[Senate Report 104-374]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 612
104th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 104-374
_______________________________________________________________________
GREAT WESTERN SCENIC TRAIL
_______
September 30, 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 H.R. 531]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the Act (H.R. 531) to designate the Great Western
Scenic Trail as a study trail under the National Trails System
Act, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that
the Act do pass.
Purpose of the Measure
The purpose of H.R. 531 is to direct the Secretary of
Agriculture to work in consultation with the Secretary of the
Interior in order to study the Great Western Scenic Trail for
potential inclusion in the National Trails System.
Background and Need
The Great Western Trail is envisioned as a north/south
trail system extending from Canada to Mexico. The proposed
route would take advantage of many existing trails, roads and
public lands throughout the Rocky Mountain area, including
lands managed by the National Park Service, National Forest
Service and Bureau of Land Management.
The proposed route from north to south would run through
the Idaho Panhandle, Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests,
then east between the Selway Bitterroot and Frank Church River
of No Return Wilderness Areas. Once at the Idaho/Montana
border, the trail corridor would extend south along the
alignment of the existing Continental Divide National Scenic
Trail to the Trail Pass (Salmon and Beaverhead National
Forests). The route would then continue south through the
Targhee National Forest past the west side of Yellowstone
National Park to Palisades Reservoir, where it would split into
two routes which would merge at the Utah border.
At the Utah border the trail corridor would continue south-
east of Logan, Salt Lake City, Provo, Nephi and several smaller
communities along the Wasatch Front, extending into southern
Utah (Wasatch/Cache, Uinta, Manti, Fishlake and Dixie National
Forests). At the southern Utah border, the trail corridor would
extend through Arizona completing the link to the border of
Mexico. This section of the corridor would follow a proposed
motorized trail route and would be known as the El Camino
Grande section of the Great Western Trail. This section would
extend south and east through Arizona, crossing the Colorado
River upstream of Grand Canyon National Park and head south
passing Flagstaff, Phoenix and Tucson, finally reaching the
border of Mexico (Kaibab, Coconino, Tonto and Coronado National
Forests).
The Great Western Trail is envisioned as a ``multiple use''
trail that would accommodate nearly all methods of recreational
trail use including hiking, biking, skiing, horses, boating,
four wheel and off road vehicles. This is reaffirmed in the
proposed legislation by requiring the Secretary of Agriculture
to examine the appropriateness of motorized and non-motorized
uses along the trail.
Legislative History
H.R. 531 was introduced on January 17, 1995, by
Representatives Hansen, Orton and Wallace. The bill was
reported as amended by the House Committee on Resources (H.Rep.
104-57). The bill passed the House as amended on March 14,
1995, (400-15) and was referred to the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee on March 15, 1995. Reports from the
Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior, and the Office of
Management and Budget were requested on March 24, 1995. A
hearing was held on H.R. 531 on May 16, 1996.
H.R. 531 is identical to S. 621, which was introduced on
March 24, 1996 by Senators Bennett, Campbell, Brown, Jeffords,
Stevens and Hatch. The Subcommittee on Parks, Historic
Preservation and Recreation held a hearing on the bill on May
16, 1996. Similar legislation, S. 1652, was introduced by
Senator Bennett and cosponsored by Senator Hatch during the
103d Congress. The Subcommittee on Public Lands held a hearing
on S. 1652 on May 19, 1996 (S. Hrg. 103-755). No further action
was taken on the bill.
At the business meeting on September 12, 1996, the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered H.R. 531
favorably reported.
Committee Recommendation
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open
business session on September 12, 1996, by a unanimous voice
vote of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R.
531.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1 amends the National Trails Systems Act by
authorizing a study of the Great Western Scenic Trail, which is
described as a system of trails accommodating a variety of
travel users in a corridor approximately 3,100 miles in length
extending from the Arizona-New Mexico border to the Idaho-
Montana-Canada border, and following the approximate route
depicted on a map titled ``Great Western Corridor, 1988.'' The
Act directs that the map be available for public inspection.
Section 1 directs that a trail study be conducted by the
Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the Secretary of
the Interior, and directs that the study include: (A) the
current status of land ownership and potential land use along
the route; (B) the estimated cost of land acquisition; (C) an
examination of the appropriateness of motorized use along the
trail.
Cost and Budgetary Considerations
The following estimate of the cost of this measure has been
provided by the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, September 18, 1996.
Hon. Frank H. Murkowski,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
reviewed H.R. 531, an act to designate the Great Western Scenic
Trail as a study trail under the National Trails System Act,
and for other purposes, as reported by the Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources on September 16, 1996. CBO
estimates that implementing this legislation would cost about
$300,000 over fiscal years 1997 and 1998, assuming
appropriation of the necessary amounts. Enacting H.R. 531 would
not affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-
go procedures would not apply.
H.R. 531 would amend the National Trails System Act to
designate the Great Western Trail as a potential addition to
the National Trails System. This act would require that the
Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the Department
of the Interior, conduct a study of various issues concerning
the trail. Based on information provided by the Forest Service,
CBO estimates that the study would cost about $300,000,
assuming appropriation of the necessary funds, and would take
two years to complete.
H.R. 531 contains no private-sector or intergovernmental
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4) and would have no impact on the budgets of
state, local, or tribal governments.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Victoria V.
Heid.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill, Director.
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 H.R. 531. 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 H.R. 531, as ordered reported.
Executive Communications
On September 13, 1996, the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of
Agriculture, the Department of the Interior and the Office of
Management and Budget setting forth Executive agency
recommendations on H.R. 531. These reports had not been
received at the time the report on H.R. 531 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
Agriculture at the Subcommittee hearing follows:
Statement of Gray F. Reynolds, Deputy Chief, Forest Service, Department
of Agriculture
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: We appreciate
the opportunity to provide the views of the Department of
Agriculture regarding legislation for the Great Western Trail
and the National Discovery Trails Act. I am accompanied by
Brent Botts, Trails Program Manager here in the Washington
Office.
s. 621 and h.r. 531, great western trail
S. 621 and H.R. 531 would amend the National Trails System
Act to designate the Great Western Trail as a study trail for
potential addition to the National Trails System.
The Department of Agriculture supports enactment of S. 621
and H.R. 531.
The Forest Service testified on H.R. 531 before the House
Resources Committee, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests
and Lands, in January 1995 and recommended certain amendments
that would make the bill favorable and less costly for the
Administration. These amendments were included in the bill as
reported by the House Resources Committee on February 27, 1995,
and were also included in S. 621.
The Great Western Trail would begin at the Arizona-Mexico
border and extends north approximately 3,100 miles to the
Idaho-Montana-Canada border. The trail corridor, which also
crosses Utah and Wyoming, would extend through the heart of the
Intermountain West, some of the world's most spectacular
scenery. This trail would be located primarily on public lands,
crossing 18 National Forests and public domain lands
administered by the Bureau of Land Management. Certain segments
of the trail would also cross two National Parks, and State and
county lands in Wyoming, Utah, and Idaho.
Section 5(b) of the National Trails System Act (Public Law
90-543) provides that the study of a trail shall be finalized
and submitted to Congress within 3 complete fiscal years from
the date of designation of the trail for study. Assuming the
appropriation of funds for that purpose, we estimate that the
proposed study would cost approximately $300,000 and take 2
full fiscal years to complete. As indicated in S. 621, among
other things, the study will include the current status of land
ownership and potential use along the designated route, the
estimated cost of acquisition of lands or interests in lands,
if any, and examination of the appropriateness of motorized
trail use along the Great Western Trail.
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 H.R. 531, as ordered reported, are shown as follows
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black
brackets, new matters is printed in italic, existing law in
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C.
1244(c)) is amended by adding at the end of the following new
paragraph:
(38) The Great Western Scenic Trail, a system of trails to
accommodate a wide variety of travel users in a corridor of
approximately 3,100 miles in length extending from the Arizona-
New Mexico border to the Idaho-Montana-Canada border, following
the approximate route depicted on the map identified as ``Great
Western Trail Corridor, 1988'', which shall be on file and
available for public inspection in the Office of the Chief of
the Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
The trail study shall be conducted by the Secretary of
Agriculture, in consultation with the Secretary of the
Interior, in accordance with subsection (b) and shall include--
(A) the current status of land ownership and current
and potential use along the designated route;
(B) the estimated cost of acquisition of lands or
interests in lands, if any; and
(C) an examination of the appropriateness of
motorized trail use along the trail.