[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 2099, H.R. 3917 and H.R. 4874
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
July 9, 2002
__________
Serial No. 107-136
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
house
or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
______
80-550 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska, George Miller, California
Vice Chairman Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Jim Saxton, New Jersey Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Elton Gallegly, California Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Samoa
Joel Hefley, Colorado Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Ken Calvert, California Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Scott McInnis, Colorado Calvin M. Dooley, California
Richard W. Pombo, California Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Adam Smith, Washington
George Radanovich, California Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Islands
Carolina Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Mac Thornberry, Texas Jay Inslee, Washington
Chris Cannon, Utah Grace F. Napolitano, California
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Tom Udall, New Mexico
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Mark Udall, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Greg Walden, Oregon Hilda L. Solis, California
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Betty McCollum, Minnesota
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Tim Holden, Pennsylvania
C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana
Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California, Chairman
DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands Ranking Democrat Member
Elton Gallegly, California Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
Joel Hefley, Colorado Samoa
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Tom Udall, New Mexico
Carolina, Mark Udall, Colorado
Vice Chairman Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Mac Thornberry, Texas Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Chris Cannon, Utah Hilda L. Solis, California
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Betty McCollum, Minnesota
Jim Gibbons, Nevada
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 9, 2002..................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Baird, Hon. Brian, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Washington........................................ 4
Prepared statement on H.R. 2099.......................... 6
Murtha, Hon. John P., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Pennsylvania, Prepared statement on H.R. 3917..... 7
Otter, Hon. C.L. ``Butch'', a Representative in Congress from
the State of Idaho......................................... 2
Prepared statement on H.R. 4874.......................... 4
Radanovich, Hon. George P., a Representative in Congress from
the State of California.................................... 1
Prepared statement on H.R. 2099, H.R. 3917, and H.R. 4874 2
Statement of Witnesses:
Anderson, Bruce, Land Surveyor, Kootenai County, Coeur
d'Alene, Idaho............................................. 54
Prepared statement on H.R. 4874.......................... 55
Anderson, Robert, Deputy Assistant Director, Minerals, Realty
and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, U.S.
Department of the Interior................................. 9
Prepared statement on H.R. 4874.......................... 10
Hagensen, Bruce, Board Member, Vancouver National Historic
Reserve Trust, Vancouver, Washington....................... 40
Prepared statement on H.R. 2099.......................... 42
Kemmerer, Elizabeth, Flight 93 Family Organization
Representative, Budd Lake, New Jersey...................... 38
Prepared statement on H.R. 3917.......................... 39
Pollard, Hon. Royce E., Mayor, City of Vancouver, Washington. 20
Prepared statement on H.R. 2099.......................... 22
Smith, P. Daniel, Special Assistant to the Director, National
Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.............. 10
Prepared statement on H.R. 2099.......................... 12
Prepared statement on H.R. 3917.......................... 14
Tokar-Ickes, Pamela, Somerset County Commissioner, Somerset,
Pennsylvania............................................... 33
Prepared statement on H.R. 3917.......................... 36
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 2099, TO AMEND THE OMNIBUS PARKS AND PUBLIC
LANDS MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1996 TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE FUNDING AUTHORIZATION
FOR THE VANCOUVER NATIONAL HISTORIC RESERVE; H.R. 3917, TO AUTHORIZE A
NATIONAL MEMORIAL TO COMMEMORATE THE PASSENGERS AND CREW OF FLIGHT 93
WHO, ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, COURAGEOUSLY GAVE THEIR LIVES THEREBY
THWARTING A PLANNED ATTACK ON OUR NATION'S CAPITAL, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES; AND H.R. 4874, TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO
DISCLAIM ANY FEDERAL INTEREST IN LANDS ADJACENT TO SPIRIT LAKE AND TWIN
LAKES IN THE STATE OF IDAHO RESULTING FROM POSSIBLE OMISSION OF LANDS
FROM AN 1880 SURVEY
----------
Tuesday, July 9, 2002
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2 p.m., in room
1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. George Radanovich
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE RADANOVICH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Mr. Radanovich. Good afternoon. The Subcommittee on
National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands will come to
order. And this afternoon we are going to hear testimony on
three bills, H.R. 3917, H.R. 4874, and H.R. 2099. Our first
bill, H.R. 3917, is introduced by Representative John Murtha,
would authorize a national memorial to commemorate the
passengers and crew of Flight 93 who, on September 11th, 2001,
courageously gave their lives, thereby thwarting a plane attack
on our Nation's Capital.
Our second bill is H.R. 4874, introduced by our Committee
colleague Butch Otter, which would direct the Secretary of the
Interior to disclaim any Federal interest in lands adjacent to
Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in the State of Idaho resulting from
possible omission of lands from an 1880 survey.
Finally, our last bill H.R. 2099, introduced by
Representative Brian Baird, would amend the Omnibus Parks and
Public Lands Management Act of 1994 to provide for increased
funding authorization for the Vancouver National Historic
Reserve.
Before--let's see. I am informed that Mrs. Christensen will
not be here today, so I am going to ask for unanimous consent--
I will likely get it--that Mr. Baird, Mr. Murtha, and Mr. Otter
would be permitted to sit on the dais following statements.
Without objection, so ordered.
Gentlemen, welcome to the hearing. And I think that what we
will do is go to our first panel, and I am proud to recognize
the Honorable Butch Otter, Representative from the First
District of Idaho. Butch, welcome to your Committee, and please
begin your testimony on H.R. 4874.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Radanovich follows:]
Statement of The Honorable George P. Radanovich, Chairman,
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands
Good afternoon. The hearing will come to order.
This afternoon the Subcommittee will hear testimony on three bills,
H.R. 3917, H.R. 4874, and H.R. 2099.
Our first bill, H.R. 3917, introduced by Representative John
Murtha, would authorize a national memorial to commemorate the
passengers and crew of Flight 93 who, on September 11, 2001,
courageously gave their lives thereby thwarting a planned attack on our
Nation's Capital.
Our second bill, H.R. 4874, introduced by our Committee colleague
Butch Otter, would direct the Secretary of the Interior to disclaim any
Federal interest in lands adjacent to Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in the
State of Idaho resulting from possible omission of lands from an 1880
survey.
And finally, our last bill, H.R. 2099, introduced by Representative
Brian Baird, would amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management
Act of 1996 to provide for increased funding authorization for the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
Before turning the time over to Mrs. Christensen, I would ask
unanimous consent that Mr. Baird, Mr. Murtha, and Mr. Otter be
permitted to sit on the dais following their statements. Without
objection, so ordered.
I now turn to the Ranking Member, Mrs. Christensen for any opening
statement she may have.
______
STATEMENT OF HON. BUTCH OTTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO
Mr. Otter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was going--I
hesitated, but I was going to ask for a division of that
question, being the only other member of the Committee here. I
might have allowed myself to sit up there, but I am not so sure
about Brian.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing today and
for providing the opportunity for me to testify before the
Subcommittee. I introduced House Resolution 4874, a bill to
direct the Secretary of Interior to disclaim any Federal
interest in lands adjacent to Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in
northern Idaho. The bill requires the Bureau of Land Management
to conduct a new survey of the lakes to correct errors
identified in the original 1880 survey.
For over 100 years, individuals have owned land around the
beautiful lakes located in Idaho's Kootenai County. However,
ownership is now in question for more than 400 families who
bought the land and have paid taxes on the property. House
Resolution 4874 will correct that problem.
In 1880, John B. David, a surveyor under contract with the
General Land Office, grossly misrepresented portions of the
actual lakeshore around Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes. In some
places the meander line along the shore are up to a mile and a
half away from their actual location. No one noticed the
inaccurate survey when the land was originally patented, and no
one caught the mistake over the years as the land changed
hands. In the meantime, the shorelines of these popular lakes
have become heavily developed. It was not until recently that
Kootenai County surveyor Bruce Anderson--who will be testifying
on the third panel, Mr. Chairman--discovered the problem.
County officials have expressed concern over their
inability to approve and regulate new developments, surveys,
and permits due to the inaccuracy of the original government
survey. The problem will only worsen as the lake becomes more
developed. Under current law the Bureau of Land Management is
required to conduct a survey of the actual meander of the
lakes. The lands between the old incorrect meander line and the
new meander line will become omitted land and would revert to
the Federal ownership. Property owners would be required to
repurchase at fair market value the land they believed they had
owned for over 100 years as well as pay for the survey and the
administrative costs, and I think that that is simply not fair.
These individuals bought the land in good faith, and the
government should not be allowed to take it from them simply
because of a survey error over 120 years ago.
My legislation corrects the problem by creating a solution
that retains the correct ownership situation without placing
the expense of correcting it on the affected property owners.
H.R. 4874 allows BLM to issue a, quote, disclaimer of interest,
end quote, in the affected lands so title companies in Kootenai
County can proceed with ownership-related matters around clear
title.
The legislation also authorizes the necessary funding at
Bureau of Land Management to conduct a new survey and perform
the required administrative procedures. Most of the property
owners involved in this situation have a chain of title that
goes back well over 100 years. H.R. 4874 is really the only
acceptable solution to that problem, and I look forward to
hearing from the witnesses, both from the Administration as
well as from Kootenai County, and I want to work with my
colleagues on this legislation.
I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for your time.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Otter.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Otter follows:]
Statement of The Honorable C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Idaho
Mr. Chairman, thank you for having this hearing today and for
providing the opportunity for me to testify before the Subcommittee.
I introduced H.R. 4874 a bill to direct the Secretary of the
Interior to disclaim any Federal interest in lands adjacent to Spirit
Lake and Twin Lakes in northern Idaho. The bill requires the Bureau of
Land Management to conduct a new survey of the lakes to correct errors
identified in the original 1880 survey.
For over one hundred years, individuals have owned land around the
beautiful lakes located in Idaho's Kootenai County. However, ownership
now is in question for more than 400 people who bought the land and pay
taxes on the property. H.R. 4874 will correct that problem.
In 1880 John B. David, a surveyor under contract with the General
Land Office, grossly misrepresented portions of the actual lakeshore
around Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes. In some places the meander lines
along the shore are up to a mile and a half away from their actual
location. No one noticed the inaccurate survey when the land was
originally patented, and no one caught the mistake over the years as
the land changed hands. In the meantime, the shorelines of these
popular lakes have become heavily developed.
It was not until recently that Kootenai County Surveyor Bruce
Anderson, who will be testifying on the third panel, discovered the
problem. County officials have expressed concern over their inability
to approve and regulate new developments, surveys, and permits due to
the inaccuracy of the original government survey. The problem will only
worsen as the lakes become more developed.
Under current law, the Bureau of Land Management is required to
conduct a resurvey of the actual meander of the lakes. The lands
between the old incorrect meander line and the new meander line would
become omitted land and would revert to Federal ownership. Property
owners would be required to repurchase, at fair market value, the land
they believed they owned for over 100 years, as well as pay for survey
and administrative costs. That is simply not fair. These individuals
bought the land in good faith and the government should not be allowed
to take it from them simply because of a survey error over 120 years
ago.
My legislation corrects the problem by creating a solution that
retains the correct ownership situation without placing the expense of
correcting it on the affected property owners. H.R. 4874 allows BLM to
issue a ``disclaimer of interest'' in the affected lands so title
companies and Kootenai County can proceed with ownership related
matters surrounding clear title. The legislation also authorizes the
necessary funding for BLM to conduct a new survey and perform the
required administrative procedures.
Most of the property owners involved in this situation have a chain
of title that goes back over 100 years. H.R. 4874 is really the only
acceptable solution to the problem. I look forward to hearing from the
witnesses and I want to work with my colleagues to get this legislation
passed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
______
Mr. Radanovich. We will now move on to the honorable Brian
Baird, who is representing the Third District of Washington,
speaking on H.R. 2099. Brian, welcome back to Committee. It is
good to have you here again, and please begin your testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN BAIRD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
Mr. Baird. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to
testify before you today. I will make essentially two points,
which will be reiterated by my good friends Mayor Royce Pollard
and Bruce Hagensen of America's Vancouver.
The two points I want to emphasize are these: First of all,
the historic reserve in Vancouver is of tremendous national
historical significance, as you will hear shortly. And, second,
any investment by the Park Service in the National Historic
Reserve in Vancouver is leveraged strongly by additional
funding by the local and private partners in this venture.
Fort Vancouver is located on the banks of the Columbia
River, and is perhaps the most important significant historical
site in the Pacific Northwest. It is of rich cultural and
historical significance, and that historical significance
actually predates even the Lewis and Clark expedition.
The Vancouver Barracks was established originally in 1849,
when the first contingent of U.S. Army troops arrived in the
newly American lands. From 1849 until World War I, during which
time some of the Army's most promising officers, including
Ulysses S. Grant, Phil Sheridan, George McClellan, and George
C. Marshall, were stationed in Vancouver, during that period
the barracks was the principal military headquarters for the
entire Pacific Northwest. Owing to this national significance,
the site was designated by Congress as a national historical
monument in 1948, and later as a national historical site. The
55-acre Vancouver Barracks contains 32 structures, many of
which have been determined to be eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places, including several rare
examples of military architecture.
The barracks is an important part of the Vancouver National
Historic Reserve, which was designated by Congress in 1996 for
coordinated preservation, public use, and management of
historic sites within the Vancouver area. The reserve was
established as a partnership among landowners in the reserve,
which included the National Park Service, the city of
Vancouver, the U.S. Army, and the Washington State Office of
Archaeology and Preservation. The 366-acre historic reserve
contains Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, the Vancouver
Barracks, Officers Row, Pearson Air Field, the Water Resource
Center, and portions of the Columbia River waterfront. It is
truly a unique and wonderful resource.
The 1996 Act that created the historic reserve provided an
initial $5 million authorization for capital projects which has
now been fully appropriated. It is important to note that a
provision was included in the Fiscal Year 2002 Interior
appropriations bill which essentially said there will be no
further Federal appropriations for capital projects until a new
authorization for such projects is approved by Congress. Of
great importance to the district and to our Nation, the
legislation before us today would increase from 5 million to 25
million the authorization for appropriations.
For over a half century, local, State and Federal agencies,
along with private individuals and organizations, have
collaborated to preserve and interpret the history of Vancouver
and the region. During the past 15 years--and this is important
to emphasize--more than $30 million has been invested in
property improvements and projects within the present historic
reserve boundaries. The Federal Government to date has provided
approximately 25 percent of the capital funds, while the
remaining 75 percent has been provided by local and State
governments and foundations, such as the Vancouver National
Historic Trust as well as individuals and businesses. You will
be hearing from, again, my friends Mayor Pollard and former
Mayor Hagensen about these investments.
Based on the Barracks Adaptive Reuse and Economic Analysis,
it has been determined that rehabilitation of buildings in the
area will require approximately $40 million. The city of
Vancouver has committed $6 million for this purpose, the State
of Washington has committed $6 million for educational uses,
and private donations will make up an additional 8 million;
hence, the aforementioned leveraging of the Federal funds. Thus
we are asking for eventually a total Federal contribution of
$20 million, which is why we need the authorization today.
I appreciate the Committee's careful consideration of this
request for an increase in authorization for Fort Vancouver
National Historic Reserve, and I look forward to working with
the Chairman and the Committee to make that happen. I
appreciate your time today and your interest in this matter.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Baird.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Brian Baird, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Washington
Mr. Chairman, Madame Ranking Member, and Members of the
Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today
in support of my legislation, H.R. 2099. This bill would increase the
authorization for Federal spending on preserving and rehabilitating the
Fort Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
Fort Vancouver, located on the banks of the Columbia River, is
perhaps the most significant historic site in the Pacific Northwest. It
is rich in historic and cultural national significance, pre-dating the
arrival of Lewis and Clark through the mid-20th century. Before the
arrival of the American traders and well before the Lewis and Clark
expedition arrived, this site on the shore of the Columbia River was a
home to a variety of Indian tribes for over 10,000 years, including the
Cascades, Chehalis, Chinook, Clallam, Cowlitz, Klickitat, Nisqually,
Tillamook, and Shasta tribes. Fort Vancouver was also headquarters for
the Hudson's Bay Company's Columbia Department, embracing present-day
British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and Idaho. The trading post, which
was the center of the region's fur trading enterprise, represented
Britain's business and governmental interests in competition with the
United States. The 1846 treaty between Great Britain and the United
States established today's northern-most boundary at the 49th parallel.
The Vancouver Barracks was established in 1849 when the first
contingent of U.S. Army troops arrived in the newly American lands.
From 1849 until World War I, during which time some of the Army's most
promising officers (including Ulysses S. Grant, Phillip Sheridan,
George McClellan and George C. Marshall) were stationed at Vancouver,
the barracks was the principal military headquarters for the Pacific
Northwest. Owing to its national significance, the site was designated
by Congress as a National Historic Monument in 1948, and later as a
National Historic Site. The 55-acre Vancouver Barracks contains 32
structures, many of which have been determined to be eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places, including several
rare examples of military architecture.
The Vancouver Barracks is an important part of the Vancouver
National Historic Reserve, which was designated by Congress in 1996 for
the coordinated preservation, public use and management of historic
sites within the Vancouver area. The Reserve was established as a
partnership among the landowners in the Reserve, which include the
National Park Service, the city of Vancouver, the U.S. Army and the
Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The
366 acre Historic Reserve contains Fort Vancouver National Historic
Site, the Vancouver Barracks, Officers Row, Pearson Field, the Water
Resources Center and portions of the Columbia River waterfront.
Today, I welcome the opportunity to discuss the importance of H.R.
2099, which seeks to preserve Fort Vancouver for future generations.
The 1996 Act that created the Historic Reserve provided an initial $5
million authorization for capital projects, which has been fully
authorized. It is important to note that a provision was included in
the Fiscal Year 2002 Interior Appropriations bill which essentially
says there would be no further Federal appropriations for capital
projects within the Vancouver National Historic Reserve unless and
until a new ``authorization'' for capital projects is approved by
Congress. Of great importance to my congressional district, to the
Pacific Northwest and our nation, the legislation would increase from
$5 million to $25 million the authorization of appropriations for the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve development costs.
For over half a century local, state and Federal Government
agencies, along with numerous private individuals and organizations,
have been collaborating to preserve and interpret the history of the
Vancouver area and the region. During the past 15 years in excess of
$30 million has been invested in property improvements and projects
within the present Historic Reserve boundaries. The Federal Government
has provided approximately 25% of the capital funds for these efforts.
The remaining 75% has been provided by local and state governments,
foundations such as the locally based Vancouver National Historic
Trust, and numerous other individuals, businesses and not-for-profit
organizations. In fact, you will be hearing from two of these partners,
Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard and Bruce Hagensen, Board Member of the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust, later during this hearing.
Based on the Vancouver Barracks Adaptive Reuse and Economic
Analysis completed in early 2000, it has been determined that the
rehabilitation of buildings and the adaptations necessary for new uses
in the west barracks will cost approximately $40 million. The city of
Vancouver has committed $6 million for infrastructure improvements, the
state of Washington has committed $6 million for educational uses, and
private donations will make up an additional $8 million for building
preservation efforts. A total Federal contribution of $20 million is
being sought to match non-Federal funding for the west Barracks
project. This Federal funding has been deemed key to successful private
fund-raising efforts, securing tenants for the property, minimizing the
impact of inflation and avoiding additional serious property
deterioration.
I appreciate your careful consideration of this request for an
increase in the authorization for the Fort Vancouver National Historic
Reserve. I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and the
other members of the Subcommittee to move this legislation forward and
continue progress on this significant project for the Pacific Northwest
and our nation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to answering any questions
that members of the Subcommittee may have.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Our next bill is H.R. 3917. Representative
John Murtha was unavoidably detained and won't be here to make
an opening statement or to testify; however, we do have his
written testimony on hand, and I ask unanimous consent that Mr.
Murtha's statement be included into the record. There being no
objection--Mr. Otter, are you OK with that?
Mr. Otter. Yes.
Mr. Radanovich. OK. So ordered.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Murtha follows:]
Statement of The Honorable John P. Murtha, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Pennsylvania
I want to thank the Chairman, Ranking Member and the Subcommittee
for holding this hearing on this extremely important bill.
By now we are all too familiar with the story of United Airlines
Flight 93, which crashed on September 11, 2001 in Shanksville,
Pennsylvania at 10:06 am after being hijacked by terrorists en route
from Newark, New Jersey to San Francisco, California.
The people on Flight 93 were courageous and heroic in giving their
lives to bring down that airplane before it could reach its intended
target in our Nation's capital. Hundreds if not thousands of additional
lives would have been lost, and our government would have been
disrupted if this attack had been carried out as planned. I don't think
anybody can argue with the fact that the crash site has national
historical significance as the first site in America where citizens
fought back against terrorism. As the bill says, the crash site is 'a
profound symbol of American patriotism and spontaneous leadership of
citizen-heroes.'
As we approach the one-year anniversary of that fateful, horrible
day in our Nation's history, I am confident that we will pass this bill
expeditiously to indicate our unwavering commitment to honoring these
brave souls with a memorial site befitting their character.
The passage of this legislation will not set in stone any type of
memorial plan, but rather a process for establishing a memorial site.
The process of designing this National Monument must move forward, but
it also must be careful and deliberate. All stakeholders need a voice
in the process. That includes the family of passengers and crew, the
local community surrounding the crash site, landowners at the site, the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, emergency responders, historians and the
National Park Service, who will inherit the responsibility for not only
assisting in the design, development and construction of the memorial
but maintaining the memorial site in perpetuity.
As we envisioned the process, two groups will be involved:
The Flight 93 Task Force will be organized by local stakeholders
and families of victims. It is my understanding that this
organizational effort has begun and has been ongoing as the families of
victims have been sorting out who will be primarily speaking for them.
However, it will be given added momentum by the passage of this
legislation. The Task Force will be as broad-based as possible among
the affected parties and include as many people as possible to satisfy
concerns regarding input. I think everyone agrees fully with this
concept of including as much input as possible from the stakeholders to
make sure all have a say and their concerns are addressed throughout
the process.
The Task Force will recommend members whom the Secretary of
Interior will appoint to a 15-Member Flight 93 Advisory Commission.
This Commission will then undertake the formal process of developing
the plan for the site. As with the Task Force, it is expected that the
Commission will comprise the broadest and fairest possible
representation of all stakeholders.
Nearly one million dollars have already been raised privately for
this memorial, and we expect more donations as the process moves
forward. However, I also look forward to working with my Colleagues in
Congress to ensure that the project receives adequate Federal funding
as needed.
I would like to thank each and every single person who has worked
and will continue to work to make this memorial a reality.
Finally, I would also like to remember individually the people on
that plane. They are the reason we are here today. They are:
,-- ,
Jason Dahl Jane Folger
LeRoy Homer, Jr. Colleen L. Fraser
Lorraine Bay Andrew Garcia
Sandra Bradshaw Jeremy Glick
Cee Cee Lyles Lauren Grandcolas
Wanda Green Donald F. Greene
Deborah Anne Jacobs Welsh Linda Gronlund
Christian Adams Richard Guadagno
Todd Beamer Toshiya Kuge
Alan Beaven Hilda Marcin
Mark Bingham Waleska Martinez
Deora Bodley Nicole Miller
Marion Britton Louis J. Nacke II
Thomas E. Burnett Jr. Donald and Jean Peterson
Willam Cashman Mark ``Mickey'' Rothenberg
Georgine Rose Corrigan Christine Snyder
Patricia Cushing John Talignani
Joseph DeLuca Honor Elizabeth Wainio
Patrick ``Joe'' Driscoll Kristin Gould White
Edward Porter Felt
Thank you.
______
Mr. Radanovich. And with that, I want to thank you
gentlemen. You are more than welcome to join us on the dais for
the rest of the hearing.
And we will move on to panel two, which is Mr. Daniel
Smith, special assistant to the Director of the National Park
Service, and also Robert Anderson, the Deputy Assistant for
Minerals, Realty, and Resource Protection of the BLM, to speak
on these bills.
Gentlemen, welcome. We are going to turn the clock on you
guys. It is a 5-minute clock. Give your testimony. And it is
just like the regular traffic rules: Green is go, yellow is
speed up, and red is stop.
So, you may begin your testimony, Mr. Anderson. Welcome to
the Committee; and let's go.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT ANDERSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT FOR MINERALS,
REALTY, AND RESOURCE PROTECTION, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Mr. Robert Anderson. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the
opportunity to testify on H.R. 4874. This bill directs the
Secretary of the Interior to disclaim any Federal interest in
lands adjacent to Spirit and Twin Lakes in Idaho resulting from
omission of such lands from an 1880 survey. The Department of
Interior supports H.R. 4874.
Errors were recently discovered in the 1880 survey of the
Spirit and Twin Lakes area. The original survey shows the
meander lines along the lakes at up to 1/2 mile away from their
actual location, in effect omitting about 600 acres of land
from the official survey of record. Between 1891 and 1908, land
surrounding the lakes was patented out of Federal ownership
based on the belief that the 1880 survey was correct. A
discovery of errors in the 1880 survey raises concerns about
potential clouds on title to some 400 properties along these
two lakes. Many property owners have a chain of title that goes
back over 100 years. No one disputes that the current cloud on
the title is due to errors of the 1880 survey.
The Bureau of Land Management has no interest in retaining
the lands and believes it is in the public interest to remove
the cloud on the many titles to the property. This is an
unusual situation because it involves a large number of private
homes and lands with lengthy chains of title. The 1880
surveyors were discovered by private and Kootenai County
surveyors and brought to the attention of BLM in 2001.
The BLM believes that use of the normal Agency procedures
for clearing lands, title to lands erroneously described in the
1880 survey would raise unnecessary concerns to affected
residents and be costly and time-consuming to property owners
and the United States.
H.R. 4874 would authorize BLM to investigate alleged errors
in the 1880 survey; to resurvey the area to establish the
official record of land and lakeshore areas; and, based on that
resurvey, issue a disclaimer of interest that would divest the
United States of any interest in the affected lands. The
investigation and resurvey authorized by H.R. 4874 would allow
the BLM to establish an official survey plat through which
legal descriptions of real property could be referenced. This
would remove the cloud on title to over 400 properties. The
Department believes the establishment of an accurate survey
plat is in the public interest, and therefore it is appropriate
that the Federal Government rather than the individual
landowners bear the costs of the resurvey.
The Department supports enactment of H.R. 4874, and would
like to work with the Committee on a few technical changes to
the legislation.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Anderson.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Robert Anderson follows:]
Statement of Robert Anderson, Deputy Assistant Director, Minerals,
Realty and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, U.S.
Department of the Interior
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on H.R. 4874. This bill
directs the Secretary of the Interior to disclaim any Federal interest
in lands adjacent to Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in Idaho resulting from
the omission of such lands from an 1880 survey. The Department of the
Interior supports H.R. 4874.
Errors were recently discovered in an 1880 survey of the Spirit
Lake and Twin Lakes areas. The original survey shows the meander lines
along the lakes at up to one-half mile away from their actual location,
in effect omitting approximately 600 acres of land from the official
survey of record. Between 1891 and 1908, land surrounding the lakes was
patented out of Federal ownership based on the belief that the 1880
survey was correct. The discovery of the errors in the 1880 survey
raises concerns about potential clouds on title to some 400 properties
along these two lakes. Many property owners have a chain of title that
goes back over 100 years. No one disputes that the current cloud on the
title is due to the errors in the 1880 survey. The Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) has no interest in retaining the lands erroneously
omitted from the 1880 survey, and believes it is in the public interest
to remove the clouds on title to the properties.
This is an unusual situation because it involves a large number of
private homes and lands with lengthy chains of title. The 1880 survey
errors were discovered by private and Kootenai County surveyors and
brought to the attention of the BLM in 2001. The BLM believes that use
of normal agency procedures for clearing title to the lands erroneously
described in the 1880 survey would raise unnecessary concerns to
affected residents and be costly and time consuming to property owners.
H.R. 4874 would authorize the BLM to investigate alleged errors in
the 1880 survey, resurvey the area to establish the official record of
land and lakeshore areas, and, based on that resurvey, issue a
``disclaimer of interest'' that would divest the United States of any
interest in the affected lands. The investigation and resurvey
authorized by H.R. 4874 would allow the BLM to establish an official
survey plat to which legal descriptions of real property could be
referenced. This would remove the cloud on title to over 400 properties
resulting from the errors in the 1880 survey. The Department believes
establishment of an accurate survey plat is in the public interest, and
therefore it is appropriate that the Federal Government, rather than
individual landowners, bear the cost of the resurvey.
The Department supports enactment of H.R. 4874, and would like to
work with the Committee on some technical changes to the legislation.
This concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any
questions.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Mr. Smith, welcome to the Committee, here
to speak on, I believe, two bills.
Mr. Smith. Yes, Mr. Chairman. And I will summarize both and
submit the entire testimony for the record.
Mr. Radanovich. Terrific.
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to
appear before your Committee to present the views of the
Department of the Interior on H.R. 3917, a bill to commemorate
the passengers and crew of Flight 93 who, on September 11,
2001, courageously gave their lives thereby thwarting a planned
attack on our Nation's Capital and for other purposes. The
Department supports the enactment of this bill with minor
amendments discussed at the end of this testimony.
On September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four United
States passenger aircraft with the intent to kill American
citizens and to use the planes as weapons to destroy important
structures critical to this country. The targets were in New
York City and Washington, D.C. Three out of four of the planes
hit their mark, destroying the Twin Towers of the World Trade
Center, destroying a significant portion of the Pentagon,
causing the deaths of almost 3,000 people, and affecting
millions of people worldwide.
But one hijacked plane did not succeed in its mission.
Passengers and crew on the fourth plane, United Airlines Flight
93, learned of these disasters in midair and took heroic
action--excuse me--by thwarting a planned attack on our
Nation's Capital, which resulted in the crash of the plane into
a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, within the rural, remote,
and previously peaceful Stonycreek Township.
The passengers and crew of Flight 93 are remembered and
honored as having given their lives to save others. They have
inspired other airline passengers and crews to be significantly
more vigilant and proactive in dealing with hijackers, and have
directly influenced new airline security systems. Flight 93
will be understood to be nationally significant, because on
Flight 93 America began to fight back.
The way people traditionally mourn victims of catastrophic
events by visiting the site of the occurrence reflects an
instinctive public choice of the appropriate location for a
memorial. In the months that followed September 11th's attacks,
thousands of people have visited the Flight 93 site, drawn by
the heroic action and sacrifice of the Flight 93 passengers and
crew. Many are profoundly concerned about the future
disposition of the crash site, including grieving families of
the passengers and crew, the people of the region who are the
current stewards of the site, and a broad spectrum of citizens
across the United States.
The Stonycreek Township and Shanksville have no resources
to enable them to protect the site from inappropriate relic
seekers or to serving the visiting public. Congress provided
emergency appropriations to secure the site, but for only a
short time. Establishing a permanent memorial would serve as a
meaningful way to honor those who sacrificed their lives on
September 11th, and would provide an opportunity to provide a
respectful setting for family members and other visitors.
Like so many families in America, we continue to mourn the
loss of a member of our Interior family, Richard Guadagno, a
17-year employee of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
manager of the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge in
California, who was among the heroic passengers of Flight 93.
The Department offers our deepest sympathy to all those who
lost a friend or family member because of the attacks on 9/11.
The National Park Service has had the opportunity to
conduct reconnaissance and analysis of the site of the crash of
Flight 93. Numerous National Park Service professional staff
have visited the Flight 93 site over the past 10 months to
understand the site and its changes over time and to meet with
local people, including landowners, the local historical
society volunteers, the mayor of Shanksville, county
commissioners, rescue workers, and others to provide technical
assistance and advice.
There is a critical need for the National Park Service to
provide technical assistance to consult on the immediate needs
of collection, storage, oral history, and archives. We learned
from our role at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, there is a
great need to permit the public to place mementos and express
feelings. The Somerset County Historical Society has begun an
archive and collection of such materials; the National Park
Service should be available to provide whatever consultation or
assistance is desired.
This legislation recognizes the need for a special process
to determine how best to treat the site, whether as a preserved
landscape, a designed memorial structure, or some other
appropriate treatment. Most importantly, the legislation, with
special sensitivity and insight, provides time for listening
and time for allowing a consensus to build, with an appropriate
role for the family members of the flight passengers and crew,
for the public, the community, and for the Secretary of
Interior. It is appropriate the crash sight of Flight 93 be
designated a national memorial as a unit of the National Park
System, and that it be done contemporaneously, and that the
National Park Service participate in this public process.
The legislation suggests the commission will have the
authority to raise funds. We believe many Americans will want
to have an active part in the fundraising process and therefore
recommend that the authorization for fundraising be explicit in
the legislation.
We look forward to work with the Committee on this
amendment and a couple of technical amendments needed to the
bill.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]
Statement of P. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the Director,
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of
the Department of the Interior on H.R. 2099, a bill to amend the
Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to increase the
authorization of appropriations for the Vancouver National Historic
Reserve and for the preservation of Vancouver Barracks.
The Department recognizes and appreciates the efforts of our
partners to cooperatively administer the Vancouver National Historic
Reserve. This is a partnership that has worked well, and we look
forward to continuing our work with the City of Vancouver, State of
Washington, and the Department of the Army to achieve the goals outline
in the Cooperative Management Plan for the Reserve. However, in light
of the Department's commitment to supporting the President's initiative
to eliminate the deferred maintenance backlog in our parks, we cannot
support diverting limited funds away from the Service's own needs. We
believe that funds that are appropriated to the National Park Service
are more appropriately directed to reducing the long list of necessary
but deferred construction projects that have been identified in our
national parks.
The Vancouver area of southwestern Washington was an important site
of 19th-century social, economic, political, and military activity in
the Pacific Northwest. In recognition of its historical significance,
Congress in 1948 designated a portion of the area Fort Vancouver as a
National Monument, and in 1961 Fort Vancouver became a National
Historic Site. Over the next several decades, continuing efforts to
preserve the area's other historic sites prompted Congress, in 1990, to
pass legislation authorizing the creation of a Vancouver Historical
Study Commission. Subsequently, the commission recommended the
establishment of a reserve as the best management strategy for
protection of the resources within the study area, and in 1996,
Congress passed legislation that established the Vancouver National
Historic Reserve. The Reserve itself is not a unit of the National Park
System, although the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site component is
part of the System.
The Reserve encompasses 366 acres along the Columbia River within
the City of Vancouver, Washington, and includes a particularly rich
collection of cultural resources, including Fort Vancouver National
Historic Site, Officers Row, Vancouver Barracks, Pearson Air Museum and
Air Field, portions of the Columbia River waterfront, and the Water
Resources Education Center. In this nationally significant historic
setting, the Reserve celebrates well over 200 years of history
including the use of the area by Native Americans; the creation of the
first multi-cultural village of its kind in the Pacific; the Hudson Bay
Company's Fort Vancouver, which was one of the largest such British
enterprises; and the growth of the U.S. Army in the Pacific Northwest
as reflected in the historic Officers Row and Vancouver Barracks.
The law that established the Reserve directed the preparation of a
general management plan to be developed by a partnership comprised of
the National Park Service, the Historic Preservation Office of the
State of Washington, the Department of the Army, and the City of
Vancouver, Washington. The plan, completed in early 2000 and approved
by the Secretary of the Interior, envisions an active public/private
partnership in managing the shared assets of the Reserve. The Reserve
partners, while maintaining full authority and management
responsibilities for their individual areas consistent with applicable
laws, work cooperatively on all matters relating to the Reserve.
Additional financial support comes from the privately based nonprofit
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust. The cornerstones of the 15-
year Cooperative Management Plan are preservation, education, and
public use.
The plan, however, is not a budget document. While it identified
estimated costs for recommended actions, it did not commit any of the
agencies or other partners to specific funding requirements. Signature
by the partners or the Secretaries did not commit the Department of
Interior or Army to any funding requirements outside of agency budgets
as approved by Congress.
The law that established the Reserve authorized the appropriation
of $400,000 annually for operational costs, and a total of $5 million
for development costs. These funds have been provided in the National
Park Service budgets for fiscal years 1998 through 2002 in the
construction and statutory aid accounts.
The Cooperative Management Plan for the Reserve provided a summary
of development costs estimated at approximately $85 million (in 1998
dollars). The plan contemplates that the costs will be shared by the
Federal Government, the state, the city, nonprofit groups and
organizations, and private investors, corporations, and businesses. The
Federal share could be allocated from the U.S. Army, the U.S. Army
Reserve, the Department of Defense, or the Department of the Interior.
The Vancouver National Historic Reserve has benefitted greatly from
the contributions made by our partners and other donors, who have
already provided over $19 million for a wide variety of projects, and
plan to provide approximately $20 million more for projects that have
already been identified.
We would like to emphasize that we are committed to working with
our partners in the Vancouver National Historic Reserve to find
appropriate ways to meet the goals outlined in the Cooperative
Management Plan. We encourage our partners in the Reserve to continue
to seek funding and other solutions for the preservation and protection
of its resources through grants and other programs administered by the
Service, the Department, and other Federal agencies.
This concludes my testimony. I am glad to answer any questions that
you or members of the Subcommittee may have.
______
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, the second bill is H.R. 2099,
which would amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management
Act of 1996 to increase the authorization of appropriations for
the Vancouver National Historic Reserve and for the
preservation of Vancouver Barracks.
The Department recognizes and appreciates the efforts of
our partners to cooperatively administer the Vancouver National
Historic Reserve. This is a partnership that has worked well,
and we look forward to continuing our work with the city of
Vancouver, State of Washington, and the Department of the Army
to achieve the goals outlined in the cooperative management
plan for the reserve. However, in light of the Department's
commitment to supporting the President's initiative to
eliminate the deferred maintenance backlog in our parks, we
cannot support diverting limited funds away from the Service's
own needs. We believe that the funds that are appropriated to
the National Park Service are more appropriately directed to
reducing the long list of necessary, but deferred construction
projects that have been identified in our national parks.
Congress in 1948 designated a portion of the area, Fort
Vancouver, as a national monument, and in 1961 Fort Vancouver
became a national historic site. In 1996, Congress passed
legislation that established the Vancouver National Historic
Reserve. The reserve itself is not a unit of the National Park
System, although the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
component is part of the System. The reserve encompasses 366
acres along the Columbia River within the city of Vancouver,
Washington, and includes a particularly rich collection of
cultural resources. The Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
is approximately 208 of those acres.
The law that established the reserve directed the
preparation of a general management plan to be developed by a
partnership comprised of the National Park Service, the
Historic Preservation Office of the State of Washington, the
Department of the Army, the city of Vancouver, and others. The
plan, completed in early 2000 and approved by the Secretary of
the Interior, envisions an active public/private partnership in
managing the shared assets of the reserve.
The plan, however, is not a budget document. While it
defined--while it identified estimated costs for recommended
actions, it did not commit any of the agencies or other
partners to specific funding requirements. The law that
established the reserve authorized the appropriation of 400,000
annually for operational costs and a total of 5 million for
development costs. These funds have been provided to the
National Park Service budgets for fiscal years 1998 through
2002 in the construction and statutory aid accounts.
The cooperative management plan for the reserve provided a
summary of development costs estimated at approximately $85
million. The plan contemplates that the costs will be shared by
the Federal Government, the State, the city, nonprofit groups,
and organizations, and private investors, corporations, and
visitors. The Federal share could be allocated from the U.S.
Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, the Department of Defense, or the
Department of the Interior.
We would like to emphasize that we are committed to working
with our partners in the Vancouver National Historic Reserve to
find appropriate ways to meet the goals outlined in the
cooperative management plan. We encourage our partners in the
reserve to continue to seek funding and other solutions for the
preservation and protection of its resources through grants and
other programs administered by the Service, the Department, and
other Federal agencies.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony on the two bills,
and I look forward to any questions you or members of the
Committee may have.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Smith.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]
Statement of P. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the Director,
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
Committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
H.R. 3917, a bill to commemorate the passengers and crew of Flight 93
who, on September 11, 2001, courageously gave their lives thereby
thwarting a planned attack on our Nation's Capital, and for other
purposes. The Department supports the enactment of this bill with minor
amendments discussed at the end of our testimony.
H.R. 3917 would do several things. It would establish a national
memorial at the crash site to honor the passengers and crew of United
Airlines Flight 93 of September 11, 2001; it would establish a Flight
93 Advisory Commission to assist with consideration and formulation of
plans for a permanent memorial to the passengers and crew of Flight 93,
including its nature, design and construction; and it would authorize
the Secretary of the Interior to coordinate and facilitate the
activities of the Flight 93 Advisory Commission, provide technical and
financial assistance to a Flight 93 Task Force, and to administer a
Flight 93 memorial as a unit of the National Park System.
On September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four United States
passenger aircraft with the intent to kill American citizens and to use
the planes as weapons to destroy important structures critical to this
country. The targets were in New York City and Washington, D.C. Three
out of four planes hit their mark destroying the Twin Towers of the
World Trade Center, destroying a significant portion of the Pentagon,
causing the deaths of almost 3,000 people, and affecting millions of
people worldwide.
But one hijacked plane did not succeed in its mission. Passengers
and crew on the fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, learned of
these disasters in mid-air, and took heroic action by thwarting a
planned attack on our Nation's Capital, which resulted in the crash of
the plane into a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, within the rural,
remote and previously peaceful Stonycreek Township. The passengers and
crew of Flight 93 are remembered and honored as having given their
lives to save others. They have inspired other airline passengers and
crews to be significantly more vigilant and proactive in dealing with
hijackers and have directly influenced new airline security systems.
Flight 93 will be understood to be nationally significant because on
Flight 93, America began to fight back.
The way people traditionally mourn victims of catastrophic events
by visiting the site of the occurrence reflects an instinctive public
choice of the appropriate location for a memorial. In the months that
followed the September 11th attacks, thousands of people have visited
the Flight 93 site, drawn by the heroic action and sacrifice of the
Flight 93 passengers and crew. Many are profoundly concerned about the
future disposition of the crash site, including grieving families of
the passengers and crew, the people of the region who are the current
stewards of the site, and a broad spectrum of citizens across the
United States. Many of these people are forming a Flight 93 Task Force
as a broad, grassroots, inclusive organization to provide a voice for
all interested and concerned parties.
The Stonycreek Township and Shanksville have no resources to enable
them to protect the site from inappropriate relic seekers, or to serve
the visiting public. Congress provided emergency appropriations to
secure the site, but for a short time only. Establishing a permanent
memorial would serve as a meaningful way to honor those who sacrificed
their lives on September 11th and would provide an appropriately
respectful setting for family members and other visitors. As we
testified earlier this year on another memorial bill, in the case of
enormous national tragedies, we have found that commemoration seems
most appropriate at the site of the tragedy itself. The Oklahoma City
National Memorial would not have nearly the power it has if it had been
constructed anywhere else but at the site of the Murrah Building. The
memorial landscapes of Gettysburg and Antietam National Battlefields
still haunt visitors who contemplate what occurred there nearly 150
years ago. Indeed, people from all over the world continue to be drawn
to these hallowed grounds to reflect on the historical events that took
place at these sites or to pay their respects to those who lost their
lives there.
Like so many families in America, we continue to mourn the loss of
a member of our Interior family. Richard Guadagno, 17-year employee of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and manager of the Humboldt Bay
National Wildlife Refuge in California, was among the heroic passengers
on Flight 93. The Department offers our deepest sympathy to all those
who lost a friend or family member because of the attacks on September
11th. We understand that the road to healing will be long, but we
believe that through the strength and unity of this country, the spirit
of America lives on.
Public Law 105-391, the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of
1998, requires congressional authorization of areas to be studied for
potential new units of the National Park System. The law also
designates the criteria to be followed by the National Park Service in
determining whether to recommend an area as a unit of the National Park
System. The National Park Service has had the opportunity to conduct a
reconnaissance and analysis of the site of the crash of Flight 93.
Numerous National Park Service professional staff have visited the
Flight 93 site over the past ten months to understand the site and its
changes over time, to meet with local people including landowners, the
local historical society, volunteers, the Mayor of Shanksville, County
Commissioners, rescue workers, and others, to provide advice and
technical assistance in the areas of site security and in the
preservation and curation of artifacts left by visitors at the site,
and to facilitate public meetings regarding the future of the site. We
also brought to the site people directly involved with the creation of
the Oklahoma City National Memorial to provide assistance to the local
people and officials. Although this would not be considered a standard
special resource study as required under the public law, these visits
and meetings have provided information on the site's significance,
ability of local and regional governments in managing the site on a
long-term basis as a memorial site, and providing services to a large
number of visitors on a long-term basis.
H.R. 3917 also departs from the normal process for creation of a
unit of the National Park System because places that may be deemed
historical in nature are typically not designated until the passage of
a sufficient interval of time to allow for historical judgment. Yet,
the events of September 11th are so clearly important to contemporary
America that some kind of national recognition is appropriate now. In
addition, there is a crucial need for National Park Service technical
assistance to be available to consult on the immediate needs of
collections, storage, oral history, and archives. We learned from our
role at the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial there is a great need to permit
the public to place mementos and express feelings. The Somerset County
Historical Society has begun an archive and collection of such
materials; the National Park Service should be available to provide
whatever consultation or assistance is desired. During consideration of
the appropriate treatment of the site, the families, the community, the
public and the commission will likely need staff support for the public
process and for design and planning.
This legislation recognizes the need for a special process to
determine how best to treat the site, whether as a preserved landscape,
a designed memorial structure, or some other appropriate treatment.
Most importantly, the legislation, with special sensitivity and
insight, provides time for listening and time to allow a consensus to
develop, with an appropriate role for the family members of the flight
and crew, for the public, the community, and the Secretary of the
Interior.
While generally we have requested no new additions to the National
Park System while we continue to focus our resources on caring for
existing areas in the National Park System, there is little doubt that
the events of September 11th were nationally significant and have had
international implications. It is appropriate that the crash site of
Flight 93 be designated as a national memorial, as a unit of the
National Park System, that it be done contemporaneously, and that the
National Park Service participate in a sensitive process with the
public and the affected parties to recommend the appropriate treatment
of the site. One family member of a passenger of Flight 93, at a press
conference announcing the introduction of this legislation expressed a
desire that the memorial be ``a place of beauty.'' The National Park
Service would like to support the families, the public, and the
community while they develop their vision to achieve this goal.
The legislation suggests the commission will have the authority to
raise funds. We believe many Americans will want to have an active part
in the fundraising process, and therefore, recommend that the
authorization for fundraising be explicit in the legislation. We look
forward to working with the Committee on this amendment and a couple of
technical amendments needed to the bill.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This
concludes my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any
questions you or other Committee members might have.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Is there any questions from anybody on the
panel?
Mr. Baird.
Mr. Baird. Mr. Smith, briefly. I fully understand the
challenge the National Park Service faces with the backlog of
maintenance and other projects, and I respect that and
appreciate your comments in that regard.
What I find unique about the Vancouver Barracks and the
historic reserve is that there is tremendous leveraging of the
funds, and essentially you are getting buy one, get two free,
or something of that sort. You are getting tremendous resource
magnification of the investments. Has the Park Service
considered that factor in its deliberations?
Mr. Smith. Congressman, it has. Part of our rationale is
that with the 208 acres of the 366 actually being a unit of the
System, that is about a million dollars a year, 14 FTE. So we
have a tremendous presence there. And at this time we are aware
there are certain appropriations that are moving through DOD
because of your Active components of military that are there
and that type of thing.
So, at this time I would have to say we do--I try to
recognize that, that we do realize this is a very valuable
partnership. But at this particular time right now, the
Department, because of its other budget constraints, needs to
step back and not be a participant at the level that this bill
has asked us to participate in.
Mr. Baird. Just for the record, Mr. Chair, obviously I
disagree with that conclusion and would note that I think that
it--the other emphasis I would make is that there are
relatively no other, that I know of, comparably important
historical sites in this particular vicinity. Indeed, the first
U.S. Army post in the Pacific Northwest was established there.
There is--as you know for sure, there is a wonderful--young
people can come visit a fort that was the first fort in the
Pacific Northwest. This is where important treaties were
signed. This is where basically the U.S. established its formal
presence in the Pacific Northwest with a military presence. It
is a tremendously rich history, and I hope we can foresee and
make possible further expansion. This fort has been active in
the military for years.
The other thing I think to emphasize that wasn't mentioned
in the testimony: When the original $5 million authorization
was established, there was a more constrained geographical
area. The Army is making--is departing from what is called the
west barracks part of this, which is an historical area of
buildings which I understand are relatively unparalleled in
terms of their era of construction, et cetera. And it is that
addition of the new property which expands the need for
additional authorization for this resource so that we can
maintain it and keep it up to the standards that it warrants.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Baird.
Mr. Otter?
Mr. Otter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Anderson, you are very familiar now with the Spirit
Lake, Twin Lakes problem that we have got. Is this something
that is unique for the BLM, for the Department of Interior?
Mr. Robert Anderson. No, sir, it isn't, although I don't
know how many cases specifically we have on bidded lands. We
had a couple of cases around Jackson Hole, Wyoming, for
example, along the Snake River back in the 1970's and 1980's,
which ended up in court with high litigation costs, and
eventually ruled in favor of the landowners in terms of the
land obtained from the government. But we--this is not a
frequent occurrence.
Mr. Otter. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Otter.
Mr. Smith, I do have one question regarding H.R. 3917. Can
you tell me how the National Park Service envisions working
with the advisory council on the development of this memorial?
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, what we hope to do is to work as
the legislation gives us direction to use the existing task
force that is already existing for Flight 93, and, as the
Secretary forms the commission, to take all of the advice that
this existing task force provides. Among other things, that
task force will actually recommend 14 members of what the
commission that the Secretary will form will consist of.
We haven't done a study on this area, Mr. Chairman, but the
Park Service has had literally probably more than a dozen
individuals, professional staff, to the site, have talked to
the local people, have talked to local government, the State
government, and there is a tremendous feeling of coordination
to move forward with input from the people directly affected by
this, especially the families of those who were lost on this
flight. And we perceive it being a very smooth transition from
this task force into a commission to get an awful lot of
consensus before we ever move forward to what will eventually
be at this site.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you.
Mr. Smith, there was a reconnaissance and analysis of this
site done by National Park Service already? Am I--
Mr. Smith. Yes, sir.
Mr. Radanovich. --saying that?
Mr. Smith. On several visits, just because of the
importance of this, we have actually had land acquisition
people out there. We have had planners. They have brought staff
who dealt directly with the Oklahoma City memorial who went
through sort of the same very quick process--appropriate
process, but nonetheless quick, a full understanding of what
this rural area can and cannot do, working closely with the
mayor. It really has been an outpouring of professional advice
and consultation that has moved into a real awareness of what
this local area is trying to accomplish. And in that regard,
our people have gathered an awful lot of information that will
help us move forward from the task force and into this
commission that will eventually advise the Secretary on what
should occur at this site.
Everyone is in agreement that what happened in this rural
land in Pennsylvania needs to be commemorated, and we think we
can build a consensus with all of these interested parties to
accomplish this if Congress does enact it into law.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much.
One other question regarding Mr. Baird's bill. Is the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve, is it a unit of the
National Park System?
Mr. Smith. The actual Fort Vancouver, 208 of these 366
acres which are in the reserve is a national historic site and
a unit of the Park System.
Mr. Radanovich. OK.
Mr. Smith. So about 160 plus or minus are the actual
reserve; the actual Fort Vancouver itself, national historic
site, is a unit of the System.
Mr. Radanovich. And the reason for the jump in authorized
spending from 5 to 20 million in 6 years is because of what?
Mr. Smith. It is because of things located on the site, as
the Congressman talked about, the barracks, which may or may
not--I kind of have conflicting information on whether that
will actually be used by Reserve components in the BRAC
process. People are coming back to where they might not have
been before, but to improve these very historic buildings on
the national historic site, but then also other considerations
the city has with its education portion and its actual
riverfront.
Mr. Radanovich. I will yield to you in just a second, but
one other question.
The cooperative management plan, is that an actual budget
document of the National Park Service, or is this done by
somebody else?
Mr. Smith. It is a planning document, Congressman. It is
not a budget document.
Mr. Radanovich. All right. Mr. Baird, I would be happy to
yield.
Mr. Baird. Just to explain, if I may. Envision, if you
will, a field in which sits an old stockade-style fort, which
we are all familiar with the parapets and whatnot, lodge poles
and things like that. Then up the hill from that, you have the
barracks of the more modern military, which have now been
vacated. But these are barracks that served from the World War
II and before era. Further along there are barracks or what we
call Officers Row, which were not barracks, but were the
officers' buildings in a classic, almost colonial style, in
which, for example, Ulysses S. Grant, Sheridan, McClellan, and
General George C. Marshall resided. And also up the field a
ways from the historic fort itself, you have Pearson Air Field
in which the first transpolar flight, the Chkalov Russian
flight, came overseas or over the North Pole.
So it is a very unique and integrated area in which you
have a replica of the very first military fort originally
established by Hudson's Bay Company, then occupied later on, on
up through modern military times.
So that is what we see as unique. In fact, a slogan for the
Historic Reserve has been One Place Across Time, where you can
really follow the transition of the U.S. military presence in
the Pacific Northwest from its earliest days up to modern
times. And it is that which we are seeking to preserve in this
additional authorization. And that is the more--the 20th
century, the mid to 20th century barracks, which, frankly, are
in some state of disrepair, and yet it is the responsibility of
the reserve area to take care of.
Mr. Radanovich. Right. Thank you.
Any other questions of the panel?
Mr. Anderson, I want to thank you. Mr. Smith, thank you
very much for coming to testify today.
Mr. Radanovich. We will go ahead and call up our third
panel, which includes the Honorable Royce Pollard, who is the
mayor of the city of Vancouver, Vancouver, Washington, here to
speak on 2099; Mr. Bruce Hagensen, board member of the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust, Vancouver,
Washington, again on H.R. 2099; Mrs. Pam Tokar-Ickes, Somerset
County Commissioner, Somerset, Pennsylvania, to speak on H.R.
3917; Mrs. Betty Kemmerer, Flight 93 Family Organization
representative from Budd Lake, New Jersey, on 3917; and Mr.
Bruce Anderson, who is a land surveyor at Kootenai County in
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, H.R. 4874.
Thank you very much for being here. I hope I didn't
mispronounce anybody's name. You see this name? It gets
mispronounced a lot.
We will go ahead and start. Everybody has 5 minutes to
offer their testimony. We are going to go with everybody, and
then open up the panel to questions from other members.
Mr. Pollard, welcome to the Committee, and please begin
your testimony.
STATEMENT OF ROYCE POLLARD, MAYOR,
CITY OF VANCOUVER, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON
Mr. Pollard. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and
members of the Subcommittee. I am Royce Pollard, the mayor of
America's Vancouver in Washington State. Thank you for this
opportunity to testify on behalf of House Resolution 2099.
First off, for those who may not know about America's
Vancouver, we are not located in Canada. We are the fourth
largest city in the State of Washington and are located on the
north bank of the Columbia River. I could go on about the many
wonderful virtues of our city and community, but for today I
will focus my discussion with you on the historic reserve.
Few places in America can match the layers of historic
assets of the Vancouver National Historic Reserve. I believe
the Vancouver National Historic Reserve will become one of our
Nation's premier historic sites. The historic reserve played a
significant role in the events that shaped the history of the
West and the Pacific Northwest, from the Indian Nations that
were long established by the time Lewis and Clark visited our
shores and declared, and I quote, the only desirable situation
for a settlement on the western side of the Rocky Mountains,
unquote, to the Hudson's Bay Company and the fur and trade
monopoly of the British Empire. It all happened here.
The 366-acre reserve is located right in the heart of our
downtown core. It is comprised of Officers Row, the barracks,
Pearson Air Field, and Fort Vancouver National Historic Site.
Its southern boundary is the mighty Columbia River. The
Hudson's Bay Company established its Western fur trade
headquarters along the Columbia in the 1820's at Fort Vancouver
and, as a result, greatly influenced the economic, political,
and cultural developments in the Pacific Northwest. Fort
Vancouver emerged as the most multicultural and diverse
community in the West, with close to 1,000 people, made up of
French Canadians, Hawaiians, Scots, and members of over 30
different American Indian tribes, calling the reserve home.
The historic area, and particularly Fort Vancouver, is now
considered the premier historical archaeological site in the
Pacific Northwest with a collection of 1.5 million artifacts
used by researchers and visitors around the world.
The emergence of Vancouver Barracks as the first U.S. Army
post in the Pacific Northwest in May of 1849 determined the
boundaries of the United States, adding the territory that
would become Idaho, Washington and Oregon. The barracks was the
headquarters for the Department of Columbia, and, as mentioned,
many famous soldiers have lived and served there, including
Captain Ulysses S. Grant, George McClellan, Philip Sheridan,
General Oliver Otis Howard, and General George C. Marshall, the
architect of victory in World War II and the Nobel Peace Prize
recipient for the Marshall Plan.
From the 19th through the 21st centuries, this post
continued a rich tradition of military service with soldiers
serving in the Indian wars, the Philippine war, and both World
Wars. Officers Row, which served as residential housing for
many of the soldiers' and officers' families stationed at
Vancouver Barracks, has been beautifully restored and
rehabilitated and is one of our city's signature assets and is
the oldest neighborhood in the Pacific Northwest. The Reserve
is also home to the oldest, continuously operated air field in
the country, Pearson Air Field.
As mentioned, in 1937, a Soviet aviator and his crew landed
there at the end of history's first nonstop transpolar flight.
They were welcomed to America by the commander of the barracks,
General George C. Marshall.
As you can tell by my brief history, the historic reserve
is of national and international significance and is an
American gem. While I can tell you more about the reserve's
historical significance than you would ever want to know, my
main purpose is to urge you to support this increase in
appropriations so we can preserve, maintain, and reuse this
valuable piece of our 5nation's history.
Many things have changed and happened since 1996 when you
passed legislation creating the four partnerships. The
nonprofit Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust was created
and supports the reserve by bringing private resources into the
partnership.
In the year 2000, the Army vacated the west barracks, and
later that year former President Clinton signed the Defense
Authorization Act which would allow the transfer of the
barracks to the city of Vancouver. Our delegation, led by
Congressman Baird, Norm Dicks, and Senators Murray and
Cantwell, have pledged to secure additional authorizations for
the reserve. We expect the Army to provide financial support as
well. The Trust has pledged to raise 20 percent of needed
funding to establish a permanent endowment for the reserve. We
are asking the State of Washington to match the city's
contribution of 15 percent. Federal funding will leverage local
and State public funding and private contributions. Without
adequate Federal funding, the city will not be in a financial
situation to accept transfer of the west barracks from the
Army. In that event, the Federal Government would remain
responsible for maintaining and protecting the property in
accordance with statutory historic preservation requirements.
Much needs to be done to restore and preserve the buildings
of this site to achieve our community's vision of turning them
into classrooms, museums, and interpretive spaces. The scope of
this project is beyond our local resources, both public and
private. Because of the national significance of this site, we
feel that it is critical it be preserved and interpreted for
future generations. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to
connect millions of people to our Nation's heritage and its
legacies of cultures, commerce, and politics. Given the scope
of this project, success will be realized only through the
cooperative support and participation of all of our partners.
We are presented with an opportunity to create a model public/
private partnership. The city of Vancouver is absolutely
committed to the success of this unique preservation
initiative, and I urge your support for this resolution.
In summary, America's Vancouver is the birthplace of
history in the Pacific Northwest. By working together in a true
public/private partnership, we will create a historic
destination of national and international significance that
will attract millions of visitors, making you and our Nation
proud of our partnership's efforts.
Thank you very much for this opportunity.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Pollard.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pollard follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Royce E. Pollard, Mayor,
City of Vancouver, Washington
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on
National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands. My name is Royce Pollard,
Mayor of Vancouver, Washington. Thank you for this opportunity to
testify on behalf of House Resolution 2099, amending the Omnibus Parks
and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to provide adequate funding
authorization for the Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
First off, for those of you who may not know about Vancouver, we
are the fourth largest city in the state of Washington and are located
on the north bank of the Columbia River directly across from Portland,
Oregon. I could go on about the many wonderful virtues about our city
and community, but for today, I will focus my discussion with you on
the Reserve.
Few places in our country can match the historic assets of the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve. You all know about Colonial
Williamsburg. Well, we think the Reserve can be the Williamsburg of the
west. We know the Reserve has the potential to be as intriguing, as
interesting and as much of a destination as Williamsburg is. We want
the Reserve to be one of our nation's premiere historic sites.
The Historic Reserve played a significant role in the events that
shaped the history of the west and the Pacific Northwest--from the
Indian Nations that were long-established by the time Lewis and Clark
visited our shores, to the fur and trade monopoly of the British Empire
it all happened right here.
The Reserve, designated by Congress in 1996, has been recognized as
the most historically significant site in the Pacific Northwest. The
Historic Reserve's cultural resources encompass successive layers that
reflect major themes in the nation's history pre-dating the arrival of
Lewis and Clark through the mid-20th century. Highlights of this
layered history include:
Early Native American inhabitants of the area
Lewis and Clark expedition in 1805 06
Hudson's Bay Company headquarters operations at Fort
Vancouver
150 years of U.S. Army history at Vancouver Barracks, the
Northwest's military administrative headquarters beginning in 1849
``Golden Era of Aviation'' at Pearson Field 1920s-1930s,
one of the U.S. Army's oldest airfields
Officers Row (honoring such notables as Ulysses S. Grant,
O.O. Howard, and George C. Marshall)
Columbia River, one of the world's great waterways, an
artery of commerce and productivity from the prehistoric era to the
present
The 366-acre Reserve boasts a unique, urban location right in the
heart of our downtown core. It is comprised of Officer's Row, Vancouver
Barracks, Pearson Field and Fort Vancouver. Its southern border is the
mighty Columbia River. As many of you know, the Columbia River has long
enticed Native Americans, explorers, workers, traders, soldiers, and
settlers to its shores. Indigenous peoples fished and settled along its
banks and tributaries. The Hudson's Bay Company established its western
fur trade headquarters along the Columbia at Fort Vancouver and, as a
result, greatly influenced the economic, political, and cultural
development of the Pacific Northwest. Fort Vancouver emerged as the
most multi-cultural and diverse community in the west with close to a
1,000 people, made up of French-Canadians, Hawaiians, Scots, and
members of over 30 different American Indian tribes, calling the
Reserve home. Thousands of American settlers emigrated over the Oregon
Trail and arrived at Fort Vancouver in desperate need of supplies and
assistance. The birth of what is today the Pacific Northwest was made
possible by the generosity provided to these settlers by the villagers
at Fort Vancouver.
Fort Vancouver is now considered the premiere historical
archaeological site in the Pacific Northwest. Over 50 years of
excavations have resulted in a collection of 1.5 million artifacts used
by researchers and visitors from around the world.
Along with the settlement of these Oregon Trail pioneers, the
emergence of Vancouver Barracks as the first U.S. Army post in the
Pacific Northwest determined the boundaries of the United States,
adding the territory that would become Idaho, Washington and Oregon.
The Barracks was the headquarters for the Department of the
Columbia and many ``famous'' soldiers including Ulysses S. Grant,
George McClellan, Philip Sheridan, O.O. Howard and George C. Marshall
were stationed here at some point in their careers. From the 19th
through the 21st centuries, this post continued a rich tradition of
military service. Soldiers served in the Indian Wars, the Philippines,
and both World Wars. In 1917, the U.S. Army operated the world's
largest spruce mill on this site, providing lumber for the manufacture
of biplanes during World War I.
Officer's Row, which served as residential housing for many of the
soldiers, officers and families stationed at Vancouver Barracks has
been beautifully restored and rehabilitated. Once described as ``21
white elephants nose to tail'', today, the stately tree-lined row is
pointed to with pride as one of our city's signature assets.
Last, but not least, the Reserve is also home to the oldest
continuously-operated airport in the county, Pearson Field. From 1923
to 1941, Pearson was home to the U.S. Army Air Service and many key
events during the ``Golden Age of Flight.'' One of its first commanders
made the first non-stop transcontinental flight in 1923. In 1937, a
Soviet aviator and crew landed there at the end of history's first non-
stop, trans-polar flight.
As you can tell by my brief history lesson, the Reserve is a
historic gem. Both Fort Vancouver and Officer's Row are listed on the
National Register. Vancouver Barracks and Pearson Field are eligible
for listing on the Register as well.
While I can tell you more about the Reserve's historical
significance, my main purpose is to urge you to support this increase
in appropriations so we can preserve, maintain, and reuse this valuable
piece of our nation's history.
When Congress passed legislation establishing the Vancouver
National Historic Reserve, the designation set forth a partnership
among the four landowners in the Reserve the National Park Service, the
City of Vancouver, the U.S. Army and the Washington State Office of
Historic Preservation. The non-profit Vancouver National Historic
Reserve Trust supports the Reserve by bringing private resources into
the partnership.
Key Congressional Actions
Congressional involvement in the Reserve goes back to 1948.
Fort Vancouver National Monument Establishment of Fort
Vancouver National Monument in Vancouver, Washington; transfer of lands
by War Assets Administration and Secretary of the Army to Secretary of
the Interior authorized, (62 Stat. 532) June 19, 1948
Fort Vancouver National Historic Site Fort Vancouver
National Monument authorization to increase boundaries revised and
monument re-designated as ``Fort Vancouver National Historic Site,''
June 30, 1961 (75 Stat. 196)
National Historic Preservation Act, 1966 Establishes a
program for the preservation of historic properties throughout the
Nation and, in section 106, identifies governmental obligations. 16
U.S.C. 470; P L 89-665 October 15, 1966 as amended through 1992 by P L
102-575.
Vancouver Historical Study Commission Established the
Vancouver Historical Study Commission for the purpose of evaluating
resources in the area and determining the feasibility of creating a
Vancouver National Historic Reserve, P L 101-523, November 5, 1990
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Legislation
establishing the Vancouver National Historic Reserve as defined in the
Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment, by the Vancouver
Historical Study Commission, 1993. Required a General Management Plan
to be completed no later than three years after the Act. This plan was
to be developed by a Partnership team consisting of one representative
from each of the following organizations: the National Park Service,
Historic Preservation Office of the State of Washington, the Department
of the Army and the city of Vancouver, P L 104-333, Sec. 502, November
12, 1996
West Barracks Transfer Authority 2000 Legislation
provides for transfer of the west Vancouver Barracks property to the
city of Vancouver. Allows the Secretary of the Army to approve the
transfer presently scheduled for mid 2002.
RATIONALE FOR FEDERAL FUNDING REQUEST
The request for $20 million of Federal funding to assist in the
preservation and reuse of the Reserve is partially based on principle
and partially based on the financial benefits derived from the public/
private partnership proposed by the city of Vancouver and the Reserve
Trust.
There are two fundamental principles underlying the funding
request:
Principles
1. Historic Preservation. The U.S. Government has an obligation to
assist in the preservation of one of the nations important historic
sites first recognized by the designation of the Fort Vancouver
National Monument in 1948. (renamed in 1961 as the Fort Vancouver
National Historic Site) and the establishment of the Vancouver National
Historic Reserve in 1996.
2. Conversion of Military Bases. The U.S. Government has an
obligation to assist in the conversion of no longer needed military
bases to non-military purposes.
Financial Benefits
1. Federal funding will leverage local and state public funding and
private contributions. The Federal Government share is proposed at 37%
of the total project cost. The Federal money would be used primarily to
rehabilitate the buildings to a level of compliance with public safety
codes and applicable Federal laws such as ADA. Some Federal money would
also be used to preserve the important historical features of the site
and buildings. (For example, use of ``Save America's Treasures funds to
preserve the Red Cross Convalescent House already designated as an
America's Treasure.)
2. An early commitment of funding would enable the redevelopment to
proceed at a more rapid pace resulting in substantial cost savings.
3. Without adequate Federal funding for the barracks project, the
city would not be in a financial position to accept transfer of the
west barracks. In this event, the Federal Government would remain
responsible for maintaining and protecting the property in accordance
with statutory historic preservation requirements. In addition, the
Federal Government would likely be faced with rebuilding old
deteriorated infrastructure in the near future.
REQUESTED CONGRESSIONAL ACTIONS
The City of Vancouver, its partners, and the Reserve Trust are
grateful for the recent and ongoing efforts by our Congressional
delegation in support of the Vancouver National Historic Reserve. Our
Congressional delegation led by Congressmen Brian Baird and Norm Dicks
and Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, have pledged to secure an
additional authorization for the Reserve. We expect the U.S. Army to
provide financial support as well.
FY 2003 request for the Reserve:
Pass legislation providing an additional multi-million dollar
Federal ``authorization'' for capital projects at the Reserve. (The $5
million `cap' for capital projects included in the 1996 legislation
creating the Reserve. has now been exceeded; this year's Interior
earmark was accompanied by a caveat that future appropriations for
capital projects at the VNHR would require a lift of the lid). Senators
Cantwell and Murray have introduced S 1649 and a companion measure H.R.
2099, has been introduced by Congressman Baird. Due to the specific
language in this year's Interior Conference Committee report, passage
of this legislation is critical.
The Trust has pledged to raise 20% of needed funding to establish a
permanent endowment for the Reserve. We are asking the State of
Washington to match the city's contribution of 15%.
CLOSING STATEMENT
Much needs to be done to restore and preserve the buildings on this
site to make the community's visions of turning them into to the
classrooms, museums, or interpretive space a reality. The scope of this
project is beyond our local resources, both public and private. Because
of the national significance of this site, we feel that it is critical
it be preserved and interpreted for future generations. To accomplish
this, assistance from the Federal Government is crucial. This is an
amazing, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to connect millions of people
to our nation's heritage and its legacy of cultures, commerce and
politics. Given the scope of this project, success will be realized
only through the cooperative support and participation of all our
partners. We are presented with an opportunity to create a model
public/private partnership. The City of Vancouver is committed to the
success of this unique preservation initiative. I urge your support of
this resolution.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. I would be happy
to respond to any questions you may have.
______
[Attachments to Mr. Pollard's statement follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.015
------
Mr. Radanovich. Next is Ms. Pam Tokar-Ickes. And, Pam, I
hope I have gotten your name right. Welcome to the Committee,
And take your time to ready yourself.
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. Thank you very much.
Mr. Radanovich. But when you are ready, please.
STATEMENT OF PAM TOKAR-ICKES, SOMERSET COUNTY COMMISSIONER,
SOMERSET, PENNSYLVANIA
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. It is close.
Good afternoon, Chairman Radanovich and esteemed members of
the Subcommittee. I am Somerset County Commissioner Pamela
Tokar-Ickes, and, on behalf of my colleagues James Marker and
Brad Cober and the residents of Somerset County, I wish to
express our strong support for House bill 3917 introduced by
Congressman John Murtha as an appropriate and a fitting means
to forever honor the legacy of the passengers and crew members
of United Airlines Flight 93.
As I testify before you today, I can assure you that the
events of September 11th have done nothing but strongly
reinforce my personal belief that history is not the domain of
academics; it belongs to us all, because we have not only been
witness to a literal turning point in our Nation's history,
every man, woman, and child who will have recall of those
events profoundly experienced them. It may be recorded by
scholars, but the history of September 11th is being written by
us all. That date has entered our collective imagination as one
of those moments you will never forget, one that for many has
not been experienced since November 22nd, 1963.
I am 40 years old, and I can't tell you what I was doing
when President Kennedy was shot because I was only 2, but I
will never forget the blur of events during those fateful 2-1/2
hours on what began as a beautiful, crisp autumn morning that
changed our Nation, our world, and Somerset County.
At about 10:10 a.m., with the knowledge of the planes
hitting the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, the
Somerset County Commissioners were preparing for our biweekly
public meeting when we received a call from our emergency
operations center. The exact words of our emergency management
director were, ``We have a report of a jetliner down in
Buckstown. It's big. This is the real thing, guys.'' And I
remember looking at my other commissioners, fellow
commissioners, in stunned disbelief and saying to the
speakerphone, ``Our Buckstown?'' the reply: ``yes, Buckstown,
Pennsylvania, and there are 400 on board.''
From there we just responded, determining shortly
thereafter that there were only several dozen people on board,
but we would not know until much later in the day that the
crash in that remote field was linked in any way to the events
in New York City and Washington, D.C.; we just responded.
And then in the days to follow came the stories from family
members, telephone operators, and emergency dispatchers about a
series of phone calls that came from the individuals on that
plane, and the eyewitness accounts of residents throughout
western Pennsylvania who had noticed the low-flying and
wavering jetliner in its final moments. And piece by piece the
puzzle came together, and we soon realized that the smoldering
crater in an abandoned strip mine in Stonycreek Township marked
more than the scarred earth of a plane crash. It cradled the
remains of individuals who exemplified the highest of human
ideals; and that, whether by fate or destiny, Somerset County,
Pennsylvania, holds a unique place in American history linked
forever to one of the most poignant and valiant acts in its
pages.
We have become the caretaker of the story of these
seemingly ordinary people who unknowingly, when they boarded
United Airlines Flight 93 in Newark, New Jersey, on that
beautiful day, were to become the Nation's first civilian
soldiers to fight the first battle in what we now know as the
war against international terrorism. What a huge responsibility
we now shoulder for not only their survivors, but for the
generations who will follow.
As the enormity and the reality of the events began to set
into the Nation, the Office of the County Commissioners of
Somerset County was inundated with calls and donations and
letters from throughout the world imploring us to establish
some type of a permanent memorial to the 40 passengers and crew
members of Flight 93. And I will tell you, those calls began as
early as September 12th, when most of the country--I would say
most of the world--was simply trying to wrap its mind around
what had happened. There were letters from Cub Scout groups who
held car washes and children who emptied their piggy banks. One
woman sent $300 she has earmarked for Christmas shopping at the
request of her children. Another wrote that enclosed in her
card was the very first check her 14-year-old daughter had ever
written, and she signed it simply, ``A proud mom.'' a senior
citizen sent $2. ``Not much,'' she said, ``but from the
heart.'' corporations called telling us that they were setting
aside hundreds of thousands of dollars in endowment funds that
would be available when we were ready. To date, more than $1
million has been committed, and that number reflects only
unsolicited contributions with, I have no doubt, millions more
available for the asking.
And then came the ideas, literally hundreds, scribbled on
the backs of napkins and scraps of paper, intricate drawings
that were carefully sketched by their creators after
inspirational moments or dreams. Architectural firms
commissioned professional designers and artists to produce
their own renderings and offered their services free of charge.
What was most extraordinary, though, was what began to
occur almost immediately near the impact site. Temporary
memorials sprung up as close as people could get, even as the
recovery efforts continued. They brought flowers and pictures
and letters and quilts and patches and angels, even a flight
attendant's uniform; but they did not come to see that crash
site as voyeurs, they came on more of a pilgrimage seemingly
drawn there by need to simply get close to the place where this
event occurred. As the professional historians would soon tell
us, it is a phenomenon referred to as the power of place, and
they still come daily, sometimes by the hundreds, just to pay
their respects and see firsthand how this story which belongs
to us all began.
The items they bring now fill two entire rooms of the
Somerset Historical Center, the home of the Historical and
Genealogical Society of Somerset County which has been
appointed by the county to collect, catalog, and archive the
artifacts that are being left behind, which, individually and
collectively, have also become an important part of the
historic record.
Last December, in response to the groundswell of support
for the creation of a permanent memorial, a town meeting was
held in Shanksville in which those who participated identified
key stakeholder groups that must be represented on this soon-
to-be-appointed Flight 93 task force. In addition to every
family member that wishes to participate, they told us that the
task force must include representatives of the community,
emergency responders, educators, veterans, and historians.
In January, the Somerset County Commissioners formally
requested that Congressman John Murtha introduce legislation
that would create a national memorial to the passengers and
crew members of United Airlines Flight 93 under the auspices of
the National Park Service, the Nation's curator, to ensure its
proper administration long after all who now remember are gone.
At a meeting in February, surviving family members
representing 37 of the 40 individuals who perished on Flight 93
reached strong consensus that a permanent memorial should be
constructed. The second question they were asked to answer is,
where should the permanent memorial be sited? The location,
they said, had been selected on September 11th when, after the
fateful struggle in the skies over Pennsylvania, their loved
ones reached their final resting place. As Jennifer Price, a
young woman who lost both of her parents on that plane, so
eloquently told those who gathered at the National Press Club
last March when the legislation was publicly announced, ``It is
the place where we will go to say hello and good-bye.''
House bill 3917, the Flight 93 National Memorial Act, will
ensure that the crash site of Flight 93 is held in perpetuity
with the dignity and the honor it deserves. The legislation
provides a unique framework that will meld the grassroots input
of the Flight 93 task force with the necessary support and
oversight provided by the Federal Flight 93 Advisory Commission
to make a national memorial a reality. And although the members
of the advisory commission will be appointed by the Secretary
of the Interior, the bill specifies that those appointments
come from recommendations of the local Flight 93 task force,
ensuring that the voices of the families and the community
where this crash occurred remain central to the memorial
process.
Although the story of Flight 93 is significant to our
Nation's history, its importance in no way diminishes the
sacrifice of those who died at the World Trade Center towers
and the Pentagon, but what happened over the skies of western
Pennsylvania was different. Forty individuals, our newest
American patriots, who count among their ranks nationals from
Japan, Puerto Rico, and Germany, fought to overtake the plane,
and, in so doing, gave their lives to save countless others. It
is their courage that flamed the fires of freedom in the shadow
of September 11th and served to inspire a Nation that so
desperately needed to find its way out of the darkness.
On behalf of the community that now cradles them as its
own, the county in which they find their perpetual rest, the
State to which their destiny was linked, and the country for
which they died to defend, I respectfully ask the members of
this Subcommittee and the Congress of the United States to
honor these extraordinary individuals and their families so
that their sacrifice will be remembered for generations to
come. Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much. I know it is tough to
go back to the memories of that day; I think it is pretty tough
for a lot of people.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Tokar-Ickes follows:]
Statement of Pamela Tokar-Ickes, Commissioner,
Somerset County, Pennsylvania
Good afternoon Chairman Radanovich and esteemed members of the
Subcommittee. I am Somerset County Commissioner Pamela Tokar-Ickes and
on behalf of my colleagues James Marker and Brad Cober, and the
residents of Somerset County, I wish to express our strong support for
House Bill 3917, introduced by Congressman John Murtha, as an
appropriate and fitting means to forever honor the legacy of the
passengers and crew members of United Airlines Flight 93.
As I testify before you today, I can assure you that the events of
September 11th have done nothing but strongly reinforce my personal
belief that history is not the domain of academics, it belongs to us
all. Because we have not only been witness to a literal turning point
in our nation's history- every man, woman and child who will have
recall of those events profoundly experienced them. It may be recorded
by scholars, but the history of September 11th is being written by us
all. That date has entered our collective imagination as one of those
moments you will never forget, one that for many has not been
experienced since November 22nd, 1963. I am forty years old, and I
cannot tell you what I was doing when President Kennedy was shot
because I was only two, but I will never forget the blur of events
during those fateful two and half hours on what began as a beautiful,
crisp autumn morning that changed our nation, our world, and Somerset
County.
At about 10:10 a.m. with the knowledge of the planes hitting the
World Trade Center Towers and the Pentagon, the Somerset County
Commissioners were preparing for our bi-weekly public meeting, when we
received a call from our emergency operations center. The exact words
of our emergency management director were, ``We have a report of a
jetliner down in Buckstown. It's big. This is the real thing guys.'' I
remember looking at the other Commissioners in stunned disbelief and
saying to the speakerphone, ``Our Buckstown?'' The reply, ``Yes,
Buckstown, Pennsylvania. They think there are 400 on board.''
From there, we just responded, determining shortly thereafter that
there were only several dozen people on board. But we would not know
until much later in the day that the crash in that remote field was
linked in any way to the events in New York City and Washington, DC. We
just responded.
And then, in the days to follow, came the stories from family
members, telephone operators, and emergency dispatchers, about a series
of phone calls that came from the individuals on that plane. And the
eyewitness accounts of residents throughout Western Pennsylvania who
had noticed the low flying and wavering jetliner in its final moments.
Piece by piece the puzzle came together and we soon realized that the
smoldering crater in an abandoned strip mine in Stonycreek Township,
marked more that the scarred earth of a plane crash. It cradled the
remains of individuals who exemplified the highest of human ideals. And
that whether by fate or destiny, Somerset County, Pennsylvania holds a
unique place in American history, linked forever to one of the most
poignant and valiant acts in its pages.
We have become the caretakers of the story of these seemingly
ordinary people who, unknowingly when they boarded United Airlines
Flight 93 in Newark, New Jersey on that beautiful day, were to become
the nation's first civilian soldiers, to fight the first battle in what
we now know as the war against international terrorism. What a huge
responsibility we now shoulder for not only their survivors, but for
the generations who will follow.
As the enormity and reality of the events began to set into the
nation, the Office of the Somerset County Commissioners was inundated
with calls and donations and letters from throughout the world,
imploring us to establish some type of permanent memorial to the 40
passengers and crewmembers of Flight 93. Those calls began as early as
September 12th, when most of the country, most of the world, was simply
trying to wrap its mind around what had happened.
There were letters from Cub Scout groups who held car washes, and
children who emptied their piggy banks. One woman sent three hundred
dollars she had earmarked for Christmas shopping- at the request of her
children. Another wrote that enclosed in her card was the first check
her 14-year old daughter had ever written, and signed it simply, ``A
proud mom''. A senior citizen sent two dollars, ``not much,'' she said,
but ``from the heart''. Corporations called telling us that they were
setting aside hundreds of thousands of dollars in endowment funds that
would be available when we were ready. To date, more than one million
dollars has been committed. That number reflects the unsolicited
contributions, with I have no doubt, millions more available for the
asking.
And then came the ideas, literally hundreds. Scribbled on the backs
of napkins and scraps of paper, intricate drawings that were carefully
sketched by their creators after inspirational moments or dreams.
Architectural firms who commissioned professional designers and artists
to produce their own renderings and offered their services free of
charge.
A man named Herbert from Guatemala, who called to tell me he was
having a marble plaque designed and shipped at his own expense, and
asked if I could guarantee that it would be used for the memorial. I
told him that I could not, but I promised I would personally see it was
sent to the site and kept until further decisions were made. I did not
hear from Herbert again until two months ago when he called to tell me
he didn't forget about his promise, he simply didn't like the first
plaque and had it redone, this time in green marble with gold embossed
lettering. A 70-pound crate arrived in my office later that week, and
was, as promised, taken to the temporary memorial. Herbert called again
to see if we liked the plaque and said simply ``Thank you, I needed to
hear that,'' when I told him it was beautiful, and then, he hung up.
What was most extraordinary though was what began to occur almost
immediately near the impact site. Temporary memorials sprung up as
close as people could get, even as recovery efforts continued. They
brought flowers and pictures and letters, and quilts and patches and
angels, even a flight attendants uniform. But they did not come to see
the crash site as voyeurs; they came on more of a pilgrimage, seemingly
drawn there by need. To simply get close to the place where this event
occurred. As the professional historians would soon tell us, it is a
phenomenon referred to as ``the power of place.'' They still come
daily, sometimes by the hundreds, just to pay their respects and see
firsthand how this story, which belongs to us all, began.
The items they bring now fill two entire rooms at the Somerset
Historical Center, the home of the Historical and Genealogical Society
of Somerset County which has been appointed by the County to collect,
catalog and archive the artifacts that are being left behind, which,
individually and collectively, have become an important part of the
historic record.
Last December, in response to the groundswell of support for the
creation of a permanent memorial, a Town Meeting was held in
Shanksville in which those who participated identified key stakeholder
groups that must be represented on the soon to be appointed Flight 93
Memorial Task Force. In addition to every family member that wishes to
participate, they told us the Task Force must include representatives
of the community, emergency responders, educators, veterans, and
historians.
In January, the Somerset County Commissioners formally requested
that Congressman John Murtha introduce legislation that would create a
national memorial to the passengers and crewmembers of United Airlines
Flight 93 under the auspices of the National Park Service, the nation's
curator, to ensure its proper administration long after all, who now
remember, are gone.
At a meeting in February, surviving family members representing 37
of the 40 individuals who perished on Flight 93 reached strong
consensus that a permanent memorial should be constructed. The location
they said had been selected on September 11th, when, after the fateful
struggle in the skies of Pennsylvania, their loved ones reached their
final resting place. As Jennifer Price, a young woman who lost both of
her parents on that plane so eloquently told those who gathered at the
National Press Club last in March when the legislation was publicly
announced, ``It is the place where we will go to say hello and
goodbye.''
House Bill 3917, The Flight 93 National Memorial Act, will ensure
that the crash site of Flight 93 is held in perpetuity with the dignity
and honor it deserves. The legislation provides a unique framework that
will meld the grassroots input of the Flight 93 Task Force with the
necessary support and oversight provided by the Federal Flight 93
Advisory Commission to make a national memorial a reality. And although
the members of the Advisory Commission will be appointed by the
Secretary of the Interior, the bill specifies that the appointments
come from recommendations of the local Flight 93 Task Force, ensuring
that the voices of the families, and the community this crash affected,
remain central to the memorial process.
The crash of Flight 93 is significant to our nation's history, and
its importance in no way diminishes the sacrifice of those who died at
the World Trade Center Towers and the Pentagon. But what happened over
the skies of Western Pennsylvania was different. These forty
individuals, our newest American patriots who count among their ranks
nationals from Japan, Puerto Rico and Germany, fought to overtake the
plane, and in so doing, gave their lives to save countless others. It
is their courage that flamed the fires of freedom in the shadow of
September 11th, and served to inspire a nation that needed to find its
way out of the darkness.
On behalf of the community that now cradles them as its own, the
county in which they find their perpetual rest, the state to which
their destiny was linked and the country for which they died to defend,
I respectfully ask the members of this Subcommittee, and the Congress
of the United States to honor these extraordinary individuals so that
their sacrifice will be remembered for generations to come. Thank you.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Mrs. Kemmerer, I know it is toughest for
you because I know you lost your mom on that flight. But
welcome to the Committee, and I thank you for being here and
representing the family organization of Flight 93. And your
testimony will be very valuable to the establishment of this
site, so please accept my thanks for being here, and you may
begin.
STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH KEMMERER, FLIGHT 93 FAMILY ORGANIZATION
REPRESENTATIVE, BUDD LAKE, NEW JERSEY
Ms. Kemmerer. Yes. My mother Hilda Marcin was a passenger
on Flight 93. Mr. Chairman, Committee members, thank you for
the opportunity to appear here today. Shanksville,
Pennsylvania, where Flight 93 crashed, is the final resting
place for the passengers and crew. The crash site is now a
cemetery and should be treated with the utmost respect and
compassion. Ninety-two percent of our families' remains were
unidentifiable and remain at the site. The site, without proper
care--sorry for my voice--
Mr. Radanovich. That is OK.
Ms. Kemmerer. --and maintenance has the potential of
becoming a circus atmosphere where trinkets and trash will be
sold. The meaning of the site and the people who died there
fighting is much deeper than that.
The passengers and crew of Flight 93 have been referred to
by the President of the United States as well as other
prominent leaders as the first Americans to fight a battle on
American soil since the Civil War. They were the first
casualties on U.S. soil in the war against terrorism. I am
sorry. As such, the site can be compared to battles such as
Gettysburg and Antietam, both national parks.
The town of Shanksville is, quote, small-town America and
thus not equipped to take on the burden, both financial and
logistical, of maintaining a site where Americans can go to
remember the heroics of 40 passengers and crew. The crash site
should be a place to say a prayer, meditate or reflect on just
what happened on September 11, a day that will be remembered as
one of America's darkest.
The only way the site can be maintained properly for future
generations is to have the National Park Service take over and
maintain the site. The site is part of U.S. history for current
and future generations. The story of the crew and passengers of
Flight 93 will be written in the U.S. history textbooks. To
rely on Shanksville or on Somerset County and its future
population to do so in a respectful and dignified manner is
placing an undue burden on today's children and future
generations.
If not the National Park Service, then who? Who can bear
the responsibility--excuse me--of ensuring that the site is a
place where Americans can go and feel that the Flight 93
passengers were properly recognized--I am sorry--for their
selfless, heroic act. Forty lives were lost saving numerous
others.
CBS News has reported on May 23, 2002, that the target of
Flight 93 was the White House. What must be remembered and
never forgotten is that beyond the mere plane crash, the people
on that flight made sure that no others became victims of the
terrorists. Our government should, in fact, be thankful to them
for their heroism and make sure that this site is under U.S.
Government care and funding.
Mr. Radanovich. Take your time, Ms. Kemmerer.
Ms. Kemmerer. I am sorry.
Mr. Radanovich. No. No. No problem.
Ms. Kemmerer. Remember, no one gave orders to the soldiers
of Flight 93. They took it upon themselves to save others. They
fought a battle at 35,000 feet in an aisle no wider than 3
feet. A proper memorial to their memory is the very least that
can be done to appropriately remember these brave and valiant
people. The National Park Service should be the ones to do it.
It is the right thing to do. I am sorry.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you so much.
Ms. Kemmerer. I read much better than that, believe me. It
is the subject matter that hurts.
Mr. Radanovich. If it were up to me, it would be a
historical site already. We have got a lot of procedures we
have to go through, and you have helped contribute to that, so
I want to thank you very much for--
Ms. Kemmerer. In addition I have also brought photos of the
temporary memorial which the people in Shanksville and many,
many thousands of visitors have brought contributions to the
site, and if anyone would like to see them, they are there.
Mr. Radanovich. There being no objection, so ordered. Thank
you very much.
Ms. Kemmerer. You are welcome.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kemmerer follows:]
Statement of Elizabeth Kemmerer
(Daughter of Hilda Marcin, Deceased, Flight 93, 9/11/2001)
WHY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE?
Shanksville, PA, where Flight 93 crashed, is the final resting
place for the passengers and crew. The crash site is now a cemetery and
should be treated with the upmost respect and compassion. 92% of our
families remains are were unidentifiable and remain at the site. The
site, without proper care and maintenance, has the potential of
becoming a circus atmosphere where trinkets and trash will be sold. The
meaning of the site and the people who died there fighting is much
deeper than that.
.The passengers and crew of United Flight 93 have been referred to
by the President of the United States, as well as other prominent
leaders, as the first Americans to fight a battle on American soil
since the Civil War. They were the first casualties on U.S. soil in the
war against terrorism. As such, the site can be compared to battle
sites such as Gettysburg and Antietam, both National Parks.
The town of Shanksville is ``small town America'' and thus not
equipped to take on the burden, both financial and logistical, of
maintaining a site where Americans can go to remember the heroics of
the 40 passengers and crew. The crash site should be a place to say a
prayer, meditate or reflect on just what happened on Sept. 11, 2001; a
day that will be remembered as one of America's darkest.
The only way the site can be maintained properly for future
generations is to have the NPS take over and maintain the site. This
site is part of U.S. History for current and future generations. The
story of the crew and passengers of Flight 93 will be written in the
U.S. History text books. To rely on Shanksville and or Somerset County
and its future population to do so in a respectful and dignified manner
is placing an undue burden on today's children and future generations.
If not the NPS, then who? Who can bear the responsibility of
insuring that the site is a place where Americans can go and feel that
the Flight 93 passengers were properly recognized for their selfless
heroic act? Forty lives were lost saving numerous others. CBS News has
reported on May 23, 2002 that the target of Flight 93 was the White
House. What must be remembered, and never forgotten, is that beyond a
mere plane crash, the people on that flight made sure that no others
became victims of the terrorists. Our government should be thankful to
them for their heroism and make sure that this site is under U.S.
Government care and funding.
Remember, no one gave orders to the soldiers of Flight 93. They
took it upon themselves to save others. They fought a battle at 35,000
feet in an aisle no wider than three feet. A proper Memorial to their
memory is the very least than can be done to appropriately remember
these brave and valiant people. The NPS should be the ones to do it. It
is the right thing to do.
______
Mr. Radanovich. All right. Next up is Mr. Bruce Hagensen,
who is a board member of the Vancouver National Historic
Reserve Trust of Vancouver, Washington, on H.R. 2099, and, Mr.
Hagensen, you have got 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF BRUCE HAGENSEN, BOARD MEMBER, VANCOUVER NATIONAL
HISTORIC RESERVE TRUST, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON
Mr. Hagensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here today, and I want to thank Congressman
Baird as well for his ongoing support of our efforts. Royce
Pollard, our esteemed mayor, has used his oral and written
testimony to provide you with the background for the Vancouver
National Historic Reserve, which was designated by Congress
through the National Preservation Act of 1996.
The historic reserve has been recognized as the most
historically significant site in the Pacific Northwest. It is
truly an American treasure. But I think more importantly, what
I want to share with you today is that the Vancouver National
Historic Reserve is also a rare example of partnerships that
work.
For over a half a century, local, State and Federal
Government agencies along with numerous private individuals and
organizations have been collaborating to preserve and interpret
the history of Vancouver and the region. However, in 1996,
Vancouver National Historic Reserve designation established a
true partnership among the landowners of the 366-acre historic
reserve, and that partnership included the National Park
Service, the city of Vancouver, the United States Army, and the
Washington State Historic Preservation Office.
The Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust is a
nonprofit organization established in 1998 as an outgrowth of
an earlier citizens' project to help support the historic
reserve and to bring private resources into the partnership. I
would like to give you some examples of some of the successes
that have been referenced earlier.
First, we have the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site,
which is operated by the Park Service, and recently it has
completed a new fur store and an archaeological collections
facility. It has completed a new carpenter shop all in the
efforts to recreate the ambiance of this Hudson's Bay holding.
We have also restored landscape following the removal of more
than 30 airline hangars that were surrounding that area. They
have done cultural resource management, and they have also done
numerous interpretive education programs including tours,
exhibits and reenactments.
I would also like to reference Officers Row that was
mentioned earlier by Congressman Baird and the mayor. Officers
Row is a $10 million project. It was started in 1986 as the
city strove to save 21 historic homes on Officers Row that had
been let fall into disrepair by the General Services
Administration. That project was successfully completed and is
financially self-sustaining and is a nationally recognized
example of a mixed use preservation project that has brought
economic and public benefit to the community.
We have Pearson Air Field and the M.J. Murdock Aviation
Museum. This is a $4.3 million project that was done with local
funds. We have also rehabilitated the munitions and
headquarters building. We have the Vancouver National Historic
Reserve Center, which is a $2.8 million project at the General
O.O. Howard house. We have renovated this beautiful house, and
it is used as a visitors' center and administrative office. It
is also the location of a nationally recognized museum exhibit
called One Place Across Time, which the mayor referenced
earlier, which is symbolic of how we are trying to interpret
this site.
More importantly, I would like to share with you today some
of the programs that have emanated out of these particular
efforts. I think all of us appreciate the fact that we have
responsibility to preserve our historic assets, but I think
even more important is what do we do with those assets. How do
we project those assets and make a learning experience for our
young people?
I would like to relate to you our Celebrate Freedom
programs started in 1991. We have one of the most significant
Fourth of July celebrations west of the Mississippi. We also
have Flag Days and Veterans Days events. We have the George C.
Marshall Lecture, which we bring renowned people to honor the
past and the service of General Marshall. Past lectures have
included Senator Daniel Inouye in 2002, Tom Brokaw in 2000,
Madeleine Albright was with us in 1998, and Colin Powell was
with us in 1991. We also have the George C. Marshall leadership
awards for emerging young adults in public service, and we also
have the George C. Marshall youth leadership award.
We have completed projects along the Columbia River, trails
and parks, historical markers and sculptures, and we also
established about a $3 million project, which was the Water
Resources Education Center. All this tells of a--that 5 went
quickly. I apologize.
Mr. Otter. [Presiding.] It does go very fast.
Mr. Hagensen. Let me just summarize, Mr. Chairman. You have
some of the written documentation of what I have spoken about.
You also have a written documentation of the upcoming project,
which is the west barracks.
I would just like to point out that, as mentioned before,
when the Army pulled back from this historical post that left
322,000 square feet of buildings, we have to do something
constructive with those buildings. We have a model of what can
be done with Officers Row, and we look forward to maintaining
that progress and that momentum with the help of this bill.
I thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today
and will be happy to help answer any questions regarding the
historic preserve.
Mr. Otter. Thank you, Mr. Hagensen.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hagensen follows:]
Statement of Bruce Hagensen, Board Member,
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust
Chairman Radanovich, and Members of the Subcommittee of National
Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands:
I am Bruce Hagensen, former Mayor of Vancouver and a member of the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust board of directors, here
before you to testify on behalf of H.R. 2099, to amend the Omnibus
Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to provide adequate
funding authorization for the Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
Royce Pollard, the esteemed Mayor of Vancouver Washington has used
his oral and written testimony to provide you with the background of
the Vancouver National Historic Reserve. Designated by Congress through
the National Preservation Act of 1996, it has been recognized as the
most historically significant site in the Pacific Northwest. It is
truly an American treasure.
Partnerships that Work: A Record of Achievement
For over half a century local, state and Federal Government
agencies, along with numerous private individuals and organizations,
have been collaborating to preserve and interpret the history of the
Vancouver area and the region.
The 1996 Vancouver National Historic Reserve (VNHR) designation
established a partnership among the landowners in the 366-acre Historic
Reserve the National Park Service, the city of Vancouver, the U.S.
Army, and the Washington State Historic Preservation Office. The
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust (VNHR Trust), a nonprofit
organization, established in 1998 as an outgrowth of an earlier
citizens project, helps support the Historic Reserve and brings private
resources into the partnership.
The VNHR, in the heart of the city of Vancouver, Washington
includes the following components:
Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
Vancouver Barracks and Officers Row
Pearson Air Field
Portions of the Columbia River Waterfront
Kaiser Shipyards and Viewing Tower
The Water Resources Education Center
This remarkable public/private partnership has benefited many of
the entities within the Historic Reserve boundaries. During the past 15
years in excess of $30 million has been invested in property
improvements and projects within the present Vancouver National
Historic Reserve boundaries, mostly from non-Federal sources. The
Federal Government has provided approximately 25% of the capital funds.
The remaining 75% has been provided by local and state government,
foundations such as the locally based M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust,
and numerous other individuals, businesses and not-for -profit
organizations. Immeasurable in-kind dollars have been provided as well
by a legion of dedicated volunteers.
The following are a sample of remarkable Historic Reserve projects
that have occurred:
Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
Fur Store Reconstructed/Archaeological Collections
Facility, 1993
Carpenter Shop completed, 1998
Construction of 1845 Counting House/Commander Thomas
Baillie residence, 1999 ongoing
Restored landscape following the removal of more than
thirty hangers, 2000
Jail, archaeology excavations and reconstruction, 2001
Archaeology surveys, excavation, and research at Hudson s
Bay Company cemetery, Company (Kanaka) Village, Parade Ground, Pearson
Munitions and Headquarters buildings
Cultural resource management
Interpretive and Education programs, including tours,
exhibits, and reenactments.
Officers Row
In 1986, the city of Vancouver saved 21 historic homes on Officers
Row and accomplished a signature project for Vancouver. The Row is
financially self-sustaining and is a nationally-recognized example of a
mixed use preservation project that has brought economic and public
benefit to the community.
Pearson Field and M.J. Murdock Aviation Museum
Completion of M.J. Murdock Aviation Museum, largely with
private funding, 1997
The last series of non-historic hangars are being removed
from National Park Service property, Spring 2002
Full build out of new hangars away from Historic Reserve
property, 2000
Rehabilitation of the Munitions and Headquarters
Buildings, 2001
Vancouver National Historic Reserve Visitor Center at the Gen. O.O.
Howard House
Renovation and reuse of historic post commander s
quarters as VNHR Visitor Center and administrative offices, 1998
A nationally recognized museum exhibit, One Place across
Time: Vancouver National Historic Reserve, providing the visitor with a
comprehensive overview of the Historic Reserve within national and
international contexts, 1998
Educational publications and programs include books,
documentary videos, exhibits and school curricula
Celebrate Freedom Programs
Fourth of July, Flag Day and Veterans Day Events
George C. Marshall Lectures: Past lecturers include
Daniel Inouye (2002), Tom Brokaw (2000), Madeline Albright (1998), and
Colin Powell (1991).
George C. Marshall Leadership Award for emerging young
adults in public service
George C. Marshall Youth Leadership Award recognizing
public service in a high school student
Columbia River Waterfront Projects Trails and Parks
Historical markers and sculptures
Water Resources Education Center
Vancouver Barracks Preservation and Reuse Project
Planning 1998 and continuing:
* Vancouver Barracks Physical History Study, 1998. Report and
resource guide prepared by the National Park Service describing
selected buildings.
* Vancouver Barracks Environmental Assessment, 1999. Report
prepared by the U.S. Army analyzing current conditions at Vancouver
Barracks.
* Vancouver Barracks Adaptive Reuse & Economic Analysis, 2000. A
cooperative effort of the Reserve Partners and the Reserve Trust
analyzed alternative property use scenarios and the cost of
rehabilitation and adaptation for new uses of 16 West Barracks
buildings.
* American Red Cross Convalescent House, constructed in 1919,
has been designated as an Official Project of Save America s Treasures,
with endorsement from the national president of American Red Cross.
An Outstanding Record of Achievement: A Vision for the Future
The theme ``Preserving the Past, Shaping The Future'' guides the
Vancouver National Historic Reserve partners' vision for the future. We
continue to identify, preserve and adapt for the benefit of the public
structures on the Historic Reserve. We provide opportunities for more
than 500,000 annual regional, national, and international visitors to
access the site and educational programs that tell the stories of this
``One Place across Time.'' The Historic Reserve offers opportunities
for learning experiences preparing citizens for productive lives and
leadership roles in society.
Vancouver Barracks Project: The VNHR Partnership in Action
At the present time the City of Vancouver is proposing to proceed
with a project to preserve and reuse the west area of the Vancouver
Barracks, home to the U.S. military for over 150 continuous years. The
Vancouver Barracks was the first U.S. Army post in the Pacific
Northwest and served as the headquarters for the vast Department of the
Columbia. Vancouver Barracks was a center for U.S. military operations
in the region for the last half of the 19th century and into the 20th
century. National mobilization efforts took place here, supplying
lumber and ships for two world wars.
This project will be a major step toward achieving the goals for
the Historic Reserve as established in the 1999 Cooperative Management
Plan (CMP). Preserving and protecting these irreplaceable historic
assets will bring new sustainable uses to this rare urban park, and at
the same time, bring its past alive to current audiences. Historic
places, buildings and furnished rooms bring history alive in a powerful
way. The Interpretive Plan for the Historic Reserve specifies restoring
and furnishing several rooms at Vancouver Barracks appropriate to the
period of the Army's use.
While specific uses for each of the seventeen buildings are in the
process of being determined, it is intended that the property will be
used for formal and informal educational programs for both residents of
the area and visitors to the Historic Reserve. Educational planning
work for Vancouver Barracks has involved the Partners, leaders from
school districts, the local and national arts community, and nonprofit
executives from regional cultural organizations. The Partners and
Reserve Trust are currently facilitating dialog among organizations to
develop collaborative and innovative educational programs. These
discussions involve Washington State University, Clark College,
Educational Services District 112, the National Park Service and the
104th Infantry Training Division of the U.S. Army Reserve.
However, the Vancouver Barracks site infrastructure is dangerously
outdated and will need to be replaced as soon as possible. The
buildings are deteriorating and need major work to comply with building
safety codes that would be applicable to any new public use. The longer
the barracks buildings remain unoccupied, the threat to the buildings
by vandalism, potential water damage, fire, and further structural
deterioration will increase, thereby increasing costs of restoration.
Therefore, it is critically important that action be taken as quickly
as possible.
Based on the Vancouver Barracks Adaptive Re-use & Economic Analysis
completed in early 2000, it has been determined that the rehabilitation
of buildings, and site, plus the adaptations necessary for new uses,
will cost approximately $40,000,000 provided the work can be done in a
four year time span.
The analysis clearly indicates that revenues, to be derived largely
from space rental, would not be sufficient to finance this project with
long-term debt. Consequently, it has been determined the full amount
must be raised from public and private sources.
West Area Funding Proposal
The continued Federal appropriation monies for the Vancouver
National Historic Reserve will be committed to this important project.
The VNHR Trust has determined that Federal funding, sufficient to
permit site work and building rehabilitation to begin in late 2002,
must be obtained now to trigger initiation of the project. A total
Federal contribution of $20 million (Fiscal Year 2003 2005) is needed
to match non-Federal funding for the West Barracks project. This action
is deemed key to successful private fundraising efforts, securing
tenants for the property, minimizing the impact of inflation, and
avoiding additional serious property deterioration.
The $20 million Federal commitment will be matched by non-Federal
dollars, two to one.
Federal
Rehab/Preservation -- $20 million -- 37%
Non-Federal
City of Vancouver -- $6 million -- 11%
Infrastructure/Site (2001 2004)
State of Washington -- $6 million -- 11%
Adaptation for Educational Uses (2002 2005)
Private -- $8 million -- 15%*
Rehab/Preservation/Adaptation
Total Capital Investment -- $40 million
Private -- 26%*
Program Investment -- $6 million
Endowment -- $8 million
Total Project -- $54 million -- 100%
*Total private support is 41%.
Please note that, in addition to the capital investment, the
Vancouver National Historic Trust proposes to raise an additional
$8,000,000 from private sources as an endowment to provide long-term
financial security for the project and $6,000,000 for investment in
educational programs to be located at the Vancouver Barracks.
The VNHR Trust is prepared to proceed with planning and
preparations for private fundraising work while progress is being made
to achieve the above requirements. However, private, city, and state
money is contingent upon Federal support. The opportunity to transform
Vancouver Barracks with a proportional mix of public and private
investment cannot wait. Each year, the project becomes more expensive.
On behalf of the members of the Vancouver National Historic Reserve
Trust, I want to reiterate to members of Congress our ongoing
commitment to match or exceed Federal monies.
I refer you to a letter from the Reserve Trust's Chairman, Ed
Lynch. Thank you for your consideration.
______
[Attachments to Mr. Hagensen's statement follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.023
Mr. Otter. I would remind yourself as well as the rest of
the panel that it is the normal course for the Committee to
unanimously accept your entire written testimony.
Mr. Hagensen. Thank you.
Mr. Otter. So if you have--due to a desire for brevity have
shortened that somewhat, your entire testimony will be as a
matter of record.
Mr. Hagensen. I appreciate that, sir.
Mr. Otter. Now speaking on House Resolution No. 4874 will
be Mr. Bruce Anderson from Kootenai County, Idaho.
STATEMENT OF BRUCE ANDERSON, LAND SURVEYOR, KOOTENAI COUNTY,
COEUR D'ALENE, IDAHO
Mr. Bruce Anderson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of
the Subcommittee. This is a story that began 120 years ago.
John B. David was a U.S. General Land Office surveyor under
contract to survey a couple of townships in north Idaho
preparatory to the sale and disposition of lands to the
settlers under the Homestead Act. He was instructed to survey
the section lines in a certain manner. Included in those
instructions were instructions to survey any riparian
boundaries, which would be lake boundaries, lake shores or
rivers. We have the notes of Mr. David. We have the
instructions of Mr.--what Mr. David was supposed to do. We have
the notes of what Mr. David said he did, and now we have
evidence of what Mr. David actually did on the ground.
The two lakes we are talking about are Spirit Lake, which
in the old General Land Office's notes and plats show as Lake
Tesemini, which is now known as Spirit Lake, and the other lake
is Lower Twin Lake, which used to be called Fish Lake. Mr.
David shows, according to the survey, that he would be--if we
used his survey, the boundaries of the eastern portion of
Spirit Lake would be between a quarter and a half a mile
distant from the present shoreline and some 350 feet in
elevation above the present shoreline of Spirit Lake.
On Lower Twin Lake it is more dramatic. He was between a
quarter and a half a mile in distance from the present
shoreline and over 1,000 feet in elevation above the present
shoreline of Spirit Lake. Taking that into local perspective,
that would be like saying that a surveyor of the Washington,
D.C., area would say that the Tidal Basin is nearly two and a
half times the height of the Washington Monument.
The purpose of my testimony is to introduce the exhibits.
There are eight of them. Exhibit 1 shows pictorially the
differences between the John B. David survey and the present
shoreline. Exhibit 2 is the Lower Twin Lake differences between
John B. David survey, based on Exhibit 2 and 3, which is the
depiction of the original survey of the maps that were the
basis--based upon Mr. David's notes. Exhibits 5 and 6 show
comparisons of the original acreages as reported by the Federal
Government and modern measurements taken from the Assessor's
Office records as best available information.
In the Spirit Lake case, Mr. David shorted the settlers by
as much as 40 to 50 percent, and in other cases he over--
understated the acreage by as much as 120 percent. On the Twin
Lakes situation, again, he understated acreage by as much as 87
to nearly wiping out the entire government lot. At the other
extreme he underestimated the correct acreage from anywhere
from 400 to 600 percent.
Being the county does not have the resources nor the legal
authority to rectify the predicament that the current owners
are in, it is incumbent upon the Federal Government to make
good on the early survey that gave the settlers clear title
patents to their property.
This House Resolution 4874 is very straightforward. It has
two items. One is to accurately define the omitted lands, and
two is claim any interest for the current landowners. In this
manner people can live in peaceful harmony knowing that they
have at least somewhat of a clear title to their ownership.
Thank you.
Mr. Otter. Thank you very much, Mr. Anderson.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bruce Anderson follows:]
Statement of Bruce Anderson, L.S., Kootenai County Surveyor,
Kootenai County, Idaho
Purpose
The purpose of this report is twofold: (a) to explain the history
and technical aspects of the original survey, which created a
significant area of omitted lands; and (b) to ask for your support in
providing relief to the affected landowners abutting these two lakes.
This bill is comprised of two proposed actions. Firstly, the omitted
lands must be identified by an accurate survey. Secondly, action must
be taken to relinquish any Federal interest in the omitted lands,
according to said survey.
History
A. Spirit Lake
In September 1880, General Land Office contract surveyor, John B.
David conducted a survey of the township containing the eastern portion
of Spirit Lake.. His survey affects the east half of Spirit Lake. (See
Exhibit 1). Exhibit 1 depicts the shoreline as surveyed by Mr. David,
taken from his notes and the plat of the township. (See Exhibit 3).
Referring to Exhibit 1, the erroneous survey places the shoreline of
Spirit Lake between one-quarter and one-half of a mile distant from its
present location. Also, his survey places the shoreline in excess of
three-hundred feet in elevation above its present elevation in some
locations. It is not possible that Spirit Lake ever existed at those
locations within recent geologic history. His erroneous survey is
contrasted with the Robinson and Dike survey of the western half of
Spirit Lake in 1893. The Robinson and Dike survey conforms very well
with the present shoreline of Spirit Lake, and is not an issue in this
case.
B. Twin Lakes
A similar situation exists along the shore of Lower Twin Lake. John
B. David also surveyed the township containing the easterly one-half of
Twin Lakes, referred to now as Lower Twin Lake also in 1880. (See
Exhibit 2). Mr. David's survey places the shoreline of Lower Twin Lake
between one-quarter and one-half of a mile distant from its present
location. In addition, his survey places the shoreline nearly one-
thousand feet in elevation above its present elevation in some
locations. This Exhibit is a compilation of the notes and plat by Mr.
David. (See Exhibit 4). As with his survey of Spirit Lake, it is not
possible that Lower Twin Lake ever existed per the location as surveyed
by Mr. David. The westerly portion of Twin Lakes, known as Upper Twin
Lake, was meandered by Robinson and Dike in 1893. Their survey conforms
well with the present position of the existing shoreline, and is not an
issue in this case.
Applicable Sections of the Manual of Surveying Instructions, 1973
relating to omitted land.
Erroneously Omitted Areas
7-77. Lands exposed by changes in water level or accreted
subsequent to survey are not erroneously omitted lands. This title is
applied to lands, not shown on the plat of the original survey, which
were excluded from the survey by some gross discrepancy in the location
of a meander line. The unsurveyed land typically lies between the
actual bank of a lake, stream, or tidewater and the record meander
line.
7-78. In some older surveys temporarily flooded lands, or swamp and
overflowed lands, were meandered as if they were permanent bodies of
water. In a few cases, meander lines were reported where no body of
water ever existed in fact. In still other instances, several lakes
have been surveyed as one lake. All are treated in the same manner as
those where the discrepancy is a grossly erroneous position of the
record meander line. The converse is sometimes found where the record
meander line leaves the bank and extends into the body of water. A
water area may thus be shown as land.
7-79. Marginal discrepancies between the meander lines and the
water at the time of survey fall into two classes, those that are
merely technical differences and those that constitute erroneous
omission. The guide lines for determining the class of a particular
case are laid down in court and departmental decisions.
7-80. If land is to be regarded as erroneously omitted from survey,
it must first be shown affirmatively that the area was land in place at
the date of the original subdivision of the township. Then, if the land
is similar to the surveyed lands, the usual inference that the official
survey was correct may be set aside, and the conclusion may be
substituted that the land should have been covered by that survey.
However, a convincing showing is needed that the representations of the
original plat and field notes are grossly in error.
7-81. Applications for the extension of the subdivisional lines to
include the areas erroneously omitted from the original survey may be
initiated either by settlers on the omitted land or by the owners of
the adjoining land. The owner of the surveyed land, or a claimant who
has purchased from him, may apply for the survey as a preliminary to
quieting the title. There may or may not be adverse claims. The
immediate question is the merit of the application under the acts of
Congress which grant relief in these cases. A field examination is
nearly always required to verify the conditions alleged in the
applications. It is objectionable in principle to amend a plat unless
large and unwarranted discrepancies can be shown.
7-82. The survey of erroneously omitted lands may also be
undertaken as an administrative responsibility for identifying public
lands. Such cases may be brought to the attention of the Bureau by a
Federal agency having administrative authority over the general area.
7-83. No proof is required to show the whys and wherefores of an
erroneous meander line, but only that the line as run and as
represented on the plat and in the field notes is in effect grossly in
error. The rule is concisely stated in John McClennen, 29 L.D. 514
(1900): It is not necessary to search for the source of the error. The
result is the same whether such error arose from mistake, inadvertence,
incompetency or fraud on the part of the men who made the former
survey.
7-84. Where lands have been determined to be erroneously omitted
from the original survey, the original meander line is made a fixed and
limiting boundary segregating the previously surveyed areas from the
unsurveyed public lands. The line is reestablished and marked with
permanent monuments at the old angle points. Retracement between
successive meander corners nearly always will show differences from the
record in latitude and departure. The positions of the angle points are
adjusted by the broken boundary method described in section 5-43 under
``Angle Points of Nonriparian Meander Lines.'' The angle points are
given serial numbers which do not duplicate numbers that may have been
previously assigned in that section. The monuments are marked as shown
in section 4-45.
From the above citations, it is evident that these two surveys
involve omitted lands. The standard used in the determination of
omitted lands is the ``fifty percent rule.'' When the area is more than
fifty percent larger than that reported by the original survey, omitted
land exists. Exhibits 5 and 6 are comparisons between the area reported
by John B. David survey, and best available data obtained from
Assessor's Office records and maps, U.S.G.S. topographic maps, and
ortho-photographic maps.
The differences are significant, without rhyme or reason. For
example, Exhibit 5, the differences on Spirit Lake range from forty-
five percent smaller than reported, to over one-hundred twenty percent
in excess of that reported. Exhibit 6, the differences on Lower Twin
Lake are even more dramatic. They range from a shortage of over eighty
percent to an excess of six-hundred percent.
Implications and Problems
The situation of fraudulent surveys cannot be dealt with by the
individual land owner abutting these two lakes. They, through their
predecessors, purchased, in good faith, based upon their belief of an
accurate survey from the General Land Office. All land lying within the
area of omitted land on both lakes are claimed by private interests.
Each claimant within the omitted area has a cloud on their title, that
is now public knowledge. A cloud of title may preclude a claimant from
obtaining financing, or refinancing, and may even prevent the sale of
property without a clear disclaimer of interest in the property by the
Federal Government. Without such action, a claimant or prospective
purchasers does not know that a possibility exists, that the Federal
Government may at any such time lay claim to a portion or all of the
omitted land. It is beyond the scope of power available to Kootenai
County to resolve the survey and legal issues, even if it had the
monetary resources.
On Spirit Lake, there are over one-hundred seventy (170) parcels of
land affected, lying within or partly within the area of omitted land.
(See Exhibit 7). These parcels contain nearly four-hundred acres (400),
with an assessed value in excess of nineteen million dollars
($19,000,000), per Kootenai County Assessor's office figures. The
parcels range in size, from one-hundred forty-six (146)parcels
containing less than one acre, to one parcel containing more than one-
hundred sixty acres (160). There are thirty-six (36)parcels ranging is
size, from one to six acres, with three parcels in the ten to thirty-
five (35) acre range.
On Lower Twin Lake, there are over four-hundred eighty (480)
parcels of land affected, lying within the area of omitted land,
claimed by individuals, families, partnerships or corporations. (See
Exhibit 8). These parcels comprise approximately eight-hundred acres
(800), with an assessed value in excess of forty million dollars
($40,000,000). The average value per parcel is approximately eighty-six
thousand dollars ($86,000). The parcel size ranges from four-hundred
fifty (450)parcels containing less than one acre, to one parcel
containing three-hundred forty (340) acres. There are another thirty
(30) parcels ranging from one to fifty (50) acres.
The acreage and assessed values contain many variances, due to site
specific data. Some parcels fall partly or entirely within the omitted
lands, with the area calculated on the entire parcel. Appraised value
varies, depending upon whether it is lake front or upland property, and
whether the parcel is bare land or has improvements.
Kootenai County, as a governmental unit, gains little benefit from
this legislation. The County claims title to eighteen parcels of land
through dedicated rights-of-way, providing public access to both lakes.
Of these public access sites, one is developed and lies in the omitted
land category. Three other sites lie in the omitted land category, but
are not developed.
Kootenai County is the collective voice for our constituents, and
we believe it to be in the best interest of our constituents to have
peaceful occupation of their lands, by having the title quieted to
them. We ask Congress to support this resolution, and to pass it as
written.
______
[Attachments to Mr. Anderson's statement follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.008
------
Mr. Otter. We will now go to the panel--or we will now go
to the folks seated at the dais. Mr. Kildee, do you have any
questions of any of the panelists?
Mr. Kildee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I want to thank all the witnesses for their
testimony. When I drive back to Michigan, I drive near the very
sacred site in Pennsylvania, and I get a feeling there like I
get at no other place. And I say a prayer of gratitude. And I
am going to thank you for your testimony today. I certainly
support the bill and will do everything I can to see that it is
enacted. But it is a sacred site, and we should hold it in a
special way in our history and in our heart.
Mayor Pollard, my cousin Russell Kildee was mayor of
Washugal, Washington, just east of you, before you were born, I
am sure, so there is a connection out there. And Lewis and
Clark made Washugal historically important also. So I certainly
will support that bill and also the bill for Idaho. So I again
thank all of you for your testimony, and thank you very much.
Mr. Otter. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Kildee. I
appreciate it.
Mr. Anderson, not that your bill is any more important than
any others, but because it is the bill that I introduced, I
would like to ask you first. Folks that are now the residents
of those 400 lots who built their homes and built their lives
on those lots have been paying taxes all along under the
assumption that this was their property, right?
Mr. Bruce Anderson. That is correct, Congressman.
Mr. Otter. And you heard Mr. Robert Anderson's testimony
representing the Administration and the Department of Interior
relative to previous errors and what it has cost to correct
them. Are you familiar with any other sites in Idaho or in the
West that have had to be corrected this same way?
Mr. Bruce Anderson. Not any of the other ones mentioned by
Mr. Anderson.
Mr. Otter. I see.
I would just mention to you, as a part of the lure of
Idaho, that the second lieutenant who was sent out to the
Salmon River Breaks by then General Grant, President Grant, in
order to survey the new Idaho Territory, as you might recall,
the story goes is that he and some of his troops got a little
inebriated the night before, and when they left, they hit--they
got onto the wrong mountain range, and as a result they got on
the Continental Divide instead of where they were supposed to
be, and Idaho has lost a sizable portion of ground to Montana.
In fact--which would increase the size of the State by a third.
And I had meant to ask Mr. Anderson in the Department if they
would seek to correct that error as well. But I would probably
find a little opposition from my colleague Mr. Rehberg if he
were here, and he is not.
Anyway, I just--it is not unusual, as you have stated, and
as Mr. Anderson before him has stated, for us to have to go
back and correct some of these problems.
Let me ask Ms. Tokar-Ickes--did I say that right?
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. Tokar-Ickes. That is fine. Thank you.
Mr. Otter. What has been the involvement--in a brief part
of your statement you talked about the--some of the community
involvement. But what has been the involvement of the local
communities in this effort?
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. I think the local communities have really
felt a very great stewardship toward maintaining the integrity
and the dignity of this site. In fact, many of the community
residents of Shanksville and Stonycreek Township are actually
serving as Ambassadors at the temporary crash site on a
voluntary basis 7 days a week during this peak of visitation
season really, the height of the tourism season. We are seeing
thousands of people visiting the temporary crash site, and they
are serving as citizen Ambassadors to tell those who visit the
story of what happened and provide some perspective and
interpretation at the site currently.
Mr. Otter. And forgive me for not knowing this, because I
should, but is the site of the crash site, is that private
ground?
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. It is currently private property, yes.
Mr. Otter. And how does the private property owners feel
about this.
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. We have talked to all of the landowners
there.
Mr. Otter. How many landowners are there?
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. There are seven. There are seven obviously
involved in the crash site boundaries. We are going to be
working with the landowners. They will have a voice on the task
force that is to be appointed.
I think to the landowner, they are very supportive of
moving forward to memorialize this site. They know that life is
never going to be the way it was prior to September 11, and
they have been very cooperative with those who are visiting the
site. We really are--they are hosting really the world at this
point because it is their private property.
So I would say unequivocally that we do have support from
all of the landowners.
Mr. Otter. Is there any prohibition of any activity that
that private property owner has on that land right now?
Ms. Tokar-Ickes. The County of Somerset has been in charge
of security. It is currently still a coroner's site, and our
county corner is holding the site, because without that
jurisdiction, the security would not be able to be there on a
round-the-clock basis. The private property owners do have
access to their particular parcels; however, the access is
restricted. They are not to be bringing anybody else onto the
property.
Mr. Otter. I see. Thank you very much.
Ms. Kemmerer, how do you feel about the role as it has been
described in 3917, H.R. 3917, of the family--of the family
folks, organization.
Ms. Kemmerer. The family organization was just formed over
the last couple of months. There are three board of directors,
and what we--our role is to support the task force in coming up
with an appropriate memorial. Hopefully all the wishes of the
family members would be combined into a memorial that everybody
would respect and honor.
Mr. Otter. I see. Do you see--I know that Ms. Tokar-Ickes
described the napkins and the more sophisticated drawings and
renderings and ideas. Do you see this as a memorial to freedom,
as a memorial--obviously, you know, as has been stated so many
times, the first time that we went to war since the Civil War
on our own ground, as well as--I mean, certainly in honor of
those on Flight 93, but as a war of freedom and civil
contribution, civilian contribution to our national security?
Ms. Kemmerer. It definitely speaks very highly of the
people and their belief that it is a free United States and
that the terrorists were not going to get their own way. They
completely took over the plane, kept the plane away from
hurting any other individuals on the ground, and took it upon
themselves to act as the caretakers of the United States and
not letting any other terrorist act occur on that day.
Mr. Otter. Well, I would certainly join with my colleague
Mr. Kildee in recognizing that these were the first of the
citizen patriots; that if we could get 282 million Americans to
recognize their responsibility to themselves, their families
and their national security as those folks on Flight 93
recognized that, this war against terrorism would be over.
Do you have any further questions, Mr. Kildee?
Mr. Kildee. No, thank you.
Mr. Otter. There are no further questions. This panel may
be excused. There being no further business before the
Committee, the Committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]