[Senate Hearing 109-447] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] S. Hrg. 109-447 DESIGNATE AS WILDERNESS LANDS IN ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK; JAPANESE AMERICANS CONFINEMENT SITES; CONVEY LAND TO LEWIS AND CLARK VISITOR CENTER; INCLUDING COL. BARRETT FARM IN THE NPS; DESIGNATE THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF WILDLIFE ART; AND GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK LAND ADDITION ======================================================================= HEARING before the SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS of the COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION on S. 1510 S. 1719 S. 1957 S. 2034 S. 2252 S. 2403 H.R. 1492 H.R. 394 __________ APRIL 6, 2006 Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ______ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 28-401 WASHINGTON : 2006 _____________________________________________________________________________ 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 LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RON WYDEN, Oregon RICHARD BURR, North Carolina TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California CONRAD BURNS, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia KEN SALAZAR, Colorado GORDON SMITH, Oregon ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JIM BUNNING, Kentucky Bruce M. Evans, 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 LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Vice Chairman GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii RICHARD BURR, North Carolina RON WYDEN, Oregon MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana GORDON SMITH, Oregon KEN SALAZAR, Colorado ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 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 Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii.................. 7 Enzi, Hon. Michael B., U.S. Senator from Wyoming................. 4 Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii................. 2 Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., U.S. Senator from Massachusetts......... 2 Kerry, Hon. John F., U.S. Senator from Massachusetts............. 3 Masica, Sue, Associate Director, Park Planning, Facilities and Lands, National Park Service, Department of the Interior....... 7 Salazar, Hon. Ken, U.S. Senator from Colorado.................... 20 Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................... 1 Yamada, Gerald H., National Coordinator, Japanese American National Heritage Coalition.................................... 15 APPENDIXES Appendix I Responses to additional questions................................ 27 Appendix II Additional material submitted for the record..................... 33 DESIGNATE AS WILDERNESS LANDS IN ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK; JAPANESE AMERICANS CONFINEMENT SITES; CONVEY LAND TO LEWIS AND CLARK VISITOR CENTER; INCLUDING COL. BARRETT FARM IN THE NPS; DESIGNATE THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF WILDLIFE ART; AND GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK LAND ADDITION ---------- THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 2006 U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 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. Thank you all for being here. This, of course, is the Subcommittee on National Parks. We have several pieces of legislation to talk about today. I want to welcome, of course, Ms. Sue Masica from the National Park Service and Mr. Gerald Yamada from the Japanese American Heritage Coalition here today. And, of course, welcome my friend and partner, Senator Enzi from Wyoming. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on six Senate bills and two House bills. S. 1510, a bill to designate as wilderness certain lands within the Rocky Mountain National Park in the State of Colorado. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 are bills to provide for the preservation of the historic confinement sites where Japanese-Americans were detained during World War II and other purposes; S. 1957, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the Missouri River Basin's Lewis and Clark Interpretive Center and Visitor's Center Foundation certain Federal lands associated with the Lewis and Clark historic trail in Nebraska to be used as a historical interpretive site; S. 2034 and H.R. 394, bills to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to evaluate the significance of the Colonel James Barret Farm in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and assess the suitability and the feasibility of including the farm in the National Park System as part of the Minutemen National Historical Park; S. 2252, a bill to designate the National Museum of Wildlife Art, located in Jackson, Wyoming, as the National Museum of Wildlife Art for the United States; and, finally, S. 2403, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to include in the boundaries of the Grand National Teton Park an interest in the lands at Grand Teton subdivision and for other purposes. So these are the bills that we have today. I'm glad to be joined by my friend from Colorado, Senator Salazar. Do you have any comments, sir? [The prepared statements of Senators Inouye, Kennedy and Kerry follow:] Prepared Statement of Hon. Daniel K. Inouye, U.S. Senator From Hawaii Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, on September 19, 2005, I introduced S. 1719, a bill that provides for the preservation of historic confinement sites where Japanese Americans were detained during World War II. I was initially approached by the Japanese American community to preserve these sites, and worked on S. 1719 on their behalf. More recently, a question was raised on the applicability of the bill to German and Italian Americans who were also confined. The purpose of this bill is to recognize and teach us that prejudice and wartime hysteria should never again be allowed to justify the violation of human dignity and the fundamental freedoms afforded under the Constitution. Created under this purpose, and based upon my reading of the bill, S. 1719 would also provide the Secretary the discretion to award grants for similar efforts by German and Italian American groups seeking to preserve sites where they were interned. I believe that the German and Italian Americans also have a stake in telling and preserving their internment history. S. 1719 is a bill that will help Japanese, German, and Italian Americans lead the way in teaching our country important lessons in civics. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, thank you for your time and consideration. ______ Prepared Statement of Hon. Edward M. Kennedy, U.S. Senator From Massachusetts I greatly appreciate Chairman Thomas and Senator Akaka's scheduling this hearing and for the opportunity to support the House-passed bill that Congressman Meehan proposed. John Kerry and I have introduced companion legislation in the Senate. The bill is an essential step in preserving a very sacred part of the nation's history, Colonel James Barrett's Farm in Concord, Massachusetts. The bill asks the Secretary of Interior to conduct a boundary study of Minute Man National Park to evaluate the suitability of adding the Farm to the Park, and I also greatly appreciate the Park Service's support for the legislation. The Farm is already listed in the National Register of Historic Places, but it ought to be part of the National Park itself. It's located two miles from the Old North Bridge, where the famous battle took place at the beginning of Revolutionary War. The bridge is part of the Park, and Emerson immortalized it in his famous poem, ``The Concord Hymn,'' which I'm sure the Subcommittee is familiar with, and which was originally a hymn and was later sung at the dedication of the Concord Battle Monument in 1886 after Emerson had died. I'd like to include it in today's hearing record. ``Concord Hymn'' By Ralph Waldo Emerson By the rude bridge that arched the flood, Their flag to April's breeze unfurled; Here once the embattled farmers stood; And fired the shot heard round the world. The foe long since in silence slept; Alike the conqueror silent sleeps, And Time the ruined bridge has swept Down the dark stream that seaward creeps. On this green bank, by this soft stream, We place with joy a votive stone; That memory may their deeds redeem, When, like our sires, our sons are gone. O Thou who made those heroes dare To die, and leave their children free, Bid Time and Nature gently spare The shaft we raised to them and Thee. Barrett's Farm was very much a part of that moment. Colonel James Barrett was one of the principal figures in battle and was the commander of the Middlesex militia regiment in the battle. He used his farm to store large supplies of cannons, gun powder and other munitions, and he oversaw the storage of other weapons in the town. The objective of the British troops in Boston that day was to march to Concord and seize the colonists' arsenals, and Colonel Barrett's farm was the principal target. Paul Revere's ride alerted the colonists to what was happening, and gave Barrett enough time to hide most of the munitions. In Lexington, on the way to Concord, the colonial militia briefly engaged the British forces and withdrew. When the British forces arrived in Concord, they occupied the town, sent detachments to search the farm and other sites, and stationed troops at the North Bridge. When the British set fire to the local courthouse and a blacksmith ship, Colonel Barrett gave the order to the militia to advance, but not to fire unless they were fired on. The British opened fired at Concord Bridge, and the patriots joined the battle and changed the course of history by forcing the British to retreat in disarray, with militia members rushing to the scene and fighting them all the way back to Boston along what is now called the Battle Road. Today, two weeks before the 231st anniversary of that famous battle, we have the opportunity to begin the process of permanently protecting Barrett's Farm, which is currently in the hands of Save Our Heritage, a conservation organization based in Concord. Save Our Heritage recently acquired the property and the historic farmhouse through private financing so that it could be held safely while Congress and the Park Service decide whether it should be included in Minute Man National Park. Save Our Heritage won't be able to maintain ownership of the property indefinitely, which is why it is so important for this bill to become law quickly so that the property can receive permanent protection through the Park Service. I'm confident that once the study is completed, the Park Service will decide that Barrett's Farm should be added to the Park. Few places are so important in the history of our nation. By voice vote last September, the House of Representatives approved H.R. 394--Congressman Meehan's legislation--on the needed study for Barrett's Farm. Our Senate bill is very similar, and I urge the Subcommittee to approve the House bill without amendment, so the full Committee and the Senate can approve it quickly and send it to the President. We have a rare opportunity to protect a truly unique landmark in our nation's history, and preserve it for future generations to visit and experience. I commend the Committee for scheduling this hearing, and I respectfully ask you to support its passage. Thank you very much. ______ Prepared Statement of Hon. John F. Kerry, U.S. Senator From Massachusetts I would like to thank Chairman Thomas and Ranking Member Akaka for holding this hearing today. Of particular importance to me is the Subcommittee's consideration of S. 2034, the Colonel James Barrett Farm Study Act of 2005--a bill that Senator Kennedy and I support. The legislation directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a boundary study to evaluate the significance of the Colonel James Barrett Farm in Concord, Massachusetts, and to assess the suitability and feasibility of including Barrett's Farm in the National Park System as part of Minute Man National Historical Park. There is no question that Colonel Barrett's farm played a major role in the early history of our nation. Listed in the National Register of Historic Places thirty years ago, Barrett's farm is part of not only the history of Massachusetts but of our nation. Encompassing the farm into the existing Minute Man National Historic Park would be a great addition in the continued preservation of our history. As you may know, Colonel James Barrett was the commander of the Middlesex militia during the Revolutionary war and his farm was a central depository for American revolutionaries' supplies. On April 19, 1775, General Thomas Gage, the commander of all British Forces in North America, ordered 700 of his troops to march to Barrett's Farm and destroy the supplies stored there. Fortunately, the colonists learned of the plot ahead of time and sent Paul Revere on his famous ride, calling his countrymen to arms. Colonel Barrett and his sons were able to hide their supplies in furrows they dug in the fields, saving the supplies that would be vital to the survival of the colonials. Ultimately, the colonials and the British met at the North Bridge in Concord, where the ``shot heard 'round the world'' was fired--launching our war for independence. Again, I want to thank you for holding a hearing on S. 2034 today. I look forward to working with the Subcommittee and hopefully soon passing this important piece of legislation. Senator Salazar. Thank you Chairman Thomas. Let me reserve my comments for the legislation on Rocky Mountain Wilderness Area when you call up that bill, in accommodation to Senator Enzi. Senator Thomas. Fine. Senator Salazar. Will that be okay with you? Senator Thomas. We'll do that, that's fine. Thank you very much. We're very pleased this morning to have Senator Enzi from Wyoming here. Where is that? Wyoming? We appreciate you being here and you wanted to comment, I believe, on the Jackson Hole bill that's in here. Thank you for being here. STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL B. ENZI, U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING Senator Enzi. Well thank you very much for allowing me to speak today on S. 2252 and in answer to your first question, it's that big square State that's right above our neighbor, Mr. Salazar's State, which is the other big square State, both of which would like to have a little bit of change in boundaries so that we can have on a lapel pin that's recognizable. But I also want to thank you for co-sponsoring the legislation that recognizes the best wildlife art museum in both Wyoming and in the Nation. I'm testifying in support of a bill that provides a national designation for the National Museum of Wildlife Art that's in Jackson, Wyoming. And, as it should, a national designation signifies something unique that belongs to all the people of our Nation. Just as President Theodore Roosevelt recognized the uniqueness of Devil's Tower in Wyoming when he proclaimed it the first national monument, my bill recognizes the uniqueness of the National Museum of Wildlife Art in Jackson. Wildlife museums aren't unusual in the United States, art museums aren't unusual in the United States. This museum, however, sets itself apart from all the others because it focuses on wildlife art. This interdisciplinary approach fosters education as the museum uses are to teach people about wildlife and encourages wildlife lovers to explore art. The museum's educational focus is clear in their motto, which is bringing people, wildlife, and fine art together. It's my understanding that the National Park Service is taking no position on the bill. I can understand their concern that we assure that there is not another National Museum of Wildlife Art that would object to this designation. In my exploration I have not found one. I would mention that the museum is currently called the National Museum of Wildlife Art and no one has objected to that. It just didn't have the national recognition of the name. So I'm certain that that's the only one. However, Congress, through its committee hearings and deliberations, can explore the justification for providing a national designation to the National Museum of Wildlife Art. The first question should be, is this a reputable museum. The strongest voice answering yes to that question is the museum's accreditation with the American Association of Museums. Any serious museum strives for this accreditation and the National Museum of Wildlife Art is the only museum specifically focused on wildlife art that is accredited by the AAM. In addition, the designation accurately represents the museum. They have a broad, comprehensive and national collection that considers the entire history of wildlife art in America and does not focus on any one type of animal, even though they're right across the road from the elk pasture in Jackson. This bill is not an attempt to provide an avenue for Federal appropriations to the museum. This testimony will provide a record that I do not intend to seek funding for the museum to accompany the designation. However, this designation will ensure the national reputation, the awareness, and the future of the museum. The designation would be significant on the State, national, and international levels because it would mean no other institution can claim the name National Museum of Wildlife Art. It's currently the premiere museum dedicated to enrich and inspire public appreciate and knowledge of fine art related to nature and wildlife. The museum's mission is to explore humanity's relationship with nature by collecting fine art and presenting exceptional exhibitions and educational programs. The national designation would acknowledge that a major museum in Wyoming is the most important museum in the Nation of its kind. The National Museum of Wildlife Art was founded in 1987 with a private gift of a collection of art and is accredited with the American Association of Museums. I'd also ask consent that pictures of the museum and the surrounding area be a part of the record. Senator Thomas. They will be made part of the record. Senator Enzi. The National Museum of Wildlife Art features a collection of over two thousand pieces of art portraying wildlife dating from two thousand B.C. to the present. The collection chronicles much of the history of wildlife art focusing primarily on European and American painting and sculpture. The collection of American art from the 19th and 20th centuries is particularly strong, recording European exploration in the American West. Many of these works predate photography, making them vital representations of the frontier era in the history of the United States. Using the collection as a base, the central themes to the museum's programming are connections between people, wildlife and fine art. Even before this designation, people from across the United States had discovered the National Museum of Wildlife Art. Since its inception it's become an American West destination attraction with an annual attendance of 92,000 visitors from all over the world and an award-winning website that receives more than ten thousand visits per week. These visitors fine wildlife on the walls of the museum, but also outside its doors. The National Museum of Wildlife Art is housed in an architecturally significant and award-winning 51 thousand square foot facility that overlooks the 28,000 acre National Elk Refuge and is adjacent to Grand Teton National Park. The museum displays and interprets this wildlife art in one of the few remaining areas of the United States where native wildlife roams abundantly. The works in the museum are united by their subject and their quality. The permanent collection of the National Museum of Wildlife Art has grown to more than three thousand works by important historic American artists, including Edward Hicks, Anna Hyatt, Anna Hyatt-Huntington, Charlie M. Russell, William Merritt Chase, Alexander Caldwell, as well as contemporary American artists, Steve Kestrel, Bart Walter, Nancy Howe, Jamie Wyeth, and a number of others. In fact, Conrad Schwiering has quite a collection there. He designed the Wyoming stamp. And they're getting ready to put together an exhibit by Thomas Moran whose paintings made Yellowstone Park famous. The National Museum of Wildlife Art seeks to educate a diverse audience through collecting fine art focused on wildlife, presenting exceptional exhibitions, providing community, regional, national, and international outreach and presenting extensive educational programming for adults and children. A national designation presents a great opportunity to use this invaluable resource of the National Museum of Wildlife Art to teach the Nation's school children through onsite visits, traveling exhibits, classroom curriculum, online distance learning and other educational initiatives. It expands the goals of the wildlife museum. I look forward to officially recognizing the renown of the National Museum of Wildlife Art through this bill. And I thank you for this opportunity. I'll take any questions. Senator Thomas. Thank you very much, Senator. We're all very proud of that facility in Wyoming. It's unusual in that you can go in there and look out the window and see about two, three dozen elk out there grazing around and so on, as well as the Tetons. So thank you sir, for your---- Senator Salazar. Mr. Chairman? Senator Thomas. Yes sir? Senator Salazar. May I make a comment prior to the departure of Senator Enzi on this bill? Senator Thomas. Yes sir. Senator Salazar. I just want to--Mr. Chairman, to you and to Senator Enzi, make a quick point on the common heritage that we share in Colorado and Wyoming with respect to wildlife and water and whole host of issues that so effect our two States. And, even though we are the two rectangle States of the Nation, I think that your statement about a national wildlife museum puts its finger on the very serious opportunity that we have in both Colorado and Wyoming with respect to wildlife. For us in the West who struggle every day for trying to find jobs in rural America, we know the tremendous contribution that hunting and wildlife watching make to our communities. And so I think you have your hands on legislation that makes a lot of sense as we move forward to try to preserve and celebrate the wildlife heritage of Wyoming and the West. Senator Thomas. Thank you. Senator Salazar. Thank you, sir. Senator Thomas. Senator Akaka, do you have any comments? STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII Senator Akaka. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I just want to ask whether you would want to excuse Senator Enzi or have him listen to my statement? Senator Thomas. Oh, I think he certainly ought to listen to your statement. Senator Akaka. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for scheduling this hearing, which includes bills of particular interest to several members of this committee. I would like to take a minute to briefly discussion S. 1719, Senator Inouye's bill to establish a program within the National Park Service to help preserve historic confinement sites where Japanese- Americans were detained during World War II. I am pleased to be an original co-sponsor of this legislation. The House of Representatives has already passed a companion measure sponsored by Congressman Bill Thomas of California. Both bills have brought bi-partisan support, including both Senators from Utah and one of the 14 cosponsors of the House-passed bill. I would like to extend my appreciation to my colleagues in the House and Senate for their support to ensure that these historic sites are appropriately protected. These bills will help acknowledge the experience of Japanese-American citizens that were detained, and also help educate the public on a very sad but important chapter in our Nation's history that all citizens, the elderly, the young, must continue to learn from. I think it's important to make clear that this bill will only involve sites on private land, if the land owner consents. And that this bill does not provide for any Federal management or special designation. The bill also limits the use of Federal funds to assist in land acquisition at four specific sites where there is strong local support for potential land acquisition. The other sites could not be acquired with funds from this act. Mr. Chairman, I would like to welcome our two witnesses today, Sue Masica from the National Park Service and Mr. Gerald Yamada with the Japanese- American National Heritage Coalition to the committee today. And I look forward to hearing from both of them as we discuss the bill. Thank you very much. Senator Thomas. Thank you Senator. Now, if our witnesses will take their place, please. Why don't you both come to the table. Ms. Masica, nice to have you from the Park Service, and Mr. Yamada, glad to have you, sir. Sue, if you'd begin please. STATEMENT OF SUE MASICA, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, PARK PLANNING, FACILITIES AND LANDS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Ms. Masica. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I'm pleased to be here today to present the administration's position on a series of bills. Since my written statements are all part of the record, I'll summarize briefly the prepared response. Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Ms. Masica. S. 1510, the Rocky Mountain Wilderness bill would designate approximately 250 thousand acres of Rocky Mountain National Park back country as wilderness. These lands are currently managed as wilderness and have been since 1974. Present road and water corridors and all developed areas are excluded from the recommended wilderness. The wilderness designation would not alter activities or access within the park. The administration supports this bill if amended to reflect the recent discussions that have been ongoing with the town of Grand Lake, Grant County and other interested parties. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, having to do with the Japanese- American confinement sites will establish a grant program to provide a system for the preservation of historic confinement sites. The Park Service is actively involved in preserving resources associated with the experiences of Japanese-Americans during World War II, and collecting and disseminating information on this unfortunate chapter in our Nation's history. Since 1992, two units have been added to the National Park System to help us learn from our history, Manzanar in California and Minidoka in Idaho. The Park Service is also completing a National Historic Landmark theme study of sites associated with the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II. Two internment camp sites received National Historic Landmark designations this past February--Tule Lake in California and Granada in Colorado. Because of the financial implications of the proposed $38 million grant program, the administration does not support the approach taken by these two bills. S. 1957 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the Missouri River Basin Lewis and Clark Interpretive Trail and Visitor Center Foundation certain Federal land associated with the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail. The transfer would involve two parcels of land in Nebraska City, Nebraska. The site contains a visitor center recently constructed with a combination of Federal and non-Federal funds. The Department supports enactment of the bill with an amendment to substitute a map reference for the metes and bounds description presently contained in the legislation. S. 2034 and H.R. 394, the Barrett Farms study, would authorize the Park Service to conduct a study to evaluate the significance of the Colonel James Barrett Farm in Massachusetts, and to assess the suitability and feasibility of including the farm in the Park System. We would conduct a boundary study of the property and its significance with respect to the Revolutionary War. The study would also examine the feasibility of administering the farm as part of the Minute Man National Historical Park. Colonel Barrett was one of the leading figures in the events that began the American Revolution in April of 1775. Barrett's farm was the impetus for the British excursion to Concord on April 18, 1775. And the vigorous work of Colonel Barrett and his militia was the key reason for the British retreat following the encounter at the north bridge in Concord. The Department supports enactment of this legislation. S. 2252 would change the name of the museum in Jackson, Wyoming from the National Museum of Wildlife Art to the National Museum of Wildlife Art of the United States. The legislation involves the renaming of a private museum that is not located within the boundaries of any federally owned property and is not under Federal jurisdiction. As a result, the Department has no position on S. 2252. Lastly, S. 2403, the Grand Teton boundary modification, would authorize the Park Service to include within the boundaries of Grand Teton National Park approximately 49 acres adjacent to the park and to adjust the boundary accordingly. The lands would be donated at no cost to the Federal Government except for closing and other costs, which are estimated to be about $300 thousand. The Park Service does not anticipate any additional costs associated with the management or administration of the lands to be donated. The Department supports S. 2403 with an amendment to clarify the terms under which the Secretary of the Interior may accept the donation. We recommend donation language be used that is similar to other donation transactions. And with that, Mr. Chairman, any questions I would be happy to respond to any questions. [The prepared statements of Ms. Masica follow:] Prepared Statement of Sue Masica, Associate Director, Park Planning, Facilities, and Lands, National Park Service, Department of the Interior S. 1510 Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1510, a bill to designate as wilderness certain lands within Rocky Mountain National Park. The Department supports S. 1510 if amended to reflect recent discussions with the Town of Grand Lake, Grand County, and other interested parties. S. 1510 would designate approximately 249,339 acres of Rocky Mountain National Park's (park) backcountry in the National Wilderness Preservation System. This represents approximately 95% of the park's total acreage, lands that currently are managed as wilderness. In 1964, Congress designated Rocky Mountain National Park as a wilderness study area. In 1974, President Nixon recommended to Congress 239,835 acres for immediate designation and 5,169 acres for potential designation as wilderness in the park. S. 1510 increases the recommended acreage amount based on modifications brought about by land acquisition and boundary adjustments since 1974. Present road, water, and utility corridors, and all developed areas, are excluded from recommended wilderness. Wilderness designation would not alter any current visitor activities or access within the park, and would allow visitors to utilize the park in the same ways and locations that they presently enjoy. Federal reserved water rights for park purposes are not an issue related to wilderness designation as water rights for the park have been adjudicated through the State of Colorado water courts. Consequently, no water rights claims for wilderness purposes are needed or desired by the National Park Service (NPS). After holding public meetings on the proposed designation in June 2005, the gateway communities of Estes Park and Grand Lake, and the counties of Grand and Larimer endorsed wilderness designation for Rocky Mountain National Park, subject to specific boundary modifications on the west boundary of the park. These modifications would provide an area of non-wilderness around the Town of Grand Lake in order to ensure that the park could continue to actively manage hazardous fuels and other uses that might affect the Town. The proposed modifications would also reserve a corridor along Shadow Mountain and Granby reservoirs for the possible building of a non-motorized hike/bike trail along the east shore of these two reservoirs. The building of this trail would be subject to the normal NPS planning process for such proposals including analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act. We would be happy to work with the Committee on amendments to the bill that would reflect the proposals made by the local communities. That concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee might have. S. 1719 AND H.R. 1492 Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, legislation to provide for the preservation of the historic confinement sites where Japanese Americans were detained during World War II. H.R. 1492 was passed by the House on November 16, 2005. The Department recognizes the importance of taking steps to more fully preserve the history of the experience of Japanese Americans during World War II, when many were forcibly removed from their homes and sent to live at internment camps. However, we do not support the approach taken by S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 to preserve this history. For many years, the Department has opposed legislation authorizing appropriations for grants for specified non-National Park Service projects. Many of these projects represent an important contribution to the preservation of our Nation's history, as would be the case with projects associated with the Japanese American internment camps. Each time such legislation is enacted and appropriations follow, it further reduces a limited amount of discretionary funds available to address the priority needs of our national parks and other programs administered by the National Park Service. With the emphasis we have placed on fulfilling our core mission of operating units of the National Park System and on the President's initiative to reduce the deferred maintenance backlog, it has become more important than ever to avoid authorizing funding for non-National Park Service projects that would draw funds from the National Park Service's budget. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, which contain identical provisions, would require the Secretary of the Interior to establish a program within the National Park Service to administer grants to public and private entities to protect, restore, interpret, acquire and take other actions with respect to the ten internment camps and other historically significant locations where Japanese Americans were detained during World War II. The grants would be made in consultation with the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition, an umbrella organization of groups that are involved in efforts to preserve one or more of the Japanese American detention sites. The bill would authorize appropriations of $38 million for this purpose. The Department is actively involved in preserving resources associated with the experience of Japanese Americans during World War II and collecting and disseminating information on this unfortunate chapter of our Nation's history. As recently as 1990, the National Park Service had virtually no role in preserving and interpreting this story. That changed in 1992, when Congress (1) authorized the establishment of Manzanar National Historic Site in central California, (2) directed the National Park Service to conduct a National Historic Landmark (NHL) theme study of sites associated with the detention of Japanese Americans during World War II, and (3) authorized a memorial in the Nation's Capital to honor Japanese American patriotism in World War II. Today, the National Park Service administers two of the ten internment camps. In addition to Manzanar, the Minidoka Relocation Center in Idaho was added as a unit of the National Park System in 2001 following a presidential proclamation that designated the site as Minidoka Internment National Monument. Manzanar is a now a well- established unit; its visitor center was opened two years ago and its annual visitation is about 78,000. Minidoka is preparing a General Management Plan and is still under development. In 1999, to provide the documentation needed for the NHL theme study authorized by Congress, the National Park Service's Western Archeological and Conservation Center published an extensive compilation and analysis of resources associated with these sites. This compilation, Confinement and Ethnicity: An Overview of World War II Japanese American Relocation Sites, has proven to be an invaluable source of information about this subject not only for the National Park Service but also for the many organizations that are involved in the efforts to preserve these sites. The NHL theme study directed by Congress is nearly complete. Based on that study, two internment camps were designated in February as National Historic Landmarks: Tule Lake in California, and Granada in Colorado. National Historic Landmark designation is the highest level of historic significance our Nation bestows on a place. As designated sites, they are eligible for technical assistance available through our NHL program and they have an advantage in competing for public and private preservation grants. In addition to its designation as a NHL, Tule Lake received a Save America's Treasures matching grant of $200,000 in the Interior appropriations act for Fiscal Year 2006. The grant will be co-managed by the Tule Lake Committee for Preservation of the Tule Lake Camp and the National Park Service and used to stabilize the carpenters' shop and to correct drainage problems. The National Park Service is providing historic preservation assistance to the Bureau of Reclamation, which has administrative jurisdiction over part of the Tule Lake property, and to State agencies, which own the remaining part. The National Park Service is also providing technical assistance to Departmental bureaus and others to help preserve Heart Mountain in Wyoming, Topaz in Utah, and Granada in Colorado. The National Park Service is also close to finalizing and transmitting to Congress a special resource study of Bainbridge Island, Washington, which was the first location from which Japanese Americans were forcibly removed from their homes following the issuance of Executive Order 9066, which provided the authority for the detention of Japanese Americans. This study, which was authorized by Congress in 2002, analyzes different alternatives for memorializing, preserving, and interpreting this important site. Our Pacific West Regional Office, through the National Park Service's Preservation Partnership programs, has also provided technical assistance to the Bainbridge Island community to document the community's internment experiences and the history of the Japanese on Bainbridge. That office also provided funding to train Asian-American students in documenting sites important to the history of their communities. In addition, the National Park Service, through its National Mall and Memorial Parks unit, administers the memorial to Japanese American Patriotism in World War II, which is located about two blocks north of the U.S. Capitol Building. Our National Capital Region office assisted in establishing the memorial. We helped secure an appropriate site for the memorial, assisted in its design, and facilitated the approval process for it. The memorial honors the approximately 120,000 Japanese Americans who were relocated to the internment camps. It incorporates the names and locations of the camps, as well as the names of Japanese Americans who died in military service to the United States during World War II. A few examples of other activities we have engaged in include:Establishing a lesson plan on the War Relocation Camps of World War II on the National Park Service's ``Teaching with Historic Places'' web site; Conducting oral history recording projects that entailed recording the histories of internees and other individuals associated with the World War II internment; and Providing technical assistance to the Jerome County Historical Society, Idaho, to copy original newspapers from 1942-1945 onto microfilm for reference and research purposes, and technical assistance to develop methods to preserve internment-related materials for long-term preservation. The Department would like to continue and build on the efforts we are already involved in on this subject. In addition to the activities already mentioned, there are other ways the National Park Service could enhance the role we play in protecting resources and interpreting the history of the Japanese American experience in World War II at a relatively small cost. For example, working in partnership with other entities that own and administer the internment camp sites, we could develop a comprehensive interpretative plan for all ten sites. We could designate a staff person to coordinate the preservation and interpretation activities among the different sites. Another possibility would be to publish a handbook on the internment camps that would be available at National Park Service bookstores. We could also develop a web-based travel itinerary on the sites. To summarize, we believe there are appropriate ways for the National Park Service to expand upon its already significant role in increasing public awareness and understanding of the Japanese American experience during World War II. But we do not believe it is appropriate for the National Park Service budget to be used as a funding source for grants to non-Federal entities to undertake costly restoration and other types of projects at the sites of these camps. We therefore cannot support S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I will be happy to respond to questions from you or other members of the committee. S. 1957 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. 1957, a bill to authorize the Secretary of Interior to convey to the Missouri River Basin Lewis and Clark Interpretive Trail and Visitor Center Foundation, Inc. certain Federal land associated with the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail in Nebraska, to be used as an historical interpretive site along the trail. The Department supports enactment of S. 1957, with an amendment. S. 1957 would convey without consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United States in two parcels of land at 100 Valmont Drive, Nebraska City, Nebraska to the Missouri River Basin Lewis and Clark Interpretive Trail and Visitor Center Foundation, Inc. (Foundation). The Foundation would bear all the costs associated with the conveyance. If the Foundation determines to discontinue use of the land as a historic site and interpretive center, the land shall be conveyed back to the Secretary of the Interior. The three-story Missouri River Basin Lewis & Clark Interpretive Trail & Visitor Center (Center), authorized by the National Trails System Act (NTSA), was designed and constructed by the National Park Service (NPS). The Center is located on the Federally owned 78-acre site acquired for this purpose, and focuses on the flora and fauna and scientific discoveries recorded by the Lewis and Clark expedition and the Native American people's role in the success of the Corp of Discovery. There is a Keelboat Exhibition Room on the entry level with an authentic replica of the 55-foot-long keelboat used on the journey, and the lower walkout level houses a Theater Educational Room and the Young Explorer's Discovery Wing. There also is an outdoor classroom and an unobstructed view of the Missouri River, part of the route used by Lewis and Clark as they pulled upriver and walked the banks to make the scientific observations and collect specimens of flora and fauna. There are 11 other historic and interpretive facilities along the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail. The NTSA specifies that, wherever possible, the facility is to be operated by a non-federal entity. The Foundation was established as the non-federal operating partner and raised the necessary funds. The NPS has provided approximately $1.1 million to purchase the land, to provide design and construction supervision services, and to develop the facilities and exhibits. The Foundation raised about $2.2 million toward the cost and development of the visitor center. Construction of the facility began in the spring of 2003 and was completed in July 2004. The Foundation has operated the Center since July 2004, with a substantial Federal subsidy. The Midwest Region of NPS currently subsidizes the Center out of ONPS base ($150,000), contingency ($32,000), and cyclic ($18,000) funding, for about $200,000 per year. This helps pay salaries, utilities, routine maintenance, and other needed expenses. It is estimated that it would cost approximately $574,000 per year for the NPS to operate the Center for a traditional 7-day per week schedule. By owning the Center, the Foundation could collect entrance and special use fees to supplement donations for operations and maintenance. Annual visitation for calendar year 2005 was 27,105; based on a typical $5 entrance fee, that could result in $135,525. The Foundation projects it could collect approximately $88,000 in special use fees per year. The two fee types could thus generate about $223,525 per year. The passage of S. 1957 would authorize $150,000 a year for 10 years to assist in the operation of the facility. The NPS spends approximately $50,000 more than this amount to subsidize current operations. The savings would then be used to assist with other trail partnerships and perhaps contingency issues in other national park units of the Midwest Region. The Department recommends that section 1(a) be amended to include a map reference to replace the metes and bounds description of the two parcels to be conveyed. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This concludes my prepared testimony. I would be pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have. S. 2034 AND H.R. 394 Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2034 and H.R. 394, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to evaluate the significance of the Colonel James Barrett Farm in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and to assess the suitability and feasibility of including the farm in the National Park System as part of the Minute Man National Historical Park, and for other purposes. The Department supports the enactment of this bill. If enacted, the bill would direct the Secretary to conduct a boundary study to evaluate the significance of Barrett's Farm, and to assess the suitability and feasibility of including the Farm as part of the Minute Man National Historical Park, a unit of the National Park System. The study, which is to be completed within two years after funds are made available for it, is to include an analysis of Barrett's Farm's significance with respect to the Revolutionary War. It must also analyze opportunities for public enjoyment of the property as part of Minute Man National Historical Park, and any operational, management, and private property issues that must be considered if the farm is added to the park. In addition, the study must include a determination by the Secretary of the feasibility of administering the farm as part of the Minute Man National Historical Park, taking into account its size, configuration, costs and any other appropriate factors, as well as an evaluation of other alternatives for management and resource protection of the property. The Colonel James Barrett Farm is located at 448 Barrett's Mill Road, Concord, Massachusetts, two miles from the town center and from Minute Man National Historical Park. The Barrett House was the home of Colonel James Barrett (1710-1779), commander of Middlesex County militia and one of the leading figures in the events that began the American Revolution in April, 1775. The property comprises six acres and includes land that has been farmed continuously since the 18th century as well as the historic 1705 farm house. Much of the surrounding acreage is owned by the Town of Concord and managed as agricultural conservation land. The proposed study area of six acres is coterminous with the property listed on the National Register of Historic Places and includes abutting properties that once were part of the original farm. In addition, the National Park Service recommends that approximately 40 acres of the town-owned lands which directly abut the farm (and which were once part of the original farm) also be included in the study area. Inclusion of these lands in the study area would allow the NPS to explore the options for increased collaboration with the town and for ways to support long-term management should Barrett's Farm be acquired and managed by the National Park Service in the future. The Town of Concord has expressed its support for inclusion of these resources in the study. Colonel Barrett's Farm was a major hiding place for the colonists' stores of arms and ammunition. It was the farthest point that was targeted by the British expeditionary force sent from Boston to seize these weapons. The British troops headed there on April 19, 1775 but found nothing, the residents having been alerted by Paul Revere several days earlier, in time to hide muskets, cannons and powder in the nearby fields. On that same day, Colonel Barrett ordered the advance to Concord's North Bridge that resulted in ``the shot heard 'round the world'' and the start of the Revolutionary War. Minute Man National Historical Park encompasses 971 acres and includes the North Bridge, Lexington Green and the Battle Road trail, where the British both advanced and retreated. Including Barrett's Farm within the boundaries of Minute Man National Historical Park appears to offer many opportunities for resource preservation and interpretation. Barrett's Farm was the impetus for the British excursion to Concord on April 18, 1775 and the vigorous work of Colonel Barrett and his militia was the key reason for the British retreat following the encounter at the North Bridge. The farm was considered for inclusion when Minute Man National Historical Park was established in 1959, but was at that time in private ownership and not available for acquisition. It has since been purchased by Save Our Heritage, a local nonprofit organization, which seeks to preserve it. The group has been working closely with the Town of Concord and has raised $2 million to acquire and stabilize the property. We believe that this study would allow the Secretary to explore further the feasibility of adding this important historical property to the National Park System. 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. S. 2252 Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2252, a bill to designate the National Museum of Wildlife Art as the National Museum of Wildlife Art of the United States. The Department has no position on S. 2252 since it involves the renaming of a private museum that is not located within the boundaries of any federally owned property and is not under federal jurisdiction. However, the Administration would not support future federal funding for a newly designated National Museum of Wildlife Art of the United States as proposed in this bill. Also, while we are not aware of one, prior to moving forward with this bill we would encourage the subcommittee to determine that there is not another National Museum of Wildlife Art that might object to the redesignation of this museum. The National Museum of Wildlife Art is a private, non-profit entity located just outside of Jackson, Wyoming, across from the National Elk Refuge and only a short distance from Grand Teton National Park. Although the museum is not affiliated with the park, it supports the park's mission to preserve and protect wildlife and serves many of the same visitors. Grand Teton National Park has a relationship with the National Museum of Wildlife Art. Currently, the park and the museum are working together on a special exhibition of the works of Thomas Moran, one of the premier painters of the American West, and the artist who accompanied the Hayden Expedition into Yellowstone in 1871. Moran is perhaps most widely known for his monumental paintings of Yellowstone, works that showed the American people for the first time the spectacular natural treasures of the area and inspired them to preserve it as the world's first national park. The area that was to become Grand Teton National Park was also the subject of Moran's brush, and the park has several of his works in its museum collection. This summer, those works will be on loan to the National Museum of Wildlife Art and displayed as part of an exhibition celebrating the 125th anniversary of the Hayden Expedition that first explored and documented the region that is now Yellowstone National Park. Additionally, we expect to continue our close relationship with the museum in other ways that are of interest and benefit to both parties. That concludes my testimony, I would be glad to answer any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have. S. 2403 Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2403, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to include in the boundaries of the Grand Teton National Park land and interests in land of the GT Park Subdivision, and for other purposes. The Department supports S. 2403 with one amendment. S. 2403 would direct the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to accept, by donation, approximately 49 acres adjacent to Grand Teton National Park, and upon donation, adjust the park boundary to include these lands within the park and to administer the acquired lands in accordance with all applicable laws. In addition, the Secretary would be prohibited from selling, donating, exchanging, or otherwise transferring the acquired land without authorization from Congress. The lands added to the boundary would be donated at no cost to the federal government, and no additional costs would be associated with management or administration of the donated lands. Costs that would be associated with the conveyance of the land include closing and other associated costs. We estimate those costs to be approximately $300,000, and we currently do not have a funding source identified for these costs. The privately owned land that is the subject of S. 2403 is located approximately one mile from the major road through the park and is visible from that road. The land consists of eight lots that total 49.67 acres and are located near the Lost Creek Ranch, adjacent to the park's eastern boundary. Similar in character and quality to adjacent park lands, the lots are primarily grassland and sagebrush meadow and provide habitat for a wide variety of wildlife including elk, deer, antelope, bison, coyotes, and wolves. The lots offer spectacular and unobstructed views of the Teton Range across the broad valley of Jackson Hole. The National Park System includes countless examples of philanthropic efforts that have added immeasurably to the preservation of our Nation's natural and cultural treasures. Nowhere is this more evident than at Grand Teton National Park, where the gift of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. in 1949, of more than 38,000 acres, helped to ensure the creation of the park. Today, the spirit of philanthropy is very much alive at Grand Teton, and a prime example is the extraordinary generosity of Gerald T. Halpin and his family. Of the eight lots which are the subject of this bill, one is owned by the Halpin family, and the other seven were previously donated by the Halpins to several foundations with the understanding that they would ultimately be donated to the federal government for inclusion in Grand Teton National Park. These foundations include the National Park Foundation, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and the Grand Teton National Park Foundation. Inclusion of these lands within Grand Teton National Park cannot be accomplished without this legislation. When Congress established the park in 1950, it included a provision in the park's enabling legislation that prohibited any expansion of national parks or monuments in the State of Wyoming without the express authorization of Congress. We recommend one amendment to the bill. Section 3(a) as written may imply that the Secretary shall accept the donation of the land regardless of any potential environmental hazards on the land or the condition of the title. We recommend donation language that has been used in other similar donation transactions and is attached to this testimony. Mr. Chairman, we wish to thank you for your efforts in sponsoring and introducing this legislation. It is the product of many generous and forward-looking people working together to continue protecting Grand Teton National Park for the American people. That concludes my statement. I would be glad to answer any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee might have. Proposed Amendment for S. 2403 Page 2, strike lines 18-20 and insert the following: ``(a) The Secretary is authorized to acquire, by donation, lands and interests in land in the Subdivision.''. Senator Thomas. All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Yamada, would you like to make your statement please? STATEMENT OF GERALD H. YAMADA, NATIONAL COORDINATOR, JAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL HERITAGE COALITION Mr. Yamada. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the invitation to testify before this subcommittee. I ask for the subcommittee's unanimous consent to have my full statement entered onto the record. Senator Thomas. It will be included. Mr. Yamada. I will summarize it. My name is Gerald Yamada. I am appearing on behalf of the Japanese American Heritage Coalition in support of S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. The Heritage Coalition represents 28 national and community organizations. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 embody a fundamental principle that is unique to America. This principle is that the strength of America lies in its openness to recognize our national mistakes. In 1942 the U.S. Government made a horrific national mistake. This mistake is epitomized in Executive Order 9066, signed by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on February 19, 1942. This Executive Order was used to forcibly exclude and evacuate 120 thousand persons of Japanese ancestry from California, Alaska, Hawaii, portions of Arizona, Oregon and Washington to government-controlled assembly centers and, later, to internment camps and other secured facilities. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 refer to these sites as confinement sites. In our bicentennial year of 1976, President Gerald R. Ford issued Proclamation 4417 on February 19, 1976 to rescind Executive Order 9066. In issuing this presidential proclamation, President Ford affirmed the American promise that he described with these words. ``We have learned from the tragedy that long ago experienced, forever to treasure liberty and justice for each individual American and resolve that this kind of action shall never again be repeated.''. That brings me too why S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 are important. The internment experience for the vast majority of Japanese Americans took a tremendous toll in human sacrifice and hardships on families and individuals during and after World War II. Many demonstrated within the confinement sites to protest the injustice of their treatment. Yet Japanese Americans remain law-abiding citizens and families proudly sent more than 25,000 of their sons and daughters to serve in the U.S. military during World War II while they remained behind, confined against their will and imprisoned without due process. These soldiers served with legendary distinction and honor in the European and Pacific campaigns. Over 800 of these soldiers gave their lives defending America. The ordeal suffered by Japanese Americans in confinement sites will not have been in vain if their sacrifices and hardships can be preserved in ways so that the lessons of the past will not be forgotten and can be used to benefit future generations. This is the legacy of S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. This is the legacy that those who were interned want to leave in their twilight years. Most Japanese Americans who were evacuated and interned are today in their 70s, 80s or older. Their recollections are crucial to ensure the accuracy of preservation projects. This is the reason why we urge expeditious passage of S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. This legislation would make the American promise a reality. Racially motivated government actions and policies such as those taken under Executive Order 9066 must never be repeated. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would fund preservation projects to provide physical teaching venues to demonstrate that this Nation's commitment to the fundamental principles of due process and equal protection must not be compromised by prejudicial and discriminatory governmental actions. They teach that patriotism and citizenship founded in our constitutional system of governments and tradition of justice will transcend prejudice and discrimination. These lessons deserve to be preserved as a part of the American promise made to the American public and future generations of Americans. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 accomplish this by creating a framework that would give the initiative to committee groups and organizations. This framework is carefully created in terms of a partnership arrangement with the National Park Service and would impose a sense of provision, a sensible patch requirement, limited authority to acquire real property and the needed level of authorization for appropriation. The Heritage Coalition urges that this framework be kept in tact. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present this testimony and I would be happy to respond to any of your questions. [The prepared statement of Mr. Yamada follows:] Prepared Statement of Gerald H. Yamada, National Coordinator, Japanese American National Heritage Coalition My name is Gerald H. Yamada. I am submitting this statement on behalf of the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition (``Heritage Coalition'') in support of S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. HERITAGE COALITION MEMBERS The Heritage Coalition has 28 organization members. The members are the Go For Broke Educational Foundation, Go For Broke National Veterans Association, Japanese American Citizens League; Japanese American National Museum; Japanese American Veterans Association; National Asian Pacific American Bar Association; National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium; National Japanese American Historical Society; National Japanese American Memorial Foundation; National Japanese American Veterans Council; Organization of Chinese Americans; Amache Preservation Society; Committee to Change ``Jap'' Road, TX; Densho: The Japanese American Legacy Project, WA; Denver Central Optimists; Colorado River Indian Tribes; Friends of California Civil Liberties Public Education Program; Gila Reunion Committee; Heart Mountain Wyoming Foundation; Japanese American Service Committee, Chicago, IL; Japanese American Historical Society, San Diego, CA; Japanese Cultural Center of Hawaii; Life Interrupted Program (Arkansas Camps); Nisei Farmers League, CA; Poston Restoration Project; Topaz Museum Board, UT; and Tule Lake Preservation Committee. The Heritage Coalition appreciates this Subcommittee's consideration and work in holding this hearing on S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. IMPORTANCE OF S. 1719 AND H.R. 1492 S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 are important to the Japanese American community and American public because they would provide federal partnerships with public and private entities to preserve the historic significance of ``confinement sites'' used during World War II to imprison Japanese Americans. These ``confinement sites'' are individually unique but have one common thread: these sites were the results of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signing Executive Order 9066 in 1942. The federal government used EO 9066 as the authority to forcibly exclude and evacuate 120,000 persons of Japanese ancestry from California, Alaska, Hawaii, and portions of Arizona, Oregon, and Washington to government-controlled assembly centers and later to ``internment camps'' and other secured locations. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 refer to these sites as ``confinement sites.'' CONFINEMENT SITES There were ten (10) ``internment camps,'' and they are commonly referred to as Gila River, Granada (or Amache), Heart Mountain, Jerome, Manzanar, Minidoka, Poston, Rohwer, Topaz, and Tule Lake. Their locations are depicted respectively in Figures 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, 7.1, 8.4, 9.2, 10.6, 11.2, 12.2, and 13.2 in Confinement and Ethnicity: An Overview of World War II Japanese American Relocation Sites, Publications in Anthropology 74 of the Western Archeological and Conservation Center, National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), 1999. In addition to these 10 internment camp sites, approximately 42 other confinement sites are identified in Confinement and Ethnicity. Examples of confinement sites identified in Confinement and Ethnicity include: Gila River Relocation Center, Arizona Poston Relocation Center, Arizona Leupp, Arizona--Citizen Isolation Center Mayer, Arizona--Assembly Center Tucson, Arizona--Catalina Federal Honor Camp Granada Relocation Center, Colorado Honolulu, Hawaii--Sand Island Detention Center Oahu, Hawaii--Honouliuli Internment Camp Camp Livingston, Louisiana--Detention Center Santa Fe, New Mexico--Internment Camp Fort Stanton, New Mexico--Department of Justice Camp Portland, Oregon--Assembly Center Crystal City, Texas--Department of Justice Camp Camp Forrest, Tennessee--Held Japanese Hawaiians Heart Mountain Relocation Center, Wyoming All the above examples are described in Confinement and Ethnicity and are illustrative of sites that are within the definition of ``confinement sites.'' wrongfulness of executive order 9066 established We need not take the time here to establish that the actions taken under the authority of Executive Order 9066 were wrongful. The wrongfulness of those actions have already been established. In the Bicentennial Year of 1976, President Gerald R. Ford issued Proclamation 4417 on February 19, 1976 to terminate Executive Order 9066. In issuing this Presidential Proclamation, President Ford affirmed the ``American Promise'' that he described with these words: ``[W]e have learned from the tragedy of that long-ago experience forever to treasure liberty and justice for each individual American, and resolve that this kind of action shall never again be repeated.'' The 1982 Report of the U.S. Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, created by legislation signed by President Jimmy Carter, concluded that ``Executive Order 9066 was not justified by military necessity'' and that Executive Order 9066 decisions were shaped by ``race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.'' President Ronald Reagan stated ``Here we admit a wrong. Here we affirm our commitment as a nation to equal justice under the law'' when he signed the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 into law. The Civil Liberties Act provided the federal government's formal apology for the imprisonment of Japanese Americans during World War II. The Civil Liberties Act showed the strength of our system of government. By publicly admitting a wrong, the federal government reconfirmed its faith in the principles of democracy and the protection of rights provided by our Constitution. ``AMERICAN PROMISE''--PRESERVING CONFINEMENT SITES The Civil Liberties Act authorized the President to make a formal apology and give a redress payment to each Japanese American imprisoned during World War II. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would go further by fulfilling the ``American Promise'' to the American public and future generations of Americans. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would use preservation projects to remind us that racially motivated government actions and policies such as those taken under Executive 9066 must never be repeated. Preserved confinement sites would provide physical teaching venues to demonstrate that this Nation's commitment to the fundamental principles of due process and equal protection must not be compromised by prejudicial and discriminatory governmental actions. They would teach that patriotism and citizenship founded in our constitutional system of government and tradition of justice will transcend prejudice and discrimination. These lessons must be preserved for the American public and for future generations of Americans. DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS Sadly, the internment experience is still unknown to many Americans. That is why it is important to enact S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 into law and keep the carefully crafted framework embodied in these bills intact. The Heritage Coalition supports S. 1719, as introduced by Senator Daniel K. Inouye, and H.R. 1492, as passed by the US House of Representatives. To this end, I want to highlight certain provisions in S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 and state the Heritage Coalition's reasons why they should be kept intact. Sunset Provision S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 contain a carefully crafted sunset provision. The sunset provision is needed to provide time to develop projects based on the personal recollections and first hand experiences of those who were interned. Their recollections are important to ensure the accuracy of these preservation projects. The internment experience for the vast majority of Japanese Americans took a tremendous toll in human sacrifice and hardships on families and individuals during and after World War II. Many demonstrated within the confinement sites to protest the injustice of their treatment. Yet, the Japanese Americans remained law-abiding citizens, and families proudly sent more than 25,000 of their sons and daughters to serve in the US military during World War II while they remained behind, confined against their will, and imprisoned without due process. Those soldiers served with legendary distinction and honor in the European and Pacific campaigns. Over 800 of these soldiers gave their lives defending America. The ordeal suffered by Japanese Americans in confinement sites will not have been in vain if their sacrifices and hardships can be preserved in ways so that the lessons of the past will not be forgotten and can be used to benefit future generations. The strength of America lies in its willingness to recognize our national mistakes as well as our national achievements. In developing projects to preserve the historic significance of the Japanese American story during World War II, ample time should be afforded so that the story can be developed accurately and in ways deemed important to the internees. The sunset provision provides the needed time. Partnership With the National Park Service, S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 do not preempt or impose National Park Service unit designations on behalf of any of the confinement sites. These bills do not mandate a formula for disbursing funds. Rather, this legislation would create a partnership with the National Park Service to provide resources to community groups, non-profit organizations, local and state governments, and Indian Tribes. The Heritage Coalition recognizes that the National Park Service may not normally work with or fund sites that are not seeking NPS unit status or NPS recognition. However, the National Park Service has a working knowledge of this period of history since two internment camp sites have been designated as National Park Service units and two others have recently received National Historic Landmark recognition. The National Park Service's technical assistance would be invaluable in capturing the historic significance of the different confinement sites or the internment experience. Also, the lessons that must be preserved from the internment experience are too important to be limited to only some of the sites. The whole history must be preserved where the actual events took place. The examples listed above demonstrate that confinement sites were spread across the United States and that there were different types of confinement sites used to carry out Executive Order 9066. Each confinement site has its own unique history and relationships within and outside of the site. Confinement site committees should have the opportunity to preserve a site's history in their own way and in ways that the experiences of internees are not forgotten. A confinement site committee may want to use funding to restore, reconstruct, stabilize, or relocate camp site structures; upgrade site infrastructures; build a museum or interpretative center on or off site; erect a monument, marker, or signage; sponsor educational programs, document oral histories, refurbish an on-site cemetery, etc. In other words, S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would allow a wide range of preservation projects to be funded, and the scope of those projects would depend upon the initiative of community groups or organizations working in partnership with local, state, and Indian Tribes; the National Park Service; and other federal agencies. 25% Match S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would require a 25% non-federal match. The 25% match should not be increased because the internees and sites are in a race against time. Most Japanese Americans who were evacuated and interned at these confinement sites are today in their 70's, 80's, or older. Unfortunately, we are losing too many of them every day. Their knowledge and experiences are critical to ensure historic accuracy. Also, Confinement and Ethnicity reported that the internment camp sites are, in varying degrees, deteriorating and in disrepair and must have federal support if their historic significances and lessons are to be preserved. A non-federal match higher than 25% would take longer to raise resulting in delaying the funding and completion of the preservation projects. The price for a higher match requirement would be loss of key persons and possibly physical structures at confinement sites. Accountability Controls There is no need to add accountability controls to S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. Existing Federal law and regulations create an accountability framework so that additional controls are not needed in this legislation. Grant applications would be submitted to the Department of Interior and evaluated by the National Park Service. Presumably, either DOI or NPS would issue grant guidance that would define what would be eligible for funding and set priorities for a given fiscal year if available funds are limited. The decisions as to which grants to approve and in what amount reside in federal officials. These decisions are within the judgment of the awarding official but must be made within the authority defined in the authorizing legislation and appropriations laws. In awarding the grant, there are grant conditions that are a part of the grant agreement, which forms a contract with the grantee. There are standard grant conditions, which have been issued by the Office of Management and Budget. For grants to local and states governments and Indian Tribes, the standard conditions are found in OMB Circular No. A- 102. For non-profit organizations, the standard conditions are found in OMB Circular No. A-110, 2 CFR Part 215. These circulars set forth pre- award, post-award, and after-the-award requirements. The post-award requirements set forth financial and program management, property, procurement, reports and records, and termination and enforcement standards. DOI has adopted these circulars by regulation, 43 CFR Part 12. In addition to standard grant conditions, a federal agency can impose special or additional grant conditions to meet the needs of the project being funded. Federal grants are subject to audit. The audit standards for state and local governments are found in OMB Circular A-128. The audit standards for non-profit organization are found in OMB Circular A-133. The DOI Inspector General's Office conducts audits of grants awarded by DOI or NPS. Any misappropriation of funds could subject the grantee to administrative, civil, and criminal penalties depending upon the circumstances. See Inspector General's Act, 5 USC App. 3, Sec. 4, False Claims Act, 31 USC Sec. 3729, and False Statements Act, 18 USC Sec. 1001. The standard grant conditions set forth the procedures that need to be followed to close out a grant when the project has been completed. There should be no difference between the accountability controls imposed on the grants that would be made under this legislation and any other grant made by the National Park Service or the federal government. Limited Authority to Acquire Real Property The Heritage Coalition has identified four confinement sites that would need to acquire real property as a part of their preservation projects. In recognition of this need, S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 provide very limited authority to authorize federal funds made available under this legislation to acquire real property. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would limit this authority with three restrictions. First, the property must be one of the four sites listed in the legislation. Second, the current owner must give written consent to the acquisition. Third, the use of the authority must be approved by the Secretary of Interior in the form of awarding a grant for this purpose. Amount of Authorization for Appropriations Finally, S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would authorize $38 million for confinement site preservation projects. This authorization for appropriations is small when compared to the tremendous cost that would be incurred if the same mistakes are not avoided in the future. At the same time, that authorization for appropriations amount is not large when compared to preserving the importance of the ``American Promise.'' This legislation would show the American public, other nations, and other peoples of the world that the United States is willing to admit and preserve its wrongs in ways to remind us that they must not be repeated. The Heritage Coalition asks that the importance of this legislative purpose be supported by maintaining the $38 million authorization for appropriations now provided in S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. CONCLUSION In sum, the Heritage Coalition supports S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 and urges this Subcommittee's favorable and expeditious consideration of this legislation. Again, the enactment of this legislation would preserve the historic lesson that government action founded in prejudice and discrimination cannot be justified and is not part of our democratic way of governing. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present this testimony. If you have questions, I am prepared to respond to them. Senator Thomas. Thank you very much and we appreciate your contribution. I just want to mention that we're very delighted to have a group of students from Wyoming here in a close up to participate in our hearings here today. Welcome. We're glad to have you here. I know both of you have special issues, particularly Senator Salazar. Would you care to make a comment at this point or ask questions. STATEMENT OF HON. KEN SALAZAR, U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO Senator Salazar. Thank you Chairman Thomas. I deferred my opening statement until this point, so I would like to give that opening statement now, please. Let me at the outset just thank you, Chairman Thomas and Senator Akaka for holding this very important hearing on S. 1510 and thank you, as well, for being one of our leaders in the Levin/Warner CODEL into Iraq and Pakistan and Afghanistan and I'm still recovering from that 50,000 mile journey with you. So thank you for being back on the job and focusing on the issues of our parks today. I want to talk briefly about S. 1510, the Rocky Mountain National Park Wilderness Area Act. I want to welcome Sue Masica from the National Park Service. I also want to thank the Rocky Mountain National Park Superintendent Vaughn Baker for his leadership on this issue. Congress established the Rocky Mountain National Park on January 26, 1915 on the vision of a man named Ennis Mills, one of our Nation's most committed naturalists whose love for the wild Rockies began in 1884 when, at the age of 14, he scaled Long's Peak. Mills saw in the high meadows and the alpine tundra, the ranches and the roaring waterfalls that span the continental divide, our Nation's most prized landscapes, a crown jewel deserving the protection as America's 10th national park. He said in years to come, when I am asleep beneath the pines, thousands of families will find rest and hope in this park. He was right. Thanks to the excellent work of the Park Service and its employees over the past 90 years, the 3.2 million visitors that come to Rocky Mountain each year experience the same wild lands and spectacular vistas that our ancestors enjoyed. Our job of protecting the wild character of Rocky Mountain National Park is not complete, however. In 1964 President Richard Nixon recommended that Congress designate 239,835 acres within the park as wilderness to ensure the continued preservation of the park's values. Though the Park Service has managed these lands to preserve these wilderness qualities, Congress has yet to act to designate the Rocky Mountain National Park wilderness area. Thanks to the tireless efforts of local communities and the dedicated protectors of the park, we now have a broadly support bill that is deserving of passage. S. 1510 and its companion in the House, H.R. 3193, add 249,339 acres, nearly 95 percent of the Rocky Mountain National Park to the Wilderness Preservation System. It does so in a way that does not affect private land owners, existing development or water rights. The boundaries for the wilderness area will ensure the continued use of the Grand River ditch and its right of way, the Colorado-Big Thompson project and its gauging stations, and lands owned by the St. Vrain and Left Hand water conservancy district, including the Copeland Reservoir. Visitors will still be able to drive the park roads, including Trial Ridge Road, which leads to the Continental Divide at 12,183 feet. And the bill does not affect areas where additional facilities and road work will improve park management and visitor services. Wilderness designation for the park will enhance the park's original mission by permanently protecting the values, vistas and wildlife that have enthralled visitors for generations. In elevating wilderness protections from policy to law we eliminate ambiguity for park managers and give them a clear direction on how to protect the resource. This added permanency to the protections on the park's values ensures that our children and grandchildren will be able to enjoy the same wild character that we enjoy today when we visit the park. Recently the bill sponsor and I have been working with local communities to make some additional modifications of the bill. I appreciate the assistance and support of the Park Service in this effort. I am submitting for the record an amendment to S. 1510 that will create a buffer zone around the town of Grand Lake for wildfire mitigation. The amendment also provides for a bicycle trail along the western edge of the park, provided the construction of the trail is consistent with the park's mission and makes a small increase in the size of the nearby Indian Peaks Wilderness Area. As one who feels it is critical that local communities participate in and support these efforts, I am proud that this bill, with these changes, has the endorsement of local communities and organizations including Larimer County, the town of Estes Park, Winter Park, the town of Grand Lake, the League of Women Voters, and the Headwaters Trail Alliance. The people in local communities understand that protection of the park's resources is a win-win for economic development and conservation. I thank them for their sincere efforts to craft a bill that accommodates the needs of all parties as well as possible. I look forward to and appreciate the Park Service's testimony and cooperation in this effort as we move forward. I would also like to briefly recognize Senator Inouye and Senator Akaka and their work on S. 1719 on which we will hear and have heard testimony today. This bill would protect the historic sites where Japanese-Americans were detained during World War II, including Camp Amache in southeastern Colorado. These internment sites recall a sad moment in American history and it is important that we do all we can to preserve them. We must never forget the sacrifices of the brave Americans who were confined at these sites. Thank you Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Akaka. Senator Thomas. You're very welcome. Thank you. Senator Akaka, I know you have a bill you're interested in. Would you care to make a comment or ask questions? Senator Akaka. Yes. Thank you. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. Thank you Senator Salazar for your remarks. I would like to ask a few questions of Sue Masica on S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, the Japanese-American internment sites. First of all, I understand that the Park Service generally opposes bills authorizing grants regardless of the subject area. Aside from that, however, is there any question as to whether this is an issue of national significance that merits Federal assistance? It would seem to me that the proposal such as this, to provide assistance and work cooperatively with outside groups who, in turn, will be responsible for the preservation and interpretation of these sites is preferable to the traditional Park Service role of Federal acquisition and management. And my question to you there, also, is do you agree? Ms. Masica. Senator Akaka, the position that the administration has taken on this bill is not driven by the significance question. It is the money issue and the overall budget situation and what we're dealing with trying to take care of the parks and programs that are already authorized, and struggling to appropriately manage and take care of in the budget environment we're operating within. Senator Akaka. Mr. Yamada, I don't really have any questions for you. I wonder if you have any response to the administration's concern with this proposal and what options remain if this legislation is not approved. Mr. Yamada. The framework that's contemplated in S. 1719 as well as H.R. 1492 is a--perhaps a different way of doing business for the National Park Service. As I understand the National Park Service, they focus primarily on sites that are seeking National Park Service unit designation or some form of formal recognition, such as landmark status. And we believe that the expertise, the technical assistance that's available through the Park Service is very important to developing these sites. So what we're asking of the Park Service is to create a different way of doing business with the public and in dealing with the potentially historic sites. The initiative contemplated by the statute is really driven by grassroots committees. It's driven by committees that are composed in part by internees. And it's important that they-- that they participate in defining the historical significance of the confinement sites. We don't see that to be the role of the Federal Government. This story should not be told by the Federal Government. It should be told by the people that were interned in the camps. If this legislation fails, the sad part about it is the vast majority of internees--I mean, we've lost many today, we're losing some every day, and we're at a critical stage, both from the standpoint of a race against time in terms of the age of the internees and the, I think, 1990 report that was done by the National Park Service says many of these sites are already in general disrepair. So without this legislation, I'm afraid that we will just lose this period of history. Senator Akaka. I am very concerned about that question. In case it's not passed, what will happen, what options do you have after that? As you pointed out, and as we know, it has been many years since this has taken place and we're trying to be certain that America and the people of the United States know that history and can even visit those places. And we look forward to support on this bill. As we all know, Senator Inouye has certainly been a huge part of this. I would tell you that Congressman Bill Thomas has been speaking with us about this and so there is this kind of support for H.R. 1492 and S. 1719. So I thank you very much for being here and I also want to thank Sue Masica for her statement as well. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Senator Thomas. Thank you Senator. We have a Hart Mountain area in Wyoming that's also involved in this, as you may know. Couple of questions about the Rocky Mountain Park Wilderness. Is there an interim management policy restricting the use of the Park Service lands which are recommended as unsuitable for wilderness designation? Will this change that? Ms. Masica. No sir. If they're determined to be unsuitable, they're not managed as wilderness, so this doesn't change that. Senator Thomas. Okay. That's good. Mr. Yamada, in these interim sites, the legislation authorizes $38 million to be used at the sites as a grant program. On what basis would these grants be awarded? Who has the authority for selecting the projects for funding and what are the priorities for funding? Mr. Yamada. Well the grants would be awarded by the National Park Service. There are potentially 52 sites that are eligible in terms of---- Senator Thomas. 50? Mr. Yamada. 52. Senator Thomas. 52. Mr. Yamada. Yes. There are 52 confinement sites that are identified in the National Park Service unit. We don't contemplate all 52 being eligible or interested in applying for grants. As I mentioned earlier, the grants and the projects themselves would be driven by community groups wanting to preserve a particular area or a particular site. Let's just take ten internment camps, which are the most well known. Each of the internment camps, I believe, are unique. Each camp has a different story to tell. And if you look at the layouts, I think, they probably look very, very similar because common blueprints were used to build the barracks and the mess hall and showers and that type of thing. But in terms of the stories that developed at each of the sites, each was different. And if you look at the assembly centers, the Department of Justice camps and some of the other secured areas, each of those has---- Senator Thomas. I guess my question really is what role, for example, does the Heritage Coalition have in the grant? Does the Department make these judgments as to where this money's spent, or, in other words, out of the $38 million, who specifically allocates the dollars? Mr. Yamada. The Secretary of the Interior. Senator Thomas. The Interior Department? Mr. Yamada. The Interior Department. That may be allocated to the National Park Service, but the ultimate decisions in terms of who gets the money and what projects will be funded, the statutes contemplate that the National Park Service would make those decisions. What we ask for is some daylight, some sunshine in the grant process so that there would be a consultation process with the community in terms of what we ask--what we're being awarded. Senator Thomas. Okay. Mr. Yamada. We would hope that there would be some communication and consultation in terms of the priorities that the National Park Service sets. But, again, the ultimate decision as to who gets the awards would be the National Park Service. Senator Thomas. All right. Thank you. I appreciate that. I grew up in Cody, Wyoming, so I'm pretty familiar with the Hart Mountain site and have been there a number of times and share with you the enthusiasm for maintaining that historic activity there. Ms. Masica, the Lewis and Clark Visitor's Center appropriation authorizes $150 thousand per year, not to exceed 10 years. How much is the park currently spending on these sites? Do you know? Ms. Masica. Senator, we spend about $200 thousand a year in mostly operational support. About 25 percent of that is associated with some of the facility's upkeep. It's a relatively new facility, so that's a modest amount at this point in time. Senator Thomas. So you contemplate some saving for the Park Service and does this---- Ms. Masica. We would. We wouldn't have the maintenance responsibility and the operational contribution under the terms of the legislation would be set at $150 thousand a year. If we had full operational responsibility it would be even more than that. So we do believe it would be cost-effective. Senator Thomas. A cost-saving bill, ooh. Barrett Farm, this site is a critical part of the story before. Why wasn't it included in the original boundary of the Minuteman National Historic Park? Ms. Masica. When the park was established in 1959 the property was in private ownership and was not available for acquisition. But it is, we believe, a critical part of the story and there now is a possibility that it could become available. Senator Thomas. Okay. I see. Well, obviously I don't need to express my support for the Jackson Wildlife Art Museum. I think that is one of the outstanding places in the country and I'm delighted---- Ms. Masica. It's a great facility, I've been there Mr. Chairman. Senator Thomas. And, also, the exchange in Teton Park. As some of you may understand, this area of the park was acquired after the original park area by the Rockefeller Foundation, basically, and there were in-holdings and gradually these in- holdings are being turned back over or purchased again by the parks. By the way, we're interested in working on that section that belongs to the State, making some trade with the Federal Government on that. So it could become part of the park again as well. The bill directs the Secretary not to transfer the parcel to any third parties in the future. Has this type of requirement been included in the transfers in any other parks or is this and will this provision protect the land in the future? Ms. Masica. Mr. Chairman, we checked and we can find no record of a similar provision in other legislation for other park units. But because of the language that would preclude the Secretary from disposing of any of that land, it would keep it in Federal ownership so the likelihood of future development is significantly diminished. Senator Thomas. I see. Well, that's great. We met this morning--yesterday, I guess, with the Director of the Teton Park in working on the transportation plan there and so on. The gentleman who's transferring this land was going to be here, but I don't believe he made it today. Sorry. Well thank you both for being here. I think these are important bills and we needed to have a hearing and we appreciate your being here and we'll move them forward. If any of the other members have questions, we'll have them submit them to you over the next day or so. So if not, thank you very much. Mr. Yamada. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Senator Thomas. The committee is adjourned. [Whereupon, at 3:21 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] APPENDIXES ---------- Appendix I Responses to Additional Questions ---------- Responses of Gerald Yamada to Questions From Senator Thomas Question 1. (S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, Japanese American Internment Sites): The bill states that the Secretary of the Interior would award grants in Consultation with the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition. a. How is the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition structured? b. Who belongs to it, how are the members selected, and how frequently do they meet? c. Mr. Yamada, I see from your title that you are the National Coordinator of the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition. How is the National Coordinator selected and how long a term does the National Coordinator serve? Answer. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 provide that the Secretary of the Interior, ``in consultation with the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition, shall make grants. . . .'' At the close of the hearing, the Chairman mentioned that he found the ``shall make grants'' language to be different from other grant authorities given to the National Park Service (``NPS''). The Chairman noted that the language for such authority generally provides that NPS ``may make grants.'' Before responding to the Subcommittee's questions, I want to address why the ``shall make grants'' language must be kept even if it is different from other NPS authorities. Because NPS units and non-NPS units would be eligible for funding under this legislation, the ``shall'' language is used to keep a level playing field among all eligible confinement sites. As signaled by its opposition to this legislation, NPS has shown a preference for NPS units. The ``may make grants'' language could be interpreted to allow NPS to fund only NPS units or to use the funds for purposes that are not intended by this legislation such as paying for on-going operations at NPS units. The language ``in consultation with the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition'' language is a compromise made with NPS on the House bill. Congressman William Thomas originally introduced this legislation as H.R. 360, which would have created a federal advisory commission composed of 21 members. NPS objected to the creation of this federal advisory committee. The Heritage Coalition's position is that the internees have earned the right and the Japanese American community should be given the opportunity to shape how the Japanese American internment experience is preserved. We are asking for an open process and are not wedded to a certain form of participation such as a federal advisory committee. As one of the concessions made to NPS, Congressman Thomas deleted the Advisory Commission to Preserve World War II Historic Confinement Sites and reintroduced his legislation as H.R. 1492 with the ``in consultation with the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition'' language included. This language was suggested by the House subcommittee as a compromise. One reason why the Heritage Coalition would be given this consultation role is that it would not be a potential grant applicant. By contrast, each of the member organizations would be eligible to submit a grant application. The Heritage Coalition believes that it is important to have an open process in implementing S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. The need for this openness is demonstrated by the recent closing of the More Perfect Union Exhibit within the Smithsonian Institution's Museum of American History. The Congress provided appropriated funds to the Museum of American History to create a permanent exhibit on the Japanese American internment experience in World War II. The exhibit was called the More Perfect Union. In 2005, the Museum of American History unilaterally and, without any apparent consultation with anyone in the Japanese American community, closed the exhibit. Members of the Japanese American community were not informed until after the exhibit was taken down and artifacts returned to lenders so the exhibit could not be reassembled. It is this type of unilateral decision making that the consultation language in S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 hopes to avoid. The Heritage Coalition has 28 organization members. The members are the Go For Broke Educational Foundation, Go For Broke National Veterans Association, Japanese American Citizens League; Japanese American National Museum; Japanese American Veterans Association; National Asian Pacific American Bar Association; National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium; National Japanese American Historical Society; National Japanese American Memorial Foundation; National Japanese American Veterans Council; Organization of Chinese Americans; Amache Preservation Society; Committee to Change ``Jap'' Road, TX; Densho: The Japanese American Legacy Project, WA; Denver Central Optimists; Colorado River Indian Tribes; Friends of California Civil Liberties Public Education Program; Gila Reunion Committee; Heart Mountain Wyoming Foundation; Japanese American Service Committee, Chicago, IL; Japanese American Historical Society, San Diego, CA; Japanese Cultural Center of Hawai'i; Life Interrupted Program (Arkansas Camps); Nisei Farmers League, CA; Poston Restoration Project; Topaz Museum Board, UT; and Tule Lake Preservation Committee. To join the Heritage Coalition, organizations adopted the attached resolution * or its equivalent. A member organization can withdraw at any time. To date, no member organization has withdrawn from the Heritage Coalition. No organization that has adopted the resolution to join the Heritage Coalition has been denied participation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * The resolution and a letter to Congressman Thomas have been retained in subcommittee files. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I communicate with all Heritage Coalition member contact persons regularly by sending them monthly updates by email to keep them informed on the progress of our legislative efforts and to ask for their comments on any submissions to Congress such as my testimony before the Senate National Parks Subcommittee and this letter. I organized the Heritage Coalition and have been coordinating our efforts in support of S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. I volunteered to serve as the Heritage Coalition's National Coordinator on a pro bono basis for two reasons. First, I have a strong interest in seeing S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 enacted and properly implemented since I was born at the Jerome War Relocation Authority Center. Second, my career experiences with the federal government qualifies me to carry out the needed duties for this position. Early in my federal career as the Assistant General Counsel for Grants with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, I provided legal services to EPA's 30-plus grant programs including the annual multi-billion dollar wastewater construction grant program and the then newly enacted Superfund trust fund. As EPA's Associate General Counsel for Grants, Contracts, and General Law, I provided legal services for EPA contracts and general law matters such as Federal Advisory Committee management and public participation in regulatory development matters. As EPA's Principal Deputy General Counsel for 13 years, I provided legal services for statutory interpretation, appropriations, and program management matters. Throughout my career, I have been substantially involved in numerous legislative initiatives. Question 2. (S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, Japanese American Internment Sites): Who on the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition would be responsible for making grant recommendations? Answer. S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 envision a ``consultation'' role for the Heritage Coalition. Consultation would cast the Heritage Coalition in the role of facilitating the opportunity for member organizations to review and comment on the implementation of the legislation. The Heritage Coalition would not filter out comments submitted by member organizations. The consultation role would need to be further refined in discussions with NPS after the legislation is enacted. At a minimum, I would expect that NPS would look to the Heritage Coalition to facilitate the opportunity for member organizations to review and comment on NPS' implementation of this legislation in terms of program guidance and funding levels and on grant applications. Question 3. (S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, Japanese American Internment Sites): The legislation authorizes $38 million for use at former Japanese American Internment sites through a grant program. On what basis would these grants be awarded, who would have authority for selecting projects for funding, and what are some of the highest priority items for funding? Answer. The challenge is how to best preserve the whole Japanese American experience during World War II as a comprehensive story. Although NPS two internment camp sites are NPS units and two others have been recently recognized as National Historic Landmark sites, each of internment camp sites have an unique story to tell. Furthermore, there are other confinement sites other than internment camp sites that have historically significant parts in this story. To meet this challenge, grants should be awarded based on the initiative and creativity of the applicant, how the project would fit into a comprehensive preservation of this period of history, and the historic significance of the confinement site. The Secretary of the Interior would be the authorized government official who would make the final decision on which grants to fund. In our letter of July 30, 2004 to Congressman Thomas, the Heritage Coalition outlines projects that were submitted by Internment Camp committees. A copy of this letter and budget estimates are attached describing the types of grant projects that could be funded under S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. It is important to note that these projects are not all-inclusive and that these projects and estimates may have changed since July 2004 or may change in the future. Furthermore, our letter to Congressman Thomas included descriptions of only a very limited number of projects at confinement sites that are not one of the 10 Internment Camp sites. Question 4. (S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, Japanese American Internment Sites): Other than the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition, are you aware of any organizations that should have a role in reviewing grant applications and making recommendations? Answer. The Heritage Coalition consists of 28 member organizations. Consultation between the NPS and the Heritage Coalition would include the opportunity for participation by all of the Heritage Coalition's member organizations. The Heritage Coalition represents only its member organizations. If NPS wants also to consult with other organizations or persons or directly with Heritage Coalition member organizations, S. 1719 and H.R. 1492 would not preclude NPS from doing so. ______ Responses of Fran Mainella to Questions From Senator Thomas Question 1. (S. 1510, Rocky Mountain Wilderness): How would wilderness designation change the current management of the lands identified in this bill? Answer. In 1964, Congress designated Rocky Mountain National Park as a wilderness study area. In 1974, President Nixon recommended to Congress 239,835 acres for immediate designation and 5,169 acres for potential designation as wilderness in the park. In accordance with NPS policy, all parklands that have been formally recommended for wilderness are managed to preserve wilderness resources and character until the legislative process of wilderness designation has been completed. Present road, water, and utility corridors, and all developed areas, are excluded from recommended wilderness. Wilderness designation would not alter any current visitor activities or access within Rocky Mountain National Park and would allow visitors to utilize the park in the same ways and locations that they presently enjoy. Question 2. (S. 1510, Rocky Mountain Wilderness): Will S. 1510 affect private property rights in or outside of the park? Answer. No. All private lands and interests have been excluded from the proposed wilderness boundaries. Question 3. (S. 1510, Rocky Mountain Wilderness): How would the wilderness designation affect water rights? Answer. Federal reserved water rights for park purposes are not an issue related to wilderness designation. Water rights for the park have been adjudicated through the State of Colorado water courts. Consequently, no water rights claims for wilderness purposes are needed or desired by the NPS. Question 4. (S. 1510, Rocky Mountain Wilderness): The Wilderness Act of 1964 requires the Park Service to study their lands to determine [they are suitable for wilderness. As of December 31, 2004, the Park Service is protecting approximately 26 million acres, 2 million of which are in Wyoming, as wilderness while it waits for action from the Department of Interior or Congress on Park Service recommendations. Is this interim management policy restricting use of Park Service lands which are recommended as unsuitable for wilderness designation? Answer. Those lands that were determined to be unsuitable for wilderness designation have been managed in the same fashion as other non-wilderness lands in a particular park. At Rocky Mountain National Park for example, over the last five years on lands that were not recommended for wilderness designation, the park has made significant improvements in frontcountry visitor facilities and access to the park's backcountry. Examples include reconstruction of the Bear Lake Road (parking, trailheads), renovation/restoration of the former Hidden Valley ski area (snow play area, access point for backcountry skiing, snowshoeing), and relocation of the Twin Owls trailhead (access to popular hiking/climbing areas). Question 5. (S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, Japanese American Internment Sites): The legislation authorizes $38 million for use at former Japanese American Internment sites through a grant program. On what basis would these grants be awarded, who would have authority for selecting projects for funding, and what are some of the highest priority items for funding? Answer. Since NPS would be setting up a new program to administer these grants, we cannot say at this point what the basis would be for warding the grants. It seems likely that the grants would be awarded in a similar manner to other grant programs, such as Save America's Treasures, where organizations are invited to submit applications for projects that are then evaluated on the basis of a scoring system developed by NPS. Both bills require consultation with the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition in making the grants, so that consultation would be part of the process as well. The bills give authority to the Secretary of the Interior for making the grants, so the decision about which projects are funded would rest with the Secretary or with whomever the Secretary delegates that authority. As for projects that would be the highest priority for funding, that, too, would depend on decisions that would be made as the program is established. Question 6. (S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, Japanese American Internment Sites): What is the role of Japanese American National Heritage Coalition in the grant program? Would they be an advisory or decision- making body? Answer. The legislation specifies that the Secretary shall makes grants ``in consultation with the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition,'' so the organization would be consulted in the decisions about recipients of the grants. The coalition would be an advisory body, not a decision-making body. Question 7. (S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, Japanese American Internment Sites): Other than the Japanese American National Heritage Coalition, are you aware of any organizations that should have a role in reviewing grant applications and making recommendations? Answer. It is unusual to give any private organization a role in reviewing and making recommendations about grants in a grant-making program administered by the NPS. Question 8. (S. 1957, Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail Visitor Center): I see this bill will authorize appropriations of $150,000 per year for a period not to exceed 10 years. a. How much is the National Park Service currently spending to operate the center and is this a cost effective solution? Answer. The Midwest Region currently subsidizes the Center for about $200,000 per year. This helps pay salaries, utilities, routine maintenance, and other needed expenses. This is not an effective solution to the operation and management of the Center. By owning the Center, the Missouri River Basin Lewis and Clark Interpretative Trail and Visitor Center Foundation, Inc. could collect entrance and special use fees to supplement donations for operations and maintenance. Question 8b. Will this management transfer save the NPS money in the long run? Answer. Yes. The conveyance of these parcels would result in a savings to the NPS and allow future funds to be used to assist with other trail partnerships and perhaps contingency issues in other national park units of the Midwest Region. Question 8c. If so, how much savings do you estimate? Answer. We currently subsidize the Center at about $200,000 per year, however, the total projected annual operating cost per year to operate the Center is about $547,000. At an annual subsidy of $150,000 a year provided under the bill, the savings would be approximately $50,000 a year or $500,000 for the 10-year period. Question 9. (S. 2034 and H.R. 394, Colonel James Barrett Farm Study): The arms hidden at Colonel James Barrett's farm sparked the Battle of Lexington and Concord, the first battle of the American Revolutionary War. If this site is such a critical part of the story of Lexington and Concord, why was it not included in the original boundary for Minuteman National Historic Park? Answer. The farm was considered for inclusion when Minute Man National Historical Park was established in 1959, but at that time, the farm was in private ownership and unavailable for acquisition. It already has been found to be nationally significant and it is a key resource of the story of the beginning of the Revolutionary War. Question 10. (S. 2252, Jackson Wildlife Art Museum): Are any other major museums in the United States dedicated exclusively to wildlife art? How do the collections of wildlife art at the Museum compare with other collections in the United States? Answer. The NPS does not keep records on private museums throughout the United States. We are aware of some other museums that focus on wildlife are such as the Ward Museum of Wildfowl Art, in Salisbury, Maryland, which states on its website that it is home to the premier collection of wildfowl art, including decoy carving, and the Leigh Yawkey Woodson Art Museum in Wausau, Wisconsin, which each year hosts a juried ``Birds in Art'' Exhibition that has been in existence for more than 30 years. We do not have an ability to compare collections of private museums through the United States. Question 11. S. 2403, Grand Teton): The Grand Teton National Park Act of 1950 provides that no further extension or establishment of national parks or monuments in Wyoming may be undertaken except by express authorization of the Congress. a. Has development around Grand Teton National Park impacted the park? If so, what is the greatest type of impact and what is the best solution? Answer. Impacts from development occur both on private lands adjacent to the park, and on inholdings within the park. Currently, there are over 130 tracts of non-federal land within the park, most of which are in private ownership. These properties may be developed in accordance with the Teton County Land Development Regulations, and the NPS does not have regulatory authority over the development. Development of these lands could have significant impacts on the scenic views for which the park is renowned, on visitor enjoyment, and on wildlife. Acquisition of inholdings from willing sellers, or protecting them through the use of conservation easements, is a high priority for the park, but is dependent on the availability of land acquisition funds, or the generosity of donors. Question 11b. This bill directs the Secretary not to transfer the parcel to any third parties in the future without the express authorization from Congress. Has this type of requirement been included for land transfers at any other park units? If so, where? Would this provision help protect the land from future development? Answer. The NPS can find no record of a similar provision in legislation for any other park units. Because this provision ensures that, without Congressional authorization, the land will remain in federal ownership, the likelihood of future development is diminished. Responses of Fran Mainella to Questions From Senator Salazar Question 1. Will the passage of S. 1510 in any way detract from the National Park Service's ability to protect the resources of the Park? Answer. No. In 1964 Congress designated Rocky Mountain National Park as a wilderness study area. In 1974 President Nixon recommended to Congress 239,835 acres for immediate designation and 5,169 acres for potential designation as wilderness in the park. In accordance with NPS policy, all lands within Rocky Mountain National Park that have been formally recommended for wilderness are being managed to preserve wilderness resources and character until the legislative process of wilderness designation has been completed. Passage of S. 1510 will not alter the way the park is currently being managed, and will enhance the NPS's ability to protect park resources by defining the wilderness boundaries and affording the legal protections of the Wilderness Act. Question 2. Will the passage of S. 1510 limit the ability of the Park Service to maintain and improve its existing visitor facilities, including roads? Answer. No. Present road, water, and utility corridors, and all developed areas, are excluded from recommended wilderness. Wilderness designation would not alter any current visitor activities or access within Rocky Mountain National Park, and would allow visitors to utilize the park in the same ways and locations that they presently enjoy. S. 1510 would not limit the ability of the National Park Service to maintain or improve existing visitor facilities, including roads. Question 3. Will the passage of S. 1510 in any way limit access to, or maintenance of, existing water resource facilities in the Park? Answer. No. Water resource facilities in the park include the Grand River Ditch, the Harbison Ditch, Specimen Ditch, Lily Lake, Copeland Lake, and the Alva B. Adams Tunnel. The East Portal and the West Portal of the Alva B. Adams Tunnel are located outside the park. All the other aforementioned facilities have been excluded from the recommended wilderness boundaries. Question 4. Can I have your assurance that, if S. 1510 passes with the amendment that I have submitted for the record, the National Park Service will work quickly and closely with local communities and interested parties in the process of authorizing construction of the East Shore Bike Trail? Answer. Yes. If S. 1510 were enacted, the NPS would work quickly and closely with local communities to initiate the planning process for the bike trail. As a federal agency, the NPS must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) before authorizing a non- motorized bike trail. Congress passed NEPA in 1969 to allow, among other things, public input into the decision making for the use of public resources. Two of the major tenets of NEPA are its emphasis on a full and open evaluation of environmental costs and benefits before actions are taken that may impact the environment, and the development and critical evaluation of alternative courses of action, including the ``No Action'' alternative. Section 102 of NEPA requires a statement of possible environmental effects to be released to the public and other agencies for review and comment. A decision on the bike trail will be made after analysis of the environmental effects and consideration of public input. Appendix II Additional Material Submitted for the Record ---------- Grand County Board of Commissioners, Hot Sulphur Springs, CO, August 2, 2005. Hon. Mark Udall, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC. Hon. Ken Salazar, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Udall and Senator Salazar: Please accept this letter as support for the designation for Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP) for a wilderness area subject to the following conditions: 1. The buffer areas set forth from the Town of Grand Lake's letter to Congressman Udall dated June 29, 2005, and attached hereto as Exhibit A, should be applied 2. RMNP should designate areas for future expansion of parking, as visitor numbers will only increase and parking is essential for a quality visit. 3. Snowmobiling on the routes currently designated in the Park should be maintained. 4. If the Grand Ditch were to breach in the future, repairs should be allowed as well as sedimentation issues caused by this sort of action need to be immediately addressed. Again, Grand County supports the designation of RMNP as a wilderness area if the above restrictions can be applied. Sincerely, James L. Newberry, Chairman. Nancy Stuart, Commissioner. Duane E. Dailey, Commissioner. ______ Town of Grand Lake, Grand Lake, CO, June 29, 2005. Hon. Mark Udall, Congressman, Minturn, CO. Dear Congressman Udall: The Town of Grand Lake held a Public Hearing on the proposed Wilderness Designation for Rocky Mountain National Park on June 13, 2005 to gather public comment. At the meeting, a clear majority of the citizens in attendance were in favor of such designation in order to preserve and manage the Park as wilderness. The Board of Trustees voted unanimously in favor of such designation for the Park with the following requests: 1. A one-fourth to one-half mile buffer be excluded from the designation around the border of Grand Lake. The buffer is requested for fire mitigation and future development possibilities that are unknown at this time with the private property that borders the Park. 2. A one-eighth mile buffer, including the East Shore Trail and the Range Meadows Trail be excluded from the designation along the east shore of Shadow Mountain Lake and Lake Granby extending from the northern boundary of the Park near Grand Lake to the southern boundary of the Park for the Granby to Grand Lake trail. Headwaters Trails Alliance (HTA) has identified this section of the Park (East Shore Trail) as part of the future Granby to Grand Laker non-motorized trail. HTA's mission is to connect each Town in Grand County with non-motorized trails. Currently HTA has completed the Winter Park to Fraser and the Fraser to Granby trails. A planning grant has been awarded to HTA to plan the Granby to Grand Lake trail and initial analysis of possible routes indicates that the East Shore Trail, which lies mostly on National Park Service property, is the ideal candidate for the upper section of the Granby-to-Grand Lake Trail. Thank you for allowing the community of Grand Lake to comment on the Wilderness Designation for Rocky Mountain National Park. Sincerely, Judy M. Burke, Mayor. ______ International Mountain Bicycling Association, Boulder, CO, March 30, 2006. Senator Craig Thomas, Chair, Senator Daniel Akaka, Ranking Member, Senate Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on National Parks, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Thomas and Ranking Member Akaka: On behalf of the International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA) and our member Colorado bicycle clubs, I thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in support of S. 1510, the Rocky Mountain National Park Wilderness Act. IMBA was founded in 1988 and leads the national and worldwide mountain bicycling communities through a network of 32,000 individual members and more than 550 affiliated clubs. More than 39 million Americans participated in singletrack bicycling and 7.6 million were ``enthusiasts'' of the sport in 2004, according to the Outdoor Industry Association. IMBA teaches sustainable trailbuilding techniques and has become a leader in trail design, construction, and maintenance. We promote responsible riding, volunteer trailwork and cooperation among trail user groups and land managers. IMBA members and affiliated clubs perform close to one million hours of volunteer trailwork and advocacy annually, and are outstanding partners for federal, state and local land managers. IMBA has formal partnership agreements with the USDA Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and US Army Corps of Engineers. Just last year, we signed an official agreement with the National Park Service (NPS) to develop more mountain biking opportunities at NPS units across the country. Currently more than 40 national parks have mountain biking on dirt roads and trails. In Colorado, IMBA has approximately 10,000 supporters through our 2,500 individual members and 50 affiliated bike clubs. More than 30 bicycle retailers are also affiliated with IMBA. Colorado is a hub of the bicycle industry, with leaders such as Pearl Izumi, Catalyst Communications, Yeti Bicycles, Moots Bicycles, Bicycle Village, Criterion Cycles, Koobi Saddles, SRAM/Rock Shox, USA Cycling, Colorado Cyclist, Peak Bar, Carmichael Training Systems, Velo News, and many others residing in the state. Bicycling is a billion-dollar industry in the state, according to the Colorado Department of Transportation. Thousands of tourists travel to Colorado each year to ride their mountain bikes and experience trails that have become world famous. Tourists flock to Durango, Crested Butte, Telluride, Steamboat Springs, Fruita, Grand Junction and many other Colorado communities to explore the outdoors by bicycle. Colorado tourism communities take trail access very seriously as they know that cyclists spend money on lodging, gas, restaurants, and in local stores. In 2004, Colorado ranked sixth in the nation for singletrack bicycling participants, with 22 percent of the population-- 730,940 people--involved in the sport (Outdoor Industry Association). As you know, federal agency interpretation of the 1964 Wilderness Act bans bicycle access. Every time a congressional Wilderness bill is proposed, cyclists risk losing access to trails they have ridden for years. Further, they lose the potential to build new trails or expand bicycling access in these lands in perpetuity. IMBA members take Wilderness bills very seriously and want to be at the table to help craft land protection legislation. For this reason, bicyclists seek modifications of Wilderness proposals that will protect the land while continuing to allow this quiet, low-impact, muscle-powered recreation on existing trails. When conflict exists, IMBA suggests boundary adjustments, non-Wilderness trail corridors, grandfathering in our existing use, or other land protections such as National Protection Areas or National Conservation areas. Senator Salazar has been very inclusive of IMBA and mountain bicyclists in the discussions of the proposed Wilderness boundaries as has Congressman Udall in the House. We are pleased to see the bill includes a boundary that allows for the possible inclusion of bicycles on the East Shore Trail. This trail will provide a critical connector for the Headwaters Trail Alliance (HTA) in their master trails plan to connect Grand County with 70 miles of shared-use, non-motorized trails. The Granby to Grand Lake trail is the next leg of their master plan and the best alignment is on the western edge of Rocky Mountain National Park and provide spectacular views of Grand Lake, Shadow Mountain Reservoir, and Lake Granby. This trail will be a beautiful community amenity allowing non-motorized trail users to travel near the shore. We are confident that the East Shore Trail will be a draw for trails-based tourism and give families, community members and tourists a resource that will be highly valued for many years to come. There are 359 miles of dirt trails open to hikers in the National Park but only paved roads open to cyclists. These paved roads have very narrow shoulders and park officials encourage cycling early in the morning to avoid conflict with vehicles. IMBA encourages the committee to do more to get visitors out of their cars and experience the park by bicycle. The 16-20 mile East Shore Trail would do just that and only remove about 500 acres of land from the approximately 250,000 acre proposal. In 1974, the National Park Service determined many of these areas to be appropriate for Wilderness and classified them as Wilderness Study Areas (WSA). NPS management will not allow the consideration of bicycles in these areas until Congress acts to decide the fate of these lands. Enacting S. 1510 would allow the community and the federal land agencies to begin the environmental process to consider opening the East Shore Trail to bicycles. We look forward to working with the National Park Service and the USDA Forest Service on starting this process. Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments on this important legislation. IMBA looks forward to working with the committee and Senator Salazar and urges your favorable consideration. Sincerely, Jenn Dice, IMBA Government Affairs Director. ______ Town of Grand Lake, Grand Lake, CO, March 30, 2006. Hon. Ken Salazar, Senator, 400 Rood Avenue, Ste 213, Grand Junction, CO. Dear Senator Salazar: The Grand Lake Board of Trustees would like to congratulate you on creating the wilderness designation for Rocky Mountain National Park. Your time and efforts are truly appreciated. The protective mechanisms being put into place to preserve nearly 250,000 acres of wilderness will bring enjoyment to future generations. By the same token, the East Shore Trail Area, excluded from the recommended Wilderness Area for the proposed Headwaters Trails Alliance trail corridor, will help to ensure that visitors to the area and locals alike will have the opportunity to access and appreciate such pristine wilderness. We believe that both of these measures will be looked upon as forward-thinking when reflected upon through the eyes of history. The Town is grateful for the opportunity you gave us to be heard; the efforts that you made to include our concerns won't soon be forgotten by the citizens of Grand County. Our two major concerns have been addressed by this proposed legislation: the buffer around the Town for fire mitigation and growth, and the preservation of a Headwaters Trails Alliance trail corridor along the east side of Shadow Mountain Lake that, hopefully, will one day allow for bicycles to ride along this beautiful part of Colorado. The Grand Lake Board of Trustees supports the Rocky Mountain National Park Wilderness Act (S. 1510) and hopes that it can be adopted by Congress expeditiously. For the Board of Trustees, Judy M. Burke, Mayor. ______ Headwaters Trails Alliance, March 31, 2006. Senator Ken Salazar, 702 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Senator Salazar: Headwaters Trails Alliance would like to take this opportunity to express our support for the Rocky Mountain National Park Wilderness Bill, H.R. 4935, and its companion resolution in the United States Senate. Headwaters Trails Alliance is a non-profit organization dedicated to the planning, construction, and maintenance of trails for all trail users in Grand County, Colorado. The members of the Alliance are the Town of Winter Park, Town of Fraser, Town of Granby, Town of Hot Sulphur Springs, Town of Grand Lake, Grand County, Fraser Valley Metropolitan Recreation District, Grand Lake Metropolitan Recreation District, and Fraser Valley Partnership for Trails. We greatly appreciate the efforts of both Congressman Udall's and Senator Salazar's staff on this issue. We feel that the bill as it stands will provide Rocky Mountain National Park with the long-term protection it deserves, while also providing opportunities for community-based trail construction initiatives along Shadow Mountain Lake and Lake Granby. Thank you for all of your hard work on this resolution, and for your consideration of the local communities' needs throughout this process. Sincerely, Dawn Packard, Executive Director. ______ Town of Winter Park, Winter Park, CO, April 3, 2006. Senator Ken Salazar, 702 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Senator Salazar: The Town of Winter Park is writing to express our support for the S. 1510: Rocky Mountain National Park Wilderness Act. As you know, the Town is a funding member of the Headwater Trails Alliance and we support the mission of that organization. We appreciate your efforts in designating nearly 250,000 acres of wilderness that also provides an opportunity for an important trail corridor. We appreciate your efforts in working closely with the local governments of Grand County on this issue. Sincerely, Harold N. Teverbaugh, Mayor. ______ Larimer County Board of County Commissioners, Fort Collins, CO, April 4, 2006. Dear Senators: If you have had the exhilarating experience of visiting Rocky Mountain National Park, then you understand the reasons why ``wilderness'' designation for the park is most appropriate and greatly needed. Rocky Mountain National Park is a gem and a national treasure. Most Coloradans believe the park already has wilderness designation, because that is how it has been managed to date. However, to protect this magical place for future generations, Rocky Mountain National Parks deserves the wilderness designation reserved for our most pristine habitats. With that designation, the park will remain a refuge for wildlife and humans alike, for centuries to come. Wilderness areas have a distinct benefit to tourism and to the economic health of the region and state. Both the Larimer County Board of Commissioners and the Estes Park Board of Trustees have recognized those benefits in advocating for the protection of the park under the banner of ``wilderness.'' It is my particular hope that we preserve the best attributes of our state and our nation for the enjoyment of future generations, who will need this treasured park for respite, even more than we do today. Rocky Mountain National Park is feeling the unintended impacts of today's society, but will survive and prosper through federal designation as a protected wilderness area. Please preserve Rocky Mountain National Park through wilderness designation. Sincerely, Karen Wagner, Larimer County Commissioner. ______ Town of Estes Park, Estes Park, CO, April 4, 2006. Senator Craig Thomas, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington DC. Dear Senator Thomas: The Town of Estes Park and surrounding community supports the proposed Wilderness designation for Rocky Mountain National Park. This position was reached after a briefing and public hearing in Estes Park attended by approximately 100 area residents. At the hearing, nearly two dozen citizens spoke in favor of the designation while no one opposed the measure. Following the briefing, the Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees passed Resolution #17-05 in support of Wilderness designation for Rocky. I have included a copy of the resolution for your review.* --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * The resolution has been retained in subcommittee files. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, John Baudek, Mayor. ______ Statement of The Wilderness Society; Colorado Environmental Coalition; Colorado Mountain Club; and Southern Rockies Conservation Alliance Thank you very much for your leadership toward securing wilderness protection for the remarkable scenic and ecological wonders of Rocky Mountain National Park. We strongly support that protection and endorse your revised legislation to that end. While we have reservations about withholding wilderness protection for the portion of the park along the East Shore Trail, we consider your approach to that question, as described in your revised legislation, to be essentially fair. We are pleased to continue working with you to clarify provisions affecting that area, and we are confident that those last details can be worked out. Again, we support your pending legislation and encourage Congress to act on it promptly. ______ Statement of S. Floyd Mori, Director, Pubic Policy, Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am appreciative of being given the opportunity of submitting this written testimony to the National Parks Subcommittee on S. 1719 and H.R. 1492. My name is Floyd Mori. I am the Director of Public Policy and immediate past national president of the Japanese American Citizens League, also known as the JACL. JACL is the oldest and largest Asian American human and civil rights organization in the nation. We have a membership of over 20,000 and are represented by 113 chapters throughout the country. Our mission is to challenge discrimination against any citizen of this country and to protect civil liberties of our community. JACL has long been associated with the issues surrounding World war II internment of Japanese Americans. JACL was the lead organization advocating for the passage of H.R. 442 in 1988, which provided redress for all living internees and recognized the folly of the WRA program by giving each an apology from the President of the United States. The latter is extremely important as it was critical that this nation have the courage to recognize its mistakes of the past and in so doing, serve a lesson to the future. In this regard, I believe it is very important that we continue as a nation to learn from our past by maintaining the symbols of our history. Hallowed names like Gettysburg, Little Big Horn, Valley Forge, Sutter's Fort, and so many others serve as invaluable lessons from our past and speak of both the courage and the tragedies of that past. History has little meaning if it does not teach us about ourselves and about those who have sacrificed for the greater good of the nation. If we were to allow the existence of the ten world war II internment sites to be removed from our collective memory, we only do the future a disservice. There are Americans today who do riot believe that the United States government could possibly have interned its own citizens, do not believe that concentration camps existed within the borders of the United States, and equally do not believe that an entire segment of our population, though innocent, could possibly have been imprisoned solely on the basis of race. These internment sites, Manzanar, Topaz, Minidoka, Heart Mountain, Tule Lake, Gile River, Poston, Amache, Rohwer, Jerome and what is left of them today stand as an important and powerful lesson for this nation. If we choose to remove all evidence of that experience from this land, it would be akin to denying it ever happened. We are better than that. We are greater than that as a nation. The Japanese American Citizens League is in strong support of S. 1719 and H.R. 1492, and we urge the members of this committee to consider the profound implications of this legislation. We urge your approval of this measure to ensure that this World War II internments camps stand forever as a lesson for our future. Thank you very much for allowing us to submit this statement.