[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 134 (Tuesday, October 24, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H10709-H10717]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        GREAT SAND DUNES NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE ACT OF 2000

  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 2547) to provide for the establishment of the Great 
Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve and the Baca National Wildlife 
Refuge in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 2547

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Great Sand Dunes National 
     Park and Preserve Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Great Sand Dunes National Monument in the State of 
     Colorado was established by Presidential proclamation in 1932 
     to preserve Federal land containing spectacular and unique 
     sand dunes and additional features of scenic, scientific, and 
     educational interest for the benefit and enjoyment of future 
     generations;
       (2) the Great Sand Dunes, together with the associated sand 
     sheet and adjacent wetland and upland, contain a variety of 
     rare ecological, geological, paleontological, archaeological, 
     scenic, historical, and wildlife components, which--
       (A) include the unique pulse flow characteristics of Sand 
     Creek and Medano Creek that are integral to the existence of 
     the dunes system;
       (B) interact to sustain the unique Great Sand Dunes system 
     beyond the boundaries of the existing National Monument;
       (C) are enhanced by the serenity and rural western setting 
     of the area; and
       (D) comprise a setting of irreplaceable national 
     significance;
       (3) the Great Sand Dunes and adjacent land within the Great 
     Sand Dunes National Monument--
       (A) provide extensive opportunities for educational 
     activities, ecological research, and recreational activities; 
     and
       (B) are publicly used for hiking, camping, and fishing, and 
     for wilderness value (including solitude);
       (4) other public and private land adjacent to the Great 
     Sand Dunes National Monument--
       (A) offers additional unique geological, hydrological, 
     paleontological, scenic, scientific, educational, wildlife, 
     and recreational resources; and
       (B) contributes to the protection of--
       (i) the sand sheet associated with the dune mass;
       (ii) the surface and ground water systems that are 
     necessary to the preservation of the dunes and the adjacent 
     wetland; and
       (iii) the wildlife, viewshed, and scenic qualities of the 
     Great Sand Dunes National Monument;
       (5) some of the private land described in paragraph (4) 
     contains important portions of the sand dune mass, the 
     associated sand sheet, and unique alpine environments, which 
     would be threatened by future development pressures;
       (6) the designation of a Great Sand Dunes National Park, 
     which would encompass the existing Great Sand Dunes National 
     Monument and additional land, would provide--
       (A) greater long-term protection of the geological, 
     hydrological, paleontological, scenic, scientific, 
     educational, wildlife, and recreational resources of the area 
     (including the sand sheet associated with the dune mass and 
     the ground water system on which the sand dune and wetland 
     systems depend); and
       (B) expanded visitor use opportunities;
       (7) land in and adjacent to the Great Sand Dunes National 
     Monument is--
       (A) recognized for the culturally diverse nature of the 
     historical settlement of the area;
       (B) recognized for offering natural, ecological, wildlife, 
     cultural, scenic, paleontological, wilderness, and 
     recreational resources; and
       (C) recognized as being a fragile and irreplaceable 
     ecological system that could be destroyed if not carefully 
     protected; and
       (8) preservation of this diversity of resources would 
     ensure the perpetuation of the entire ecosystem for the 
     enjoyment of future generations.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Advisory council.--The term ``Advisory Council'' means 
     the Great Sand Dunes National Park Advisory Council 
     established under section 8(a).
       (2) Luis maria baca grant no. 4.--The term ``Luis Maria 
     Baca Grant No. 4'' means those lands as described in the 
     patent dated February 20, 1900, from the United States to the

[[Page H10710]]

     heirs of Luis Maria Baca recorded in book 86, page 20, of the 
     records of the Clerk and Recorder of Saguache County, 
     Colorado.
       (3) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Great 
     Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve'', numbered 140/80,032 
     and dated September 19, 2000.
       (4) National monument.--The term ``national monument'' 
     means the Great Sand Dunes National Monument, including lands 
     added to the monument pursuant to this Act.
       (5) National park.--The term ``national park'' means the 
     Great Sand Dunes National Park established in section 4.
       (6) National wildlife refuge.--The term ``wildlife refuge'' 
     means the Baca National Wildlife Refuge established in 
     section 6.
       (7) Preserve.--The term ``preserve'' means the Great Sand 
     Dunes National Preserve established in section 5.
       (8) Resources.--The term ``resources'' means the resources 
     described in section 2.
       (9) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (10) Uses.--The term ``uses'' means the uses described in 
     section 2.

     SEC. 4. GREAT SAND DUNES NATIONAL PARK, COLORADO.

       (a) Establishment.--When the Secretary determines that 
     sufficient land having a sufficient diversity of resources 
     has been acquired to warrant designation of the land as a 
     national park, the Secretary shall establish the Great Sand 
     Dunes National Park in the State of Colorado, as generally 
     depicted on the map, as a unit of the National Park System. 
     Such establishment shall be effective upon publication of a 
     notice of the Secretary's determination in the Federal 
     Register.
       (b) Availability of Map.--The map shall be on file and 
     available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of 
     the National Park Service.
       (c) Notification.--Until the date on which the national 
     park is established, the Secretary shall annually notify the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives 
     of--
       (1) the estimate of the Secretary of the lands necessary to 
     achieve a sufficient diversity of resources to warrant 
     designation of the national park; and
       (2) the progress of the Secretary in acquiring the 
     necessary lands.
       (d) Abolishment of National Monument.--(1) On the date of 
     establishment of the national park pursuant to subsection 
     (a), the Great Sand Dunes National Monument shall be 
     abolished, and any funds made available for the purposes of 
     the national monument shall be available for the purposes of 
     the national park.
       (2) Any reference in any law (other than this Act), 
     regulation, document, record, map, or other paper of the 
     United States to ``Great Sand Dunes National Monument'' shall 
     be considered a reference to ``Great Sand Dunes National 
     Park''.
       (e) Transfer of Jurisdiction.--Administrative jurisdiction 
     is transferred to the National Park Service over any land 
     under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior 
     that--
       (1) is depicted on the map as being within the boundaries 
     of the national park or the preserve; and
       (2) is not under the administrative jurisdiction of the 
     National Park Service on the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. GREAT SAND DUNES NATIONAL PRESERVE, COLORADO.

       (a) Establishment of Great Sand Dunes National Preserve.--
     (1) There is hereby established the Great Sand Dunes National 
     Preserve in the State of Colorado, as generally depicted on 
     the map, as a unit of the National Park System.
       (2) Administrative jurisdiction of lands and interests 
     therein administered by the Secretary of Agriculture within 
     the boundaries of the preserve is transferred to the 
     Secretary of the Interior, to be administered as part of the 
     preserve. The Secretary of Agriculture shall modify the 
     boundaries of the Rio Grande National Forest to exclude the 
     transferred lands from the forest boundaries.
       (3) Any lands within the preserve boundaries which were 
     designated as wilderness prior to the date of enactment of 
     this Act shall remain subject to the Wilderness Act (16 
     U.S.C. 1131 et seq.) and the Colorado Wilderness Act of 1993 
     (Public Law 103-767; 16 U.S.C. 539i note).
       (b) Map and Legal Description.--(1) As soon as practicable 
     after the establishment of the national park and the 
     preserve, the Secretary shall file maps and a legal 
     description of the national park and the preserve with the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives.
       (2) The map and legal description shall have the same force 
     and effect as if included in this Act, except that the 
     Secretary may correct clerical and typographical errors in 
     the legal description and maps.
       (3) The map and legal description shall be on file and 
     available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of 
     the National Park Service.
       (c) Boundary Survey.--As soon as practicable after the 
     establishment of the national park and preserve and subject 
     to the availability of funds, the Secretary shall complete an 
     official boundary survey.

     SEC. 6. BACA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, COLORADO.

       (a) Establishment.--(1) When the Secretary determines that 
     sufficient land has been acquired to constitute an area that 
     can be efficiently managed as a National Wildlife Refuge, the 
     Secretary shall establish the Baca National Wildlife Refuge, 
     as generally depicted on the map.
       (2) Such establishment shall be effective upon publication 
     of a notice of the Secretary's determination in the Federal 
     Register.
       (b) Availability of Map.--The map shall be on file and 
     available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
       (c) Administration.--The Secretary shall administer all 
     lands and interests therein acquired within the boundaries of 
     the national wildlife refuge in accordance with the National 
     Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 
     668dd et seq.) and the Act of September 28, 1962 (16 U.S.C. 
     460k et seq.) (commonly known as the Refuge Recreation Act).
       (d) Protection of Water Resources.--In administering water 
     resources for the national wildlife refuge, the Secretary 
     shall--
       (1) protect and maintain irrigation water rights necessary 
     for the protection of monument, park, preserve, and refuge 
     resources and uses; and
       (2) minimize, to the extent consistent with the protection 
     of national wildlife refuge resources, adverse impacts on 
     other water users.

     SEC. 7. ADMINISTRATION OF NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall administer the 
     national park and the preserve in accordance with--
       (1) this Act; and
       (2) all laws generally applicable to units of the National 
     Park System, including--
       (A) the Act entitled ``An Act to establish a National Park 
     Service, and for other purposes'', approved August 25, 1916 
     (16 U.S.C. 1, 2-4) and
       (B) the Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the 
     preservation of historic American sites, buildings, objects, 
     and antiquities of national significance, and for other 
     purposes'', approved August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.).
       (b) Grazing.--
       (1) Acquired state or private land.--With respect to former 
     State or private land on which grazing is authorized to occur 
     on the date of enactment of this Act and which is acquired 
     for the national monument, or the national park and preserve, 
     or the wildlife refuge, the Secretary, in consultation with 
     the lessee, may permit the continuation of grazing on the 
     land by the lessee at the time of acquisition, subject to 
     applicable law (including regulations).
       (2) Federal land.--Where grazing is permitted on land that 
     is Federal land as of the date of enactment of this Act and 
     that is located within the boundaries of the national 
     monument or the national park and preserve, the Secretary is 
     authorized to permit the continuation of such grazing 
     activities unless the Secretary determines that grazing would 
     harm the resources or values of the national park or the 
     preserve.
       (3) Termination of leases.--Nothing in this subsection 
     shall prohibit the Secretary from accepting the voluntary 
     termination of leases or permits for grazing within the 
     national monument or the national park or the preserve.
       (c) Hunting, Fishing, and Trapping.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     Secretary shall permit hunting, fishing, and trapping on land 
     and water within the preserve in accordance with applicable 
     Federal and State laws.
       (2) Administrative exceptions.--The Secretary may designate 
     areas where, and establish limited periods when, no hunting, 
     fishing, or trapping shall be permitted under paragraph (1) 
     for reasons of public safety, administration, or compliance 
     with applicable law.
       (3) Agency agreement.--Except in an emergency, regulations 
     closing areas within the preserve to hunting, fishing, or 
     trapping under this subsection shall be made in consultation 
     with the appropriate agency of the State of Colorado having 
     responsibility for fish and wildlife administration.
       (4) Savings clause.--Nothing in this Act affects any 
     jurisdiction or responsibility of the State of Colorado with 
     respect to fish and wildlife on Federal land and water 
     covered by this Act.
       (d) Closed Basin Division, San Luis Valley Project.--Any 
     feature of the Closed Basin Division, San Luis Valley 
     Project, located within the boundaries of the national 
     monument, national park or the national wildlife refuge, 
     including any well, pump, road, easement, pipeline, canal, 
     ditch, power line, power supply facility, or any other 
     project facility, and the operation, maintenance, repair, and 
     replacement of such a feature--
       (1) shall not be affected by this Act; and
       (2) shall continue to be the responsibility of, and be 
     operated by, the Bureau of Reclamation in accordance with 
     title I of the Reclamation Project Authorization Act of 1972 
     (43 U.S.C. 615aaa et seq.).
       (e) Withdrawal--(1) On the date of enactment of this Act, 
     subject to valid existing rights, all Federal land depicted 
     on the map as being located within Zone A, or within the 
     boundaries of the national monument, the national park or the 
     preserve is withdrawn from--
       (A) all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under 
     the public land laws;

[[Page H10711]]

       (B) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (C) disposition under all laws relating to mineral and 
     geothermal leasing.
       (2) The provisions of this subsection also shall apply to 
     any lands--
       (A) acquired under this Act; or
       (B) transferred from any Federal agency after the date of 
     enactment of this Act for the national monument, the national 
     park or preserve, or the national wildlife refuge.
       (f) Wildnerness Protection.--(1) Nothing in this Act alters 
     the Wilderness designation of any land within the national 
     monument, the national park, or the preserve.
       (2) All areas designated as Wilderness that are transferred 
     to the administrative jurisdiction of the National Park 
     Service shall remain subject to the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1131 et seq.) and the Colorado Wilderness Act of 1993 (Public 
     Law 103-77; 16 U.S.C. 539i note). If any part of this Act 
     conflicts with the provisions of the Wilderness Act or the 
     Colorado Wilderness Act of 1993 with respect to the 
     wilderness areas within the preserve boundaries, the 
     provisions of those Acts shall control.

     SEC. 8. ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY AND BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS

       (a) Acquisition Authority.--(1) Within the area depicted on 
     the map as the ``Acquisition Area'' or the national monument, 
     the Secretary may acquire lands and interests therein by 
     purchase, donation, transfer from another Federal agency, or 
     exchange: Provided, That lands or interests therein may only 
     be acquired with the consent of the owner thereof.
       (2) Lands or interests therein owned by the State of 
     Colorado, or a political subdivision thereof, may only be 
     acquired by donation or exchange.
       (b) Boundary Adjustment.--As soon as practicable after the 
     acquisition of any land or interest under this section, the 
     Secretary shall modify the boundary of the unit to which the 
     land is transferred pursuant to subsection (b) to include any 
     land or interest acquired.
       (c) Administration of Acquired Lands.--
       (1) General authority.--Upon acquisition of lands under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall, as appropriate--
       (A) transfer administrative jurisdiction of the lands of 
     the National Park Service--
       (i) for addition to and management as part of the Great 
     Sand Dunes National Monument, or
       (ii) for addition to and management as part of the Great 
     Sand Dunes National Park (after designation of the Park) or 
     the Great Sand Dunes National Preserve; or
       (B) transfer administrative jurisdiction of the lands to 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service for addition to 
     and administration as part of the Baca National Wildlife 
     Refuge.
       (2) Forest service administration.--(A) Any lands acquired 
     within the area depicted on the map as being located within 
     Zone B shall be transferred to the Secretary of Agriculture 
     and shall be added to and managed as part of the Rio Grande 
     National Forest.
       (B) For the purposes of section 7 of the Land and Water 
     Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-9), the 
     boundaries of the Rio Grande National Forest, as revised by 
     the transfer of land under paragraph (A), shall be considered 
     to be the boundaries of the national forest.

     SEC. 9. WATER RIGHTS.

       (a) San Luis Valley Protection, Colorado.--Section 1501(a) 
     of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act 
     of 1992 (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4663) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) adversely affect the purposes of--
       ``(A) the Great Sand Dunes National Monument;
       ``(B) the Great Sands Dunes National Park (including 
     purposes relating to all water, water rights, and water-
     dependent resources within the park);
       ``(C) the Great Sand Dunes National Preserve (including 
     purposes relating to all water, water rights, and water-
     dependent resources within the preserve);
       ``(D) the Baca National Wildlife Refuge (including purposes 
     relating to all water, water rights, and water-dependent 
     resources within the national wildlife refuge); and
       ``(E) any Federal land adjacent to any area described in 
     subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D).''.
       (b) Effect on Water Rights.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to the amendment made by 
     subsection (a), nothing in this Act affects--
       (A) the use, allocation, ownership, or control, in 
     existence on the date of enactment of this Act, of any water, 
     water right, or any other valid existing right;
       (B) any vested absolute or decreed conditional water right 
     in existence on the date of enactment of this Act, including 
     any water right held by the United States;
       (C) any interstate water compact in existence on the date 
     of enactment of this Act; or
       (D) subject to the provisions of paragraph (2), State 
     jurisdiction over any water law.
       (2) Water rights for national park and national preserve.--
     In carrying out this Act, the Secretary shall obtain and 
     exercise any water rights required to fulfill the purposes of 
     the national park and the national preserve in accordance 
     with the following provisions:
       (A) Such water rights shall be appropriated, adjudicated, 
     changed, and administered pursuant to the procedural 
     requirements and priority system of the laws of the State of 
     Colorado.
       (B) The purposes and other substantive characteristics of 
     such water rights shall be established pursuant to State law, 
     except that the Secretary is specifically authorized to 
     appropriate water under this Act exclusively for the purpose 
     of maintaining ground water levels, surface water levels, and 
     stream flows on, across, and under the national park and 
     national preserve, in order to accomplish the purposes of the 
     national park and the national preserve and to protect park 
     resources and park uses.
       (C) Such water rights shall be established and used without 
     interfering with--
       (i) any exercise of a water right in existence on the date 
     of enactment of this Act for a non-Federal purpose in the San 
     Luis Valley, Colorado; and
       (ii) the Closed Basin Division, San Luis Valley Project.
       (D) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), no 
     Federal reservation of water may be claimed or established 
     for the national park or the national preserve.
       (c) National Forest Water Rights.--To the extent that a 
     water right is established or acquired by the United States 
     for the Rio Grande National Forest, the water right shall--
       (1) be considered to be of equal use and value for the 
     national preserve; and
       (2) retain its priority and purpose when included in the 
     national preserve.
       (d) National Monument Water Rights.--To the extent that a 
     water right has been established or acquired by the United 
     States for the Great Sand Dunes National Monument, the water 
     right shall--
       (1) be considered to be of equal use and value for the 
     national park; and
       (2) retain its priority and purpose when included in the 
     national park.
       (e) Acquired Water Rights and Water Resources.--
       (1) In general.--(A) If, and to the extent that, the Luis 
     Maria Baca Grant No. 4 is acquired, all water rights and 
     water resources associated with the Luis Maria Baca Grant No. 
     4 shall be restricted for use only within--
       (i) the national park;
       (ii) the preserve;
       (iii) the national wildlife refuge; or
       (iv) the immediately surrounding areas of Alamosa or 
     Saguache Counties, Colorado.
       (B) Use.--Except as provided in the memorandum of water 
     service agreement and the water service agreement between the 
     Cabeza de Vaca Land and Cattle Company, LC, and Baca Grande 
     Water and Sanitation District, dated August 28, 1997, water 
     rights and water resources described in subparagraph (A) 
     shall be restricted for use in--
       (i) the protection of resources and values for the national 
     monument, the national park, the preserve, or the wildlife 
     refuge;
       (ii) fish and wildlife management and protection; or
       (iii) irrigation necessary to protect water resources.
       (2) State authority.--If, and to the extent that, water 
     rights associated with the Luis Maria Baca Grant No. 4 are 
     acquired, the use of those water rights shall be changed only 
     in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado.
       (f) Disposal.--The Secretary is authorized to sell the 
     water resources and related appurtenances and fixtures as the 
     Secretary deems necessary to obtain the termination of 
     obligations specified in the memorandum of water service 
     agreement and the water service agreement between the Cabeza 
     de Vaca Land and Cattle Company, LLC and the Baca Grande 
     Water and Sanitation District, dated August 28, 1997. Prior 
     to the sale, the Secretary shall determine that the sale is 
     not detrimental to the protection of the resources of Great 
     Sand Dunes National Monument, Great Sand Dunes National Park, 
     and Great Sand Dunes National Preserve, and the Baca National 
     Wildlife Refuge, and that appropriate measures to provide for 
     such protection are included in the sale.

     SEC. 10. ADVISORY COUNCIL.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     advisory council to be known as the ``Great Sand Dunes 
     National Park Advisory Council''.
       (b) Duties.--The Advisory Council shall advise the 
     Secretary with respect to the preparation and implementation 
     of a management plan for the national park and the preserve.
       (c) Members.--The Advisory Council shall consist of 10 
     members, to be appointed by the Secretary, as follows:
       (1) One member of, or nominated by, the Alamosa County 
     Commission.
       (2) One member of, or nominated by, the Saguache County 
     Commission.
       (3) One member of, or nominated by, the Friends of the 
     Dunes Organization.
       (4) Four members residing in, or within reasonable 
     proximity to, the San Luis Valley and 3 of the general 
     public, all of whom have recognized backgrounds reflecting--
       (A) the purposes for which the national park and the 
     preserve are established; and
       (B) the interests of persons that will be affected by the 
     planning and management of the national park and the 
     preserve.
       (d) Applicable Law.--The Advisory Council shall function in 
     accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. 
     App.) and other applicable laws.
       (e) Vacancy.--A vacancy on the Advisory Council shall be 
     filled in the same manner as the original appointment.
       (f) Chairperson.--The Advisory Council shall elect a 
     chairperson and shall establish

[[Page H10712]]

     such rules and procedures as it deems necessary or desirable.
       (g) No Compensation.--Members of the Advisory Council shall 
     serve without compensation.
       (h) Termination.--The Advisory Council shall terminate upon 
     the completion of the management plan for the national park 
     and preserve.

     SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Hansen) and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen).
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill provides for the establishment of the Great 
Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve and the Baca National Wildlife 
Refuge in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
McInnis), who is the author of the legislation.
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to point out, so 
we have kind of a perspective of what we are talking about, this is a 
photo of the Great Sand Dunes, what we propose to make a national park 
in Colorado. I want to let everyone know that this is our opportunity 
to mark for all future generations of Americans a national park that is 
well deserved. This bill was carried out of the United States Senate 
with unanimous consent by Senator Wayne Allard. Senator Allard and 
myself have spent a lot of time in the local community and we have also 
had a lot of help, frankly, from our Democratic colleagues in Colorado 
and some of our Republican colleagues, not only here in Congress 
through the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette) and the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Udall) but also through the State House in Colorado, 
the State Senate in Colorado, which by strong majorities support naming 
a new national park in the State of Colorado.
  We also have the support of Governor Bill Owens, who strongly 
believes that a national park of the Sand Dunes is long time overdue in 
the State of Colorado. We have the Attorney General in the State of 
Colorado. We have community support. This proposal was built at the 
community level up. Neither Senator Allard nor myself walked into this 
community and said, hey, we would like to create a new national park 
down there.
  Obviously both Senator Allard and I and my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle have been down to look at this national park, what we hope 
to be the national park, and are amazed by what we walk into. The fact 
is, it did not come from us. This started at the local community level, 
and over a period of years we have built up the momentum and we are now 
finally on the verge, finally on the verge of one final vote to create 
a national park in Colorado that will last forever, for all generations 
of America. That is why I urge support tonight.
  Let me say that the Great Sand Dunes, this makeup if we can see right 
behind it, that is not painted in on this picture, those over 14,000 
foot peaks of the Alpine Meadows. It is the only place in the world, 
the only place in the world, where we can see desert sands piled up as 
great sand dunes mixed in amongst the Alpine 14,000 Rocky Mountain foot 
peaks. Take a look at everything from the ecosystems of the water and 
the sand and the wind, there is no other combination like this in the 
world. All America deserves the privilege of having this as a national 
park for preservation.
  I look forward and I am honored to be the one that is sponsoring this 
on the House side and I openly thank my colleague on the Senate side, 
of whom it means as much to him as it does to me, as it does to the 
people of Colorado, as it does to the people of America, that this 
become a national park.
  Now in the last few hours somebody has suggested that it is not in my 
congressional district. I want to point out that this is entirely, 
entirely in the Third Congressional District. This is my congressional 
district this national park proposal is in, and I know this. My family 
has multiple generations not very far from that park. I have been in 
that park numerous times. Now is our opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to stand 
up and be counted. Now is our opportunity for future generations of 
America to create a new national park in the State of Colorado. I ask 
for support.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill. 
Mr. Speaker, along with my colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
McInnis), I strongly support passage of this bill to provide for an 
expansion of the Great Sand Dunes National Monument in Colorado and its 
redesignation as a national park. I want to thank again my colleague, 
the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), for his leadership in making 
it possible for the House to consider this legislation today.
  Mr. Speaker, the Great Sand Dunes National Monument is one of 
Colorado's gems. The remarkable dunes within its boundaries exist 
because of a set of very unusual circumstances. They are also part but 
only part of a complex ecosystem that includes adjacent lands. This 
natural interconnective system includes towering peaks soaring 14,000 
feet above sea level, an intricate underground water supply, and a vast 
valley filled with wonderful wildlife and rare plants. The natural 
resources of the area are complemented by a rich human history that 
includes American Indians, Spanish explorers and the mountain men.
  All of these elements culminate in the amazing site of sand dunes 
reaching hundreds of feet high piled up against the rugged snow capped 
Rockies.
  Enactment of this bill will authorize the acquisition of key parts of 
adjacent lands from willing sellers. That will allow not just an 
expansion of the national monument but also for boundary revisions of 
the San Isabel National Forest and for establishment of a national 
wildlife refuge.
  This will protect the Dunes and also protect the many lives that 
depend on the water and other resources of the affected lands.
  Physically, these dunes have a long geologic history. Politically, 
their protection is an example of one of the most important 
conservation laws on our books, the Antiquities Act. That law gave 
President Hoover the authority for establishment of the national 
monument and it gave Presidents Truman and Eisenhower the authority to 
enlarge it.
  The Antiquities Act has proved its value over the years. Since its 
enactment, almost every President, starting with Theodore Roosevelt, 
has used it to set aside some of the most special parts of our public 
lands as an enduring legacy for future generations.
  In some instances, Presidential action has been controversial, but 
they have stood the test of time and nowhere more than with the Great 
Sand Dunes and other national monuments in Colorado. We are very proud 
of the special places that have been set aside in our State. We do not 
want to abolish the Colorado National Monument. We do not want to 
weaken the protection of Dinosaur National Monument. We highly prize 
the archeological and other values of Yucca House and Hovenweep 
Monuments, and we are very protective of both the Great Sand Dunes 
National Monument and the Black Canyon of the Gunnison.
  We know the values of these areas. That is why last year the Colorado 
delegation worked together to further expand the Black Canyon Monument 
and to redesignate it as a national park. That is why I strongly 
support this bill. Like the Black Canyon, the Great Sand Dunes are a 
remarkable natural wonder, visible for many miles and attracting the 
interest of ordinary visitors as well as geologists, biologists, and 
other scientists.
  Together with the adjacent lands addressed by the bill, they are part 
of an array of diverse natural, environmental and scientific resources 
that the Department of Interior has found deserving of inclusion in our 
national park system.
  In short, this is a good bill. It has broad support among our 
Coloradans,

[[Page H10713]]

including both Senators, our governor and our State's attorney general. 
It is supported as well by the Clinton-Gore administration. I urge its 
approval by the House.
  Currently, the Great Sand dunes National monument covers 
approximately 38,000 acres in the San Luis Valley of south central 
Colorado. The current monument boundary includes only the dunes 
themselves, which, at over 700 feet in height, are the tallest in North 
America. The dunes, however, are only one part of a highly complex 
system that includes the extremely fragile and vulnerable sand sheet, 
the surrounding watershed, and the underground aquifer, all of which 
are integral to the flow of water and replenishment of sand that 
created and maintains the dunes. These critical elements of the system 
are located mostly outside of the monument boundaries, on Federal, 
State, and private lands. Expanding the boundaries of the national 
monument to include the entire natural system, as provided for in S. 
2547, will help to ensure the long-term preservation of the dunes.
  The bill will also help to address long-standing concerns surrounding 
protection of the water resources of the San Luis Valley. A large 
ranch, known as the Luis Maria Baca Grant No. 4, is located to the west 
of the existing national monument and contains key lands in the sand 
sheet and water resources that support the dune system, as well as 
other wetlands, rich wildlife habitat, and a diversity of ecosystem 
types.
  In 1986, the private owners of the Baca property attempted to obtain 
a water right to pump as much as 200,000 acre-feet-per year from the 
unconfined aquifer beneath the land to communities along Colorado's 
Front Range. The effort failed when the courts dismissed their claims, 
and the owners subsequently sold the property.
  The potential for development and export of the water, however, is 
still a major concern for residents of the valley because of the 
potential for such a project to affect the availability of water for 
irrigation and other local uses. S. 2547 would authorize the Federal 
acquisition of the Baca property, incorporating parts of the property 
into a national park, national wildlife refuge, and the existing 
national forest. The legislation requires the Department of the 
Interior to work with the State of Colorado to protect the water 
dependent resources of the dunes while not jeopardizing valid existing 
water rights.
  S. 2547 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to establish the 
Great Sand Dunes National Park when the Secretary determines that land 
having a sufficient diversity of resources has been acquired to warrant 
its designation as a national park.
  The national park will include the existing national monument (which 
will be abolished when the national park is established), as well as 
adjacent lands located generally to the west, including the Baca 
property and other State, private, and Federal lands which would be 
acquired by or transferred to the National Park Service.
  In addition, S. 2547 establishes the Great Sand Dunes National 
Preserve from lands that are currently included in the Rio Grande 
National Forest. Administrative jurisdiction over these lands is 
transferred from the Secretary of Agriculture to the Secretary of the 
Interior to be managed as a unit of the National Park System.
  Finally, S. 2547 authorizes the Secretary to establish the Baca 
National Wildlife Refuge after determining that sufficient lands have 
been acquired to constitute an area that can be efficiently managed as 
a National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge would be comprised of the 
western portion of lands acquired from the Luis Maria Baca Grant No. 4, 
as well as adjacent State and private lands, and land currently managed 
by the Bureau of Land Management.
  As noted by Stephen Saunders, the Assistant Secretary of the Interior 
for Fish and Wildlife and Park, this legislation is an excellent 
example of what Congress and the Administration can accomplish when we 
work together.
  In December of last year Secretary Babbitt traveled to Colorado and 
met with Senators Allard and Campbell, Congressman McInnis, Colorado 
Attorney General Ken Salazar, and other Coloradans to explore the 
threats to the sand dunes and the opportunities to preserve them. In 
that meeting--which some in the Colorado press immediately called the 
Summit at the Dunes--it became evident that there was broad agreement 
about what needs to be done, and about the need to work together to 
make it happen.
  Since then, the Secretary and others in the Department have worked 
closely with the Colorado Congressional delegation, the state 
government, and others in reaching agreement on the broad outlines of 
this legislation.
  The bill before the House is the result of that process. It is 
supported by Colorado Senators and Representatives of both parties, by 
Governor Bill Owens, a Republican, and by the Attorney General of 
Colorado, Ken Salazar, the highest ranking Democrat in the state 
government, who, as a native of this part of the State, understands 
this issue especially well. It has been editorially endorsed and is 
supported by people throughout Colorado. It deserves enactment.

  Statement of Ken Salazar, Attorney General of Colorado, on S. 2547, 
               Great Sand Dunes National Park Act of 2000

       I offer this statement to express my strong support for S. 
     2547, which redesignates the Great Sand Dunes National 
     Monument as a national park and adds protection to the rare 
     geological and ecological area within and surrounding the 
     current Monument. This action will protect and enhance one of 
     the great ecosystems in the Sangre de Cristo mountain range, 
     as well as head off damaging water export schemes that 
     threaten the existence of that ecosystem.
       The San Luis Valley in Colorado is the largest, highest 
     alpine valley in the country with an average elevation of 
     over 7,000 feet. The Valley extends 140 miles from the divide 
     with the Arkansas River on the north to the San Antonio 
     Mountains in New Mexico to the south. The Valley spans about 
     70 miles east to west, from the Sangre de Cristo Mountain 
     Range to the San Juan Mountain Range. The headwaters of the 
     Rio Grande are located in the San Juans above the town of 
     South Fork. The Valley has a colorful and rich heritage 
     starting with the Native American tribes, the first Colorado 
     settlements in the 1850's, and a history of agriculture and 
     mining.
       The Great Sand Dunes became a national monument in 1932. 
     The Dunes cover 39 square miles and sit at the center of one 
     of the most extensive wetland systems in the Rocky Mountains. 
     The Dunes are inextricably tied to the flows of Sand Creek 
     and Medano Creek, the latter of which not only transports 
     sands, but exhibits an interesting and rare phenomenon known 
     as a ``pulsating'' or ``surge'' flows, creating mini-waves in 
     the creek. The government has obtained reserved rights for 
     those creeks. The Dunes and the surrounding area overlie the 
     groundwater system on which the features of the Dunes and 
     adjacent wetlands rely.
       The San Luis Valley in Colorado has unique hydrologic 
     characteristics. Underlying the lands in the Valley are two 
     aquifers: the upper aquifer is known as the ``unconfined'' or 
     ``shallow'' aquifer, the lower aquifer is called the 
     ``confined'' aquifer. These aquifers interact with the 
     surface streams to create a delicate hydrologic balance 
     within the Valley. The agricultural economy and the wildlife 
     values are dependent on maintaining that balance. Although 
     there is a considerable amount of water in the confined 
     aquifer, pumping that water to the surface will disrupt the 
     overall balance. The State Engineer recognized this in 1972, 
     when he stopped issuing well-permits.
       S. 2547 recognizes that some lands adjacent to the Dunes 
     contain important portions of the sand dune mass and the 
     ground water system on which the sand dune and wetland 
     systems depend. S. 2547 provides the Secretary of the 
     Interior with authority to protect this hydrologic system by 
     purchasing lands surrounding the dunes, thus protecting the 
     aquifers from being significantly depleted.
       The State of Colorado, along with New Mexico and Texas, is 
     party to the Rio Grande Compact, which allocates waters of 
     the Rio Grande among the three states. Under the 1938 
     Compact, Colorado must make deliveries to the state line 
     pursuant to a schedule based on the amount of flows in the 
     river. The State Engineer closely regulates all withdrawals 
     of water from the stream system and connecting groundwater 
     system in order to make Colorado's Compact deliveries. The 
     Closed Basin Project, located in the San Luis Valley, is a 
     federal project, authorized by the Reclamation Project 
     Authorization Act of 1972 to provide water to local federal 
     reserves and to assist Colorado in making its Compact 
     deliveries. The Project captures water historically 
     discharged by evapotransporation from water on the surface or 
     in the soil or by native plant life. That water is then used 
     to augment the flows of the Rio Grande, assisting Colorado in 
     meeting its Compact delivery obligations and the United 
     States in meeting its treaty obligations to Mexico. Viability 
     of the project is dependent upon maintenance of the delicate 
     hydrologic balance in the Valley.
       The Baca Grant No. 4 is a 100,000-acre parcel of land 
     located just north and west of the Great Sand Dunes National 
     Monument. In 1986 American Water Development, Inc. (``AWDI'') 
     sought the right to withdraw 200,000 acre-feet of ground 
     water per year from the aquifers underlying the Grant. AWDI's 
     plans met with strong opposition from the water users, the 
     State, and the United States, all of whom spent a great deal 
     of time, effort and funds to protect the Valley resources. 
     The United States opposed the project not only because of its 
     effect on the Sand Dunes, but also because of the damage that 
     would be sustained by the Closed Basin Project and the 
     national wildlife reserves in the Valley. The water court 
     found that the withdrawals of groundwater proposed by AWDI 
     would lower the water level in the unconfined aquifer, 
     depleting flows in the natural stream system and 
     significantly reducing the annual yield of the Closed Basin 
     Project. The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the findings of 
     the water court.
       Water users and the State of Colorado have been concerned 
     about a new project that

[[Page H10714]]

     threatens the hydrologic balance in the Valley. The project, 
     billed as the ``No Dam Water Project,'' is sponsored by 
     Stockman's Water Company, successors in interest to AWDI. The 
     project proposes the transbasin export of up to 100,000 acre-
     feet of confined aquifer water from a well field on the Baca 
     Grant No. 4. We know that the withdrawal of any water will 
     affect the system overall.
       Over the last seven years, the community has made efforts 
     through The Nature Conservancy to acquire land near the Sand 
     Dunes in an effort to protect this natural resource. Last 
     year, The Nature Conservancy purchased over 50,000 acres of 
     land in two ranches known as the Zapata Ranch and the Medano 
     Ranch located directly adjacent and south of the Sand Dunes 
     National Monument. The federal government has also acquired 
     another parcel of land in the area known as the White Ranch 
     for inclusion in the National Wildlife Refuge system. S. 2547 
     will assure further protection of the ecosystem.
       I strongly support the creation of the Sand Dunes National 
     Park and Preserve as provided in S. 2547. The bill contains 
     sufficient language to protect existing water rights and 
     provides that the Secretary shall obtain any new water right 
     in accordance with federal and State law. Further, if lands 
     on the Baca Grant No. 4 are acquired, all water rights and 
     water resources associated with the Grant shall be restricted 
     for use only within the park, preserve, or immediately 
     surrounding areas of Alamosa or Saguache Counties in 
     Colorado. This protects the Valley from future speculative 
     water projects intended to export water to other basins 
     within and outside the State of Colorado, which would be 
     damaging to the Sand Dunes and its ecosystem.
       S. 2547 will preserve a very unique and outstanding 
     resource in this country, the Sand Dunes and their associated 
     resources. It will also protect the delicate hydrologic 
     balance of the San Luis Valley, assuring the resources 
     necessary to sustain the Sand Dunes. I am committed to 
     working with Congress and the Administration to achieve these 
     laudable goals.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Hefley), a senior member of the Committee on Resources.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, I must object to the bill before us, Senate 
bill 2547, the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act. This 
bill has never been the subject of hearings in the House of 
Representatives before the Committee on Resources.
  National parks should not be designated without going through the 
process. The gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) and I have worked long 
and hard in that committee, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) is 
chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands, to see 
that there is a logical process for naming national parks.
  One of the reasons for that is that we love national parks. We are 
proud of our national parks, and we do not have the resources, it 
seems, to take care of the national parks we have like they should be 
taken care of.
  We have in Yellowstone, one of the jewels of the system, in Yosemite, 
we have roads that have potholes in them; we have guardrails that are 
falling down, all kinds of maintenance things that we simply do not 
have the resources to take care of evidently because we are not doing a 
very good job of it.
  So when we add national parks, that draws on all the other national 
parks, and the pie is divided up that much more. The main thing is it 
ought to go through a logical process. The gentleman from Utah (Mr. 
Hansen) and I several years ago put in legislation in place to see that 
that would happen. What ought to happen with this bill is that next 
year we ought to have hearings on it. We ought to take it through the 
process and we ought to answer all the questions.
  Now there are a number of questions to be answered. First, most 
National Park Service regulations say that a park comprises a variety 
of resources. Now I know the proponents of this would say that there 
are a variety of resources. There are mountains, there are streams and 
so forth, but the basic thing is there is a pile of sand, a beautiful 
pile of sand. But that is the basic resource for this park.
  If the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall) has been, and he has, in a 
lot of national parks, I would start with Rocky Mountain National Park, 
for instance, in our own State, I would ask the gentleman to compare 
that in his own mind to the Sand Dunes National Park, and it does not 
compare.
  I do not honestly feel this rises to the level of a national park. I 
think it is a great national monument, but I do not think it rises to 
the level of a national park.

                              {time}  1945

  Second, the land acquisition provisions of this bill are open to 
discussion. This gives the Secretary the right to acquire land, and it 
takes it out of the hands of Congress. Usually we are the ones that do 
the acquiring of land. This gives the Secretary the right to do that.
  The Baca Ranch, which is adjacent to the existing monument, I would 
have no objection to us buying and adding to the monument, except there 
is a problem with whether it is for sale or not; some of the owners 
want to sell it, some do not, and the price that has been quoted to me 
is far above the appraised value on it. I do not think we want to get 
into that kind of a situation.
  Third, the act would create as many as four inholders, none of which 
have been contacted, as far as I can tell, as to their feelings in this 
matter.
  Lastly, there is a question of water beneath the dunes. One of the 
main reasons for this bill is to stop the speculation on water in that 
valley. Now, I do not want water in that valley to come to the front 
range of Colorado. I do not want it to come to Colorado Springs, 
Aurora, or anywhere else. I want that water to stay in the valley.
  So this is a good part of the bill. If you actually bought the ranch 
and tied up the water and kept it in the valley, that is a good part of 
it. I think that can be done as a monument. It does not have to be a 
national park. In fact, every bit of this, except the Baca Ranch, is 
protected in one way or another. It is either wilderness, national 
forest, or monument. So this is not an environmental vote. The 
environment is being protected, whether it is a national park or not.
  There are many public officials in Colorado who would like to have 
input into this and have contacted me, not the least of which are the 
three county commissioners from the county where this is, who are 
opposed to this.
  By circumventing the process, we lose the opportunity for the public 
to have input in it, which I think that the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Udall) would champion, that the public should have input into 
anything like this. We have been contacted by numerous public officials 
who say, we would like to testify on this. We would like to testify on 
this.
  Therefore, I urge that S. 2547 be rejected and that next year we have 
full hearings on it. It may be this is the right thing to do. We may 
decide it is the right thing to do. But is not the right thing to do 
this way. I do not know very many times in the history of this House 
where you have designated a national park without it going through the 
full procedure of both the House and the Senate.
  The arguments I get for it are twofold. The water we have already 
talked about. That is a good argument. Second, economic development. 
Well, you should not name national parks as an economic development 
process. That is not why they should be named.
  All I am asking is we go through the normal process; we have the 
hearings, and we make a decision based upon the merit, not based upon 
who can put the most pressure on the Speaker. This did not come out of 
the committee; this came out of the Speaker's office. He put it on the 
calendar. I do not know why he put it on the calendar and circumvented 
the whole process. I do not think he should have, but this should not 
be based on that. It should be based upon merit.
  I ask us to reject this and have the hearings, go through the 
process, and then we may well decide it is a good idea.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).
  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this 
legislation. Colorado's Great Sand Dunes area is an amazing site, well 
worth the protection afforded by a national park designation.
  As we have seen from that magnificent photo that my colleague from 
the Western Slope has, the Sand Dunes rise up from the Colorado plains 
evoking the great Sahara Desert's mountains of sand. Yet the Great Sand 
Dunes are but

[[Page H10715]]

a part of the larger unique ecosystem. The snow-capped Sangre de Cristo 
Mountains tower in the background, and nearby wetlands harbor numerous 
species, including sandhill cranes and white-faced ibis. The entire 
ecosystem will benefit from the protection Congress provides today.
  This designation will also benefit the people of southern Colorado, 
not only because it protects one of their most treasured natural 
resources, but also because such protection will boost the local 
economy. Preserving natural resources provides Western Slope 
communities with a comparative advantage over other rural areas for 
diversifying their economy by enhancing their ability to attract and 
retain businesses and a talented workforce. Protecting public lands 
provides many economic benefits and maintains the natural capital that 
forms the foundation of Colorado's identity, quality of life and 
economic well-being.
  I sincerely hope that the passage of this bill is the next step in a 
concentrated effort to safeguard all lands in Colorado which are 
deserving of appropriate protection.
  Last year, for example, I introduced H.R. 829, the Colorado 
Wilderness Act. This legislation would designate 1.4 million acres of 
land in Colorado as wilderness, including a small portion of the Great 
Sand Dunes. Today's legislation does not include any wilderness 
designation, and I hope the Colorado delegation will work together, as 
we did on this bill and several other bills, to provide the protection 
wilderness designation affords to these areas.
  Earlier this year, the Colorado delegation came together to designate 
the Black Ridge Canyons as wilderness. Yesterday the House passed the 
Spanish Peaks Wilderness Act. Today we have another bipartisan effort 
that will result in strong protections for unique parts of Colorado.
  These are good first steps. However, because of the growth pressures 
on our precious public lands in Colorado, we need to look at a 
comprehensive Colorado public lands policy.
  Public support throughout the State is growing for this proposal 
tonight and other public lands proposals, as is evidenced by the 
bipartisan support you heard from my colleagues, that our legislature, 
that our local elected officials and that our citizens have all across 
the State for more protection of public lands. Well, today's 
legislation will provide protection for some of Colorado's most unique 
areas.
  We must not stop there. We need to take additional steps to protect 
other areas of Colorado from the threats of growth and overuse. Areas 
such as Dominguez Canyon and Handies Peak are wilderness study areas 
that must be protected through permanent wilderness designation. If we 
wait to act on each of the 48 areas in Colorado included within my bill 
that deserve wilderness protection individually, many of them will be 
gone by the time we are ready to legislate.
  So I want to commend my colleague from the Western Slope. I want to 
commend my colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall), and the 
bipartisan support of my fellow Members of Congress on this bill. I 
hope we can all sit together and work over the recess to have 
comprehensive Colorado omnibus wilderness legislation in the next 
session.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. McInnis).
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Hefley) brought up a few points that should be addressed here.
  First of all, in regard to the inholdings, there are three inholdings 
within the national park. All three of those are held by the Nature 
Conservancy District, which is 100 percent behind this national park.
  In regard to the gentleman's discussions on process and we should 
never have a national park and have not had one in the best of the 
gentleman's memory that has happened in a process that did not go 
through the House committee, remember, this went through full hearings 
at the Senate committee. To the best of my knowledge, none of the 
gentleman's staff, none of the staff of any of the people the gentleman 
was talking about, even expressed an interest to go sit in on these 
hearings.
  But back to my point: 2 weeks ago there was a national park, which, 
by the way, I support, that was included in the Interior bill, and 
there were no objections raised on the floor.
  That is the mystery of this. I want the gentleman to know, I have 
gone to the committee. I have gone to my good colleague, and I say this 
with all due respect, because our dispute is a professional dispute, 
not a personal dispute, but I have gone to the gentleman and said, give 
me a hearing. I want this bill heard on its merits. Let it rise or fall 
on its own merits. But Colorado and the future of America, they deserve 
this national park.
  It is in my district, by the way. I know a little something about it. 
I was denied the hearing month after month after month. Not by the 
chairman, by the way, not by the chairman, but at the request of the 
chairman.
  I had no other choice but use the same rules that the gentleman who 
is opposed to this this evening, the rules he is using to kill this 
national park, the same rules I used to get to the House floor. The 
beauty of bringing it to the House floor is 435 Congressmen, 435 
Congressmen make the decision whether this should be a national park. 
Not one Congressman. Not one Congressman kills this national park; 435 
or 434 of my colleagues make the decision based on the merits whether 
we deserve another national park.
  There are a number of other issues we ought to talk about. When we 
talk about the water to the dunes, as the gentleman and I discussed, 
and I know this and I say this to the credit of the gentleman, this 
gentleman understands water. He has years of meritorious service in the 
State legislature of Colorado as well as the U.S. Congress on water 
issues.
  But the gentleman could agree with me; you drain the water out of the 
Sand Dunes and you destroy it. You destroy the most unique, or the 
only, the only geological, geographical, any type of archeological, I 
could go on and on, type of site in the world that exists. You cannot 
drain the water out of there. Draining the water out is like taking the 
blood out of a human body and then telling the body to continue to 
live. It does not happen. It is destroyed. That water is the human 
blood for the San Luis Valley. I urge my colleague to join me in 
regards to that.
  Mr. Speaker, it is clear that this process is within the process of 
the House, or we would not be here today. We had suspensions. In fact 
the Sand Creek, by our colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Schaffer), yesterday, followed the exact same process. But I did not 
see anybody up there objecting to that.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. McInnis), I do not want to prolong this. I think we have said what 
needs to be said.
  The gentleman repeated several times that this is his district, his 
district, his district, as if it is in his district, we ought to do it.
  When I got on the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands 
several years ago, I discovered that a lot of Members were bringing 
parks home to their district, whether they had any merit or not. 
Steamtown, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) may remember Steamtown 
is one of them. Our good friend Joe McDade brought that one home. I 
guess this has a whole lot more merit than that did, by the way. So 
there is interest by people when that is not in their district. There 
is interest in that park, or whether it is a park or not.
  I do not know if the gentleman heard me, because I think the 
gentleman was talking to one of his staff at the time, but when the 
gentleman starts talking about draining water out from under the Dunes, 
I have no intention, and the gentleman knows that, of draining water 
out from under the Dunes.
  The gentleman is absolutely right; you take that water, and the Dunes 
go away. The water has to stay there. I want the water to stay there, 
not just for the Dunes, but I want the water in the San Luis Valley to 
stay in the San Luis Valley. I do not want it coming to the Eastern 
Slope or the big cities. I want it to stay there, because if it does 
not stay there, I think that valley, which is already economically 
depressed in many ways, becomes a real problem. So I want the water to 
stay there, and I do not want there to be any mistake about that.

[[Page H10716]]

  I guess I would just close by saying again, yes, this is part of the 
process; but it is a subversion of the process. There was a national 
park put in the Interior bill. I voted against that. I think that was 
wrong. I do not think that this should be part of the process. I think 
the process should be both Houses go through their committee structure, 
ask the questions, have the hearings, let everybody who wants to have 
input into it, and then make a logical decision.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I had two comments I wanted to add to the debate this 
evening. I agree with my colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Hefley), that this is not just a question of the third district in 
Colorado; it is a question I think for all of Colorado and really for 
all of the Nation; and that is why I support the bill, because I 
believe it will be good for Colorado, and it will be good for the 
Nation. I think it is important to bring it to the House and let all 
435 of us have our say on this idea, that we would create a national 
park.
  The other thing I want to add just from a personal point of view is 
that when you go to that area and you look at the Sand Dunes and their 
uniqueness, I agree with the gentleman, if it was just the Sand Dunes 
we were talking about, they might not rise to the level of a park. But 
when you add in this very diverse set of ecosystems that rise to the 
14,000-foot level, it is truly unique, and I believe truly worthy of 
national park status.
  That is why I support this legislation, and I think my colleague, the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), has been right in bringing this 
question forward to the full House.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. McInnis).
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, again to the colleague, talk about 
subversion of the process, subversion of the process occurs when you 
cannot even get a committee hearing. I will not embarrass the gentleman 
by asking him, but I would if I were in some kind of real knock-down-
drag-out, ask the question, did not I in fact request that this go to 
the committee? Did not the gentleman in fact request that it not go to 
the committee?

                              {time}  2000

  The fact is this has had Senate hearings. The fact is that the 
gentleman can stall this bill to its death. Today is the last 
opportunity this bill will have to pass. It is the last opportunity to 
create a national park in the Third Congressional District, in my 
opinion, for a long period of time.
  It has the unanimous support of the Governor's office, the Attorney 
General, near unanimous support of the State House, near unanimous 
support of the State Senate, unanimous support of the United States 
Senate.
  This bill will pass on its merits, and that is what we have asked it 
to do, go on its merits. I should also bring up the point, because I am 
a strong private properties advocate, and my colleague from Colorado 
(Mr. Hefley) brings up the point to the best of his knowledge the 
owners of the Baca Ranch that would be involved in this are not 
interested in selling the ranch; wrong.
  I have their correspondence.
  Mr. Speaker, I submit the following for the Record:


                                      Hogan & Hartson, l.l.p.,

                                 Washington, DC, October 24, 2000.
     Office of Congressman Scott McInnis,
     Cannon House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Member of Congress: Farallon Capital Management owns a 
     controlling interest in the Baca Ranch, located adjacent to 
     Great Sand Dunes National Monument in southern Colorado. As 
     controlling owners, we are fully supportive of establishment 
     of Great Sand Dunes National Park and National Preserve as 
     proposed in S. 2547 and of the government's interest in 
     acquiring the Baca Ranch property as provided for in Section 
     8 of S. 2547. To that end, we completed an independent 
     Appraisal Report on April 18, 2000, and we look forward to 
     continuing our cooperation with completion of the National 
     Park and National Preserve. In addition, we have been in 
     close contact with the Administration which fully supports 
     this legislation and we look forward to completing the 
     transaction for Baca Ranch following enactment of S. 2547.
           Sincerely,
                                               Douglas P. Wheeler,
                         Attorney for Farallon Capital Management.

  Mr. Speaker, let me quote from the correspondence, as controlling 
owners, as controlling owners, we are fully supportive of establishment 
of the Great Sand Dunes National Park and the government's interest in 
acquiring the ranch property.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McINNIS. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, maybe the gentleman misunderstood what I 
said or I did not say it very well. I said there was a division among 
the owners as to whether or not to sell or not. The owners in San 
Francisco want to sell; the owners in Colorado do not.
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I will accept that from the gentleman. I 
will say the controlling owners. We do have a minority holder out there 
who thinks for pricing and negotiation purposes. The fact is that the 
controlling owners think it is a great proposal. The end holders think 
it is a great proposal; they support it. The people of the valley think 
it is a great proposal.
  The gentleman brought up three county commissioners in a very small 
county. I have gone to them. They were worried about their $68,000 loss 
of property tax. I replaced it with $80-some-thousand, and it has an 
inflationary type of clause in it. It is not exactly stuck with 
inflation, but it goes up, that we will increase that amount every 
year.
  We have done everything we can to appease those people, but what I 
think is the most important as I speak to the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Hefley) is this process that we are talking about. I agree with 
the gentleman on Steamtown. I agree with the gentleman on some of these 
other issues, but I think everybody with a couple of exceptions who has 
taken a look at this, the Sand Dunes say, gosh, this ought to be 
preserved for all future of America. We ought to expand on this and 
make it a national park.
  The fact that we have it on here on the House floor is exactly where 
it ought to be. The best point I think the gentleman has made this 
evening is, Mr. McInnis, just because it is in your congressional 
district does not mean we should vote for it; that is right. That is 
why 435 Members of the United States Congress should vote for it, not 
one person in one committee stop it from ever having a hearing.
  Mr. Speaker, just the same as we should not pass it just because of 
the fact it is in my district, we should also not allow it to have a 
committee hearing because of one person. We should bring it to the 
whole body, and that is exactly what we have done this evening. I 
encourage all of my 434 colleagues to vote yes on this and create a 
national park for the future of America.
  I am proud of it. People in Colorado are proud of it. We want to show 
it off, not just to America, but to the world.
  Mr. Speaker, I am submitting a letter from the State of Colorado 
raising an issue regarding control and management of hunting in the 
Great Sand Dunes National Preserve. I share the State of Colorado's 
concern, and as the House author of this bill and one involved in the 
negotiations that produced the final Senate version, I would read the 
current language in the light most favorable to Colorado's sovereignty 
and predominant role in hunting, fishing and trapping that states have 
in our federal/state system. Specifically, the term ``limited periods'' 
in section 7(c)(2) of the bill, referring to the time periods that 
hunting, fishing or trapping in the preserve may be prohibited, should 
be strictly construed to limit the time and nature of the closures or 
restrictions on hunting, fishing and trapping in the Great Sand Dunes 
National Preserve. Permanent closures or expansive closures would 
absolutely run counter to the intent of this legislation.
  Moreover, section 7(c)(3) of the legislation calls for consultation 
by the Park Service with the appropriate Colorado agency on any limited 
prohibitions of hunting, fishing and trapping. As an author of this 
legislation, this language should be read as expansively as possible to 
require real, meaningful consultation with the State of Colorado, 
including involvement in the decisions and crafting the scope and 
nature of any closures to allow for the maximum management of the 
bighorn sheep herds and other wildlife in the Great Sand Dunes 
Preserve.


[[Page H10717]]


                                                State of Colorado,


                              Department of Natural Resources,

                                      Denver, CO, October 4, 2000.
     Mr. Mike Hess,
     Cannon Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mike: Per our telephone conversation earlier today, it 
     has come to our attention that some important language in the 
     Great Sand Dunes National Park bill was not included. 
     Specifically, the paragraph requiring the Secretary of the 
     Interior to obtain approval of the Colorado Division of 
     Wildlife before closing hunting opportunities, except for 
     emergencies, was replaced with general consultation language.
       This current form causes problems for the State of 
     Colorado. We are concerned about giving the Secretary carte 
     blanche to control the way we manage game and non-game 
     species on a new national park.
       As you know, the bighorn sheep is Colorado's state animal, 
     and the Sangre de Christo Mountains are home to the State's 
     largest bighorn sheep herds. The management of this herd has 
     been one of the Division of Wildlife's biggest success 
     stories over the years, and the possibility that our most 
     important management tool could be taken away by the 
     Secretary of the Interior is adverse to the best interests of 
     the State and our wildlife.
       Furthermore, any ban on hunting in the expansion areas 
     would also greatly reduce our ability to properly manage the 
     elk herd in that game unit. This will increase our animal 
     damage payments to citizens and reduce recreational 
     opportunities.
       I hope this is helpful. Thanks for all your great work on 
     this important bill.
            Sincerely,
                                                     Greg Walcher,
                                               Executive Director.

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I just want to add a final word. I urge passage of 
this bill. I think it is the right thing to do for the State of 
Colorado. It is the right thing to do for the country. My colleague, 
the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), has made a powerful 
argument. It is the right thing to do for the citizens of the world who 
would come to see this very unique area that starts with the Sand Dunes 
in a low elevation and rises to 14,000-foot peaks. I hope the House 
will do the right thing.
  Madam Speaker, I urge passage of this bill.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HANSEN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) that the House suspend 
the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 2547.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________