[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 9]
[House]
[Page 12843]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        THE TRUTH ABOUT YOSEMITE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, Yosemite Valley is a national treasure 
that was set aside in 1864 with the promise that it would be preserved 
for the express purpose of ``public use, resort, and recreation.'' Ever 
since, Americans have enjoyed a host of recreational opportunities and 
amenities as they come to experience the splendor of the valley.
  Now the National Park Service, at the urging of leftist environmental 
groups, is proposing eliminating many of these amenities, including 
bicycle and raft rentals, horseback riding rentals, gift shops, snack 
facilities, swimming pools, and iconic facilities, including the ice 
skating rink at Curry Village, the art center, and the historic stone 
bridges that date back to the 1920s.
  For generations, these facilities have enhanced the enjoyment of the 
park for millions of visitors, adding a rich variety of recreational 
activities amidst the breathtaking backdrop of Yosemite. But today the 
very nature and purpose of Yosemite is being changed from its original 
promise of public resort, use, and recreation to an exclusionary agenda 
that can best be described as ``look, but don't touch.''
  As public outrage has mounted, these leftist groups have found 
willing mouthpieces in the editorial boards of the left-leaning San 
Francisco Chronicle and Sacramento Bee. It is obvious their editorial 
writers have either not read the report or are deliberately 
misrepresenting it to their readers. They say the plan is designed to 
relieve overcrowding in the park. In fact, this plan compounds the 
overcrowding.
  In 1997, flooding wiped out almost half the campsites in Yosemite 
Valley. Congress appropriated $17 million to replace these campsites. 
The money was spent; the campsites were never replaced. That's what's 
causing the overcrowding--half the campsites for the same number of 
visitors.
  This plan would lock in a 30 percent reduction in campsites and a 50 
percent reduction in lodging compared to the pre-flood area. Three 
swimming pools in the valley give visitors a safe place with lifeguards 
for their children to cool off in the summer. The park service wants to 
close two of them. That means packed overcrowding at the remaining 
pool, pushing families seeking water recreation into the perilous 
Merced River.
  They assure us they're not eliminating all the shops at Yosemite, but 
only reducing the number of them. Understand the practical impact on 
tourists. It means they're going to have to walk much greater distances 
to access these services and then endure long lines once they get 
there.
  Another of the falsehoods is that the plan doesn't ban services like 
bike rentals, but just moves them to better locations. The government's 
own report puts the lie to this claim. It specifically speaks to 
``eliminating'' and ``removing'' these services. It goes on to 
specifically state: ``Over time, visitors would become accustomed to 
the absence of these facilities and would no longer expect them as a 
part of their experience in Yosemite.'' Their intent could not possibly 
be any clearer.
  We are assured that although bicycle rentals will be--and I'm using 
the government's word--``eliminated'' from the valley in the interest 
of environmental protection, visitors will still be free to bring their 
own bikes. That invites the obvious question: What exactly is the 
environmental difference between a rented bicycle and a privately owned 
bicycle?
  We're assured in the smarmy words of the Sacramento Bee that the plan 
merely contemplates relocating raft rentals so they meet visitors at 
the river. In truth, the plan specifically states that it will ``allow 
only private boating in this river segment,'' and even then will limit 
total permits to only 100 per day.
  Mr. Speaker, every lover of Yosemite needs to read this report. It 
proposes breaking the compact between the American people and their 
government that promised public use, resort, and recreation for all 
time when the park was established.
  My district includes the Yosemite National Park. I represent the 
gateway communities that depend on park tourism to support their 
economies. The affected counties and communities are unanimous in their 
vigorous opposition to this plan; and in a recent phone survey, the 
people of these communities, who are jealous guardians of Yosemite, 
expressed opposition to it in numbers well exceeding 80 percent.
  Many things need to be done to improve gate access and traffic flow 
through the park, but destroying the amenities that provide enjoyment 
for millions of Yosemite visitors each year is not among them.

                          ____________________