[Senate Hearing 108-739]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-739
PETRIFIED FOREST IN ARIZONA; QUINCENTENNIAL OF THE DISCOVERY OF
FLORIDA; HARRY S TRUMAN NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE; HUDSON-FULTON-CHAMPLAIN
COMMISSION; AND ROAMING HORSES IN CAPE LOOKOUT NATIONAL SEASHORE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
S. 784 S. 1311
S. 2499 S. 2656
H.R. 2055
__________
SEPTEMBER 21, 2004
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
97-780 WASHINGTON : 2004
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman
DON NICKLES, Oklahoma JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming BOB GRAHAM, Florida
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee RON WYDEN, Oregon
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
CONRAD BURNS, Montana EVAN BAYH, Indiana
GORDON SMITH, Oregon DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
JIM BUNNING, Kentucky CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York
JON KYL, Arizona MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
Alex Flint, Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Chief Counsel
Robert M. Simon, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on National Parks
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming Chairman
DON NICKLES, Oklahoma Vice Chairman
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BYRON L. DORGAN, North Carolina
CONRAD BURNS, Montana BOB GRAHAM, Florida
GORDON SMITH, Oregon MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
JON KYL, Arizona EVAN BAYH, Indiana
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York
Pete V. Domenici and Jeff Bingaman are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
Thomas Lillie, Professional Staff Member
David Brooks, Democratic Senior Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Clinton, Hon. Hillary Rodham, U.S. Senator from New York......... 2
Fitzgerald, Michael R., Owner, Twin Buttes Ranch, LLC, Holbrook,
AZ............................................................. 27
Gillette, David D., Ph.D., Department of Geology, Colbert Curator
of Paleontology, Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ..... 30
Graham, Hon. Bob, U.S. Senator from Florida...................... 15
Jones, Hon. Walter B., U.S. Representative from North Carolina... 9
Kyl, Hon. Jon, U.S. Senator from Arizona......................... 5
McCain, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arizona..................... 7
Pataki, Hon. George, Governor, New York State.................... 5
Smith, Daniel P., Special Assistant to the Director, National
Park Service, Department of the Interior on:
S. 784....................................................... 10
S. 2656...................................................... 13
S. 2499...................................................... 18
S. 1311...................................................... 19
H.R. 2055.................................................... 20
Talent, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from Missouri................ 7
Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................... 1
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 37
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 41
PETRIFIED FOREST IN ARIZONA; QUINCENTENNIAL OF THE DISCOVERY OF
FLORIDA; HARRY S TRUMAN NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE; HUDSON-FULTON-CHAMPLAIN
COMMISSION; AND ROAMING HORSES IN CAPE LOOKOUT NATIONAL SEASHORE
----------
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2004
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Craig Thomas
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Thomas. Let us see if we can get started here. I
want to welcome our witnesses for today's National Parks
Subcommittee hearing.
Our purpose is to hear testimony on four Senate bills and
one House bill. They include:
S. 784, to revise the boundary of Petrified Forest National
Park in the State of Arizona, and for other purposes;
S. 2656, to establish a national commission on the
quincentennial of discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon;
S. 2499, to modify the boundary of the Harry S Truman
National Historic Site in the State of Missouri;
S. 1311, to establish the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th
commemoration commission, and for other purposes; and H.R.
2055, to amend Public Law 89-366 to allow for an adjustment in
the number of free roaming horses permitted in Cape Lookout.
So that is what we have on our agenda.
So I thank you all for being here. Keep your statements
limited somewhat. They will all be in the record, and then we
will have some questions. We will include your entire
statement. So we look forward to hearing your testimony and the
opportunity to discuss these bills.
[The prepared statement of Senator Clinton and a letter
from Governor Pataki follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Hillary Rodham Clinton, U.S. Senator
From New York, on S. 1311
Mr. Chairman, I want to open my testimony by extending my warmest
thanks to you and to the ranking member, Senator Akaka, for including
S. 1311 in today's hearing. I am grateful to have been given this
opportunity to discuss my legislation before your subcommittee. Senator
Schumer is a co-sponsor of the bill. It is also important at the outset
to mention the efforts of Congressman Hinchey, my colleague from New
York, who has introduced companion legislation, H.R. 2528, in the House
of Representatives. I know he is heartened by your decision to hold
this hearing, particularly in light of the action recently taken on
H.R. 2528 by the House Committee on Government Reform. On July 21,
2004, that committee's Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency
Organization forwarded H.R. 2528 to the full committee, and on the same
day the full committee ordered the legislation to be reported, as
amended.
Let me also take a moment to thank you for the committee's past
consideration of S. 1241, the Kate Mullany National Historic Site Act.
As you know, following a hearing in your subcommittee and a full
committee markup of S. 1241, the Senate passed the bill, as amended, on
September 15, 2004.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to emphasize that the Hudson-Fulton-
Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission Act has bipartisan support. As
a notable example, I am submitting with my testimony a letter of
support from Governor George Pataki of the State of New York. It is not
surprising that there should be bipartisan support for this
legislation, because the creation of the federal commission would help
to celebrate some key events in the history of the great State of New
York, the surrounding region, and North America as a whole. The three
signal events I am referring to are the 400th anniversary (in 2009) of
Henry Hudson's pioneering exploration, in the service of Dutch
interests, of what is now known as the Hudson River; the 400th
anniversary (also in 2009) of Samuel de Champlain's pioneering
exploration of what is now known as Lake Champlain; and the 200th
anniversary (in 2007) of Robert Fulton's inauguration of the successful
commercial use of steam navigation by way of his historic voyage from
New York City to Albany, New York. Each of these events is remarkable
and together they demonstrate how vital they are to an understanding of
the development of my State, the region, and, indeed, our Nation.
The Hudson River extends from the western edge of New York City and
the northeastern edge of New Jersey, past the U.S. Military Academy at
West Point, by Albany, farther northward into the Adirondack Mountains.
Hudson's 1609 exploration of the Hudson River, extending to a point
near Albany, the capital city of New York, was followed by the
establishment of Fort Orange, a Dutch, and later, English settlement in
the area. Almost two hundred years after Hudson's voyage, Robert
Fulton's introduction of successful commercial steam navigation on the
Hudson River helped make that waterway a vital commercial highway and
engine of development for the state and the region. The river remains a
natural wonder that is extremely rich in history, outdoors life,
wildlife, and artistic inspiration.
In 1609, the same year that Henry Hudson, an Englishman, sailed
north on the Hudson River, Samuel de Champlain traveled in the company
of Native Americans and arrived at Lake Champlain. Lake Champlain
itself is shared by two states--New York and Vermont. In addition to
its enduring natural grandeur, it has contributed renowned chapters to
the military history of the Nation and served as a passageway to
Canada, our neighbor, trading partner, and ally to the north.
In keeping with the multilayered importance of these anniversaries,
the proposed membership of the federal Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th
Commemoration Commission is designed to bring together people with a
wide variety of expertise and knowledge, including employees of the
National Park Service. As envisioned in S. 1311, the commission would
be composed of 31 members. Three members would be appointed after
consideration of recommendations by the Governors of New York, Vermont
and New Jersey. Thirteen members would be appointed after consideration
of recommendations by the members of the House of Representatives whose
districts encompass the Hudson River Valley and Champlain Valley. Six
members would be appointed after consideration of the recommendations
from the members of the Senate from New York, New Jersey, and Vermont.
Two members would be employees of the National Park Service, of whom
one would be the Director of the National Park Service (or a designee),
and one would be an employee of the National Park Service having
relevant experience. Another member of the commission appointed by the
Secretary would be an individual knowledgeable of the Hudson River
Valley National Heritage Area. And six members of the commission
appointed by the Secretary would have an interest in, support for, and
expertise appropriate to, the commemoration.
The purpose of the federal Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th
Commemoration Commission would be to: (1) ensure a suitable national
observance of the Henry Hudson, Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain
anniversaries through cooperation with and assistance to the programs
and activities of New York, New Jersey, and Vermont; (2) assist in the
appropriate development of heritage tourism and economic benefits to
the United States; (3) assist in ensuring that Hudson-Fulton-Champlain
observances provide an excellent visitor experience and beneficial
interaction between visitors and the natural and cultural resources of
the New York, New Jersey, and Vermont sites; (4) assist in ensuring
that Hudson-Fulton-Champlain observances are inclusive and
appropriately recognize the diverse Hudson River and Lake Champlain
communities that developed over four centuries; (5) facilitate
international involvement in the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain observances;
and (6) support and facilitate marketing efforts for a commemorative
coin, a commemorative stamp, and related activities for the Hudson-
Fulton-Champlain 2009 observances.
To carry out these responsibilities, the federal Hudson-Fulton-
Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission would be required to: (1)
plan, develop, and execute programs and activities appropriate to
commemorate the three anniversaries; (2) facilitate Hudson-Fulton-
Champlain-related activities throughout the United States; (3)
coordinate its activities with State commemoration commissions and
appropriate Federal Government agencies, including the Departments of
Agriculture, Defense, State, and Transportation, the National Park
Service with respect to the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area,
and the American Heritage Rivers Initiative Interagency Committee
established by Executive Order 13061, dated September 11, 1997; (4)
encourage civic, patriotic, historical, educational, religious,
economic, and other organizations throughout the United States to
organize and participate in anniversary activities to expand the
understanding and appreciation of the significance of the voyages of
Henry Hudson, Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain; (5) provide
technical assistance to States, localities, and nonprofit organizations
to further the commemoration; (6) coordinate and facilitate for the
public scholarly research on, publication about, and interpretation of,
the voyages of Henry Hudson, Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain;
and (7) ensure that the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain anniversaries provide a
lasting legacy and long-term public benefit by assisting in the
development of appropriate programs and facilities.
Thus, the federal Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration
Commission would coordinate educational, cultural and historical
projects while cooperating and assisting the programs and activities
conceived by New York, New Jersey and Vermont. The commission, as a
federal entity, will naturally play a vital role in facilitating
national and international celebration efforts, and helping to ensure
the observances are inclusive and recognize the wonderful diversity of
the communities that have inhabited the Hudson River and Lake Champlain
regions over the last four hundred years. The commission would also
play an important role in working with state commissions to help foster
appropriate capital improvements that will help to attract heritage
tourists from across the Nation and elsewhere.
Since a vital element of a successful commemoration is the
participation of the state commissions mentioned in the legislation, I
am pleased to let you know that the states of New York and Vermont have
already created state quadricentennial commissions and New York's
Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area, referenced in the bill, has
already made a tremendous contribution to fostering heritage tourism,
making it a significant element in the area economy. In 2002, Governor
George Pataki of the State of New York signed legislation creating the
Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Quadricentennial Commission. Governor Pataki
said in his announcement: ``These legendary figures played a key role
in the history of New York and this important new commission will play
a key role in helping us celebrate and honor their legacies . . . .
These upcoming celebrations will help energize communities all along
the Hudson River and Lake Champlain . . . .
New York's Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Quadricentennial Commission was
established with twenty-one members, including members appointed by the
governor and elected officials of the state legislature, and members
representative of relevant geographic areas. As set forth in Governor
Pataki's announcement, the state commission is responsible for, among
other things: (1) seeking funding from private individuals, foundations
and corporations to support capital improvements, preservation and
conservation needs associated with the commemoration; (2) making
existing cultural institutions, museums and libraries the focus of the
commemoration; (3) coordinating forums to seek public ideas for the
commemoration; (4) coordinating civic, educational, cultural and
heritage organizations to develop public interest and involvement in
the planning and development of the commemoration; (5) promoting and
encouraging educational outreach programs, media and technology
including electronic communications to achieve national and
international impact; (6) coordinating the planning of commemorative
events for all communities along the Hudson River, Lake Champlain, and
elsewhere; (7) inviting other interested states and nations to
participate; (8) coordinating and promoting conferences, seminars and
conventions in Hudson River and Lake Champlain communities using the
quadricentennial as an attraction and theme; and (9) coordinating and
cooperating with local, state and federal entities, including any
federal quadricentennial commission.
Likewise, in 2003 Governor James Douglas of the State of Vermont
established the Lake Champlain Quadricentennial Commission, with up to
26 members. The commission is charged with the responsibility to
advise, assist and support regarding the commemoration of the 400th
anniversary of Samuel de Champlain exploration of Lake Champlain. The
creation of the New York and Vermont state commissions is an essential
step in the commemoration effort.
The federal-state cooperation envisioned by S. 1311 has an
important precedent. Congress has acted before to help recognize the
significance of the Hudson and Champlain commemorations by means of the
creation of a federal commission. In 1958, President Dwight D.
Eisenhower signed legislation (Public Law 85-614) establishing a 350th
anniversary ``Hudson-Champlain Celebration Commission.'' According to
that statute, the commission was designed to ``develop and execute
plans for the celebration in 1959 of the three hundred and fiftieth
anniversary of the exploratory voyages in 1609 of Henry Hudson and
Samuel de Champlain which signaled the beginning of settlements whose
influence on our history, culture, law, and commerce extend through
generations to the present day, settlements whose significance is
recognized not only by their parent countries, sister nations across
the sea, but by untold others who have come from foreign lands to find
in America a new homeland.''
The year 1959 was also marked by the passage of S. J. Res. 59
(Public Law 86-68) and the issuance of a presidential proclamation,
according to the Congressional Research Service. The joint resolution
noted the significance of the commemorations and called on the
President of the United States to ``issue a proclamation designating
1959 as the year of the Hudson-Champlain Celebrations, and calling upon
all citizens to join in commemorating the explorations carried out by
these heroic men . . . .'' By proclamation issued June 25, 1959,
President Eisenhower designated 1959 as the year of the Hudson-
Champlain Celebrations and invited the citizens of the United States,
and the ``schools, patriotic and historical societies, and civic and
religious organizations to participate'' in the commemorations.
The Final Report of the Hudson-Champlain Celebration Commission to
the President and Congress of the United States (``Final Report'')
describes the celebration period's rousing success. ``From New York
City up through the Hudson and Champlain Valleys as far as Canada and
then into Vermont, with a nod of recognition from New Jersey and
counties of New York State which lie far to the west of the Hudson and
Champlain areas, 1959 was a year of commemoration and celebration . . .
. The character of the festivities ranged all the way from educational
and religious projects, exhibitions of Dutch and French art, and
continuing professional performances of music, drama and ballet to
parades, waterama, fireworks, pageants, canoecades, historic re-
enactments and exhibitions of the armed might of the United States.''
The report also describes the involvement of the governments of The
Netherlands, France, Canada and Great Britain, which no doubt served to
bring allies in North America and Europe even closer to the United
States during that period when the Cold War was a daily fact of life.
The Final Report also describes an even earlier celebration laying the
foundation for this legislation. Festivities were held in 1909 as part
of the Champlain Tercentenary in the Champlain Valley and the Hudson-
Fulton celebrations in New York City.
Mr. Chairman, there are many significant voyages of exploration
that led to the development of our Nation, but among the most
significant are those of Hudson and Champlain. There are many acts of
invention that have contributed to unleashing the full potential of
America, and among the most significant is the contribution of Robert
Fulton. These are some of the reasons I feel privileged to represent
the State of New York. The history of New York and its waterways
stretch back before the dawn of this great Nation. Native peoples knew
the beauty and mystery and plenitude of this region. Those who arrived
later--among them Hudson, Champlain, and Fulton--plied the magnificent
rivers and lakes of New York in voyages of exploration. Crucial
episodes in the American Revolution and other battles took place in
this region. The story of these explorers and the waters they traveled
upon are a part of the continuing story of New York, Vermont, New
Jersey, and the Nation, because that determined spirit of exploration,
discovery and invention still thrives today, and is one of the reasons
our Nation is unique among the Nations of the world.
Mr. Chairman, that is why it is so important to establish the
Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission. The federal-
state cooperation that took place nearly a half-century ago is evidence
that the collaboration envisioned by S. 1311 has a crucial role to play
in the proper commemoration of the significance of these events. I
thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony in support of
S. 1311 and I look forward to working with you and Senator Akaka to
turn this legislation into a reality. Thank you.
__________
State of New York,
Albany, NY, September 17, 2004.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thomas and Ranking Member Akaka: It is my
understanding that the Subcommittee on National Parks will soon
consider legislation to establish the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th
Commemoration Commission. S. 1311 seeks to celebrate and commemorate
the anniversaries of events of major historic importance along these
internationally significant waterways. I write in support of this
legislation.
The discovery of the Hudson River in 1609 by Englishman Henry
Hudson, while in the service of the Netherlands, is a key moment in the
history of New York. His exploratory voyage up the Hudson provided the
Western world with its first view of the wonders of the New World and,
in large measure, with the limitless potential of North America. In the
same year, French explorer Samuel de Champlain was the first European
to set eyes upon the lake that now bears his name. Since the
tricentennial of Hudson's exploration in 1909, when its commemoration
was joined with that of the centennial of Robert Fulton's voyage up the
Hudson on the steamship Clearmont, both events have generally been
celebrated together.
In order to mark the significance of the 400th anniversary of these
important events, New York State passed legislation in 2002 to create a
statewide, commission. This commission will plan and develop the
celebrations of these events by commemorating the rich heritage of the
Hudson River and Champlain corridors, and the impact of these
discoveries on our history, culture, and commerce.
At the federal level, S. 1311 would recognize the national and
international significance of the discovery of the Hudson-Champlain
Waterways, and the role these waters played in the birth and
development of our nation, and the entrepreneurial spirit that
continues to be a hallmark of our national identity. The multi-state
commission envisioned by the bill would assist the states and
communities in the region by coordinating events and observances across
the region, and by providing federal recognition and resources to
programs designed to commemorate these important discoveries and
historical and cultural heritage associated with them.
I wholeheartedly support the bill and urge its swift passage.
Very truly yours,
George Pataki,
Governor.
Senator Thomas. Senator Kyl, would you like to comment?
STATEMENT OF HON. JON KYL, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA
Senator Kyl. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very
much for holding this hearing.
I will be exceedingly brief, but just to note that the
first I believe is the Petrified Forest National Park Expansion
Act. Basically only 6 miles of the 22-mile Chinle Escarpment
that carries the Petrified Forest are currently in the park and
what this legislation would do is significantly expand the land
that would comprise the park.
By the way, the bill is supported by the people in the
area, by the Federal Government, by the State government, and
so on.
There is one change. The one thing that I would like to
draw your attention to, Mr. Chairman, is there were concerns in
one area raised by the administration. They were legitimate.
The substitute that I will offer at the markup addresses those
concerns. It has to do with the fact that we have a unique
provision in our State constitution that does not permit the
exchange of State lands with Federal lands. Our State trust
lands have to be sold at auction to the highest bidder. As a
result, this language will allow the State and the National
Park Service to exercise the appropriate means available under
the law to acquire the land at the time of acquisition and
allow for a memorandum of agreement between the State and the
NPS for management of the State trust lands included within the
park boundary until the Park Service and the State can agree on
the terms of acquisition. So to my knowledge, that is the only
issue to be resolved and I think that will resolve it, and we
will try to accomplish that at the time that we mark the bill
up.
But I want to thank you and I want to thank all the people
from Arizona who are here in support of this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, might I ask too that my full statement be
inserted in the record? I also note that Senator McCain, a
cosponsor of the legislation, also has a statement, and I would
like to submit that for the record as well.
Senator Thomas. It will be included in the record.
[The prepared statements of Senator Kyl and Senator McCain
follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jon Kyl, U.S. Senator From Arizona, on S.
784
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on S. 784, the
Petrified Forest National Park Expansion Act of 2004. This bill, which
I am co-sponsoring with Senator McCain, would expansion the park to
include some of the most unique natural and cultural resources
contained anywhere in the world.
The Petrified Forest National Park is something of an anomaly among
national parks. Designated as a National Monument in 1906 to protect
the large petrified tree trunks that once towered over Triassic
swamplands, it may not quite fit the popular image of a national park.
Nevertheless, it is, a treasure, worthy of National Park status for the
unique educational experience it provides its visitors. No where else
can you glimpse the fossil remains of an ancient wilderness ecosystem,
as it existed 30 million years ago.
Today we know that petrified wood is only a part of the globally
significant record contained in the rock formation commonly known as
the ``Chinle Escarpment'' which cuts across the park. Science has
revealed numerous paleontological deposits and nationally significant
archeological sites, including ancient Pueblo cultural sites. The
Chinle Escarpment is now known to constitute the best record of
Triassic period terrestrial ecosystems found anywhere in the world.
Currently, however, only six miles of the 22-mile escarpment are within
the park boundaries.
S. 784 would expand the park to include an additional 120,000
acres. These acres include the east and west portions of the Chinle
Escarpment which are believed to include additional globally
significant paleontological deposits and potentially nationally
significant archeological sites The proposed expansion areas are
checkerboarded federal, state, and private lands.
Although a large addition to the federal land mass, this expansion,
like the park itself, is unique. The expansion permitted by S. 784 is
not just about adding land to the park. S. 784 is needed to protect
these resources, they are seriously threatened by illegal activities
occurring in the region, such as the theft of petrified wood and
fossils, pot hunting, vandalism to petroglyph sites and the
environmental degradation caused by mineral exploration.
This expansion has been in the works for nearly 10 years. It is
supported by the private landowners, local communities, scientific and
research institutions, state tourism agencies, and environmental groups
such as the National Parks Conservation Association.
Mr. Chairman, this bill may unlock answers to profound questions
about our earth's history and the changing environment. This bill is
good for the state of Arizona and the nation. I plan to work with my
colleagues to ensure that we pass it.
__________
Prepared Statement of Hon. John McCain, U.S. Senator From Arizona,
on S. 784
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today on a number
of important pieces of legislation, including S. 784, the Petrified
Forest National Park Boundary Expansion Act, which I introduced with
Senator Kyl. Support for this proposed boundary expansion is
extraordinary, from the local community of Holbrook, scientific and
research institutions, state tourism agencies, and environmental
groups, including the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA).
As this Subcommittee is well aware, the Petrified Forest National
Park is a national treasure among the nation's parks, renowned for its
large concentration of highly colored petrified wood, fossilized
remains, and spectacular landscapes. Upon visiting this Park, one is
quick to recognize its wealth of scenic, scientific, and historical
value. Preserved deposits of petrified wood and related fossils are
among the most valuable representations of Triassic-period terrestrial
ecosystems in the world. These natural formations were deposited more
than 220 million years ago. Scenic vistas, designated wilderness areas,
and other historically significant sites of pictographs and Native
American ruins are added dimensions of the Park.
The Petrified Forest was originally designated as a National
Monument by former President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906 to protect the
important natural and cultural resources of the area. It was designated
as a National Park in 1962. While several boundary adjustments have
been made, a significant portion of unprotected resources remain in
outlying areas adjacent to the Park.
Increasing reports of theft and vandalism around the area have
activated Park authorities, local communities, and other interested
entities to seek additional protections through a proposed boundary
expansion. It has been estimated that visitors to the Park steal about
12 tons of petrified wood every year. Reports of destruction to
archaeological sites and grave sites have also been documented. Based
on these continuing threats to the Park's resources, the National Parks
Conservation Association listed the Petrified Forest National Park on
its list of Top Ten Most Endangered Parks in 2000.
A proposal to expand the Park's boundaries was recommended in the
Park's General Management Plan in 1992, in response to concerns about
the long-term protection needs of globally significant resources and
the Park's viewshed in nearby areas. For example, one of the most
concentrated deposits of petrified wood is found within the Chinle
Escarpment, of which only thirty percent is included within the current
Park boundaries.
S. 784 would revise the boundary of the Park to include
approximately 130,000 acres, continue current grazing rights on lands
transferred to the Park, and within three years, authorize the
development of a plan, in accordance with Federal and State law, for
acquisition of State land or interests in State lands within the Park's
revised boundary. Since introducing the bill last year, we have been
seeking the input of interested parties to ensure that the Park and all
its wonderful resources are protected for future generations. I want to
thank the major landowners and other witnesses today for their
contributions to this effort.
Again, I thank the Chairman and the Subcommittee members and hope
this measure will be approved by the full Committee as soon as
possible.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Senator.
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM TALENT, U.S. SENATOR
FROM MISSOURI
Senator Talent. I thank the chairman.
It is good to see Mr. Jones again. I am looking forward to
his testimony.
Again, I will also be brief about the Truman Farm Home
Expansion Act, which we have on the calendar. I am grateful to
the chairman for scheduling a hearing on that. I hope we can
put it out and pass it. I cannot imagine anything less
controversial.
The former Truman Farm home, where Harry Truman worked in
the early part of the last century, is located in Grandview in
eastern Jackson County, Missouri. It is an historic site, about
5 acres. And because of encroachment of commercial development,
wear and tear on the house, we need to expand it by about
another 5 acres. This will increase the educational
opportunities for people who visit, protect the homestead from
being threatened by commercial development, and open up a lot
of other opportunities to really expand people's opportunity to
enjoy and learn from the site.
So I am, again, grateful that you scheduled it, Mr.
Chairman, and hope we can put it out so that the people of
Missouri and, in fact, of the whole country can enjoy this
opportunity to see where, according to Harry Truman's mother,
he got common sense, by working on that farm. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
I have a full statement to submit for the record.
Senator Thomas. It will be included.
[The prepared statement of Senator Talent follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. James M. Talent, U.S. Senator From Missouri
Chairman Thomas, thank you for holding this hearing today and thank
you for including a bill that I introduced, the Truman Farm Home
Expansion Act, to expand the boundaries of the Harry S Truman Farm Home
in Grandview.
The additional acreage to the site will be used to build a new
visitors center and preserve the historic integrity of the farm by
preventing additional commercial encroachment. This bill will permit
the National Park Service to ensure the protection of the Farm Home and
the historic grounds by removing non-historic uses. It will also offer
increased educational opportunities to school children, residents, and
visitors alike that are not currently available at this site.
The Truman Farm Home is a very special place to the people of
Grandview and the Greater Kansas City area. It is here that Harry S
Truman's mother said he got his common sense.
Truman was 22 when his father called him to work on the Young and
Truman farm in 1906. In describing his duties Mr. Truman said he, ``. .
. Plowed, sowed, reaped, milked cows, fed hogs, doctored horses, bailed
[sic] hay, and did everything there was to do on a six hundred acre
farm with my father and my brother.''
Currently the Truman Farm is located on a 5.2 acre area. S. 2499
would nearly double the size of the Harry S Truman Historic Site by
giving the government the authority to purchase approximately 5-acres
of land on the south side of the property. This area is basically
undeveloped except for a small retail paint store located at the west
end and fronting on Blue Ridge Boulevard. The proposed 5-acre strip is
the only undeveloped land that remains of the original 600-acre Truman
Farm.
The use of the existing paint store as a visitor contact center
will permit the park to eliminate the administrative use of the Truman
Farm Home's screened-in side porch as a visitor welcome point and sales
area. This will restore the historic integrity to the home, while
removing the impact of the wear and tear on the historic structure.
Since the existing portion of the Truman Farm is so small, there
isn't adequate space to plant vegetation that would have the potential
of screening existing commercial development. Sen. Talent's bill would
give the park space to provide for those plantings without encroaching
on the home. Eliminating views of commercial development, which
surrounds the farm site, would help visitors better understand and
appreciate the rural nature of the farm.
I believe this preservation is needed to ensure that future
generations can gain an understanding of the lives of our Presidents. I
am hopeful that this committee will act on this bill and it can be
passed by the Senate before we adjourn this year.
STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER B. JONES,
U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NORTH CAROLINA
Mr. Jones. Mr. Chairman, I thank you and I thank the
committee members for this opportunity to speak briefly on H.R.
2055.
For 3 centuries, a herd of wild Spanish horses has occupied
the Shackleford Banks, a barrier island in my district that is
part of Cape Lookout National Seashore. H.R. 2055 would improve
existing law by updating the science-based parameters that
govern management of the horses.
The bill is based on the research of two world-renowned
genetic scientists who spent decades studying the herds, Dr.
Dan Rubenstein of Princeton University and Dr. Gus Cothran of
the University of Kentucky.
This bill is supported by the National Park Service. We
have worked together for over 8 years now, and this bill
itself, all it is doing is just to ensure the future of the
herds based on science.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Walter B. Jones, U.S. Representative
From North Carolina, on H.R. 2055
Mr. Chairman, thank you for scheduling this hearing on H.R. 2055--a
bill to adjust the number of free roaming horsed permitted on
Shackleford Banks in the Cape Lookout National Seashore. Shackleford
Banks is a barrier island off the coast of North Carolina that has been
home to a herd of wild horses for over three centuries. In fact,
experts believe the herd descended from Spanish stallions that were
shipwrecked on the island during colonial times.
Over the years, the Shackleford horses have become an integral part
of the natural and cultural fabric of Eastern North Carolina. They are
treasured by the local community and adored by the visitors who come
from around the world to see them.
To protect these beautiful creatures, in 1997 I introduced the
Shackleford Banks Wild Horses Protection Act which the President later
signed into law. The Act directed the Department of the Interior to
enter into an agreement with a non-profit group--the Foundation for
Shackleford Horses--to manage the herd. It also required the Department
to allow a herd of 100 free-roaming horses in the Seashore, and it set
out terms under which horses could be removed, including a prohibition
on removal ``unless the number of horses . . . exceeds 110.''
As the National Park Service and the Foundation began to implement
the Act, disagreement erupted over the law's requirements on the size
of the herd. The Park Service interpreted the Act to mean that the
herd's population should be kept between 100 and 110. However, as the
author of the legislation, I can tell you this interpretation was
inconsistent with Congressional intent--which was to allow the herd to
hover above 110.
The Park Service's interpretation also conflicted with the
established scientific consensus on the size of the herd. Studies by
world-renowned genetic scientists Dr. Daniel Rubenstein of Princeton
University, and Dr. Gus Cothran of the University of Kentucky, confirm
that in order to maintain the herd's long-term viability, its optimum
size is around 120 animals. The experts also agree that the population
should not dip below 110 and that it should be allowed to expand
periodically to numbers at or above 130 in order to sustain the proper
genetic diversity in the herd. It's important to note that these
numbers are well within the island's carrying capacity.
After years of disagreement on the issue of herd size, the Park
Service met in the fall of 2002 with the Foundation for Shackleford
Horses, Dr. Rubenstein, Dr. Cothran and other stakeholders to find
middle ground. After two days of meetings, the parties emerged with an
agreement that largely minors the scientific understanding of how the
horses should be managed.
H.R. 2055 seeks to codify this scientific consensus into law. It
would allow a herd of not less than 110 free roaming horses, with a
target population of between 120 and 130 free roaming horses.'' It
would also clear up confusion on when horses can be removed from the
island by mandating that removal can only occur if ``carried out as
part of a plan to maintain the viability of the herd.''
Mr. Chairman, this non-controversial legislation is supported by
the Park Service, the scientific experts, and the local community. It
is a legislative fix based on sound science, and I urge the
Subcommittee to support it.
Senator Thomas. All right, sir. Thank you very much.
I might say we have some extra wild horses in Wyoming, if
you are interested.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Jones. Senator, I know my colleague, Ms. Cubin, and we
have had several discussions about our horses and your horses
as well.
Senator Thomas. Ours are not used to the water, however.
Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate your being here.
Mr. Jones. I appreciate it. Thank you.
Senator Thomas. We are ready for our first panel then. It
will be Mr. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the Director,
National Park Service, the Department of the Interior. Welcome,
Mr. Smith.
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
REGARDING S. 784
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I will try to be brief,
and I will go through all these bills in hopefully short order.
Mr. Chairman, the first bill is the Department of the
Interior's views on S. 784, a bill to revise the boundary of
Petrified Forest National Park in the State of Arizona.
The Department supports S. 784, and on June 15 of this
year, we testified in support of H.R. 1630, which as introduced
in the House was identical to S. 784.
S. 784 does not include the number of acres, identify which
acres are proposed for expansion, or cite a specific map
reference. However, the NPS, in consultation with BLM, has
developed a map that was incorporated in H.R. 1630 at markup.
We suggest that S. 784 be amended to reference the same map.
Much of the proposed expansion land ownership is best
described as a checkerboard, which is common in western lands
bordering railroad corridors. The 128,000-acre addition
includes Federally-owned, BLM-managed lands, about 14,500
acres; privately owned lands, about 79,000 acres; and lands
owned by the State of Arizona, about 34,500 acres.
Petrified Forest National Park was established in 1906 and
has been expanded several times to preserve and protect the
Petrified Forest, its outstanding paleontological sites and
specimens, its associated ecosystem and specimens, cultural and
historic resources, and scenic and wilderness values for
present and future generations. This is a world-class site, Mr.
Chairman.
In addition to including the acreage and reference map, we
would suggest two other amendments, which I think Senator Kyl
alluded to. These are amendments that were included in H.R.
1630, and it involves an MOU with the State to deal with the
possible purchase of the State-owned lands at a later date and
management of those lands until that can be accomplished.
That concludes my testimony on S. 784.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 784
follows:]
Prepared Statement of A. Durand Jones, Deputy Director, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior, on S. 784
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the Department of the
Interior's views on S. 784, a bill to revise the boundary of Petrified
Forest National Park in the State of Arizona. We thank Senators McCain
and Kyl for their interest and support for including and protecting
world-class paleontological and archeological resources as well as
extensive petroglyph sites in Petrified Forest National Park.
Congressman Renzi and the other members of the House delegation have
introduced companion legislation, H.R. 1630.
The Department supports S. 784. On June 15, 2004, the Department
also testified in support of H.R. 1630, which as introduced was
identical to S. 784.
S. 784 would expand the boundary of Petrified Forest National Park
and authorize the Secretary to acquire lands within the boundary
expansion from a willing seller by purchase, donation, or exchange.
Within two years of enactment, the Secretary would be directed to
develop a plan for the acquisition of State land or interests in State
lands. The bill also would direct the Secretary to transfer to the NPS,
administrative jurisdiction over other federally owned lands within the
boundary expansion and specifically would allow . grazing to continue
on lands where grazing presently exists. And finally, S. 784 would
require that the park's General Management Plan (GMP) be amended within
three years after this bill is enacted to address the use and
management of additional lands.
S. 784 does not include the number of acres, identify which acres
are proposed for expansion, or cite a specific map reference. However,
the NPS, in consultation with the BLM, has developed a map that was
incorporated in H.R. 1630 at markup. We suggest that S. 784 be amended
to reference the same map entitled ``Proposed Boundary Adjustments,
Petrified Forest National Park'', numbered 110/80,044, and dated July
2004. This map would result in a total proposed expansion of
approximately 128,000 acres.
Much of the proposed expansion landownership is best described as a
checkerboard, which is common in western lands bordering railroad
corridors. The 128,000 acres includes federally owned BLM-managed
lands, privately owned lands, and lands owned by the State of Arizona.
Under the bill, approximately 14,500 acres of BLM-managed public
land would be transferred to the National Park Service. Approximately
79,500 acres are privately owned. There are four major private
landowners within this area and each has expressed interest in selling,
exchanging, or donating their lands or interests. Because the proposed
boundary expansion has been discussed for more than ten years, some of
the landowners are losing interest while others are facing economic
hardship and may be forced to sell to other interests if the expansion
is not completed soon. Much of the private lands adjacent to the park
have been managed as part of large cattle ranches for the past 120
years, however, this historic use of the land that has preserved the
scenic views seen from the park is starting to change. According to the
park's 1993 GMP, new land uses occurring within the past 30 to 40 years
include large-scale, mechanized petrified wood mining on private lands
(with no reclamation efforts)--and subdivision of square-mile sections
into 40-acre ranchettes. Pot hunting and vandalism continue regularly,
and the costs for patrolling are beyond the ability of most private
owners to manage.
The State of Arizona owns approximately 34,500 acres in the
proposed expansion. In support of the bill, the State has closed these
lands to surface and sub-surface applications, mineral location, and
prospecting permit application. This closure was originally done on
March 4, 1991 and was just renewed on May 26, 2004.
We should note that two issues exist concerning the state-owned
lands authorized for acquisition. First, State law prohibits lands to
be donated. Second, it is our understanding that the Arizona Supreme
Court has determined that the Arizona Constitution prohibits the
disposal of certain state land except through auction to the highest
and best bidder. We are told there is an effort to amend this provision
in the Arizona Constitution on the November ballot. Given these
remaining issues, we would have to await a determination on how the
citizens of Arizona and their representatives would recommend
proceeding should S. 784 be enacted.
The average cost per acre in the proposed new boundary, based on
appraisals completed by the Department of the Interior, is between $105
and $175. Recurring costs for the management of the new lands would be
approximately $690,000, which includes planning, and compliance,
resource inventory and monitoring, resource protection, and
maintenance. We also expect to incur approximately $625,000 in non-
recurring costs for new fencing and the purchase and installation of
site sensors to remotely monitor lands for illegal activities. Funding
would be subject to NPS priorities and the availability of
appropriations.
Petrified Forest National Park was established in 1906 and has been
expanded several times to preserve and protect the Petrified Forest,
its outstanding paleontological sites and specimens, its associated
ecosystems and specimens, cultural and historic resources and scenic
and wilderness values for present and future generations. The Petrified
Forest is located in the stark and beautiful high desert environment of
badlands, dry washes, and sagebrush of northeastern Arizona. Where 200
million years ago there were lush green forests, rich in vegetation and
trees hundreds of feet high supporting a variety of life, and where
dinosaurs once roamed, there are now vistas broken only by distant
mesas and the remnants of that forest and life, preserved by forces of
nature in the shape of petrified wood and delicate fossils. In this
stark and remarkable place, the remains of the oldest known dinosaur on
earth were discovered in 1985.
The park contains some of the best fossil records of late Triassic
ecosystems in the world, and nowhere else can one find the combination
of world-class paleontology and nationally significant archaeological
sites that one finds here. For the past 150 years, people have visited,
researched and sometimes vandalized and looted these resources. The
creation of the park and subsequent expansions has diminished the
threat.
However, historic research by institutions such as the American
Museum of Natural History, The Smithsonian, and the University of
California at Berkeley has shown that the areas outside the park
contain an even richer record of Triassic fossils than the areas within
the park. The proposed boundary expansion would bring into the
protection of the park, the following resources:
the Chinle Escarpment, which cuts across the park from East
to West and includes resources that contain in their rock
layers the story of the world's only know complete Triassic era
ecosystem--a remarkably rich concentration of information about
a world that vanished more than 200 million years ago;
critical riparian habitat along the Puerco River, central to
ancient human history of the region and important for the
protection of plants and wildlife;
the Rainbow Forest Badlands, significant because it contains
fossil-bearing strata that is a continuation of that protected
within the park;
the Dead Wash Petroglyphs parcel, containing a wide variety
of paleontological features, archeological resources and
riparian habitat critical to the wildlife and water quality of
the region;
the Wallace Tank Ruins parcel, containing a large ruin that
may have played an important role in the closing phases of the
area's prehistoric settlement; and
the West Rim of the Painted Desert parcel, significant for
its substantial number of archeological sites including three
ruins, an ancient petrified wood quarry and a petroglyph site
as well as several paleontological fossil beds adjacent to the
Devils Playground bone site within the park.
These fossils are non-renewable, unique resources that face
constant threat of destruction from erosion and theft, development
pressures, and the attraction of commercial mining, particularly of
petrified wood. Petrified Forest National Park has an established
monitoring program within the park as one of many resource protection
tools. The NPS would use that established monitoring program, as well
as all law enforcement and resource protection tools in the expanded
boundary. S. 784 would ensure long-term protection of the valuable
paleontological, archeological, cultural, and natural resources of the
Petrified Forest for generations to come.
In addition to including the acreage and map reference, we would
suggest two other amendments. First, because of the checkerboard nature
of the land ownership of the lands being considered under this bill,
especially in the portion known as the East Chinle Escarpment, NPS is
concerned about the ability to manage this area effectively. NPS would
like to amend the bill to provide that the acquisition of the East
Chinle parcel is authorized dependent upon a determination of the
Secretary that either 1) federal lands elsewhere in the state of
Arizona have been identified for exchange with the state lands or 2)
that the state and the NPS have completed a Memorandum of Agreement
that would allow the NPS to manage the state lands. Second, the bill
should be amended to authorize the Department to acquire State land
within the revised boundary of the Park by donation. These amendments
were also suggested in the hearing on H.R. 1630 and were adopted in the
markup of that bill.
S. 784 would continue the long and respected tradition and
commitment of the NPS to science, education, and protection of the
special places in the country significant enough to be considered
national parks. These lands and resources are the legacy of the
American people and by protecting them we expand our knowledge and
understanding of the history of the earth and how changes through time
have affected it.
That concludes my remarks. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to answer
any questions you may have.
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
REGARDING S. 2656
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, the second bill is S. 2656, a bill
that would establish a commission to commemorate the
quincentennial of the discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon.
The Department supports S. 2656 if amended as outlined in
our testimony.
S. 2656 would establish a Discovery of Florida
Quincentennial Commemoration Commission to encourage,
coordinate, and conduct the commemoration of the
quincentennial, and to ensure that the anniversary will have
lasting educational value. The commission would terminate on
December 31, 2013.
The Department suggests several clarifying amendments. We
recommend that if a feasibility study is conducted, that the
bill be amended to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
conduct the study, rather than the commission, in accordance
with generally accepted practices for suitability and
feasibility studies that the Park Service uses.
Also, while S. 2656 is quite specific in requiring the
commission to consult with and encourage participation with
governmental agencies, educational institutions, foreign
governments, and private organizations, it is silent with
regard to consultation with Indian tribes, and the Department
recommends that consultation with tribes be included,
especially the Seminole and the Miccosukee tribes of Florida.
There is also a minor constitutional issue brought up by
the Justice Department concerning dealing with the Government
of Spain, and we would work with the committee to work on that
clarifying amendment.
This concludes our remarks in support of S. 2656.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 2656
follows:]
Prepared Statement of A. Durand Jones, Deputy Director, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior, on S. 2656
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
2656, a bill that would establish a commission to commemorate the
quincentennial of the discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon.
The Department supports S. 2656 if amended as outlined in our
testimony. We believe that establishment of the commission would help
ensure that the lasting legacy of the discovery and colonization of
Florida is understood and appreciated by all Americans.
S. 2656 would establish a Discovery of Florida Quincentennial
Commemoration Commission to encourage, coordinate, and conduct the
commemoration of the quincentennial and to ensure that the anniversary
will have lasting educational value.
Specifically, the bill would establish a Commission composed of 12
members who are Presidentially appointed and have demonstrated a strong
sense of public service and expertise that will contribute to the
duties of the Commission. The duties of the commission would include
conducting a study regarding the feasibility of creating a National
Heritage Area or National Monument to commemorate the discovery of
Florida, planning and developing activities appropriate to commemorate
the Quincentennial, consulting with and encouraging appropriate
governmental entities as-well-as elementary and secondary schools,
colleges and universities, foreign governments, and private
organizations to organize and participate in Quincentennial activities,
and coordinating activities throughout the United States and
internationally that relate to the history and influence of the
discovery of Florida. The Commission would terminate on December 31,
2013.
As S. 2656 suggests, Juan Ponce de Leon, arriving in 1513, was
likely the first European to set foot in what is now Florida, near
present-day St. Augustine. Ponce de Leon's quest for the fountain of
youth has become an established legend that has also drawn fame and
recognition to Florida and the United States.
Spanish explorers and conquistadors who followed Ponce de Leon
sought gold and other treasures, glory, and fame, like those who had
previously made such discoveries in Mexico and Peru. Only in the New
World was there the opportunity for quick advancement in diplomatic and
Spanish military careers. Others came to advance the cause of the
Inquisition, to convert all non-believers in the New World.
Historians generally believe that Ponce de Leon landed at or near
the present location of the City of St. Augustine. Spanish heritage is
still reflected in local architecture and historic resources and
attractions in the center of the old part of the city. The Castillo de
San Marcos National Monument contains arguably one of the oldest and
most important historic structures in the State and the nation. It is
prominently located on the Matanzas River directly across the road from
the Spanish Quarter of St. Augustine. These aspects of St. Augustine's
heritage combine to make it the ideal location for the offices of the
Commission.
The Department suggests several clarifying amendments for S. 2656.
We recommend that if a feasibility study is conducted, as specified in
Section 5(a)(1) of the bill, that the bill amended to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to conduct the study, rather than the
Commission, in accordance with generally accepted practices for
suitability and feasibility studies, to determine what, if any, type of
unit would be appropriate to commemorate the discovery of Florida
within the National Park System. In addition to examining whether a
unit of the National Park System would be appropriate, such a study
would also examine other alternatives for a federal role, including
whether designation of a National Heritage Area should be considered.
Also, while S. 2656 is quite specific in requiring the Commission
to consult with and encourage participation in the commemoration by
governmental agencies, educational institutions, foreign governments,
and private organizations, we note that it is silent with regard to
consultation with and involvement of the Indian tribes of Florida,
particularly the Seminole and Miccosukee tribes. The Department
suggests that Section 5(a)(3) of the bill be amended to require the
Commission to consult with Indian tribes in Florida, as well as with
foreign governments and State and local governments.
We recommend that Section 4(c)(3) be deleted due to concerns that
the Department of Justice has raised regarding the constitutional
authority of this provision of the bill. We will be happy to work with
the Committee as well as the Department of Justice and the Department
of State in order to find appropriate ways to involve the Government of
Spain in activities regarding the Commission.
Finally, S. 2656 authorizes appropriations that are necessary for
each fiscal year from 2005 to 2013. We recommend that $250,000 a year
be authorized for this effort given other competing priorities and the
need to focus federal funds on our parks and other essential programs.
Our suggested amendments are attached to this testimony.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or any members of the subcommittee
might have.
__________
Proposed Amendments
S. 2656--QUINCENTENNIAL OF THE DISCOVERY OF FLORIDA
On page 5, line 1, strike paragraph (3) and renumber the following
paragraph 4 as 3.
On page 6, line 18, strike ``(1) conduct a study regarding the
feasibility of creating a National Heritage Area or National Monument
to commemorate the discovery of Florida;'', and renumber the following
paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 as 1, 2, and 3.
On page 7, line 6, insert ``tribal governments,'' after
``governments,''.
On page 16, line 14, strike all of subsection (a) and insert the
following new subsection;
``(a) IN GENERAL.--Subject to subsection (b) there is authorized to
be appropriated to carry out the purposes of this Act $250,000 for each
of fiscal years 2005 through 2013.''
On page 16, following line 23, insert the following new section;
``SEC. 10. STUDY.--
The Secretary of the Interior shall--
(1) conduct a study regarding the suitability and feasibility of
commemorating the discovery of Florida with a unit within the National
Park System in accordance with Section 8(c) of Public Law 91-383 (16
U.S.C. 1a-59(c)); and
(2) submit a report to Congress that describes the findings of the
study and any conclusions and recommendations of the Secretary not
later than 3 years after the date on which funds are made available to
carry out the study.''
Senator Graham. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Thomas. Yes, the Senator from Florida.
STATEMENT OF HON. BOB GRAHAM, U.S. SENATOR
FROM FLORIDA
Senator Graham. I apologize for arriving late. I appreciate
your putting this legislation on the schedule.
The event that is going to take place seems like a long way
away, but in terms of the ability to prepare for such an
important celebration, I think it is timely.
In 1513, the first European discovery of North America
occurred when Ponce de Leon bumped into what is now St.
Augustine in the State of Florida. That event commenced the
development of our great continent, and it deserves, in my
judgment, the kind of recognition that this commission would
call for.
I am going to raise some questions about the amendments
that have been suggested. One is Spain has been a long, long
ally of the United States and has been a participant most
recently in the war in Iraq until there was a change of
government. This is an important opportunity for Spain and the
United States to recognize their many intersections in history,
and the purpose of inserting that provision about Spanish
participation was to accomplish that purpose. I can say that
there is considerable interest in this in Spain as a means of
celebrating the historic links between our country and our
cultures.
I think this would also be an important statement for the
large Hispanic population in the United States, to recognize
their heritage and their culture as an important part of the
culture of the United States of America.
So I would be open to work on language, but the idea of
maintaining this relationship with Spain I think is an
important part of the concept of this celebration.
[The prepared statement of Senator Graham follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bob Graham, U.S. Senator From Florida,
on S. 2656
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your including my bill on the agenda
today. In 2013, our nation will celebrate the 500th anniversary of
Ponce de Leon's landing on the east coast of Florida. I introduced a
bill that establishes a commission to determine how we can best
commemorate his discovery of North America. For a country as young as
ours, a Quincentennial is a rare milestone worthy of tribute.
Juan Ponce de Leon landed on the coast of Florida, south of the
present-day St. Augustine, in April of 1513. During the Easter holiday,
he explored our coasts, visiting the southern half of the east coast,
the Florida Keys and the southwest coast of Florida. The first European
explorer to step foot on North American soil, Ponce de Leon opened
Florida and the mainland of the Americas to the rest of the world.
Florida owes its heritage to Ponce de Leon. Even the name Florida dates
back to Ponce de Leon's discovery. When he saw the lush terrain, Ponce
de Leon named the area the `land of flowers' or `Florida' in Spanish.
While there is no doubt that Ponce de Leon is a key part of
Florida's history, his landing in Florida is ingrained in our entire
nation's early history. Children read in their history books about the
myths surrounding Ponce de Leon's voyages. His quest for the fountain
of youth has become a myth symbolic of the age of exploration.
Other Europeans were encouraged to make the dangerous journey
across the Atlantic toward the Americas, persuaded by the stories of
Ponce de Leon's explorations of the new lands of North America.
Ultimately, his discovery opened the path for exploration and
colonization of the Americas.
I have drafted this bill with the assistance of a notable scholar
accomplished in the field of early Florida history--Dr. Samuel Proctor,
Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of History at the University
of Florida. I would like to thank Dr. Proctor for all of his efforts in
drafting this bill. I would also like to thank another eminent scholar
at the University of Florida, Dr. Michael Gannon, Distinguished Service
Professor Emeritus of History, for his testimony in support of the
bill.
Funding authorized by this legislation would support the activities
of this commission and would allow for educational activities,
ceremonies, and celebrations. Fittingly, the principal office for this
operation would be located in St. Augustine, Florida.
With the establishment of this commission, I want to not only
commemorate Ponce de Leon's arrival in Florida but also to enhance the
American public's knowledge about the impact of Florida's discovery on
the history of the United States and North America. I hope that my
colleagues will recognize the importance of commemorating this historic
event.
The National Park Service has proposed a number of changes to the
original bill, one of which shifts the responsibility of conducting a
study as to creating a National Park Service site from the commission
to the National Park Service. I hope that the National Park Service
will not object to consulting with the commission in conducting the
study.
I have proposed several changes to the original bill. They reduce
the number of commission members from 12 to 10, change the method of
selecting commission members, and add a specific authorization figure.
I hope the proposed changes meet the concerns of the National Park
Service and Committee members. If not, I am willing to discuss the
issues further. I hope we can work together to pass this legislation
before Congress adjourns for the year.
Thank you.
Mr. Smith. Senator, it was my understanding that it was a
very technical constitutional issue, and the Justice Department
and Interior will coordinate. I believe it is certainly not to
preclude----
Senator Graham. It is not a policy issue.
Mr. Smith. No. It was a constitutional issue involving just
how we deal with foreign governments. It certainly is not to
preclude Spain. It is to find the correct language that will
allow that type of participation to occur.
Senator Graham. Muy bien.
[Laughter.]
Senator Graham. The second issue that I understand was
being raised was the question of the authorization level for
the amount of funding. I frankly cannot tell you with much
confidence today what this is going to entail over the next
several years.
What would seem to me to be more appropriate would be to
set an authorization level, for instance, similar to that which
was provided in the Lewis and Clark Trail, and then allow the
appropriators, on a year-by-year basis, to evaluate what was
appropriate and make the judgment. With the number that I
understood was being suggested, we would be setting a pretty
tight cap for a celebration, which I hope is going to be as
expansive as this. While much of it will focus on the St.
Augustine point of landing, I would hope that this would become
a celebration for the Hispanic role and influence throughout
our country.
Mr. Smith. Senator, the amount of $250,000 suggested by the
administration is done with all of the concerns that we have in
the Park Service budget, whether it be heritage areas or new
areas or studies. Obviously, we fully recognize the authorizing
and appropriations committees will make those determinations as
the bill moves forward.
Senator Graham. Well, my concern is if we start with an
authorization of $250,000, then that at least appears to be a
ceiling on what the appropriations might be, and I would
suggest that we consider some number that would allow for
flexibility over what is going to be a 9-year period between
now and when this comes to fruition.
Could we do this? Let me engage with the people in the
administration. I assume this is primarily through the National
Park Service. Which agency has suggested this?
Mr. Smith. The National Park Service, in consultation with
OMB, Senator. Again, you would be correct, in having the
history that you have, of what has gone on at Jamestown or
Lewis and Clark or others. Obviously, the authorizing committee
and the Appropriations Committee will consider that as it moves
through. This was the recommended amount, rather than just
leaving it as the usual language of ``sums necessary to carry
out the act.''
Senator Graham. Mr. Chairman, how do you want to proceed on
this?
Senator Thomas. Well, we can make some conversation
afterwards and so on. We do not do it here, of course, in the
hearing, but whatever you would like to do. I happen to
personally think there ought to be some level. We ought to
decide. It makes you much more comfortable with a bill if you
have some sort of a limit on what the authorizations can be.
Senator Graham. Are you anticipating that there will be a
markup on this legislation?
Senator Thomas. Senator, I do not know. There could be
because we do have some time, but frankly, I think the notion
is unlikely that we will have a markup this year. Does anyone
have any better information?
Senator Kyl. I am hoping.
Senator Thomas. I am not sure.
Senator Graham. Are you hopeful that we do?
Senator Kyl. I said I am hoping.
Senator Thomas. There is none scheduled. That does not
necessarily mean there will not be one.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
Senator Thomas. Are you finished?
Senator Graham. The completes my comments, yes. Thank you.
Senator Thomas. Thank you.
All right. If you would like to go on ahead then with the
other bills, please.
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
REGARDING S. 2499
Mr. Smith. Yes, Senator. I had finished on that bill, and
the next one is S. 2499, a bill to authorize the Secretary of
the Interior to modify the boundaries of the Harry S Truman
National Historic Site in the State of Missouri.
The Department strongly supports the enactment of S. 2499.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 2499
follows:]
Prepared Statement of A. Durand Jones, Deputy Director, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior, on S. 2499
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 2499,
a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to modify the
boundaries of the Harry S Truman National Historic Site in the State of
Missouri. The Department strongly supports enactment of S. 2499. The
Administration transmitted a similar proposal to Congress on June 2.
Harry S Truman National Historic Site is comprised of two separate
units within the Greater Kansas City Metropolitan area in Missouri. The
current acreage is 6.67 acres with the 1.41-acre portion in
Independence divided between four residential properties including the
Truman Home. The 5.26-acre portion in Grandview includes the Truman
Farm Home. S. 2499 would add approximately 5 acres of the original 600-
acre Truman Farm that abut the Grandview unit. These two contiguous
parcels are the only undeveloped land that remains of the original
Truman Farm. This additional acreage would preserve the historic
integrity of the Grandview site, provide improved on-site visitor
amenities and interpretation, permit vegetative screening of existing
development, and prevent additional commercial encroachment to the
Truman Farm.
This expansion is included in the park's approved 1999 General
Management Plan. It is the only land acquisition priority for this
park. Both property owners are willing to sell their land to the
National Park Service for the purposes defined in the park's General
Management Plan and Long-Range Interpretive Plan. Public Law 103-184
authorized the addition of the Truman Farm Home by donation from
Jackson County, Missouri, and directs the Secretary to provide
appropriate means to minimize the adverse effects of development and
use of adjacent lands.
The proposed 5-acre strip of land is basically undeveloped (3.82
acres) except for the small retail paint store (.95 acre) located at
the west end and fronting on Blue Ridge Boulevard. The strip separates
the park boundary on the south from a five-story retirement housing
facility. The paint store is connected to all utilities (water, sewer,
electricity, and telephone) and has a paved parking area in front. The
total land acquisition cost for both parcels is estimated at about
$900,000, with a current economic price escalation factor of 3 percent
per year.
S. 2499 would allow the park to remove non-historic items, such as
the existing paved parking area, the paved entrance road, temporary
park maintenance shed, portable toilet, and flag pole from the historic
scene and relocate them to the new visitor contact center in the
renovated existing paint store and paved parking area. The historic
earthen entrance lane would then be re-established and used by visitors
as the walk-in entrance to the site.
The use of the existing paint store as a visitor contact center
would permit the park to eliminate the use of the Truman Farm Home's
screened-in side porch as a visitor welcome point and cooperating
association sales area, which is not sheltered from inclement weather.
This would restore the historic integrity to the home, remove the
impact of the wear and tear on the historic structure, and provide
visitors with a sheltered staging area for tours. In addition, indoor
handicapped accessible restroom facilities and drinking water would be
available to visitors.
Passage of S. 2499 would have minimal impact on the park's current
budget. In order to convert the paint store building into a visitor
contact center, the park would request a one time nonrecurring project
sum estimated at $530,000 after acquisition of the 5 acres. The project
would include minor remodeling of the paint store, development of an
audiovisual program, and the construction of exhibits as well as
restoration of the historic scene. The request for funds would be
subject to National Park Service prioritization procedures for non-
recurring project funding, so a specific timeframe cannot be identified
for completion of this work. To operate the visitor contact center at
current visitation levels from May 1 to October 15 would require an
annual operating increase estimated at $103,000. This figure includes
all staff, maintenance, and utility costs.
Upon acquisition of the two parcels, the park would be able to
increase the visitor's experience, understanding, and appreciation of
how Harry S Truman's time spent as a farmer helped develop his
character and principles. This would be done through restoring the
historic scene and utilizing interpretive exhibits and audiovisual
programs in the visitor contact center. The interpretive media in this
center would help the visitor understand what it must have been like to
work on and manage a 600-acre Missouri farm during the turn of the 20th
century, before they go out to tour the farm home.
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.
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
REGARDING S. 1311
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, the next bill is S. 1311, a bill
to provide for the establishment of the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain
Commemoration Commission.
The Department supports the enactment of this bill if
amended to reduce the number of commission members and to cap
the annual appropriations to the commission, much in the same
way as we requested that for the Ponce de Leon commission bill.
S. 1311 provides for the establishment of a commission to
undertake the activities celebrating the contributions of Henry
Hudson, Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain to the history
of our Nation. It proposes a commission of 31 members. We
recommend that that be reduced to 15 to 17 members. We find
that in the history of commissions, that is a much more
workable number.
And the Department does recommend that the authorizing
level be at $250,000 per year during the period of its
operation.
That concludes my comments on S. 1311.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 1311
follows:]
Prepared Statement of A. Durand Jones, Deputy Director, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior, on S. 1311
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of
the Department of the Interior on S. 1311, a bill to provide for the
establishment of the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Commemoration Commission.
The Department of the Interior supports this bill, if amended to reduce
the number of commission members, to clarify Section (4)(d)(1), and to
cap annual appropriations to the Commission.
S. 1311 provides for the establishment of the Commission to
undertake activities celebrating the contributions of Henry Hudson,
Robert Fulton and Samuel de Champlain to the history of our nation.
Henry Hudson, as the master of the vessel Half Moon, was the first
European to sail up the river that now bears his name in 1609. In 1807,
Robert Fulton navigated up the same river between New York City and
Albany in the steamboat Claremont, revolutionizing the method of
waterborne transportation and influencing forever commerce, the world's
navies, and transoceanic travel and trade. The French explorer, Samuel
de Champlain, was the first European to discover and explore what is
now called Lake Champlain in 1609.
The Commission, composed of thirty-one (31) members, would be
appointed by the Secretary of the Interior based, in part, on
nominations from the governors of New York, New Jersey and Vermont and
members of Congress from those states whose districts encompass the
Hudson River and Champlain Valleys. Nine additional members would also
be appointed by the Secretary including the Director of the National
Park Service, or her designee, and one other NPS employee with relevant
commemoration experience. The National Park Service would also provide
administrative assistance to the Commission on a reimbursable basis.
The duties of the Commission are to plan, develop, and execute
appropriate commemorative actions, coordinate with federal and state
entities, and encourage a wide range of organizations to participate in
activities and expand understanding and appreciation of the
significance of the voyages of these three men. It is granted broad
powers to accomplish these tasks.
The Department recommends several amendments. First, we believe
that a thirty-one member commission is too large and would be difficult
to establish in a timely manner, would probably not work effectively
and efficiently, and would be too costly. We recommend a smaller
commission, with perhaps fifteen to seventeen members. We would like to
work with the committee to develop an amendment that would reduce the
number of commission members while ensuring a continued role for House
and Senate members and the Governors from the relevant areas in the
selection process.
Second, section (4)(d)(1) of the bill provides that the Commission
may ``disperse funds, and accept donations of personal services and
real and personal property related to the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 2009
and of the significance of Hudson, Fulton, and Champlain in the history
of the United States.'' We suggest that the word ``money,'' be inserted
between the phrases ``donations of'' and ``personal services'' in this
subsection. We believe that the Commission should be authorized to
accept monetary donations, as well as those other donations to
accomplish its tasks.
Third, given other competing priorities and the need to focus
federal funds on our parks and other essential programs, we also
suggest an amendment to cap the appropriations to the Commission at
$250,000 per year during its period of operation.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I will be happy to
answer any questions of members of the Committee.
__________
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO S. 1311
Page 16, line 4, insert the following:
``(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--There are authorized to be appropriated to carry
out the purposes of this Act not more than $250,000 for each of fiscal
years 2005 through 2010.
``(2) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.--Amounts appropriated under this
section for any fiscal year shall remain available until December 31,
2010.''
Page 16, line 4: renumber section 4 (i) as section 4 (j).
STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
REGARDING H.R. 2055
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, the final bill is the Department
of the Interior's views on H.R. 2055. This bill would increase
the number of free roaming horses at Cape Lookout National
Seashore.
The Department supports H.R. 2055's efforts to adjust the
number of free roaming horses within Cape Lookout National
Seashore. And it is my understanding that the House has passed
a bill that the Department can support. We had recommended
language that the bill specify a maximum of 130 horses, but the
language in the bill does work to sustain this healthy, free
roaming herd of wild horses on the Shackleford Banks of North
Carolina.
That, Mr. Chairman, concludes my statement before the
committee and I look forward to answering any questions from
the members.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding H.R. 2055
follows:]
Prepared Statement of A. Durand Jones, Deputy Director, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior, on H.R. 2055
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on H.R. 2055. This bill would
increase the number of free roaming horses at Cape Lookout National
Seashore.
The Department supports H.R. 2055's efforts to adjust the number of
free roaming horses within Cape Lookout National Seashore (Seashore)
with an amendment, as stated in this testimony, that clarifies the
population range of the horses. On June 24, 2003 the Department also
testified in support of H.R. 2055 at a hearing before the House
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands.
The Department is strongly committed to conserving, protecting, and
maintaining a representative number of horses on the Shackleford Banks
portion of the Seashore, as we have done in other units of the National
Park System which contain horses, and believes that the number of
horses on Shackleford Banks should be determined by the ecology of the
island and by means which protect the genetic viability of the
Shackleford Banks horses. Without this legislation, NPS would manage
this herd consistent with P.L. 105-229 which provides for a herd of 100
free roaming horses.
H.R. 2055 amends P.L. 89-366 by changing the number of free roaming
horses at Cape Lookout National Seashore from 100, to not less than
110, and establishes a target population of between 120 and 130 horses.
The bill also changes one of the criteria that the Secretary of the
Interior may use to remove free roaming horses from the Seashore,
allowing removal as part of a plan to maintain viability of the herd.
Congress established Cape Lookout National Seashore (Seashore) on
March 10, 1966. Encompassing more than 28,000 acres of land and water
about 3 miles off the mainland coast, the Seashore protects one of the
few remaining natural barrier island systems in the world with
excellent opportunities for fishing, shellfishing, hunting,
beachcombing, hiking, swimming, and camping in a wild and remote
setting.
The enabling legislation for the Seashore did not address the issue
of free-roaming wild horses on Shackleford Banks. Public comments on
the Seashore's 1982 Draft General Management Plan demonstrated
widespread concern about, and interest in, the future of the horses on
Shackleford Banks. The Final General Management Plan stated that a
representative number of horses would remain on Shackleford Banks after
the privately owned land on the island was purchased by the United
States.
In 1996, following a series of public meetings, as well as
discussions with scientists and professional managers of wild horse
herds, the Seashore developed an Environmental Assessment (EA) with
alternatives for managing the Shackleford Banks horse herd. That plan,
while acceptable to the public, was opposed by some groups who rejected
the idea of any management intervention. The plan proposed to maintain
a representative herd of horses by using a combination of contraceptive
drugs and periodic roundups and removal of horses.
On November 11, 1996, the National Park Service (NPS), with
assistance from state veterinarians from the North Carolina Department
of Agriculture, initiated a roundup of the Shackleford horses. State
law required testing the horses for Equine Infectious Anemia (EIA). Out
of the 184 horses on the island, 76 tested positive for EIA and were
removed to the mainland for temporary quarantine. On the advice of the
North Carolina Department of Agriculture, these horses were euthanized.
In December 1996, the NPS established the Shackleford Banks Horse
Council, representing a wide variety of interests and stakeholders, as
a working committee to assist the park with plans for managing horses.
In 1997, a second roundup and testing program was conducted on the
Shackleford horses. Of the 103 horses on the island, five tested
positive for EIA. By this time, the Foundation for Shackleford Horses,
Inc. had secured a state-approved quarantine site and the five EIA
positive horses were transferred to it. In the transfer document, the
Foundation and the Service committed to develop a long-term Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA) to cooperate in the management of the Shackleford
Banks horses. On an interim basis, the Service issued a special use
permit to the Foundation to allow it to assist with the management of
the herd.
On August 13, 1998, Congress passed P.L. 105-229, ``An Act To
Ensure Maintenance of a Herd of Wild Horses in Cape Lookout National
Seashore.'' This act directed the NPS to maintain a herd of 100 free
roaming horses and to enter into an agreement with the Foundation for
Shackleford Horses, Inc. or another qualified nonprofit entity, to
provide for the management of free roaming horses in the Seashore. In
April 1999, a Memorandum of Understanding with the Foundation for
Shackleford Horses, Inc. was signed.
P.L. 105-229 requires an annual Findings Report that provides the
public with information regarding the population, structure, and health
of the horses on Shackleford Banks. Research, monitoring and record
keeping, with the goal of informed decisions for removal and
immunocontraception, is ongoing, as is consultation with
internationally recognized advisors in the fields of equine behavior,
genetics, virology, immunocontraception, management, humane issues, and
island ecology. The NPS continues to work with the Foundation under the
MOU and management decisions regarding the horses are reached jointly
with the Foundation and with the advice of scientists.
On October 29 and 30, 2002, the NPS hosted a roundtable meeting
with the aim of reaching a consensus on the free roaming horse
population range and the strategy for achieving that range.
Participants included the Seashore Superintendent and staff, staff from
Representative Jones' office, and representatives from the Foundation
for Shackleford Horses, Inc. Three leading scientists considered
experts in their respective fields also participated: Dr. Dan
Rubenstein of Princeton University, Dr. Gus Cothran of the University
of Kentucky, and (by telephone) Dr. Jay Kirkpatrick of ZooMontana.
Included in the discussion was the value of occasional herd
expansion to maintain genetic variability in the population. The
conclusion reached was that the population should be allowed to
fluctuate between 110-130 individuals. The methodology of conducting
removal and contraception toward this goal was also discussed and
agreed upon. The range of 110 to 130 horses is based on sound science
and provides the population changes, which are necessary for
maintaining the genetic viability of the herd.
Based upon the October roundtable discussion, we recommend an
amendment to the bill that is attached to this testimony. We believe
that this amendment will more clearly reflect the need to allow the
population bloom necessary for maintaining the genetic viability of the
herd.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have.
__________
SUGGESTED AMENDMENT, H.R. 2055
On page 2, line 1, delete ``with a target population of between 120
and 130'' and insert, ``allowing periodic population expansion of the
herd to a maximum of 130 horses''.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Let me ask a couple of questions here. Let us go back to
the Petrified Forest. This is a substantial increase in size,
over 120,000 acres. Is that correct?
Mr. Smith. Yes, 128,000 according to the map that we have
now provided the committee, Senator.
Senator Thomas. Do you ever consider some kind of trade? My
State is 50 percent owned by the Federal Government, so I am
not anxious to increase the net numbers. Is there any way to
talk about trades, or have you considered some kind of
reduction in other Federal holdings in order to offset this
120,000 acres?
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, this is a complicated land
pattern. About 15,000 of the acres would be BLM lands, which
the Park Service would just do an exchange in that ownership.
So that brings it down to about 103,000 or 104,000. The 79,000
of private ownership, obviously, I think you will hear later
from witnesses here today that these are large ranches. They
are willing to sell but I do not know what exchange
possibilities would be there.
And then, as Senator Kyl alluded to, the 34,000 or 35,000
acres of State land is really complicated right now with the
way that Arizona has dealt with their public lands issues
because they are a public lands State. So there are
possibilities that something could be worked out, depending on
if they change their State constitution, that we could enter
into exchanges in the future, but there really are not exchange
opportunities with what we are looking at here, and because the
State cannot donate land, there really are not donation
possibilities right now either. But this is still a little bit
in movement because the State is going to consider whether they
would change their constitution to allow that.
The reason for the acreage, though--and believe me, this
administration looks very carefully before we recommend land
acquisition, looking at budgets, property rights and other
issues in the country. But as Senator Kyl said, this is an
amazing escarpment of world-class fossils. This is an attempt,
10 or 12 years of effort, to try to do something to put a
boundary around these lands that will assure they are protected
for future generations.
Senator Thomas. What about the county and the tribal? What
is their point of view?
Mr. Smith. There are letters of support from the county. I
believe the Hopi and the Navajo tribes have been in informal
discussions with the superintendent, but I am not aware that
there is anything official as far as a statement that they have
made for the record yet.
Senator Thomas. What is the estimated cost of the
acquisition of these lands?
Mr. Smith. Senator, that is always a difficult thing when
you deal with appraisals, but it is my understanding that some
work has been done on the ground out there. They have looked at
the private acres, the private ownership, and they are looking
at somewhere around $14 million at a high, $8 million at a low.
But again, until you really appraise it and come to agreement
on those values, that is just the range that has been looked at
very briefly out there. But basically it does have a price tag
in the tens of millions of dollars.
Senator Thomas. Before you agree to support it, would you
not want to know what it is going to cost?
Mr. Smith. Well, in the world of appraisal, you really do
not know until you get on the land. This is based on other
actuals that have been completed in the area and whatever else.
Again, this is the range. BLM and NPS have sort of looked at
this range, and that is what I put on the record today,
Senator.
Senator Thomas. It is my understanding Congress
appropriated $2 million in 2000 for the acquisition. It could
not be spent. Now we understand BLM has spent the money for
wildfire suppression. What is the status of that?
Mr. Smith. Senator, it is my understanding that part of the
money we spent on fire suppression. The Park Service also has
to contribute to that, and as you all from the West know, we
just had tremendous fire seasons. It is my understanding that
some of that $2 million, which is an add-on to the
administration's request, was spent for fire suppression, and
then, because BLM did some appraisals but could not get to an
agreed-upon price with the willing sellers, they did reprogram
part of that money through the Senate and House Appropriations
Committees and did apply it to some lands in Idaho.
I am not fully aware of the status of whether that money
came back in a supplemental or not, but I would say it is very
common that land acquisition money is utilized for fire
management when it is necessary, and then we hope to get
supplementals to replace that. To my knowledge, maybe $1.6
million has been made available, but I would have to look that
up for the record, Senator.
Senator Thomas. On S. 2656, I do not think I have been
involved in commemoration commissions before. Is this customary
for the Park Service to be the lead agency on these?
Mr. Smith. Yes, to my knowledge it is. We have other
examples. Lewis and Clark is a major commemoration that is
going on right now. The Park Service is certainly involved in a
very major way but with the other agencies in Interior and
other governmental agencies. The commemoration for Jamestown,
the 400th anniversary there, has the Park Service involved with
a commission, and we certainly staff that for the commission.
And there are others we could provide for the record, Senator.
They escape me right now.
Senator Thomas. Senator, do you have any questions?
Senator Graham. Mr. Chairman, I have a statement which I
would like to submit for the record at the appropriate place.
Senator Thomas. Absolutely. We will have it in the record.
So the commemoratory commissions are a normal way to do
this, but is there some end to it? Does the responsibility of
the park terminate at some point?
Mr. Smith. Yes, Senator. Almost all of the commissions--the
administration position is they do have a termination date, and
in the case of the Ponce de Leon, that is 2013. It would
terminate, I believe it is, on December 31 of that year. But
yes, the legislation usually always does include a closeout
date.
Senator Thomas. For the commission or for the Park
Service's role?
Mr. Smith. For the commission.
Senator Thomas. On S. 2499, is there any other land that
has been identified for the future of the Harry Truman site?
Mr. Smith. Senator, it is my understanding this is the last
available 5 acres and there is no intention of looking for
other land. This land is immediately adjoining, protects the
farm, and there is no discussion of any additional acreage that
would have this importance in protecting the resources that are
already part of the park. Most of the rest of the nearby land
has been developed.
And I would add that the landowners in this case are both
willing sellers also, Senator.
Senator Thomas. Let us see then. We have another
commemoration, the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain. What events do you
expect to conduct to commemorate this event?
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, I cannot go into specifics here
today, but I will tell you that there is already a heritage
area that identifies the Hudson. There are at least 6, if not
10, National Park Service sites along the Hudson, as well as
many State and local areas of interest. Kingston, New York is
there, the first capital of New York. So my feeling is that
they would intertwine the commemoration of this in New York and
up the Hudson and into Vermont in any number of key events in
our history. That is such a historic river valley for our
Nation. I can certainly try to provide some of that to you, but
it obviously is an area of tremendous importance.
Senator Thomas. I guess I am curious, trying to identify
what the role of the Park Service is going to be. We are
talking constantly about not having enough money and having to
pick up repairs from the past. Yet, we find ourselves now,
what, with 389 parks or whatever, doing heritage sites, doing
more of these. So we have to sort of, I think, begin to take a
look at what the role is and where the role is in all these
different kinds of programs so that we do what is appropriate,
that we do not find ourselves doing things that could logically
be done locally. I am not suggesting this one could, but I
think that is an issue that we have to look at in all these and
make sure that there is an appropriate for the Federal
Government.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, you are exactly correct. And this
one, again, with the amendment to keep the authorized ceiling
for the annual appropriations low, would say that there is a
Federal role but it also does require a partnership role from
State and local governments, from nonprofits, from interested
citizens, and certainly that is the model we are looking for.
So we certainly agree, those of us who look at these bills in
the Department and at OMB. We do consider that they do carry
costs and it is a concern of ours too. The testimony here says
it is important, but we would reduce the role of the Federal
dollar going toward the commission and hope that it would get
support from State and local governments and nonprofits.
Senator Thomas. Well, I think we ought to keep working at
this. As you know, we just tried to define what heritage areas
ought to be. Of course, I understand in each one people have
different views, and it is not as black and white as it could,
but we need to do that.
Wild horse. I am a little confused about this. Now, are you
going to end up with a minimum number of horses that you would
like to keep there, or does your suggested amendment change
that?
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, when the bill was passed by
Congress in 1998, we were taking a herd that had been at about
187 horses, was very sick with certain equestrian diseases and
whatever else. And the original act stated that we would put
the herd through a very major veterinarian type of review that
was done by the State. As that herd was culled, for all the
right reasons, as far as healthy animals, it came down at that
time that we thought the best number that the herd would be
able to sustain was about 100.
That herd has been studied by both an expert in horses from
Kentucky and an expert in horses from Princeton, and they have
been down there with field teams every year through the 1990's
and through this last year. They are there every year. Those
horses, through hurricanes and whatever else--they now really
feel that the viability of that herd is to be able to have a
maximum of 130 horses on those Shackleford Banks.
What they do now is they have a wonderful program, the
Shackleford Banks Horse Association. When they do need to
remove either sick or over-number horses, they do have a
workable adoption program, a little bit different than maybe
what you are used to with the wild horses in the West, but they
are able to move those horses off the island and to have them
adopted or to care for them at their center. The 130 horses
from both of these university studies, very scientific--they
have come to the conclusion that 130 is the manageable number
to work with. They can adjust to that and keep this herd very
healthy and very viable.
And if you ever get a chance to see it, Mr. Chairman, they
are absolutely marvelous, little, miniature horses that somehow
survive on those outer banks. Through hurricanes, they hunker
down. Through dry weather or whatever, they have been there for
300 or 400 years, and they are an amazing cultural and historic
resource for that part of the country.
Senator Thomas. Did they hunker down here lately?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Smith. The last storms missed them, but--what is our
one from 2 years ago? Isabel. When Isabel did what it did to
the east coast, they lost one mare, one young colt, and one
mare and one colt swam about 2 miles across the inlet to get to
safety. They are amazingly resourceful, and we hope that this
bill continues to protect them out there on the banks.
Senator Thomas. I guess this is a different location, but
normally you evaluate the resource that is available for feed
and this and that and sort of set a scientific number. Is it
unusual to legislate the numbers that ought to be grazing here?
Mr. Smith. Senator, unusual but not unprecedented. It was
done at Ozark National Riverway in a situation sort of like
this where those horses have a cultural and an historic meaning
to the people, and the Park Service was managing them, actually
calling them feral horses. People who live in these localities
do not consider them feral. They consider that they have been
there longer than most people have been.
It is amazing that these horses do survive with the
vegetation that is there. Of course, that is what dictates
their size, being very small and whatever else. But any
assessments that would be done--they have survived in that
natural habitat for 300 years. So for anybody to really study
it, they have been a major part of it that entire time.
And the reason for this to be legislated rather than
administratively done, as would normally be the case, the
general management plan at one time for this unit of the park
system, Cape Lookout National Seashore, considered eradicating
them just as it would feral pigs or feral cows or whatever. And
the people on the banks have long memories and this basically
gives assurance that we will manage in accordance with a law
rather than somebody being, at some time later, able to change
the policy. It is an amazing history of what has happened down
there on this, and that is why the administration does support
a number rather than thinking we can do it administratively
because of that long history and actually feeling that the Park
Service might not manage to a number unless Congress legislated
it.
Senator Thomas. If you had some sort of a change in the
vegetation, you might have to come back to reduce them to the
amount of resources available.
Mr. Smith. That is probably true, but I will tell you those
banks--they move south and east, and they move all around, but
somehow they all make do through storms and climate and
whatever. They are amazing.
Senator Thomas. Yes, it must be interesting.
We are thinking of a number in Wyoming, but it would be not
to exceed a certain number. We seem to have more than we can
handle.
At any rate, thank you very much. Appreciate your
testimony. Thank you for being here.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Thomas. All right. Let us see. We have panel 2: Mr.
Mike Fitzgerald, Twin Buttes Ranch, Holbrook, Arizona, and Dr.
David Gillette, Department of Geology, Museum of Northern
Arizona in Flagstaff.
Welcome, gentlemen. Mr. Fitzgerald, would you like to
begin?
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. FITZGERALD, OWNER,
TWIN BUTTES RANCH, LLC, HOLBROOK, AZ
Mr. Fitzgerald. Sure. Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee, I am Michael Fitzgerald, owner of the Twin Buttes
Ranch that borders a large portion of the Petrified Forest
National Park in Navajo County. I appreciate the opportunity to
state today my strong support of S. 784. I applaud Senator
McCain's and Senator Kyl's leadership in sponsoring this
important legislation and thank the chairman for scheduling
this hearing. I cannot express how relieved I am that we have
come to this long-awaited hearing, and I urge the subcommittee
to act favorably and quickly on this bill.
My family, which includes my wife Carol and our three
children, have either lived on or worked this ranch since 1986,
when we received it as a part of a three-way trade with the
Federal Government after we felt compelled to cede our former
ranch located on the eastern side of the park, as part of the
Navajo-Hopi Relocation Act of 1974. We typically run a 600-cow/
calf operation over the 38,400 acres of the ranch, of which
about 80 percent is deeded and 20 percent is composed of State
and BLM lands.
By the time I had taken title to the ranch, I realized that
the Park Service was interested in adding portions of the ranch
to the park. At first, I was not interested in another land
trade. But over the years, I have learned about the wealth of
pueblo sites and rock art galleries contained within the ranch
and, more recently, about the potential to hold fossils of
great importance to scientific learning about the early age of
the dinosaurs. I also understand that my maintaining the open
range has benefited the park and its visitors, whose vistas of
the Painted Desert and Chinle Escarpment from prominent
viewpoints along the park's road include large portions of my
holdings.
The ranch has remained well protected over the years as a
result of our cattle ranching operation and its limited access
from paved roads. Carol and I place a high priority on the
innate value of the land and its wildlife and we have
demonstrated this commitment, for example, by providing
permanent water sources for wildlife. Even though our
commitment to the land runs deep, we recognize that we cannot
adequately police the ranch from pot hunters and thieves. And
we have found we cannot rely on local law enforcement to help
us combat the rising tide of encroachment by grave robbers.
Further, because we do not control the mineral rights within
our ranch, we are powerless to stop commercial-scale mining,
with track hoes and unreclaimed spoil piles, that render our
rangeland worthless by others who unearth buried petrified
logs.
These factors, combined with the economics of ranching in
northeastern Arizona, have made us willing sellers, and we wish
to see the ranch and its scientifically valuable artifacts
protected within the park. Two years ago, we deferred our
grazing privileges on the public lands and sold all our cattle.
As a result of increases in artifact theft, the fluctuating
beef market and drought, we simply cannot protect the land and
its important resources as the Park Service could. And we would
much rather see the ranch kept intact than having to sell it to
a company that would subdivide it into recreational ranchettes.
If this were to happen, the important fossils and
archaeological sites would, of course, be lost.
I am a willing seller and will consider either a cash
purchase or land trade with the Federal Government for my
holdings in the Twin Buttes Ranch, as long as such a sale or
trade is in my family's best interest. It is my understanding
that the other primary landowners will also entertain a land
trade. I will insist on my part, however, that the Government
purchase my entire ranch and not leave me with an uneconomic
remnant. It is my understanding that the proposal offered by
Senators McCain and Kyl, and that is supported by the Park
Service, accommodates this request.
In closing, I would like the subcommittee to understand
that my family has waited patiently for over 12 years to
establish resolution to the Park Service's proposal to purchase
the Twin Buttes Ranch. There has been a lot of activity
regarding this bill over the past 4 years, and this is the
second Congress to see an expansion bill introduced. At this
point, we find ourselves needing to make long-term business
decisions regarding the disposition of our ranch, and I
respectfully request that you help us to immediately resolve
this issue.
Thank you very much for inviting me to be here, and I would
be very delighted to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fitzgerald follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael R. Fitzgerald, Owner,
Twin Buttes Ranch, LLC, on S. 784
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Michael Fitzgerald,
owner of the Twin Buttes Ranch that borders a large portion of
Petrified Forest National Park in Navajo County. I appreciate the
opportunity to state today my strong support of S. 784. I applaud
Senator McCain's and Senator Kyl's leadership in sponsoring this
important legislation and thank the Chairman for scheduling this
hearing. I cannot express how relieved I am that we have come to this
long-awaited hearing and I urge the subcommittee to act favorably and
quickly on this bill.
My family, which includes my wife, Carol, and our three children,
have either lived on or worked this ranch since 1986, when we received
it as part of a three-way trade with the federal government after we
felt compelled to cede our former ranch, located on the eastern side of
the park, as part of the Navajo-Hopi Relocation Act of 1974. We
typically run a 600-cow/calf operation over the 38,400 acres of the
ranch, of which about 80 percent is deeded and 20 percent is composed
of state and BLM lands.
By the time I had taken title to the ranch, I realized that the
Park Service was interested in adding portions of the ranch to the
park. At first, I was not interested in another land trade. But over
the years I have learned about the wealth of pueblo sites and rock art
galleries contained within the ranch and, more recently, about its
potential to hold fossils of great importance to scientific learning
about the early age of the dinosaurs. I also understand that my
maintaining the open range has benefited the park and its visitors,
whose vistas of the Painted Desert and Chinle Escarpment from prominent
viewpoints along the park's road include large portions of my holdings.
The ranch has remained well protected over the years as a result of
our cattle ranching operation and its limited access from paved roads.
Carol and I place a high priority on the innate value of the land and
its wildlife and we have demonstrated this commitment, for example, by
providing permanent water sources for wildlife. Even though our
commitment to the land runs deep, we recognize that we cannot
adequately police the ranch from pothunters and thieves. And we have
found we cannot rely on local law enforcement to help us combat the
rising tide of encroachment by grave robbers. Further, because we do
not control the mineral rights within our ranch, we are powerless to
stop commercial-scale mining--with track hoes and unreclaimed spoil
piles--that render our rangeland worthless by others who unearth buried
petrified logs.
These factors, combined with the economics of ranching in
Northeastern Arizona, have made us willing sellers and we wish to see
the ranch and its scientifically valuable artifacts protected within
the park. Two years ago, we deferred our grazing privileges on public
lands and sold all our cattle. As a result of increases in artifact
theft, the fluctuating beef market and drought, we simply cannot
protect the land and its important resources as the Park Service could.
And we would much rather see the ranch kept intact than having to sell
it to a company that would subdivide it into recreational ranchettes.
If this were to happen, the important fossil and archaeological sites
would be forever lost to science.
I am a willing seller and will consider either a cash purchase or
land trade with the federal government for my holdings in the Twin
Buttes Ranch as long as such a sale or trade is in my family's best
interest. It is my understanding that the other primary landowners will
also entertain a land trade. I will insist, however, that the
government purchase my entire ranch and not leave me with uneconomic
remnants. It is my understanding that the proposal offered by Senators
McCain and Kyl, and that is supported by the Park Service, accommodates
this request.
The original proposal contained in the park's 1992 General
Management Plan would not be acceptable to me as it considered adding
only the highlands portion of my ranch--the Ramsey Slide that contains
the Chinle Escarpment--while leaving the lowland portions of the ranch
presumably to be maintained as part of my cattle ranching operation.
But this proposal was not feasible; as such a configuration would have
bisected my ranch into two separate and far-removed pastures. It also
would have greatly constricted my access between the two remaining
pastures to a parcel of public land over which I would have no control.
So this earlier proposal would have left me with a significant
reduction in the number of cattle I could have run on the remaining
lands, made my management of the ranch extremely difficult and, thus,
would have left me with an unviable and uneconomic ranch. Therefore, I
appreciate the fact that Senators McCain and Kyl, and the Park Service
understand my situation and that their current proposal includes
purchase or exchange for my entire ranch.
The idea to incorporate our entire ranch into the park has the
support of prominent paleontologists and archaeologists that I have had
the good fortune to work with these past two years. Many important and
promising paleontological and archaeological sites exist on the Twin
Butte Ranch that were unknown to the Park Service when they prepared
their proposal in 1992. This oversight is largely a result of the fact
that the government did not have access to our private lands.
Since 1992, when the Park Service first recommended its expanded
boundary, paleontologists working in the area have discovered the
immense significance of the upper portion of the Chinle Escarpment for
their understanding the late Triassic period.
The Twin Buttes Ranch includes substantial amounts of the upper
Chinle. In addition, leading archaeologists at Northern Arizona
University, most notably Dr. Kelley Hays-Gilpin, have mapped extensive
archaeological sites on the Twin Buttes Ranch that either were not
known or whose location was not well understood by the Park Service in
1992. Finally, including my entire ranch into the park would also
capture miles of healthy riparian areas along the Puerco River, for
which I understand the Park Service has made restoration and recovery
of its vital wildlife habitat a high priority.
In closing, I would like the Subcommittee to understand that my
family has waited patiently for over twelve years to establish
resolution to the Park Service's proposal to purchase the Twin Buttes
Ranch. There has been a lot of activity regarding this bill over the
past four years and this is the second Congress to see an expansion
bill introduced. At this point, we find ourselves needing to make long-
term business decisions regarding the disposition of our ranch and I
respectfully request that you help us to immediately resolve this
issue.
Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today and for
considering my views. I would be happy to answer any questions.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much. A couple of quick
questions and then we will go to Dr. Gillette.
This acquisition is 128,000 I believe. Your ranch is what?
Mr. Fitzgerald. It is about 38,000.
Senator Thomas. I have a little map. Is yours on that
checkerboard land?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No. It is that green portion on that map,
if it is the colored one, on the west side of the Petrified
Forest part of the park.
Senator Thomas. But you have had a split estate. Is that
right? For the minerals and the surface?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is correct. I own the surface rights.
Senator Thomas. Dr. Gillette.
STATEMENT OF DAVID D. GILLETTE, PH.D., COLBERT
CURATOR OF PALEONTOLOGY, MUSEUM OF NORTHERN
ARIZONA, AND RESEARCH PROFESSOR OF GEOLOGY, NORTHERN ARIZONA
UNIVERSITY
Mr. Gillette. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I
am David Gillette, Colbert Curator of Paleontology at the
Museum of Northern Arizona in Flagstaff, and I am also a
research professor of geology at Northern Arizona University. I
have been associated with Petrified Forest for more than 20
years, conducting scientific research and educational
activities within the park, and I also participated in the
production of the general management plan for the park in 1992,
and I believe that is the most recent general management plan.
I am testifying today on behalf of the Museum of Northern
Arizona, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, the Sonoran
Institute, National Parks Conservation Association, Northern
Arizona University's Department of Anthropology, the city of
Holbrook, Arizona, the Holbrook Chamber of Commerce, Petrified
Forest Museum Association, the city of Winslow, Navajo County,
and a large number of independent scientists, including
archaeologists and paleontologists in northern Arizona.
Our organizations appreciate the opportunity to state our
strong support of S. 784, and we appreciate the critical
leadership of the sponsors of this important legislation. We
thank you for scheduling this hearing.
We enthusiastically urge the subcommittee to act favorably
and quickly on this bill.
Mr. Chairman, it is altogether fitting that we should be
considering this bill today in the same day when we have the
opening of the National Museum of the American Indian. The
holdings in the expansion area include some nationally
significant archaeological sites that have direct bearing on
the early history of our indigenous ancestors and preservation
of those is critical in light of recent activities with regard
to pilfering and unauthorized collections.
It is also important that we recognize the paleontological
significance of this area, which is separate from the
archaeological materials, but especially along the Chinle
Escarpment we have what would otherwise be a common cliche when
we say we have world-class resources. But we really do have
world-class resources because the Chinle Escarpment and the
Petrified Forest represent the very earliest days of the age of
dinosaurs. In fact, it is the reference standard for the global
study of the earliest days of the age of dinosaurs for the
Triassic Period. This area could, indeed, be called Triassic
Park.
More than 220 million years ago, the earth was in
transition. Pangaea was the world continent and that was the
dominant landmass. The Atlantic Ocean did not exist. The
earliest dinosaurs roamed the land.
We know these things because evidence from this interval of
geologic time is frozen in the geologic record, and we know it
best from the Petrified Forest National Park area, including
the area of the expansion lands. In addition to evidence from
around the globe, a treasure trove of information can be found
at Petrified Forest National Park that goes beyond the
spectacular petrified trees. The petrified logs represent a
forest, a tropical forest, that is now strewn across a desert
landscape. Fantastical life forms frozen in the rocks bespeak
an age that is so alien that it stupefies the imagination. We
had amphibians like frogs that weighed 500 pounds. We had
predators as large as crocodiles with 4-foot-long skulls and a
battery of teeth that drove the evolution of the fleet-footed
dinosaurs. Nearly 100 years after its establishment as a
national monument by President Theodore Roosevelt, we now know
that few places in the world contain such a rich fossil record
of animals as well as the trees that have been preserved at the
park.
This bill would add more than 100,000 acres, including
lands that encompass virtually the entire Chinle Escarpment. It
contains a priceless natural heritage of fossils and artifacts.
They are being today systematically pilfered. Black market
dinosaur bones and archaeological artifacts bring thousands of
dollars on the commercial market. Grave robbers supply that
black market with artifacts from areas so remote even the cows
get lost. Treasure hunters seeking pots and burial items held
sacred by Arizona's Native Americans have looted site after
site in this area.
These archaeological and paleontological stories should be
developed in the interest of all Americans. This national
inheritance cuts to the core of our existence as citizens and
leaders. The mission cannot be conservation and protection
alone. Preservation without education is like a library under
lock and key. Here in the Petrified Forest area we can tell
gut-wrenching stories of predator-prey interactions, floods
that carried trees as large as giant redwoods into colossal
logjams. This represents the very humble beginnings of our
modern ecosystem. We cannot afford to lose these stories or the
ability to share them. This is our national natural laboratory.
Petrified Forest National Park and the expansion area hold
the keys to education in the raw. This is the full surround
sound, sunburn, flash flood experience. Here we teach teachers
and students alike. We work elbow to elbow. Everybody is equal.
We are all in this together. This is hands-on dinosaur
excavations and application of technology to map archaeological
sites. We can use high technology for remote sensing, and we
can use traditional techniques of labor for the down and dirty
work of hoisting 1,000-pound blocks of rock encased in burlap
and plaster that contain dinosaur skeletons. This is the
training ground for our next generation of scientists,
historians, business executives, teachers, and yes, even
politicians.
Education is the only solution to understanding our modern
world. This is the real experience. We teach the scientific
method. We become professional skeptics. We test our
understanding with discoveries of new sites and new fossils. At
the Petrified Forest, the time dimension is the critical
missing link. Can we understand the logs? Can we place them in
perspective? Can we see the forest?
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would simply say that
tragically every day prehistoric archaeological sites,
historical sites, and paleontological sites in the United
States are lost forever, along with the precious information
they contain. We have the ability, the opportunity, and the
responsibility to prevent this loss of our heritage, a loss
that impoverishes both present and future generations. Promptly
enacting S. 784 into law will be a marvelous and tangible step
forward to meet these duties. Future generations will thank you
for your wisdom to act now.
Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today and
for considering our views. I would be happy to answer any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gillette follows:]
Prepared Statement of David D. Gillette, Ph.D., Colbert Curator of
Paleontology, Museum of Northern Arizona, and Research Professor of
Geology, Northern Arizona University, on S. 784
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am David Gillette,
Colbert Curator of Paleontology at the Museum of Northern Arizona in
Flagstaff, Arizona. I am testifying today on behalf of the Museum of
Northern Arizona, The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, The Sonoran
Institute, National Parks Conservation Association, Northern Arizona
University's Department of Anthropology, City of Holbrook, Holbrook
Chamber of Commerce, Petrified Forest Museum Association, City of
Winslow, and Navajo County. I am also submitting for the record letters
and resolutions from a number of these parties, as well as others who
support this legislation.
The Museum of Northern Arizona is a private, non-profit museum
dedicated to research, collections, education, and outreach in cultural
and natural sciences of the Colorado Plateau. Established seventy-five
years ago, MNA has been deeply involved with archaeology and
paleontology in the national parks throughout its existence.
NPCA is a non-profit citizens' organization, founded in 1919,
dedicated to the protection and enhancement of the National Park
System. NPCA has approximately 300,000 members, including 6,850 in the
State of Arizona.
The Sonoran Institute is a non-profit organization that works
collaboratively with local people and interests to conserve and restore
important natural landscapes in western North America, engaging
partners such as landowners, public land managers, local leaders,
community residents, and nongovernmental organizations.
The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology is a non-profit organization
of professional and avocational paleontologists, with an international
membership of approximately 2000. The SVP has worked actively to
promote responsible stewardship of paleontological resources on public
lands.
Our 10 organizations appreciate the opportunity to state our strong
support of S. 784. We appreciate the critical leadership of Senators
McCain and Kyl in sponsoring this important legislation and thank the
Chairman for scheduling this hearing. With enthusiastic support from
all the major landowners, the State of Arizona, local governments,
chambers of commerce, and scientists nationwide, we urge the
subcommittee to act favorably and quickly on this bill.
More than 220 million years ago, the Earth was in transition.
Pangaea, the World Continent, was the predominant landmass, the
Atlantic Ocean did not exist, and the earliest known dinosaurs roamed
the land.
We know these things because evidence from this interval of
geologic time, called the Triassic Period, is frozen in time. In
addition to evidence from around the globe, a treasure trove of
information can be found at Petrified Forest National Park in
northeastern Arizona. A vast forest of petrified logs, strewn across
what is now a desert landscape, and fantastic life forms frozen in
stone bespeak a time when a tropical swamp, filled with 200-pound
ancestors of frogs and salamanders, and enormous crocodile-like beasts,
existed where there is now arid, open land.
Petrified Forest National Park, originally proclaimed a national
monument by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906, was designated a
national park in 1962 and receives about 600,000 visitors each year.
The park originally was set aside to preserve the spectacular
concentrations of rainbow-hued petrified wood, scenic landscapes of the
Painted Desert, rare shortgrass prairie, and more than 500
archaeological and historical sites that reflect a 10,000-year
continuum of human history. We now know that few places in the world
contain such a rich fossil record of the Triassic Period. The Petrified
Forest National Park could easily claim the title ``Triassic Park'' for
its plant and animal fossils that represent the very roots of dinosaur
history.
Recent scientific work has revealed that petrified wood is only one
part of the globally significant record contained within the Chinle
Escarpment, the name given to the geological formation containing the
``mineralized remains of the Mesozoic forest'' that the park was
established to protect. Only six miles of the 22-mile-long escarpment,
which contains the world's most significant record of late Triassic
Period fossils, is currently within the park. The area outside the park
may contain more and better fossils that can more readily increase our
understanding of flora and fauna and the changing climatic and tectonic
conditions on Earth during that era. It also presents a unique
opportunity to educate the public. According to the current director of
the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, Dr. Adrian Hunt,
Petrified Forest National Park is the most important place in the world
to study the early evolution of dinosaurs, an assessment with which I
heartily agree.
S. 784 would add approximately 128,000 acres, including lands that
encompass virtually the entire escarpment. These lands contain a
priceless natural heritage of fossils and artifacts that are being
systematically pilfered. Grave robbers supply the black market with
artifacts from areas so remote even the cows get lost. Treasure hunters
seeking pots and burial items held sacred by Arizona's Native Americans
have looted site after site. Fossils in the same area have come under
similar pressure; dinosaur bones can bring thousands of dollars on the
commercial market, but once they are removed, they are forever lost to
science and the public domain. These activities led NPCA to place
Petrified Forest National Park on its list of Ten Most Endangered Parks
in 2000 and 2001. Since that time, the park has engaged in fruitful
efforts to significantly reduce theft of petrified wood from within its
boundaries, prompting NPCA to remove it from the endangered list in
2002. With the advent of high tech, low-cost mobile sensors and other
non-intrusive measures aimed at educating and redirecting well-meaning
park visitors, the Park has demonstrated that it is now in a much
better position to protect this wealth of resources.
STATE LANDS
Slightly more than half of the lands within the proposed expansion
areas currently are in private ownership, and 45 percent are in state
or federal ownership. The State of Arizona and the Bureau of Land
Management recognize the significance of the paleontological resources
on their lands and have expressed an interest in seeing them preserved
In her letter to House National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands
Subcommittee Chairman George Radanovich (in which she cc'd Senators
Thomas and Akaka) dated February 19, 2004, Governor Janet Napolitano
wrote: ``Seldom does an opportunity arise to more fully protect an
incredible national treasure like Petrified Forest with such broad,
unequivocal support at the local, state and national levels.'' .\1\ In
that same letter, the State suggested a language change to the bill
that the organizations I am representing here today all support. In
addition, on May 28, 2004, the State closed approximately 36,000 acres
adjacent to the park to both surface and subsurface applications to
better protect these lands until they are added to the park.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Letter from Arizona Governor, Janet Napolitano, to National
Parks Subcommittee Chairman George Radanovich, dated February 19, 2004
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
State lands within the park expansion proposal contain a wealth of
paleontological and archaeological resources. For example, state lands
within the Twin Buttes Ranch contain numerous unique and highly
detailed petroglyph panels dating from 600 to 1,000 years before
present. One such panel appears to be a map of the constellations
visible in the night skies each April. This panel has been photographed
for the book Tapamveni: The Rock Art Galleries of Petrified Forest and
Beyond and has been referred to as a work of ``remarkable geometric
intellect.''
The State lands also include a significant amount of the Chinle
Escarpment that is such an important addition to the park, by virtue of
the world-class paleontological resources it contains. State lands
along the Chinle Escarpment east of the park also contain a rare
Chacoan Culture Great House dating back some 1,000 years to between
A.D. 900 and 1130. This pueblo ruin maintains the distinctive ``core
and veneer'' masonry of the Chacoan Culture, whose ceremonial center
was located in northwestern New Mexico, and the great house included in
the park expansion proposal is thought by some scholars to define the
southwestern edge of the Chacoan system. Understanding of this system
has become one of the most significant questions in Southwest
archaeology and the inclusion of this great house into the park will
protect the site's context and likely will enhance scientific
understanding of this remarkable culture. State lands are, to varying
degrees, intermingled with the ranches of all four primary landowners.
PRIVATE LANDS
Most of the private lands adjacent to the park have been managed as
part of large cattle ranches for the past 120 years. This use of the
land has preserved the scenic views seen from the park. However, this
land use pattern is starting to change. More intensive land uses, such
as subdivisions and mineral exploration and mining--including
mechanized petrified wood mining on private lands--threaten to both
destroy the scenic quality of the park and destroy irreplaceable
resources.
Four major landowners together own approximately half the total
acreage of the expansion area, and all are highly supportive of the
legislation and wish to see the cultural and scientific resources on
their properties included in and protected by the National Park System.
They have been patient since the Park's General Management Plan
recommended expansion in 1992, but cannot be expected to wait
indefinitely while other development offers come their way. In fact,
history demonstrates that delay poses further risks for this land. The
private lands identified in 1992 in the park's GMP were, at that time,
held almost exclusively by 6 landowners. Since then, two of those
landowners have subdivided and sold their holdings, and a portion of
those lands is unfortunately not included in the current proposal.
Expansion lands formerly owned by the New Mexico and Arizona Land
Co and now owned by Mr. Bob Worsley contain the Wallace Tank Ruin, an
immense Pueblo IV period ruin dating from about A.D. 1200 to 1325. The
pueblo contains an estimated 400-600 rooms. Looting has occurred at
this site, including looting with the use of heavy equipment.
Nonetheless, archaeologists believe that 90% of the architecture is
intact. These Pueblo IV sites in the Western Pueblo region are quite
rare and they are critical in understanding how the Western Pueblos
(Hopi, Zuni, Acoma, and Laguna) came to be.
On the Twin Buttes Ranch, owned by Mr. Mike Fitzgerald, four Canyon
Butte sites dating from about A.D. 1130 to 1325 (during the Pueblo III
period) contain from 25 to 65 rooms each. These sites, originally
recorded by Walter Hough of the Smithsonian Institution in 1901,
represent the small hamlets that would later coalesce into large
pueblos like Wallace Tank. More detailed analysis of these sites and
their associated artifacts will allow them to be more precisely dated
and will provide important information on the regional interactions
that led to settled village life.
On the Paulsell Ranch expansion lands owned by Mr. Marvin Hatch, a
researcher from the University of Texas discovered a fully intact
phytosaur while on a dig in 2002. Phytosaurs were large, aquatic
reptiles that were prevalent in the Petrified Forest of Triassic times.
Also contained on these lands are Triassic era clamshell beds; the
thickest that many paleontologists have ever seen. The Paulsell Ranch
contains extensive portions of the Upper Triassic Chinle Formation.
According to the park's 1992 General Management Plan, the lateral
exposures of the Chinle Escarpment are most likely the best exposure of
this geologic sequence in the world. Paleontologists are convinced that
the escarpment's fossil resources are globally significant and that it
has the potential to become the paleontological ``gold standard'' for
late Triassic terrestrial life, since the fossil bearing rocks exposed
here are even more continuous than those inside the park, which are now
setting the standard. Other researchers have labeled the Hatch Ranch a
``priceless outdoor lab for geologists, archaeologists, biologists,
paleontologists and ecologists'' and of ``inestimable paleontological
and geological importance.''
BRINGING SCIENCE TO LIFE
These stories should be developed in the interest of all Americans.
This national inheritance, both within the modern boundaries of the
park and in the expansion area, cuts to the core of our existence as
citizens and leaders. With leadership and vision, our parks and
monuments can move to center stage where we need help the most--in
solid, hard-nosed education. The mission cannot be conservation and
protection alone, for preservation without education is like a library
under lock and key.
Petrified Forest is filled with information that could unlock a
bonanza of secrets about current challenges, such as biodiversity,
ecosystem health, the importance of fire to the health of an ecosystem,
and endangered species. Gut-wrenching stories of predator-prey
interactions, floods that carried trees as large as giant redwoods into
colossal log jams, and the humble beginnings of our modern world can be
pried from the rocks at Petrified Forest National Park and the
expansion areas. We cannot afford to lose these stories or the ability
to share them. This is our natural laboratory.
Petrified Forest National Park, and the expansion area around its
current perimeter, hold the keys to education in the raw, the full
surround-sound, sunburn, and flash flood experience. Here we can teach
teachers and students alike, elbow to elbow, with hands-on dinosaur
excavations, application of Global Positioning System to mapping
archaeological sites, high technology remote sensing, and the down-and-
dirty work of hoisting thousand-pound blocks of rock encased in burlap
and plaster that contain dinosaur skeletons. This is a training ground
for the next generation of scientists and politicians, historians and
business executives. Education is the only solution to understanding
our modern world. This is the real experience, where we teach the
scientific method, where we become professional skeptics, where we can
test our understanding with discoveries of new sites and new fossils.
Modern technology makes our natural laboratories accessible to
everyone. Why accept replicas and models? Our mission must be to
educate our public first. At the Petrified Forest, the time dimension
is the critical, missing link. We can understand the logs, but can we
place them in perspective? Can we see the forest? I recently had the
remarkable good fortune to participate in a live broadcast from my
paleontology laboratory in Flagstaff to classrooms across North
America, from Florida to Alaska. Students called in and asked their own
questions. Some were so excited they could scarcely talk into the
telephone. They watched us on their television screens, and listened.
to our answers. We were ordinary people who were excavating an
extraordinary dinosaur. Our laboratory became theirs. We were
transported live to schools across the continent, and those students in
turn were transported to our laboratory in Flagstaff.
Now, at one of our national parks, Petrified Forest, we have the
unique opportunity to enlarge and amplify that experience and build our
future from the raw materials of field-based scientific exploration.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would simply say that tragically,
every day, prehistoric and historic archaeological and scientific sites
in the United States are lost forever--along with the precious
information they contain. Congress has the ability, the opportunity,
and the responsibility to prevent this loss of our heritage, which
impoverishes both present and future generations. Promptly enacting S.
784 into law will be a marvelous and tangible step forward to meet
these duties. Future generations will thank you for your wisdom to act
now.
Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today and for
considering our views. I would be happy to answer any questions.
Senator Thomas. All right, sir. Thank you very much.
Where is this relative to Phoenix, for example?
Mr. Gillette. North and a little west. I am sorry. North
and a little east.
Senator Thomas. You already have 95,000 acres to work on.
What will this additional do to you? Is it the same thing?
Expanding the same materials?
Mr. Gillette. Virtually all of the private land and most of
the public land in the expansion area have been off limits to
scientific investigations because ranchers, frankly, have not
wanted paleontologists and archaeologists on their land and
they have not wanted anybody on their land. In this area, the
lands are virtually untouched from pilfering for fossils,
although they are being decimated by pilfering for artifacts.
But along the Chinle Escarpment, we have exposures of
continuous rocks in the Chinle formation that now hold the
secrets to questions we have been able to formulate from within
the park. This becomes a substantial international laboratory.
Senator Thomas. But it is just more of the same thing, is
it not?
Mr. Gillette. No. There are more exposures and greater
thickness of rocks there than in the park.
Senator Thomas. What generally, Mr. Fitzgerald, are the
other owners like over on this checkerboard? What kind of
private owners have those?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I am probably the only one, other than Bill
Jeffers who has just a small portion going--I am a fifth
generation rancher, so to speak, and this is my life. This is
my way of life. I do not want to give it up, but it is
necessary at this point. Mr. Worsley, who owns the Milky Ranch
to the southeast is a billionaire who owned this sky mall
thing. Then Mr. Hatch is a businessman, a rancher, and has
branched out into various other businesses as well.
Senator Thomas. So relatively few owners in the area.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Oh, yes. We just mentioned four of us.
Senator Thomas. I guess that is about it. I do not know
exactly, as was asked before, what we will be able to do this
year. Perhaps we can move it if we have a chance. We might have
a markup. If not, why, I think at least the hearing materials
will go on over into the first part of next year and we could
continue to move forward.
So I appreciate your all taking time to be here. If anyone
has any questions, we will leave the record open for 2 weeks in
case somebody has some questions and would like to get in touch
with you. Otherwise, thank you very much.
We will close the hearing.
[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Departmnet of the Interior,
Office of Legislative and Congressional Affairs,
Washington, DC, December 2, 2004.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Enclosed are answers to the follow-up questions
from the hearing held by the Subcommittee on National Parks on
September 21, 2004, on S. 784, S. 2656, S. 2499, S. 1311, and H.R.
2055. These responses have been prepared by the National Park Service.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to respond to you on this
matter.
Sincerely,
Jane M. Lyder,
Legislative Counsel.
[Enclosure.]
Questions from Senator Akaka
Question 1a. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: The bill
authorizes acquisition of over 120,000 acres of land. The Federal
government already owns a lot of land in the west and we need to be
thinking about no net gain whenever land is acquired.
Has the National Park Service examined the possibility of a land
exchange instead of fee simple purchase?
Answer. The boundary adjustment includes lands privately-owned,
those owned by the United States and managed by BLM, and state-owned
lands. BLM manages approximately 14,500 acres, which could be
administratively transferred to NPS management should this bill be
enacted. All four of the private landowners who could be involved in
the expansion have indicated an interest in a combination of exchanges
and purchase. However, as stated in our testimony, ranching is becoming
more and more difficult with drought and other factors, and some of the
owners have expressed interest in selling their land, either to NPS or
other parties. These other potential purchasers may have interests that
conflict with or impact resources valuable to the park. With regard to
state-owned lands, the Arizona Supreme Court has determined that the
Arizona Constitution prohibits the disposal of certain state land
except through auction to the highest and best bidder. Given these
remaining issues, we would have to await a determination on how the
citizens of Arizona and their representatives would recommend
proceeding should this bill be enacted.
Question 1b. Has the National Park Service prioritized the land
proposed for acquisition so that only parts of it could be acquired
instead of the entire 120,000 acres?
Answer. The 1990 GMP lists priorities for the approximately 93,000
acres that were proposed as a boundary expansion in that document. As
of now, these are the priorities identified in the GMP:
Chinle Escarpment (Fitzgerald & Hatch)
Key Archeological Sites (Worsley & Jeffers)
Visual Resource Protection (Jeffers--West Rim of the Painted
Desert)
S. 784 also would direct the Secretary to revise the park's GMP.
Land acquisition priorities could be established as part of that
process and a Land Protection Plan could be completed. Since the
original GMP was completed, we have acquired additional information
about park resources, which would be considered. Also, relationships
with the owners have improved and we have had better access to
determine what areas near the park boundary may be more critical than
other areas. The 1990 priorities are a place to start, but they will
need to be revisited with the new knowledge we have acquired about
these areas.
Question 2. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: Have County or
Tribal officials expressed support for the proposed legislation?
Answer. We have letters of support from the City of Winslow, City
of Holbrook, Navajo County Board of Supervisors, 4 landowners, Society
of Vertebrate Paleontology, and other professional societies.
We have had informal consultation with two tribes (Hopi, Navajo).
Neither have taken a public position on the proposal:
Question 3. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: What is the
estimated cost to acquire the private and state land covered by this
bill?
Answer. We estimate that there would be 79,500 acres of private
land within the proposed boundary expansion that could be acquired.
Based upon appraisals recently conducted by the Department of the
Interior the average cost per acre for these lands is between $105 and
$175. If all of the private land within the boundary expansion were
acquired in fee, the estimated costs could range from $8,347,500 to
$13,912,500. Acquisition through exchange, donation, or purchase of
easements could reduce the cost.
The Arizona constitution prohibits the disposal of State-owned
lands except through auction to the highest and best bidder. We
suggested amendments in our testimony that might help resolve the issue
of management of State-owned lands, however, with regard to
acquisition, we would have to await a determination on how the citizens
of Arizona and their representatives would recommend proceeding should
S. 784 be enacted.
Question 4a. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: Congress
appropriated $2 million in 2000 to use for acquisition of property in
the proposed expansion area. The money could not be spent until
authorizing legislation was enacted. We have heard that BLM may have
spent the money for wildfire suppression.
Is $2 million currently available for use towards acquisition of
this land if the proposed authorizing language is enacted?
Answer. The $2 million was appropriated to the Bureau of Land
Management's Land Acquisition Appropriation in FY 2001. This funding
was used, along with other Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)
funding, to pay for fire suppression costs in FY 2003. Some, but not
all, of this funding was restored, reducing the total available to $1.6
million. The agencies in the Department have been under increasing
pressure by the House and Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittees
to spend unobligated LWCF balances. Because there was no imminent deal,
earlier this year BLM, with the approval of the House and Senate
Interior Appropriations Subcommittees, reprogrammed these funds for use
in the acquisition of conservation easements within Idaho's Upper
Snake/South Fork Snake River Area of Critical Environmental Concern/
Special Recreation Management Area, which is a high priority
acquisition area for the Administration.
Question 4b. What steps are necessary after enactment of the
authorizing legislation before actual acquisition of property can
begin? How long do you think it would take to complete those steps?
Answer. NPS would develop priorities and if appropriations are made
available, we would negotiate with landowners. If funds were available
and all landowners were willing sellers, and the ``due diligence'' was
completed, acquisition could be completed in 1-2 years. Due diligence
includes researching title, conducting hazmat surveys, and completing
appraisals. For large ranches, hazmat surveys could cost as much as
$100,000 each, and appraisals $30,000 each. With land resources
programs now centralized, each step could take 6 to 8 months to
complete. This estimate is for privately held land and for the 4
primary owners. A portion of the area proposed for addition is composed
of multiple, small landowners (North of the Rio Puerco River). This
area could take longer to complete.
State lands are not included in these estimates. As we have
mentioned, State law prohibits lands to be donated, and it is our
understanding that the Arizona Supreme Court has determined that the
Arizona Constitution prohibits the disposal of certain state land
except through auction to the highest and best bidder. Given these
remaining issues, we would have to await a determination on how the
citizens of Arizona and their representatives would recommend
proceeding before we could complete ``due diligence'' on these lands.
Question 5. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: The bill allows
grazing to continue on land acquired by the National Park Service for
addition to the park Is cattle grazing currently allowed in the
existing boundary of Petrified Forest National Park? If so, how many
acres?
Answer. Grazing does not exist within current park boundaries.
Question 6. S. 2656, Ponce de Leon Commemoration Commission: Is it
customary for the National Park Service to be the lead agency for
implementing authorizing legislation for commission of this type?
Answer. Yes. Often the National Park Service is directed to assume
the lead on the Commission when the proposed legislation represents an
historical theme.
Question 7. S. 2656, Ponce de Leon Commemoration Commission: How
many other commemorative commission laws is the National Park Service
currently implementing and how much has been authorized for
appropriation for each?
Answer. Since 1997 there have been six Commissions enacted. Three
of these Commissions authorize such sums as may be necessary to carry
out the duties of the Commission. The remaining three have authorized a
total of $7.5 million for the life of the Commissions. In addition to
the Commissions that have been established, during the same time period
there have been at least five additional Acts that either extended or
made corrections to existing Commissions. These Acts did not authorize
additional funds. In addition to S. 2656 and S. 1311, there are three
additional bills involving Commissions that have been introduced in the
108th Congress.
Question 8. S. 2499, Harry Truman Historic Site Boundary
Adjustment: Other than the property included in S. 2499; has any other
land been identified for future addition to the Harry S Truman Historic
Site?
Answer. No. This is the last 5 acres of undeveloped land of the
original 600-acre Truman Farm and is the only acquisition priority for
this park. No other land in the area has historic significance that
would qualify for addition to the historic site.
Question 9. S. 1311, Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration
Commission: What type of events do you expect to be conducted to
commemorate the accomplishments of Hudson, Fulton, and Champlain?
Answer. If established, the Commission might sponsor or facilitate
a full range of celebrations and events at the local, state, regional
and national level to commemorate the accomplishments of Hudson, Fulton
and Champlain. The commission might also sponsor or support scholarly
research, symposia, and papers regarding the importance of the
explorations and steamboat to the history of the region and to the
United States. The commission would be authorized to develop a coin(s)
to commemorate these individuals, as well as assist in the development
and implementation of interpretive exhibits at strategic venues and
waysides along the routes and at landing sites traversed by the
explorers and Fulton. These functions would not only commemorate the
successes of these three individuals but would also explain the
meanings of their contributions to modern society. Assistance in and
development and dissemination of educational materials could also be a
major activity. The National Park Service could be involved through
activities coordinated through the Hudson River Valley National
Heritage Area.
Question 10. S. 1311, Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration
Commission: Would it be more appropriate for the State rather than the
Federal government to sponsor such a commission and conduct special
events?
Answer. The states in the region that is the focus of the
Commission (NY, NJ and Vermont) do plan to take an active role in
commemorating this effect. The Federal government has, in the past,
sponsored multi-state commissions, as well as encouraged and assisted
national commemorative events.
Question 11. S. 1311, Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration
Commission: If the State has already established a Hudson-Fulton-
Champlain Commission, why is a Federal Commission needed?
Answer. New York and Vermont have each established commissions for
these commemorations. A Federal commission could promote coordination
between the various State activities and extend the commemorative
activities to other parts of the nation. Similar federal commissions
were established for commemorations of Hudson, Fulton and Champlain's
accomplishments in 1909 and 1959.
Question 12a. H.R. 2055, Cape Lookout Wild Horses: The bill
specifies that at least 110 wild horses shall be allowed to roam freely
on Cape Lookout.
Is it common for the Congress to legislate specific resource levels
in National Parks?
Answer. It is not common, but as the Department's witness answered
at the hearing, Congress has done this in the past. At Ozark National
Scenic Riverways, for example, Congress set specific limitations on the
quantity of resources in the management of horses.
Question 12b. Can this be worked out in a management plan for Cape
Lookout instead of in legislation?
Answer. This could be done administratively, but as the
Department's witness answered at the hearing, management plans often
become contentious, can take years to complete, and can be changed,
modified, or even reversed by subsequent plans.
Question 13. H.R. 2055, Cape Lookout Wild Horses: The National Park
Service has recommended a technical amendment to the bill. Is the
amendment absolutely necessary or can the Park Service live with the
bill in its current form?
Answer. As the Department testified at the hearing, the Department
supports the bill's efforts with a technical amendment.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Twin Buttes Ranch,
Holbrook, AZ, October 5, 2004.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Honorable Senator Thomas: This is a reply to your letter of
September 21, requesting my opinion about the possibility of grazing on
the Petrified Forest National Park. This has to do with S. 784. I'm
sorry that your letter only reached me yesterday, or I would have
replied sooner.
To answer your first question, this country used to carry
approximately 10 cow calf units per square mile. This was before the
drought became so severe in the mid Nineties, and continues on to this
day. I sold the last of my cattle in January of '02. I know you
understand ranching in Wyoming, well Northeastern Arizona is not all
that different from parts of your state, as I'm sure you know.
To answer your second question, as to my opinion about grazing on
the Park. I must answer a reluctant ``No''. In the long run it would
not be good. Your current Park Superintendent, Mr. Lee Biaza, is the
best man this park has ever had in this position. But even he would
probably have to give under the pressure of various naturalist and
environmental groups. Also, he will probably only be here a few more
years before he is replaced by who knows. I managed a grazing allotment
on the National Forest for 10 seasons. Please, believe me, the change
of personnel changes everything, from a man like Biaza with his feet on
the ground to an environmentalist with their Socialistic ideals. I can
remember helping my neighbor, Pat Paulsell, drive cattle across the
Petrified Forest when I was 5 years old. I think we received more
attention from the tourist of the mid-1950s than the sites of what was
then a National Monument. So I have been aware of the problems of being
a neighbor of this Park all my life. I'm sure from your opinion, Mr.
Chairman, and mine as well, it would be better for the wildlife as well
as the country in general to keep cattle on it. However, relating these
practical truths to the population in general is not an easy
undertaking. We presented our reasons for the expansion of the Park as
a need to protect ``world class'' archaeological sites and artifacts,
paleontological attributes, and viewshed. I could have talked for an
hour or more at the hearing about the problems relating to cattle
ranching in this nation at this time.
If your questions are in anyway relating with what to do about
government lands, my ranch is 80% deeded with only a few sections of
BIM and State lands scattered throughout. It would be impossible to do
anything different with any portion of it. The other ranches with their
Checkerboarded deeded are State lands would be very similar since you
can't graze in one place and not the other without fences and water. In
my opinion then, if it is to be a National Park then the Park Service
must take care of it. Ranching on the other hard should be done on
private land since we ranchers are such individuals with our differing
opinions on how things should to done.
Thank you for your kind interest in our situation. We are looking
forward to hearing that S. 784 has been passed by the Senate very soon.
Sincerely,
Michael R. Fitzgerald,
Owner.
Prepared Statement of Michael Gannon, Distinguished Service
Professor Emeritus of History, University of Florida
April 2, 2013 will be an historical date of major national
significance. It was on April 2, five hundred years before, that
Europeans first sighted and landed on the part of the North American
continent we call the United States. It was on that distant day, too,
that the first geographic name of European origin, La Florida, was
etched upon the maps of our country.
The expedition that left us this legacy was led by the Spaniard
Juan Ponce de Leon, lately governor of Puerto Rico. On March 3, 1513,
Juan Ponce (the short form of his name used by Spanish chroniclers)
departed Anasco Bay on the western side of Puerto Rico with two
caravels and a bergantina. In addition to the Spanish crews these
vessels carried two women, Beatriz and Juana Jiminez, two African
freemen, Juan Garrido and Juan Gonzalez [Ponce] de Leon, and two
unnamed native Taino seafarer-guides from Puerto Rico. Florida's
discoverers were a multi-cultural body.
Juan Ponce's intended destination was a rumored island to the north
of Puerto Rico named Bimini. According to legend, the island contained
a fountain of waters that rejuvenated old men--the so-called ``fountain
of youth.'' Our source for the legend is a questionable mention of the
fountain a century later by the historian Antonio de Herrera y
Tordesillas. Today's historians tend toward the view that the fountain
was probably a gloss by Herrera, particularly given the fact that Juan
Ponce's asiento, or charter, from King Fernando II authorizing his
voyage, which was meticulously detailed in its specification of the
expedition's purpose and goals, nowhere mentions such waters.
Juan Ponce encountered the Florida peninsula by accident. Sailing
through the chain of Bahama Islands, he was swept westward by winds and
currents through the New Providence Channel and into the Florida
Current, popularly called the Gulf Stream. Bearing westward as best he
could, he was shouldered to the north by the three-knot current until
he made a landfall just south of Cape Canaveral, probably at or near
Melbourne Beach, where his tiny fleet anchored in forty-four feet of
water.
From Herrera's redaction of Juan Ponce's log we learn what
followed: ``And thinking that this land was an island, they called it
La Florida [the flowery land], because it was very pretty to behold
with many and refreshing trees, and it was flat and even; and also
because they discovered it in the time of Flowery Easter [Pascua
Florida], Juan Ponce wanted to give the land this name.''
After remaining in the region for six days, the expedition sailed
south against the Gulf Stream, Juan Ponce's second great discovery, in
an effort to circumnavigate the ``island.'' In so doing he gave us
seven more geographic names: Cabo de las Corrientes (Cape of the
Currents, for a cape north of Lake Worth Inlet); La Cruz (The Cross),
for Jupiter River; Santa Marta (Saint Martha) for Key Biscayne; Pola
(meaning unknown), for one of the keys; Los Martires (Martyrs), for the
entire chain of keys; Matanzas (Massacre), for Sanibel Island, where
his party was attacked by Calusa natives; and Las Tortugas (Turtles),
for the Dry Tortugas. Sanibel was the farthest north Juan Ponce
ventured on the Gulf Coast before shaping course home to Puerto Rico.
Unlike some of the would-be conquistadors who followed him to
Florida, Juan Ponce did not of his own design employ violence against
the native populations, though he himself was assaulted three times by
clubs and arrows, near Lake Worth Inlet, at Jupiter Inlet, and at
Sanibel. Of the first encounter Herrera wrote that Juan Ponce did not
wish to do the natives harm but was forced to fight in order to save
both his men's lives and their boat, oars, and weapons.
Delayed by family responsibilities, Juan Ponce did not return to
Florida until winter 1521, when he arrived on the lower Gulf Coast,
probably in the region of San Carlos Bay, with 200 male and female
settlers, parish priests and missionary friars, horses and domestic
animals, seeds, cuttings, and agricultural implements. The composition
of this expedition indicates that he intended to build a permanent town
and develop farmland. The presence of parish priests indicates that his
settlement conducted the first Christian service (Mass) in North
America north of Mexico. The presence of missionary friars indicates
that he intended to approach the native peoples in a peaceful way,
imparting to them the basic teachings of Judaeo-Christian religion, as
well as the rudiments of European arts and crafts, as was done later in
the Franciscan Florida missions of the 16th and 17th centuries. But
such was not to be.
Natives at the site attacked the Spaniards as they debarked, as
they erected their buildings, and as they planted their crops and
tended their cattle. When Juan Ponce himself received a painful,
suppurating wound in a thigh, he ordered abandonment of the colony. The
Spaniards sailed to Cuba where Juan Ponce could receive medical
treatment, but shortly after arriving there he died from his infection.
To the natives it was the invaders who were the infidels. And this
was still their land.
The effects of Juan Ponce's discovery and enterprise were far-
reaching. Over the following forty-four years, six more Spanish
expeditions came to La Florida, including that of Pedro Menendez de
Aviles, who in 1565 established St. Augustine, which proudly bears the
title of first permanent European settlement in North America north of
Mexico. By a half century after Juan Ponce's exploits, his appellation
La Florida was applied by Spain to the entire seaboard from the Florida
Keys to Newfoundland, and westward indefinitely from the Atlantic.
It is altogether fitting and proper that the name of our country's
First Discoverer should be writ large in the chronicles about early
America, and that it should be celebrated by the entire nation in the
years leading up to and including the Quincentenary Year of 2013.
I strongly support the establishment of a National Commission on
the Quincentenary of the Discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon. And I
particularly endorse the Senate's support of scholarly research,
publications, lectures, conferences, and media presentations that will
acquaint the American people with their largely unknown Hispanic
heritage.