[Senate Report 104-309]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 484
104th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

 2d Session                                                     104-309
_______________________________________________________________________


 
                   LAMPREY WILD AND SCENIC RIVER ACT

                                _______
                                

                 June 28, 1996.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


  Mr. Murkowski, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1174]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 1174) to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers 
Act to designate certain segments of the Lamprey River in New 
Hampshire as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers 
System, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that 
the bill do pass.

                         Purpose of the Measure

    The purpose of S. 1174 is to designate an 11.5-mile segment 
of the Lamprey River in New Hampshire as a ``recreational'' 
component of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

                          Background and Need

    The Lamprey River is situated in coastal New Hampshire and 
includes portions of Strafford and Rockingham counties. It is 
the largest of the rivers that discharge into Great Bay, a 
designated National Estuarine Research Reserve consisting of 
4,500 acres of tidal waters and wetlands and 100 acres of 
uplands.
    ``The Lamprey Wild and Scenic River Study,'' authorized in 
1991 by Public Law 102-214, and completed by the National Park 
Service in 1995, found that 23.5 miles of the River are 
eligible for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers 
System based on the free-flowing character and the presence of 
outstanding ecological, anadromous fish, and historical 
resources. The eligible portion extends from the Bunker Pond 
Dam in West Epping to the confluence of the Lamprey and 
Piscassic rivers in the vicinity of the Newmarket-Durham town 
line.
    The Lamprey is considered New Hampshire's most significant 
river for anadromous fish. River herring (largely alewives), 
American shad, and Atlantic salmon are the principal anadromous 
species found in the Lamprey. Sea lamprey, a parasite on other 
fish, also come upriver to spawn. Common warmwater fish include 
members of the sunfish, catfish, and pike families. The New 
Hampshire Fish and Game Department stocks the river with brook, 
brown, and rainbow trout in Lee and Durham and maintains shad 
and herring restoration programs along the river.
    The National Park Service documented six of New Hampshire's 
known fresh water mussel species during its study, including 
one listed as an endangered species by the State, the brook 
floater (Alismidonta varicosa), which is also a candidate for 
Federal listing. Its presence is considered a strong indicator 
of good water quality.
    According to the State Architectural Historian, the Lamprey 
is one of New Hampshire's most historic streams. Archeological 
remains from one of the ten most significant sites in the 
state, at the Wadleigh Falls in Lee, date back some 8,000 
years. Because the riparian zone has remained undeveloped, it 
is likely that archeological sites have been well preserved. 
Among the historical resources on the river is the mill site at 
Wiswall Falls, which is listed on the National Register of 
Historic Places.
    Recreational use of the upstream portion of the river 
includes fishing, canoeing, kayaking, and swimming in the 
summer and cross country skiing, skating and snowmobiling in 
the winter. In the lower reaches of Durham and Newmarket, the 
river is deep enough for motor boats.
    Except for land holdings by the University of New Hampshire 
in the town of Lee and the nine town owned parcels on the 
river, the land on the Lamprey is privately owned by some 268 
individuals. One-quarter (65) of all private landowners own 56 
percent of the river frontage. Of the public entities with 
frontage on the river, the University owns the most, with 1.7 
miles.
    According to the National Park Service study, there is 
strong local support for the Wild and Scenic River designation 
of the Lamprey within the towns of Newmarket, Durham, and Lee, 
New Hampshire. This corresponds to the 11.5 miles of river 
stretching from the southern Lee town line to the confluence of 
the Lamprey and Piscassic rivers in the vicinity of the Durham-
Newmarket town line.
    As part of the River Study, a management plan was developed 
to create a framework for successful long-term use and 
protection of the Lamprey River. The plan has been approved by 
the towns of Newmarket, Durham and Lee. The plan was developed 
through the consensus of the Lamprey River Advisory Committee 
(LRAC), a permanent advisory body whose members are nominated 
by the local communities and appointed by the New Hampshire 
Department of Environmental Services.
    The National Park Service study also identified a preferred 
management alternative which they feel would best achieve the 
principal river conservation goals articulated by the LRAC and 
local communities. This alternative is reflected in the 
proposed legislation.

                          Legislative History

    S. 1174 was introduced by Senators Gregg and Smith on 
August 10, 1995. A hearing on the bill was held by the Senate 
Subcommittee for Parks, Historic Preservation and Recreation on 
May 2, 1996. At the business meeting on June 19, 1996, the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 1174 
favorably reported, without amendment.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open 
business session on June 19, 1996, by a unanimous voice vote of 
a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 1174 
without amendment.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    Section 1 entitles the bill the ``Lamprey Wild and Scenic 
River Act.''
    Section 2 contains the Congressional findings, including: 
(1) the Lamprey River Study Act of 1991 authorized the study of 
a segment of the Lamprey River for potential inclusion in the 
National Wild and Scenic Rivers System; (2) the study 
determined that a specific segment of the river within the 
study area was eligible for inclusion in the National Wild and 
Scenic Rivers System; (3) a comprehensive management plan was 
prepared as part of the study which established objectives, 
standards and action programs to ensure long-term protection of 
the river segments; (4) the Lamprey River Advisory Committee 
has unanimously voted in favor of wild and scenic river 
designation; (5)(A) the governing bodies of the towns of 
Newmarket, Durham and Lee have voted to endorse the management 
plan and are seeking wild and scenic river designation; (5)(B) 
the upstream town of Epping, which participated in the study on 
an informal basis, chose not to vote on the management plan or 
designation.
    Section 3(a) amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by 
designating the 11.5 mile segment of the Lamprey River, 
extending from the southern Lee town line to the confluence of 
the Piscassic River in the vicinity of the Durham-New Market 
town line as a recreational river, to be administered by the 
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) through cooperative 
agreements with the State of New Hampshire and the towns of 
Durham, Lee and Newmarket, New Hampshire. This section directs 
that the segment be managed in accordance with the general 
management plan prepared in 1995 as part of the study, and any 
amendments deemed necessary by the Secretary.
    Section 4(a) directs the Secretary to coordinate management 
responsibilities for the designated segment of the river with 
the Lamprey River Advisory Committee.
    Section 4(b)(1) states that the zoning ordinances adopted 
by the towns of Durham, Lee, and Newmarket, including 
provisions for conservation of shorelines, flood plains, and 
wetlands, will satisfy the standards and requirements of the 
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
    Section 4(b)(2) prohibits the Federal acquisition of land 
by condemnation, and directs that the acquisition of land by 
the Secretary be on a willing seller basis only, and subject to 
the additional criteria set forth in the Lamprey River General 
Management Plan.
    Section 5 authorizes the Secretary to offer assistance to 
the upstream town of Epping, New Hampshire, relative to their 
continued involvement in the implementation of the Lamprey 
River Management Plan and the potential of the portion of the 
river within Epping as a future component of the Wild and 
Scenic River.
    Section 6 authorizes the appropriation of sums as one 
necessary to carry out the Act.

                   Cost and Budgetary Considerations

    On June 20, 1996 the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources requested a Congressional Budget Office estimate on 
S. 1174. This estimate had not been received at the time the 
report on S. 1174 was filed. When this estimate becomes 
available, the Chairman will request that it be printed in the 
Congressional Record for the advice of the Senate.

                      Regulatory Impact Evaluation

    In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following 
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in 
carrying out S. 1174. The bill is not a regulatory measure in 
the sense of imposing Government-established standards or 
significant economic responsibilities on private individuals 
and businesses.
    No personal information would be collected in administering 
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal 
privacy.
    Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the 
enactment of S. 1174, as ordered reported.

                        Executive Communications

    On June 20, 1996, the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of 
the Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting 
forth Executive agency recommendations on S. 1174. These 
reports had not been received at the time the report on S. 1174 
was filed. When these reports become available, the Chairman 
will request that they be printed in the Congressional Record 
for the advice of the Senate. The testimony provided by the 
Department of the Interior at the Subcommittee hearing follows:

      Statement of Katherine H. Stevenson, Associate Director for 
     Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships, National Park 
                  Service, Department of the Interior

          Thank you for the opportunity to offer the Department 
        of the Interior's views on S. 1174, a bill to designate 
        certain segments of the Lamprey River in New Hampshire 
        as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers 
        System. We support enactment of S. 1174 as introduced.
          Mr. Chairman, S. 1174 would designate 11.5 miles of 
        the Lamprey River in New Hampshire as a recreational 
        river in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. 
        The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to 
        administrator the designated portion of the river 
        through cooperative agreements with the State of New 
        Hampshire and relevant local governments. It limits 
        federal land acquisition to donation or willing seller 
        only, and provides a funding authorization to carry out 
        the purposes of the Act. Mr. Chairman, we strongly 
        support S. 1174.
          This bill is based closely on the National Park 
        Service's findings and recommendations as described in 
        the Draft Study Report for the Lamprey River Wild and 
        Scenic River Study, dated June, 1995. This study was 
        authorized by P.L. 102-214, and was conducted in close 
        partnership with the State of New Hampshire, local 
        communities, and the Lamprey River Advisory Committee. 
        All of the principal study partners and affected 
        communities of Durham, Lee, and Newmarket, New 
        Hampshire have signaled their support for the 
        designation as crafted. This support is documented in 
        the Draft Study Report, which has now finished the 90-
        day review period without any comments in opposition to 
        the proposed designation.
          The essence of this legislation is a partnership 
        between the National Park Service, the State of New 
        Hampshire, and local communities designed to ensure the 
        sound stewardship of the Lamprey River and the 
        protection of its outstanding ecological, anadromous 
        fish, and historical values. The provisions of S. 1174 
        which implement this partnership are similar to those 
        contained in other recent designations, including the 
        Wildcat in New Hampshire, the Maurice and Great Egg 
        Harbor in New Jersey, and, most recently, the 
        Farmington in Connecticut. Critical components of this 
        partnership, all of which are included in S. 1174, 
        include: the adoption of the Lamprey River Management 
        Plan (January 10, 1995) as the comprehensive management 
        plan for the segment required by section 3(d) of the 
        Wild and Scenic Rivers Act; the recognition of local 
        land use authority and the associated prohibition 
        against land condemnation; and the adoption of the 
        Lamprey River Advisory Committee as established under 
        New Hampshire law as a local advisory body to guide 
        river management. We urge the retention of these 
        provisions in S. 1174 to ensure that local expectations 
        are met and that an effective partnership to protect 
        the river is formed.
          Investigations during the study period and comments 
        on the Draft Study Report revealed no known water 
        resources projects that would be precluded or otherwise 
        impacted by the designation. The only active project on 
        the segment, a proposed hydroelectric development in 
        the Town of Durham, was withdrawn by the applicant in 
        June of 1995. We estimate costs associated with the 
        designation at between $50,000 and $75,000 per year, a 
        fraction of the costs of such a protection effort in 
        the absence of the envisioned partnership approach.
          This concludes my prepared testimony on S. 1174. At 
        this time, I will be pleased to respond to any 
        questions you may have.

                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
the bill S. 1174, as ordered reported, are shown as follows 
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
    Section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 
1274(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(  ) Lamprey River, New Hampshire.--The 11.5 mile segment 
extending from the southern Lee town line to the confluence 
with the Piscassic River in the vicinity of the Durham-
Newmarket town line (referred to in this paragraph as the 
`segment') as a recreational river. The segment shall be 
administered by the Secretary of the Interior through 
cooperative agreements between the Secretary and the State of 
New Hampshire and the towns of Durham, Lee, and New Market, New 
Hampshire, under section 10(e). The section shall be managed in 
accordance with the Lamprey River Management Plan dated January 
10, 1995, and such amendments to the plan as the Secretary of 
the Interior determines are consistent with this Act. The plan 
shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements for a comprehensive 
management plan pursuant to section 3(d).''