee
are still actively involved in this work. For the past 5\1/2\
years, the steering committee and other interested parties have
held numerous public meetings, and have encouraged individuals
to become involved on the committee or in other pertinent ways.
Individuals from the committee have presented at various
meetings of other non-profit entities, special interest groups,
civic groups, local governments and tourism boards. Resolutions
have been received supporting the National Heritage Area from
the counties and municipalities lying within the proposed area.
Numerous letters of support have been obtained from
businesses, non-profit organizations, and regional economic
development entities and individuals. Friendly relations with
other local public land agencies and organizations have been
another area of focus for the committee. A close working
relationship has been established with the Nation's newest
National Park, the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve.
Individuals have contributed countless hours of research,
which was the basis for a collaborative, scholarly symposium
that was presented in 2002 by the steering committee. Over one-
third of the research was donated to the National Heritage Area
effort. The greatest contribution that has impacted our goal of
designation has been the overwhelming amount of work of
professional volunteers.
Partnerships with Adams State College and other entities
were formed to present the one-day, multi-topic symposium on
history, heritage, culture and natural recreational resources
that are the unique characteristics of the proposed area. The
symposium received valuable acclaim for the top-quality of
information presented.
The final feasibility study was researched and authored
almost entirely by local historians, authors, scholars,
business individuals, and residents of the proposed area. Our
State Senator and State Representative have also shown their
support for the project throughout our efforts. The
comprehensive show of support from a multitude of people within
the San Luis Valley and from around the State of Colorado for
this designation is apparent. The Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area is a crossroads of cultures where a unique blend
of Native American, Hispano and Anglo-settlement converged in
what was the 19th Century dynamic of westward movement, and
today is reflected in the diversity of the people, art and
traditions.
The geographic isolation of this alpine valley and the
people's enduring ties to the land have given rise to a rich
cultural heritage. The spirit of independence and self-
reliance, an important National value, remain as the legacy of
those first courageous settlers, who fought many odds to make
this their home.
The area's rich cultural heritage, remarkable natural
resources, the mighty Rio Grande, the majestic Rocky Mountains
and the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve all lend
this area an unparalleled beauty that offers a sense of well-
being and a powerful source of inspiration to all who visit
this integral part of the national landscape.
From the cultural treasure chest of living history to the
abundance of natural resources and recreational opportunities,
this unique locale is akin to a diamond among precious stones.
This may be one of the few remaining places in our great
country with a distinctive history worthy of national acclaim.
Your designation of the three-county, Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area as an important component of the
tapestry of the American historical experience will be the
recognition that is well-deserved. The steering committee
encourages you to officially acknowledge the significance of
this area, through the enactment of S. 443, establishing the
Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area in the great centennial
State of Colorado.
Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will be glad to
entertain any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lopez follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dennis J. Lopez, on Behalf of the Sangre de
Cristo National Heritage Area
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am Dennis J. Lopez and
I am testifying in support of the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area (SDCNHA). I am a member of the steering committee for the proposed
National Heritage Area. I am a sixth generation native of the San Luis
Valley and my ancestors were one of the original forty families who
were grantees in 1843 of the Conejos Land Grant in Conejos County,
Colorado. Raised in a bilingual, bicultural family, I have maintained
the rich heritage of my Hispano ancestors as well as being fluent in
the American mainstream culture. I am a member of Adobe de Oro Concilio
de Artes, a local arts council that promotes the documentation,
preservation and promotion of Indio-Hispano arts and traditions and a
past member of the Sociedad Proteccion Mutua de Trabajadores Unidos
(S.P.M.D.T.U.), an Hispanic farm labor workers union established in
Conejos County in 1901. I received my post-secondary education at Adams
State College in Alamosa County. My career of choice has been as an
educator, for the past thirty three years teaching U.S. History of the
Hispanic Southwest, Spanish, French and lately as a school
administrator. I spent ten years as an administrator in Alamosa School
District and I am currently the principal at Sierra Grande School
District in Costilla County. As an historian, linguist, and educator I
have gained valuable insight into the evolving diverse aspects of our
national heritage.
I wish to thank you for inviting me to testify at this hearing. The
bill to designate the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area is one of
high importance to the three county region which lies within the great
San Luis Valley of Colorado.
The San Luis Valley is located in the south central region of the
State of Colorado surrounded by the Sangre de Cristo Range and northern
Culebra Range of the Rocky Mountains to the east and the San Juan
Range, which forms the Continental Divide, to the west. At 122 miles
long and 74 miles wide, the San Luis Valley is Colorado's largest
mountain park and has been labeled ``the highest, largest mountain
desert in North America''. The proposed designation area is comprised
of Costilla, Conejos and Alamosa counties in addition to the Great Sand
Dunes National Park and Preserve, Baca National Wildlife Refuge and
Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge; all lying within the southeastern
part of the San Luis Valley.
With 11,000 years of documented human habitation, the Sangre de
Cristo National Heritage Area is a crossroads of the centuries. Here a
unique blend of Native American, Hispano and Anglo settlement is
reflected in the diversity of the people, art and traditions. The
geographic isolation of the alpine valley and the people's enduring tie
to the land have given rise to a rich cultural heritage and ensured its
preservation. The area's fertile cultural landscape is complemented by
remarkable natural resources, including the mighty Rio Grande, majestic
Rocky Mountain peaks, Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve,
National Wildlife Refuges, and the high mountain desert, all of which
lend the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area an unparalleled beauty
that offers a sense of retreat and a powerful source of inspiration for
visitors.
For a century and a half the region has cultivated a rich heritage
that is a living testament to the generations gone before us. Everyday
life is endowed with traditions, both conscious and subconscious, that
have been passed from father to son, mother to daughter and neighbor to
neighbor. New neighbors learn traditional ways and over time, find
themselves embracing these traditions either out of need or out of
respect. This is a land that is essentially true to its roots.
The history of the proposed area is marked by the dynamic encounter
of three major cultures during a time when the nation's boundaries and
flags were in a state of constant change. First Nations, or Native
Americans, Indo-Hispanos and AngloEuropeans vied for the land. They
held divergent views of the land and its resources. The Utes, who claim
11,000 years of ancestry and occupation, like other First Nations had a
unique and spiritual relationship with the land. They could never think
in terms of owning it. That would have gone against all that they
believed. The land was a friend, a provider, and a partner to all of
nature. It fed and sheltered. It cared for the people and gave them
everything they ever needed.
Hispanos claimed territory for the motherland and God. Theirs was a
communal self-sustaining system, which required the cooperation of
everyone. Villages were born with extended families, building adobe
structures which were connected and surrounded a town square called a
plaza. Farming and ranching depended on the acequia* system of
irrigation which functions well only when everyone is a participant.
Land ownership was for the good of the family, the community and the
Church.
When Anglo-Europeans began to populate the land, they brought with
them a system of deeds, surveys, titles, taxation and barbed wire to
delineate and define. Mining, building railroads and big ranching were
the goals. For the Anglo-Europeans, the land was not so much perceived
as a place of sustenance, but seen more as a source of resources to be
used and extracted.
The U.S. military presence came in 1852 just one year after the
first Hispano settlement in the region. Fort Massachusetts, built then,
proved to be inadequate so the army replaced it with Fort Garland in
1858. Fort Garland remained a fort for 25 years. Its mission was to
protect settlers against hostile Indians. Hostilities were present
among the three groups, but major battles never occurred.
The distinguishing elements that set this region apart from others
are the multitude of natural resources and incredible recreational
choices that integrate with the distinctive cultural landscape. Early
settlers found precious water in abundance and fertile soil in which to
raise crops and graze livestock. Vast forests provided wildlife, wood
for lumber, plants for medicines and forage for livestock.
The designation area contains habitats and wildlife that are
characteristic of the San Luis Valley, yet unique to Colorado and the
West. A natural marvel, the Great Sand Dunes National Park and
Preserve, lies to the north end of the designation area. The dunes, the
tallest in North America, developed as a result of prevailing winds
blowing across the valley.
Despite the title of ``desert'', the San Luis Valley boasts one of
the West's most prized natural resources--WATER. Two separate aquifers
underlie the valley and both contain large quantities of water. Water
from mountain drainages and ground water moving toward the valley
filtrates down and recharges the aquifers. The range of wetland types
in the designation area, each with varying degrees of water permanence,
supports a diversity of plant and animal species, some of which are
very rare such as the slender spiderflower. The SDCNHA provides a
comprehensive sampling of the valley's intricate system of wetlands
that is fed by watershed runoff, creeks, ditches, ground water and
artesian wells.
The amount of federally protected land within the proposed National
Heritage Area attests to the natural resources within the southern
portion of the San Luis Valley. The State of Colorado and the Nature
Conservancy also protect substantial land holdings in the proposed
area. These protected lands include a National Park and Preserve, three
National Wildlife Refuges, a National Forest, two National Wilderness
Areas, a proposed National Natural Landmark (Rio Grande), Bureau of
Land Management lands, 15 State Wildlife Areas, a State Park and the
97,000 acre Nature Conservancy Medano-Zapata Ranch.
Plant species, wildlife and birds are abundant throughout the
SDCNHA. A number of plant communities and bird and animal species found
in this area have been recognized by the Colorado Natural Heritage
Program as globally significant. Rankings of these particular plants,
birds and animals put them in the category of vulnerable to extinction.
For this reason, protected lands serve as last bastions in preserving
species.
Other wildlife in the area boasts large populations of deer, elk,
Rocky Mountain sheep, and pronghorn. More common furbearers such as
beaver are found throughout the region.
Exceptional recreational opportunities abound in the Sangre de
Cristo area. There are hundreds of square miles of public lands,
thousands of acres of wildlife rich wetlands, marshes, and water bodies
and two designated wildernesses that provide for highly diverse
recreation experiences. While experiencing this unparalleled scenic
beauty one can find solitude, absorb clean crisp air, gaze upon some of
the clearest of night skies and bask in a climate that is dominated by
sunlight.
Nature based tourism includes recreational pursuits such as dune
skiing, snowshoeing, snowmobiling, camping, biking, bird watching/
wildlife viewing, cross-country skiing, hiking, mountaineering, star
gazing, fishing and hunting. Both the Sangre de Cristo Wilderness and
the San Juan Wilderness areas provide excellent recreation
opportunities for visitors seeking more remote backcountry hiking,
camping, and mountain and ice climbing experiences.
The Rio Grande and the diversity of ecosystems and life zones and
the intricate system of wetlands that span the area, make wildlife
viewing phenomenal. The valley is situated on a major flyway and sees a
large number of species as great waves of birds pass through on annual
migration. With further enhanced partnerships and interpretive tourist
information, several of these areas could be organized into wildlife
driving tours. Bird watching guides and tours have the potential to
increase visitor traffic tremendously throughout the area.
Cultural based tourism can be experienced through the architecture,
development patterns, art, food, lodging and cultural events. Los
Caminos Antiguos, the Ancient Roads, is a 129 mile stretch of Colorado
highway that links many of the key resources in the proposed SDCNHA.
The Byway provides visitors with panoramic views, a strong sense of the
past and opportunities to experience the rich culture and traditions of
the local people. Along this route one can see and feel the
authenticity of the cultural landscape. Visitors can experience
numerous historic Hispano communities such as San Luis, the oldest town
in Colorado, listed as a National Historic District, with its plaza,
vega,* adobe structures, mission churches, local artifacts, authentic
restaurants, cultural museum and B&Bs. On the same trip, visitors can
see historic Mormon villages that illustrate the tightly grided streets
and clustered homes of the early settlers and pass through the numerous
railroad towns that sprung up during the late 1800s. One of the largest
railroad towns is Antonito where the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic
Railroad, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is
located. This historic railroad has vintage steam-powered locomotives
and wooden passenger cars that wind through spectacular scenery as it
travels through the San Juan Mountains en route to Chama, New Mexico.
Fort Garland, the once stronghold of protection for the settlers of the
region, is now a fine museum offering interpretation of everyday life.
Its one time commander, Kit Carson, and the regiment of buffalo
soldiers who served at the fort are highlighted with interpretative
signage, artifacts and special displays. Reenactment camps and living
history events bring bygone times back to life. Many more recreation
opportunities exist but are far too numerous for this testimony to
list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Acequia--ditch
Vega--meadow
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isolation within these valley walls has been the impetus that has
kept the culture intact and the natural resources from being completely
exploited. An archaic dialect of 17th Century Spain is still spoken by
about 35% of the population, showing remnants of centuries past.
In this high mountain valley, isolation has worked to our advantage
and to our disadvantage. Although our heritage and culture have been
well preserved, the population has remained relatively low. The exodus
of our youth to more prosperous areas has left its mark on the ability
of families to keep generations-held land. Our financial resources and
tax base has not kept pace with urban areas or even with other rural
communities. The counties of Conejos and Costilla are two of the
poorest in the country. The struggling economies of these counties, as
well as their sister county, Alamosa, are in desperate need of economic
enhancement. Unemployment averages within these counties is high and
per capita income, when compared to the Colorado State average, is low
at 45-65%. As we search for ways to sustain our agrarian lifestyle, a
National Heritage Area designation would compliment existing efforts of
attracting heritage travelers through tourism. Heritage tourism and
historic preservation are proven economic stimulators and a perfect fit
for rural communities. Along with tourism, heritage education to
include the traditional arts, language and local history would benefit
tremendously from the national designation.
I would like to include in this testimony the process of bringing
this dream of National Heritage Area designation from beginning to
present day and of the overwhelming support that exists for the
designation.
Los Caminos Antiguos Scenic and Historic Byway, a 501(c)(3) not for
profit organization, is one of the 24 Colorado scenic byways and
traverses three of the southernmost counties of the San Luis Valley.
During the research the Byway conducted, while preparing interpretive
material for production, the board of directors realized that there was
a significant, important, and integrated story within the region that
had not been told, nor had it been celebrated. The Byway holds a stake
in the cultural and historical preservation of the area. It's not
unusual for a byway, either a State Scenic Byway or National Scenic
Byway, to lie within a National Heritage Area.
A consensus of the Board of Directors instructed byway planners to
include the formation of a National Heritage Area in the Strategic Plan
for the Byway. Beginning with three public meetings, one in each of the
Alamosa, Conejos and Costilla counties, the Byway assessed interest,
attendance and the willingness of individuals to help move the project
forward.
Attendance and interest from these meetings encouraged us to
organize interested parties to work on the designation. A volunteer
steering committee was nominated and formed. Today, several of the
original steering committee members of 2002 are still actively
involved. The steering committee has been responsible for the majority
of the work done thus far on the Heritage Area designation effort and
in the creation of the feasibility study.
From those first meetings, we've met regularly over the past five
and a half years to plan, organize and take forward the concept. We've
held several other meetings and have encouraged individuals to become
involved whether on the committee or in other ways. Individuals from
our committee have presented at various monthly and quarterly meetings
of other non-profits, special interest groups, civic groups, local
governments and tourism boards. We have periodically met with the
County Commissioners of all three counties to update them on the
progress of the designation process. Countless hours have been spent in
research and building public support for the project.
Resolutions supporting the National Heritage Area designation from
all three Boards of County Commissioners have been received, as well as
supportive resolutions from communities lying within the proposed
region. Numerous letters of support have been obtained from local and
regional governments, businesses, non-profit organizations, regional
economic development entities and individuals. Our State Senator, Gail
Schwartz, and our State Representative, Rafael Gallegos have also shown
their support for the project throughout our efforts and have given
letters committing their support.
Financially, Los Caminos Antiguos has supported the efforts, and
through their non-profit status, individuals and organizations have
been able to make cash contributions. The greatest contributions that
have impacted our goal of designation have been the overwhelming
personal work of our professional volunteers. As I mentioned, countless
hours of research have been contributed. That research had its roots in
a collaborative scholarly symposium that our steering committee
presented in November of 2002. Partnerships with Adams State College ,
Trinidad State Junior College, Adams State College Title V Office,
Jalisco Inc. (a private business) and Los Caminos Antiguos were formed
to present the full day, multi-venue symposium on the history,
heritage, culture and natural resources that make up the proposed
region. Over 31 presenters donated their time, travel costs and
research to the National Heritage Area effort. Scholarly papers were
presented at the symposium and then given to the steering committee to
be used in the authoring of the feasibility study. Cultural groups
donated performances during the lunch that was provided with funding
from our partners. People from the San Luis Valley and other regions of
Colorado and the state of New Mexico came to hear the presentations
that were made through lectures and panel discussions.
The feasibility study was researched and authored almost entirely
by local historians, authors, scholars, business people and residents
of the proposed region. This once again shows the overwhelming support
for this designation from a multitude of people within the valley and
around the state of Colorado. A well known landscape architecture firm
Shapins Associates, specializing in heritage planning and research,
contributed significantly to the completion and production of the final
study.
Within the planning process, partnerships with our local public
land agencies and organizations have been a main focus. Our partners
include the Rio Grande National Forest, the Bureau of Land Management
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the three National
Wildlife Refuges within the SDCNHA boundaries. All of these agencies
have been contributors to the research and writing of the feasibility
study. A close working relationship has been established with the
nation's newest National Park, the Great Sand Dunes. State agencies
such as the Division of Wildlife and Colorado State Parks have all
offered technical assistance along the way.
Since the completion of the feasibility study, the group has sought
to further Heritage Tourism by participating with other organizations
to advance visitor readiness and increase the profile of the region.
Preservation projects to protect some historic treasures include
placing the original Antonito Train Depot circa 1880s on both the State
and National Registers of Historic Places. Restoration work on the
depot is being planned with a new coalition of partners and an
interpretive center is under consideration.
To further the cause of the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area's designation, financial contributions from the three counties,
non-profit organizations, economic development agencies, chambers of
commerce, and other interested parties have been made to fund the
travel, lodging and additional expenses for the steering committee
members to travel to Washington D.C. to attend the hearings for S. 2037
on June 22, 2006 and again for this testimony on S. 443, today, March
20, 2007. These trips to Washington D.C. to provide valuable testimony
would not have occurred without these significant, invaluable
donations.
The recognition of the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area's
three county region as an important component in America's history is
long overdue. From the cultural treasure chest of living history to the
abundance of unique natural resources and recreational experiences,
this region sits as a diamond among gems.
In conclusion, the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area is
worthy of national designation and has met the criteria of the National
Park Service. This may be one of the few remaining places in our great
county with the integrity worthy of national acclaim. I urge you to act
quickly to enact legislation establishing the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area. Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee
and I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Lopez.
Mr. Nichols.
STATEMENT OF GARY E. NICHOLS, DIRECTOR, PARK COUNTY TOURISM AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, FAIRPLAY, CO
Mr. Nichols. Mr. Chairman, and ranking member Thomas, on
behalf of the Park County, Colorado Commission and our Heritage
Area Partnership, I am honored and grateful for the opportunity
to be here today to provide testimony on the South Park
National Heritage Area bill, S. 444.
The South Park Heritage Partnership was established in
1994, after local ranchers, miners and community leaders
approached me with their vision to preserve South Park's unique
heritage resources, and utilize them to generate new economic
opportunities. Shortly after which, the Governor of Colorado
designated South Park as the State's second official State
Heritage Area.
Our National Heritage Area bill recognizes the importance
of developing a strategic management plan that engages all 80
partners, and 90-plus heritage sites in South Park. It also
addresses key elements of Senator Thomas' proposed NHA bill, by
establishing definitive resource criteria and budget
guidelines, by limiting our funding requests to what is
required and can be matched locally, and by providing specific
language that protects the rights of individual private
property owners, many of whom are longstanding partners in our
program. No where else in the Nation is the Nation's heritage
preserved in such an extraordinary high-altitude landscape.
At two miles above sea level in South Park, archeologists
have documented human occupation over the last 8,000 years
nearly continuously. As the highest elevation Pleistocene
fossil site in North America, Porcupine Cave is also one of the
world's most important sites for the study of Ice Age animals.
South Park is home to a rare grassland community, the
largest remaining natural grassland of its type on earth. South
Park also contains the greatest concentration of rare and
significant wetlands known as fens, in the lower 48 States, as
well as the oldest trees in the Rocky Mountain Region. Growing
at elevation above 11,000 feet, South Park's Bristle Cone pine
trees are over 2,000 years old.
At 14,000 feet above sea level, in the Mosquito Range, the
Present Help Mine is still the highest mine ever to operate in
the United States. This ancient mountain range contains several
rare plants found no where else in the world.
Designated by Congress in 1966, the Lost Creek National
Natural Landmark Area in South Park protects stunning rock
formations in a stream that disappears and reappears at the
surface at least 9 times.
Over the last 12 years, our partnership has raised $17
million to preserve a multitude of historic properties, secure
conservation easements on agricultural land, establish new
heritage tourism facilities and programs, and develop a variety
of educational and promotional media. As a result, we are now
positioned to showcase this 900-square mile mountain basin
through the National Heritage Area Program.
With a recent Preserve America grant from the White House,
we are currently preparing adaptive-use plans for several key
historic sites. We therefore, propose applying 87 percent of
our NHA budget to our implementing site-specific plans on
participating properties with their landowners. The estimated
budget to accomplish our highly-targeted goals, amounts to
$12.2 million over the term of the National Heritage Area, half
of which will be provided by the local partnership.
Again, thank you so much for the opportunity to comment and
provide testimony on South Park's National Heritage Area Act. I
would be glad to answer any questions you may have about our
program and bill.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nichols follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gary E. Nichols, Director, Park County Tourism &
Community Development Office
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Thomas, thank you very much for
holding a hearing today on S. 444, the South Park National Heritage
Area Bill of 2007.
On behalf of the Board of Park County Commissioners and the South
Park Heritage Area Partnership, I am honored to be here today to
provide our testimony on the South Park National Heritage Area in the
State of Colorado. We appreciate the time and effort the Committee, its
staff, Senator Salazar, and his staff have committed to the development
of this bill.
To retain the authenticity of their home place in the face of
growth and change, cattle ranchers, miners, business leaders, and local
government officials came together in 1994 to conserve South Park's
unique heritage resources and utilize them to generate a new
sustainable economy. Shortly thereafter Colorado's governor designated
South Park as the second official State Heritage Area.
Over the last twelve years our 80 program partners have worked
diligently to survey and preserve a multitude of significant historic
properties, secure conservation easements on 25,000 acres of
agricultural land, restore thirteen miles of impaired stream and
riparian habitat, establish new heritage tourism facilities and
programs, and develop a variety of educational and promotional media.
To date the South Park Heritage Area partnership has raised $17 million
in grants and matching funds for these purposes. As a result of our
collective efforts, we are now poised to showcase this thousand-square-
mile mountain landscape through the National Heritage Area Program.
With a recent Preserve America grant from the White House, we have
retained planning professionals to prepare master plans for a number of
key historic properties in the South Park basin, in cooperation with
their (private) owners. These sites are culturally significant,
representing the pioneer industries of ranching, mining and railroading
at high altitude in the central Rocky Mountains. These plans will
provide the local partnership with a blueprint for preserving and
preparing each site for appropriate types and levels of adaptive use,
including but not limited to heritage tourism.
This milestone planning project entails 1) assessing, 2)
stabilizing, 3) restoring, 4) rehabilitating, 5) protecting, 6)
enhancing, 7) interpreting, 8) managing, 9) branding, 10) marketing,
and 11) adaptively using each of the target sites. However, strategies
contained in each of these master plans will require significant
additional funding for implementation. Consequently, we propose to
apply the majority (87%) of our NHA budget toward implementing site-
specific recommendations on participating properties within the South
Park NHA boundary. Moreover, half (50%) of our $12.2 million budget
will be provided by the local partnership. Thus, the estimate of
Federal funding required to accomplish our targeted heritage area
strategies amounts to $6.1 million over the ten-year period.
Nowhere in the United States will you find the centennial ranches,
prehistoric sites, steam locomotives, and forgotten gold mines
preserved in a setting as extraordinary as South Park, at elevations
exceeding two miles above sea level. The altitude of South Park and
surrounding mountains define our heritage and attract individuals who
value the authenticity of this proposed National Heritage Area. As they
have for centuries, local residents still depend on the land for their
livelihood and quality of life. As America's population grows and other
places lose their traditional industries and identity, places like
South Park become increasingly rare and more intriguing.
Despite our extreme elevation, or perhaps because of it, rare and
abundant natural resources have attracted people to the South Park
basin since 7,000 B.C. Ute and Arapaho peoples frequented the same high
altitude hunting and gathering sites that prehistoric peoples used
8,000 years before. Grazing animals first established the trails that
indigenous peoples eventually followed. The same trails were used by
guides and government explorers like Kit Carson, John Fremont and
Zebulon Pike. Members of these early expeditions first documented the
fossilized remains of animals found in South Park, including an extinct
North America cheetah. Located at 9,400 feet in the proposed National
Heritage Area, Porcupine Cave is the highest Pleistocene fossil site in
North America, and its wealth of animal fossils makes it one of the
most important sites in the world for the study of Ice Age vertebrates.
Second only to Lewis and Clark in the annals of frontier
exploration, Pike's 1806 expedition marked the first official American
exploration into South Park. One of the most famous early explorers,
John C. Fremont, led multiple expeditions into South Park in the 1840s.
Like Pike, Fremont was tasked by the US government with securing,
surveying, and opening up the western territory for development in the
name of Manifest Destiny.
During the famous Pikes Peak Or Bust gold rush of 1859, pack trains
and freight wagons turned buffalo trails into rutty roads, which rail
companies then graded to supply early miners with supplies. Cattle
ranches sprang up across this high altitude prairie to feed the miners.
The same ranches that supplied world-class hay to England and Russia a
century ago still support a globally rare grassland community, the
largest remaining natural grassland of its type on earth.
Democratic traditions that are fundamental to our country's
governance were underscored in remote outposts like South Park. Lacking
even common law principles, the early miners had to establish customs
based on elementary rules of property and equity. In 1859 bylaws were
enacted for the ``Buckskin Joe Mining District'' near Alma, which is
now the highest incorporated town in the United States. These laws
represent some of the earliest legislation in the region; birthed among
the hardscrabble mining camps of that period.
The challenges of mining at high altitude in the 19th Century were
incredible, and the mines above Alma are higher than any others in
North America. At 14,157 feet near the summit of Mount Lincoln, the
Present Help Mine is still the highest mine ever to operate in the
United States. Mount Lincoln was named in 1862 for our 16th President.
Immediately following President Lincoln's 1865 assassination, thousands
of Americans trekked westward to pay tribute to ``our dead but immortal
President'' by ascending its summit ``so near the heavens.''
By far the most unusual ``mining'' enterprise in South Park,
Colorado Salt Works (National Register) is the only surviving example
of an 1860s kettle and pan salt production facility in the United
States. Drawing from surrounding salt springs, the facility extracted
salt between 1862 and 1870. Also on the National Register, Salt Works
Ranch is among Colorado's oldest continuously operating cattle ranches
(five generations) and is still owned by the same family.
The Mosquito Range is the only place in the United States where
hearty climbers may ascend four peaks above 14,000 feet in a single
day, including Mount Lincoln and Mount Democrat. This ancient mountain
range contains 33 rare plant species, collectively representing one of
the highest concentrations of rare plants in the Rocky Mountains.
Several of these species are found only within the Mosquito Range and
nowhere else in the world. One species is currently listed as
``Threatened'' in its entire range by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
At 13,188 feet, Mosquito Pass is the highest motor vehicle pass in
North America. But it's only one of many mountain passes into South
Park. Much to his satisfaction, Walt Whitman was once detained for an
hour at Kenosha Pass summit. From this lofty vantage point along the
South Park Railroad, Whitman wrote: ``At this immense height the South
Park stretches fifty miles before me. Mountainous chains and peaks in
every variety of perspective, every hue of vista, fringe of view, in
nearer, or middle, or far-dim distance, or fade on the horizon . . . As
afternoon advances, novelties, far reaching splendors, accumulate under
the bright sun in this pure air.''
Helen Hunt Jackson has been described as the most brilliant woman
and one of the most successful writers of her day. During a week in
Colorado, she reported, ``we found ourselves on a true summit at last,
on the [Kenosha] summit of the eastern wall of the great South Park . .
. nowhere else in the world are there mountains fourteen and fifteen
thousand feet high which have all the room they need--great circles and
semicircles of plains at their feet and slopes a half continent long!''
The sentiments expressed by Whitman, Jackson and many others are
echoed by contemporary visitors who cross into South Park over one of
nine mountain passes for the first time: ``it's hard to believe that a
place like this still exists within an hour of Denver!''
The South Park basin supports some of the most extensive
bristlecone pine forests in the world. Bristlecones are the oldest
known living trees on earth. The bristlecone pines in South Park took
root during reign of the Roman Empire and are the oldest trees (2400
years) in the Rocky Mountain region. South Park's ancient pine forests
are complemented by rare and unusual wetlands called fens. These
wetlands are comparable to few others in the United States. South Park
contains more of these nationally significant wetlands than any other
region in the lower forty-eight states. Situated at just under 10,000-
feet above sea level, High Creek Fen is an astonishing vestige of the
last Ice Age that has been identified as the most ecologically diverse,
floristically rich fen known to exist in the Southern Rocky Mountains.
Now managed by the Nature Conservancy, High Creek Fen is open daily to
the public for photography and nature study.
In 1966 Congress designated the Lost Creek National Natural
Landmark Area along the eastern edge of South Park. Forty miles
southwest of Denver in the proposed NHA, the Area's stunning rock
formations include spires, pinnacles, narrow ridges, and narrow gorges.
Another marvel of the Landmark Area is Lost Creek, which disappears and
reappears at the surface at least nine times. The last wild herd of
bison in Colorado ranged near Bison Peak in the Landmark Area.
Sixteen properties in South Park are currently listed on the
National Register of Historic Places. More than 75 additional sites are
officially eligible for the National Register according to the National
Park Service. It is also worth noting that, since most of the NHA has
yet to be excavated, countless undiscovered prehistoric and
paleontological sites may also prove to be eligible.
Our South Park NHA bill recognizes the importance of developing a
strategic management plan that engages all 80 partners and 90+ heritage
sites. It also addresses key elements of Senator Thomas' proposed NHA
bill by establishing definitive criteria and budget guidelines for
heritage resources in the South Park NHA; limiting our federal funding
request to what is actually needed and can be matched locally to
accomplish our annual goals; and providing specific language that
protects the rights of individual private property owners, many of whom
are longstanding partners in the South Park State Heritage Area
Program.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to provide comment and
testimony on the South Park National Heritage Area Act. I would be
happy to answer any questions you may have about our heritage area
program and bill, or and any other questions you may have.
Senator Salazar. Thank you very much, Mr. Nichols, and
thank you, again, to all of the panel for your testimony this
afternoon.
We'll have 5 minutes of questions each, and we'll see how
long we'll keep you here this afternoon.
My first question is to you, Mr. Esparza, concerning the
National Latino Museum. You commented on the contributions of
Latinos to the United States, and commented on some of the
military contributions, especially in World War II. I will note
at the outset of my question here that both Senator Bingaman,
our chairman, and Senator Domenici, the ranking member, are
sponsors of our bill, along with approximately another 30
sponsors, both Democrats and Republicans, of this legislation.
And, I think it is part in recognition of that history of
contribution that Latinos have given to this country from its
very beginning, and even before.
I will note that the founding of the American GI Forum,
essentially came out of a very painful part of our history as
you well recall, and that is that in 1948, Dr. Hector Garcia
decided to found the National, the American GI Forum, because
of the fact that Mexican-American soldiers were being returned
as casualties back into south Texas, were not being allowed to
be buried in cemeteries. In that specific case, it was in Three
Rivers, and it was part of an effort on the part of Dr. Garcia
to try to make sure that the Hispanic contributions in the
military were, in fact, recognized.
Would you comment, just briefly, from your knowledge of the
historical information on the Hispanic contributions to the
military of our country?
Mr. Esparza. Certainly, Senator.
We have more Congressional Medal of Honor winners, per
capita, than any other group in the country. And, we have
contributed our manpower, our blood to every single engagement
of defending this country from its very beginning, and continue
to be over-represented in the military. It is something that
our community is very proud of, and has always supported our
military men and women.
We particularly take pride in our contributions in this
area. And, you mentioned the case of Private Longoria, who of
course, President Lyndon Johnson, then-Senator, from Texas,
took the step of having him, interred in Arlington National
Cemetery to overcome the great injustice of him being denied
burial there in Texas, in his home town.
And that, of course, became one of the very first steps
towards creating a barrier to discrimination in public places,
which is again part of our legacy of fighting for civil rights
and pursuing equality for all people.
Senator Salazar. I thank you, Mr. Esparza, and I'm certain
you're aware that I think it is somewhere around 17.5 percent
of the men and women who are currently serving in Iraq are from
the Hispanic community here in the United States, so I think
the continuing contribution is there today, as we hold this
hearing here in the U.S. Senate.
Let me ask you a second question, and that is with respect
to the funding of a National Latino Museum, in your history as
part of the New American Alliance and others, do you think
there is corporate support out there that we could identify to
help us in the construction and maintenance of a National
Latino Museum?
Mr. Esparza. There is growing wealth in our community, and
I know that our philanthropists in our community and the major
corporations view the value of creating an institution of this
nature, and will step forward to support it.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Esparza, for your
contributions to our Nation, and to preserving the history of
our heritage and culture, as well.
Mr. Sakura, I had a question for you on the expansion on
the Mesa Verde National Park. If the funds are not appropriated
in fiscal year 2008 for this acquisition, is there a risk that
this project will never be completed?
Mr. Sakura. Senator, there is that risk, yes.
Senator Salazar. Question for you, Mr. Ostermiller, and
that is that the administration's testimony noted that the
proposed study doesn't include the necessary criteria for the
study to assess the conceptual boundary map of the Heritage
Areas. You have to understand that the bill identified certain
coastal areas of Oregon and Washington, and other areas along
the Columbia River. Is there a general agreement, locally,
among those who have been involved in this project about the
geographical extent and boundaries of the area?
Mr. Ostermiller. Senator, there is general agreement. One
of the topics of our 3-day gathering was to come to some
consensus of what that boundary might look like. There is still
work to do with all of the neighbors in that area, but
essentially we're looking at the three-county area, north from
Long Beach, Washington, south into Oregon to around Cannon
Beach and up the river as far as Okaicum County. That is a
natural geographic area, as well as the center of gravity for
all of the different cultural activities of the area as well.
Senator Salazar. I have questions for the rest of you, but
I will hold off until after Senator Thomas goes.
Senator Thomas. Okay. Mr. Esparza, how will this museum
that you talked about be funded?
Mr. Esparza. Well, certainly I would expect that the same
way that other museums that have been part of our Nation's
history have been funded, through a combination of private and
public support. We certainly feel that we're meritorious of
following the same tradition of how other museums have been
funded.
Senator Thomas. So, some of each, private and public.
Mr. Esparza. It is my understanding that many museums have
had private support, as long as the Government has stepped
forward to enable that private support can be marshaled. If we
see that the Government is stepping forward, we believe that
our community and that other corporations will step forward and
provide what is necessary.
Senator Thomas. We've had some discussion about the site,
do you have any feeling about that?
Mr. Esparza. We certainly feel that we should be there
alongside the other main museums, absolutely.
Senator Thomas. On the Mall.
Mr. Esparza. On the Mall.
Senator Thomas. Okay, have a little discussion about that,
won't we?
Mr. Esparza. I'm sure that General Washington appreciated
our support several hundred years ago, and we could see that
that support might have some benefit today.
Senator Thomas. I'm sure. And I'm sure General Washington
would like to see the Mall stay open for people to visit, as
well.
Mr. Esparza. So that we can be there to visit.
Senator Thomas. Mr. Ostermiller, how much money do you
expect from the Park Service for the study of this Heritage
Area?
Mr. Ostermiller. Senator Thomas, we are hoping for a
partnership relation, for the study, but in anticipation of the
fact that this is very important to us, and we are a community
of people who feel very independent in our self-determination.
We've already raised over $150 million, and we're very anxious
to proceed.
Senator Thomas. Approximately how many people live within
the boundaries of this study area, do you know?
Mr. Ostermiller. In the Clatsop County in Oregon, it's
about 35,000 people, and in Pacific County in Washington, it's
20-some thousand, I believe. And then Wahkiakum County is
perhaps 10,000, but we have hundreds of thousands of people
from throughout the United States every year.
Senator Thomas. No, I mean, live there.
Mr. Ostermiller. That's just the resident population, sir.
Excuse me, the three counties I described.
Senator Thomas. That's a little unusual, isn't it? To have
that many people in a Heritage Area?
Mr. Ostermiller. It's always been a high activity area for
people, it's very rich in Scandinavian populations, there's
certainly some Native American folks that live there.
Senator Thomas. But aren't there areas you're trying to
preserve that are somewhat unique, and not populated?
Mr. Ostermiller. Yes, sir. The counties are quite large,
and there's wetlands, mountain ranges, certainly the large
estuary area and the beaches.
Senator Thomas. I see.
Mr. Carlino, you're aware that the Congress provides $10
million over a period of 15 years for these projects.
Mr. Carlino. Yes, sir, that was in our founding
legislation.
Senator Thomas. And what is your request now?
Mr. Carlino. Well, we would like to have a reauthorization
of the full amount, but recognizing that the committee would
like to evaluate the Heritage Areas, and this bill, as it's
proposing, it wouldn't add any more time to it, but it would
add an additional authorization of appropriations of $5
million.
We're one of the Heritage Areas that have been able to
receive a larger amount of funding, so we've got time left in
our authorization, but we will max out on our appropriations at
the end of the next fiscal year.
Senator Thomas. Did you have any plans, at the beginning of
the period that you knew you were going to get $10 million, and
that you would have to raise your own money?
Mr. Carlino. Well, we are raising our own money, and when
we started this planning, actually, 17 years ago, Heritage
Areas did not have that limitation that it does now.
Recognizing that at the time when the Park Service evaluated
our plan, there was never any indication at that point that
after 10 years, or $10 million and 15 years, it would be
nothing after that point.
Our concern, and our partner-funder's concern is that any
funder in a systematic relationship that is built within the
Heritage Area, if any funder walks away from the table, it
could create a situation that other funders would seem less
likely to contribute to the project.
Senator Thomas. But I think there's been a pretty good
understanding for some time that the amount of money was 10
years, $10 million over 15 years.
Mr. Carlino. I don't doubt that, sir, but with all due
respect, there have been Heritage Areas that have been
reauthorized, too.
Senator Thomas. Well, I think we're evaluating that, very
much, at the moment.
Thank you very much, all of you, for being here, and we
appreciate your work on these things.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Senator Thomas.
Mr. Carlino, you are seated at the table next to other
proponents of other National Heritage Areas and so my question
to you is, given the fact that your Heritage Area has already
been authorized, has been funded, how is it that you would want
us to provide additional money for your Heritage Area, when we
have all of these other Heritage Areas that have lined up to
try to receive a similar designation to what you received years
ago?
Mr. Carlino. Well, Senator, Heritage Areas have
demonstrated a remarkable ability to raise money with the money
that this Congress provides them through the Park Service. So,
I would say to you that the funding relationship between us and
the proposed sites for your consideration, shouldn't be an ``us
or them.'' It actually, to me, would seem to me that this is a
type of program that should be embraced by the Congress in a
tight budget situation, and that having Heritage Areas which
can demonstrate remarkable track records of additional funding,
would be something that we would want to implement, Park
Service-wide, and especially in the other Heritage Areas to
help bring other people to the table.
I can't speak for the others, but I would guess that absent
a Heritage Area designation, some of my colleagues, not
necessarily at the table, but that are designated as Heritage
Areas now, could be units of the Park Service. And, if that
were the case, the cost to the Federal Government would be a
lot more than the appropriation that has been provided to them
as a National Heritage Area.
Senator Salazar. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Carlino.
Mr. Lopez, I know you've brought with you a number of
letters of support, and those letters will be made a part of
the record in connection with S. 443.
My question to you has to do with financial assistance for
the National Heritage Area from the local communities. Is there
a willingness on the part of the local communities to provide
some contribution to making the National Heritage Area a
reality for the San Luis Valley?
Mr. Lopez. We have received that type of support and
commitment from both public and private groups. We have also
investigated some private corporations and asked them if they
would be willing to support our efforts, and willing to
contribute to the parks, to the National Heritage Area, and we
have received very favorable response from both public and
private entities.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Lopez.
Mr. Nichols, let me commend the work of Park County, and
your vision and the vision of so many people who worked on the
creation of this Heritage Area. You have asked in S. 444 that I
have included in there an authorization of $6.1 million over
the next 15 years, that's a lower level than is typically
authorized for a National Heritage Area, and you tell me, why
it is that that number is sufficient for your plans, and what
you intend to so with it?
Mr. Nichols. Yes, sir. Part of the answer relates to the
efforts that we've been pursuing over the last 12 or so years,
in fundraising and partner-building, and we have very solid
experience with what it takes to actually accomplish our, both
preservation and promotional goals of our heritage resources.
And that $6.1 million reflects the realistic amount that, No.
1, that we need to accomplish the goals that are identified in
our feasibility study, and No. 2, what can realistically be
matched, on a one-to-one ration, which we feel is important.
So, two-fold answer there.
Senator Salazar. Thank you very much.
Mr. Nichols. Thank you.
Senator Salazar. Mr. Nichols.
Let me just make a concluding remark here. And that is,
that this is the first subcommittee hearing that I get to
chair, in my history. And it is an impressive group of
witnesses that we have here, I support all of the legislation
that all of you have testified to today.
I want to just make a personal comment, and that is, in
your testimony I see a lot of my own history in the testimony
supporting the wilderness expansion of Mesa Verde National
Park, the bill that I am sponsoring with Senator Allard. I see
us preserving the rich heritage of the settlement of Native
Americans of the southwestern part of our State, a very rich
history that really does, in fact, belong to our entire Nation.
The designation of Park County as a National Heritage Area, I
see the rich history of our ranching communities in that part
of Colorado, and the great beauty of that State being
preserved, and I honor and give my best wishes to all of the
local community that have, that has led that effort.
In the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area, I see very
much the history of our people. I very often describe my native
valley as a valley that is a very big valley, it's 140 miles,
south to north, 70 miles east to west. The river that traverses
our ranch is named the San Antonio River. If you look off to
the east, you see the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, the Blood of
Christ Mountains, and if you look to the west, you see the San
Juan Mountains. And to be able to preserve that history and the
heritage and to demonstrate to the Nation its importance, I
think, is important and I'm very hopeful that we'll be able to
get the legislation through this year.
With respect to the Latino Museum, Mr. Esparza, I recognize
the huge contribution that Hispanic-Americans have made to this
country for a very long time. I often say in many of my
speeches that I give around the country that we've been very
much an America in progress, and sometimes that progress has
come as a result of pain--the founding of the American GI
Forum, in 1948 was really a painful experience, when even our
dead soldiers were not being allowed to be buried in cemeteries
because of the kind of segregation that existed in the South.
And even in those times, it was people like our parents, my
parents who were very proud veterans of World War II, my mother
working in the War Department, my father working in, or being a
soldier in World War II, my uncle losing his life in the soils
of Europe, and yet, our country has been a country that has
been in progress, has recognized those contributions. Sometimes
it's taken awhile, but we've gotten to a point where those
contributions have been recognized.
So, I make that comment only to let you know that I'm very
proud of the legislation that all of you have helped craft, and
that you're helping us move forward, and I'm hopeful that we
will see a successful end to that legislation.
At this point, I'd like to thank each of you, because I
know you have traveled far, you've worked hard in preparing
your testimony that you presented here to the committee, the
committee members will all get a copy of your testimony, and
your testimony will be included in the record, along with all
of the letters of support that you've brought in for each of
your specific projects.
It is my hope that working with Senator Thomas, and with
Senator Akaka, and the chairman and the ranking member of the
full committee, that we will be able to move these bills
through the committee as quickly as possible. If we receive any
questions in writing from other members of the committee who
could not be here today, we will forward them to you, and ask
for your response for the record.
We will keep the hearing record open for 1 week from today
to receive additional comments on any of these bills. And if
there are no other statements at this time, the subcommittee
stands adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Mesa Verde Foundation,
Denver, CO, March 16, 2007.
Hon. Wayne Allard,
Dirksen Senate Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Ken Salazar,
Hart Senate Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Allard and Senator Salazar: On behalf of the Mesa
Verde Foundation, I am writing to express our strong support for your
important legislation, S. 126, the Mesa Verde National Park Boundary
Expansion Act, and to commend your leadership to pass this bipartisan
legislation. The Mesa Verde Foundation is a Colorado-based non-profit
organization with a mission to support the education and preservation
efforts of Mesa Verde National Park.
Several years ago, the Foundation committed to donating a 38-acre
tract to the NPS for a new building to house a new federally-funded
Collections and Research Center and a new Foundation-funded Visitor
Center at the entrance to the park. As a result of this commitment,
both components are currently under design in anticipation of the
donation. The Foundation plans to make the donation when construction
funds for the Collections and Research Center are appropriated.
Currently, the NPS does not have the authority to accept the
donation of the land, which is outside the park boundary. Your bill
would allow the Foundation to donate the land to the NPS to support the
construction of both federal and Foundation building components.
Specifically, it would authorize a boundary expansion at the entrance
to the park, on the northeast edge, to include the Foundation's 38-acre
tract and the Henneman's 324-acre tract. We support your proposal to
include additional lands in the park boundary.
This bill will enable the NPS to preserve critical wildlife
corridors and habitat and protect views into the park. Your legislation
is also a critical step forward in the process to construct both the
Collections and Research Center and the Visitor Center, a facility
which will provide for the protection of the park's collection and
introduce visitors to this magnificent park.
We would be pleased to provide additional information or assistance
to you in support of this important legislation.
Sincerely,
Ellen Anderman,
Vice Chair, Board of Directors.
______
Property Rights Foundation of America,
Trenton, NJ, March 19, 2007.
Hon. Daniel Akaka,
U.S. Senate.
Dear Senator Akaka: I wish to bring comment on Nat'l. Park Service
``The Journey Though Hollowed Ground'' National Heritage Area Act Bill.
As a New Jersey resident, and a board member of Property Rights
Foundation of America, I attended three (3) public meetings for NPS
``Crossroads of the American Revolution'' National Heritage Area in
2001, and saw first hand how NPS set up public meetings that the public
had no knowledge of, and had invited persons and organizations to
attend.
The pitch by NPS was that if established, ``Crossraods'' NHA would
bring in to N.J. Revolutionary sites $100 million, $10 million per year
for 10 years.
NPS ``Crossroads'' NHA passed Congress in 2006 with only $10
million in ten years, $1 million a year not $100 million in ten years.
NPS ``Crossroads of the American Revolution'' NHA covers into 14 of
the New Jersey counties.
98% at least of the property owners in the 14 New Jersey counties
have no knowledge their property is in a NPS NHA.
NPS ``Crossroads'' NHA put New Jersey at 100% covered in Federal
areas.
National Park Service trails, areas, rivers, US Fish & Wildlife
refuges, U.S. Forest Service Stewardship Area on the N.J. Highlands
which is now being promoted by
NGO environmental groups to become a United Nations International
Biosphere Reserve, just as our N.J. Pinelands is thanks to National
Park Service.
These Federal areas trails, rivers, and refuges violate the 10th
Amendment, states rights, and Article 1, Sec. 8 of the U.S.
Constitution.
The National Park Service is terrible in responding to
correspondence.
I ask that you and the Committee oppose ``The Journey Though
Hollowed Ground'' Nat'l. Heritage Area Act!
Thank You!
Sincerely,
William J. Opferman,
Board Member.
______
Leesburg, VA, March 16, 2007.
Hon. Daniel Akaka,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Akaka: I hope you will oppose Journey Through Hallowed
Ground because of its side effects.
JTHG will make millions of acres of land into a protected island.
It is too much preservation. Houses and businesses all need land. JTHG
restrictions will drive up the cost of land that already costs too
much.
It is very difficult to own land in Hawaii. That should not be the
case for the four states that JTHG will affect. They are not islands
but will be protected to give the rich their sought-after goal--privacy
from others not like them. (I have lived in Loudoun for a long time.)
I hope you will demand an economic impact statement. JTHG will
create building land shortages that will harm the rising middle class.
Many historic areas are already adequately protected. Ordinary people
need an affordable place to live and a job to pay for it. JTHG will
conflict with those human goals.
I hope your choice will be to strengthen the middle class. Allow
them to make new history. Do not take away the chance for them to own
land.
JTHG is overkill. The Park Service is already overburdened.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Rose Ellen Ray.
______
Madison, VA, March 19, 2007.
Hon. Daniel Akaka,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Sir: Allow me to qualify myself. I served as a trustee of the
Virginia Outdoors Foundation under then Governor George Allen. I hold a
Ph.D. in Foundations of Education and for two decades, I have
researched the history of National Park Service practices and abuses in
Virginia.
I am deeply concerned about the Journey Through Hallowed Ground
bill that appears to be moving forward at breakneck speed and without
due deliberation. It is a highly controversial bill because it contains
no system of accountability and transfers democratic powers that
constitutionally rest with the voters to a government agency and a
private non-profit organization.
I supported Senator Allen since he entered the U.S. House of
Representatives because he promised to protect property rights.
However, I opposed him when he attempted to convince his constituents
that this bill contained all the appropriate safe guards against abuses
of property rights. Many other voters were not convinced. This is part
of the reason why Mr. Allen is job-hunting. Now, as was predicted, the
party in power has fulfilled all our worst fears and removed those
safe-guards.
This bill gives ALL planning authority to the National Park Service
and the Hallowed Ground Project, (Read Piedmont Environmental Council)
with no mechanism for accountability whatsoever. Even if these entities
were reliably considerate of the rights of voters and property owners,
this tact would be unconscionable! But the fact is (and I have
documented proof) that both entities have a less than desirable track
record with private citizens, courts at all levels, and governing
bodies where fundamental rights and stakeholder input are concerned.
The proponents of this bill claim that it will enhance economic
development in the region, but their prospectus consists of prosaic and
empty rhetoric totally void of facts and statistics. No self-respecting
business would endorse a project that failed to offer supporting
documentation.
The proponents of this bill neglected to furnish local governing
boards of supervisors with fundamental details of this bill, much less
maps depicting the geographic areas that are involved by this bill.
The proponents of this bill claim to be interested in protecting
open space whereas some of them and the VOF are directly involved in
easements that literally override the very mission and stipulations of
open space protection by retaining mining rights. Others have
approached the Virginia Outdoors Foundation expecting special favors,
and still others have literally taken undue advantage of the
Foundation.
The proponents of this bill claim to be the preservators of open
farm land, when in reality they support the creation of cluster housing
which crowds the middle classes, inflates the crime rate, and clogs our
highways.
Our government rests on the principle of checks and balances. I
urge you clarify where those exist in this bill and to reconsider
passage of this bill as it is written. It is an arrogant product of a
mentality that promotes history at the expense of principles. Do you
really want history to recount your role in the destruction of
fundamental rights?
Sincerely,
Leri M. Thomas.
______
Graves Mill, VA, March 19, 2007.
Hon. Daniel Akaka,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Akaka: We are writing to express our opposition to S.
289, The Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
Our concern is endangerment of Private Property Rights as provided
for by our U.S. Constitution. The Constitution does not refer to rights
of tourism or historic preservation. We support historic preservation
but we feel very strongly that it should be done privately and/or by
local government. Above all, it should not be financed by the federal
government and managed by NONELECTED special interest groups.
In addition to the Hallowed Ground bill, the JTHG Partnership is
asking that Rt. 15 be designated as a National Scenic Byway. While this
is a separate issue, it is important to note that the two entities
together will have much more control over our local property owners.
We respectfully ask that you do not support this bill.
Sincerely,
Randall A. and Ruth A. Lillard.
______
South Riding, VA, March 19, 2007.
Senator Daniel Kahikina Akaka,
U.S. Senate.
Re: S. 289 The establishment of the ``Journey Through Hallowed Ground''
National Heritage Area
Dear Honorable Senator Akaka: I write to you today to implore you
to protect the sacred property rights of ALL persons by denying the
request to establish the so called Journey Through Hallowed Ground
National Heritage Area. This is a feel-good proposal whose costs will
be great even if born by a few. Worse it is an unnecessary and
pernicious land grab, the purposes of which extend beyond historical
preservation.
Although this ``heritage area'' is planned to traverse several
states, it is appalling to me that the proposal comes from a Senator
representing the great Commonwealth of Virginia, home of the great
bastions of individual liberty, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington,
James Madison and George Mason to name but the most famous.
George Mason, the author of the Virginia Bill of Rights from which
the US Bill of Rights is derived knew and declared the importance of
property rights when he wrote ``. . . all men are by nature equally
free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when
they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact,
deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and
liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and
pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.''
How do we justify the trampling of the property rights of those
persons who own land in the area that we would now ``hallow''? As
Abraham Lincoln himself so eloquently acknowledges in the deeply moving
Gettysburg Address ``we can not dedicate--we can not consecrate--we can
not hallow--this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled
here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or
detract''. We surely fail in our efforts to hallow an arbitrarily
labeled corridor if in doing so we take that land either in deed or in
value from those who own it. The action proposed to you in this
legislation would make you thieves. How can stealing bring honor to
those who gave their lives for the very rights you would now set aside?
Can it ever be right for us to diminish the value of another man's
land by deciding now that we have a use that is somehow greater than
any he might have? If we will take either the land or the value how can
we ever do so without recompense?
James Madison understood that the protection of property is the
foundation of all freedoms. He said, ``. . . a man is said to have a
right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his
rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly
respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties,
or his possessions''.
Much more contemporarily, in reaction to the maddening indifference
to property rights meted out by the narrowest of Supreme Court margins
in Kelo v New London, your brethren in the House passed H.R. 4128 (the
Private Property Rights Protection Act) in 2005 by an overwhelming
majority (376-38). This action withholds federal money from state and
local governments that use powers of eminent domain to force businesses
and homeowners to give up their property for commercial uses. How can
the states and localities reasonably be punished for their takings
while the Federal Government would now seemingly sanction such takings
themselves? Is your taking justified because what you would TAKE you
would then GIVE to all citizens through a national preservation area?
I do not own any land in the affected area. I live nearby on a
suburban lot that is less than 1/6 of an acre. I speak today for those
property owners who are affected. I speak because I think sometimes
that nobody cares about them anymore, most of all the government. At
every level government agents have abandoned the defense of property
rights. There are few persons who own significant parcels of land and
those who choose anything other than perpetual preservation of the land
are often vilified without mercy. Indeed many of the affected
landowners have been characterized as people without respect for
history. I respect history but never more so than I respect the
individual rights of others. I beseech you to show the same respect and
especially not to delude yourself into thinking that you would be
acting as an agent of good by designating this land as hallowed.
Respectfully,
Stephanie L. Smith.
______
Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc.,
Stony Creek, NY, March 21, 2007.
Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy
and National Resources, Washington, DC.
Re: ``The Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act''
Dear Senator Akaka: This letter is to urge you to reject the ``The
Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act.''
Those of us who have been opposing the National Heritage Areas
since the early nineties are deeply concerned that the results of this
National Park Service program so far are exceeding the negative
predictions that we made early on. A multiple-channeled river of
federal and state moneys to land trusts and zoning and planning
agencies has brought preservation planning and zoning regulations;
acquisition of valuable land that could have been enjoyed for many uses
diverted to preservation by the federal, state and local government and
land trusts; and the implementation of numerous devices, especially new
trails, that strip away private property rights and private property
ownership.
For years we have urged that the impacts of National Heritage Areas
on private property rights be studied, but our pleas have fallen on
deaf ears. A pretense of a study was done to discredit our protests,
with a false and misleading so-called ``record'' created and worthless
conclusions reached.
From the beginning, it was crystal clear from a reading of the
preservationist literature that National Heritage Areas were for the
purpose of creating a grid of greenways for landscape preservation
throughout the areas of the United States where private land
predominated. It is strikingly true that, if viewed from the point of
view of preservationists, this perverse vision is doing well, and whole
riverine areas are being struck from human use and development, except
by the wealthy and land trusts, even though historically having enjoyed
a variety of intensive use.
Anyone with an open mind can see, certainly at this point, roughly
two decades into the serious creation of the National Heritage Areas
and similar regional greenways, that the National Park Service is
succeeding in surreptitiously implementing national zoning, a goal that
failed to pass Congress when it was bluntly presented during the
seventies.
Even our efforts to persuade Congress to give the local property
owners a fair shake against this behemoth, have been rejected. ``What
about giving personal, mailed notice to all property owners in the
National Heritage Area before Congressional Hearings and Congressional
passage of such bills?'' we asked.
``Too cumbersome,'' is the reply.
But, such notice is given before eminent domain proceedings, even,
now, in New York State, that bastion of rathertoward private property
rights. And, for eminent domain, rather than regulatory restriction
through preservation zoning, a property owner is actually compensated.
Written, mailed notice is given when raising real estate tax
assessments, also, in New York State. But the financial impact of an
incremental tax increase is quite a lot less than facing a zoning
change from, say, one-acre per house, to twenty or forty acres, or
more, per house.
Wouldn't an honorable Congress want property owners to know of a
potential ``benefit'' to their area? If, indeed, National Heritage
Areas can be presented as a benefit.
Of course not, because Congress knows that there are many threats
presented by National Heritage Areas. Secrecy is essential to keeping
the lid on potential, very reasonable opposition.
We have longed for an accounting of all funds toward each National
Heritage Area through various federal and state appropriations and
discretionary expenditures. I sought in vain for this accounting for
the Erie Canal National Heritage Area and was personally insulted in
public by officials of the National Park Service when I asked for this
information at a meeting. As all involved U. S. Senators and Members of
Congress know, the moneys flowing to National Heritage Areas come from
many agencies and through many advocacy organizations. But there has
never been a clause added to a bill to create transparency for funding
of National Heritage Areas.
You of course know all of this. Unless there is some important
change of heart in Congressional leadership, I fear the worst. Will you
choose to flaunt your power, to deny the historic prerogative of a
Member of Congress who has voiced his opposition to the Journey Through
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area though his district, to deny
your responsibility to the general citizenship and private property
owners, to play pork barrel dispenser so that you can look beneficent
in some newspaper article or on some television footage, and to buy
power from the endorsement of the radical environmental organizations,
particularly the land trusts?
Again, I'd like to urge you to reject this National Heritage Area.
Whatever your disposition, I'd like my opposition to be incorporated
into the record, if you so please, so that as I answer the requests for
assistance from private property owners from New York to Hawaii in the
face of hardship caused by preservation zoning, federal trails, eminent
domain, government and not-profit land acquisition with the resultant
impact on the tax base and local economy and culture in the many
National Heritage Areas, I can have the small personal satisfaction
that the basis of my opposition was made clear at this juncture.
Respectfully,
Carol W. LaGrasse,
President.
______
Keysville, VA, March 18, 2007.
Hon. Daniel Akaka,
U.S. Senate.
Dear Senator Akaka: As a Virginian living on US 15 I am writing to
oppose approval of S. 289, The Journey Through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area Act, that your Sub-Committee will hear this week.
Two weeks ago the House Resources Committee saw fit to strip all
property rights protections from this bill, and so effectively negated
the promises of property protection made by Representative Wolf and the
JTHG Partnership in their campaign for the project.
These protections were nominal at best and I hope you will not
follow the example of the House in giving an unelected management
entity license to acquire private lands with or without direct use of
taxpayer funds. S. 289 allows the Partnership to disburse funds to
local governments that agree with their management plan. Typically this
leads to downzoning, housing and business restrictions, and loss of
livelihood.
The people of Yuma, Arizona, learned about zoning restrictions the
hard way when the the Yuma Crossing Heritage Area came to their town in
2001. Citizen outrage led to the US House passing HR 326 only 4 years
later to restrict the area, with the report stating, ``The fear of
adverse impacts on private property rights were realized when local
government agencies began to use the immense heritage area boundary to
determine zoning restrictions.''
My fears for property rights go even farther in that the Board of
the Hallowed Ground Partnership is composed of those outspokenly
opposed to private land use by others than themselves. The Piedmont
Environmental Council, which administers the Partnership website, is
now raising money to oppose the Dominion-Allegheny power line to the
Washington-Baltimore area because it (from their website) ``would cut
through private land . . . historic sites . . . magnificent
viewsheds.'' If they would prevent energy for the metropolitan public,
what will they do to the livelihoods of farmers, small businessmen and
working people in the wide heritage area which takes in historic sites
and all the land in between?
With overwhelming citizen support legislatures all over the country
are passing ``Kelo'' reform to prevent the taking of property for
private use. Will you please ask your Committee to reject S. 289 until
it is re-drafted to prevent property from being acquired by an
unelected management Partnership with the help of federal funds.
With many thanks and best wishes,
Sincerely,
Jane Hogan.
______
South Riding, VA, March 21, 2007.
Hon. Daniel Akaka,
Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate.
Dear Chairman Akaka: I am a ten-year resident of Loudoun County
Virginia, and a lifelong northern Virginian. As a lifelong resident of
this wonderful and historic state I have a keen interest in and love of
history, and consequently hate to see history re-imaged and rewritten
for political purposes.
I believe this is what is occurring with the proposed Journey
Through Hallowed Ground, and other projects, in Loudoun County. Loudoun
is home to several sites designated National Historic Landmarks, only
one of which involves an event of historically significant action, and
that is the Ball's Bluff Battlefield and Cemetery.
All other landmarks within the county are either the retirement
homes of people who were historically significant in other venues, or
``vernacular sites'' such as the village of Waterford, in which nothing
historically significant happened (hence its remarkable preservation in
a border Civil War state).
Waterford is often touted for the status of its historic
designation as a 17th century Quaker village (that was likely/probably/
surely/definitely a station on the Underground Railroad), and as a
student of local history I always find it fascinating that this hamlet
of the predominately wealthy and second homes for the wealthy shares
equal historic status on this side of the Potomac with the North
Terminal of National Airport, the George Washington Memorial Parkway,
the Pentagon, and a condominium complex in Rosslyn.
Prominent Waterford resident and leader of the push for Hallowed
Ground Cate Magennis Wyatt usually only references the shared glory
with Monticello and Mount Vernon.
Routes 15 and 50, both designated US Highways, are primarily
historic for being ROADS, and both are under assault from
``preservationist'' NGOs whose mission is to reduce their viability in
transportation. These roads claim lives each year in my county. It
might be reasonable to suggest turning over all land use decisions in
these corridors to these self-proclaimed nanny stewards if the same
individuals who comprise the groups did not also work diligently to
block any and all improvements that might offload traffic from these
arteries.
The ``historification'' process for these two US Highways is in
high gear in Loudoun. Route 50 is now the home of three ``cavalry
battles'' that were formerly skirmishes. ``Skirmish'' is an appropriate
designation for the inevitable clashes along what was the major ROAD
between Alexandria and the Shenandoah Valley. The ``preservation''
group for Route 50 (itself the recipient of huge government grants) has
totaled all troop movement to and from major battles along this road
together to create ``the largest cavalry action of the Civil War'',
which is starting to be imaged as ``the precursor to Gettysburg''. Here
is history rewritten on behalf of the horse estate district of Loudoun
and Fauquier, at the expense of public safety along a US Highway.
The Unison Historic District, a recent designation in horse country
promoted by a retired Washington Post editor (which paper provides most
of the advertising for these efforts, disguised as news) has much in
common with Waterford; it is a ``vernacular site'' in a good state of
preservation because absolutely nothing happened there.
The original documents submitted for the creation of the Unison
district actually say that. I have a hard copy of those documents,
which seem to no longer be available online at the NPS site. However,
they state that the only activity during the Civil War was the pursuit
of a caisson through Snickers Gap from the battle of the Shenandoah.
The caisson was caught and destroyed three miles north of the hamlet of
``Union'', as it is referenced in the one document that the report
notes.
This has now been re-imaged into ``the three day battle of
Unison'', and the reason that President Lincoln fired General McLellan.
Honest Abe sure must have been attached to that particular wagon!
A particularly egregious example of the misinformation that is
being used to promote the Journey and related projects can be viewed on
our own federal government websites.
The NPS website, which links to (and apparently swallows whole)
JTHG wishful historic thinking, promotes the idea that the Monroe
Doctrine was written south of Leesburg at Mr. Monroe's Oak Hill estate.
However, if one visits http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/journey/oak.htm
the first paragraph admits that Monroe lived at Oak Hill FOLLOWING his
Presidency.
Of greater interest and concern to me is the information I learned
last summer during a tour of the fine Adams National Historical Park in
Quincy MA: John Quincy Adams, Monroe's Secretary of State, actually
wrote the Doctrine. It is credited with the President's name because it
was presented by him as policy during his tenure. The State
Department's website section Basic Readings in U.S. Democracy at http:/
/usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democracy/50.htm states in
paragraph 8 that ``in truth it should have been called the Adams
Doctrine''. The Library of Congress website at http://
www.americaslibrary.gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/aa/presidents/jqadams/
secretary_1 states in paragraph one that ``Adams suggested and outlined
the Monroe Doctrine''.
Yet on the National Park Service website all JTHG material promotes
the fantasy that this seminal document was written by James Monroe at
his retirement home in Loudoun.
I have no problem with recognizing and promoting legitimate
history. I have severe problems with my tax dollars being used to allow
private individuals with much to gain in terms of lifestyle protection
to hold sway over the private property of others, all land use
decisions, and any road improvements on these vital roads.
In closing, I ask you to research exactly what ``history'' you are
promoting, and how it is changing. There are currently 51 recognized
historic sites in Loudoun County. Go to http://www.hallowedground.org/
component/option,com_jthg/theme,region/task,view/county,Loudoun/
Itemid,l/id,56/ for a sobering map. This JTHG site (which links to the
tax-funded NPS site) shows literally hundreds of dots shadowing
Loudoun, billed uniformly as ``historic sites''.
Be aware that they may be such things as the site of the demolition
of the caisson that ``caused the firing of McLellan, thus changing the
course of the war!'' Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Barbara Munsey.
______
Edison Electric Institute,
Washington, DC, March 16, 2007.
Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
Re: Submission of written testimony for the March 20 hearing on S. 289
Dear Senator Akaka and Senator Thomas: The Edison Electric
Institute is pleased to submit the attached written statement with
regard to the Subcommittee's consideration of S. 289, a bill to
establish The Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
We appreciate the opportunity to do so and look forward to further
discussion with you regarding the concerns we have raised with respect
to the legislation.
Sincerely,
Thomas R. Kuhn,
President.
[Attachment.]
Statement of the Edison Electric Institute
The Edison Electric Institute (EEI) appreciates the opportunity to
submit written testimony regarding S. 289, a bill to establish the
Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
Edison Electric Institute (EEI) is the association of United States
shareholder-owned electric companies, international affiliates and
industry associates worldwide. Our U.S. members serve 92 percent of the
ultimate customers in the shareholder-owned segment of the industry,
and 67 percent of all electric utility ultimate customers in the
nation. They generate almost 60 percent of the electricity produced by
U.S. electric generators.
The United States has a rich and diverse cultural heritage and a
distinctive history that is important to our identity as a nation. The
National Heritage Area program is emerging as an important means for
recognizing an area where ``natural, cultural, historic, and
recreational resources combine to form a cohesive, nationally
distinctive landscape'' that can serve to remind Americans of our
diverse background and rich history. It also can contribute to the
economic vitality of an area, especially where there is a desire by
local governments to expand the opportunity for tourism and recreation.
As more areas are set for designation as national heritage areas,
the challenge for Congress is to assure that the value of a heritage
area designation can be realized without becoming an impediment to
meeting the needs of this and future generations who are in or near the
area affected by the designation, including the need for clean, safe
and reliable electric service. We believe that Congress should give
careful consideration about how to strike the balance on what would
appear to be potentially conflicting needs. Doing so will serve the
long term interest of the National Heritage Area program and will be
important to preserving public support for the program.
EEI would like to note that many of the national heritage areas
that have previously been designated have been established during a
period of relative quiet as to the siting and construction of new
infrastructure. Notwithstanding the electric utility industry's
increasingly aggressive promotion of energy efficiency, the Energy
Information Agency continues to forecast a pronounced need for new
baseload generation and to project that increased reliance on renewable
technology will expand the need for new transmission to bring
electricity from high wind areas to metropolitan areas.
The North American Electric Reliability Council and the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) have both acknowledged the need for
additional transmission throughout many areas of the nation, including
into the Eastern metropolitan corridor. In August, 2006, DOE completed
a nationwide transmission congestion study required by the Energy
Policy Act of 2005. The study identified the mid-Atlantic region of the
United States as a critically congested area, with reliability emerging
as a significant issue. The mid-Atlantic region is experiencing
significant growth that is driving demand for electricity and is an
area that is vital from a homeland security perspective. Electric
utilities have an obligation to provide reliable service to their
customers, as is evidenced by the final rule recently issued by FERC
implementing 83 mandatory reliability standards and subjecting
utilities to $1 million per day per violation fines. In order to
continue to provide reliable service and keep pace with recent and
forecasted growth, new facilities will be needed. As a result of such
national needs, the annual investment in new transmission by
shareholder owned electric utilities is now projected to be $8.4
billion annually between 2006 and 2009.
With these factors in mind, EEI has reviewed S. 289, which would
establish The Journey Through Hallowed Grounds National Heritage Area,
and is concerned that the bill does not sufficiently address the
potential for conflict between the important and valuable goals of the
heritage area designation and the need to assure that existing and long
term needs for basic and critical utility infrastructure can be met. It
is not unusual for the siting of a new transmission facility to take 5
years or considerably longer. The process has become so difficult and
contentious that often times consumers experience the costs of
transmission congestion long before a solution can be implemented. EEI
therefore recommends that--prior to the designation of this or any
other national heritage area--steps be taken to assure that the
designation, if it takes place, will be implemented in a manner
consistent with the need for vital projects. In this regard, S. 289
already acknowledges and addresses the potential for a problem to arise
with respect to road construction. Utility infrastructure should be
treated no differently.
With respect to the specific text of S. 289, EEI has particular
concerns with Sections 8 and 11, as well as Section 4 regarding the
composition of the board of trustees. Section 4 designates broad
geographic areas for inclusion in the new heritage area and limits
participation on the heritage area management entity's board of
directors to only those who are ``partners'' of the management entity.
The term partners is undefined but would appear to confine
participation to a relatively small ``club.'' These provisions become
especially sensitive, given the consultation and conformity
requirements of Section 8, which would appear to raise the bar for any
federal authorizations that might be required for a project in the
heritage area, absent clear direction that the heritage designation
shall not impede the siting, permitting and construction of basic and
critical infrastructure. As to Section 11, EEI is concerned that the
absence of a provision for utility infrastructure similar to that
provided for roads will be interpreted as constituting an express
intent by Congress to modify ``Federal, State or local government
authority to regulate land use'' within the boundaries of the heritage
area or its viewshed as it pertains to the siting of new utility
infrastructure, or the upgrading of existing infrastructure.
EEI understands and appreciates the important historic, cultural
and recreational values present in the area that would form the
boundaries of the Journey Through Hallowed Grounds National Heritage
Area. We urge the Subcommittee to recognize also the important
infrastructure needs of the mid-Atlantic region. State, local, and
federal governments--together with electric utilities and regional
planning bodies--have a responsibility to assure that the electricity
needs of the mid-Atlantic region can be met. Their authorities to
accomplish this task while respecting Heritage values need to be
preserved.
In support of our member companies, EEI would be pleased to work
with the Subcommittee and the full Committee, as well as the sponsors
of S. 289, to address the issues and concerns that we have raised
regarding S. 289.
______
Statement of Allegheny Energy, Greensburg, PA
Allegheny Energy, an investor-owned electric utility headquartered
in Greensburg, Pennsylvania, with customers in Pennsylvania, West
Virginia, Maryland and Virginia, appreciates the opportunity to submit
this statement for the record on S. 289, the ``Journey Through Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area Act.'' S. 289, introduced by Senator John
Warner of Virginia, would establish a roughly 175-mile corridor
generally following U.S. Route 15 from Adams County, Pennsylvania to
Albemarle County, Virginia, with a loop off Route 15 to include
Brunswick, Maryland and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, as the Journey
Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
Allegheny Energy applauds Senator Warner's efforts to pass
legislation designed to preserve and promote the many historically
significant landmarks within the four-state corridor defined in his
bill. We agree that an appropriately drafted heritage area bill could
yield great benefits to the area. We appreciate the opportunity to work
with Congress to ensure passage of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground
National Heritage Area Act that accomplishes these goals.
The stated purposes of the bill include ``to preserve, support,
conserve and interpret the legacy of the American history created along
the Heritage Area'' and ``to promote heritage, cultural and
recreational tourism and to develop educational and cultural programs
for visitors and the general public.'' While these goals are certainly
laudable, Allegheny Energy believes that the legislation as currently
drafted might cause unintended consequences that would impede or
complicate the development of infrastructure necessary to serve public
needs within the designated Heritage Area. Allegheny Energy and other
providers of essential services, including public utilities with the
obligation to serve customers, must maintain the ability to plan,
construct and improve infrastructure. Any legislation that interferes
with a utility's ability to do so, within existing regulatory
frameworks, could prevent the delivery of essential services.
Allegheny Energy will focus specifically on two sections of the
bill, Sections 8 and 11(c), which we believe could be interpreted in
the future in a manner that might unreasonably impede critical
infrastructure development.
Section 8--Duties of Other Federal Entities. This section of the
bill would require any federal entity conducting or supporting
activities directly affecting the Heritage Area to (1) consult with the
Secretary of the Interior and the Heritage Area's management entity
with respect to such activities. It would further require any federal
entity to (2) cooperate with the Secretary and the management entity in
carrying out their duties under the Act and (3) to the maximum extent
practicable, conduct or support such activities in a manner that the
management entity determines shall not have an adverse effect on the
Heritage Area. These directives are subject to interpretation. We're
concerned, however, that across a diverse four-state, 175-mile
corridor, these provisions could be interpreted so as to impede
critical infrastructure development by parties who oppose such
projects.
At the very least, Section 8 provides significant authority to the
management entity, the makeup of which is not well defined in the bill.
We concede that Section 8 is not an obvious or absolute deterrent to
development of essential public utility infrastructure. However, we
believe that it could create a duplicative, conflicting, and
unnecessary review process for infrastructure projects, based on poorly
defined criteria.
Recommended amendment:
Amend Section 8[3] as follows:
``Any Federal entity conducting or supporting activities
directly affecting the Heritage Area shall--[1] consult with
the Secretary and the management entity with respect to such
activities; [2] cooperate with the Secretary and the management
entity in carrying out their duties under this Act and, to the
maximum extent practicable, coordinate such activities with the
carrying out of such duties; and [3] to the maximum extent
practicable consistent with applicable law, conduct or support
such activities in a manner that minimizes [start line type]
the management entity determines shall not have an [end line
type] adverse effects on the Heritage Area.''
Section 11(c) Recognition of Authority to Control Land Use. Last
year's version of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Heritage Area
legislation (S. 2645/H.R. 5195 in the 109th Congress) stated ``Nothing
in this Act shall be construed to modify the authority of Federal,
State or local governments to regulate land use.'' We understand that
because of concerns voiced by interested parties about the potential
for the bill to impede or complicate the construction of new roads or
the improvement of existing roads, the following language was added to
this year's bill--``, including the authority of Federal, State, and
local governments to make safety improvements or increase the capacity
of existing roads or to construct new ones.'' Allegheny Energy, as a
provider of essential services with the obligation to serve within its
territory, shares a similar concern about the current language in S.
289. Therefore, we would support similar language to preserve the
existing authority of Federal, state, and local governments to regulate
utility services.
Recommended amendment:
Amend Section 11(c) as follows:
``Nothing in this Act shall be construed to modify the
authority of Federal, State, or local governments to regulate
land use, including, but not limited to, the authority of
Federal, State, and local governments and utilities to make
safety improvements or increase the capacity of existing roads
or utility facilities or to construct new roads or utility
facilities.''
Allegheny Energy supports the goal of preserving and promoting our
nation's unique historical and cultural landmarks. We welcome the
opportunity to work with the authors of the Journey Through Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area Act to ensure that passage of the bill
does not threaten the ability of essential service providers, including
public utilities, to fulfill their obligation to serve. Allegheny
Energy is required to provide safe and reliable electric service to
every customer in our service territory, which contains much of the
proposed Heritage Area.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit our statement for your
consideration.
______
The Virginia Land Rights Coalition,
McDowell, VA, March 21, 2007.
Senator Daniel K. Akaka,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, Dirksen Senate Building,
Washington, DC.
Re: S. 289, Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act
Dear Senator Akaka: I appreciate your concern on this issue and am
providing these comments for inclusion in the record of yesterday's
hearing on the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area
Act (JTHG).
The Virginia Land Rights Coalition was formed over ten years ago as
a private, not-for-profit, educational coalition of property rights
advocates working mainly in Virginia. We provide assistance to and
cooperate with other groups and individuals across the country on a
variety of property rights related issues. We do not engage in partisan
political action nor do we accept any public or corporate funding.
During the past several weeks, particularly since an amendment to
the House version of the bill stripped out all private property rights
protections with Congressman Frank Wolfs approval, numerous people from
across Virginia and from other states have been contacting us about
this legislation. Almost every person with whom we have spoken has been
very disturbed to learn of the manner in which it has been handled so
far, that is, with an almost arrogant disregard for the rights of
individual property owners within the proposed JTHG boundaries.
Many of Virginia's citizens are particularly taken aback by the
unethical--and what some are calling illegal--$1 million `earmark' to
the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Foundation, allegedly secured by
Congressman Frank Wolf. These funds apparently have been used to lobby
for the legislation. If the allegations are true, the ethical
violation/conflict of interest is very serious and casts a shadow on
the legitimacy of support for the measure.
Last year, we published a report, available at our website, on this
National Heritage Area plan in which we detailed some of the proposals
of the JTHG Foundation's executive director, Cate Magennis Wyatt. As a
result, more and more people are raising questions about the
credibility and propriety of her organization's intentions in regard to
the formation of a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT). Its purpose
would be to purchase and tie up large tracts of desirable land within
the proposed NHA, then to encumber the land with restrictive
conservation servitudes which would limit or preclude development, and
then resell the land.
Her statements imply the REIT would buy out farmers, for instance,
who for various reasons felt they needed to sell. One is left with an
uneasy but distinct impression of vultures sitting on a fence waiting
to pick the bones of a struggling or aged agricultural landowner.
Mrs. Wyatt claims the REIT would be funded by ``socially conscious
investors'' for the purpose of land ``preservation.'' We believe every
Senator and Congressman should be exploring exactly what she and her
unnamed supporters have in mind for the Piedmont of Virginia and for
portions of three additional states. She has repeatedly stated nothing
being planning would adversely affect private property rights, yet her
REIT plan does indeed adversely affect private land by restricting its
future uses, thus having the potential to negatively impact the growth
and tax bases of local governments.
While the details have not been made public, it seems the REIT
would be controlled by or would operate under the auspices of the non-
profit JTHG Foundation. I am sure you are cognizant of the implications
of such a federally-funded, non-profit organization being involved in a
scheme such as this.
Numerous individuals, organizations, municipalities and state and
federal officials were `sold' on the JTHG concept with the assurance of
protections for the rights of individual landowners. The assurances
were a major inducement of support throughout the region. Cate Wyatt,
Congressman Frank Wolf, former Senator Allen and many others made the
point. Yet every indication so far in this process, including the anti-
property rights protection amendment in the House, screams those
assurances are absolutely worthless.
Local governing bodies and the millions of people in those
jurisdictions already included should be outraged by this act of bad
faith. We hope Subcommittee members will be asking hard questions about
the real intent of the people pushing this bill; and about lack of
protections for the average working families, farmers, and for the
small business owners who do not have powerful, wealthy and well-
connected friends lobbying for and supporting their interests.
Simply stated, after careful examination of the total JTHG
proposal, it appears to us to have every hallmark of an elitist scam
where a relatively few individuals would be able to reap huge financial
gains and would secure protection for the gentry's exclusive `estates'
in the Piedmont's `hunt country'--all on the backs of the working man
and woman.
The claims of ``historic preservation'' and ``heritage tourism''
are simply ruses designed to funnel federal and state funds into the
hands of special interests. They, in turn, would use those funds to
further their own political and economic agenda. This has been exactly
the case in other National Heritage Areas, such as the Shenandoah
Valley Battlefields NHA, where favoritism, unethical conduct,
dishonesty and `pork' have made a mockery of ``heritage'' and have led
to the largest federally-funded land grab in Virginia since the
creation of the Shenandoah National Park.
Frankly, Senator Akaka, it's time to get the federal government
totally out of the National Heritage Area business. The abuses,
corruption and waste are becoming far too obvious and too widespread.
This National Park Service scheme has become a subject of cynicism and
derision and is fast becoming a political liability, especially in
Virginia and other parts of the nation where the rights of private land
owners are guarded and respected by the citizens. George Allen's
support for it was a major factor in the loss of his Senate seat.
Historic preservation and tourism should be handled privately, or
in certain, very limited cases, at the state or local government level.
If you have any questions or would like further information or
documentation, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Respectfully submitted,
L. M. Schwartz.
______
U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce,
Washington, DC, March 19, 2007.
Hon. Ken Salazar,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Sen. Salazar: On behalf of the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of
Commerce, the largest and most influential advocate for the nation's 2
million Hispanic-owned businesses, we write to lend our wholehearted
support for Congress to approve S. 500/H.R. 512, legislation that would
allow for a commission to study the establishment of a national museum
dedicated to the contributions and history of the American Hispanic
community.
As you well know, the House of Representatives passed this
legislation by voice vote in the 109th Congress, and it enjoyed broad
bipartisan support. The sponsors are Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA) and
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL). We appreciate the leadership you and
Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL) have shown in advancing this legislation in
the Senate.
We would like to point out to any Member of Congress with concerns
over the bill that this bill adopts a judicious approach to the
consideration of a national museum. It only authorizes a study
commission; no authority is provided for the establishment or
construction of such a museum. Congress would have to act once again to
do so after receiving the commission's recommendations on potential
locations, fundraising sources, available collections, and community
involvement. Many potential contributors from the private sector are
committed to ensuring that a museum dedicated to American Hispanic
history and cultural contributions is successful. The proponents of the
project expect that half of the funding for the establishment of such a
museum would come from the private sector.
There are 45 million Americans of Hispanic descent in the United
States. One of every 5th child born in the United States is Hispanic.
Yet hardly any of the exhibits in the national museums in Washington
portray Hispanic contributions to the United States. Visitors to these
museums walk away from them expecting to have a better sense of
American history and culture. Although this sense is improving due to
the National Museum of the American Indians and an upcoming National
Museum of African American History and Culture, we cannot afford to
continue letting an incomplete story be told.
Sincerely,
David C. Lizarraga,
Chairman, Board of
Directors.
Michael L. Barrera,
President and CEO.
______
William C. Velasquez Institute,
San Antonio, TX, March 19, 2007.
Hon. Ken Salazar,
Senate Hart Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Salazar: On behalf of the William C. Velasquez
Institute, I am writing to thank you for introducing the National
Museum of the American Latino Community Commission Act of 2007 (S.
500). We offer our strong and unqualified support of this legislation
which will establish a federal commission to explore the viability of
creating the ``National Museum of the American Latino'' in Washington,
DC.
The lack of a Latino-focused institution located at the National
Mall has long been of great concern to the Latino community. As you
know, some of the most significant museums in our country sideline the
National Mall between the United States Capitol and the Washington
Monument. These museums purport to reflect the history, culture, and
achievements of the people of the United States. Yet scarcely do any of
the permanent exhibits in these museums represent the American Latino
community's role in the history and culture of this country.
Even with the many challenges and opportunities facing the Latino
community, the importance of proper representation of Latinos and their
contributions in our nation's foremost cultural institution cannot be
underestimated. For example, Latino children visiting our nation's
capital have no place to point to with pride as commemorating the
Latino presence in this country. Just as troubling is that millions of
schoolchildren and families as well as tourists from all over the world
can visit Washington, DC without ever encountering a single museum,
monument, or collection that helps to educate them about this nation's
largest minority. Recent experience clearly demonstrates that the
virtual invisibility of the history, contributions, and status of the
Latino community to most of their fellow Americans is no longer
tenable.
Immediate passage of S. 500 is a critical first step to remedying
this unfortunate situation and creating an institution devoted to the
research and study of American Latino life, art, history, and culture.
Once again, I appreciate your leadership and look forward to working
with you on advancing this historic effort.
Sincerely,
Antonio Gonzalez,
President.
______
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund,
March 20, 2007.
Hon. Ken Salazar,
Senate Hart Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Salazar: On behalf of the Mexican American Legal
Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), I am writing to thank you for
introducing the National Museum of the American Latino Community
Commission Act of 2007 (S. 500). We strongly support your efforts to
establish a federal commission to explore the viability of creating the
``National Museum of the American Latino'' in Washington, D.C.
The lack of a Latino-focused museum on the National Mall is a
significant concern. Museums on the National Mall should reflect the
history, culture, and achievements of all people of the United States.
The importance of proper representation of Latinos and their
contributions in our nation's foremost cultural institutions should not
be underestimated.
Latinos and all visitors to our nation's capital should be able
visit a museum that commemorates the many valuable contributions of
Latinos in the United States. Currently, millions of schoolchildren and
families as well as tourists from all over the world can visit
Washington, D.C. without ever encountering a single museum, monument,
or collection that helps to educate them about this nation's largest
minority group. The virtual invisibility of Latino history,
contributions, and status in our nation's cultural institutions is
untenable.
Immediate passage of S. 500 is a critical first step to remedying
the current lack of Latino representation on the National Mall and to
creating an institution devoted to the research and study of American
Latino life, art, history, and culture. We commend your leadership and
look forward to working with you to advance this historic effort.
Sincerely,
John Trasvina,
President and General Counsel.
______
Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities,
Washington, DC, February 8, 2007.
Hon. Ken Salazar,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Salazar: On behalf of the Hispanic Association of
Colleges and Universities (HACU), I want to express our gratitude and
full support for your Senate Bill S. 500 to establish the ``Commission
to Study the Potential Creation of a National Museum of the American
Latino Community,'' The proposed Commission will have as its major
function the development of a plan of action for the establishment and
maintenance of a National Museum of the American Latino Community to be
located in Washington, D.C.
The proposed Latino Museum will exhibit and display the richness
and diversity of the Latino culture within the United States and the 18
Latin American countries of origin from which Latino people immigrate.
Clearly the proposed museum will provide a venue for our nation to
learn more about the many Latino groups that make up the fastest-
growing and second oldest population in the United States.
Currently the Latino community represents 14% of the U.S.
population; by 2050, it is projected to exceed 96 million, 25% of the
total U.S. population. The proposed museum will be an important
addition to the Smithsonian and other museums in Washington, D.C., that
introduce visitors to the nation's capitol and highlight the
contributions of the various peoples living and working in the U.S.
We applaud your foresight and wisdom in introducing this important
piece of legislation. We strongly endorse any efforts by Congress to
provide appropriate support to institutions through which we can all
learn about the many peoples that have made the United States one of
the most culturally rich and diverse countries in the world.
We stand ready to assist your leadership in moving S. 500 through
the Senate during this Congressional session. Please call upon us and
our membership if we can provide any information, testimony or other
support to help you win swift passage of this bill celebrating the
contributions of Hispanic Americans.
Respectfully,
Antonio R. Flores,
President and CEO.
______
Edmund G. ``Pat'' Brown Institute of Public
Affairs,
California State University, Los Angeles,
Los Angeles, CA, March 19, 2007.
Hon. Ken Salazar,
Senate Hart Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Salazar: On behalf of the Edmund G. ``Pat'' Brown
Institute of Public Affairs. we are writing to thank you for
introducing the National Museum of the American Latino Community
Commission Act of 2007 (S. 500). We offer our strong and unqualified
support of this legislation which will establish a federal commission
to explore the viability of creating the ``National Museum of the
American Latino'' in Washington, DC.
The lack of a Latino-focused institution located at the National
Mall has long been of great concern to the Latino community. As you
know. some of the most significant museums in our country sideline the
National Mall between the United States Capitol and the Washington
Monument. These museums purport to reflect the history. culture. and
achievements of the people of the United States. Yet scarcely do any of
the permanent exhibits in these museums represent the American Latino
community's role in the history and culture of this country.
Even with the many challenges and opportunities facing the Latino
community, the importance of proper representation of Latinos and their
contributions in our nation's foremost cultural institution cannot be
underestimated. For example, Latino children visiting our nation's
capital have no place to point to with pride as commemorating the
Latino presence in this country. Just as troubling is that millions of
schoolchildren and families as well as tourists from all over the world
can visit Washington. DC without ever encountering a single museum.
monument, or collection that helps to educate them about this nation's
largest minority. Recent experience clearly demonstrates that the
virtual invisibility of the history. contributions, and status of the
Latino community to most of their fellow Americans is no longer
tenable.
Immediate passage of S. 500 is a critical first step to remedying
this unfortunate situation and creating an institution devoted to the
research and study of American Latino life, art, history, and culture.
Once again, we appreciate your leadership and look forward to working
with you on advancing this historic effort.
Sincerely,
Jaime A. Regalado, Ph.D.,
Executive Director.
______
Statement of Dr. Jonathan Lorenzo Yorba, Arts & Cultural Affairs
Manager, Development Department, City of Riverside
Thank you, Senator Bingaman, Senator Akaka, and Members of the
Committee, for inviting me to submit testimony on S. 500/H.R. 512,
which would authorize the establishment of a National Commission to
study the potential creation of a new museum for the United States: The
National Museum of the American Latino.
My name is Jonathan Yorba, and I am honored to provide you with
this testimony from the perspective of several professional positions
that I hold. First and foremost, I am the Arts & Cultural Affairs
Manager in the Development Department of the City of Riverside. We are
the ``City of the Arts'' and the capital of arts and culture in the
Inland Empire of Southern California. Second, I am Adjunct Professor of
Museum Studies at John F. Kennedy University in Berkeley, California.
Third, I am Chair Emeritus of the American Association of Museums
Latino Network Professional Interest Committee, a national group of
professionals that is dedicated to fostering a greater understanding
and exchange of cross-cultural dialogue on issues pertinent to Latinos
and Latino art and culture. And last but not least, I am Chair of the
Ford Foundation Fellows Fund, which works to increase the diversity of
the nation's professoriate--whether that is in the arts, culture, and
the humanities or in the sciences.
My hope is that my brief testimony will help you consider, at a
future point, approving legislation that would establish the
Commission. In thinking carefully about my charge, I bear in mind a
lesson that continues to resonate with me personally and
professionally: The humanities are referential, dialectic and
tentative. In the same way, a National Commission would need to
carefully and thoughtfully consider a number of critical factors
related to the establishment of a National Museum of the American
Latino, by placing such factors in comparative perspective to other
regional and national cultural institutions, by engaging in considered
dialogue with a number of stakeholders, and then presenting to the
President a more richly informed perspective than what the Commission
Members began with.
I respectfully address below a few of these considerations that I
imagine the Commission would need to explore. They are: need,
viability, programs, and community reception and impact.
On the idea of whether the nation needs a new museum and, in
particular, a Latino museum, two ideas come to mind. The first is from
the report Excellence and Equity: Education and the Public Dimension of
Museums, whose principles state in general that museums have the power
to nurture an enlightened and humane citizenry that appreciates the
value of knowing about its past, is resourcefully and sensitively
engaged in the present, and is determined to shape a future in which a
variety of experiences and points of view are given voice. This speaks
to one of the unique features of the American museum: its educational
dimension.
The second is a provocative quote that I once heard ethnic studies
scholar Dr. Ronald Takaki paraphrase: ``What happens when someone with
the authority of, say, a teacher describes the world and you are not in
it? There is a moment of psychic disequilibrium, as though you looked
into a mirror and saw nothing.'' If museums are indeed at their core
educational institutions, then current residents of and visitors to
Washington, D.C. would not be able to find a single, prominent cultural
institution on the scale of a museum of the United States, whose
primary purpose is to educate visitors about the many contributions of
Latinos through permanent exhibitions and educational programs.
But were a National Museum of the American Latino to be considered,
its viability would then need to be examined. This could include such
elements as structure, site, and support. There are a number of
existing models to draw upon for examples which, again, a National
Commission would need to explore.
In reading through the Congressional Record regarding the creation
of such a museum for the United States, various findings of Congress on
the subject are presented. Therefore, through the nation's many Arts &
Cultural Affairs offices, and organizations such as the American
Association of Museums Latino Network and other related organizations,
the Commission would surely discover the tremendous variety of Latino
cultures and potential exhibitions and collections that are available
for possible display in such a National Museum of the American Latino.
The key will be to determine how such primary issues as representation
and (re)presentation--that is, the interpretive component--are taken
into consideration.
Last but not least, in the American museums' move towards community
and civic engagement, the National Commission would need to listen to
the voices of many communities--from Riverside in California to San
Antonio in Texas, and from Chicago, Illinois and beyond--to understand
how such a national museum would be received. In talking with a number
of stakeholders around the nation, the Commission Members would learn
about the existence of a number of Latino museums--whether they are
focused on a single culture or their mission is to serve pan-Latino
audiences. The Commission Members would then have to explore what
effect the establishment of a National Latino Museum would have on
these institutions.
Museums began as cabinets of curiosity, assumed a civilizing
function, asserted their educational importance, have become forums for
cultural exchange, and are determined to play a significant role in
community and civic engagement. In order to explore the factors I have
briefly raised, as well as others that will emerge, I overwhelmingly
support the establishment of a National Commission to establish a
National Museum of the American Latino. Thank you.
______
Statement of C. Allen Sachse, President/Executive Director, Delaware &
Lehigh NHC, Incorporated and the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage
Corridor Commission
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, my name
is Allen Sachse and I am Executive Director of the Delaware and Lehigh
National Heritage Corridor Commission (Commission) and President of the
Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, Incorporated (D&L)--a
501(c)(3) non-profit. Together they serve as the `managing partners' of
the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor (Corridor). I
appreciate this opportunity to submit written testimony on behalf of
the Corridor partnership and ask for your approval of S. 817.
Congress designated the Corridor as the nation's third national
heritage corridor in November 1988. The Corridor's authorizing
legislation also established the Commission to assist the state and
local agencies in preserving and interpreting the Corridor's historic,
cultural and natural resources, while fostering economic development
focused on those resources. The Management Action Plan, approved by the
Secretary of Interior in 1993, recognized the Corridor's stories and
related resources as nationally significant.
Located in eastern Pennsylvania, the Corridor passes through five
counties following an historic transportation system of overland
railroads and canals for 165 miles. The system was innovative in its
day, and continued to operate for over 100 years, becoming the nation's
longest operating canal system. From the Wyoming Valley in the north to
the port town of Bristol in the south, the system moved anthracite coal
that fueled the industrial revolution. Along the route a diversity of
industries flourished, including iron and steel, cement,
transportation, textile, slate, zinc and others.
The last two decades have seen the emergence of heritage
partnerships throughout the United States. I have observed that there
are some very common similarities among the more successful heritage
partnerships:
A strong local pride of cultural and natural heritage and
belief that the region has an important story and the
responsibility to share the story;
The region exhibits a distinctive landscape, clearly
reflecting its cultural natural heritage;
This pride of heritage is embraced by the broadest range of
community leaders and there is a consensus that the practice of
heritage development will improve the quality of life and
enhance the region's economy;
A partnership network evolves focused on a common vision and
led by creativity, dedication and the ability to reach across
traditional boundaries.
In 2005, the Commission determined the time had come to have an
independent evaluation of our accomplishments and an assessment of the
Corridor partnership network. Recognizing there were few examples of
appropriate research models to follow, the Commission engaged the
services of the Conservation Study Institute (CSI), Northeast Region of
the National Park Service to accomplish the task. The findings are
detailed in the report titled Connecting Stories, Landscapes, and
People: Exploring the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor
Partnership, which was completed and published in spring of 2006. (A
copy of the report is attached for reference and documentation.)
The CSI was asked by the Commission to address the following
specific issues:
Evaluate progress toward accomplishing the purposes of the
Corridor's authorizing legislation and the strategies set forth
in the Corridor's Management Action Plan of 1993.
Identify additional actions and work needed to protect,
enhance, and interpret the Corridor and its nationally
significant resources.
Analyze the National Park Service and Pennsylvania Heritage
Park Program (PHPP) investments to determine the leverage and
impacts of these investments.
Examine models, options, and opportunities to enhance state
and local partnerships and to continue the NPS relationship,
including the possibility of a permanent NPS designation or a
new framework to support the work of the Corridor initiative.
The CSI was not asked to provide specific recommendations regarding
the future management of the Corridor partnership network. Instead,
through rigorous research CSI was to identify the strengths, weaknesses
and opportunities for the partnership--so that the managing partners
could make informed decision regarding the future of the Corridor
partnership.
We found that of the 175 actions in the Management Action Plan, 145
(or 83%) were acted upon; almost half of these projects being Corridor
wide in scope; and 67 were determined to be ``ongoing'' activities that
will require ongoing commitment to maintain the achievements to date.
The findings make it apparent that time is important, as well as, the
careful selection and seeding of early projects. Approximately two
thirds of all projects have been initiated in the last six years. Also,
as the momentum builds, the managing partners continue to be challenged
with the task of building the capacity and sustainability of the
numerous local partners.
The partnership's ability to leverage funding and other resources
has been impressive. The study substantiated that for each dollar
provided through the National Park Service, the Corridor was able to
directly leverage almost 12 dollars from other sources. In addition, a
considerable amount of indirect funding and volunteer services were
leveraged, but not counted.
Looking to the future the CSI identified critical ingredients
necessary for sustained success of the partnership network. Foremost
among the ingredients was the NPS role, ``The anchoring state and
federal government connections provided by the DCNR and the NPS are
extremely important to the stability and sustainability of the D&L
partnership system. These two partners have played critical and
complementary roles in the Corridor partnership for a long time--the
DCNR since it was formed in 1993 and the NPS since the Corridor's
formative stages. They provide credibility and reinforce the importance
of the Corridor initiative for partners and communities. . . . Other
critical structural ingredients include secure, stable funding from
diverse sources and the ability to leverage funds, resources, and
ideas. It is important to note that the ability to leverage derives
primarily from the funding and participation of the two anchoring state
and federal partners.'' (1)
All future management options recognized the importance of a
continuing relationship with the anchoring partners--DCNR and the NPS.
However, one option addressed the possibility of moving forward without
a federally authorized management entity and dedicated federal funding.
If this were to become a reality, the study team concluded, ``this
scenario would be a significant setback for the Corridor initiative and
in all likelihood would substantially slow the progress toward
achieving its broad mandate. Without federal authorization, D&L, Inc.,
and the partnership overall could have reduced stature, clout, and
credibility with government agencies and other stakeholders. Perhaps
more importantly, the loss of dedicated federal funding would leave a
substantial void--both in direct terms for Corridor operations and
management plan implementation, and indirectly in leveraging support
from others.'' (2)
Among the various other options for the future, the managing
partners have concluded the time is appropriate to fully shift the
responsibility for managing the partnership network to the D&L, thus,
allowing the federal Commission to sunset. Such a move should provide
for additional administrative flexibility, while also expanding the
potential base of funding support.
Also, the Corridor intends to pursue opportunities to strengthen
the existing partnership with the NPS. This will include technical
assistance and other services; developing working relationships with
nearby NPS units; and possibly seeking a Congressional ``authorization
of a `special resource study' to explore potential permanent NO'S
involvement and additional designations'' for the Corridor. (3)
The Corridor managing partners have committed a substantial amount
of time and effort evaluating accomplishments and weighting options for
the future. We remain focused on the vision of a strong partnership
network preserving and sharing the nationally significant resources and
stories of the Corridor. We continue to seek out ways to empower our
partners' creativity, to support their work, to share their
accomplishments and strengthen their capacity. As an organization we
recognize that our partnership network and their accomplishments is our
measurement of success. We must serve our partners well by focusing on
the vision of the Corridor; by minimizing the bureaucracy often
associated with state and federal programs; by providing quality
programs and services; and by being creative, flexible and innovative.
Again, I appreciate the opportunity to review the work of the
Corridor and share with you what we believe will make the Corridor
stronger and more efficient. The managing partners have taken the
evaluation process very seriously and are using the findings to help
shape our future. I ask for your approval of S. 817, which will provide
the time, resources and support necessary to continue the work of the
Corridor.
Excerpts taken from:
Connecting Stories, Landscapes, and People: Exploring the Delaware
& Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Partnership--A Technical Assistance
Project for the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission
and the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, Inc.
--completed by the Conservation Study Institute, Northeast Region,
National Park Service
1. page 59
2. page 62
3. page 65
______
Statement of Daniel M. Rice, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Ohio & Erie Canalway Coalition, Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway,
Akron, Ohio
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, my name is
Daniel M. Rice. I am the President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Ohio & Erie Canalway Coalition, a regional private non-profit
organization working on the development of the Ohio & Erie National
Heritage Canalway from Cleveland to New Philadelphia, Ohio in northeast
Ohio. I appreciate the opportunity to offer testimony in support of S.
817, a bill to amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act
of 1996 to provide additional reauthorizations for certain National
Heritage Areas, and for other purposes. I want to thank Senator
Voinovich, Senator Kennedy and Senator Spector and their staffs for
their leadership in drafting the legislation with the staff of the
Subcommittee. I also wish to thank Senator Brown, Senator Casey,
Senator Graham and Senator Kerry for cosponsoring S. 817.
Mr. Chairman, now, more than ever, we need to maintain our
partnership with the National Park Service and renew our shared
commitment to the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway, and the five
National Heritage Areas listed in S. 817. National Heritage Areas
successfully promote and export the National Park Service ethic of
resource conservation without significant permanent investment. Through
the National Heritage Area designation, we are building permanent
community partnerships and developing funding diversification and
sustainability strategies for the conservation of nationally
significant resources. Most importantly, National Heritage Areas expand
the reach of the National Park Service and allows the Service to affect
the lives of ordinary citizens, in urban areas and townships, across
this country in extraordinary ways, without the burden and
responsibility of ownership and long-term maintenance by the National
Park Service.
The Ohio & Erie Canalway is a regional and national treasure that
celebrates the unique natural, historical and recreational resources
along the Ohio & Erie Canal from Cleveland to New Philadelphia in
northeast Ohio. Through the leadership of Ohio Canal Corridor, Ohio &
Erie Canalway Association and Ohio & Erie Canalway Coalition, we are
developing a 101-mile multi-use recreational trail, conserving hundreds
of acres of natural areas, preserving historic structures and
stimulating over $270,000,000 of community and economic development
activity. For every $1 of federal seed funding, we are leveraging over
$12 of private, local, and state investment.
As one of the 37 Congressionally-designated National Heritage
Areas, the Ohio & Erie Canalway is a successful example of the national
heritage area concept of the conservation and interpretation of
nationally significant resources through local management and
investment. Some examples of our resource conservation accomplishments
include:
Development of 75 miles of the multi-use recreational
Towpath Trail from Cleveland to New Philadelphia, Ohio. To
date, over $53,000,000 of private, local, state and federal
resources have been invested in this regional greenway. Over 3
million users utilized the Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail in
2006.
Implementation of four county trail and green space plans
with over 400 miles of connecting trails and 1,000 acres of
green space.
The relocation of the world headquarters of Advanced
Elastomers Systems from St. Louis, Missouri to Akron, Ohio,
along the banks of the Ohio & Erie Canal. Local developer Paul
Tell invested $25 million in a former BFGoodrich headquarters
building and generated over 300 new jobs in downtown Akron.
Over 175,000 volunteer hours on National Heritage Area
related programs and projects, and over 250,000 participants in
educational programs.
Preservation and restoration of historic canal resources
including, the Mustill House and Store, Henniger House, Zoar
Hotel, Zoar Town Hall, Jackson Township School and the Richard
Howe House.
Local developer Frank Sinito invested over $13 million
dollars in the mixed-use development, Thornburg Station, along
the banks of the Ohio & Erie Canal and Towpath Trail in
Independence, Ohio in Cuyahoga County. Through a combination of
upscale restaurants, offices and shops, Thornburg Station has
generated over 50 jobs and is a destination Trailhead along the
Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail.
Designation of the Canalway Ohio Scenic Byway as a State and
National Scenic Byway.
Extending the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad from the
Cuyahoga Valley National Park to the City of Akron and the City
of Canton.
Creation of a Communications Plan, including a comprehensive
Interpretation Plan, Signage Plan and Marketing Plan. In April
2006, we introduced a ``first-of-its-kind'' Visitors Guide for
the entire Ohio & Erie Canalway, in partnership with our
Convention & Visitors Bureaus.
Provided technical assistance and planning support for the
four main Canalway Center Visitors facilities. The first of our
facilities, the Stark County Canalway Learning Center is
scheduled to open in summer 2007.
Through the development of public/private partnerships, we are
exporting the National Park Service ethic of resource conservation to
thousands of citizens, cultivating stewardship and investment of the
unique resources and most importantly, creating a legacy for future
generations.
All of these accomplishments would not have been possible without
the designation, as a National Heritage Area, by Congress in 1996.
The National Heritage Area designation provides an organized
regional structure and forum for the promotion of resource
conservation, interpretation and development of the natural, historical
and recreational resources along the Ohio & Erie Canalway. With the
development of the Corridor Management Plan, we obtained the
investment, commitment and support from our private, local, state and
federal partners for the Ohio & Erie Canalway. These partners,
including the National Park Service, endorsed the Corridor Management
Plan and committed their resources to the completion of the 20-year
plan.
For the first three years of our designation, we completed our
resource inventories and developed the Corridor Management Plan. From
2000 to 2006, we established the identity for the Ohio & Erie Canalway
and worked on its three main regional linkages--the Towpath Trail, the
Scenic Byway and the Scenic Railroad. Through the hard work and
dedication of over 90 partners, I am proud to tell you that we are
ahead of schedule and are poised to move into the second phase of the
development of the Ohio & Erie Canalway.
According the Corridor Management Plan, approved by the Secretary
of the Interior, over the next six years, we will work on the following
items:
Complete the key regional linkages, including the Towpath
Trail, Scenic Byway and Scenic Railroad.
Expand the connecting trail network.
Market locally and regionally the entire Ohio & Erie
Canalway and its journeys.
Assist the Canalway Center project partners to complete
construction.
Continue coordination with the National Park Service for
program involvement.
Develop Corridor-wide programs and mechanisms for their
continued operations.
As you can see, Mr. Chairman, we are at a critical crossroads in
the development of the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway, and that
is why we are requesting reauthorization of this nationally significant
project. Just as much of the past accomplishments of the Ohio & Erie
Canalway have been due to the participation and involvement of the
National Park Service, much of our future success depends on the
continued partnership and participation of the National Park Service.
As the Corridor Management Plan for the Ohio & Erie Canalway states,
``Alliances and regional coalitions are critical to the long-term
success of the National Heritage Corridor as well as to the
accomplishment of short-term projects.''
Without reauthorization of the Ohio & Erie Canalway, we will be
unable to fulfill the commitments and obligations outlined in the
Corridor Management Plan. If our federal partners abandon the
partnership and their commitment to the Corridor Management Plan, the
private, local and state partners may take the same approach and
withdraw their commitment and support. If this occurs, the public/
private partnership will dissolve; the foundation for the regional
resource conservation strategy will cease to exist; and the previous
investments by private, local, state and other partners will be put at
risk. Continued federal investment is necessary to maintain the
momentum and provide the critical seed funding components of the
Corridor Management Plan.
All of the National Heritage Areas included in S. 817 were
established with Management Plans to guide the work of the National
Heritage Areas. National Heritage Areas were established as long-term
conservation tools to protect America's heritage in places where sole
federal government ownership, i.e., units of the National Park Service,
were not feasible or practicable. These National Heritage Areas need to
be reauthorized in order to fulfill their Management Plans. Selecting a
pre-determined termination, as it has been suggested, endangers what
has been created and what is planned.
S. 817 incorporates components of the National Park System Advisory
Board report titled, ``Charting a Future for National Heritage Areas.''
This ground breaking report examines in great detail, the intricate
relationship between National Heritage Areas and the National Park
Service, and the importance of embracing National Heritage Areas as
part of the family of the National Park System. One of the components
of the Advisory Board report, included in S. 817, is the establishment
of an evaluation and analysis process that evaluates the need for
continued federal involvement with the National Heritage Area. This is
an important component in defining, and embracing National Heritage
Areas as part of the National Park System.
Reauthorization of the Ohio & Erie Canalway, allows us to complete
our Corridor Management Plan, fulfill our commitments to the
communities and develop the necessary funding diversification
strategies. In essence, reauthorization enables the National Heritage
Areas identified in S. 817 to move towards a decreased dependence on
the National Park Service for long-term funding.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I believe that National Heritage Areas
are an innovative approach to resource conservation and they represent
the future direction of the National Park Service in the 21st century.
That is why I strongly urge your support for the passage of S. 817 so
we can continue our successful partnership for resource conservation
and the celebration of our nationally significant resources. Working
together, we are creating legacies for future generations.
Thank you again for the opportunity to offer testimony in support
of S. 817.