U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

72–434 PDF 2012

S. HRG. 112–225 

A CALL TO ACTION REPORT OF THE 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

TO

CONSIDER A RECENTLY RELEASED REPORT BY THE NATIONAL PARK 

SERVICE: A CALL TO ACTION: PREPARING FOR A SECOND CENTURY 

OF STEWARDSHIP AND ENGAGEMENT 

SEPTEMBER 21, 2011 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

DANIEL COATS, Indiana 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

MCKIE CAMPBELL, Republican Staff Director 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

MARK UDALL, Colorado, Chairman 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

DANIEL COATS, Indiana 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

JEFF BINGAMAN and LISA MURKOWSKI are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Jarvis, Jonathan B., Director, National Park Service, Department of the 

Interior .................................................................................................................. 4 

Morris, Jason, Executive Vice President, NatureBridge, San Francisco, CA ..... 12 

Mulholland, Neil J., President and CEO, National Park Foundation ................. 7 

Udall, Hon. Mark, U.S. Senator from Colorado .................................................... 1 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 33 

APPENDIX II 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 41 

(1) 

A CALL TO ACTION REPORT OF THE 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m. in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark Udall presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM COLORADO 

Senator UDALL. Good afternoon. The Subcommittee on National 

Parks will come to order. Welcome gentlemen, I’m very much looking forward to the discussion that we’re going to have on this important hearing to discuss the build up to the 100-year anniversary. 

That’s truly 100 years, anniversary of the founding of the National Park Service and our National Park system. Specifically 

we’re here to review a report that the Park Service issued last 

month entitled, A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century 

of Stewardship and Engagement. It identifies 36 separate actions 

the Park Service plans to undertake in preparation for the agency’s 

centennial in 2016. 

Over the past 2 decades there have been a number of reports 

that have attempted to provide guidance to the Park Service. These 

range from the Park Service’s so-called Vail Agenda issued 20 

years ago to the Bush Administration’s Centennial Challenge Initiative 5 years ago which focused on raising billions to promote specific programs in the parks. Last year the National Park’s Conservation Association convened the National Park’s Second Century 

Commission which was co-chaired by former Senators Howard 

Baker and Bennett Johnston, provide recommendations to the Park 

Service as it moves forward in its second century of operation. 

I don’t have to tell the Director of the Park Service that a tremendous amount of time and professional expertise has been invested in all of these reports. Our challenge is to see Congress 

work with the Park Service to use these recommendations to make 

sure that the services in our Park System are fully prepared for the 

next 100 years. But while we’re here let’s not forget what the National Park System has become over the first and the last 100 

years. 
2 

From the creation of the first park, Yellowstone in 1872 to today 

our National Parks have helped us better understand our history 

and protect special landscapes. The National Parks unite us. They 

are a place for people all across the globe to come together to recreate, to find adventure or calm for peaceful contemplation. 

For me, personally, National Parks have helped shape who I am 

today. Many people are familiar with my father, Congressman Mo 

Udall and my Uncle, Interior Secretary Stewart Udall and their 

work to promote conservation across the country especially through 

the Park Service. But in this subcommittee and in my passion for 

conservation generally, I often think frankly more about my mother 

and how she was the real conservationist in our family. 

She was a Coloradan. She raised 6 kids. She was a member I 

found out later in life of the NRA. She was a sharp shooter, a 

marksman, an angler and an equestrian. She encouraged my 5 

brothers and sisters and me to get outside, to get dirt under our 

fingernails, to look at and also tackle the steepest climbs, to strap 

on our skis on the coldest days and on the coldest mountains. Her 

influence prevailed in many ways. 

That passion for the outdoors is why I campaigned to be able to 

chair this important subcommittee. That’s why one of my top priorities for this Congress and the coming years will be to build upon 

what has been an incredibly successful Federal agency. Make it 

even better. 

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention as a parent myself some of my 

favorite times with my own children, Jed and Tess, have been in 

our National Parks. They’re young adults now and old enough to 

pursue their own outdoor adventures although they do invite me 

along every once in a while. But it has me thinking about who will 

the next generation of enthusiasts be? What better antidote to the 

childhood obesity crisis is there than to get another generation of 

kids away from video games and outside in our parks. I strongly 

believe that without developing a solid relationship with America’s 

youth, our National Park system will suffer. 

That’s why I’ve started an initiative this year to encourage kids 

and their parents to get involved in outdoor activities in Colorado. 

But our enthusiasm for the parks is not without challenges. We all 

know the challenges the Park Service and the Federal Government, 

as a whole, face. 

A common topic in this subcommittee is the maintenance backlog 

that the Park Service and many other public land agencies face. 

That backlog is going to continue to grow and the Federal Government is going to have to make difficult decisions about where to invest limited Federal dollars. So I’m interested in exploring the endowment idea that is in this important report. 

Today I’m looking forward to hearing about this report in detail 

from Jon Jarvis, the Director of the National Park Service, specifically how he sees its recommendations being implemented and to 

what extent this newest report will build on or differs from the earlier efforts. In announcing this report Director Jarvis highlighted 

how the future successes of the National Park Service rely on efforts from partners. 
3 

We’ve also invited 2 organizations with a long and established 

history of cooperative work to benefit our National Parks to hear 

their views as well. 

The first organization is the National Park Foundation, the congressionally chartered, philanthropic partner of the National Park 

Service. 

The second is NatureBridge, which for 40 years has worked with 

the Park Service to educate and bring school aged children to our 

National Parks. 

I look forward to hearing from each of our 3 witnesses today. If 

Senator Paul was able to join us, he’s the subcommittee’s ranking 

member, we’ll recognize him for any statement that he’d like to 

make. His timing is impeccable. Senator Paul, I can filibuster for 

a minute or 2 if you’d like or I can recognize you. 

Senator PAUL. I’m ready if you are ready. 

Thank you for holding these hearings. I don’t have an opening 

statement. But I look forward to hearing the testimony. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Paul. 

Director Jarvis, let’s turn to you and we’ll in turn hear from Mr. 

Mulholland, who has deep Colorado roots and Mr. Morris as well. 

So welcome, gentlemen. 

Director Jarvis. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Mark Udall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL, U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

Good afternoon. Today, the Subcommittee on National Parks is holding a hearing 

to discuss the buildup to the 100 year anniversary of the founding of the National 

Park Service and our National Park system. 

Specifically, we are here to review a report that the Park Service issued last 

month, entitled ‘‘A Call to Action: Preparing for the Second Century of Stewardship 

and Engagement.’’ It identifies 36 separate actions the Park Service plans to undertake in preparation for the agency’s centennial in 2016. 

Over the past two decades, there have been a number of reports that have attempted to provide guidance to the Park Service. These range from the Park Service’s so-called ‘‘Vail Agenda’’, issued 20 years ago, to the Bush Administration’s 

‘‘Centennial Challenge’’ initiative five years ago, which focused on raising billions 

to promote specific programs in the Parks. 

And last year the National Parks Conservation Association convened the National 

Parks Second Century Commission, which was co-chaired by former Senators Howard Baker and Bennett Johnston, to provide recommendations to the Park Service 

as it moves toward its second century of operation. 

A tremendous amount of time and professional expertise has been invested in 

these reports. Our challenge is to see Congress work with the Park Service to use 

these recommendations to make sure that the Service and our Park system are fully 

prepared for the next 100 years. 

Let’s not forget what the National Park System has become over the last 100 

years. 

From the creation of the first park—Yellowstone—in 1872 to today, our national 

parks have helped us better understand our history and protect special landscapes. 

The national parks unite us. They are a place for people from all across the globe 

to come together to recreate, to find adventure—or calm for peaceful contemplation. 

For me personally, National Parks have helped shaped who I am today. Many 

people are familiar with my father, Congressman Mo Udall, and my uncle, Interior 

Secretary Stewart Udall, and their work to promote conservation across the country—especially through the Park Service. 

But in this Subcommittee, and my passion for conservation generally, I often 

think about my mother and how she was the real conservationist in our family. She 

was a Coloradan, she raised six kids. She was a member of the NRA, a sharpshooter, a marksman, an angler, and an equestrian. And she encouraged my five 

brothers and sisters and me to get outside. . .to feel the dust in our hands, tackle 

the steepest climbs, and ski the coldest mountains. Her influence prevailed in many 
4 

ways. That passion for the outdoors is why I sought to become chairman of this Subcommittee. And that is why one of my top priorities for this Congress and the coming years will be to build upon what has been an incredibly successful federal agency and make it even better. 

As a parent myself, some of my favorite times with my own children, Jed and 

Tess, have been in our national parks. They’re grown now, and old enough to pursue 

their own outdoor adventures, but it has me thinking about who the next generation 

of enthusiasts will be. . . What better antidote to the childhood obesity crisis is 

there than to get another generation of kids away from video games and outside 

in our parks? I strongly believe that without developing a solid relationship with 

America’s youth, our Park system will suffer. That’s why I’ve started with an initiative this year to encourage parents to get their kids involved in outdoor activities 

in Colorado. 

But enthusiasm for the parks is not without challenges. We all know the challenges the Park Service—and the federal government as a whole—face. 

A common topic in this subcommittee is the maintenance backlog that the Park 

Service—and many other public lands agencies—faces. That backlog is going to continue to grow and the federal government is going to have to make difficult decisions about where to invest limited federal dollars. So I’m interested in exploring 

the endowment idea that is in this report. 

Today, I am looking forward to hearing about this report in detail from Jon Jarvis, the Director of the National Park Service, specifically how he sees its recommendations being implemented and to what extent this newest report will build 

on or differs from the earlier efforts. In announcing this report, Director Jarvis highlighted how the future success of the National Park Service will rely on efforts from 

park partners. We have also invited two organizations with a long and established 

history of cooperative work to benefit our national parks, to hear their views. 

The first organization is the National Park Foundation, the congressionally-chartered philanthropic partner of the National Park Service, and the second is 

NatureBridge, which for 40 years has worked with the Park Service to educate and 

bring school-aged children to our national parks. 

I look forward to hearing from our three witnesses in a few minutes. First, I’d 

like to recognize Senator Paul, the subcommittee’s ranking member, for any statement he’d like to make. 

STATEMENT OF JONATHAN B. JARVIS, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL 

PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. JARVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Paul. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss A 

Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and 

Engagement. 

We launched A Call to Action in a town hall meeting in Ford’s 

Theatre and broadcast it to the National Park Service employees 

and partners on August 25th, which was our 95th anniversary. 

This document and its actions were developed by National Park 

Service career employees as a road map to help us and our partners prepare for our second 100 years of service to the American 

people. A Call to Action is both a rededication of our mission and 

a recognition that we need to strategically integrate what we do in 

parks with our programs that offer historic preservation, recreation 

and conservation assistance to communities. 

The document is built around 4 themes. 

The first is connecting people to parks. That involves a continuum of engaging recreational, educational, volunteer and work 

experiences as well as outdoor activities to really engage diverse 

audiences. 

The second is advancing the National Park Service’s education 

mission through collaborative means that will help develop American values, civic engagement and citizen stewardship. We will do 

this in part through using social media, leading edge technologies 
5 

to capture public interest and working directly with many of our 

partners, such as NatureBridge, who is with us here today. 

Nine actions are identified to achieve thematic goals for preserving America’s special places. These include modernization of 

historic preservation technologies and engaging the power of philanthropy as well as addressing critical infrastructure needs. 

Finally the theme of enhancing professional and organizational 

excellence will be accomplished by meeting recruitment and retention goals of a diverse work force and the development of an innovative, collaborative and creative work force. 

Across A Call to Action there are 36 action items. They call upon 

our employees and our partners to choose. For instance one action 

calls for expanding opportunities for students to directly experience 

National Parks through transportation support provided by our 

Park partners. 

Another action will encourage our visitors to make healthy lifestyle choices when they purchase healthy, sustainably, locally produced and reasonably priced food options in our concession operations. 

Additional action items are called for that will connect people to 

parks, including local ones in their own communities. 

A Call to Action challenges us to create youth employment pathways to connect new and diverse generations to parks. 

To reach 25 percent of the Nation’s K through 12 school population through virtual field trips, teacher training, online resources 

and actual visits to the parks. 

Foster civic dialog about the stories of the civil rights movement 

found within the National Parks through a series of special events 

that commemorate significantly the 50th anniversary of the civil 

rights movement. 

Demonstrate how historic structures can be sustainable and part 

of an economic vitality of rural and urban communities. Develop a $1,000,000,000 billion, second century endowment 

campaign with the National Park Foundation and our other partners. 

Each of the senior executives in the National Park Service have 

stepped up to champion an action item. I’ve asked that every park, 

every program and every office identify those actions that they will 

work on and encouraged them to work with their local and national 

partners like our friends groups, our cooperating associations and 

concessioners in this effort. 

A key component to this Call to Action is that it is built upon 

the expectation that there will be little or no new money, new Federal money anyway, in the National Park Service in the near future. With so many things that divide us as a Nation we see the 

National Parks as a rallying point that can unite every American 

in a sense of wonder, patriotism and pride in our country. One of 

the National Park Service’s most important responsibilities is to invite fellow citizens to get to know these places that they own, discover how the National Park Service can help revitalize their 

neighborhoods and join in the stewardship of America’s greatest 

places. 

A Call to Action challenges our employees and partners to commit to concrete actions that advance the mission of the service. 
6 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I’d be pleased to 

answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jarvis follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JONATHAN B. JARVIS, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to 

appear before you today to discuss ‘‘A Call to Action—Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement.’’ 

A Call to Action was announced at a Town Hall meeting at historic Ford’s Theatre 

and broadcast to National Park Service employees Servicewide on August 25, 

2011—our 95th anniversary. It was developed by National Park Service career employees as a roadmap to help us—and our partners—prepare for our second hundred 

years of service to the American people. It is online at www.nps.gov/CallToAction. 

A Call to Action is both a rededication to our mission and a recognition that we 

need to strategically integrate what we do in parks with our programs that offer 

historic preservation, recreation, and conservation assistance to communities. The 

plan builds on three previous reports—America’s Great Outdoors: A Promise to Future Generations (2011); the National Parks Second Century Commission Report, 

Advancing the National Park Idea (2009); and The Future of America’s National 

Parks (the Centennial Report, 2007). 

A Call to Action is built around four themes. Connecting People to Parks involves 

a continuum of engaging recreational, educational, volunteer, and work experiences 

and outdoor activities to engage diverse communities. Advancing the NPS Education 

Mission through collaborative means will develop American values, civic engagement, and citizen stewardship. We will do this, in part, through use of social media 

and leading-edge technologies to capture public interest. Environmental literacy programs offered by organizations such as NatureBridge further this theme. Nine actions are identified to achieve thematic goals for Preserving America’s Special 

Places. These include modernization of historic preservation technologies and engaging the power of philanthropy to provide legacy support for the NPS both nationwide and at the individual park level. Finally, the theme of Enhancing Professional 

and Organizational Excellence will be accomplished by meeting goals such as recruitment and retention of a diverse workforce and development of an innovative, 

collaborative and creative workforce. 

Across the themes, A Call to Action lays out 36 specific action items that NPS 

employees and partners will undertake. For instance, one action calls for expanding 

opportunities for 100,000 students to directly experience national parks through 

transportation support provided by the National Park Foundation and other park 

partners. Another action will encourage park visitors to make healthy lifestyle 

choices through choices of healthy, sustainably produced, and reasonably priced food 

options in parks. 

Additional actions are called for that will connect people to parks, including the 

local ones in their own communities. These actions will advance the educational 

mission of the NPS and continue our efforts to preserve and interpret America’s special places. A Call to Action challenges us to: 

• Create a pathway to youth employment in the NPS to connect new, diverse generations to parks. 

• Reach 25 percent of the nation’s K-12 school population annually through virtual field trips, teacher training, online resources, and visits to parks. 

• Reach new audiences with digital media and engage in conversations with all 

Americans. 

• Create a new generation of citizen scientists and future stewards with fun and 

educational biodiversity discovery activities in at least 100 parks. 

• Foster civic dialogue about the stories of the civil rights movement found within 

the parks through a series of special events to commemorate significant 50th 

anniversaries of the civil rights movement. 

• Demonstrate, using modern historic preservation techniques and technologies, 

how historic structures can be sustainable and part of the economic vitality of 

rural and urban communities. 

• Develop a $1 billion second-century endowment campaign with the National 

Park Foundation and other NPS partners. 

Each of our Senior Executives have stepped up to champion an action item and 

I have asked every park, program, and office to identify those action items that they 

will work on, and encouraged them to engage local and national partners like the 
7 

National Park Foundation, friends groups, cooperating associations, and concessioners in this effort. 

We have also created an intranet site that allows employees across the Service 

to learn from each other, share great ideas, and collaborate on success using tools 

like discussion forums and a blog. 

It is also important to note that A Call to Action assumes no new funding. We 

are committed to focusing our efforts to accomplish our objectives within our budget, 

or in some cases, with the help of our amazing partners. 

With so many things that divide us as a nation, we see the national parks as a 

rallying point that can unite every American in a sense of wonder and pride in our 

country. One of the National Park Service’s most important responsibilities is to invite our 307 million fellow citizens to get to know these places that they own, discover how the National Park Service can help them revitalize their neighborhoods, 

and to join in the stewardship of America’s greatest places. A Call to Action challenges our employees and partners to commit to concrete actions that advance the 

mission of the Service. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to respond to any 

questions you or the other members of the subcommittee may have. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Director Jarvis. 

Mr. Mulholland, welcome to Washington. It’s good to see you 

here. 

STATEMENT OF NEIL J. MULHOLLAND, PRESIDENT AND CEO, 

NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. Great to see you. 

Mr. Chairman, Senator Paul, thank you for the privilege of appearing before you today. The National Park Foundation commends 

the subcommittee for its commitment to help preserve the National 

Park Service, prepare the National Park Service for the opportunities and challenges of the next century and for highlighting the role 

that partnerships and philanthropy will play in the future. 

Established by Congress in 1967 the National Park Foundation 

is the philanthropic and promotional partner of the National Park 

Service. Through our grant making programs and public outreach 

the Foundation works with Park Service leaders to conserve natural resources, engage diverse audiences, promote health and 

recreation in the great outdoors and educate our children about our 

shared American history in the places where it actually happened. 

In the previous 5 years the Foundation has contributed over 

$123 million to the Park Service in grants, program support and 

contributive goods. In addition the Foundation is leading the $30 

million, private fundraising campaign to build the Flight 93 National Memorial which was dedicated earlier this month. Unlike 

other congressionally chartered, non-profits established to support 

land management agencies, the Foundation receives no Federal appropriations. 

This year the Foundation initiated a strategic planning process 

to increase alignment between our organization and the Park Service. The process has helped us refine our mission of enriching 

America’s National Parks and programs through private support. 

Developed simultaneously the Foundation’s strategic planning and 

the development of the Park Service Call to Action report had significant overlap. 

The Foundation was pleased to provide thoughts and ideas to the 

Park Service in the development of a Call to Action. I’m energized 

by the opportunities it presents to expand public/private partnerships to protect and preserve our National Parks. 
8 

A Call to Action envisions a Park Service that works closely with 

partners to improve visitor services, but also strengthen local 

economies, create jobs and support conservation in American communities. The Foundation embraces this vision and believes that 

park philanthropy is a vital element of securing the second century 

for parks. Annually the National Park Foundation and National 

Park Friends groups grant over $100 million in private support to 

National Parks. 

The Foundation’s new strategic vision aligns with many of Call 

to Action goals. By example, the report calls for reaching 25 percent of the Nation’s K to 12 school population annually so that they 

may learn about our parks. Like our friends at NatureBridge, the 

Foundation has a great passion for the education of our youth. The 

Foundation’s park stewards program gives high school teachers 

and students the opportunity to build a deeper connection to their 

National Parks through service learning projects that will leverage 

our parks as classrooms. Today over 4,000 students have directly 

benefited from park stewards program and more than 100,000 National Park visitors have been positively impacted by the work of 

the park steward students. 

Through a Call to Action, the Park Service highlighted an important mechanism for inviting all Americans to continue their support of our National Parks, an endowment. A second century National Park endowment will require the Foundation, the Park Service and local friends groups to work collaboratively to assess the 

feasibility of a coordinated friend fundraising campaign. It also provides a challenge to think beyond the traditional definition of an 

endowment. Instead consider the potential of an umbrella structure 

encompassing a range of restricted and unrestricted funds, capital 

campaigns and fund raising initiatives. The Park Service and the 

Foundation are now beginning that conversation, planning to due 

diligence necessary to successfully launch such an effort. Our organizations will explore how to create a portfolio of national and local 

park endowments that will complement rather than compete 

against one another. 

A second century endowment is a legacy for the current generation and a benefit for future generations. Those who lead the Foundation, friends groups and the Park Service realize that the actions 

we take today in establishing an endowment will be a long term 

strategy to position the parks for future success. 

A second century endowment has the potential to benefit from 

the transfer of trillions of dollars of wealth from baby boomers to 

their children and the causes they are passionate about. Our National Parks have demonstrated for generations that they are worthy of philanthropy. They have used this private support to become 

centers of education, science, history, recreation and conservation. 

A second century endowment or a constellation of national, local 

endowments ensures continuity in programming during periods of 

financial uncertainty. Yet we recognize that an endowment and all 

other forms of private park philanthropy will only be successful 

when donors have faith that their government is doing everything 

they can to ensure that these special places remain preserved and 

protected for future generations. 
9 

Partnership in philanthropy must be central to the future of our 

National Parks. We are confident this can be accomplished in a 

manner that enables national and local partners to be successful 

and fulfill our shared mission with the Park Service. Through a 

Call to Action the Park Service is committed to transform itself to 

meet the needs of the American people in the next century. As its 

congressionally established partner, the National Park Foundation 

is committed to securing the private resources necessary to help 

the Park Service achieve these goals. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Paul, for your ongoing support of America’s National Parks. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mulholland follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF NEIL J. MULHOLLAND, PRESIDENT AND CEO, NATIONAL

PARK FOUNDATION

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today. The National Park Foundation (‘‘Foundation’’) commends this Subcommittee for its commitment to help prepare the National Park 

Service (‘‘NPS’’) for the challenges and opportunities of the next century and for 

highlighting the role that partnerships and philanthropy will play in this future. 

Established by Congress in 1967 (PL 90-209), the Foundation serves as the philanthropic and promotional arm of the NPS. Through its grant-making programs and 

public outreach, the Foundation works with NPS leaders in Washington, D.C. and 

in parks across the country to fund conservation and sustainability efforts, engage 

diverse communities, promote health and recreation in the great outdoors and educate our citizens about our shared history in the places where it happened. In the previous five years (FY2006-2010) the Foundation has provided $95 million in grants and program support and more than $28 million in contributed goods and 

services to the NPS, a total contribution of over $123 million. Unlike other Congressionally chartered nonprofits established to support land management agencies, the 

Foundation receives no federal appropriations. The Foundation is governed by a citizen Board of Directors appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. Additionally, the 

Secretary and the NPS Director serve ex officio as Chairman and Secretary of the 

Board, respectively. The Secretary of the Interior and the NPS Director have always 

been invaluable resources to the Board as it charts a course for our organization. 

This year, the Foundation initiated a strategic planning process with the goal to 

increase alignment between our organization and the NPS. The process has helped 

the Foundation’s Board and staff to refine our mission of enriching America’s national parks and programs through private support, safeguarding our heritage and 

inspiring generations of national park enthusiasts. The Foundation’s strategic planning process and the development of the NPS A Call To Action report had significant overlap and both organizations benefited from the simultaneous and parallel 

conversations about how best to adapt our long standing organizations to this new 

moment in our nation’s history. 

The Foundation was pleased to provide thoughts and ideas to the NPS in its development of A Call To Action, and I am energized by the opportunities it presents 

to expand public-private partnerships to protect and preserve our national parks. In 

my testimony, I will highlight how the Foundation will assist the NPS in finding 

creative and innovative ways to meet the goals outlined in A Call To Action, including its call for an endowment for the national parks, and the role of park philanthropy in the next century. 

PHILANTHROPY AND THE NATIONAL PARKS

Since Yellowstone National Park was established in 1872, private philanthropy 

has been at the core of the preservation, protection, and improvement of America’s 

national parks, and will continue to be essential in securing their future. 

Private philanthropy helped create individual national parks, as well as the National Park Service itself. The earliest philanthropic acts spanned the country from 

California to Maine. In 1907, William and Elizabeth Thatcher Kent donated land 

that later became Muir Woods National Monument in California. In June 1916, a 

group of private citizens donated to the federal government the land for Sieur de 

Monts National Monument in Maine, the very same land that would one day grow 

and develop into Acadia National Park. Stephen Mather himself, the first director 

of the NPS, contributed from his personal fortune to support parks and their admin-
10 

istration both before and after he led the agency. In addition to land purchases, 

Mather enlisted several western railroads to join him in contributing $48,000 to 

publish the National Parks Portfolio, which promoted national parks and helped 

persuade Congress to create the NPS in 1916. 

These examples from, what are today, the icons of our national park system necessitate the recognition of park philanthropy as a vital element of the second century for parks. Annually, the National Park Foundation and Friends Groups leverage the federal government’s necessary investment in national parks to grant over 

$100 million in private support to the parks. With the help of these nonprofit park 

partners, the Foundation will build on this rich tradition and help achieve the goals 

of A Call To Action with public and private interests working in tandem. 

IMPLEMENTING A CALL TO ACTION 

A Call To Action envisions a National Park Service that works closely with park 

partners to improve the services they provide within our parks, but also to strengthen local economies, create jobs and support conservation in American communities. 

Park partners like the Foundation are asked to work hand in hand with NPS employees to advance a shared vision toward the NPS centennial in 2016. 

The Foundation looks forward to working with the NPS to help convene national 

park Friends Groups, cooperating associations and other nonprofit park partners in 

preserving, interpreting and restoring natural, historic and cultural resources in the 

NPS and local communities. It will work to enable park partners, educational institutions and youth to use national parks as places of learning and thereby deepen 

our knowledge and understanding of the natural world, science, art, history and 

other academic disciplines. The Foundation will seek to collaborate with non-NPS 

land managers and park partners to conserve urban, rural and landscape-scale resources that connect these neighboring lands to parks. 

The work of the Foundation and its new strategic vision align with many A Call 

To Action goals including: 

• Provide multiple ways for children to learn about the national parks and what 

they reveal about nature, the nation’s history, and issues central to our civic 

life. 

The Foundation and NPS are looking to leverage the NPS Teacher-RangerTeacher program with the Foundation’s Park Stewards, a grant program that 

gives high school teachers and students the opportunity to build a deeper connection and sense of stewardship for their national parks through personal engagement and service learning projects. To date, over 4,000 students have directly benefited from the Park Stewards program; an estimated 7,000 have indirectly benefited; and more than 100,000 national park visitors have also benefited from materials and activities produced by the Park Stewards students. 

• Expand opportunities for students to directly experience national parks, where 

natural and historic settings inspire powerful learning. To achieve this we will 

provide transportation support for 100,000 students each year to visit national 

parks. 

Early next year, the Foundation will offer a grant program aimed at helping 

parks provide transportation for youth in their local area to engage with park 

programs, educational efforts and service opportunities. 

• Foster civic dialogue about the stories of the civil rights movement found within 

the parks. 

The African American Experience Fund of the National Park Foundation is 

working with NPS Interpretation and Education to plan numerous special 

events between 2012 and 2015 to commemorate the 50th anniversaries of major 

national civil rights events including the 1963 March on Washington, enactment 

of the Civil Rights Act, enactment of the Voting Rights and other key events 

that are memorialized in our parks. 

• Lead the way in protecting natural darkness as a precious resource and create 

a model for dark sky protection. 

Since 2005, the Foundation’s Best Lighting Practices grant program has worked 

to reduce light pollution in several national parks and we are working with corporate partners like Musco Lighting to expand that commitment. 

• Create a new basis for NPS resource management to inform policy, planning, 

and management decisions and establish the NPS as a leader in addressing the 

impacts of climate change on protected areas around the world. 
11 

The Foundation has committed to fund the re-examination of the Leopold Report to help the NPS enhance its national resource science and stewardship in 

the next century. 

Each of these goals presents the private sector with an opportunity to provide financial, technical, scientific and educational support and expertise to help the NPS 

meet and exceed its expectations. 

A SECOND CENTURY ENDOWMENT

America’s national parks are owned by all its citizens. As the history of park philanthropy suggests, these citizens have supported their parks through their tax dollars and their charitable contributions. In A Call To Action, NPS has highlighted 

one important mechanism for inviting Americans to continue that support: an endowment. The action item states: 

• Engage the power of philanthropy to provide legacy support for the NPS both 

nationwide and at the individual park level. To do so we will develop a $1 billion National Park Service second century endowment campaign working in 

partnership with the National Park Foundation and national park Friends 

Groups. 

This goal presents an opportunity for the Foundation to work collaboratively with 

the NPS and Friends Groups to assess the feasibility of a substantial endowment 

campaign. It also provides a challenge to think beyond the traditional definition of 

an endowment and instead consider the potential for an umbrella for a range of restricted and unrestricted funds, capital campaigns and fundraising initiatives. The 

NPS and the Foundation are now beginning the conversations, planning and due 

diligence necessary to launch such an effort. Our organizations will explore how to 

create a movement in support of national and local parks endowments that would 

complement, rather than compete against, one another. 

The Foundation supports the NPS goal of creating for future generations a long 

lasting source of support to ensure that our parks are protected. An endowment, or 

constellation of national and local endowments, ensures continuity in programming 

during periods of financial uncertainty and changing times. As a supplemental financial support to normal appropriations, an endowment would provide the national 

parks with a perpetual funding stream that would allow park leadership to thoroughly plan and implement multi-year programs. 

A second century endowment is a legacy for the current generation and a benefit 

for future generations. Those who lead the Foundation, Friends Groups and the 

NPS realize that the actions they take today in establishing an endowment will be 

a long-term strategy to position the parks for future success. An endowment will 

provide donors with a maximum return on their investment. In a sense, their gifts 

to our national parks live on in perpetuity, contributing to the purpose for which 

they were intended. 

A second century endowment, and the other forms of private philanthropy that 

help support the NPS, will only be successful when donors have faith that their government is doing everything it can to ensure these special places will remain preserved and protected for future generations. 

A second century endowment has the opportunity to benefit from the substantial 

transfer of trillions of dollars of wealth from baby boomers to their children, causes 

and charities. Our national parks have demonstrated for generations that they are 

worthy of philanthropy, and they have used this private support collaboratively with 

their partners to become centers of education, science, history, recreation and conservation. 

CONCLUSION

The state of our parks at the Centennial Celebration in 2016 will say a lot about 

our priorities as a nation. Through A Call To Action, the NPS has pledged its own 

commitment to transform itself to meet the needs of the American people in its next 

century. As its Congressionally established partner, the Foundation is ready to help 

the NPS achieve its goals. 

Opportunities for partnership and philanthropy must be central to the future of 

our national parks. The Foundation is confident this can be accomplished in a manner that empowers local partners to be successful and helps national programs extend the benefits of philanthropy to all parks. Partnership and philanthropy are 

critical to create new opportunities for more of the public to relate to their parks 

and to generate the creativity and innovation the NPS recognizes in A Call To Action that it will need. 
12 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your ongoing support of America’s national parks 

and for allowing me the opportunity to report on the important role philanthropy 

plays in supporting the noble mission of the NPS. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Mulholland. 

Mr. Morris, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF JASON MORRIS, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, 

NATUREBRIDGE, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 

Mr. MORRIS. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, thank you for 

the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee to offer our perspective on the National Park Service Call to Action report. 

NatureBridge commends Director Jarvis and the National Park 

Service for developing an action oriented report that brings together the best thinking from a decade of reports and commissions. 

As the report explains there are benefits to schools, communities 

and to society at large. I will focus on the greater good with reflections on these 3 key issues. 

First, how can we provide meaningful National Park experiences 

for 25 percent of America’s schoolchildren? 

Second, how can we create the next generation of stewards, career professionals and engage citizens? 

Third, how can we overcome the current barriers to partnerships? 

As a 40 year partner of the National Park service, NatureBridge 

is uniquely suited to help the Park Service succeed in its goals for 

the next century. Our mission is to inspire personal connections to 

the natural world and responsible actions to sustain it. We bring 

more than 40,000 young people and teachers to the parks annually 

through our residential field science education programs. We are 

proud to have introduced almost one million students to the wonder of our National Parks, but there are 52 million school aged 

children in this country. 

So how do we reach more students? NatureBridge supports 

changes that will connect our schools to our Nation’s best classrooms, National Parks. We have 3 suggestions. 

First, continue working across the Administration. With the Associate Director for Interpretation and Education, the National 

Park Service can collaborate with counterparts at the Department 

of Education. We commend this outreach and ask that partners be 

engaged to deliver programs that are well aligned with cross departmental goals. 

Second, work across congressional committees. Our Federal education laws, specifically the Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act should recognize organizations like ours as eligible partners so 

that schools can use the funding they receive for National Park 

based school programs. 

Third, ensure that private sector resources are leveraged. We applaud the National Park Foundation on the initiative to fund transportation and to create an endowment. While educational opportunities will compel philanthropic support, the private sector cannot 

do this alone. 

All of these suggestions are focused on introducing more students 

to National Parks. But how do we extend these experiences to cre-
13 

ate the next generation of engaged citizens and career professionals. 

I have an example to share. Virginia Delgado made her first connections to the natural world as a sixth grader at NatureBridge’s 

Golden Gate Program. Virginia later became a team mentor and 

taught at our summer education programs. In her own words, ‘‘At 

NatureBridge, I got hooked.’’ She is now pursuing a career in environmental policy so more students from underserved communities 

can have this opportunity. 

So how do we all join Virginia’s cause? We must work as a community of program providers to set young people on the path to become stewards in their communities and in their careers. With the 

action item on the Class of 2016, we recommend the Park Service 

do just that. We recognize that the National Park Service cannot 

accomplish actions alone and that partnerships are essential. However, the barriers to successful partnerships are significant. 

So how do we overcome these barriers? We fully support the National Park Service goals in the enhancing the professional and organizational excellence section of the report. Unfortunately those 

goals are not evident in the proposed actions. 

We recommend the following. 

First, the Career Academy. Partners should be engaged in 

trainings that focus on how non-profits and government agencies 

operate. We recommend that partnerships be one of the 12 fields 

in the Career Academy. 

Second, cooperative agreements. We are not vendors and considerations around streamlining cooperative agreements for program 

partners should not be lumped in with those of vendors. 

We have some additional recommendations on partnerships that 

we have included for the record. 

We look forward to working with the National Park Service and 

other non-profit partners to overcome these barriers. We are confident that we can move forward together. NatureBridge is inspired 

to do more everyday by the beaming faces of the students we serve 

and by the teachers who organize bake sales so that their students 

can experience our programs in National Parks. 

We know that our programs and our talented educators are only 

part of the equation. The other part is the power of place embodied 

in our National Parks. We hear the Call to Action everyday and we 

are ready to answer it. 

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, this concludes my prepared remarks. I’d be happy to answer any questions that you 

have. Thank you for considering our views. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Morris follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JASON MORRIS, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, 

NATUREBRIDGE, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee 

to provide our perspective on the National Park Service’s recently released report 

‘‘A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement.’’ 

NatureBridge commends Director Jarvis and the National Park Service for developing an action-oriented report that brings together the best thinking from a decade 

of reports and Commissions. The report does not start over but instead focuses on 

moving forward through concrete actions. I recognize that many of these actions are 

appropriately focused on preparing the agency for a second century. As the opening 

section of the report explains, there are broader benefits that will come from under-
14 

taking these benefits to schools, communities, and society at large. I will focus on 

that greater good with reflections on three questions: 

1. how to provide meaningful national park experiences for 25% of America’s 

K-12 schoolchildren 

2. how to create the next generation of stewards and career professionals 

3. how to overcome the current barriers to partnerships 

About Us 

Founded in 1971 in Yosemite National Park, NatureBridge has been working in 

partnership with the National Park Service for 40 years. Ours is a history of mutually beneficial collaboration. Indeed, we are excited about the impact we have on the 

lives of youth through our partnership with the National Park Service. 

NatureBridge employees 180 people in three states; primarily field educators who 

deliver what we have dubbed the ‘‘Wow! moments’’ for the students and teachers 

who participate in our programs. Our mission is to inspire personal connections to 

the natural world and responsible actions to sustain it. We currently operate residential campuses in Yosemite National Park; Golden Gate National Recreation 

Area; Olympic National Park; and Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation 

Area. In 2012 we will be conducting a demonstration program at Prince William 

Forest Park in Virginia and we are excited to be working with the National Park 

Service on this new venture. And, since 2009, NatureBridge in conjunction with the 

National Military Family Association has hosted military families participating in 

the Operation Purple Healing Adventures program, giving veterans and their families a chance to reconnect. 

We serve more than 40,000 participants annually through field science, youth 

leadership and teacher training programs. We are a fee-based program and we 

fundraise to provide scholarships to 35% of our participants. In looking at the past 

three years alone, NatureBridge has served schools from 19 states including 49 of 

the 53 California congressional districts, all 9 of the Washington congressional districts, and all 5 of the Oregon congressional districts. As we prepare to celebrate 

our 40th anniversary, we are approaching one million students served through our 

programs. 

While we are proud of one million, there are 52 million school-aged children in 

this country who would benefit from programs like ours. We are one of about a 

dozen residential environmental education programs operating in national parks 

and our combined best efforts are just scratching the surface. 

So, how do we scale to provide meaningful national park experiences for 25% of 

America’s school children as called for in the report? 

We recognize that there are several strategies contemplated in this action item 

but there are some efforts that will benefit all proven program providers. Whether 

you are talking about field-science programs like ours or history and civics in our 

national parks, NatureBridge supports making systemic changes that will connect 

our schools to our national parks, our ‘‘nation’s best classrooms.’’ We have three suggestions on this front. 

1. Continue working across the Administration.—With the first-ever Associate 

Director for Interpretation & Education, the National Park Service is able to 

engage counterparts at the Department of Education. We commend this outreach and ask that partners be engaged where they can deliver, extend, or implement programs that are well-aligned with cross-departmental goals. 

2. Work across Congressional committees.—As we work to reauthorize our 

federal education laws, specifically the Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act, we should provide clarity so that organizations like ours are recognized as 

‘‘eligible partners’’ under the law. This will ensure that schools can use funding 

that they receive for national park-based student programs and teacher training. Other legislative efforts include Senator Reed’s ‘‘No Child Left Inside’’ legislation. We would like to thank members of the Committee who have co-sponsored that legislation. 

3. Ensure that existing resources are preserved.—There is modest funding, 

$10 million per year, for environmental education programs in the EPA budget. 

We must ensure that this funding is not cut as contemplated in the House Interior Appropriations bill. We applaud the collaboration with the National Park 

Foundation and other partners to provide transportation support for 100,000 

students each year. This is desperately needed as transportation costs are a significant barrier for many schools. We also support the $1 billion endowment 

campaign and feel certain that educational opportunities will compel philanthropic support. However, the private sector cannot do its part only to see the 
15 

modest amount of federal funding for environmental education cut from the 

budget. 

All of these suggestions are focused on introducing more students to national 

parks but how do we extend the experiences to create the next generation of stewards and career professionals? 

The report talks about creating deep connections between a younger generation 

and parks through a series of diverse park experiences offered in collaboration with 

education partners and youth organizations. The described outcome is to create a 

pathway to employment with the NPS, with a focus on diversifying the workforce. 

Our programs provide these deep connections every day and we know that we are 

achieving the intended outcome. A few years ago, we gave a presentation at a National Park Service forum and after the presentation four Superintendents in the 

room stood up and said that they had been through our programs and that it impacted their career choices. 

A student from our Yosemite Summer Research Institute writes, ‘‘It was this program that showed me my love for science. I hiked over 50 miles total with 40 pound 

pack; everyday was incredibly challenging, but I’ve never felt more accomplished. I 

didn’t realize how tedious science really is, and this showed me not only what it 

is really like, but that I can do it and because of this trip I’ve decided that a career 

in science is what I want to pursue.’’ 

Another student, Virginia Delgado, made her first connections to the natural 

world at our Golden Gate campus in the 6th grade. She came with her biology club 

and in her own words, ‘‘got hooked.’’ She is now pursuing a career in environmental 

policy and urban planning and is committed to seeing that more students in lowincome areas, like the one she grew up in, have the same opportunity. 

So, how do we all join Virginia’s cause? One program provider will never excel 

in providing all of the experiences from first exposure to education to stewardship 

to career. We offer two thoughts: 

1. Connect the experiences.—The report contains separate actions that talk 

about first experiences, deep connections, diverse experiences, new audiences, 

and new locations. The action focused on adopting a class of 2016 graduates at 

all national parks has the potential to connect these experiences. Proven partners should be included in developing and delivering the ‘‘fun, educational, and 

engaging activities culminating in the NPS Centennial in 2016’’ but we should 

not stop in 2016. The next five years are should be just the beginning of a program for the second century that can have profound impacts on young people 

from all parts of the country and all demographics. 

2. Cross promote.—As a community of partners that provide experiences 

along this continuum, we must cross promote. NatureBridge will do our part to 

bring the community together through our privately-funded field building initiative. 

Everything in my remarks thus far, and indeed the Call to Action itself is based 

on recognition that the National Park Service cannot accomplish all of these actions 

alone and that there is a shared vision between the Service and its partners. While 

we are certain that we have the shared vision, we are also certain that the barriers 

to effective and sustainable partnerships have not evaporated with the release of 

this report. I would like to turn my attention to the question of: 

How to overcome the current barriers to partnerships? 

NatureBridge is looking to strengthen an already rewarding partnership with the 

NPS. We seek to advance our common mission and develop a closer working relationship. Our testimony is offered in the spirit of wanting to move forward with 

these actions and a need to leverage increasingly scarce resources. 

We fully support the National Park Service goals in the Enhancing the Professional and Organizational Excellence section of the report to: 

• develop and recruit NPS leaders at all levels with the skills to work with partners 

• build a more flexible and adaptive organization that encourages innovation, collaboration, and entrepreneurship 

• modernize and streamline NPS business systems 

Unfortunately, those goals are not evident in the proposed actions. We would like 

to highlight two actions where the full range of partners and their perspectives will 

need to be considered, and possibly directly engaged, to ensure success: 

1. The NPS Career Academy.—We recommend that Partnerships be one of 

the 12 career fields in the NPS Career Academy. The cultural differences be-
16 

tween government and nonprofits are often a barrier to effective partnerships. 

Understanding this is a key for both the NPS and their nonprofit partners. 

Partners should be directly engaged in trainings that focus on how nonprofits 

and government agencies operate, and how to bridge the gap. NatureBridge 

would gladly participate in this type of training. 

2. Cooperative agreements.—Cooperative agreements impact more than the 

buying power of national parks. From our perspective they impact mission delivery. We are not vendors and would not want considerations around streamlining cooperative agreements for program providers to be lumped with those 

of buying offices as implied by the report. 

The following are additional recommendations on partnerships that speak to modernizing and streamlining NPS business systems. 

1. Difficulty of Completing Legal Agreements.—The increasing complexity of 

public/private partnerships has resulted in Agreements (Cooperative, Fundraising, etc.) that are overreaching and unworkable. The staff time and financial 

resources spent on reviewing and redoing agreements is frustrating and wasteful, can take several years to complete and in the end fosters a climate of legal 

adversaries rather than partners. 

The process of reviewing agreements is highly centralized; drafts acceptable 

to the Park or the Region may be extensively questioned by the Washington 

Support Office (WASO), which can at times seem disconnected from the field. 

‘‘No risk’’ partnerships do not exist and should not be the legal bar that is set. 

For example, our Yosemite Institute has operated under a series of agreements with the NPS since 1971, but in 2010 questions from WASO about the 

NPS’s legal authority to allow us to enter into agreements has caused extensive 

delays. Our most recent experience with the Fundraising Agreement for our 

proposed new Environmental Education Center in Yosemite National Park is a 

perfect example of what is not working. We first received a 20 page draft modeled from former partner agreements that has now mushroomed into over 40 

pages after review by NPS solicitors. 

Meanwhile, at Golden Gate National Recreation Area, NatureBridge’s 

Headlands Institute campus is operating under its fourth successive one-year 

extension of its general agreement. After operating and providing programs for 

over 30 years in the Park, the partnership feels more like a landlord/tenant arrangement as we are now being asked to pay approximately $140,000 annually 

in ‘‘service district charges’’ to continue our programs in the Park. 

NatureBridge recognizes and values the uniqueness of each park but is frustrated by our inability either to use agreements signed in one park as a template for a similar agreement in another park, or to negotiate a master agreement that would cover NatureBridge operations in multiple parks. 

Suggestion: NatureBridge supports streamlined and standardized partnership 

agreements. For example, the National Park Service should consider ‘‘proven 

partner status’’ for longtime partners that have a strong mission alignment and 

have met their program and financial obligations for a number of years. This 

would involve setting up a vetting system for new partners and enabling them 

to use streamlined processes once certain conditions are met and a proven track 

record is established. 

2. Cost of construction in National Parks.—Last year the National Park Service signed a Record of Decision approving construction of a new environmental 

education center in Yosemite National Park. The Center will be owned by Yosemite National Park and operated jointly by NatureBridge and Yosemite National Park. NatureBridge will raise more than $45 million from private donors 

to pay for the center. It doesn’t need to cost this much. 

We have worked closely with the Park Service for 5 years finalizing the EIS, 

the design and the construction drawings. The process involves thousands of design decisions made by the National Park Service that affect cost while as a 

partner we are focused on ensuring that scarce resources have maximum impact. 

Suggestion: A greater focus on value per dollar spent will increase the power 

of public-private partnerships and allow partners to apply increasingly scarce 

resources to program delivery. 

3. Decision Making.—Decisions must be made more quickly. This mainly has 

to do with the layering of agreements and multiple written approvals that are 

time-consuming, cumbersome and difficult to manage and enforce. Often it 

seems the delays come from divisions within a particular park’s management. 

These kinds of delays are costly, frustrating and can inhibit timely implementa-
17 

tion and execution of partnership agreements as well as program and fundraising activities. 

Suggestion: Approval processes should be streamlined to fit the pace of business in the 21st century. This will improve mission-related results for both partners and will save both donor and taxpayer money. 

We look forward to working with the National Park Service and other non-profit 

partners to overcome these barriers to partnership and we feel confident that we 

can move forward together. 

The NatureBridge staff is inspired to do more every day by the beaming faces of 

the students we serve and by the teachers who organize bake sales so that their 

students can experience our programs. We know that our model and our talented 

educators are only part of the equation—the other part is the power of place embodied in our national parks. We hear the call to action every day and we are ready 

to answer it. 

Thank you for focusing on the future of our National Parks and what it means 

for our communities and our children, and for including NatureBridge in this hearing. I would be glad to answer any questions. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Morris. I look forward to hearing 

more in the timeframe now where we ask some questions and receive some answers. 

Let me recognize myself for 5 minutes and then I’ll recognize 

Senator Paul for 5 minutes after my 5. Let me start. 

Director Jarvis, your report has several themes. Again, congratulations on compiling your conclusions based on your own internal 

work, but also these other important seminal studies that have 

been published. The report has several themes and I think 40 different action items. What’s the most important thing we should 

take away from the report? 

Mr. JARVIS. I think there, from my perspective, may be 2 things. 

One, for the very first time, we are looking at all of the responsibilities that have been bestowed upon the National Park Service 

by the U.S. Congress and past Presidents to aggregate all of those 

for a vision for the second century. Everything from our Rivers and 

Trails Conservation Assistance program to our Historic Preservation Tax Act tax credit programs as well as the 395 units of the 

National Park System, all focused on a vision. It’s a call for people 

to use a little bit of their discretion, a little bit of their authority 

to align that toward this common goal. 

I think the second is the endowment itself. We are a perpetuity 

institution on an annual appropriation. If you think about any 

other major institution in this country whether it’s the Smithsonian or Harvard, they have an endowment that allows them to 

carry forward on programs, as Mr. Mulholland said, in times of 

austerity and it provides a point for giving from an extraordinary 

philanthropic American people. 

I think if we look back 100 years from now when we are facing 

our third 100 years, I think if you look back what action might 

have been one of the most important, the Second Century Commission said it was an endowment. 

Senator UDALL. I want to just make an editorial comment, I’ll 

move forward with my second question. I have joined forces with 

Senator Hatch to propose an unauthorizing Committee that would 

look at Federal programs that are perhaps duplicative or are not 

necessary anymore. I’m going to sit down with you, Director, and 

look at all the missions or the directives that you’ve received 

through the years from many Senators, many Presidents, many 
18 

members of the House. It might be a useful exercise to look at harmonizing those. 

Some cases we may want to set aside one or 2 of the things we’ve 

asked you all to do. Because I know when you look at the broad 

suite of directives they’re almost all well intentioned, but some of 

them may be beyond your means. But that’s another conversation. 

I know this will upset Senator Paul, but you said you don’t need 

any Federal funding to implement the Call to Action. Would you 

elaborate on this for the 2 of us? 

Mr. JARVIS. Recognizing that we are in a tough economic situation in this country, I know the Senate and the House are working 

diligently to find economies. I deeply believe the National Park 

Service is a great investment and we leverage what appropriated 

dollars we have. But I did not want to build an action plan from 

here to 2016 that was predicated on new Federal appropriations 

because that’s probably just not going to happen. 

So the direction that I gave to the team was to build a set of actions that could be actually executed without new money, without 

new Federal money anyway. So that’s really what there’s no call 

here to appropriations in this document. 

Senator UDALL. Mr. Mulholland, let me build on the Director’s 

comments. A billion dollars is an ambitious undertaking. I admire 

the Foundation’s commitment to putting a plan in place to pursue 

such a goal. 

Are you concerned that the endowment plan would negatively affect your other park fundraising programs? 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. It’s a good question. But, you know, when we 

look at the terms of endowment and we put a goal out there of a 

billion dollars. First of all we wanted to have something that would 

benefit the entirety of the Park System and 395 units of buildings, 

a billion is an adequate goal. We look at this to be a long term 

campaign that would start now but, you know, build for a period 

of 20 to 25 years. 

So we do not see it impacting our current programs. Really look 

at it more for legacy, estate planning, it would be a big part of it 

when people transfer wealth to fund it. 

Senator UDALL. As a former non-profit CEO I’m very intrigued 

with the way in which you laid out the creative ideas for the Foundation and for the endowment. I look forward to pursuing some additional questioning with you on that front. 

Let me recognize Senator Paul for his time. 

Senator PAUL. Oh my goodness, you’ve come not asking for more 

money. I love it. 

I like the idea of the endowment. I have a suggestion. There’s 

this guy I’ve been hearing about in the news, apparently he has a 

lot of money and he feels under taxed, Warren Buffett. You all 

should talk to him. 

With regard to how cost are attributed, what percentage of the 

annual costs of running the parks is able to come in through concessions and admission fees? 

Mr. Jarvis. 

Mr. JARVIS. Thank you, Senator. I’ll give you it in hard numbers. 

We can run the percentage. 
19 

We collect about $175 to $180 million in recreational fees. That’s 

campground, entrance, user fees. Then we collect about another 

$100 million annually in franchise fees. So you’re looking at about 

$250 to $275 million, somewhere in that neighborhood, in total fee 

collection in the National Park system right now. 

Senator PAUL. Franchise fees is when someone puts their name 

on the entranceway or something or what’s that mean? 

Mr. JARVIS. No, that’s from our concessions. 

Senator PAUL. OK. 

Mr. JARVIS. We have about 80 business operations. 

Senator PAUL. Alright. 

Mr. JARVIS. Food, hotel. 

We are currently in negotiations for about 25 of those concessioners for new contracts and we expect those franchise fees, in 

many cases, to go up substantially. But I can’t tell you right now 

what that would actually work out to be. So you’re looking at, you 

know, the Park Service’s total budget is about $2.8 billion. So 

you’re looking at about 10 percent. 

Senator PAUL. My second is sort of a suggestion. This might be 

a little off the wall but I’ve been trying to grow a giant Sequoia 

in Kentucky for years. I had some pretty good luck. I had one grow 

for about 7 or 8 years, about 12 feet tall, about this big around. 

But I always seem to have some blight. 

But the reason I bring it up is for an education. I think I’m fascinated by trying to grow a big tree in my yard. I think kids would 

be fascinated on Arbor Day. I don’t know if people are against the 

spread of the Sequoia or something. But I think it would be a neat 

sort of a project around the country to get kids interested in the 

big trees or whatever. 

I’ve been out to Muir Woods which I think is a neat park as well. 

But I don’t know, I saw one one time that’s been growing in Northern Georgia for 150 years. It’s like almost 200 feet tall. So they will 

grow. 

I believe that one time North America had giant Sequoias across 

North America, maybe, I don’t know thousands of years ago. But 

I suspect there was some kind of blight that I don’t know of. But 

if anybody knows about this can send me some information on the 

giant Sequoia and how I might get past the adolescent years. 

A lot of trees, I think the Chestnut and the Elm will grow for 

a while, the native ones. They’re trying to get resistant ones to the 

blight. But I suspect that’s what’s happening to me is a blight 

somewhere in the maturity. But I’ve tried a couple times and I’ve 

not had success. But anyways, you’re welcome to respond if you 

want. 

Mr. JARVIS. We would be glad to help you with that. As a matter 

of fact I think there are a number of places that do sell the giant 

Sequoias. But, you know, I’m sure they’re a challenge on the east 

coast and in particular certain environments. 

I would mention that we have just developed a partnership with 

the American Chestnut Foundation to begin to replant the American Chestnut in the east. They have successfully cross bred back 

a 99 percent pure American Chestnut that is blight resistant. So 

this has been a great opportunity for us to restore this incredible 

tree in the east. 
20 

But we’ll help you with that. 

Senator PAUL. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Paul. 

Director Jarvis, I’d urge you to get back to Senator Paul as 

quickly as possible. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. Anything he’s interested in, I’m interested in. 

Senator PAUL. We don’t want to have to subpoena that information on the Sequoia. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. Mr. Morris, your story is a powerful one. It’s a 

great example of the American spirit of volunteerism which has 

been identified, for almost a couple hundred years. DeToqueville, 

the great French observer of American 1820s and 1930s, noted 

Americans even in that era had a spirit of volunteering in their 

communities. But I’m really intrigued with all of the ideas you put 

forth. 

In the Call to Action the Park Service emphasizes the use of 

technology in outreach research and management. How are you 

using technology in the programs you provide the parks? In particular when you look at that 25 percent number that everybody on 

the panel thinks is realistic or at least a goal that we ought to embrace. I would have to guess part of that is going to be through 

technology that you’re going to reach students. 

But please have at it. 

Mr. MORRIS. Thank you, Senator. Real quick for Senator Paul on 

the Sequoia piece. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MORRIS. You know, we use technology. We have this program called Sequoia-ology. We have the kids track the baby Sequoia trees in Yosemite National Park. Every week there’s a different group of schoolchildren in Yosemite National Park. Every 

week there’s a new sprout of a Sequoia tree and they map them 

using technology, using GIS technology and put it on a fixed place. 

Then the kids when they get back to their classroom can log in 

and watch the survival rate of those Sequoias and how they grow. 

Now they grow in a very small area in California. It’s getting 

smaller all the time. 

So, you know, we’re interested in the long term health of these 

trees over time. But that’s just one example of how we use technology and engage kids at the local level and then extend it, you 

know, back into their classrooms. Then they can extend it to students who didn’t get to visit Yosemite through one of our programs. 

Senator UDALL. Why are they so limited geographically? My understanding the giant Sequoia has a much broader range along the 

Sierra Nevadas but the Redwood is more limited. I can understand 

that, some of that is coastal air and humidity and stuff. 

But what is it? Is there a blight that limits them or what limits 

them geographically to their growth? 

Mr. MORRIS. I’m actually going to defer that question to the Director and his scientists. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MORRIS. Either he can answer it or we’ll get back to you with 

a specific answer. 
21 

Mr. JARVIS. Yes. I’ll take a shot at it though. I’ll probably be 

dusting off my old biology background. 

As you well know, the giant Sequoias and the Redwood trees are 

very closely related. The Redwoods survive, as you astutely picked 

up, on the fog that comes in from the coast. That’s why you get the 

tall coastal Redwoods. 

In the Sierras, I think you’re absolutely right, at one time the 

giant Sequoias covered a much greater range. But now they are 

pretty much confined to one range of sort of a mid slope that provides the perfect amount of moisture, winter, coolness and summer 

heat that allows them to re-grow. They’re also fire dependent. They 

have very thick bark. Fire goes through, they do fine. Their cones 

need to be burned in order to reopen and fire has been suppressed 

in much of the Sierras. 

We’ve brought fire back into the system in Sequoia King’s Canyon and Yosemite. As a consequence we’re getting reproduction 

there. But I think they’re a pretty tough tree. They’ve been around 

a long time. Can probably persist in other areas. 

I think that that’s one of the decisions we’re going to be making 

is about where else trees like giant Sequoias can exist. 

Senator PAUL. One final thing on my Sequoias. Mine always 

grew and stayed green at the top but was always was brown. The 

needles turned brown. I would trim them as long as I could reach 

them. It seemed to keep growing. 

But I think it always had some kind of blight in the very beginning that didn’t seem like it was a stress from water or a climate. 

But I’m not positive. I, you know, don’t know. But I really need to 

know this because I’m going to try again. 

Mr. JARVIS. OK. We’re here to help. 

Senator UDALL. I’m sure there are some of Senator Paul’s political opponents that would be happy to light his yard on fire if it 

would help the Sequoia tree. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. Alright. Mr. Morris, why don’t you continue in 

describing how you use technology? That was a wonderful example. 

But share some others with us. 

Mr. MORRIS. Yes. This is actually very timely. We’re just about 

to pilot a partnership with National Geographic around a type of 

eco-monitoring technology called Field Scope. 

We’re actually going to pilot this on the Elwah River in Olympic 

National Park where this past weekend Director Jarvis and a number of dignitaries were up there for the removal of the Elwah 

Dams. Now these dams have been there for almost 100 years and 

have blocked, you know, salmon from going up and sediment from 

going down and a number of other things. Now that these dams are 

starting to be taken down we want to engage kids in real science 

projects. 

So this is information that the National Park Service is interested in, that NOAA is interested in and that scientists from universities from all over the world are interested in. We happen to 

have schoolchildren at the, you know, at the base of these dams, 

about 200 days a year. So we’re going to start to use technology to 

monitor the environment as it is restored over time and be able to 

chart the progress that the river makes in terms of the ecology 
22 

coming back, the salmon coming back, etcetera. Use this Field 

Scope technology that was developed through National Geographic 

to put that up online and then study it over time. 

That will allow not only the kids to engage in post trip research 

which is incredibly important to their learning ability. We know 

that kids retain much greater amount of information if they can do 

something with it in the weeks following their visits to a National 

Park. So after they leave Olympic if they’re able to engage in this, 

in the data, in the science research that’s happening over time and 

then next year look at how little brother and little sister found that 

river, etcetera, etcetera. 

So we hope to create kind of a longitudinal science study where 

a kid may only be there for a week. But they can be part of that 

science study throughout their formative years and ideally lead 

them into, you know, careers that are around the sciences and engage that next generation in some critical work. 

Senator UDALL. I assume that this project and program would be 

using scientific monitoring technologies that would cover everything from the return of certain biota, to the fish themselves, to 

sediment levels, to any number of metrics tied to the water, to the 

activity on the site. Is that? Elaborate a little bit more if you’d like. 

Mr. MORRIS. That’s absolutely correct. 

Senator UDALL. Yes. 

Mr. MORRIS. We take our cue from the Park Service. The National Park Service creates the actual protocols and the science experiments that they would like to have data on and because we 

have children out there every day we’re able to collect it in a rapid 

way and an ongoing way that doesn’t cost the National Park Service any money. Through the use of technology we can actually collect legitimate data. Sometimes we’re putting probes into streams 

and testing dissolved oxygen, nitrates, those types of things. 

Senator UDALL. I assume you maybe would have miniature cameras onsite as well and you could have a series of photographs, 

today, next week, a year from now. 

Mr. MORRIS. Exactly. Photographic evidence and videos. On the 

human side of the equation we talk a lot about restoration of 

plants and rivers and salmon. On the human side of the equation, 

as Director Jarvis put in his report, we want to engage kids on an 

ongoing basis in National Parks. 

So if we use, you know, little video cameras and take 

testimonials of kids down next to a river, a 12 year old next to a 

river having a scientific experiment and put that up on the web 

and other kids from across the country can see, you know, someone 

who looks like them have a great opportunity and a transformational experience in a National Park. We’re hoping that that 

will attract really the next generation to engage in these magical 

places. 

Senator UDALL. That’s very exciting to hear. That’s the kind of 

reality TV that I would like young people to engage with. I won’t 

mention other reality TV shows that are popular, but is it going to 

be the National Park Service TV channel or the NatureBridge 

channel or a coalition? 

Mr. MORRIS. I will defer to one of these guys. That’s a terrific 

idea. 
23 

Senator UDALL. That’s intriguing. I know you’ve got many more 

examples. We may have a chance to come back to some more. Action item 29 deals with the $1 billion endowment campaign 

and to help me better understand the proposal I’d like each of you 

to talk about your understanding of how the endowment would be 

funded and managed and a sense of how long it would take to raise 

the one billion. I know, Mr. Mulholland, you spoke to that. But I’ll 

have everybody speak to that again if there’s any additional information. 

Let me start with that question with Director Jarvis. Is that 

clear enough? 

Mr. JARVIS. Yes. 

Senator UDALL. Just talk about your vision of the endowment. 

Mr. JARVIS. There’s several aspects to the development of the 

long term endowment. 

First, in terms of Congressional action we believe that the interest that could be derived from our non-appropriated fee accounts 

should be taken to go to, at least a portion of the endowment. 

As I indicated to Senator Paul, we collect around $250 million a 

year in non-appropriated dollars, fee dollars that sits in the Treasury account. The interest does not come to us. We feel that that 

would be a great start for the endowment at whatever the standard 

Federal T-bill rate is what would be spun off into beginnings of the 

endowment. That then could be leveraged by our partner here in 

the National Park Foundation to seek philanthropic matches to 

that to really begin the corpus of the endowment. 

Every fundraising effort in the National Park Service that is 

taken on by a friends group, whether it’s the Golden Gate Conservancy or some friends of any National Park has to have an agreement signed by either the regional director or the director. It will 

be our intent in all future fundraising agreements require at least 

some money go into an endowment. That endowment can be managed by that friends group. We’re not suggesting that all money be 

aggregated under the National Park Foundation. 

The goal is that in adding up all of the various endowments derived from the philanthropy that could be focused on Yosemite or 

on Golden Gate or the parks of New York or in the Foundation aggregate. We’re not aggregating them but when you add them all up 

the goal is the $1 billion. So we’re approaching this from a multiple 

directions that we’re encouraging each of our friends organizations 

out there as they raise money for parks that they create an endowment for that park or for that program in which they are raising 

money through—— 

Senator UDALL. Director Jarvis could I stop you there. 

Mr. JARVIS. Yes. 

Senator UDALL. So for example and Mr. Mulholland I want to 

call you by your first names because I know you both so well. But 

Mr. Mulholland may have to clarify for me. But I think it’s the 

Friends of Rocky Mountain National Park, when they solicit their 

donor base the idea would be that depending on what the campaign 

was, if it was a general operating or support for the park, that a 

percentage of that would go into the endowment which would be 

a part of their endowment which would be a part of the larger endowment. 
24 

You would reach agreement with them that that makes sense 

going forward. 

Mr. JARVIS. Yes. 

Senator UDALL. That any long term organizations have an endowment for a profit company. Of course has a balance sheet on 

which they hold cash and assets that are a form of an endowment, 

a non-profit or a government entity, unique like the Park Service 

has every reason to have a similar kind of fund like that. 

Mr. JARVIS. Exactly. 

Senator UDALL. Is that how it would work? 

Mr. JARVIS. Exactly, sir. I think we’ve been remiss in the past 

in major fundraising efforts than even some that I’ve been directly 

involved in like the USS Arizona where we didn’t require at least 

a portion of it to go into an endowment. 

Senator UDALL. Yes. 

Mr. JARVIS. Where we would have a very strong capital campaign and then no endowment. 

Senator UDALL. Yes. 

Mr. JARVIS. The goal here is through these agreements we would 

require at least some percentage to go in its endowment. Again, not 

that we’re going to take the money from the Friends of Rocky 

Mountain and give it to the Foundation. We want them to develop 

it. But we get to count that toward the $1,000,000,000 goal. 

Senator UDALL. I interrupted you. I know you were moving to a 

couple of other points perhaps you wanted to make on how this 

would be structured or had you worked through your list? 

Mr. JARVIS. The goal—as our primary legislatively created partner, the National Park Foundation, this larger endowment that we 

expect to build over time through the reinvestment and match of 

the interest off of our non-appropriated funds we would expect the 

National Park Foundation to be the principle manager of that. 

We would also want to prescribe how that endowment, any spin 

off from that endowment would be used. It would not just be going 

to general operations. We would also hope that the U.S. Congress 

would not to look to offset our current appropriations with any revenues or the endowment itself. 

Senator UDALL. All very important points well made and ones 

that I find very compelling. 

Mr. Mulholland, did you want to speak to the question as well? 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. Yes, Mr. Chairman. First of all, public/private 

partnerships work. 

Senator UDALL. Yes. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. Most recently we’ve seen that with the fundraising with the Flight 93 National Memorial, $60 million campaign. 

Senator UDALL. Congratulations, everybody. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. Thank you. Where, you know, the government 

provided half of that and the private sector provided the other half. 

We find that dynamic works very well. 

When we look, as the Director said here, I’m creating an endowment campaign for the National Parks. As he said it will be a series of endowments. There are places like Rocky Mountain National 

Park that have very sophisticated and well run Friends groups that 

are very good fund raising organizations. 
25 

Senator UDALL. Does every park unit have a Friends group? 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. No, over the 395 units of the National Park 

there’s approximately 175 units that have Friends groups and 

today of that 175 we find that there’s approximately 50 that really 

contribute a significant amount of money back to the park. 

One of the things the Foundation is very focused on is not only 

raising money nationally, but working with the existing Friends 

groups, the aspirational Friends groups and those parks that could 

support a Friends group in helping build that local fundraising organization. As we move forward as we feel these Friends groups, 

this private fundraising at the local park level is going to be very 

important. 

You know, and then as we take that into an endowment we think 

a coordinated campaign is going to be very important. There are individuals out there that have a very good relationship with the 

overall spectrum of the National Parks. They’ve had many good experiences and they might be more apt to donate to the overall system. There are people that have or feel solely focused on Rocky 

Mountain National Park or Yosemite and that’s where they want 

their focus to be and we want to encourage that. 

Then there’s other parks that just, by their scope, nature or location may not be able to support a Friends group because of their 

remote nature. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t benefit from private philanthropy. So we want to work that, you know, manage 

that as well. That’s the role the Foundation could play. 

We see this as being a coordinated effort. We see the billion dollars as a starting point, not an ending point. If we do this properly—here we are in 2011, perhaps 60 years from now people will 

be sitting there in this very room or 100 years from now and there 

will be several billion dollars or tens of billions of dollars in an endowment because of the actions that we’re taking today. 

Senator UDALL. Success breeds more success. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. It’s building blocks. 

Senator UDALL. Yes. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. As you know the anticipation of this starts 

with dollar one. It starts with the first dollar raised, then the second dollar. We felt it was very important, as we talk, that, you 

know, to have an initial goal. We feel a billion is a sizable number. 

It’s a reasonable number. It’s an appropriate number when you 

look at the magnitude of the National Parks. 

So again, we look at that as a starting point to where we’d like 

this endowment to go. But many of the things—what we see the 

opportunity going forward is, we look at NatureBridge. They’re 

running programs year over year. 

We want to do things that begin to create lifelong relationships 

with the National Parks. We want to, you know, do things that 

have continuity, you know, from age one through the entirety of a 

person’s life. We also want to do things that—in all aspects whether it’s programmatic or fundraising that become repetitive and that 

the National Parks become core to an individual’s philanthropic 

giving. 

Senator UDALL. Did you speak to the units that don’t have a 

Friends group and potential effort to set up groups in those areas? 
26 

Would that be something that as you further develop this plan 

that—— 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. Yes. 

Senator UDALL. Given that that would take some time and focus 

but that there will be utility I think as well. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. One of the things we’re doing, you know, independent but you add it to the endowment is we are very proactive 

investing Foundation funds into working with the Friends groups 

to help them do what they do better. That then to take those 

groups, who are very good at what they do and bring them to the 

table and help them with the smaller aspirational groups. You 

know the overall park community, the Friends group community, 

those who are involved in philanthropy work together as a group. 

We work to help at a local park level and then to, you know, help 

those parks that are aspiring to, you know, create their own individual organization. But now we’ve got to be realistic, not all National Parks or units of the National Park are going to justify a 

Friends group. It takes people. It takes committed people. It takes 

people with passion. 

But it doesn’t mean they’ll be overlooked. That’s the role that 

the, you know, National Park Foundation plays on a national level. 

Senator UDALL. Yes, and you never know over time when that 

unit triggers a connection on the part of somebody who may live 

at a far distance, but nonetheless decides to take that on as a 

cause. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. That’s exactly—— 

Senator UDALL. I’m sure there are examples of that already. I 

know there are in Mesa Verde, for example. There are a number 

of people in the Phoenix area that are huge supporters of Mesa 

Verde National Park and what it represents and so on around the 

country. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. Kirk Buckholtz, who you know. 

Senator UDALL. I know well. 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. Rocky Mountain National Park votes, you 

know, is very generous with his time across the system in working 

with aspirational groups. We see that with the leaders of the larger 

groups. 

Senator UDALL. Sounds like you’re going to have to quit your day 

job and take this on. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. We’re totally committed. 

Senator UDALL. Mr. Morris, do you want to comment on the endowment plan from your perspective? I know you did in your commentary. You had some great ideas. 

Mr. MORRIS. Yes, sure. 

Senator, I feel that the notion of all boats rising is the right approach. Mr. Mulholland talked about how there are donors that 

may want to give to a local park or may want to give to the system 

as a whole. What that does is that strengthens the backbone of the 

entire system. 

NatureBridge has taken that same approach. We’re doing that 

with our colleague organizations in the non-profit sector to try to 

build the field of education in the outdoors as a legitimate field. It’s 

hard because there’s a number of non-profits who are generally dis-
27 

parate. Efforts like this, initiatives like this really bring people together around a common vision. All boats can rise. 

It’s not about competition for a limited amount of dollars. As you 

mentioned success breeds success. That’s the attack we’re taking, 

you know, as a budding national organization and aspiring to work 

with our colleagues across the country to make these things happen. 

Senator UDALL. I think it’s a very helpful conversation if you all 

could stay just a little bit longer. I’ve got a few more questions. 

I wanted to come back to Mr. Mulholland and talk about the goal 

of reaching 25 percent of all school aged children through actual 

and virtual field trips. I understand that the Foundation provides 

a very vital service or funding stream, I should say, with transportation grants to get students to parks. Sometimes those of us in position of leadership don’t think about it, actually getting people 

there. You don’t do that for free. 

What other efforts have you undertaken to encourage young people to get outside and into the National Parks? 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. You know the biggest—we’ll start with that, 

how’s that? 

What we see with today’s youth, the dynamic is different. You 

know, today’s youth spends a lot more time indoors. You know, 

studies have shown they spend 71⁄2 hours of each day tethered to 

an electronic device. We look today there is a health and obesity 

issue with our children. They are lacking in education as far as 

their American history and science. 

When we look at National Parks that we look at these as, you 

know, wonderful places, wonderful classrooms for play space learning, experience based learning. Part of it is we’ve got to introduce 

them to the parks. When we were young someone took us to a 

park. That’s how we developed our relationship with it. 

You know, that dynamic has changed today. You asked about 

technology earlier. You know, what Mr. Morris is doing here and 

really the first point of introduction has to be through the electronic medium in many cases is for those that don’t have an advocate, a parent, a guardian, somebody that’s going to introduce them 

to the park, is taking it to them electronically and introduce them 

that way. 

By way of example, what we’re doing in partnership with the 

Park Service on Saturday is Worldwide Day of Play with Nickelodeon. Nickelodeon is going to go dark for 3 hours, nationwide. 

They’re the No. 1 children’s channel in the United States. They’ve 

been putting a message on their channel all summer long, you 

know, promoting Worldwide Day of Play with the messages, get active, get outdoors, go visit a National Park. 

So they’ll be emanating live from the Ellipse in President’s Park 

here on Saturday. There’s huge power in that. So, you know, going 

to your question. 

Some of the things we’re doing is reaching out to organizations 

that already have the audience. In this case, Nickelodeon has a 

large viewership of children. Other things we do is work with organizations like NatureBridge, that, you know, are working with children year in and year out that are very good on the educational 

aspects of it. 
28 

We’ve talked about transportation. You know, the other thing is 

is we have the parks and once we make this introduction we have 

school buses, sit in school lots that they don’t have the money for 

the gas or the driver to take the field trip. These are simple things. 

As we’re moving forward we’re creating campaigns that are sustainable that people in the private sector, you know, they can grasp 

onto that or a transportation program to get kids into the parks, 

100,000 kids, it’s a measureable goal, you know. It’s appropriate. 

So we have transportation funds. 

We’re looking at other educational initiatives to introduce kids to 

parks. What we want to do is to begin to develop lifelong learning. 

That these programs work throughout the entirety, while they’re in 

school starting with elementary school, junior high and high school 

and into adulthood. 

Senator UDALL. For the record I want to clarify that I misspoke 

earlier. I don’t want you to quit your day job. I just think you’re 

going to take on a night job and a weekend job to get all of this 

done. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MULHOLLAND. I accept the challenge. 

Senator UDALL. Good. 

Director Jarvis, let me turn to a topic you and I have discussed 

at great length and it ties to action item 23 which discusses the 

increasing use of renewable energy in the parks. I fully agree with 

that goal particularly because it will lower energy costs in the long 

term. 

Talk a little bit about your plans in that regard, particularly 

given the budget constraints that we face, and fit in there too some 

discussion about energy efficiency, not just renewable energy production, but energy efficiency which I know is a part of the overall 

approach. 

Mr. JARVIS. Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate that question. 

It’s near and dear to my heart as well. 

We just completed within the National Park Service our Green 

Parks Plan. We set the goal, I think, it’s by 2012 we will have completed our assessment of all the carbon footprints in terms of every 

park. In terms of looking at its overall operation, everything from 

fleet to fuel to what type of energy they’re using, to lighting and 

really assessing how we can significantly reduce our overall carbon 

footprint. 

As you well know in some parks we have the opportunity to perhaps install large solar arrays. Then in others we don’t. It’s because of either its cultural landscape or the natural resources 

would really prohibit that. So we’re working on agreements with 

utility companies. 

Senator UDALL. It would be PPAs or power purchasing agreements, long term? 

Mr. JARVIS. Yes, absolutely, Southern California Edison is one 

that we’re currently negotiating so that perhaps we can participate 

as a partner in the development of solar arrays on other public 

lands or on military bases that then we can get an offset for our 

overall use within the parks. We’ve set the standard for all new 

construction at a minimum of LEED Silver. We’re actually achieving LEED Platinum in a number of cases. Lassen Volcanic Na-
29 

tional Parks’, new visitor’s center, the Eielson Visitor’s Center in 

Denali are both platinum facilities as well. 

We’re also working with the historic preservation community in 

establishing sort of a lead analog to historic preservation because 

there’s a great deal of embedded energy in our many, many historic 

structures. But we also have to meet the Secretary’s Standards for 

Historic Preservation as we go through that as well. 

We’re experimenting with biofuels. We are reducing overall fleet 

to the appropriate size vehicles. We are looking to all types of renewable materials, sustainably harvested, green type products. 

Probably most important is that we’re interpreting all of that information. We’re providing that to the American public as a part of 

our overall interpretation and education programs as well. 

Mr. JARVIS. If I may I’d like to throw my hat in on the technology 

side as well. 

Senator UDALL. Please do. 

Mr. JARVIS. There’s a huge opportunity in the National Parks to 

provide students virtual experiences over the net. We have enormous content on our side. We have great interpreters. We have 

great places. The technology already exists for interpreters to literally stand in the resource and talk to students and take questions. 

We can do that right now. We could actually do it underwater 

at Channel Islands. We have live, in the kelp forest, interpreters 

that can actually answer questions through their mask from students in the classroom. 

Senator UDALL. That’s phenomenal. I want to have a chance to 

experience that myself. 

Mr. JARVIS. We can set that up. In fact when we launched A Call 

to Action and took questions from employees, one of the questions 

came from underwater at Channel Islands on video. When that 

kind of connection can be made, students can actually participate 

directly like that. 

We’ll be able to use the support of the National Park Foundation 

to get kids from school. We’ll be able to connect through 

NatureBridge for residential programs. Through those kinds of programs right now we’re reaching about 5 percent of the public school 

kids, K through 12 now. 

So it’s a reasonable goal to go to 25 percent. But a lot of that 

is going to be through virtual connections. We are partnering with 

the Department of Education on a lot of this work as well. 

So being green for the National Park Service saves us money. It 

reduces our impact on the night sky. It’s a great example of how 

a Federal agency can lead and sustainability. 

Senator UDALL. What’s not to like about that list? Thank you for 

your leadership. 

You mentioned the Channel Islands. I will take a moment to 

share a story, which I may have to further clarify for the record 

with my cousin, Tom Udall. But I know that my Uncle Stewart 

when he was Interior Secretary, I think it would have been at, is 

it Buck Island in the Virgin Islands? Is the national monument 

there? Uncle Stewart was called to dedicate that first underwater 

trail that’s there. But he didn’t mention to anybody that he’d never 
30 

had a mask and snorkel and fins explained to him. He was a desert 

kid. 

Evidently when he went down actually to cut the ribbon, he 

claimed that the Park Service half drowned him before he got the 

job done. But I’m sure you’ve got staffing today equal to all the 

challenges you face and the Secretary face. Stewart loved to tell 

that story. Talk about the diverse nature of our National Parks and 

our Park units. But he’d be very intrigued by that were he with 

us today. 

Let me end with a question to Director Jarvis and then to Mr. 

Morris and then Mr. Mulholland, if you want to weigh in as well. 

Action 2, Action Item Two, I should say, talks about creating a 

pathway to employment with the Park Service starting with educational experiences with a special focus on minority youth. Would 

you all speak to whether you have the necessary Federal hiring authorities to make this a reality. Then Mr. Morris, if you’d elaborate 

more on the educational experiences provided by groups like yours 

relate to future employment. I think this is very, very crucial. 

Before I let you answer I want to give a shout out to 2 National 

Parks in Colorado I visited or Park units I should say. I don’t want 

to get ahead of the good people of Western Colorado. Colorado National Monument is helmed by Michele Wheatley in an acting role 

right now. She has done wonderful work reaching out to the local 

community and bringing the young people from Mesa County and 

the surrounding counties into Colorado National Monument for 

very powerful experiences. 

In addition I was in the Great Sand Dunes in August. There’s 

a similar effort underway to reach out to those communities in the 

San Luis Valley. Now, Director, I know you know this, but I 

couldn’t have been more proud of the staff there and the work 

they’re doing. All the extra time they were putting in. They certainly weren’t being paid by the hour. 

But it was marvelous. It was inspiring. One of the experiences 

that I had was a young ranger, who had come up through the program, is now working for the Park Service, attempted to show me 

how to atlatl which is an advanced form of a spear that Native people used. It was a lot of fun and it was very educational. I very 

much saw how you could draw young people into that kind of physical challenge but in the process of facing that challenge you learn 

a lot more about yourself, about the people that live there, about 

the wildlife. Those were 2 very meaningful experiences I’ve just 

had in this year through my own interaction with the Park Service. 

So, you’ve probably forgotten the question I asked you because I 

started reminiscing here. But yes, please speak to your vision and 

then we’ll turn to Mr. Morris and his recommendations. 

Mr. JARVIS. Thank you, Chairman. Thanks for that shout out to 

those 2 great Colorado parks. They are doing great work. 

I think they’re examples of the kind of work that’s going on 

around the country today to reach out to communities to connect 

young people and create a lifelong connection to the outdoors. The 

fantastic experiences like practicing with an atlatl is one of those. 

We really believe, and I deeply believe and I know these 2 gentlemen that are with me deeply believe that an investment in young 

people is going to reap benefits well into the future. 
31 

Your specific question about whether we have the right authorities in place is a great question. We can connect these kids and we 

can show them what an extraordinary opportunity lies before them 

perhaps with a career in conservation. That doesn’t necessarily 

mean a career in the National Park Service. There are Federal 

land management agencies. There are State agencies. There are 

NGO’s out there. There can be all kinds of ways that they can pursue a career in conservation. 

It is difficult though, to get into the National Park Service. I 

sometimes say, we don’t hire the best, we hire the most persistent. 

Persistence generally pays off, but it is challenging. 

We are working with our human resources folks and OPM to try 

to find better pathways for individuals that show an interest and 

a willingness to pursue a career with us. We would love to increase 

the diversity of our organization. We frankly are not a very diverse 

organization. We’re a product of history and in many ways and do 

not reflect the face of America. That’s a concern for me. 

I think it should be a concern for all of us. That’s true not only 

of the National Park Service but also of my 3 sister land management agencies: the Forest Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service 

and the BLM. We’re all concerned about that. We do need to find 

creative ways to connect these kids and to lead them to potential 

careers with our organizations because they are fantastic careers 

and very, very rewarding. 

But any help that you might be able to provide us. We’d be glad 

to meet with you at some future date to talk about those challenges 

and see if we can’t create a little easier path into Federal service. 

Senator UDALL. Mr. Morris. 

Mr. MORRIS. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Really 2 strategies come to mind that I’d like to touch on. In 

terms of creating a continuum of experiences for children as they 

grow through their years I had the privilege of growing up in Colorado outside of Fort Collins. I was able to go up to Rocky Mountain 

National Park as a kid and experience the wonder. 

A lot of kids these days don’t have that opportunity. In many 

cases for many of our programs kids have never been to a National 

Park. They’ve never seen the Pacific Ocean. They’ve never seen the 

dew dripping off of a leaf from a tree in Yosemite. 

So these experiences, while incredibly transformational by themselves, are much more powerful if they’re strung together with multiple experiences. So at NatureBridge we have our core field science 

program which is a week long, 3 to 5 days long in the National 

Parks. We follow that up with additional opportunities for kids to 

engage through their years as I referenced in my testimony with 

Virginia Delgado, whether it’s a team mentorship program when 

they get into high school. 

This past summer we created an educator training program in 

Yosemite to draw in candidates for our field science educator positions that may not have the hard skills but have the soft skills to 

interact in the educational skills to interact with kids. We were 

able to train them some of the hard skills. Then we ended up hiring all of those people to work on our staff for full time jobs. So 

that’s one of the things we do in our organization. 
32 

But to the points that we’ve made earlier is we all have to work 

together to string together these opportunities. Research does show 

that it takes 4 to 5 to 7 opportunities as you’re growing up to actually create, you know, a lifelong infinity with the natural world and 

specifically with natural parks. So NatureBridge, while transformational can’t do that by ourselves. 

We have to hook up with our colleague organizations and send 

kids from our program into the SCA programs into the other residential programs. Maybe it starts with a virtual field trip. That’s 

what gets them excited or maybe that’s what gets their teacher excited. 

Then their teacher says I want to go to the NatureBridge program in the Santa Monica Mountains or in the Channel Islands. 

So there, you know, there are opportunities out there, but as I 

mentioned it’s a disparate field. We have to do a much better job 

of collaboration and bringing people to the table to map out these 

experiences for kids and make them a legitimate ladder of learning 

as kids work their way through their years. 

Senator UDALL. There’s a true use for high definition TV it seems 

like. Through the power of technology I think we could add to those 

experiences or complement the real experiences with those virtual 

experiences. But you are right. 

Having worked for many years for the Outward Bound system, 

we had many similar non-profits. Sometimes our missions were 

aligned. Sometimes the missions were complementary. Sometimes 

the missions were slightly different. 

There was a healthy competition. But it’s a very disperse and decentralized world. The more of what you all are doing can tie all 

of that together the better. 

I think, Mr. Mulholland, you see that as a vision of creating a 

confederation in the best sense of a confederation of friends of National Parks and the type of organization NatureBridge is. Then 

combined with increased—I shouldn’t say increased, the high level 

of professionalism that’s always existed in the Park Service. The 

increased knowledge that the Park Service has of technology and 

the importance of making this next 100 years equal to the first 100 

years which is going to be hard to top, isn’t it, Director Jarvis? But 

it can be equaled for sure. 

I mean this is truly America’s best idea. It’s been a pleasure to 

hear from the 3 of you today and the teams that back you up and 

the proposing of all these great ideas. So I really enjoyed the hearing. It’s been very informative. I think we could carry on for quite 

a bit longer. 

I want to thank you all for your testimony. Besides Senator 

Paul’s question on Sequoias and I’m looking forward to the answer 

myself, other members of the subcommittee may submit additional 

questions in writing. If so, we may ask you all to submit answers 

for the record. But I know you’d do that eagerly. 

We’ll keep the record open for 2 weeks to receive any additional 

comments. With that, thanks again. The subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:50p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 
(33) 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

RESPONSES OF JONATHAN B. JARVIS TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR PAUL

MAINTENANCE BACKLOG

Question 1. Can you please explain to me how the Park Service plans to address the $10 billion maintenance backlog? 

Answer. We will continue to address maintenance needs on several fronts. Funding proposed for line-item construction will be targeted primarily to addressing critical health and safety projects, especially if the project involves the repair of a facility for which corrective maintenance has been deferred. The National Park Service 

(NPS) will also continue to use other sources of funding for similar projects, including repair and rehabilitation funds, housing funds, and recreational fee revenue. 

The NPS will use operational maintenance funding, including cyclic maintenance, 

to help slow the deterioration of assets awaiting rehabilitation and to maintain the 

improved condition of repaired assets so that these projects do not become deferred. 

We will continue to target funding toward strengthening assets’ critical systems (e.g. 

roofs, utility systems, foundations), which are the highest priorities because an overall asset will become further damaged and potentially non-functional if the critical 

system is impaired. We will also continue to work toward disposing of more lowpriority assets that are contributing to the maintenance backlog. 

Question 1a. I do understand that there are sensitive lands and certain special 

circumstances for which land must be acquired despite the maintenance backlog. 

Could you tell me why the NPS couldn’t use land exchanges to acquire sensitive 

lands rather than paying to acquire these additional lands? 

Answer. The NPS considers all possible avenues to address the most urgent needs 

for recreation; species and habitat conservation; and the preservation of landscapes, 

and historic and cultural resources. The NPS has used land exchanges to acquire 

needed land in certain situations. However, in many situations, land exchanges are 

not a viable option, and therefore the NPS uses other means to acquire lands from 

willing sellers. 

Question 1b. Does the National Park Service estimate the maintenance costs of 

new land acquisitions before making the decision to purchase additional land? If so, 

how does this factor into the decision-making process? Shouldn’t the Federal Government wait until the maintenance backlogs for all federal land management agencies are paid down before new public land units are established? 

Answer. Yes, the NPS estimates the costs of maintenance for new lands before 

proposing to acquire the lands. Estimated maintenance costs are one of the factors 

that are considered in the priority-setting process for the Administration’s annual 

budget requests. Most of the land the NPS acquires for existing parks is undeveloped, so there is relatively little contribution to the maintenance backlog from these 

new acquisitions. We do not believe that designations of new units of national parks 

or other public lands should be postponed because there is a maintenance backlog 

within existing units of public lands. 

Question 1c. Generally, when a business or individual cannot afford to maintain 

their assets they are forced to sell the unmanageable assets. Can you please explain 

to me why the National Park Service decides to purchase more assets when the NPS 

cannot take care of what they already own? 

Answer. The Administration’s proposal to increase funding for NPS land acquisition reflects the strong support for land conservation and additional outdoor recreational opportunities that was voiced at the 51 America’s Great Outdoors listening 
34 

sessions held during the summer of 2010. The lands identified in the FY 2012 budget request are strategic acquisitions that would strengthen our existing national 

parks while adding little to operational costs. In fact most of these acquisitions or 

easements would simplify management and reduce expenses related to signage, 

fencing, law enforcement patrols, legal permits, rights-of-way conflicts, fire fighting, 

road maintenance, habitat management and restoration, and fighting invasive species, and they would protect national parks in perpetuity. 

Question 1d. How does the National Park Service’s maintenance backlog compare 

to other Federal Land management agencies? Answer. The NPS’s maintenance backlog is an estimated $10.8 billion. The two 

other Department of the Interior land management agencies, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service and the Bureau of Land Management, have estimated maintenance backlogs 

of $2.9 billion and $438 million, respectively. We note that the NPS has far more 

buildings at its sites, which are used by far greater numbers of people, than do the 

other two agencies. 

RAISING REVENUES

Question 2a. Would the National Park Service consider selling land or property 

that is no longer financially viable for the NPS to continue to manage? For example, 

many of the National Parks in Alaska receive fewer than 5,000 visitors per year. 

Would the NPS be better served to raise revenues by selling those lands and transferring assets to other Park Units? 

Answer. There are a number of sites under the stewardship of the NPS that protect and interpret critically important aspects of our nation’s natural and cultural 

heritage, but that receive relatively few visitors. In many cases, low visitation is attributable largely to the fact that they are in remote locations. The value of these 

places to the American public, now and for the future, cannot and should not only 

be measured by the number of people who visit them. 

Lands managed by the NPS are nationally significant areas that have been determined by past Congresses and a number of Presidents (through the Antiquities Act) 

to be worthy of permanent protection for the benefit of future generations. If the 

NPS determined it should no longer manage certain park lands, it would require 

enactment of legislation to sell those park lands. 

Question 2b. Can you please provide a list of properties that the NPS leases to 

outside entities? Shouldn’t the NPS expand leasing opportunities? 

Answer. The National Park Service is gathering information for a national database on all current leases with terms in excess of one year. This database will enable us to track the number of types of leases, types of structures subject to the 

leases, revenue generated, and other information. We are in the final stages of gathering the lease information and would be happy to provide the listing once it is compiled. 

Concurrently, we are developing tools to help park managers decide how to care 

for our inventory of structures, including whether to use leases. By law, leasing of 

properties in parks is permitted only where the proposed use is consistent with park 

purposes and compatible with park programs. However, we anticipate leasing will 

increase to some degree over time as more park mangers become aware of the benefits of leasing. 

BUFFER ZONES/PARK SERVICE JURISDICTION

Recently, there have been a number of situations where the National Park Service 

endorsed proposals to increase NPS land or effectively create buffer zones around 

existing National Park Service Units. It is important to note that the Park Service 

only manages land within the boundaries of the National Park Units, and is not 

provided with the jurisdiction to manage lands outside of those Units. 

Question 3a. What role should the National Park Service play in creating and 

mandating policy for lands surrounding National Park Units? 

Question 3b. If the Park Service plays a role in overseeing surrounding lands or 

resources, the NPS would have extremely far reaching jurisdiction, wouldn’t you 

agree? 

Answer. The NPS does not create or mandate policy for lands surrounding national park units. The agency does not have jurisdiction over lands outside of park 

boundaries, and it does not play a role in overseeing surrounding lands or resources, 

except in cases where we have entered into a cooperative management agreement 

with a neighboring entity. However, in order to address negative impacts on park 

resources from activities outside of park boundaries, NPS managers try to work 

with surrounding communities to find solutions. Working cooperatively with partners beyond park boundaries is necessary as the NPS strives to fulfill its statutory 
35 

mandate to preserve the natural and cultural resources of parks unimpaired for future generations. 

RESPONSES OF JONATHAN B. JARVIS TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BARRASSO

The State of Wyoming and the Department of the Interior have reached an agreement on the sale and purchase of a state land in-holding section within the Grand 

Teton National Park. The agreement for purchasing the state lands requires timely 

action. The Grand Teton state land acquisition has been identified as a top priority 

by the National Park Service. 

Question 1a. Does the NPS remain committed to the agreement between the State 

of Wyoming and the DOI? 

Question 1b. What steps are being taken to fulfill the agreed upon timeline and 

accompanying terms? 

Answer. The NPS and Department of the Interior (D01) remain fully committed 

to acquisition of the Wyoming inholdings within Grand Teton National Park. A 40- 

acre subsurface mineral rights-only tract was acquired earlier this year for $2,000. 

Three tracts totaling 1,366 acres remain to be acquired at a combined appraised 

value of $107 million. The NPS has set aside $5 million from FY 2011 funds, and 

the President’s budget request for FY 2012 includes $10 million for acquiring the 

Snake River parcel by the January 5, 2013 deadline established in the agreement. 

The NPS intends to seek additional funds to complete this acquisition. 

The NPS and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are also determining if alternative methods to fund acquisition of the additional inholdings may be available, 

such as royalties or bonus bids from the sale of coal in Wyoming. A 2006 report to 

Congress prepared by the BLM pursuant to the Grand Teton National Park Land 

Exchange Act (P.L. 108-32) identified several options related to coal as potential 

methods of completing the acquisition. Recent and anticipated future sales of coal 

(through 2013) could potentially provide a source of funds for acquisition of the remaining lands, but would likely require additional authority from Congress. 

Question 2. In the National Park Service’s Call to Action report, there are a number of stated goals I would like to have clarified. The seventh goal is to create a 

new generation of citizen scientists. 

a. In the NPS’s view, who is a citizen scientist? 

b. Would citizen scientists need to have the same academic credentials as real 

scientists? 

c. How will the NPS guarantee the educational materials used to create a 

new generation of citizen scientists is peer reviewed and science-based? 

Answer. Citizen scientists are volunteers who receive training from the bureau to 

enable them to collect accurate field data and may range from school children to 

professional scientists. These highly productive volunteer efforts foster a sense of 

stewardship between people and parks. Citizen scientists working on NPS Biodiscovery events are generally supervised by an agency or professional scientist to ensure safety and credible and useful data collection, and to he educated about the 

resources of the park. Citizen scientist activities are designed and overseen by agency personnel with expertise in various fields of science. Related education materials 

may be peer reviewed by the professional community, depending on the intended 

use of the citizen-generated information. 

Question 3. The eleventh goal includes creating a new competitive state grant program within the Land and Water Conservation Fund State Assistance Program for 

strategically selecting projects that support large landscape conservation. 

a. Will the selected project for large landscape conservation be restricted to 

lands currently within the National Park system boundaries? 

b. If yes, what types of projects are envisioned with the State Assistance Program? 

c. If no, what type of projects are envisioned with the State Assistance Program, and what types of lands will be considered for large landscape conservation. 

Answer. The state grant program helps state and local governments preserve open 

space and provide outdoor recreational opportunities. It is not used for purchasing 

land within national park boundaries. 

The competitive component first proposed in the FY 2012 budget request would 

address the public’s concern about the lack of open space and outdoor recreational 

areas in certain urban and other areas, which was frequently conveyed during listening sessions for the America’s Great Outdoors initiative. It would fund ‘‘signature 

projects’’ that create more outdoor recreational opportunities and conserve open 
36 

space where access to natural areas has been inhibited or is unavailable; protect, 

restore, and connect open space and natural landscapes; and provide access to waterways. The projects would be expected to be larger in scale and would likely require and receive greater amounts of funding than has typically been awarded. 

Question 4. The twelfth goal includes the protection and restoration of waterways 

across the country by establishing national system water trails. 

a. Is this goal different from the Wild and Scenic River designation? 

b. Water is obviously very fluid and crosses many ownership boundaries. How 

will the NPS advance this goal as water ways leave or come into NPS lands? 

c. What criteria will be used for protection purposes? 

d. What water trails need to be restored? 

e. How does the NPS envision managing a national water system? 

f. What would the costs be for the NPS to manage a national water system? 

g. Will a national water system or water trails affect, in any way, previously 

agreed upon water compacts between States, localities, and tribes? 

Answer. The goal for a national system of water trails is different from Wild and 

Scenic River designation. Congress designates rivers as part of the Wild and Scenic 

Rivers System in order to preserve them in a free-flowing condition for the enjoyment of present and future generations. The system of water trails, as currently envisioned, is intended to support community-based efforts to expand access to waterbased recreation. 

The national water trails system will use the authority of the National Trails System Act, which provides for National Recreation Trails to be designated administratively, for the designation of national water trails. National Recreation Trails are 

designated in response to applications from trail managers. Local trail managers 

continue to manage their trails. The management of water trails would not be related to the management of lands and waters within parks. 

The NPS helps to manage the designation process for National Recreation Trails. 

The process of application review and subsequent designation has been estimated 

at $2,000 per application. This cost is covered within existing NPS program’s and 

budget. There are no expected long term-costs to the NPS to manage a national 

water trail system. 

Partnerships are a key component to water trails. Landowner support will be necessary to receive designation. Community water trail users and local trail managers 

will identify restoration and water improvement goals appropriate to sustain waterbased recreation. 

National Recreation Trail applications require trails on State, local government, 

or private lands to have a statement of support from the State Trails Administrator. 

All concerns related to compacts between States, localities, and tribes would be addressed before designation and continue to be the responsibility of local and state 

officials. 

Question 5. The report states the NPS will manage the natural and cultural resources of the NPS to increase resilience in the face of climate change and other 

stressors. 

a. What are the other stressors? 

b. Can the National Park Service predict with accuracy what the weather will 

be, and what the subsequent impact on the landscape will be, in Yellowstone 

or any other park unit 5, 10, 50 years from now? 

c. Can computer models predict with accuracy what the weather will be, and 

the subsequent impact on the landscape, in Yellowstone or any other park unit 

5, 10, 50 years from now? 

Answer. Climate change is not the only stress affecting resources. Other stresses 

like habitat loss, invasive species, and pollution complicate species’ and ecosystems’ 

abilities to be resilient in the face of change. The NPS and its partners are analyzing historical impacts of climate change and future vulnerability of species and 

landscapes. Vulnerability comes from analysis of historical climate and impacts 

data, climate projections, and peer-reviewed published information on the sensitivity 

and adaptive capacity of plants, animals, and other resources. 

Because weather is the temperature, rainfall, and wind on a particular day, computer models cannot accurately predict the weather 5 to 50 years from now. On the 

other hand, models can project future climate, which is the average range of temperature, rainfall, and wind over an extended period of time. The NPS and its partners are using peer-reviewed published climate projections of climate 20 to 100 

years from now. These projections indicate what the climate may be under different 

plausible scenarios of global trends in energy use, population, economic activity, and 

technology development. So, computer models can provide projections of future cli-
37 

mate from which the NPS can analyze potential future impacts of climate change 

on landscapes, and take appropriate measures to make ecosystems more resilient 

to these impacts. 

Question 6. The twenty first goal calls for the creation of a new basis for NPS 

resource management to inform policy, planning, and management decisions and establish the NPS as a leader in addressing the impacts of climate change on protected areas around the world. 

a. Is the current basis for NPS resource management failing? 

b. If yes, what are the shortcomings of the existing basis? 

c. If no, why is a new basis needed? 

d. Why does the NPS need to assume the role of a leader in climate change? 

Answer a). No. However NPS approaches to resource management must respond 

to changing environmental conditions and new scientific knowledge. In order to increase resilience and management effectiveness in the face of emerging issues we 

believe now is the time to prepare a contemporary version of the 1963 Leopold Report to advise the NPS on focusing future resource management activities and resources. The Leopold Report was written as an advisory document to the NPS Director and Secretary of Interior by a committee of independent scientists, led by A. 

Starker Leopold. It proposed a science-based foundation to natural resource management in the NPS. Over the following decades, many of the principles in this report were adopted by the NPS professionals, used to train resource managers, and 

used to develop and improve NPS policies. An updated report, expanded to include 

both natural and cultural resource management will be useful in providing contemporary advice to NPS decision-makers. 

Answer c). Many elements of contemporary resource management are robust. 

However, emerging challenges include climate change, habitat fragmentation, biodiversity loss, and degradation of cultural resources. New scientific knowledge including datasets collected via remote sensing, increased modeling and computing 

power, new techniques for wildlife monitoring, and substantial new research findings, inform NPS resource management. This new knowledge must be integrated 

into NPS resource management policies, if those policies are to remain effective. 

Answer d). The National Park Service is responsible for preserving the Nation’s 

natural and cultural heritage, a stewardship that now includes protection of more 

than 84 million acres and reaches over 300 million visitors each year. Meeting that 

trust responsibility requires a robust scientific understanding of current conditions 

as well as future trends, and climate change affects both. Leadership is necessary 

to increase scientific understanding of climate change, analyze potential impacts, 

and effectively apply that information to resource management decisions. The NPS 

demonstrates leadership by working collaboratively through the Department of the 

Interior Climate Science Centers and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, as well 

as with other partnerships, including with state and Federal agencies, that promote 

science-based decision making. 

Question 7. The twenty second goal is to promote large landscape conservation by 

protecting continuous corridors through partnerships across public and private 

lands. 

a. How does the NPS define what is and what is not a continuous corridor? 

Answer. Our working definition identifies a ‘‘continuous corridor’’ as that which 

functionally links two or more areas that support viable ecosystems, natural habitats, wildlife populations, or cultural resources. By functional, the NPS means that 

with minimal management these corridors can allow the movement of species, continuation of ecosystem services, and maintenance of cultural resource integrity that 

are necessary to link and maintain the viability of the areas that the corridors connect. This working definition is similar to The Western Governors’ Association Wildlife Council draft definition (August 2011), which defines important wildlife corridors as crucial habitats that provide connectivity over different time scales (including seasonal or longer) among areas used by animal and plant species. Wildlife corridors can exist within unfragmented landscapes or join naturally or artificially 

fragmented habitats, and serve to maintain or increase essential genetic and demographic connection of aquatic and/or terrestrial populations. 

b. What other federal land agencies will be public partners in creating continuous corridors? 

Answer. Protection of wildlife and cultural corridors requires the collaboration of 

federal agencies that manage or support protected lands including, but not limited 

to, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Department of Defense, Bureau of In-
38 

dian Affairs, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Tennessee 

Valley Authority, and National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. 

c. Will state lands be considered for the continuous corridors? 

Answer. Yes, states will be key partners in the conservation of continuous corridors as landowners and as law-and policymakers that affect land use. 

d. Does the NPS believe the creation of continuous corridors is in the public 

good and eminent domain powers could be used to obtain strategic private lands 

to make a corridor continuous? 

Answer. The NPS believes that continuous corridors will result in a public good 

through the conservation and restoration of intact natural ecosystems and the preservation of cultural resources. As stated in Action #22, NPS will achieve this goal 

through voluntary partnerships across public and private lands. The NPS will work 

with willing sellers to acquire land within park boundaries and will seek to create 

partnerships with federal, tribal, state, and local governmental entities, non-governmental organizations, and private landowners to create continuous corridors. This 

approach is consistent with recommendations in Rethinking the National Parks.* 

the 21st Century (National Park System Advisory Board, 2001) which states: ‘‘Parks 

cannot survive as islands of biodiversity. They need to be linked with other natural 

areas through wildlife migratory corridors and greenways. These connections can 

only be created through partnerships.’’ Other land protection tools, such as conservation easements, will be important parts of a strategy in conserving corridors 

as land ownership when implementing landscape-scale conservation efforts. 

e. What are the boundaries of the five geographic regions mentioned in goal 

twenty two? 

Answer. The five geographic regions referenced in Action #22 have not been determined. The NPS is currently evaluating a number of areas where continuous corridors could be identified, restored if necessary, and conserved. The NPS is committed to involving landowners, other stakeholders, and the general public in the 

selection of the regions. 

f. Will the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund be targeted to make 

strategic land acquisitions for corridors outside of national parks? 

Answer. The NPS has no authority to acquire lands outside the boundaries of 

units of the National Park System except for congressionally authorized trails in the 

National Trails System and rivers designated in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. 

Question 8. The twenty sixth goal is to return the American Bison to the landscape. 

a. Where will the three wild bison populations be located across the central 

and western United States? 

b. Will the NPS, tribes, private landowners, or other land management agencies manage the bison? 

c. What is the target number for each of the three bison herds? 

d. How many total acres will be required to sustain the desired population 

levels? 

e. Will the NPS provide the funding for managing the bison herds? 

f. Outside of Yellowstone National Park, what current NPS lands are candidates for bison population? 

Answer. Specific locations and a target number are undetermined at this time. 

The NPS is working closely with state, federal, and private partners to discuss opportunities for bison conservation. Depending upon location, bison could be managed 

by tribes, the Intertribal Bison Committee, federal, or private partners. Bison are 

currently managed at Badlands National Park, Wind Cave National Park, Theodore 

Roosevelt National Park, Chickasaw National Recreation Area, Tallgrass Prairie 

National Preserve, Grand Teton National Park, and Yellowstone National Park. The 

NPS would only fund wildlife management on NPS lands. 

The DOI Bison Conservation Initiative, signed by former Secretary of the Interior 

Dirk Kempthorne on October 28, 2008, called for federal agencies to coordinate management of existing bison herds on federal lands, research bison genetics and disease, and study partnerships to increase existing herds or establish new ones to assist in the ecological recovery of the species. The NPS will continue to implement 

bison conservation strategies based upon rigorous scientific goals and objectives outlined in the 2008 Initiative in order to ensure the perpetuation of this iconic species. 

Question 9. The twenty seventh goal is to protect natural darkness as a precious 

resource. 
39 

a. What basis is there for natural darkness to be managed as a precious resource? 

Answer. National Park Service 2006 Management Policies identifies Natural 

Darkness as both a natural resource and a park value. References to the value of 

starry night skies in a park setting are also found in NPS policy statements dating 

back to at least 1997. 

We note that protection of natural darkness is a growing park visitor interest. 

This is evidenced by ranger program statistics that shows sharply increasing participation in park stargazing programs, visitor surveys conducted by academic institutions, and a high number of popular media articles on the subject. Furthermore, the 

NPS has conducted measurements of night sky quality at numerous parks, showing 

that few NPS units still retain natural or near-natural night skies and a large fraction of them experience degradation of night sky quality due to poor quality outdoor 

lighting. The NPS is building on the successes of local initiatives (private sector, 

academia, and local government), which are grounded in opportunities for increased 

tourism and other forms of economic growth. 

b. What light sources are incompatible within a Dark Sky Cooperative for 

natural darkness? For example, would a campfire be incompatible? Would a 

flashlight be incompatible? Would a highway with vehicles traveling at night be 

incompatible? Would the lights from power plant be incompatible? What about 

house lights from in-holder properties? What types of future light sources would 

be precluded from use within a Dark Sky Cooperative? 

Answer. Best management practices for outdoor lighting recommend using light 

only when it is needed (e.g. turning off when not needed, using timers or motion 

sensors), shielding the light so that all light shines downward, and using the right 

amount of light for the application. This guidance does not preclude the use of light 

for human safety, utility, and convenience. Many lighting manufacturers offer ‘‘dark 

sky friendly’’ outdoor lighting fixtures. Using such lighting results in a substantial 

improvement in night sky quality while also being energy efficient, reducing glare, 

and improving visibility. Portable lights, headlights, and campfires cause far less 

impact to the environment than permanent fixed lighting and generally are not addressed within the context of lighting guidance for natural resource conservation. 

Lighting from private residences, municipalities, and industrial sites can impact 

night sky quality. Night sky friendly solutions for those applications have been successfully implemented in many locations and on many different levels, ranging from 

city and county ordinances to purely voluntary measures. 

We do not anticipate that any future sources would be precluded from use within 

the Dark Sky Cooperative. On the contrary, most new forms of lighting, including 

emerging Light Emitting Diode (LED) lighting technology, can actually further the 

effectiveness of night sky conservation. LEDs are more easily directed, can be more 

easily controlled with smart circuitry, can shift colors and dim readily, and can be 

more finely tuned to the human necessity. 

c. What is the minimal number of square miles needed to create a Dark Sky 

Cooperative? 

Answer. The minimum size to protect natural darkness will depend on the objectives set forth by those wishing to participate including public land managers, local 

communities, chambers of commerce, state tourism offices and the citizens of the 

area. The NPS expects the Dark Sky Cooperative on the Colorado Plateau to unfold 

through voluntary participation. There is not likely to be a contiguous boundary, but 

instead a patchwork of supporters and participants across the landscape. The larger 

the area, the more effective the measures will be toward conserving the dark night 

sky. Success from an NPS perspective would mean that the entire Colorado Plateau 

would see economic value and growth through tourism, improvement to its natural 

resource condition, and the preservation of its cultural heritage through participation in a Dark Sky Cooperative. 

Question 10. One of the major goals in the Call to Action is connecting people to 

parks. National Parks in Wyoming attract nearly 6.3 million visitors every year. 

Many of these visitors come by motorcycle and they help support local economies. 

Motorcyclists seek out the sights, scenery, camping, recreation opportunities, and 

roads suited to motorcycle touring that National Parks, like Yellowstone and the 

Grand Teton offer in Wyoming and that other Parks offer across the country. 

a. What are your impressions of the economic impact that motorcyclists have 

on areas surrounding many of our National Parks? 

b. What are you doing to encourage even more motorcyclists to discover our 

National Parks? 
40 

Answer. Although many visitors travel by motorcycle to national park units, the 

NPS does not calculate economic impacts specifically for motorcyclists. The NPS National Tourism Strategic Plan encourages parks to work with tourism partners in 

our gateway communities to invite all Americans—and our foreign guests—to experience their national treasures. In some cases, these tourism partners identify package tour providers who accommodate a particular market interest based on travel 

themes and transportation modes—motorcycles and bicycles for example. A result 

of this is a growing trend among foreign travelers to purchase tour packages that 

feature motorcycles as their mode of travel to national parks. Wherever appropriate, 

park managers work with their partners to educate these visitors on means of enjoyment and safe routes and practices. 

October 6, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and 

Natural Resources, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL: 

The National Park Foundation and I greatly appreciated your invitation to testify 

before the Subcommittee on National Parks at the September 21, 2011 hearing to 

review the National Park Service report, A Call To Action: Preparing for a Second 

Century of Stewardship and Engagement. As I stated in my testimony, the Foundation is eager to assist the Park Service in finding creative and innovative ways to 

meet the goals outlined in A Call To Action, including its call for an endowment, 

and to strengthen the important role of philanthropy and partnership in the next 

century for parks. 

Senator Paul has asked me to estimate the amount of private funds that the 

Foundation provides to the Park Service each year. I am proud to share that the 

Foundation provided $22 million in grants, program support and contributed goods 

and service to the National Park Service in FY2010. In the previous five years 

(FY2006-FY2010) the Foundation has provided $95 million in grants and program 

support and more than $28 million in contributed goods and services to the NPS, 

a total contribution of over $123 million and an average of $25 million annually. 

I should also note that, unlike other Congressionally chartered nonprofits established to support land management agencies, the Foundation receives no federal appropriations and raises every dollar it contributes to our parks. 

I want to extend my sincere thanks to you and to Senator Paul for your keen interest and questions at the September 21, 2011 hearing, and for your ongoing support of the Park Service. Of course, I would be delighted to provide additional information and respond to any further questions you might have. 

Sincerely, 

NEIL MULHOLLAND. 
(41) 

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

STATEMENT OF DERRICK A. CRANDALL, COUNSELOR, NATIONAL PARK

HOSPITALITY ASSOCIATION

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Derrick Crandall 

and I am delighted to submit the following statement as a representative of the National Park Hospitality Association (NPHA). NPHA is honored to contribute to the 

discussion of the future of the National Park System and, in particular, to provide 

the Subcommittee with our comments on the recently released report entitled A Call 

to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement. 

Concessioners are proud of the important role they play in helping people enjoy 

parks. Visitors come to the national parks to be inspired by the beauty of the parks 

while relaxing, recreating, learning, and having a good time with family and friends. 

What we do as concessioners has a great deal to do with the overall experience 

when they visit the park. We are an integral part of the national park experience 

and an important element in helping the NPS meet its mission. We are working 

hard at demonstrating best practices in environmental management, and are ISOcertified in many parks. We are active in offering healthy, sustainable foods to park 

visitors. We are true partners with the National Park Service. 

Concessioners have served park visitors since the 1870’s and today serve some 

100 million park visitors annually in approximately 160 park units, providing food 

and lodging, transportation and retail services, outfitter and guide services and 

more. NPHA members have a combined workforce of nearly 25,000 persons—mostly 

front-line, visitor-contact jobs—and provide in excess of $1 billion in goods and services to visitors annually. Franchise fee payments to NPS generated from the approximately 600 concessions contracts are now approaching $100 million annually, 

or about the combined sum raised annually by the National Park Foundation and 

members of the Friends Alliance. 

And concessioners do far more than generate franchise fees. Our Guest Donation 

programs operate in partnership with local friends organizations and the National 

Park Foundation (NPF). NPF-associated programs alone, in 13 parks, have generated almost $2 million for deserving park projects since 2006, including more than 

$500,000 in the year ending June 30, 2011. Concessioner marketing and park promotion efforts exceed $10 million annually, and are coordinated with the marketing 

and promotion efforts of states and gateway communities that equal that amount. 

In addition, concessioners have made significant financial investment in the visitor 

infrastructure of many park units. 

Concessioners are now actively involved in efforts to promote the National Park 

System and to reach those Americans unaware of the great benefits available 

through time in our parks rather than focusing our efforts on specific parks and 

services and traditional park visitors. Most importantly, concessioners are committed to meeting America’s needs—needs for healthier lifestyles, for better and lifelong educational opportunities, for strong local and regional economies that can sustain and protect our parks, and for connecting all Americans to our parks across 

differences in regions, ages, income and ethnicity. 

COMMENTS ON A CALL TO ACTION

NPHA commends the efforts of the National Park Service in producing A Call to 

Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement. We applaud the report’s overriding philosophical goals: creativity, flexibility and partnerships. We believe the National Park Service’s commitment to these goals will support excellence in visitor experience long into the future. The report is timely and 

deals with important issues facing national parks today. A Call to Action focuses 
42 

* Reports have been retained in subcommittee files. 

on encouraging people to explore our parks and also recognizes an increased role 

for parks in helping people to lead healthy and happy lives. 

Concessioners have expressed—and acted on—their commitment to support parks 

in many ways. NPHA believes that the key to a healthier America lies in encouraging people to have fun in the great outdoors—and that increased physical activity, 

leading to better overall health, will be a natural result of such encouragement. This 

value is exemplified in Action Step #6 of A Call to Action: Take a Hike, Call Me 

in the Morning. We have worked with the Institute at the Golden Gate on several 

break-through meetings and the report Park Prescriptions: Profiles and Resources 

for Good Health from the Great Outdoors, which is attached.* We played a central 

role in bringing the health agenda to the America’s Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative, 

including uniting dozens of recreation and health organizations for the special AGO 

listening session on Health and the Great Outdoors in August 2010. 

We also applaud Action Step #8, Eat Well and Prosper, which highlights the role 

of national park concessioners in offering park visitors healthy food choices. Our 

members already offer healthy food to most park visitors, as well as information on 

continued healthy eating at home. And we plan on increasing these efforts. But it 

takes partnership and cooperation. Not all parks have easy access to locally grown 

foods for the full period of operation, and National Park Service approval of menus 

and pricing can be a barrier to these goals. Concessioners seek to not only offer 

healthy, reasonably priced and sustainably produced foods, but also to make our 

food operations reflect environmental best practices. Our members have achieved remarkable reductions in waste generation and energy and water use, and have even 

worked with local food suppliers to ‘‘return-ship’’ compostable wastes to be used in 

producing more food. Some of these efforts are showcased in another Institute at 

the Golden Gate report, Food for the Parks: Case Studies of Sustainable Food in 

America’s Most Treasured Places, which is also attached.* 

A Call to Action shows a very strong commitment to reaching America’s youth, 

helping our next generation abandon its increasingly sedentary lifestyle and enjoy 

and sustain our nation’s parks—a sentiment NPHA supports completely. We are 

proud that concessioners have long supported—and support today—outreach programs like NatureBridge and school trips to parks. These actions and more will become part of the broader effort to prepare the National Park Service for another 100 

years of serving and aiding the American public. 

SUPPORTING AND BUILDING ON A CALL TO ACTION

The National Park Service can serve the nation well over the next 100 years, especially through actions and programs in partnership with other government agencies, businesses serving visitors in and near park units, national and local friends 

organizations, conservation organizations and others. To unite and empower these 

park partners, the National Parks Conservation Association, National Park Foundation and NPHA will organize a first-ever America’s Summit on National Parks in 

January 2012. The Summit will draw leaders from across the nation to Washington 

to meet with Members of Congress and National Park Service officials, with medical 

and education community leaders and more. The Summit will acknowledge the energies invested over several decades in crafting visions for America’s national parks 

and the National Park Service, review A Call to Action and then unite park partners around supplemental actions designed to make national parks relevant and 

valued to all Americans. 

As longtime partners of the agency in protecting park resources and serving visitors, NPHA believes there are additional courses of action required to fully prepare 

the National Park Service to welcome a new century. We are delighted to pledge 

support to NPS efforts on the 36 identified action steps as well as outline important 

additional actions that will build upon A Call to Action. In this light we offer the 

committee several ideas and suggestions. 

First, national parks have long been a major focus for family activity. Yet the 

word ‘‘family’’ does not appear in A Call to Action at any point in the report. We 

plan to continue to focus on helping American families plan and enjoy multigenerational park experiences for the next 100 years. 

Second, we plan to continue another long tradition of involvement in helping 

Americans—and international visitors—reach national parks. Many of the early concessions operations in parks involved partnerships with railroads. We continue to 

work with transportation companies and public transportation agencies in the 21st 

century to help visitors access our parks, and believe that there are exciting opportunities ahead. 
43 

And third, we strongly encourage actions to reach active younger American servicemen and servicewomen, their families and recently discharged military members. 

Their service can and should be rewarded with special invitations to enjoy America’s 

national parks. Moreover, the age and diversity of America’s military community 

make them especially important to efforts to share the benefits of parks with all 

Americans. 

NPHA OFFERED SUGGESTIONS TO NPS PLAN DEVELOPMENT

NPHA offered the National Park Service several specific suggestions for inclusion 

in the A Call to Action plan. Our suggestions were not included, but we believe 

these ideas deserve attention as you consider actions regarding national parks and 

other National Park Service activities. These steps would increase visitor satisfaction, better connect guests to parks and increase and streamline fee collection efforts—actions that we estimate would achieve a sustainable annual gain of at least 

$110 million in revenue and savings. The key steps include: 

Campground Improvements: The National Park Service needs to take action to reverse the decline in use of its campgrounds while also reducing operation and management costs. The National Park Service should take advantage of its partners in 

the private sector by calling upon concessioners to develop and implement new operational strategies. By modernizing, better marketing and better maintaining campground operations, the National Park Service can increase visitor satisfaction and 

campsite occupancy, save millions in operating costs and redeploy staff to still provide the interpretive and other services so valued by park campers. 

Incentivize Concessioners: Concessioners are proud of their efforts to meet visitor 

needs and protect park resources. Many exceed performance required under concessions contracts. Yet current evaluations do not provide for any rating above ‘‘satisfactory.’’ We propose that concessioner evaluation include an opportunity to earn 

‘‘outstanding’’ and/or ‘‘superior’’ ratings and become eligible for contract extensions. 

Extending contract period for valuable partners will also substantially reduce NPS 

costs for prospectus development and offer evaluation. 

Increase Franchise Fees: NPS now collects nearly $100 million annually in franchise fee payments by concessioners. This income stream—used for vital maintenance and other priority purposes—can grow substantially if concessioner services 

are expanded appropriately. A national strategic business plan could define added 

services and help concessioner revenues increase by as much as 50% within four 

years. 

Cooperative Research: NPS and concessioners each fund research on visitor experiences and on attracting non-traditional visitors to parks. These efforts should be 

unified, with the results guiding cooperative actions. 

Promotion of Non-Peak Periods: Cooperative efforts should be launched to expand 

non-peak visitation. Part of the promotion can involve activities showcasing American Indian artists and other educational/cultural events. Increases in total park visitation of five million will result in entrance fee and franchise fee increases with 

little additional operational costs. 

Expanding Annual Pass Sales: Sales of the America the Beautiful Pass could be 

increased from the current level of 260,000 passes annually to at least 500,000 annually if sales were promoted by concessioners at the time lodging and other reservations are taken. Holders of annual passes are more likely to plan visits to other 

park units—including lesser visited sites. Purchased passes could either be mailed 

to visitors or held for pick up—much like will-call tickets are at theaters. 

Expand the Guest Donation Program: The current Guest Donation Program generates more than $500,000 annually for park programs and projects in about a 

dozen units, mostly under agreements done in cooperation with the National Park 

Foundation. The program is burdened by red tape and poor communication to guests 

and concessioners about the uses of contributed funds. The program can be re-energized and expanded greatly to all park lodging operations, to non-lodging services 

and to gateway communities. In addition, guests making a donation during their 

visit to a park could be invited to learn how they could make more significant contributions to either a specific park unit or the entire system. Participating concessioners would then arrange contact between interested guests and either the National Park Foundation or a local friends group. 

NEEDED: A BETTER VISITOR SERVICES INITIATIVE

Above and beyond A Call to Action, there is a critical need to respond to changing 

needs and expectations by park visitors. We are concerned that park visitation has 

declined by some 5% since the late 1980’s—despite an increase in the U.S. population of nearly 30%. The decline in hours spent in parks since the 1980’s is even 
44 

more dramatic—meaning visitors are spending, on average, fewer hours during each 

experience. Overnight stays in NPS campgrounds are also down—some 17%—when 

overall U.S. campground use is up, and when ownership of RVs has reached a new 

high of one in every 12 U.S. households. 

To address these concerns, NPHA members have developed a plan to improve 

park visitor experience. Our plan is called the Better Visitor Services Initiative and 

is attached. It has five elements: 

• Improve Visitor Infrastructure to Attract More Visitors.—Park visitor infrastructure must support relevant experiences for 21st century Americans, and 

must support an increase of visitation parallel to the overall growth of the U.S. 

population. 

• Revitalize NPS Campgrounds.—As mentioned earlier, NPS campgrounds are 

significantly underutilized, and use has declined markedly. Campgrounds need 

modernization and new options, including simple shelters like cabins, tents and 

tepees/chickees available for rent. 

• Encourage Concessioner Investment in the Parks.—Nearly all concessions contracts under the 1998 National Park Service Concessions Management Improvement Act have been for 10 years, despite authority for longer contracts. NPS 

should reduce the deferred maintenance backlog and reduce the need for taxpayer-funded capital investments by encouraging concessioner investments 

through longer contract terms. 

• Rethink Park Fees.—Entrance and other fees by the NPS should be studied 

carefully to develop a fee program that yields revenues to aid park operations 

and better supports overall the park mission. 

• Initiate Outreach Efforts to Boost Visitation.—Park experiences deliver great 

benefits—including better mental and physical health, education about our nation’s history and the environment, regional economic benefits and more. Yet a 

large portion of the public is unaware of national parks—especially young people and the urban, economically disadvantaged, and minority components of our 

population. 

SUMMARY

Mr. Chairman and Members, we commend the National Park Service on a job 

well done in its plan entitled A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of 

Stewardship and Engagement. The plan recognizes the need for parks to encourage 

Americans to get back in touch with nature, engage in physical activity and outdoor 

recreation, and connect to the magnificent culture, heritage and landscapes that are 

showcased in our National Park System. It recognizes the need to reach out to youth 

to encourage them to share in the wonder and enjoyment of our national parks and 

discourage the increasingly sedentary lifestyles that are contributing to our 

healthcare crisis. It also recognizes the need to expand park visitation to encourage 

minorities, disadvantaged communities, new Americans and urban residents to see 

their national parks for themselves and to build a broader constituency for America’s great outdoors. 

The National Park Hospitality Association and the national park concessioners 

want to help continue the contributions of the National Park Service to our national 

well-being. The upcoming 100th anniversary of the agency’s creation offers a wonderful opportunity to find new and innovative ways to improve the parks and create 

a new generation of Americans who share in the wonder of this amazing legacy. We 

thank you for considering our thoughts and recommendations. We would be delighted to provide additional information and respond to any questions you might 

have. 

STATEMENT OF JEFF CHAPMAN, PUBLIC LANDS COMMITTEE CHAIR, BACK COUNTRY

HORSEMEN OF WASHINGTON

Representing Back Country Horsemen of Washington, I’d like to state that I’m 

very disappointed with this report. I was a very active participant in the Americas 

Great Outdoors effort from the beginning and believed it held great promise for 

showcasing the various issues that related to our federal public lands. While it 

seemed to have a very limited agenda at first, recreation users from across the nation became involved. There is indeed much disagreement among public land users, 

but together we are the collective drama that is America. That is what National 

Parks were supposed to be about, showcasing the thoughtfulness and efforts of a 

growing Nation. The main group I am part of, pack and saddle stock users, represent the continued legacy of the working human and animal effort that built 
45 

America and managed our public lands as well as our National Parks. Aldo Leopold 

was an avid horse rider. What led to treasured Wilderness areas throughout America was the vision of horsemen and hikers, each of which I am an NGO Director 

for. 

The NPS A Call to Action has none of this in it. None of the goals cover recreational trails or maintenance or even Wilderness. It doesn’t recognize the importance of stock use or even hiking for that matter. It strips the AGO effort of all the 

rural, active recreation, and even historic context. It is simply a sterilized gratuity 

to the Get Kids Outdoors theme by allowing short attention span kids to observe 

National Parks through a looking glass made of wireless technology and very controlled visitations. It sets National Parks up as museums in the name of conservation, and it makes conservation as a trendy look-but-do-not-touch ethic. It does show 

that the intent of using LWCF funds is not to improve our public lands experience 

but to purchase private lands and make them off-limits to people. Simply said, we, 

the Americans that lived our lives around public lands (I worked at Mt Rainier National Park) are being written out of history. 

A Call to Action would be fine if it was only one chapter of a much bigger story. 

It reads more like A Call to Inaction. 

Thank you 

Æ