    [House Hearing, 115 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

               IMPROVING THE VISITOR EXPERIENCE AT NATIONAL PARKS

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                     THE INTERIOR, ENERGY, AND ENVIRONMENT

                                     OF THE

                             COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
                             AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 APRIL 5, 2017

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 115-7

                                   __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
                          http://www.house.gov/reform

                                      ______

                             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    25-748 PDF                     WASHINGTON : 2017
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
      Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
             DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
                              Washington, DC 20402-0001

                  Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

                         Jason Chaffetz, Utah, Chairman
    John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee       Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland,
    Darrell E. Issa, California              Ranking Minority Member
    Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Carolyn B. Maloney, New York
    Mark Sanford, South Carolina         Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
    Justin Amash, Michigan                   Columbia
    Paul A. Gosar, Arizona               Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri
    Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee          Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
    Trey Gowdy, South Carolina           Jim Cooper, Tennessee
    Blake Farenthold, Texas              Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
    Virginia Foxx, North Carolina        Robin L. Kelly, Illinois
    Thomas Massie, Kentucky              Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan
    Mark Meadows, North Carolina         Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey
    Ron DeSantis, Florida                Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands
    Dennis A. Ross, Florida              Val Butler Demings, Florida
    Mark Walker, North Carolina          Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
    Rod Blum, Iowa                       Jamie Raskin, Maryland
    Jody B. Hice, Georgia                Peter Welch, Vermont
    Steve Russell, Oklahoma              Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania
    Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Mark DeSaulnier, California
    Will Hurd, Texas                     John Sarbanes, Maryland
    Gary J. Palmer, Alabama
    James Comer, Kentucky
    Paul Mitchell, Michigan

                       Jonathan Skladany, Staff Director
                      Rebecca Edgar, Deputy Staff Director
                        William McKenna, General Counsel
                             Chris Esparza, Counsel
                             Kiley Bidelman, Clerk
                     David Rapallo, Minority Staff Director

                                     ------

              Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy and Environment

                       Blake Farenthold, Texas, Chairman
    Paul A. Gosar, Arizona, Vice Chair   Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands
    Dennis Ross, Florida                 Jamie Raskin, Maryland
    Gary J. Palmer, Alabama              (Vacancy)
    James Comer, Kentucky                (Vacancy)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hearing held on April 5, 2017....................................     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Mr. Glenn Casamassa, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest
      System, U.S. Forest Service, US. Department of Agriculture
        Oral Statement...............................................     4
        Written Statement............................................     7
    Ms. Linda Lanterman, Director of the Division of State Parks,
      State of Kansas
        Oral Statement...............................................    12
        Written Statement............................................    14
    Mr. Chris Edmonston, Vice President of Government Affairs,
      BoatU.S.
        Oral Statement...............................................    17
        Written Statement............................................    19
    Mr. Rick Cables, Vice President of Natural Resources and
      Conservation, Vail Resorts
        Oral Statement...............................................    23
        Written Statement............................................    25

                                    APPENDIX

    Opening Statement of Subcommittee Chairman Blake Farenthold......    42

               IMPROVING THE VISITOR EXPERIENCE AT NATIONAL PARKS

                                  ----------

                            Wednesday, April 5, 2017

                      House of Representatives,
              Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy and
                                            Environment
                  Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
                                                       Washington, D.C.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:18 p.m., in
    Room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Blake Farenthold
    [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Farenthold, Ross, Palmer,
    Plaskett, and Raskin.
        Mr. Farenthold. The Subcommittee on the Interior, Energy,
    and the Environment will come to order. Without objection, the
    chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time.
        Good afternoon. Today, the Subcommittee on the Interior,
    Energy, and Environment will be examining the Concessions
    Program at the National Park Service, or NPS.
        Last year, the country celebrated the 100th anniversary of
    the NPS. Now that the festivities of that milestone are over,
    it's time to get back to work improving the Park Service.
        The NPS is the custodian of some of our greatest national
    treasures. To that end, we must make sure that it's performing
    well and living up to this responsibility.
        In July of 2015, shortly before the centennial
    celebrations, this subcommittee held a hearing that began the
    Oversight and Government Reform Committee's involvement in
    these issues. In her opening statement, my predecessor as
    chair, Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, quoted Stephen Mather, the
    first director of the National Park Service. I believe the
    quotation is worthy of repeating today. He said: ``Scenery is a
    hollow enjoyment to the tourist who sets out in the morning
    after an indigestible breakfast and a fitful night's sleep on
    an impossible bed.''
        This is a particularly astute observation. To be able to
    enjoy our Nation's stunningly beautiful parks, beaches,
    monuments, wildlife, and other features, the people need food,
    lodging, and other appropriate amenities.
        To this end, since the first national parks were created in
    the late 19th century, there has been a history of private
    companies working on these parks to provide services to
    visitors. Unfortunately, the amenities at many parks have aged
    poorly and many have not been maintained properly.
        The National Park Service must modernize. It has failed to
    meet the challenge or the changing demands of its visitors.
    Millennials and modern families want tech services, like WiFi
    and internet access. Cell service is not only an amenity, it's
    an important safety consideration.
        When NPS does not keep up, our parks lose visitors to other
    tourism opportunities, such as privately run theme parks and
    other attractions. Certainly, we don't need to turn our parks
    into Disneyland, but we do need to keep up with what 21st
    century Americans want when vacationing.
        I want to see my friends' vacation pictures at our parks on
    Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, and I want to know I can get
    help in the event of an emergency by dialing 911.
        By providing up-to-date technology, contemporary food and
    beverage service, and a choice between rustic, comfortable, and
    modern places to stay and unique visitor experiences, our parks
    become more attractive. This is where the role of
    concessionaires is critical. They help provide these services
    while providing much-needed funding to the Park Service.
        In our last hearing on the subject, we heard of several
    instances of bureaucratic red tape getting in the way. For
    instance, one park had a 1,629-page-long bid request outline
    that cost one concessionaire 2,500 company management hours and
    more than $90,000 to fill out. As another example, we heard
    about parks with campgrounds that sell out, but are only open
    for part of the year due to bureaucratic requirements.
        Fortunately, we have sources of ideas for ways to update
    the NPS. For instance, in partnering with ski areas, the Forest
    Service has found a way for people to use the land it leases
    year round. Furthermore, good ideas have come from various
    State park systems, such as Kansas' matching of park fees with
    demand.
        I hope to hear more about these ideas and more from our
    panel today. I very much look forward to hearing suggestions on
    a way forward from here and hopeful the committee can help
    update our National Park System.
        I would now like to recognize our ranking member, Ms.
    Plaskett, for her opening statement.
        Ms. Plaskett. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you all for being here this afternoon to talk
    about such an important part of the American experience, our
    national parks.
        I appreciate the National Park Service's protection and
    care of our Nation's cherished natural and cultural resources
    and for the important educational and recreational
    opportunities they provide for all Americans. The National Park
    Service plays an important economic and recreational role in my
    district, the U.S. Virgin Islands. We have national parks on
    all three of our major islands. Well, technically, St. Croix,
    Hassel Island, which is off of St. Thomas, and, of course, St.
    John.
        On the island of St. John, the Virgin Islands National Park
    covers approximately 60 percent of the island and includes the
    Cinnamon Bay Resort and Campground located inside of the
    National Park Service, as well as Caneel Bay, one of the most
    wonderful resorts as well.
        Under a new concession agreement reached last fall between
    the National Park Service and Redwood Company, the campgrounds
    are currently undergoing extensive renovations that include
    eliminating bare sites and installing Eco-Tents. The original
    plan called for 64 Eco-Tents, but after public opposition, that
    was reduced to 55.
        My office has received several complaints regarding the
    relocation of bare site camping and the high cost and quality
    of the new Eco-Tents. This is an example of how improvements of
    park sites can lessen and not improve on the visitor experience
    at the national parks.
        After the Park Service held its centennial celebration in
    2017, we must ensure that the very best services are provided
    for the 280 million visitors that our national parks attract
    each year, as well as the local employment that it can provide
    through the vendors and through those individuals who work at
    those park sites and the relationship they have with the
    communities that are located adjacent or sometimes even within
    the parks themselves.
        Vendors play a key role in providing visitor services. They
    offer a wide range of recreational and retail services, while
    helping to generate more than $1.2 billion annually in revenue
    for the Federal Government, as well as the revenues that our
    local economies are able to receive by visitors and individuals
    who come to the parks and pass through the areas in which the
    parks are located. Vendors also employ more than 25,000 workers
    and drive economic growth in the communities surrounding the
    parks.
        I understand that the public is demanding more recreational
    and cultural opportunities during their visits to the national
    parks. I also understand that vendors are ready, willing, and
    able to provide these additional visitor services, but they've
    encountered some barriers. We want to understand what these are
    and how we here in Congress can be supportive of the vendors as
    well as the parks.
        Today, we will examine some of the challenges faced by the
    National Park Service and vendors in providing the best visitor
    experiences to our parks. Those challenges include a rigid
    contracting process, contracts which create negative cash flow
    for vendors, and the Park Service's failure to meet public
    demand for more services.
        Although the Park Service has made great improvements in
    its contracting process in recent years, more work can and
    should be done. We can always work to improve the contracting
    process with great cooperation between government and industry.
        I look forward to hearing from the witnesses as we explore
    possible solutions that can drive progress in these issues.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you.
        I will hold the record open for 5 legislative days for any
    members who would like to submit a written statement.
        We will now recognize our panel of witnesses. I am pleased
    to welcome Mr. Glenn Casamassa. You're associate deputy chief
    of the National Forest System for the United States Forest
    Service and the United States Department of Agriculture.
        We have Ms. Linda Lanterman, director of the Division of
    State Parks for the State of Kansas.
        Welcome.
        Mr. Chris Edmonston, the vice president of government
    affairs for BoatU.S. And Mr. Rick Cables, the vice president of
    natural resources and conservation at Vail Resorts.
        Welcome to you all.
        Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn
    before they testify. Would you please rise and raise your right
    hand?
        Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are
    about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
    but the truth, so help you God?
        Thank you. Please be seated.
        And you can let the record reflect that all witnesses
    answered in the affirmative.
        In order to allow time for questions and discussions, we'd
    appreciate it if you'd limit your testimony to 5 minutes. Your
    entire written statements will be made part of the record.
    There ought to be a timer in front of you. The green light will
    be on for the first 4 minutes. The yellow light, much like a
    traffic light, means speed up--I'm just kidding there--and the
    red light means your time is up.
        So we'll start first with Mr. Casamassa.

                           WITNESS STATEMENTS

                      STATEMENT OF GLENN CASAMASSA

        Mr. Casamassa. Good afternoon, Chairman Farenthold, Ranking
    Member Plaskett, and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate
    the opportunity to appear before you today regarding the Forest
    Service recreation program.
        We are proud of the work we accomplish with our private
    industry partners to provide the best possible breadth of
    choice and the highest quality outdoor recreation opportunities
    for the American people. Today, our national forests hosts 149
    million visits. Since 2009, estimates of our recreation
    visitation has been rising by an average of about 1 million
    visits per year.
        Through their direct and ripple spending, recreationists
    who visit the national forests contribute billions to the U.S.
    economy and support thousands of jobs, the vast majority of
    which are in gateway and rural communities. Outdoor recreation
    supports significant employment opportunities and offers a
    tremendous economic stimulus for local municipalities.
        In addition to the continued popularity of traditional
    activities, like recreational sport shooting, hunting and
    fishing, we are seeing growth in ziplining and snowboarding,
    off-highway vehicle use, rafting trips, or guided backcountry
    trips.
        The combination of public demand and tremendous economic
    contributions makes outdoor recreation one of the more
    challenging programs in public land management, pushing the
    Forest Service to seek innovative approaches in balancing the
    growing demand for recreation and economic interest for further
    development with landscape conservation for generations to
    come.
        We administer recreation special uses that enable thousands
    of private sector professionals to lead a range of activities
    on national forests and grasslands. For many Americans, these
    activities represent their first introduction to their national
    forests and grasslands, and the outfitters and guides they use
    are small businesses, providing jobs and income.
        For example, approximately 4 million people visit the
    Coconino National Forest in Arizona, which surrounds the city
    of Sedona. Several outfitter and guide permits are issued to
    locally owned and operated businesses. One specific example of
    an outstanding working relationship we have with an outfitter
    is the Pink Jeep Tours. This small business provides about 100
    percent of the maintenance to the Broken Arrow Road, one of the
    most popular 4x4 routes in the area.
        The national forests also host more than 120 alpine ski
    areas. These facilities are privately owned and constructed by
    our permittee partners, who provide recreation opportunities
    for proposing and developing sites in response to industry
    trends and public needs.
        We are working with the ski areas to go beyond snow season
    by enhancing year-round recreation, providing more choices for
    visitors, and creating additional jobs around resort
    communities.
        This is a win-win situation. More people will be able to
    find jobs in communities around ski areas, and more Americans
    will have access to year-round opportunities in these beautiful
    and convenient settings.
        Recognizing the critical role that private enterprise plays
    in outdoor recreation on our national forests and grasslands,
    we're also working to expand how we service businesses and the
    public by improving the permitting process.
        Special uses remains one of the primary economic drivers of
    the agency, in terms of both receipts to the government and
    national and local economic activity. Modernizing the special
    use program creates a more predictable business environment and
    a more efficient workforce.
        The Forest Service is working to eliminate redundant
    process, simplify forms, improve internal and external
    communication, improve financial accountability through
    simplification of fees, and streamlining the environmental
    analysis process for use of a continuing nature. Presently, our
    line officers have discretion to waive the special use
    authorization requirements for proposed uses on a case-by-case
    basis. Forest Service guidance stresses that officers shall
    allow activities that will have little impact on the land to
    move forward without undue process.
        Also, the Forest Service has implemented an agreement with
    GSA's 18F for development of an ePermitting System. We will
    soon offer a more convenient way for the public to apply for
    special use authorizations via an online application process.
        A national Campground and Day-Use Concession Review was
    conducted in early fiscal year 2017. The goal of the review was
    to enhance public-private ventures and agency business
    practices that promote true partnerships and identify
    shortfalls in agency policy and procedures.
        The Forest Service remains committed to serving the
    American public through commonsense cooperation with
    businesses, who drive the enormous diversity of recreation
    opportunities on American national forests.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'd be happy to
    answer any questions you may have.
        [Prepared statement of Mr. Casamassa follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Farenthold. Your timing is phenomenal. I assume you
    practiced that. Thank you.
        Ms. Lanterman, you are up for 5 minutes.

                      STATEMENT OF LINDA LANTERMAN

        Ms. Lanterman. Thank you, Chairman Farenthold, Ranking
    Member Plaskett, and members of the subcommittee. I am here
    representing the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, the
    Division of State Parks. We manage 26 State parks, with an
    annual budget of $12 million.
        I am also the vice president of the National Association of
    State Park Directors. It's an organization dedicated to helping
    State park systems effectively manage and administer their
    State park systems.
        I am here, though, today to discuss Kansas State parks, as
    well as the national State park landscape and how State park
    systems work to improve outdoor recreational opportunities for
    their constituents and conserve natural resources, through
    partnerships, innovations, and reducing barriers.
        Nationwide, there are over 10,000 State park areas. They
    are comprised of over 18 million acres, and we receive more
    than 790 million visits annually.
        Those State parklands may be owned outright by States or
    consist of lands leased from Federal agencies. As a result,
    Federal partnerships are crucial to the success of State park
    systems, as well as to the success of Federal agencies which
    make their lands available for public use.
        Of special importance to State park systems are Federal
    programs, such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the
    National Recreational Trails Grant, and the AmeriCorps program.
    State parks around the country collectively serve the public
    with more than 37,000 miles of trails, over 241,000 campsites,
    over 9,400 cabins and cottages, and 161 lodges. Operating
    expenditures account for $2.5 billion, with less than half of
    those expenditures coming from the general funds of the States.
    Nineteen thousand full-time and 29,000 part-time or seasonal
    staffs work tirelessly to provide topnotch memorable visitor
    experiences.
        Nationally, it's been estimated there may be as much as $95
    billion in unfunded capital improvements and maintenance needed
    just to sustain the State park systems. In Kansas, our capital
    improvement and maintenance needs are over $25 million.
        The Kansas State Parks Division and the Department do not
    receive any State general funds. Instead, our State parks are
    funded primarily from revenues we receive from our State park
    vehicle permits, camping permits, and cabin rentals. In
    addition, we also receive a portion of the Department's
    allocation of the Economic Development Incentive Fund, which is
    funded by proceeds from the Kansas Lottery.
        However, there are many State park systems that benefit
    from dedicated funding sources. The Land and Water Conservation
    Fund, the Recreational Trails Grant program, and the AmeriCorps
    program have always been an important and efficient matching
    fund for Kansas State parks. We rely heavily on our
    partnerships with our friends groups, our volunteers, and other
    park supporters that provide financial, labor, and advocacy
    support.
        With the support of Governor Brownback, we have implemented
    several measures to meet challenges of operating a primarily
    fee-based parks program. For example, we aggressively market
    our State park systems within Kansas, nationally and
    internationally. We hold staff positions open at times to save
    staffing costs. We've been successful in matching permit fees
    with demand.
        Additionally, we have special events to attract and
    encourage our customers' ongoing loyalty. Some of those events
    include outdoor music concerts, live bands, guided nature
    hikes, Halloween events, Black Friday with the hashtag
    #OPTOUTSIDE, the Governor's Campouts and, of course, our First
    Day Hike.
        To be competitive in today's leisure market, it's important
    that we address the changing needs and expectations of our
    customers. Some of the land use policies of the Federal
    agencies need to be modernized so our parks can compete for our
    Nation's young family free time.
        Among the immediate changes we recommend concerning our
    Federal landlord partners are more flexible lease agreements,
    more streamlined processing of concessionaire contracts, an
    ability for our Department to retain all net proceeds arising
    from hosting of special events designed to attract our
    customers.
        Some of the Corps properties, we have both State park and
    Corps parks. Efficiencies could be improved if these two levels
    of government were not duplicating their services, such as
    camping.
        Kansas State parks and those in other States attract a
    diverse clientele who enjoy traveling in their home State and
    visiting parks in other States. Staying at a State park is
    truly a form of recreation that's important on a national
    level.
        From my testimony today, I hope you really see the
    important role Federal partnerships are and how the Federal
    funding in our State parks and how important the partnership
    with State parks are nationally to an efficient public land
    strategy.
        I too will accept any questions. Thank you.
        [Prepared statement of Ms. Lanterman follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you.
        Mr. Edmonston, you are up for 5.

                      STATEMENT OF CHRIS EDMONSTON

        Mr. Edmonston. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Plaskett, and
    members of the committee, I am pleased to be here representing
    the 550,000 members of the Boat Owners Association of the
    United States, BoatU.S. We appreciate the chance to share how
    access, public-private partnerships, and technology can improve
    the visitor experience in national parks and other public
    lands.
        Reflecting on the visitor experience in national parks
    provides an opportunity to consider how important access to the
    water really is. Boaters need facilities to launch and
    retrieve, dock, moor, and anchor their boats. Providing such
    access is vital to keeping boating available to the American
    public.
        The thoughtful oversight of this committee and Congress
    should focus the National Park Service and other Federal
    agencies on providing such access to our public lands and
    waters. In our experience, how well a particular national park
    unit or other Federal entity provides access is highly
    variable. In some cases, they welcome boats, which might be the
    only way to reach some of the more remote areas. Other park
    units do not always welcome all boats and often make management
    decisions that diminish public access.
        The controversies at Key Biscayne National Park surrounding
    fishing closures, adequate moorings, bans on certain types of
    boats, and expansive nonmotorized zones is of grave concern to
    us. In our view, a shift in management philosophy to one that
    welcomes all users, not just the young and fit, is long
    overdue.
        Our current system of waterway access provides a good
    example of the wide range of partnerships that can benefit all
    of us. For example, many boating access programs are funded by
    the Sportfish Restoration Boating Trust Fund. This user pay-
    everyone benefits fund is supported primarily through taxes on
    boaters and anglers. The system is widely supported by the
    boating and angling communities. Boaters are not looking for a
    free ride and are quite willing to pay reasonable fees,
    provided they can count on the facilities being available and
    well-managed.
        We recognize there is a reconsideration of Federal budget
    priorities currently underway. We respectfully suggest that
    investment in facilities that provide access to public lands
    and waters should remain a priority for this Congress.
        Each year, over 80 million Americans go boating, with a
    large portion doing so on federally managed waters. We ask the
    help of this Congress to be sure that recreational boaters, as
    well as other outdoor recreation participants, aren't ignored
    as tough budget decisions are made.
        During another time of budget crunches several decades ago,
    the Coast Guard shifted its mission focus and ended its
    longtime policy of aiding recreational boaters stranded on
    public waters. While they do continue to come to the aid of
    those in life-threatening conditions, other situations, such as
    a malfunctioning engine or running out of fuel, are no longer a
    time where the Coast Guard will provide assistance.
        In response to this policy change, BoatU.S. created a
    nationwide towing dispatch service, which today has more than
    600 towboats across the country and is available at a very
    reasonable cost. The program is effective, it's popular, and it
    allows the Coast Guard to focus on emergency missions. In fact,
    there is a large industry of on-water service providers which
    works closely with State and Federal agencies to ensure that
    recreational boaters receive prompt and professional assistance
    on the water, assistance which over the past few decades has
    saved the Coast Guard untold millions of dollars.
        Another area where we see opportunity for Federal agencies
    to provide better service involves the application of new
    technology. Information on boating and other outdoor
    opportunities are often difficult to discover on many
    government or individual park websites.
        Such resources should be welcoming to visitors and provide
    ways to discover all the activities available. This requires a
    new outlook on the part of Federal managers, one with a view to
    enhance the visitor experience as part of their core mission.
        We also see technology as a way to enhance access while
    protecting resources. Providing greater connectivity will open
    up management options, such as allowing faster updates to
    resource information, better reporting of available activities,
    such as fishing or camping, and the purchase of passes and
    permits needed for recreating. BoatU.S. supports the
    appropriate use of technology to improve visitor experiences on
    all public lands and waters.
        In closing, recreational boaters and anglers have an
    abiding interest in the protection of our waterways, as do
    other recreational users of public lands. We wish to see these
    special places protected. We also need to be able to reach
    these special places in many different ways. Providing
    appropriate access is crucial to the long-term political and
    financial support for national parks and other public lands.
        We appreciate the opportunity to bring the voice of boaters
    before the subcommittee. Thank you.
        [Prepared statement of Mr. Edmonston follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you, Mr. Edmonston.
        Mr. Cables, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

                        STATEMENT OF RICK CABLES

        Mr. Cables. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Plaskett, and
    members of the committee, thank you for the invitation today.
        Vail Resorts operates 13 premier resorts worldwide. We have
    resorts in Canada, in British Columbia, and Australia. The
    others are all in the United States. We have some of the most
    iconic and beautiful landscapes that we operate on in the
    Nation, and we've learned a thing or two about managing people
    and providing a guest experience that I want to share today.
        Six of our largest resorts are on the national forest, and
    we have a 40-year permit with the United States Forest Service
    that lays out exactly how we can operate. It's a classic
    example of a public-private partnership, where the Federal
    Government provides the land and our business provides the
    business acumen, the capital, and the operational capability to
    deliver wonderful experiences for the American public and our
    guests. We provide a fee to the Treasury for leasing the land,
    which is substantial.
        It wasn't long ago that ski areas were just thought of as
    for the winter recreation. You do it on snow. And so for the
    bulk of the winter, that's when ski areas operated. In the
    summer, they didn't. In the fall, they didn't. The private land
    ski areas started changing that by offering summertime
    activities on the ski resorts and including things like hiking
    trails, mountain biking trails and mountain coasters, ziplines,
    and those sorts of activities.
        And so about a decade ago, we approached our partner, the
    United States Forest Service, with the idea: Can we do that on
    our public land resorts? Can we actually open it up for four
    seasons? The response was: Yes, and it's probably better if you
    get some enabling legislation that helps do that.
        So we approached Congress, and in 2011 the Ski Area
    Recreation Opportunity Enhancement Act was passed unanimously
    in both Houses. And I think that's a testament that it just
    made common sense that you would use this land for four
    seasons. We have the infrastructure in place, parking lots,
    restaurants. They were sitting idle half of the year. It helps
    us round out the resort communities' economies, because we
    provide jobs all year round now, and for our own employees. So
    the benefits, both from a guest experience and from an economic
    benefit, are significant.
        Our company proposed the first projects under the new law
    in 2014, after the regulations were promulgated. We started at
    Vail in Colorado and Heavenly at Lake Tahoe. We proposed
    ziplines, coasters, canopy tours, mountain biking trails, and a
    whole host of fun things to do. Our concept is learn through
    play. So we want people to learn a little bit about the natural
    environment and also have fun on these mountains.
        The results are spectacular. If any of you ever want to
    come out and enjoy a zipline at 11,000 feet, you should do it.
    The public loves it. The economic benefits are coming. Our
    guests are up in the summer versus what we had before, clearly.
    And we've got a partnership with the Nature Conservancy to take
    a percentage of our revenue and put it into conservation
    projects.
        We've worked with the Forest Service because we want
    uniformed rangers on the mountain. The public loves it when
    they're on the mountain and there's a ranger there that can
    talk to them about the environment, the wildlife, the forest,
    water, whatever questions they may have. So we're really
    excited about that. It's working.
        The challenges we have are with funding and the way the
    Forest Service budget's fire suppression has eaten into the
    other programs, like recreation. So the Forest Service is
    having a hard time keeping up with us.
        We have a proposal to solve that. If we could get
    legislation that allows us to keep the fees we pay local, then
    we can help fund the Forest Service and they can be a better
    partner and a healthier partner. Senators Gardner and Wyden on
    the Senate side are proposing this legislation and working with
    us on it, and we'd like to work with Members of Congress here.
        And also, obviously, there's process streamlining that
    would help. We think there's ways to streamline some of the
    National Environmental Policy Act analysis associated with
    really common projects that we do.
        So, again, I'll close by saying, if you can imagine a
    family, maybe a single parent from Denver, that gets up to Vail
    that's really never spent time in the mountain, getting on a
    chair lift in the fall with the Aspen turning, getting up on
    the mountain and doing a mountain bike trip or riding a
    mountain coaster, and just hooking those people on the outdoors
    and recreation, that's what we're trying to do, have fun and
    get people out and do it in a way that we haven't done in the
    past.
        So our partners with the Forest Service have been fabulous
    to work with. I can't say enough about that relationship.
        Thank you, and look forward to your questions.
        [Prepared statement of Mr. Cables follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you very much.
        And we'll start with Mr. Ross for 5 minutes of questioning.
        Mr. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And I'm particularly grateful to our witnesses today who've
    testified. I feel like I've been to most of the locations that
    you all have discussed today.
        To give you an example, I grew up traveling to national
    parks with my grandfather in a 1960 Airstream, which I have now
    restored and own. We went to the '62 World's Fair staying at
    national parks--that shows you how old I am--'64 World's Fair,
    '67 World's Fair. But what we did is we stayed at the national
    parks because they were not only convenient, but they had full
    facilities and the commercial market didn't.
        And today, the RV industry is growing phenomenally. In
    fact, I own three RVs, one of which is an antique, one of which
    I let my boys use, and one of which my wife and I use when we
    travel around the country. By the time my boys were 12, they
    had been to all continental 48 States and predominantly staying
    in national parks throughout this country.
        And what we've seen, though, unfortunately, is that the
    national park campgrounds have declined from nearly 4.5 million
    overnights in the 1980s to less than 2 million overnight stays
    in 2013. There's an opportunity being missed there, not only by
    the national parks but by the citizens of the United States
    because they don't have a chance to enjoy those phenomenal
    resources, those natural resources that are out there.
        So my questions are, first of all, Ms. Lanterman, I love
    what you guys are doing with public-private partnerships and I
    think that you've hit on something there, but it's the capital
    requirements that are necessary. And if Kansas is like Florida
    and like any other State, those resources, those dollar
    resources are so limited. Are there opportunities for bond
    issues to be funded by revenues from concessionaires or things
    of that nature? Is Kansas looking into creative ways to finance
    these capital improvements?
        Ms. Lanterman. We actually do. That's a great question. We
    look at bond issues. And we've also looked at our foundation
    for support on putting in our cabin program. Actually, our
    foundation helped do that. And then our Governor, through the
    Economic Development Fund, paid those off.
        And so now we are reaping the benefits of those revenues.
    And today, as I sit here, we are still looking at a bond issue
    for another development in one of our bigger parks.
        So you have to look at all sources. You can't look at the
    State anymore just to fund.
        Mr. Ross. You can't. And, in fact, these RVs today have
    become so--I mean, really, you know, they're your home once you
    take the wheels off. But they're large and the facilities in
    our national parks just can't accommodate them, so we have to
    put in the infrastructure necessary to allow this.
        And then I guess my question is, Mr. Cables, you've talked
    about the four seasons in Vail and how you've been able to make
    use of a resource. What other ways can we utilize our national
    parks and creative financial resources to bring them up to
    speed so that they can accommodate today's recreational
    vehicles?
        Mr. Cables. Thank you, Congressman Ross.
        All I will say is that we found a way with our partner, our
    Federal partner, the United States Forest Service, to look at
    creative ways to expand recreational opportunities, and where
    there's a will, there's a way.
        The Forest Service came to us when we started working on
    these opportunities, and we proposed some things that they
    didn't believe were natural resource-based or went a little bit
    over the line, and we talked it through and worked it through
    and came up with an agreement on the things that really did
    make sense that we thought our guests would love and that the
    Forest Service----
        Mr. Ross. And it's been a good relationship.
        Mr. Cables. Yes. It's the relationship, it's the quality of
    the land managers that we deal with locally, that we've been
    able to work this through. So I think that's really the secret.
        Mr. Ross. And, Mr. Casamassa, if I might, how has your
    relationship been with the National Park Service, I mean, in
    terms of wanting to be able to expand the infrastructure in
    these national parks?
        Mr. Casamassa. I think at times, in my experience, working
    with park superintendents around different parts of the
    country, we've looked at ways to provide opportunities for one
    thing on the park, like, for example, a large parking lot. And
    then, in addition to that, we would then do something as it
    relates to camping on the National Forest System.
        So it was providing a full suite of amenities. I think we
    have the opportunity to expand that, to find a full suite of
    opportunities for people, but it doesn't necessarily have to be
    on one land administration or another. It could be done
    together.
        Mr. Ross. And just to bring in an aside here since I've got
    limited time here, working with the RV industry, working with
    the Outdoor Recreation Industry Roundtable, is that something
    that you're taking the initiative to do? I think that would be
    very fundamental to getting it done in a very all-encompassing
    way.
        Mr. Casamassa. I think right now to ensure that we can make
    our facilities contemporary and connect people to their public
    lands is paramount.
        Mr. Ross. I agree.
        Mr. Casamassa. And that any way that we can to set up
    roundtable discussions to understand fully what the needs are
    and try----
        Mr. Ross. And with the industry.
        Mr. Casamassa. With industry. And try to marry up the
    public lands with those kinds of needs is something that we'd
    be certainly interested in.
        Mr. Ross. Thank you.
        And I see my time is expired. I yield back.
        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you very much, Mr. Ross.
        Ms. Plaskett, I'll recognize you for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Plaskett. Thank you very much.
        The National Park Service is entering its second century,
    and I want to explore ways that the agency can better utilize
    the vendors that operate with them.
        Mr. Edmonston and Mr. Cables, I understand from your
    testimony here today that the path to improving visitor
    experiences in our national parks starts with an effective
    public-private partnership. Would you say that that is correct?
        Mr. Edmonston. Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
        One of the things I noticed, and I happened to look at the
    Park Service websites for your Virgin Islands, and I noticed
    several things related to vendors.
        First off, there is a 35-page guide to becoming a vendor in
    the Park Service, and I noticed that it hadn't been updated
    since 2001. When I read it, it seemed more of a way for the
    Park Service to limit liability for the parks rather than a way
    to encourage entrepreneurs to come into the park system.
        I also looked at ways people could utilize parks, their
    visit to the parks, like, let's say, they wanted to get married
    and they wanted a nice scenic overlook or a pavilion to get
    married in. The only way to do that would be to print out a
    form, mail it in with a nonrefundable deposit, and hope that
    the date and the facility you wanted were available. There was
    no way to look to see online even what facilities were
    available for renting. So if you didn't have local knowledge,
    you couldn't do it.
        There are many ways, simple ways, better use of technology,
    that could help visitor experience and also could make it
    easier for vendors to come in and use the parks.
        Ms. Plaskett. So just to go forward with that before I get
    to Mr. Cables, when you talked about, you know, in your
    testimony you talked about technology, and prior to the passage
    of the Centennial Act, the business community had raised
    several concerns with it. And within that, I know that there
    was some discussion about technology. You talked about the
    manual that is probably a PDF----
        Mr. Edmonston. Yes.
        Ms. Plaskett. --that is not interactive, not easy to
    utilize. What are some of the other new technology that we
    might--we know what's wrong, but what could the parks be using
    that would facilitate----
        Mr. Edmonston. Oh, goodness, I will defer to Mr. Cables on
    that since he uses that on a daily basis in his business.
        Mr. Cables. Thank you, Ranking Member Plaskett.
        First, real quick on the public-private partnership. Yeah,
    that has to start, be where it starts. The government, at least
    in my experience in the government, isn't the best at
    entrepreneurial, some entrepreneurial thinking, marketing, some
    of those kind of things. I think the private sector does that
    better. The private sector is an expert on the land management,
    the forest and wildlife and water science and the
    considerations associated with that. So if we're both playing
    to our strengths in a partnership, then it can really work, and
    I think that's been our experience.
        I would say on the technology, again, my expertise is more
    in natural resources, but we do have a program that we
    initiated a couple years ago called EpicMix where there's an
    app and people can track their vertical fee in a given day, and
    you can actually find out which lift lines are shorter than
    others. And it gives young people particularly but a lot of
    people the opportunity to use their phones and to use it in a
    way that's kind of fun and figure out where to meet and to do
    things along those lines.
        So we find that tying that kind of technology in with an
    outdoor experience can actually work and not diminish the
    outdoor experience, but actually enhance it.
        So, yes, we have some really talented people in our company
    that focus on technology and how it makes the guest experience
    better.
        Ms. Plaskett. Okay. Thank you.
        I think what I'm really trying to understand is, if we want
    to have these relationships and we want to work together, I
    don't want us to just be beating up on the park, but really
    offering them some constructive support, because we know that
    they have their budgetary constraints. They are a government
    agency. And so it's not their orientation to think this way.
        And how do we in Congress facilitate a way that you as
    vendors and you as entrepreneurs and being in this recreation
    and resort business can facilitate more people coming to the
    park. Because, listen, in the Virgin Islands, on St. John, we
    want to maintain the park. And we realize how important it is
    to our local economy, because when you get to St. John, you've
    got to come over on the ferry. That's a ferry fee for us.
    You're going to eat in a local restaurant. You're going to do
    other things. And that supports our economy. So how do we make
    that experience such that people are going to keep coming back?
        So if you all have any other thoughts, I'd just leave it up
    to--I see you, Ms. Lanterman, shaking your head. If you have
    any other thoughts or, otherwise, I'll yield back after that.
        Ms. Lanterman. What I would say is we are government, those
    of us that are in government, and we can change. And there are
    companies out there that can help us change, with iPhone apps
    and with a reservation system. And we are moving towards that.
        And sometimes it's a little bit slower, but I've found the
    best way for you learning those changes is when you go out and
    use it yourself. And so when we travel and when I travel on my
    own, I use those systems and I come back and I think: Oh, my
    gosh, we've got to do this.
        And so that's how you learn. And it's a process, but I
    believe it can be done.
        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you.
        And I want to follow up on a little bit of the testimony in
    my 5 minutes here.
        Mr. Casamassa, you talked about getting special use permits
    and the like. Can you give me an example of what some of the
    special uses that people use in the forest or parks?
        Mr. Casamassa. Sure. There's, say, recreational events. In
    some respects we have, say, a bike race that crosses over five
    different national forests in an entire State over a week's
    period of time. Lots of activity associated with an event of
    that scale. And that's one of the kinds of permits that we
    issue for those type of recreational events.
        We have outfitter and guide permits for whitewater rafting,
    hunting, fishing, mountain bike tours, OHVs, and the like. So
    there's a full suite of things that we look at when it comes to
    providing recreational opportunities to meet the demands and
    needs of people.
        Mr. Farenthold. So how do you balance the mission of
    preserving the wilderness with making it available to the
    public? This has got to be one of the biggest challenges. I've
    sensed in some--Park Service more so than Forest Service--but
    this is a great national park but for the damn tourists. I
    mean, how do you reconcile that?
        Mr. Casamassa. And that's a very delicate balance. And one
    of the ways that--I think about looking at opportunities, a
    full suite of opportunities. And maybe people only understand
    or are provided the information about one place that provides
    that opportunity. If you would then provide them a full suite
    of, well, are you looking for a hike? Are you looking for a
    lake? Are you looking for that kind of setting? You know, this
    is a very crowded place here, maybe we can direct you to
    another location.
        So I think it is a lot about information. It's a lot about
    balancing the maintenance and enhancement of that landscape for
    generations to come with the use.
        And I think there's an interest from the Forest Service
    about understanding a bit more about the carrying capacity, and
    perhaps we should be thinking through this and maybe looking at
    letting the users provide that carrying capacity for an area if
    we feel like that the area could be maintained, that there
    isn't any damage to the environment around it.
        So it's just about looking at it maybe in a different way
    that expands, I think, our opportunities.
        Mr. Farenthold. Ms. Lanterman, you work in the State parks,
    and I've found that States are a little bit more responsive to
    the public than we are here in Washington, D.C. Did you want to
    kind of weigh in on that balance as well?
        Ms. Lanterman. You know, we have to be. We are in the
    business of making sure that our customers have a place to go
    and that it's maintained. And we do our best, truly, to make
    sure that we have the loyalty of our constituent groups. And,
    frankly, they'll tell us if we do not.
        And so, along with what my colleague here said, it's an
    education process. We have to educate our users. You don't love
    and protect what you don't know about. And so that's what our
    process is, is try to educate our users when they come in so
    that we can keep it for the preservation for years to come.
        Mr. Farenthold. Mr. Cables, you look like you wanted to
    weigh in as well.
        Mr. Cables. Yes. I would say there are other mechanisms to
    do that. For example, for operating our ski mountains in the
    summer on national forests, we've zoned the mountain. So at the
    top of, like, the gondola, in an area that's already developed,
    there's hard infrastructure, the environment's been altered,
    that's where we'll put certain things like climbing walls,
    ropes courses, and some of the heavier infrastructure. And then
    as you get further from that location, you'll get into what we
    call zones two, three, four, and five, where there may just be
    the only appropriate use is a hiking trail.
        So it's a spectrum of concentrated recreation, which some
    people like. They don't want to get too far off, away from
    sight of a building. But yet others may want to do a mountain
    bike trip or a hiking trip and get really back away from
    everything. And there's a master development plan that we have
    to submit to the Forest Service that actually creates a zoning,
    and that's how we deal with that.
        Mr. Farenthold. Great.
        I've got some more questions, but I've only got about 10
    seconds left. So I'll save them to the second round of
    questioning and let Mr. Raskin go for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Raskin. Thank you for your courtesy, Mr. Chairman.
        Let's see. Mr. Casamassa, I was interested in something
    that you said just a moment ago where you were saying that
    people might have a cluster of different interests. They might
    want to do a hike. They might want to do camping near a Civil
    War battlefield. Is it possible on your website for me to put
    in all of my different requests and then for you to send me
    back what your advice is for where I might go?
        Mr. Casamassa. Well, I think there are opportunities to do
    that. We continue to enhance. Rec.gov, I think, is a multi-
    agency website that provides, I think, a relatively large suite
    of opportunities for people to be informed, to maybe do some
    trip planning, to get some kind of reservations. Certainly that
    is unto itself a good start. Tailoring some of the more I'd say
    specific trips is something that we continue to work on.
        One thing that I'd like to add to that is that we recognize
    that providing information and education in more of a digital
    platform, really, what I call it is I think it adds capacity
    without adding any people.
        Mr. Raskin. Got you. Let me just follow up with you for 1
    second. I think you're the right person to direct this to, but
    others can comment if they need to.
        To what extent are you dealing with the effects of climate
    change and severe weather events, and to what extent is that
    having an effect on the visitor experience in national parks,
    in terms of floods, forest fires, hurricanes, severe events?
        Mr. Casamassa. And a good question. I think one of the
    things that I've experienced prior to coming to the
    headquarters here in our Nation's Capital is I've had to manage
    lands that had a significant number of forest fires,
    catastrophic events, that really impacted the landscape as a
    whole.
        In addition to that, I've seen some pretty significant
    flooding across a wide landscape that actually really wiped out
    all the roads and access, bridges, and some of our developed
    sites.
        Mr. Raskin. Where is that?
        Mr. Casamassa. In Colorado. And so that, you know, I've
    seen some significant weather events that we've had to adjust
    our thinking around how best to site areas and be able to
    adjust and mitigate to the best of our ability some weather
    events.
        Mr. Raskin. Thank you.
        I'm interested also in the question of accessibility. One
    of the things I've always loved about the national parks is, at
    least the ones I go to, people just go and they're not even
    paying. There might be some, I think, where people pay, but
    it's kept at a modest level. And I was moved by what Mr. Cables
    said about doing public-private partnerships that allow for
    different things to go on.
        But to what extent is that done with an eye towards
    accessibility for the whole population that would otherwise be
    able to come and hike there? Does it suddenly become off limits
    to large numbers of people because it's so expensive? Just
    curious what you might have to say about that.
        Mr. Cables. Thank you for the question.
        The resorts that operate on National Forest System lands,
    they're public lands. So uses can occur on those lands as long
    as they don't materially interfere with our permitted use. So,
    for example, people come up all the time in the summer and hike
    that don't pay a fee, don't get a ticket, don't engage in our
    own facilities or activities.
        Mr. Raskin. You're not displacing them.
        Mr. Cables. No, no, we're not, no.
        Mr. Raskin. But how much does it cost to do your kinds of
    things?
        Mr. Cables. Again, we've got one summer under our belt and
    we've got a suite of products for summer. The high end to do
    everything is like $80- to $90-dollar range.
        Mr. Raskin. For the day?
        Mr. Cables. Yes, for a day. And then we have a package, I
    think we call it the Little Explorer, which is around $50 for
    kids. And you can also do things a la carte, where you don't
    get the whole package, but you can go to a specific ride or do
    something along those lines separately. And we're still
    experimenting. Like I said, we've got one season under our
    belt.
        Mr. Raskin. That's great. Okay.
        And my final question is about education. Is there some
    formal effort underway to make connections with schools in
    local areas with the national parks?
        Mr. Casamassa. I would say that we, ``we'' the Forest
    Service, we invest heavily in student conservation service,
    resource assistant programs, and programs that connect youth to
    the outdoors. There are several applications that we use for
    children to be able to explore specific locations.
        So I think what we're trying to do is invest in youth to
    grow the next, I'd say, generation of conservationists in the
    country.
        Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you very much.
        And I guess I'm back up for my second round of questions
    rather quickly.
        So I want to talk, Mr. Cables, a little bit about something
    that I've heard from various national parks and some forest
    concessionaires, and that's end of contract time.
        You've entered into I'm assuming a relatively long-term
    contract with the amount of capital investments that you have
    put in. But as you near the end of that term, say you've had
    a--I'm picking a number out of the air--say you've had a 30- or
    40-year lease, in the last 5 to 7 years there's not a lot of
    incentive for you to put a lot of money in maintenance and
    upgrades because most likely your whole deal will go out for
    bids again.
        Is there any middle ground or way that we can structure
    this to where we don't end up having a huge capital
    expenditure, putting in nice facilities up front, with no
    incentives other than contractual requirements to upgrade or
    improve the facilities?
        Twenty or 30 years down the road, we're not going to think
    of the amenities that people are going to want and are going to
    be necessary to keep your facility competitive, and you have no
    real financial incentive to do those upgrades as you're in the
    waning years of your contract.
        Mr. Cables. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would say that it sounds like you're describing an
    assumption or a set of assumptions based on the park's
    concession program versus ours. We have a 40-year term special
    use permit, which is a huge factor because it allows us to
    invest and amortize that investment over a long period of time,
    A.
        B, we own the facilities, so they're our facilities, and
    the equipment, the lifts, whatever, they're our facilities.
        And thirdly, at the end of the term of that permit, we're
    able to get a reissued permit, without competition, as long as
    we're managing and meeting the requirements of the permit. So
    we don't go through a competitive bidding process.
        Mr. Farenthold. Does anybody want to address that issue?
        Do you face that in Kansas?
        Ms. Lanterman. We actually do. And what we've done is we've
    enacted a list of what our concessionaires do. Are they in
    compliance? Have they always been in compliance? And then we
    allow them to renew.
        Our problem is, though, if we are on Corps or Bureau
    property, we cannot extend it beyond our lease. And that is if
    we have only a 25-year lease with them, we can't extend it
    longer than that.
        Mr. Farenthold. Okay, great.
        All right, so you talked about some of the funding issues
    and such. Is there ever a point where we can be closer to self-
    sustaining? I mean, a lot of this, especially on the Federal
    level, is financed through appropriations. Obviously a ski
    resort has a much better chance of being self-sufficient than
    some wilderness park somewhere. How close to self-sufficient
    can we get?
        Ms. Lanterman. Well, I guess what I would say is the
    challenges we have is we have to--or at least we feel like we
    need to make sure our customers, all customers can come, so all
    clientele. Can they afford it? Can that single mom come? And we
    try to make our fees that way.
        Additionally, you have that weather issue. Most State park
    systems receive most of their revenue May through September.
    And so if you have weather issues in there, then you have a
    challenge of your finances and your cash flow coming in. And so
    I always believe that may be something that plays a part in
    this.
        Mr. Farenthold. Anybody else want to weigh in there?
        Mr. Edmonston. Yes, sir, I would like to. I mentioned in my
    testimony the Sportfish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund, and
    that is a system that collects fees based on the sales of
    boats, motors, fishing equipment. It collects some revenues
    from the gasoline tax.
        And it really goes a long way towards paying for a lot of
    the infrastructure that boaters and people who recreate on
    water use. It pays for fish stocking in most of the rivers and
    lakes around the country. It is a great partnership.
        And I would say that there is an appetite for more access,
    better access, better services. And if vendors were allowed to
    come in and provide those, maybe not at every park, maybe not
    at every piece of Federal land, but you would see an increase
    in revenue and you would be able to better manage your
    properties.
        And getting back to the leases, we have seen on
    particularly Corps of Engineers facilities, issues with marina
    managers losing their lease. We saw that up in New York after
    Hurricane Isabel, I believe, a few years ago, where a marina
    was taken out by the storm, and they were not allowed to
    rebuild, and we had to really have an act of Congress to get
    them to get their lease back. So that is an ongoing issue, yes.
        Mr. Farenthold. All right. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Plaskett, do you have some more questions?
        Ms. Plaskett. Yes, I did want to ask just a question to Mr.
    Casamassa, just along the lines of discussion about the growing
    public demand for outdoor recreation, discussing some of the
    best practices and initiatives you have identified in your
    testimony towards improving the visitor experience.
        How many partnerships are there between the Forest Service
    and small businesses utilizing recreational special use
    permits, if you are aware?
        Mr. Casamassa. Today, I want to say close to 25,000
    permits, recreational permits. I think that that is the number
    that we have for recreational opportunities. But it is in the
    thousands, and it is partnerships that we have for a full suite
    of activities.
        Ms. Plaskett. And how long does it take to apply and then
    receive the permit on average or typically?
        Mr. Casamassa. It depends on, I would say, what the
    proposal would be and how significant it would be, what the
    scope and scale of it. I would say for individual rec events it
    should not take but several weeks to get from a proposal into
    the actual issuance of a permit on something that is that
    relatively routine and minor, some of the activities now that
    we are saying that you don't really need a permit. Other
    activities that have some infrastructure considerations and
    some longer terms for the permit will take longer than that.
        Ms. Plaskett. What is the longest that you have seen
    permits take?
        Mr. Casamassa. That is a good question. From my own
    personal experience, I'd say over a year.
        Ms. Plaskett. Okay. And how much do the permits cost?
        Mr. Casamassa. It depends on what actually is being
    authorized.
        Ms. Plaskett. Okay. And then could you tell us a little bit
    about the rollout of ePermit system?
        Mr. Casamassa. Sure. One of the things that we've done,
    just to back up a bit, is that we have what we called a
    recreational diagnostic. It was both a public- and a private-
    facing assessment of how well we were doing.
        We had five different things that came out of our
    diagnostic, and one of them was is that we wanted to connect
    youth to--we thought it would be advantageous to connect youth
    to the outdoors. We wanted to celebrate our iconic places. We
    wanted to ensure that there was appropriate access, both roads
    and trails. We wanted to increase our reach when it came to the
    digital strategy as another one. And we wanted to streamline
    our special use permitting process because we recognized that
    that was a bottleneck.
        And so in conjunction with the streamlining, we recognized
    that some of the activities could be done online. So we are
    making considerable investments right now not only in the back
    of the house with our data systems that connect to the front of
    the house, which would be our ePermitting issue. And we are
    looking at--right now we have a platform that we are working
    with AT&F on that could be--it could be used for a wide array
    of permits. Right now our launches are around rec special uses
    in specific areas, as well as Christmas tree permits.
        And so those are the things we are starting, but, again,
    that's one of the--for me, I am advocating that we invest in
    the technology to add capacity without increasing the number of
    people that we have.
        Ms. Plaskett. Thank you. I really appreciate the work that
    you all are doing, and I am particularly grateful that you talk
    about the youth program and working with young people. I think
    that that is really important. On the island of St. Croix we
    have had a really outstanding summer youth program with the
    National Park Service, which has been really instrumental in a
    lot of kids, high school students and others, really getting
    comfortable and having a great community awareness for the Park
    Service that is there in their communities.
        Personally, one of my sons ended up going to this program
    in the summer, being really involved in the restoration that
    was happening with our fort, went on to college to get his
    degree in architecture, and is in the outdoors doing this kind
    of work. So it has really been important to us.
        And I am also grateful to the regional director of the
    National Park Service who has committed to the Virgin Islands
    to reinvigorate the program on the Island of St. John, where
    that relationship is even more important because the proximity
    that the park and the community and the young people really be
    closely involved.
        So thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to
    ask these questions.
        Mr. Farenthold. Thank you.
        And they've just called votes, which means we've got about
    5 minutes before we need to walk over to make it. So I just
    have one quick question for you guys. And if you all had some
    advice to give to the Park Service and/or concessionaires about
    what we need to do, what would it would be? And we will just go
    down the line with Mr. Casamassa.
        Mr. Casamassa. I would say, and I think that the--I don't
    know everything that the Park Service is doing, but I know that
    they are on a trajectory to look at or assess their concession
    program, and I think that that is something that we did. There
    are some good findings out of that. And to me, I would like to
    think that we would continue on with looking at ways to lever
    public-private partnerships through that assessment.
        Mr. Farenthold. Great.
        Ms. Lanterman.
        Ms. Lanterman. And I would suggest that the National Park
    Service, as they have in the past, just continue to work with
    America's State parks to help solve some of these issues too
    that we face too with them.
        Mr. Farenthold. Great.
        Mr. Edmonston.
        Mr. Edmonston. I would say it is maybe a slight change of
    focus in having the focus placed on how to enhance the visitor
    experience and how to work better with industry and other
    outside partners.
        Mr. Farenthold. Make it better for those doggone tourists.
        Mr. Cables.
        Mr. Cables. Talk and listen to your constituencies and have
    an open mind.
        Mr. Farenthold. All right. Well, listen, I want to thank
    our witness panel for being here. I think we got some great
    input. We do have votes coming up, so we will wrap this up if
    you guys are good with that.
        And I will ask unanimous consent that all members have 5
    legislative days to submit questions for the record. And
    without objection, that's so ordered.
        Did you have anything else, Mr. Raskin?
        All right. Well, then, with no further business, without
    objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:23 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                    APPENDIX

                                  ----------

                   Material Submitted for the Hearing Record

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]