[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 155 (Friday, November 7, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11989-S11990]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BURNS:

  S. 1407. A bill to allow participation by the communities surrounding 
Yellowstone National Park in decisions affecting the park, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


       THE YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ACT

  Mr. BURNS. Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Yellowstone 
National Park Community Participation Act. This is a bill to require 
the National Park Service to work in conjunction and consult with the 
communities surrounding Yellowstone National Park in both Montana and 
Wyoming.
  The communities surrounding Yellowstone National Park, are as 
directly affected by actions within the park, as anything in the park 
itself. These communities' stability and economic viability are in a 
large part dependent on the actions within the park. Their future is 
dependent upon the actions taken both by local park management, and the 
management of the National Park Service in Washington, DC.
  The Department of the Interior and the Director of the National Park 
Service have stated that the management of the parks and the Park 
Service itself should work in a cooperative effort to make sure that 
the local communities, affected by actions in the parks, are consulted 
before action occurs. Well unfortunately this is not always the case.
  Last year in the 104th Congress, authority was given to the National 
Park Service to provide for a demonstration project as it relates to 
fees charged to enter our national park. This was done with the 
understanding that this would assist the parks in coming up with 
additional funding for the backlog of construction and maintenance in 
each individual parks. Dollars which are sorely needed in the parks and 
which it is hoped would be put to good use.
  Communities surrounding our parks, especially Yellowstone, understand 
the need for the repairs to the infrastructure in the parks. They are 
all very willing to work with park management to do what they can to 
assist in maintaining the parks and assisting management in working on 
a means for caring for the parks.
  Yet, when the Park Service asked for input and provided each 
individual park with an opportunity to use and develop a new fee 
structure for the parks not all the communities were asked or informed 
of the increases in the fees. This was the case in Yellowstone National 
Park.
  While the management of Grand Teton, just a few miles south of 
Yellowstone, worked with and notified the communities affected by the 
future fee changes. Providing these communities an opportunity to 
prepare for the effects these changes would have on their business and 
economic vitality.
  An announcement was made by the management in Yellowstone to address 
the upcoming changes without very much, if any interaction with the 
surrounding communities. This then affected their ability to provide 
the information necessary to people who use their communities as a 
staging site for their visit to Yellowstone. It put them in the 
unenviable position of either subjecting their businesses to a loss, 
due to the fact that they either accepted the additional cost for 
operating their park tours, or charging the difference to those 
consumers who were there on the spur of the moment. This is not what 
any of us would like to do to our customers, nor anything that the 
Government should require of taxpayers who are either living at the 
gates of our national parks or visiting them for recreation.
  Had a consultation occurred in this instance, it is possible that 
relations between the communities and the park management could have 
developed to find a way to work through this process. However no 
consultation occurred and as a result, relations between park 
management and the local communities have been strained.
  Another telling facet of this dissolution of relations between local 
communities and the park management, is

[[Page S11990]]

what occurred just last winter. Due to what the park management called 
reduced funding, they changed the winter opening dates for the 
entrances to Yellowstone. This had a dramatic effect on the economic 
stability of the communities which are located at the entrances to 
Yellowstone.
  The basis for business in those communities at the entrances to 
Yellowstone, is not just the traffic they see during the summer, but 
rests in large part on winter tourism in and around Yellowstone. As 
beautiful and magnificent, as Yellowstone can be during the summer, the 
visual experiences a person can enjoy during the winter are multiplied. 
Many of the businesses in these local communities look upon winter 
tourism as a means of keeping them in business for the next year.
  When any change is announced, without suitable notification or 
adequate consultation, these communities suffer greatly. Last winter 
visitors arrived at Yellowstone with the understanding that the park 
would be open, to allow them to experience the beauty of the Nation's 
``Crown Jewel'' as it lay under a winter coating of snow. However, when 
they arrived at the entrance to the park, they were greeted not with a 
welcome, but with a barrier which kept them from enjoying their park.
  This delayed opening had a devastating effect on the communities at 
the gateways to Yellowstone. Many tours were canceled and groups which 
had planned future winter events in the area, have since canceled those 
plans. Although it was not true, many of these tour and business groups 
were of the understanding that Yellowstone was closed to winter travel 
and activity.
  The language in this bill would assure stability for the future of 
those communities located at the gateways to Yellowstone National Park. 
The legislation would provide for an opening and closing date, which 
the people of the community of West Yellowstone, MT, could count on in 
planning for tour groups and the hiring of personnel to make the 
visitors' stays a memorable experience.
  I have attempted to work with the Park Service and the local 
communities to see if some means of consultation could be worked out 
among all the parties involved. Last January a series of meetings 
occurred, between members of the local community the Park Service and 
my staff, to discuss the problems which the local communities were 
facing due to the actions taken last winter. As a result of these 
meetings, it was hoped that the management of the park would be more 
receptive to the working with the local communities in the development 
of changes affecting their lives. So far this has not been the case.
  I am offering this legislation today, in an attempt to open dialog to 
find suitable arrangements for consultation between the park and the 
gateway communities of Yellowstone National Park. I will request a 
hearing on this matter to open that dialog and to seek a means by which 
all parties are comfortable in a process of exchange and consultation 
on the future of the business related to Yellowstone. I look forward to 
working with the Park Service and the local communities to find a means 
of keeping Yellowstone a treasure for all America and the world to 
enjoy, during all seasons of the year.
  Thank you, Madam President.
                                 ______