[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 125 (Tuesday, October 10, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Page S10137]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        ACCESS TO NATIONAL PARKS

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I want to express my views on a more 
parochial issue--not entirely parochial, as a matter of fact; it has to 
do with access to national parks. I have served over the last 6 years 
as chairman of the National Parks Subcommittee. We have been very 
involved with where we are going and have hopefully some idea where we 
want to be with parks.
  Everybody recognizes the value of the national assets. It is one of 
the neat things. In the United States, we have 379 national parks that 
work in conjunction, of course, with State parks and local parks. The 
reasons for having a park, it seems to me, are, No. 1, to preserve the 
resource, of course, and, No. 2, to allow that resource to be enjoyed 
by the people who own it --the taxpayers.
  We have a little difficulty from time to time with both of those 
things. We passed a bill, Parks 2020, last year which puts more 
emphasis on inventory, taking care of the resources. We need to put 
more effort into that, and we are working on that.
  We have had a lot of talk about infrastructure in some of the larger 
parks and the things that need to be done, the money that needs to be 
spent for preserving the resource, such as on sewers. In the last 
budget that came from this administration, there was more money for 
acquisition of new parks than there was for maintenance of the parks we 
have. To me that is a problem.
  If you want to enjoy it, you have to have access. One of the things 
that is controversial in our part of the world--in Yellowstone, Teton 
Park--which is equally true in New England and other places, is access 
for snow machines. For 3 years we have had an ongoing study in 
Yellowstone Park prompted by a lawsuit. Today they are coming out with 
their report on the environmental study and their recommendations as to 
what we should do. It is out for public comment for 30 days. I am going 
to ask that the 30 days be extended to 60 so people have an opportunity 
to review it.
  There are difficulties with snow machines. There is difficulty with 
the noise. There is some difficulty with the pollution. The problem is 
the Park Service for 20 years has not sought to manage that growing 
industry and has simply avoided doing anything with it. Then suddenly 
there is a lawsuit filed against them, and there are some things that 
need to be changed. Instead of seeking to manage it, instead of seeking 
to find some remedies, instead of seeking to make some changes, they 
simply want to eliminate it. That is a mistake. There are ways the Park 
Service can manage those things. They can separate cross-country skiers 
from snowmobilers. They can limit the number if there are too many. But 
the EPA and the Park Service have never looked toward establishing 
standards for these machines.
  I have visited a number of times with the manufacturers, and they are 
willing to change those machines. They did some experimental work in 
Jackson Hole, WY, last year and had machines that are only as loud as 
normal voices. Of course, no one is going to invest in those unless 
they have some idea that there are standards, and if they comply with 
them, they will be useful.
  I hope we can change the idea of either nothing or no management and 
give some time to move toward the adjustments that can be made, toward 
some management in the parks so people can continue to enjoy them.
  I see my friend from Kansas. I yield to the Senator from Kansas.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up 
to 20 minutes as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________