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

56–802 PDF 2010

S. HRG. 111–476 

NATIONAL PARKS BILLS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

S. 553 S. 1017 

S. 1018 S. 1537 

S. 1629 S. 2892 

S. 2933 S. 2951 

H.R. 3804 

MARCH 17, 2010 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

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 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

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 

Burr, Hon. Richard, U.S. Senator From North Carolina ..................................... 4 

Burris, Hon. Roland, U.S. Senator From Illinois .................................................. 7 

Sessions, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator From Alabama ................................................. 11 

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

Wenk, Daniel N., Deputy Director, National Park Service, Department of 

the Interior ........................................................................................................... 13 

Wilson, D. Reid, Executive DirectorConservation Trust for North Carolina ...... 27 

(1) 

NATIONAL PARK BILLS 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 2010 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY

AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:45 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. The Subcommittee on National Parks will come 

to order. 

The purpose of this afternoon’s hearing is to consider nine bills 

pending before the subcommittee. Although we have a long list of 

bills on the agenda, for the most part, the bills appear to be fairly 

straightforward, so we should be able to consider them quickly. 

The bills to be considered today include S. 553, to revise the 

route of the North Country National Scenic Trail in Minnesota; S. 

1017 and S. 1018, which are bills to reauthorize the Cane River 

National Heritage Area Commission in Louisiana and to authorize 

the National Park Service to enter into an agreement with Northwestern State University to construct a curatorial facility for the 

Cane River Creole National Historical Park; S. 1537, which would 

designate Dr. Norman Borlaug’s home in Cresco, Iowa, as a National Historic Site; S. 1629, authorizing the National Park Service 

to study the New Philadelphia archeological site in Illinois to determine its suitability for addition to the National Park System; S. 

2892, to establish the Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area 

in Alabama; S. 2933, to authorize a National Park Service study 

of the Colonel Charles Young home in Xenia, Ohio; Senate bill 

2951, Senator Burr’s bill to authorize the acquisition of certain 

lands for addition to the Blue Ridge Parkway; and H.R. 3804, a bill 

making minor and technical corrections to several laws affecting 

the National Park Service. 

The subcommittee has received a statement from Senator Voinovich in support of his bill, S. 2933, and also a statement from the 

Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation in support of S. 1537. Without objection, both statements will be included in the record. 

[The prepared statements of Mr. George Voinovich, and Tom 

Spindler follow:] 
2 

U.S. SENATE, 

Washington, DC, March 12, 2010. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN: In an effort to protect an important chapter of American history, I recently introduced the Colonel Charles Young Home Study Act 

(S.2933). As a Buffalo Soldier serving with the 9th and 10th Cavalry and the 25th 

Infantry, Col. Young overcame severe institutional and racial intolerance to be the 

third African American graduate of West Point, the first African American national 

park superintendent, the first black U.S. military attache, the first African American officer to command a Regular Army Regiment, and the highest-ranking black 

officer in the Regular Army until his death. 

Originally born into slavery, Col. Young made significant military and public service contributions to the nation and my home state of Ohio. His service in the Army 

between 1884 and 1922 rode the tide of the turbulent changing race relations in the 

United States. At the time, there were few assignments deemed suitable for a black 

officer, but undeterred, Col. Young made the most of his career. He leveraged his 

experiences and distinguished himself as a commander of combat troops in the 

Spanish-American and Mexican Wars. 

As the commander of an Army unit assigned to protect and develop Sequoia National Park and General Grant National Park in the California, Col. Young lead efforts to protect the parks, completed the first wagon-road into Sequoia National 

park, and built lasting relations with the local populace. Col. Young’s story, as it 

relates to our national parks, is so crucial to our modern day parks system that it 

was recently highlighted in the PBS documentary film by Ken Burns titled ‘‘The National Parks: America’s Best Ideas,’’ a clip of which you can find on my website here: 

http://www.voutube.com/senvoinovich#p/c/l/D7x59allUqo. 

The Colonel Charles Young Home Study Act would authorize the Secretary of the 

Interior to conduct a special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the Colonel Young’s home, already a National Historic Landmark, in Xenia, Ohio as a unit of the National Park Service. 

I want to thank you and your fellow committee members for agreeing to consider 

the legislation during your March 17; 2010 National Parks Subcommittee hearing. 

When this legislation comes before the full committee, I would respectfully request 

and appreciate your support for this worthy piece of legislation. 

Sincerely, 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, 

U.S. Senator. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TOM SPINDLER, PRESIDENT, NORMAN BORLAUG HERITAGE

FOUNDATION, CRESCO, IA 

Chairman Udall & Members of the Subcommittee on National Parks, on behalf 

of the Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to speak with unqualified support for S. 1537, a bill introduced by Senator 

Grassley of Iowa authorizing the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service to designate the Norman Borlaug birthplace and 

boyhood homes and farms near Cresco, Iowa as a National Historic Site and a unit 

of the National Park Service. 

While the members of the committee are likely familiar with the accomplishments 

of Dr. Borlaug, I would like to briefly summarize for the record why his birthplace, 

childhood home and legacy are deserving of enshrinement as a National Historical 

Site. 

Dr. Norman E. Borlaug (1914-2009) was an agricultural scientist who was born 

and raised in the rural heartland near Cresco, Iowa, and was educated early in life 

in a typical one room Iowa schoolhouse. While his origins were somewhat typical 

for the time, there was nothing typical about his life and accomplishments. After 

completing his education in plant pathology, he spent his career working to improve 

international agricultural productivity by increasing wheat production through a series of innovative cross breeding techniques that in turn created a set of high yield, 

disease resistant varieties. While this seminal work may seem obscure or even trivial to the uninformed, it would be difficult if not impossible to overstate the importance of this work in terms of reducing global hunger, increasing global stability 

and, in the long term, increasing the probability of the survival of the human species itself. As a result of his insight, dedication, and work, Dr. Borlaug is credited 

with saving perhaps a billion lives during the 20th century, more than any person 
3 

in the history of the world. The agricultural transformation brought about by Dr. 

Borlaug’s work and accomplishments has come to be known as the ‘‘Green Revolution’’, and Dr. Borlaug is widely recognized as being the ‘‘father’’ of this development. For his work, Dr. Borlaug received hundreds of prestigious awards, one of 

which, the Congressional Gold Medal, was bestowed upon him by this body three 

years ago in 2007. Dr. Borlaug was also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom 

in 1987 and the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970. Along with Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, and Elie Wiesel, Dr. Borlaug is one of only five people 

to have ever received all three of these coveted awards, which have served as international recognition for their unending efforts to make the world a better place for 

all of humanity. 

Dr. Normal Borlaug passed away in September last year at the age of 95. Like 

other great humanitarians, Dr. Borlaug was passionately engaged in his work until 

the very end of his life, saying only a couple days before he passed away, ‘‘Africa, 

my mission is not finished.’’ Since his death, praise for and support of his body of 

work has come from nearly all reaches of the global community, and has included 

a resolution from this body (S.Res.273) as well. Dr. Borlaug is the definition of a 

great American and global humanitarian. 

As I noted above, I speak on behalf of the Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation 

(NBHF). This Foundation is a non-profit corporation with an all-volunteer board 

that for the past ten years has been dedicated to the preservation and interpretation 

of Dr. Borlaug’s legacy, birthplace and boyhood home. To accomplish these objectives, the Foundation has purchased and holds unencumbered control of two properties in rural Northeast Iowa that comprise approximately 100 acres and include 

Dr. Borlaug’s birthplace and boyhood homesteads as well as the country school that 

he attended as a youth. These sites are nationally significant both in terms of history and the scientific legacy of Dr. Borlaug. The Borlaug sites, set in the breadbasket of the Midwest, represent the crossroads of America where science and feeding the world met. Preserving these farms will not only help to preserve his legacy, 

but will provide a unique opportunity to interpret for the American public the importance of science in agriculture, and how pursuit of these two fields led Dr. 

Borlaug to help feed the world’s neediest peoples, and avoid the often predicted 

epidemics of mass starvation due to food shortages. Throughout his long life, Dr. 

Borlaug often stated how important his childhood was in shaping his character and 

work ethic, and the rich soils and cooperative ‘‘neighbor-help-neighbor’’ culture of 

the early 20th century rural Midwestern farming community provided the ideal incubator for his interest in agricultural production and helping his fellow man. 

It is our desire to turn ownership of the Borlaug properties over to the United 

States Government upon the establishment of the Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Birthplace and Childhood Home National Historic Site. We believe firmly that this could 

be a focal point of telling Dr. Borlaug’s story within the context of farm life in early 

20th century America. To date, the Foundation has been committed to promoting 

and interpreting Dr. Borlaug’s lifetime achievements and philosophy through preservation of the Borlaug properties and outreach educational programs such as the 

Norman Borlaug Education Day events and the Education Residency Program. 

Through countless hours of volunteer labor and monetary donations, Norman 

Borlaug’s boyhood home, barn, and the one room school house he attended have 

been preserved and restored. However, our Foundation has just recently acquired 

the birthplace home. It is in a state of disrepair, and major renovations are needed. 

Our resources are very limited, relying on local donations. As of now we would not 

be able to begin this renovation. While the Foundation recognizes the importance 

of preserving the physical manifestations of Dr. Borlaug’s early life in Iowa, our primary goal and focus is on the future. Namely, we consider the discussion and interpretation of Dr. Borlaug’s life, work and legacy, as both a scientist and humanitarian as our primary mission and interpretive themes. By looking at Dr. Borlaug’s 

life and achievements, current and future generations will be able to view Dr. 

Borlaug’s accomplishments at the intersection of the sciences and humanities. This 

in turn will serve as a starting point for their own understanding, appreciation and 

application of science in improving the conditions of the American and global communities, and inspire future generations to follow in Dr. Borlaug’s footsteps. 

Regional and local community support for this proposal is very strong. Currently, 

the NBHF collaborates with the City of Cresco, Howard County Economic Development, Iowa State University (ISU), volunteers, several area school districts, and the 

general public to provide tours, field trips, school day opportunities, summer interns 

for Iowa State University students and artist in residence experiences. The annual 

Norman Borlaug Harvest Fest is held each fall in Cresco and honors Dr. Borlaug 

and his family. It also provides tourism opportunities for the greater Northeast Iowa 

area. Field trips and education days have top-notch educators who volunteer from 
4 

ISU, NICC, and retired and currently practicing elementary teachers. Educational 

opportunities involve the arts, literacy, science, including ‘‘wheat and genetics’’ and 

agronomy, history of education and the one room school house, geography and global 

studies. But these educational experiences are limited given that all of it is through 

volunteerism. The ability to expand beyond our local area is not feasible given our 

limitations. The Foundation’s ultimate goal of a facility for educational outreach 

programs to the farm sites is not possible without a National Historic Site designation. The NBHF would continue to work with the Park Service where appropriate 

through volunteering with educational opportunities and programming, and assisting the Park Service with care and maintenance as needed. 

Your support for the creation of a National Historic Site honoring the work of Dr. 

Borlaug would ensure that his accomplishments and legacy would be remembered 

in perpetuity. In his 1970 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, Dr. Borlaug stated, 

It is a sad fact that on this earth at this late date there are still two worlds, ‘the 

privileged world’ and ‘the forgotten world’. The privileged world consists of the affluent, developed nations, comprising twenty-five to thirty percent of the world population, in which most of the people live in a luxury never before experienced by man 

outside the Garden of Eden. The forgotten world is made up primarily of the developing nations, where most of the people, comprising more than fifty percent of the 

total world population, live in poverty, with hunger as a constant companion and 

fear of famine a continual menace. Your support of this bill will ensure that we as 

Americans not only celebrate Dr. Borlaug’s legacy, but that we continue to work towards fulfilling his noble goals. 

On behalf of the Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation Board, I thank you for this 

opportunity to address your committee. 

Senator UDALL. At this time, I would like to recognize Senator 

Burr for his opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Senator BURR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for calling 

this hearing and thank you for a productive year so far. 

We do have a full agenda, and I will keep my remarks brief. 

Nine bills, one of those bills on the agenda today involves my home 

State of North Carolina, the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act, 

which I introduced, along with Senator Hagan, Webb, and Warner. 

I would like to submit statements from Senator Hagan and Senator 

Webb, as well as Representative Shuler and Price, who are also 

supporting the bill. 

[The prepared statements of Senators Hagan, and Webb, and 

Representatives Price and Shuler follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KAY R. HAGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA

Thank you to the Chairman and Ranking Member for your ongoing efforts to preserve and enhance our nation’s most pristine natural landscapes and historic national heritage areas. The Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act (S. 2951) offers a 

unique opportunity to continue this enduring commitment, and I thank the subcommittee for considering this important legislation. 

In North Carolina, we are fortunate to have an exceptionally diverse collection of 

national parks and public recreation areas. From Great Smoky Mountains National 

Park in the west, to Cape Hatteras National Seashore along the coast, North Carolina’s public lands provide visitors from all walks of life with opportunities to hunt, 

fish, hike, and simply appreciate the landscape. 

In particular, the Blue Ridge Parkway has for 75 years offered visitors from 

across the world some of the most spectacular views in America. Originally authorized to put Americans to work during the Great Depression, construction of the Blue 

Ridge Parkway began in 1935 near Cumberland Knob, North Carolina. Today, the 

nation’s first and longest protected roadway stretches more than 450 miles from 

Shenandoah National Park in Virginia to Great Smoky Mountains National Park 

in North Carolina. 

The Parkway’s breathtaking views attract nearly 20 million visitors per year, 

making it the most visited unit of the National Park System and one of the strongest economic engines in my state. Parkway overlooks encompass healthy forests and 
5 

wildlife habitats, pure mountain streams, and historic family farms. These views 

generate an estimated $2.3 billion in North Carolina and Virginia annually, creating 

and sustaining jobs throughout the southern Appalachian region. 

Unfortunately, despite the enduring cultural and economic import of the Parkway, 

federal efforts to protect high-priority views and ensure visitor safety have not kept 

pace with the Parkway’s growing popularity. As has been noted by others during 

today’s hearing, significant portions of land surrounding the Parkway are privately 

owned and subject to potential commercial development. Such development may 

threaten existing natural landscapes and discourage future visitation along the 

Parkway. Likewise, aging infrastructure threatens Parkway safety and has left portions of the Parkway closed to visitors. 

With the 75th Anniversary of the Parkway’s dedication occurring in September 

2010, Congress has a crucial opportunity to commemorate this important milestone 

and reaffirm the nation’s commitment to a safer and more scenic Parkway. To that 

end, the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act would authorize $75 million over five 

years to allow the National Park Service to acquire and preserve high-priority land 

surrounding this historic roadway. 

The proposed legislation would support long-term planning and new acquisition— 

by donation, by purchase with donated or appropriated funds, or by exchange—of 

up to 50,000 acres of land surrounding the Parkway. New land acquisitions would 

be entirely voluntary, with priority placed on enhancing scenic views; preserving 

recreational and natural resources; and, improving Parkway infrastructure to help 

ensure visitor safety. 

In addition, the legislation will ensure that the Park Service will submit to Congress an annual report detailing the condition of the Parkway, including threats and 

land preservation needs; a list of land acquisitions that have been completed or are 

underway; and, a list of priority land acquisitions to be pursued in the near-term. 

As an indication of the unique position that the Blue Ridge Parkway occupies both 

regionally and nationally, the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act carries bipartisan, 

bicameral support. Likewise, conservation groups from throughout the Southern Appalachian region have expressed strong support for these critical investments. 

I urge the subcommittee to support this effort, and to recognize that a renewed 

investment in the Blue Ridge Parkway is an investment in the North Carolina economy. Thank you once more for considering this important legislation and I look forward to working with the subcommittee to secure its consideration before the full 

Senate as quickly as possible. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JIM WEBB, U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA

Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr: Thank you for this opportunity to 

address the Subcommittee on National Parks. 

From our beaches to our pristine national parks and historic battlefields, Virginia’s tourism industry is a leading driver of the Commonwealth’s economic engine. 

According to the U.S. Travel Association, visitors to Virginia spent $19.2 billion in 

2007 and generated $2.6 billion in revenues for federal, state and local governments. 

The Association estimates that every $1 million spent by visitors creates 11 jobs 

within the tourism industry. 

With these figures in mind, I believe the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act is 

a sound investment for Virginia’s future. The Blue Ridge Parkway is one of the 

Commonwealth’s most significant tourist attractions, and has been nicknamed 

‘‘America’s Favorite Drive’’ by the National Park Service. As 2010 marks the Blue 

Ridge Parkway’s 75th anniversary, an expansion of the lands under the National 

Park Service’s protection is an appropriate way to celebrate the Parkway and ensure 

its continued viability into the future. 

As a longtime supporter of natural and cultural landmark preservation, I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to pass this legislation. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID E. PRICE, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NORTH

CAROLINA

I would first like to thank the distinguished Chairman and Ranking Member for 

their commitment to preserving America’s treasured landscapes. S. 2951, the Blue 

Ridge Parkway Protection Act, is in keeping with that commitment, and I appreciate your considering it today. 

The Blue Ridge Parkway runs for nearly 500 miles along the crest of the Blue 

Ridge mountains through North Carolina and Virginia touches boundaries with 

state parks, four national forests, and five federally designated wilderness areas. It 
6 

is truly a national treasure, and if you haven’t been, I hope you’ll make a point of 

going. 

The Blue Ridge Parkway is the most visited unit of the National Park system, 

with between 15 and 20 million visitors per year, and has been enjoyed by more 

than 850 million visitors since the park started counting in 1939. It’s also a critical 

economic driver for the region, generating about $2.3 billion in economic activity in 

both states annually. 

The Parkway is best known for its scenic view, but in addition to providing spectacular vistas, lands along the Parkway also provide clean water for downstream 

communities, support family farms, offer abundant forested wildlife habitat, and enable recreation. In fact, the Parkway is world renowned for its diversity. 

Unfortunately, the Parkway’s scenic, natural, and cultural integrity are threatened. For one thing, funding has not always kept pace with increasing visitation, 

aging infrastructure, and the need to work with local communities on protection of 

adjacent land. Additionally, in most places the Parkway is only 800 feet wide, and 

two-thirds of mountainside and rural farm landscapes that comprise the views are 

privately held. 

A National Park Service survey found that a significant majority of Parkway visitors consider the pristine, undeveloped landscape, and the scenic views they provide, 

as the biggest reason they choose to visit the Parkway and indicate they would be 

less likely to return to the Parkway if its scenic views were compromised. 

In light of public opinion, and in honor of the 75th anniversary of the Parkway, 

which will take place in September 2010, I was pleased to join Rep. Shuler and a 

number of my distinguished colleagues from North Carolina and Virginia in a bicameral, bipartisan, bi-state effort to preserve the integrity of this treasured national resource for us and for generations to come. 

We have introduced the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act, which would authorize $75 million over the next five years for the Park Service to acquire up to 50,000 

acres of land bordering the scenic roadway. 

When compared to the cost of compensating visitors for the lost views should development hinder or damage the views from the Parkway—which is estimated at 

over $5 billion—our legislation is a bargain! 

While there are no specific parcels defined in the bill, all land purchases would 

be voluntary, and the Park Service would place a priority on lands that meet three 

purposes: (1) adding more scenic views along the drive; (2) enhancing the parkway’s 

recreational and natural resources; and (3) eliminating or improving dangerous 

crossing and intersections. 

This bill would help to protect the views that make the Parkway such a popular 

attraction and roadway. I hope you’ll agree that ensuring the continued conservation 

of the land around the Parkway is a fitting way to celebrate the Parkway’s 75th 

year. Again, I thank the Committee for considering the bill and hope you will approve it for floor consideration. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. HEATH SHULER, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NORTH

CAROLINA

I first want to thank Chairman Udall, my friend from North Carolina, Senator 

Richard Burr, and members of the Subcommittee for convening this hearing to discuss, among other issues, S. 2951, The Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act. As you 

all have tremendous experience in developing legislation pertaining to our federal 

lands, I am grateful for the opportunity to hear your feedback on this legislation 

and hope that your suggestions can be incorporated into this bill at a later date. 

The Blue Ridge Parkway spans the western portions of North Carolina and Virginia, running a total of 469 miles through some of the most beautiful terrain in 

the southeastern United States. As the most visited unit of the National Park Service, the Parkway provides recreational benefits for countless American families who 

enjoy the scenic drive and the abundance of opportunities for outdoor activities 

along the way. 

The Parkway is also a valuable economic asset to the communities alongside of 

it, with Parkway visitors injecting roughly $2.3 billion each year into dozens of cities 

and towns that rely on a thriving tourism economy. 

In 2008, the National Park Service commissioned a detailed survey of Blue Ridge 

Parkway visitors to better understand what elements of the Parkway are of the 

greatest importance to them. In that survey, 97% of all visitors said that the scenic 

views and scenic drive were the most important attributes of the Parkway. Clearly, 

the natural beauty that can be observed from the roadway is what makes this the 

most popular unit of the entire Park Service. It is for this very reason that my col-
7 

leagues and I have introduced H.R. 4524, which is identical to S. 2951. Both of these 

bills would protect the most important lands along the Parkway and ensure that 

these scenic views are not disrupted by deforestation and development. 

S. 2951 would authorize the Park Service to acquire and incorporate into the 

boundary of the Blue Ridge Parkway up to 50,000 acres that are contiguous to current Parkway property. These properties must be identified by the Superintendent 

of the Parkway as top priorities for viewshed protection, and may only be acquired 

from willing sellers-eminent domain can not be used to carry out any portion of this 

bill. 

In working with the National Park Service during the drafting of this legislation, 

it is clear that there are concerns about specific portions of the bill, all of which we 

believe can be properly addressed with the help and expertise of this subcommittee. 

I am grateful that the Park Service has shown such willingness to work with Senator Burr, Senator Hagan, and the sponsors of the House bill-Representatives David 

Price, Rick Boucher, and Tom Perriello, and myself-to enhance portions of this bill 

pertaining to acquisition authority and how best to utilize the great resources and 

abilities of qualified land conservation groups. 

I thank you again for your time and attention to the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act. I look forward to hearing your suggestions on this bill, which will preserve 

the viewsheds of the Country’s most visited Park Service unit and protect the many 

local economies that depend on it. 

Senator BURR. This bill has bipartisan, bicameral support from 

North Carolina and Virginia. It is important for the continued enjoyment of the Blue Ridge Parkway. 

Annually, the Blue Ridge Parkway enjoys 19 million visitors, 

making it the most visited unit of the National Park System in the 

country. The parkway is a major attraction for the region and significantly contributes to the local economy. This bill would authorize the National Park Service to acquire land from willing sellers 

on a voluntary basis to protect areas that need the Park Service’s 

Blue Ridge Parkway Land Protection Plan. 

I understand the Park Service has some concerns with our bill, 

but that staff has been meeting to find language that works for all 

parties. I look forward to working with the Park Service to address 

any concerns and issues. 

I would like to welcome Mr. Reid Wilson from Raleigh, North 

Carolina, and thank all of our witnesses for being here today. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Burr. 

We will turn immediately to Senator Burris, who I understand 

is scheduled to preside over the full Senate at 4 p.m. 

So, Senator Burris, welcome. Without further ado, we would welcome your testimony. Thank you for taking the time to appear before us today. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROLAND W. BURRIS, U. S. SENATOR 

FROM ILLINOIS 

Senator BURRIS. Thank you, Chairman Udall, Ranking Member 

Burr, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear today to discuss my legislation, S. 1629. 

This legislation would direct the Secretary of Interior to perform 

a special resource study to evaluate the national significance, suitability, and feasibility of the New Philadelphia site, southeast of 

Springfield, Illinois, to be managed as a unit of the National Park 

Service. 

I feel this designation would prove especially important, adding 

to our history as a country. Archaeologists have pointed out that 

New Philadelphia was the first town before the Civil War founded, 
8 

planned, and legally adopted by a freed African American, Frank 

McWorter. National Significance for the site has been established 

by virtue of a National Historic Landmark designation in 2009, and 

the ultimate goal is to create a new national park at the site of the 

New Philadelphia settlement. 

Let me tell you a little bit about the history of this intriguing 

site. The history of Frank McWorter and New Philadelphia is one 

of daring, hard work, luck, and shrewd family leadership. 

Born a slave in South Carolina in 1777, Frank McWorter moved 

to Kentucky with his owner in 1795. He married Lucy, a slave from 

a nearby farm. Later, allowed to hire out his own time and labor, 

McWorter engaged in a number of enterprises—notably mining the 

minerals of the crude niter, an essential component of gunpowder— 

that proved profitable, allowing him to buy his wife’s freedom in 

1817, and his own freedom in 1819. 

Frank and Lucy McWorter left Kentucky for Illinois in 1830, the 

year the Thomas Lincoln family, with son Abraham, came to Illinois from Indiana. The McWorters bought a farm in Pike County, 

and that is Hadley Township, and platted the town of New Philadelphia in 1836. There was a clear defined lot of family homes, 

businesses, and a school, where citizens of all races lived. 

Bypassed by the railroad in 1869, the townspeople slowly dispersed from the scene by the late 1880s. Today, the town site is 

an open field, but the New Philadelphia township map with deed 

information shows the town lots and streets of New Philadelphia. 

Frank McWorter died at New Philadelphia in 1854, and his son, 

Solomon, assumed family leadership. Some of the family still resides in the area. 

In 2004, a 3-year National Science Foundation grant of $230,000 

allowed 3 summers of archeological work hosted by the University 

of Maryland, in collaboration with the University of Illinois and the 

Illinois State Museum. This work located many intact town features, including substantial building foundations, the remains of 

wells, and pit cellars. In total, surveys and archeological investigation located more than 65,000 artifacts. 

Oral histories from local residents and descendants, written accounts, census, land deeds, and tax records document the town’s 

historical appearance. According to an 1872 map, the town consisted of 144 lots, each 60 feet by 120 feet, laid out in a grid pattern over 42 acres. Most blocks were divided into 8 lots, and the 

primary thoroughfares were 80 feet wide. Importantly, Frank 

McWorter wisely platted New Philadelphia along the 2Pike County 

primary roads. 

Federal census reports in 1850 to 1880 indicate that residents 

were involved in a variety of enterprises—cabinetmaking, 

shoemaking, and wheelwright, carpenter, seamstress, physician, 

teacher, merchants, and blacksmiths. A post office operated in the 

town from 1849 to 1853 and is said to have served as a stagecoach 

stop. 

In its designation as a National Historic Landmark in 2009, New 

Philadelphia is recognized for its high potential to yield information of major scientific importance to our understandings of everyday life in a racially integrated community, where formerly 

enslaved individuals, free-born African Americans, and Americans 
9 

of European descent lived, worshipped, made commerce, and were 

educated together. 

I have been told it is generally recognized that previous research 

and archaeology from this era of our history has focused on historic 

sites associated with the colonial settlements, sites associated with 

the founding of our Nation, and the southern plantations associated with slavery. New Philadelphia would add new dimensions to 

our understanding of this time in our country’s history. 

The New Philadelphia Association, a not-for-profit organization 

formed by area residents, seeks to appropriately preserve a substantial portion of the town site in honor of a remarkable man and 

family of the western Illinois frontier. Currently, 14 acres of the 42- 

acre site are under purchase agreement with the Archaeological 

Conservancy, and as I understand, the current owners of the land 

are open to further discussions on this project. 

Ideally, a national park unit at New Philadelphia would commemorate a theme important to all Americans—the struggle for 

freedom and opportunity. New Philadelphia would inspire current 

and future generations as a place of interracial cooperation in an 

era and region of intense racial discord that culminated in the 

American Civil War. 

So I want to especially thank Chairman Udall and Ranking 

Member Burr for their commitment to our National Park System 

and, second, for moving this legislation as quickly as possible. I 

know that, working together, we can add to the witness of history 

for all Americans to see and understand the remarkable accomplishments of Frank McWorter, his family, and the citizens of Pike 

County, Illinois. 

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that even when I was in public 

office as a State controller and the attorney general of Illinois, I 

was working on this project, trying to help to identify the site and 

to preserve the site. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Burris follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ROLAND W. BURRIS, U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Burr, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to appear here today to discuss my legislation, S. 1629. This 

legislation would direct the Secretary of the Interior to perform a Special Resource 

Study to evaluate the national significance, suitability, and feasibility of the New 

Philadelphia site, southeast of Springfield, Illinois, to be managed as a unit of the 

National Park Service. 

I feel this designation would prove especially important, adding to our history as 

a country. Archaeologists have pointed out that New Philadelphia was the first town 

before the Civil War founded, planned and legally recorded by a freed African American, Frank McWorter. National Significance for the site has been established by 

virtue of a National Historic Landmark designation in 2009, and the ultimate goal 

is to create a new National Park at the site of the New Philadelphia settlement. 

Let me tell you a little bit about the history of this intriguing site. 

The story of Frank McWorter and New Philadelphia is one of daring, hard work, 

luck, and shrewd family leadership. Born a slave in South Carolina in 1777, Frank 

McWorter moved to Kentucky with his owner in 1795. He married Lucy, a slave 

from a nearby farm. Later, allowed to hire out his own time and labor, McWorter 

engaged in a number of enterprises, notably mining the mineral ‘crude-niter’ (an essential component of gunpowder) that proved profitable allowing him to buy his 

wife’s freedom in 1817, and his own in 1819. 

Frank and Lucy McWorter left Kentucky for Illinois in 1830, the year the Thomas 

Lincoln family, with son Abraham, came to Illinois from Indiana. McWorter bought 
10 

a farm in Pike County’s Hadley Township and platted the town of New Philadelphia 

in 1836. There were clearly defined lots for family homes, businesses, and a school, 

where citizens of all races lived. By-passed by the railroad in 1869, the townspeople 

slowly dispersed from the scene by the late 1880’s. Today, the town site is an open 

field, but the New Philadelphia township map with deed information shows town 

lots and the streets of New Philadelphia. Frank McWorter died at New Philadelphia 

in 1854, and a son, Solomon, assumed family leadership. Some of the family still 

resides in the area. 

In 2004, a three-year National Science Foundation grant of $230,000 allowed 

three summers of archeological work hosted by the University of Maryland in collaboration with the University of Illinois and the Illinois State Museum. This work 

located many intact town features including substantial building foundations, the 

remains of wells, and pit cellars. In total, surveys and archeological investigation 

located more than 65,000 artifacts. Oral histories from local residents and descendants, written accounts, census, land deeds, and tax records, document the town’s 

historical appearance. According to an 1872 map, the town consisted of 144 lots, 

each 60 feet by 120 feet, laid out in a grid pattern over 42 acres. Most blocks were 

divided into eight lots and the primary thoroughfares were 80 feet wide. Importantly, Frank McWorter wisely platted New Philadelphia along two of Pike County’s 

primary roads. 

Federal census records from 1850 to 1880 indicate residents were involved in a 

variety of enterprises; cabinetmakers, shoemakers, a wheelwright, a carpenter, a 

seamstress, physician, teachers, merchants and blacksmiths. A post office operated 

in the town from 1849 to 1853, and is said to have served as a stagecoach stop. 

In its designation as a National Historic Landmark in 2009, New Philadelphia is 

recognized for its high potential to yield information of major scientific importance 

to our understandings of everyday life in a racially integrated community, where 

formerly enslaved individuals, free born African Americans, and Americans of European descent lived, worshipped, made commerce, and were educated together. I have 

been told it is generally recognized that previous research and archaeology from this 

era of our history has focused on historic sites associated with the colonial settlements, sites associated with the founding of our nation, and southern plantations 

associated with slavery. New Philadelphia would add new dimensions to our understanding of this time in our country’s history. 

The New Philadelphia Association, a not-for-profit organization formed by area 

residents seeks to appropriately preserve a substantial portion of the town site in 

honor of a remarkable man and family of the Western Illinois frontier. Currently, 

fourteen acres of the 42-acre site are under purchase agreement with the Archaeological Conservancy, and as I understand, the current owners of the land are open 

to further discussions on this project. 

Ideally, a National Park unit at New Philadelphia would commemorate a theme 

important to all Americans: the struggle for freedom and opportunity. New Philadelphia would inspire current and future generations as a place of inter-racial cooperation in an era and region of intense racial discord that culminated in the American 

Civil War. 

I want to especially thank Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr for their 

commitment to our National Parks system, and secondly for moving this legislation 

as quickly as possible. I know that, working together, we can add to the witness 

of history for all Americans to see and understand the remarkable accomplishments 

of Frank McWorter, his family, and the citizens of Pike County Illinois. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Burris. Thank you for bringing this important opportunity to the attention of the subcommittee. 

I think this makes complete sense. I look forward to working 

with you to implement this study and with the Park Service, and 

the legacy of Frank McWorter and all that happened in New Philadelphia is one that we should cherish and preserve. 

So thanks for bringing this to the committee today. I would yield 

to the ranking member, if he has any additional comments? 

Senator BURR. No. 

Senator UDALL. You can have the last word, if you would like, 

or if you need to—— 
11 

Senator BURRIS. I think it is time for me to go preside, gentlemen. So thank you very much, and I appreciate the opportunity to 

testify with such a distinguished committee. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Burris, for acknowledging 

our subcommittee. Thank you. 

Before we hear from the panel, I think I would like to ask Senator Sessions if he has any comments. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM ALABAMA 

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do. 

The Black Belt region of Alabama is composed of 19 counties, 

represented by 6 of our 7 members of the congressional delegation. 

In 2008, I supported a feasibility study to determine if the Black 

Belt should be designated a national heritage area. That study concluded the area has natural, cultural, historic, and scenic resources 

that can be seen through the physical features and traditions in 

the region from its thriving agricultural economy to its prominence 

in the civil rights movement. 

As a result, in the 111th Congress, Senator Shelby and I introduced 2892 to establish the Black Belt National Heritage Area, and 

it highlights the features of the region that would designate the 

counties as a national heritage area. 

This is a great area of our State. It is an area that I grew up 

in. It is a poor area of the State but has a beautiful countryside. 

It is particularly rural. It has an unusual land, soil, and a rich 

black earth that is in some ways better and some ways not as good 

as others, more prairie-like. It is sticky when it is wet, but it is an 

historic region in the State, one of the first areas to be settled. 

Cotton was, of course, a primary crop over 100 years ago. But 

now, it is more prairie and catfish farming and that sort of thing. 

So, early on, the Creeks and Choctaws roamed the region. Then it 

was settled. The land was worked by African-American slaves who 

now have seen great progress as a result of the civil rights movement centered in the Selma area and other areas in that region. 

So I am proud of the region. I believe it is a uniquely historical 

area. Senator Shelby and I appreciate the committee’s consideration of that. 

I will offer for the record the rest of my remarks, but I thank the 

committee for your consideration of what we think is a very special 

and unique region of our State. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Sessions follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, U.S. SENATOR FROM ALABAMA

ALABAMA BLACK BELT NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA

The Black Belt region is comprised of nineteen counties and is represented by six 

of the seven Members of the Alabama Congressional delegation. In 2008, I supported a feasibility study to determine if the Black Belt should be designated a National Heritage Area. That study concluded this area has natural, cultural, historic, 

and scenic resources that can still be seen through the physical features and traditions in the region-from its agricultural economy to its prominence in the Civil 

Rights movement. Indeed, the Black Belt had been one of the most segregated areas 

in the nation and the Civil Rights movement transformed the region and now most 

of the elected officials are African American. As a result, in the 111th Congress, 

Senator Shelby and I introduced S. 2892 to establish the Alabama Black Belt Na-
12 

tional Heritage Area, which highlights the features of the region and would designate the nineteen counties mentioned above as a National Heritage Area. 

This unique region played a significant role in American history. At the start of 

the nineteenth century, only a few Anglo-Americans lived in the Black Belt where 

Creeks and Choctaw farmed along the rivers and hunted on the vast prairie. However, in less than 20 years the Black Belt prairie land was transformed by farmers 

who rushed to Alabama to purchase land, work the soil, and grow cotton. It was 

one of the first great American land booms, virtually unrivaled until the California 

Gold Rush during the middle of the nineteenth century. By the end of 1819, Alabama was admitted to the Union, and two decades later the native Indian tribes 

had been forced west. In a flash, Black Belt fields were cultivated with row upon 

row of cotton replacing Tallgrass prairie. African-American slaves worked the land 

formerly roamed by Creeks and Choctaws. Indeed today the majority of the population in many of the counties is African American. It was nothing less than a prodigious, all-encompassing social, cultural, and environmental revolution. Eventually, 

cattle, pasture land, soybeans, catfish, forests, and paper mills replaced cotton fields 

on the landscape. Life on the rivers changed too. First, substantial trade towns and 

cities-Cahawba, Selma, Camden, Demopolis-sprang up, and for a time prospered 

along the riverbanks. By the middle of the nineteenth century large, paddlewheel 

steamboats navigated the region’s major rivers transporting passengers, freight, and 

cotton. During the latter part of the nineteenth century and throughout the twentieth century, waterways were dammed to improve flood control, produce hydroelectric power and create reservoirs. Although change has occurred in a host of different ways in the Black Belt, the striking antebellum architecture still remains. 

Today, the Black Belt is rich in history and natural resources, but lacks adequate 

economic growth. There are treasured traditions and customs throughout the region. 

People travel from across the globe to walk the Edmund Pettus Bridge, to recall the 

Selma to Montgomery March for voting rights, participate in Civil War reenactments, visit the legendary Gee’s Bend quilters, and observe firsthand Native American artifacts as well as the region’s remarkable woodlands, streams, and rivers. 

Many of the communities in the Black Belt face declining populations, high unemployment rates, as well as infrastructure challenges. The designation as a National 

Heritage Area could be a positive factor in developing and encouraging new investment in a region that remains largely rural and contains some of the poorest counties in the United States. That the area is poor economically there can be no doubt. 

Yet it is rich in history, quality of life, faith and integrity. The spirit of the people 

is unsurpassed. Truly it is a unique and wonderful place, worthy of recognition as 

a National Heritage Area. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Sessions. 

I think I speak for the ranking member, as well as for myself, 

in acknowledging the importance of this area and your connection 

personally to it. The fact that you took time to come to the subcommittee today and share your insights and your family history 

does not go unnoted. We look forward to working with you. It 

seems to make very good sense. 

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you very much. 

Senator UDALL. We would now call to the witness table Dan 

Wenk, the deputy director of the National Park Service, and Reid 

Wilson, executive director of the Conservation Trust for North 

Carolina. If you would please be seated? 

Before we start with Mr. Wenk for the administration’s views on 

these bills, I want to observe a milestone, if I might, this afternoon. 

Whenever this subcommittee holds a hearing such as this one, 

much of the work in preparing not only the Park Service’s testimony, but also for providing background information for the committee is handled by the Park Service’s Office of Legislative Affairs, 

as Mr. Wenk well knows. 

I understand today is Beverly Davenport’s final hearing prior to 

her retirement at the end of the month. She has been a key asset 

not only for the Park Service with her work in the Legislative Affairs Office. But Beverly, here to this committee itself, you have al-
13 

ways been very helpful in quickly responding to requests for information and providing important background on many, many 

issues. 

So I want to note our appreciation for all your hard work and 

to wish you the very best in your retirement. I have a feeling this 

isn’t the last we have seen of you, at least heard from you because 

I know this committee staff here is very, very appreciative of all 

that you have done, and I think they are probably going to get your 

phone number so they can continue to call on you. 

So we wanted to acknowledge you. Thank you. You make us 

proud. 

Mr. Wenk, welcome back to the subcommittee. We keep meeting 

like this, do we not, about every month, and please proceed with 

your statement. 

STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. WENK. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the recognition of Beverly Davenport and the work that she does, and thank you for the 

opportunity to appear before this subcommittee to present the Department of the Interior’s views on the nine bills on today’s agenda. 

I would like to submit our full statements on each of the subjects 

for the record and summarize our department’s positions on these 

bills. 

S. 553 would revise the authorized route of the North Country 

National Scenic Trail in northeastern Minnesota to include existing 

hiking trails along Lake Superior’s north shore and the Superior 

National Forest and Chippewa National Forest. 

The department supports enactment of S. 553 with 2amendments 

to increase the overall length of the trail to 4,600 miles and to revise the language that references the map for the revised route of 

the trail. 

S. 1017 would reauthorize the Cane River National Heritage 

Area Commission and expand the boundaries of Cane River National Heritage Area in the State of Louisiana. The department recommends that the committee defer action on S. 1017 until program 

legislation is enacted that establishes guidelines and a process for 

the designation and administration of National Heritage Areas. 

The administration anticipates submitting such a legislative proposal to you in the near future, and we recommend enactment of 

this proposal during this Congress. 

S. 1018 would authorize the Secretary of Interior to enter into an 

agreement for constructing a facility on land owned by Northwestern State University that would help meet critical needs of 2 

National Park Service entities—Cane River Creole National Historical Park and the Natchitoches National Center for Preservation 

Technology and Training. 

The department supports enactment of S. 1018 with 2 amendments; to provide for a lease term of up to 40 years in order to provide maximum flexibility in amortizing the cost of the building and 

to provide the land at the university be leased at a nominal cost. 

S. 1537 would designate the Norman E. Borlaug birthplace and 

childhood home in Cresco, Iowa, as a national historic site and as 

a unit of the National Park System. The department supports the 
14 

effort to honor Dr. Norman E. Borlaug, but suggests amending S. 

1537 to authorize a study of his birthplace and childhood home 

rather than a designation. 

S. 1629 would direct the Secretary of Interior to conduct a study 

of the archeological site and surrounding land of New Philadelphia 

town site in the State of Illinois. The department supports enactment of S. 1629. 

S. 2892 would establish the Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area in a part of the State known for its antebellum architecture and its role in the modern civil rights movement. The department recommends that the committee defer action on this legislation until National Heritage Area Program legislation is enacted 

and until the National Park Service completes its final review of 

the feasibility study for the proposed Alabama Black Belt National 

Heritage Area. 

S. 2933 would direct the Secretary of Interior to conduct a study 

to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the Colonel Charles Young home in Xenia, Ohio, as a unit of the National 

Park System. The department supports enactment of S. 2933. 

S. 2951 would authorize funding to protect and conserve lands 

contiguous with the Blue Ridge Parkway. The department appreciates the strong interest in protecting scenic vistas along the Blue 

Ridge Parkway and the desire to have a major initiative for the 

parkway’s 75th anniversary. However, the department does not 

support this legislation in its current form. 

We would welcome the opportunity to work with the committee 

and the bill’s sponsors to develop a different approach toward promoting and incorporating the work of nonprofit conservation organizations in the protection of the parkway’s scenic resources. 

H.R. 3804 addresses several issues that are important to the National Park Service, including authorizing 10-year extension to the 

National Park System Advisory Board and the National Park Concessions Management Advisory Board, standardizing the penalties 

for violations of NPS regulations at military parks and national 

historic sites, and authorizing an agreement between the National 

Park Service and other entities that administer historic sites at 

Pearl Harbor to conduct joint ticket sales. 

This legislation also contains several other needed authorities 

and some technical amendments to previously enacted legislation. 

The department supports H.R. 3804. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be pleased 

to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wenk follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK

SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

H.R. 3804

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to present the views of the Department of the Interior on H.R. 3804, a bill to make 

technical corrections to various Acts affecting the National Park Service, to extend, 

amend, or establish certain National Park Service authorities, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports H.R. 3804, which addresses several issues that are important to the National Park Service (NPS). The Department testified in support of 

this bill before the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forest and Public Lands 
15 

in a hearing on November 5, 2009. The bill passed the House on December 7, 2009. 

We will discuss each of the portions of the bill separately in this testimony. 

H.R. 3804 would authorize ten year extensions to the National Park System Advisory Board and the National Park Service Concessions Management Advisory 

Board. The bill also would standardize the penalties for violations of NPS regulations at military parks and national historic sites and would raise the ceiling for 

annual appropriations used to fund the Volunteers in the Parks Program. The bill 

would authorize the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to enter into an agreement 

with nonprofit organizations or other entities that manage or administer historic 

sites at Pearl Harbor and to allow the sale of tickets to those historic sites by NPS 

staff or employees of the organizations that administer the historic sites. In addition, H.R. 3804 would authorize a land exchange to address a long-standing access 

issue on the George Washington Memorial Parkway and would amend the D.C. 

Snow Removal Act of 1922 to clarify which federal agency is responsible for clearing 

snow from sidewalks and crosswalks in front of or around public buildings in the 

District of Columbia. The Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic Site would 

be redesignated as a National Historical Park and the boundary of the Lava Beds 

National Monument Wilderness would be adjusted. Finally, the bill would make 

technical corrections to laws for a national seashore, wild and scenic rivers, and national heritage areas. 

Section 101—National Park System Advisory Board 

H.R. 3804 would extend the authorization for the National Park System Advisory 

Board to January 1, 2020. The Advisory Board was first authorized in 1935 under 

the Historic Sites, Buildings, and Antiquities Act. The Board advises the Director 

of the National Park Service (Director) and the Secretary on matters relating to the 

NPS, the National Park System, and programs administered by the NPS, including 

the administration of the Historic Sites, Buildings, and Antiquities Act; the designation of national historic landmarks and national natural landmarks; and the national historic significance of proposed national historic trails. 

The Advisory Board meets approximately twice yearly, at the call of the Director 

or the Director’s designee. The NPS provides support for the Advisory Board and 

members are appointed on a staggered-term basis for terms not to exceed 4 years. 

The Advisory Board has been a valuable partner of the NPS, and we look forward 

to continuing this partnership in the coming years. After several one-year authorizations, the NPS supports the longer time extension for this important body. 

Section 102—National Park Service Concessions Management Advisory Board 

H.R. 3804 would also extend the authorization for the NPS Concession Management Advisory Board for ten years, to December 31, 2019. The Concession Management Advisory Board was established on November 13, 1998 by Public Law 105-391, 

and is composed of seven members appointed by the Secretary. Advisory Board 

members must be United States citizens, and not employed by the Federal Government. Members are appointed on a staggered basis for terms not to exceed 4 years. 

The Advisory Board’s purpose is to advise the Secretary and the NPS on matters 

relating to the effective management of concessions in the National Park System. 

The Board helps make recommendations on ways to make the concession programs 

more cost effective, mitigate impacts of concession operations on park resources, improve visitor services, and allocate concession fees. 

Board members are experts in hospitality, tourism, accounting, outfitting and 

guide industries, parks concession management, traditional arts and crafts, and 

parks and recreation programs, and are selected for their expertise and area of professional skills in concessions management and oversight. The combination of the 

expert advice and the public forum that the Board offers provides a practical approach to consider contentious concession management topics and issues. 

Historically, the Board has held two to three public meetings annually. This board 

has also been continued by a one-year authorization and the NPS supports the 

longer term extension of this important body. 

Section 103—Uniform Penalties 

Section 103 of H.R. 3804 addresses a lack of uniformity in the penalties for violating regulations throughout the National Park System. Having different penalties 

for violation of the same NPS regulation, in parks that originated as military parks 

or national historic sites is confusing and inappropriate. The NPS has recognized 

that the framework for penalties for violating regulations in these military parks 

and historic sites was derived from unique historic statutes enacted over 60 years 

ago. This disparity in penalties may undermine effective and uniform law enforcement and criminal prosecution for violations on parkland. 
16 

H.R. 3804 would provide the necessary legislative authority to provide uniform, 

consistent penalties for NPS regulations, including in parks that originated as military parks or national historic sites. This would be accomplished by increasing the 

penalties for these sites from the current penalty of only a fine or a fine and/or incarceration up to three months to a fine and/or imprisonment up to six months as 

provided under the NPS Organic Act, 16 U.S.C. § 3, and the long-standing fine-enhancement provision of 18 U.S.C. § 3571. 

Section 104—Volunteers in the Parks 

H.R. 3804 would raise the ceiling for funding for the Volunteers in the Parks 

(VIP) program from $3.5 million to $10 million annually. In 1970 the VIP program 

started with a few hundred volunteers. Today, there are more than 175,000 VIPs 

helping to preserve and protect our natural and cultural resources. More than 370 

NPS areas currently use VIPs. Volunteers range in age from young children to senior citizens. They come from all over the United States, and the world, bringing different backgrounds, skills, and talents that enrich our park programs. 

The increase in the VIP ceiling proposed in H.R. 3804 is needed to more accurately reflect the resources that are being devoted to this popular program. Although the enacted levels for the VIP program were $2.794 million in FY 2009 and 

$2.797 million in FY 2010, expenditures for the program were $5.021 million in FY 

2008 and $4.753 million (with a few expenditure reports outstanding) for FY 2009— 

the two most recent years for which data is available. With the President’s and the 

Secretary of the Interior’s emphasis on the importance of volunteerism, the increased ceiling would allow the NPS to recognize the benefits offered by our many 

volunteers each year. 

Title II—Pearl Harbor Ticketing 

World War II Valor in the Pacific National Monument includes 11 acres at 

Halawa Landing at Pearl Harbor and the USS Oklahoma Memorial across the harbor on Ford Island. The NPS and the U.S. Navy are developing an overarching 

Memorandum of Understanding to address cooperative management at Pearl Harbor. 

The Pearl Harbor Naval Base is a secure site. Halawa Landing sits outside the 

main gates of the Base, but still within the area for enhanced security, and visitors 

arrive by tour bus, public transit or private car. Access to Ford Island is permitted 

only by shuttle bus. 

In addition to the NPS’s USS Arizona Memorial Visitor Center, there are two 

other Pearl Harbor partner-operated historic sites that are accessed through the 

NPS facility: the Battleship Missouri Memorial and the Pacific Aviation Museum. 

Visitors surrender all bags and luggage before entering the NPS facility to visit NPS 

sites or the partner-operated sites. Currently, the other partner at Halawa Landing, 

the USS Bowfin Submarine Museum, requires visitors to store their bags in a separate secure facility. 

The NPS is in the midst of a $50 million replacement of the USS Arizona Memorial Visitor Center, at Halawa Landing. When completed, this new facility will include space for a ticket counter for the Pearl Harbor historic sites partners to sell 

their tickets, which will be adjacent to the NPS information and ticketing counter. 

Free admission to the USS Arizona Memorial is required by law. If H.R. 3804 is 

enacted, visitors would approach the NPS ticket booth at the entrance to the Visitor 

Center and receive a free, timed ticket to the USS Arizona Memorial. At the same 

time, visitors would be able to purchase all their tickets to other Pearl Harbor historic sites and plan their visit. H.R. 3804 would authorize NPS to work with our 

partners on a joint ticketing operation, and recover a reasonable fee to cover any 

administrative costs associated with such operation. 

Our partners at Pearl Harbor enhance visitor understanding and increase appreciation for World War II Pacific Theatre history. Entrance fees to Pearl Harbor historic sites are the partners’ critical source of revenue for operations and allowing 

the sale of their tickets at the NPS visitor center supports the NPS’s broader mission to tell the story of the Pacific Theater. Joint ticket sales would be the next step 

in enhancing the visitor experience and our partnership. For example, visitors waiting for the launch to the USS Arizona Memorial would have additional time to explore the USS Bowfin Museum, or start their tours on Ford Island, returning to 

board their launch to the USS Arizona Memorial. 

Section 121 of Public Law 111-88—The Department of the Interior, Environment 

and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010, enacted on October 30, 2009, provides the same authority contained in Title II of H.R. 3804 regarding Pearl Harbor 

Ticketing for fiscal year 2010. However, the permanent authority provided by H.R. 

3804 remains necessary. 
17 

Section 301—George Washington Memorial Parkway 

Section 301 of H.R. 3804 would address a long-standing access issue on the 

George Washington Memorial Parkway. The Claude Moore Colonial Farm (Farm) is 

a 68.5-acre working colonial farm, part of the 235-acre Langley Tract property that 

was transferred to the George Washington Memorial Parkway in 1971 to provide 

public recreation and open space. The greenhouses, administrative offices, staff 

parking, a storage area for Farm equipment, and animal pens are located in the administration and maintenance area of the Farm. Colonial Farm Road forms the 

eastern boundary between the Langley Tract and the Farm and provides the main 

public access to the Farm from Georgetown Pike. In addition to providing Farm access, Colonial Farm Road serves as an entrance road to the Federal Highway Administration’s Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center (Research Center) and 

the George Bush Center for Intelligence (CIA). 

The three federal agencies have discussed concerns about crossing property lines, 

the need to have uninterrupted access to their properties, and the need to improve 

security (visibility) near perimeter fencing of the Research Center. They have identified properties suitable for exchange that would provide access to the Farm’s administrative and maintenance area and the means to improve security outside the fencing of the Research Center and CIA acceptable to NPS standards. 

H.R. 3804 would authorize the transfer of administrative jurisdiction of land between the NPS and the Federal Highway Administration to provide the NPS with 

a separate access road in the administration and maintenance area for the Farm 

that will not go through the Research Center. In exchange, NPS would provide the 

Federal Highway Administration with a visible buffer on parkland outside the perimeter fence of the Research Center. NPS would also place use restrictions on another parcel of land to improve security of the Research Center. 

Section 302—DC Snow Removal 

Section 302 of H.R. 3804 addresses snow removal within the District of Columbia. 

The Chief of Engineers of the U.S. Army was originally given responsibility for snow 

removal on sidewalks in front of all buildings owned or leased by the United States 

(except the Capitol grounds and the Library of Congress) and from all sidewalks or 

crosswalks used as public thoroughfares in and around all public squares, reservations, or open spaces within the fire limits of the District of Columbia. In 1925, the 

duties of the Chief of Engineers were transferred to the Director of Public Buildings 

and Public Parks of the National Capital, and subsequently to the NPS. 

The NPS has not removed snow from the sidewalks of non-NPS buildings and lots 

for more than thirty years. Instead, the respective federal agency has taken responsibility for snow removal on public thoroughfares or on sidewalks or crosswalks in 

front of buildings that are owned or leased by the United States and are under such 

agency’s administrative jurisdiction. The General Services Administration (GSA), 

which operates, protects, and maintains most government-owned and leased buildings and grounds in the District of Columbia, has regulations at 41 CFR Part 102- 

74 providing that GSA maintains and repairs such sidewalks and that snow removal 

is part of its complete facility maintenance schedule. The D.C. Snow Removal Act 

of 1922 was never amended, however, to reflect the effective change in responsibility. 

H.R. 3804 would amend the D.C. Snow Removal Act of 1922 to clarify that each 

federal agency would be responsible for property owned by the United States and 

under that agency’s administrative jurisdiction, including snow removal. This would 

make the law consistent with modern snow removal practices and would change the 

time period for snow removal to reflect the realities of street snow removal where 

plows usually clear the streets by pushing snow onto the adjacent sidewalks, and 

where additional time is necessary to remove it. The legislation also would allow 

for the duty of a federal agency to be delegated to another governmental or nongovernmental entity through a lease, contract, or other comparable arrangement. If 

two federal agencies have overlapping responsibility for the same sidewalk, the bill 

would provide the authority for the agencies to enter into an arrangement assigning 

responsibility. 

Section 303—Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historical Park 

H.R. 3804 would redesignate the Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic 

Site as a National Historical Park to reflect its multiple properties and broad 

themes, and provide a new map reference for the park, which reflects the proposed 

name change and indicates a land exchange that occurred in 2004. 
18 

Section 304—Lava Beds National Wilderness Boundary Adjustment 

H.R. 3804 would correct errors in the 1972 law that designated wilderness at 

Lava Beds National Monument. Through the substitution of a new wilderness 

boundary map, certain improved areas would be excluded from wilderness and other 

areas that are appropriate for designation would be included. 

Adding and subtracting parts of the two wilderness areas would produce a net increase of 399 acres in the actual amount of designated wilderness. Although the 

1972 law provides for about 10,000 acres of wilderness in the Black Lava Flow area 

and about 18,460 in the Schonchin Lava Flow area, a 1993 survey that used Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and a map produced by the U.S. Geological Survey found that the actual acreage in the two wilderness areas is 10,125 and 17,936 

respectively. The proposed legislation would provide for about 10,431 acres within 

the Black Lava Flow area and about 18,029 acres in the Schonchin Lava Flow area, 

and the map referenced in H.R. 3804 depicts two wilderness areas with the same 

amount of acreage as those two figures indicate. Added together, the acreage of the 

two wilderness areas would be the same total amount (28,460) that Congress intended to designate in the 1972 law, only distributed differently between the two 

areas and measured more accurately. 

This proposal is consistent with Lava Bed National Monument’s 1996 General 

Management Plan and 2006 Wilderness Stewardship Plan. The only costs anticipated from this proposal would be for signs and maps, which would be negligible. 

Other Provisions 

Finally, Title IV of H.R. 3804 would make technical corrections to several acts 

that involve a national seashore, wild and scenic rivers, and national heritage areas 

addressing a number of small issues for various parks that have been needed for 

a long time. We look forward to working with you for their enactment. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any 

questions that you or other members of the Subcommittee may have. 

S. 553

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to present the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 

553, a bill to revise the authorized route of the North Country National Scenic Trail 

in northeastern Minnesota to include existing hiking trails along Lake Superior’s 

north shore and in Superior National Forest and Chippewa National Forest. 

The Department supports enactment of S. 553 with two amendments described 

later in this statement. This legislation would amend section 5(a)(8) of the National 

Trails System Act to revise the route of the North Country National Scenic Trail 

in northeastern Minnesota and increase the overall length of the trail to 4,600 

miles. This reflects current measurements of the trail’s length plus the additional 

400 miles of the revised route in northeastern Minnesota. The bill includes the reference for a map that would depict the revised route of the trail. 

The North Country National Scenic Trail was authorized by Congress in 1980 to 

provide superlative outdoor recreation opportunities and conservation of nationally 

significant scenic, historic, natural and cultural qualities along the trail corridor, to 

provide a premier hiking trail facility, and to encourage and assist volunteer citizen 

involvement in the planning, development, maintenance and management of the 

trail. The National Park Service (NPS) administers this trail. The comprehensive 

management plan for the trail was issued in 1982. 

The authorized route of the trail in northeastern Minnesota traverses more than 

70 miles of black spruce and tamarack swamp, extending westward from Jay Cooke 

State Park, south of Duluth, to the Chippewa National Forest, southwest of Grand 

Rapids. Because of the location and difficult environmental conditions within the 

swamp, no portion of this section of the trail has been constructed. The proposed 

revised route uses three existing hiking trails all developed or redeveloped by volunteers since the Comprehensive Management Plan for the North Country Trail was 

written. These trails, totaling over 300 miles of existing hiking trail, follow the 

north shore of Lake Superior and traverse the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in the Superior National Forest, a region of the state known locally as the ‘‘Arrowhead.’’ The proposed change has become known in the North Country Trail community as the ‘‘Arrowhead Reroute.’’ 

Since 1987, Minnesota hiking groups have requested the NPS to study the revised 

route and consider their recommendation for a change due to the location and the 

existing environmental conditions of the present segment. As a result, the NPS conducted the Northeastern Minnesota Route Assessment between 1999 and 2004. This 

study evaluated and compared two routes-the one authorized by Congress in 1980 
19 

and the Arrowhead Reroute. In 2003 and 2004 public meetings were held in Duluth, 

Ely, Grand Rapids, and Minneapolis, Minnesota. No comments opposing the proposed change in the route were received, either at the public meetings or by mail 

or email during the widely-publicized public comment period. The plan and environmental assessment was approved by the NPS Midwest Regional Director on September 30, 2004. The National Trails System Act states that segments of a national 

scenic trail may be relocated upon a determination that the relocation is necessary 

to preserve the purposes of the trail and to promote a sound land management program. The authorized route through 70 miles of densely wooded wetlands does not 

provide a superlative outdoor recreation experience. To provide a premier hiking experience and preserve the landscape would require the construction of many miles 

of boardwalk in order to successfully traverse those wetlands. This factor alone has 

not and will not encourage volunteers to become involved in establishing that route. 

In stark contrast, the revised Arrowhead Reroute connects nationally significant 

natural, cultural, and recreational resources with outstanding scenery that epitomizes the ‘‘North Country’’ and has already encouraged volunteers to become involved in planning, developing, maintaining, and managing trails. Additionally, the 

relocation promotes a sound land management program, using established trails and 

proposing additional trail segments that are appropriately located and managed in 

accordance with established multiple use principles. 

Approximately three-quarters of the Arrowhead Reroute already exists, having 

been built as part of the three existing hiking trails-the Superior Hiking Trail, Border Route Trail, and Kekekabic Trail. New sections that would need to be constructed to complete the reroute in the Chippewa and Superior National Forests, 

Minnesota state parks and forests, and county-owned lands would be reviewed for 

environmental impacts on critical habitat, endangered species, wetlands, and cultural resources. Where no public land exists, the trail would be developed on private 

property but only with the owners’ permission and support. 

There is strong support for the trail relocation among public agencies and jurisdictions. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has been a strong 

proponent of the relocation since the late 1980s. Also, the supervisors of the Superior National Forest and the Chippewa National Forest have indicated their support 

for the proposed relocated route. Local governments in Duluth, Ely, and Grand Rapids have been supportive. 

Duluth and St. Louis County have already approved the extension of the Superior 

Hiking Trail across city and county parkland to connect Jay Cooke State Park to 

the south with Two Harbors to the north, the former southern terminus of the Superior Hiking Trail. More than 39 miles of new trail have been built in the city along 

with six additional miles between Duluth and Two Harbors. Recently, one city along 

the authorized route voiced opposition because they will no longer be on the official 

route-a route that is environmentally unfeasible. However, they did not voice this 

opposition during the study and public comment period back in 2004. 

The North Country Trail Association and the Parks and Trails Council of Minnesota are committed to developing the connecting trail segments that will be needed between Ely and the Chippewa National Forest. The Council has pledged not 

only the workers to build and maintain the trail, but also the effort and funding 

needed to secure private lands. The NPS anticipates the cost of adding this route 

and constructing a footpath to be very low. The construction would be done primarily by volunteers using hand tools. Current NPS staff would provide route planning and support for the volunteers who help develop and maintain the path. Funding would be needed to supply trail markers, signage, tools, equipment, and materials to the volunteers for the 400 additional miles of trail. The average cost is estimated to be $100 per mile per year, or $40,000 per year. 

The portions of the North Country Trail reroute yet to be built have not been laid 

out in detail. No specific landowners have been identified or contacted. Rather, the 

route assessment (study) identified a corridor several miles wide within which the 

trail will eventually be laid out. This will allow the NPS and its partners to design 

a route that will minimize the amount of private land involved and to work with 

landowners on a voluntary basis-if one landowner is not interested in having the 

trail on his property, perhaps a neighbor will be amenable. Consequently, no estimates of land acquisition costs have been developed. 

Up until March 30, 2009, the Federal government was prohibited from spending 

funds to acquire lands for the North Country National Scenic Trail outside the exterior boundaries of existing Federal areas. However, Federal funds could be granted 

to others to assist them in acquiring these lands. In FY 2000 Congress directed the 

NPS to grant $500,000 from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to the state 

of Wisconsin for acquisition of lands for the North Country Trail. Public Law 111- 

11, the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, provides authority for Fed-
20 

eral agencies to acquire lands or interests in lands from willing sellers for the North 

Country National Scenic Trail. 

We recommend that S. 553 be amended to increase the overall length of the trail 

to 4,600 miles and to insert language reflecting the revised map. The proposed 

amendments are attached to this testimony. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be glad to answer any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have. 

Suggested amendments to H.R. 481 

On page 4, line 3 strike ‘‘SEC. 3’’ and all that follows through line 17 and insert 

the following: 

SEC. 3. ROUTE REAUTHORIZATION. 

Section 5(a)(8) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 12244(a)) is 

amended as follows: 

(1) strike ‘‘thirty-two hundred miles’’ and insert ‘‘forty-six hundred miles’’, 

and 

(2) strike ‘‘Proposed North Country Trail’’ through ‘‘June 1975’’ and insert 

‘‘‘North Country National Scenic Trail, Authorized Route’, dated February 

16, 2005, and numbered 649/80,002.’’ 

S. 1017

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1017, a bill to reauthorize the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission and expand the boundaries 

of Cane River National Heritage Area in the State of Louisiana. 

The Department recommends that the committee defer action on S. 1017 until 

program legislation is enacted that establishes guidelines and a process for the designation and administration of national heritage areas. The Administration anticipates submitting such a legislative proposal to you in the near future and we recommend that Congress enact national heritage area program legislation this Congress. The Administration’s FY 2011 Budget proposes to reduce funding for national 

heritage areas to focus resources on those park activities that most closely align 

with its core mission and encourage areas to become self-sufficient, consistent with 

a FY 2010 Congressional directive. 

Cane River National Heritage Area in northwestern Louisiana was established in 

1994 as a complementary designation to the Cane River Creole National Historical 

Park, which was established at the same time. The national heritage area was intended to assist in preservation, ensure cultural sensitivity, and minimize the need 

for federal land acquisition. The heritage area is known for its historic plantations, 

Creole architecture, and complex multi-cultural legacy. The area is home to a 

unique blend of French, Spanish, African, American Indian, Creole, and other cultures. It is an extraordinarily significant area because the cultures that shaped the 

Cane River region in the 1700s remain there today, which is rare in the United 

States. 

S. 1017 would reauthorize the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission 

through 2025. Under current law, the commission, which serves as the local coordinating entity for the Cane River National Heritage Area, is scheduled to terminate 

on August 5, 2010. The commission operates in accordance with the heritage area 

management plan that was completed in 2003 and approved by both the Governor 

of Louisiana and the Secretary of the Interior. It is currently overseeing numerous 

projects and programs including a successful signage and wayfinding program, preservation of National Historic Landmarks and national register properties, development of a military heritage assessment and tour focusing on Civil War sites in preparation for the Civil War sesquicentennial, and teacher workshops on Creole history 

and culture. 

Under S. 1017, the composition of the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission would be modified to reflect current conditions. The heritage area’s 1994 enabling legislation identified specific entities for representation on the commission. 

In some cases, those entities have evolved into other organizations. In addition, in 

order to allow commission representation of the entire range of cultural and landowner interests, as intended in the original legislation, the number of members 

would be increased from 19 to 23. 

S. 1017 would also expand the boundaries of the Cane River National Heritage 

Area to include all of Natchitoches Parish west of the Red River. This change would 

add significant cultural and natural resources, including Spanish Colonial, Native 

American, U.S. military and westward expansion sites. Among the resources that 

would be included are original trail ruts of El Camino Real de los Tejas, the Spanish 
21 

Colonial trade route stretching from Natchitoches to Mexico City that is now a designated national historic trail. 

If the committee decides to take further action on S. 1017, there are two issues 

we would like to call to your attention. One is the length of the existence of the 

commission. The 1994 authorizing legislation for the heritage area envisioned the 

transition of management from a Secretarial-appointed commission to another entity within 10-15 years. S. 1017 would allow that transition to be postponed for as 

long as 15 years, until 2025. Consistent with the idea that national heritage areas 

should be locally driven, nearly all other national heritage areas that were first established with a federal commission as the managing or coordinating entity have 

transitioned to a non-federal coordinating entity, usually a non-profit organization. 

That process is underway at Cane River where a non-profit organization that could 

serve as the local coordinating entity is currently being developed. 

The other issue is the authorization of appropriations. The 1994 enabling legislation authorized unlimited appropriations with no sunset date and no matching fund 

requirement, for the Cane River National Heritage Area. Congress has held most 

other national heritage areas to authorized funding of $10 million over 15 years in 

the initial heritage area designation, and required matching funds from other 

sources. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be pleased to answer 

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

S. 1018

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1018, a bill to authorize 

the Secretary of the Interior to enter into an agreement with Northwestern State 

University in Natchitoches, Louisiana, to construct a curatorial center for the use 

of Cane River Creole National Historical Park, the National Center for Preservation 

Technology and Training, and the university, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports S. 1018 with amendments described later in this statement. This legislation would authorize an agreement for constructing a facility on 

land owned by Northwestern State University that would help meet critical needs 

of the National Park Service. The facility would be known as the Collections Conservation Center. 

Located along the Cane River in Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana, Cane River Creole National Historical Park was established by Congress in 1994 to preserve the 

distinctive architecture and cultural landscapes of the only two, intact French Creole plantations in the United States, and to interpret the complex multicultural history of the Cane River area. The park preserves and protects a total of 67 historic 

structures at two locations, Magnolia Plantation and Oakland Plantation. Cane 

River Creole National Historical Park also contains a nationally significant museum 

collection estimated at more than one million objects, which represent all aspects 

of French Creole plantation life from the 1700s until the end of the plantation era. 

Most artifacts are stored in a former bar and restaurant, which is the only space 

available for lease. Other artifacts are stored in a three-sided historic tractor shed, 

which is located in the park. Present care and storage of these resources do not 

meet National Park Service museum standards. Consequently, precious museum objects are at risk of being exposed to inadequate temperature and humidity controls, 

periodic roof leaks, insect infestation, theft, and vandalism. A new state-of-the-art 

curatorial center would address these problems and was discussed in the park’s 

2001 General Management Plan and its 2003 Museum Collection Management Plan. 

The National Center for Preservation Technology and Training is a research division of the National Park Service that was authorized under a 1992 amendment to 

the National Historic Preservation Act. It is located on the campus of Northwestern 

State University. In fulfilling its mission, the center conducts innovative conservation and collections management research and advances the use of science and technology in the field of historic preservation. The center has minimal laboratory space 

to conduct its work and is in need of additional space to house its laser conservation 

laboratory and materials research program. 

Northwestern State University’s Williamson Museum houses an archaeological 

and ethnological museum collection related to the Southeastern Tribes of the United 

States. Frequently used by tribal members for research on cultural traditions, the 

museum also serves as a gathering place for tribes and the public during special 

events. The museum collection is currently inadequately housed and is inaccessible 

to school groups because of its location in a college classroom building that has no 

available bus parking nearby. 
22 

Northwestern State University has available land that would be suitable for a 

structure that serves the purposes of the proposed Collections Conservation Center. 

The university is willing to contribute the use of the land for the center under the 

condition that the new center includes enough space to house its Williamson Museum collection, contingent on the approval of the Board of Supervisors for the University of Louisiana System. The anticipated cost to construct the center is approximately $12.5 million. Funding to build and operate the center would be subject to 

the availability of appropriations and NPS priorities. 

The land is above the 500-year floodplain, which is the level required for constructing curatorial facilities under National Park Service policies. It is also close 

to the building on campus used by the National Center for Preservation Technology 

and Training and it is about two miles away from the Cane River Creole National 

Historical Park headquarters. The authority for an agreement between the university and the National Park Service for a facility on the university’s campus would 

be another facet of the close relationship between the two entities that was envisioned both in the enabling legislation for the preservation center, which provides 

for the center to be established on the university’s campus, and in the enabling legislation for the park, which provides for a research program to be coordinated with 

the preservation center and the university. 

We recommend that the bill be amended to provide for a lease term of up to 40 

years in order to provide maximum flexibility in amortizing the cost of the building, 

and to provide that the land at the university be leased to the National Park Service 

at nominal cost. We would be happy to work with the committee to provide appropriate language for those and other amendments. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my 

prepared remarks. I would be pleased to answer any questions you or any members 

of the Subcommittee may have. 

S. 1537

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 1537, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National 

Park Service, to designate the Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Birthplace and Childhood 

Home in Cresco, Iowa, as a National Historic Site and as a unit of the National 

Park System. 

The Department supports the effort to honor Dr. Norman E. Borlaug, but would 

like to work with the committee to amend S. 1537 to authorize a study of his birthplace and childhood home instead of designating it at this time as a new Park Service unit. 

S. 1537 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to designate the Dr. Norman 

E. Borlaug Birthplace and Childhood Home as a National Historic Site if the Secretary acquires fee simple and unencumbered title to the Norman E. Borlaug property by donation from the Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation. The Secretary 

would administer the unit in accordance with laws generally applicable to preserving national historic sites. 

The homes and sites of renowned American scientists, artists and humanitarians 

provide a valuable link to understanding our country’s history and achievements 

and are an important part of our national heritage. Dr. Norman E. Borlaug’s scientific and humanitarian achievements certainly place him in this illustrious group. 

Norman Borlaug grew up on a family farm outside of Cresco, Iowa. He was a 

strong and vigorous young man who could perform prodigious amounts of manual 

labor in the fields and used this strength as a competitive, trained athlete in his 

high school and college days. He was always interested in agriculture and felt the 

need to help the poor in the world. His interests and work led him to become one 

of the greatest humanitarians of all times. 

Dr. Borlaug was a central figure in the ‘‘green revolution.’’ During the 1960s over 

a period of four years, he was instrumental in helping farmers in India increase 

wheat production by an order greater than that achieved during the preceding 4,000 

years. He also enabled developing countries to move toward achieving a balance between population growth and food production. 

Dr. Borlaug received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 for his accomplishments in 

India and Pakistan and for his role as the ‘‘Father of the Green Revolution’’, the 

only person working in agriculture to ever be so honored. Since then, he has received numerous honors and awards, including the Presidential Medal of Freedom 

and the Public Service Medal. He created the World Food Prize in 1986, which is 

the Nobel Prize for Food and Agriculture. The headquarters of the World Food Prize 

is located in Des Moines, Iowa. The life and achievements of Dr. Norman E. Borlaug 

have contributed extensively to alleviating world hunger in countries such as Canada, India, Mexico, Latin America, Norway, Pakistan, and the United States. 
23 

The purchase and restoration of the birthplace and 106-acre childhood home and 

farm is being undertaken by the Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation, a non-profit 

organization, formed to promote Dr. Borlaug’s lifetime achievements and philosophy 

through education programs and projects at Dr. Borlaug’s birthplace, childhood 

home, and one-room schoolhouse. 

The National Park System includes many previous residences of distinguished 

Americans such as Benjamin Franklin, Clara Barton, and Thomas Edison. However, 

there are also many residences of distinguished Americans that are not part of the 

system. A study would look at whether the Federal government is the most appropriate entity to manage the site. Conducting a professional study allows Congress 

to be sure it is protecting an area that meets the criteria for inclusion into the National Park System. 

With respect to historical sites, a study would not only look at whether the event 

or person associated with the site was historically significant, but it would also look 

at the integrity of the buildings, and other factors, such as whether there are other 

sites that might more appropriately tell the story associated with a particular individual. 

A study also will enable the NPS and the Congress to identify the costs in acquiring, restoring, and operating a potential site. We believe the information gathered 

during the study process is invaluable and better ensures the NPS can continue its 

progress in addressing deferred maintenance and other needs in our national parks 

amidst financial challenges. 

We recommend that the subcommittee amend S. 1537 to authorize a study of the 

Borlaug home, farm, and one-room school house to determine whether they conform 

to the criteria for potential new units of the National Park System. We estimate the 

cost of the study to be approximately $250,000 to $300,000. We would be glad to 

work with the subcommittee on the appropriate language. We do note that at 

present there are already 47 previously authorized studies for potential units of the 

National Park System, potential new National Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the National Trails System and National Wild and Scenic River System that 

have not yet been transmitted to the Congress. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This concludes my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any questions you or other subcommittee members might have. 

S. 1629

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

Department of the Interior’s views on S. 1629, a bill to authorize the Secretary of 

the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the archeological site and surrounding land of the New Philadelphia town site in the State of Illinois. 

The Department supports enactment of S. 1629. However, we believe that priority 

should be given to the 47 previously authorized studies for potential units of the 

National Park System, potential new National Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the National Trails System and National Wild and Scenic River System that 

have not yet been transmitted to the Congress. 

S. 1629 authorizes a special resource study to evaluate the national significance 

of New Philadelphia, Illinois, and to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the site as a unit of the National Park System. The bill directs the Secretary in the course of the resource study to consider alternatives for the preservation, protection and interpretation of New Philadelphia, Illinois, by Federal, State 

or local government entities or any other interested individuals, and to identify the 

costs estimates for any Federal acquisition, development, interpretation, operation 

and maintenance associated with the range of management alternatives. We estimate the cost of the resource study to range from $200,000 to $300,000, based on 

similar types of studies conducted in recent years. 

New Philadelphia, located near Barry, Illinois, was founded in 1836 by Frank 

McWhorter, an enslaved man from Kentucky, who bought his own freedom and the 

freedom of 15 family members. New Philadelphia is the first known town platted 

and officially registered by an African American before the Civil War. The rural 

community situated near the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers flourished at first, but 

later fell in decline when the railroad bypassed the community in 1869; it was eventually dissolved in 1885. The site of New Philadelphia, an archeological site with 

no visible above-ground evidence, was designated a National Historic Landmark on 

January 16, 2009. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to answer 

any questions that you or other committee members may have regarding this bill. 
24 

S. 2892

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to present the views of the Department of the Interior 

on S. 2892, a bill to establish the Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area, and 

for other purposes. 

The Department recommends that the committee defer action on S. 2892 until 

program legislation is enacted that establishes criteria to evaluate potentially qualified national heritage areas and a process for the designation and administration 

of these areas. The Administration anticipates submitting such a legislative proposal to you in the near future, and we recommend that Congress enact national 

heritage area program legislation this Congress. In addition, we recommend deferring action on S. 2892 until the National Park Service completes its final review 

of the feasibility study for the proposed Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area. 

The Administration’s FY 2011 Budget proposes to reduce funding for national heritage areas to focus resources on those park activities that most closely align with 

its core mission and encourage areas to become self-sufficient, consistent with a FY 

2010 Congressional directive. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program 

legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines for successful planning and management, 

clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing timeframes 

and funding for designated areas. Program legislation was introduced in the 109th 

and 110th Congresses, and we look forward to continuing to work with Congress on 

this very important issue. 

The feasibility of the Alabama Black Belt area for designation as a national heritage area is the subject of a study now being finalized by the Alabama Black Belt 

Heritage Area Task Force. Since the creation of the task force in 2006, it has grown 

from a group of ten people into an active organization with over 65 members across 

19 counties. The organization has worked closely with the National Park Service 

and the Alliance of National Heritage Areas to demonstrate a strong basis for seeking potential national heritage area status. The task force has also implemented 

several successful projects in the Black Belt region. 

The draft feasibility study includes an extensive inventory of cultural and natural 

resources of the region; identifies four interpretive themes; describes the plans for 

management, preservation, and interpretation of the region; and, contains a detailed 

environmental assessment. It indicates that the proposal for a national heritage 

area has strong support from the public and a myriad of state, local, federal, and 

non-governmental partners throughout the area that are essential for successful 

planning and implementation of a national heritage area. It recommends that the 

Center for the Study of the Black Belt at the University of West Alabama serve as 

the local coordinating entity for the proposed national heritage area, as provided for 

in S. 2892. The center was identified as the preferred management entity based on 

its ability to provide a sustainable foundation for the implementation of a national 

heritage area, promote an integrated vision and leadership, engage ongoing community participation, build reciprocal partnerships, and facilitate programs across all 

19 counties included in the proposed Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area. 

Geographically, Alabama’s Black Belt is part of a larger crescent-shaped area 

known as the Southern Black Belt, which extends from Virginia to Texas. The term 

refers to the fertile black soil of the region. This soil drew pioneers to settle the 

lower-central portion of Alabama in the 1820s and 1830s where they established 

and operated a network of cotton plantations using the labor of enslaved African 

Americans. 

During the Antebellum era, the Alabama Black Belt became one of the wealthiest 

and most politically powerful regions in the United States. Thriving commerce elevated Montgomery, Selma, and Demopolis into some of the nation’s most affluent 

towns. The architecture that grew out of this plantation culture produced some of 

the finest churches and rural residences in the state, including Rosemount and 

Thornhill in Greene, Countryside in Camden, and Gaineswood in Demopolis. When 

the Civil War began, Montgomery was chosen as the first capital of the Confederacy. 

The region’s distance from the front lines saved it from much of the ravages of the 

war. 

During the Twentieth Century, this area gained fame as the site where the 

Tuskegee Airmen trained during World War II, and as a center of the civil rights 

movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Montgomery County was the site of the 1955- 

56 bus boycott that challenged segregation of public transportation. Highway 80 in 

Dallas, Lowndes, and Montgomery counties shaped the route taken by participants 
25 

of the historic march for equal rights from Selma to Montgomery in 1965. The 

Lowndes County Freedom Organization, later the Black Panther Party, was an outgrowth of that march. 

Rivers and streams from several large basins-the Sipsey-Warrior, CoosaTallapoosa, Alabama-Cahaba, Tombigbee, and Chattahoochee-flow through the Alabama Black Belt. When cotton was the dominant crop grown in the region, the 

Black Belt’s many navigable waterways enabled growers to transport their harvests 

to the docks in Mobile for shipment abroad. Row crops are less prevalent today as 

more of the rural Black Belt land today is now used for livestock or aquaculture. 

While largely viewed as a region of hardship, the Alabama Black Belt has produced a rich variety of artists, musicians, writers, and other public figures. Notable 

figures from this region include Booker T. Washington, Rosa Parks, Harper Lee and 

Truman Capote. Three sites in the region managed by the National Park Service 

commemorate nationally significant history: the Tuskegee Airmen National Historic 

Site and the Tuskegee Institute National Historic Site, both units of the National 

Park System, and the Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail. 

If the committee decides to move forward with S. 2892, we would like to work 

with the committee to provide the appropriate map reference for the national heritage area and to ensure that the language of the bill is consistent with previously 

enacted national heritage area designations. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be pleased to answer 

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

S. 2933

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

Department of the Interior’s views on S. 2933, a bill to authorize a special resource 

study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the Colonel Charles 

Young Home in Xenia, Ohio, as a unit of the National Park System. 

The Department supports enactment of S. 2933. However, we believe that priority 

should be given to the 47 previously authorized studies for potential units of the 

National Park System, potential new National Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the National Trails System and National Wild and Scenic River System that 

have not yet been transmitted to the Congress. 

S. 2933 authorizes a special resource study, in consultation with the Secretary of 

the Army, to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the Colonel 

Charles Young Home as a unit of the National Park System, and to consider other 

alternatives for preservation and protection of the home and interpretation of the 

life and accomplishments of Colonel Young for future appreciation by the public. 

The bill also authorizes consultation and collaboration with the Ohio Historical Society, Central State University, Wilberforce University and other interested Federal, 

State or local governmental entities, private and nonprofit organizations or individuals in accomplishing the resource study. The home is a National Historic Landmark. We estimate the cost of this study to range from $200,000 to $250,000, based 

on similar types of studies conducted in recent years. 

Colonel Charles Young was the third African-American to graduate from West 

Point, and a distinguished African-American officer in the United States Army, commanding troops in combat in the Spanish-American War and the Mexican expedition against Pancho Villa. Colonel Young was one of the first military attaches in 

the United States, serving in Haiti and Liberia, and a pioneer of techniques in military intelligence. The experience of Colonel Young in the Army between 1884 and 

1922 illustrates the changing nature of race relations in the United States during 

a period spanning from the end of the Civil War to the beginning of the Civil Rights 

movement. 

Colonel Young was a friend and associate of other distinguished African-Americans of the period, including poet Paul Laurence Dunbar from nearby Dayton, Ohio; 

and as the commander of an Army unit assigned to protect and develop Sequoia National Park and General Grant National Park in the State of California, Colonel 

Young is recognized as the first African-American to be the superintendent of a National Park. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to answer 

any questions that you or other Committee members may have regarding this bill. 

S. 2951

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2951, a bill to authorize funding to protect and conserve 

lands contiguous with the Blue Ridge Parkway to serve the public, and for other 

purposes. 
26 

The Department appreciates the strong interest in protecting scenic vistas along 

the Blue Ridge Parkway and the desire to have a major initiative for the parkway’s 

75th anniversary that the introduction of S. 2951 demonstrates. The magnificent 

views and recreational opportunities along the 469-mile parkway are the major reason why the parkway has long been the National Park Service’s most heavily visited 

unit. However, the Department does not support this legislation in its current form. 

We would welcome the opportunity to work with the committee and the bill’s sponsors to develop a different approach toward promoting and incorporating the work 

of nonprofit conservation organizations in the protection of the parkway’s scenic resources. We are sympathetic to the desire of supporters of the Blue Ridge Parkway to find 

a mechanism to quickly channel land acquisition funds to protect the stunning 

views and the recreational opportunities that are so highly valued by visitors to the 

parkway. The parkway has identified a number of land acquisition goals in its Land 

Protection Plan that, along with the lands adjacent to the parkway threatened by 

encroaching development, could easily add up to the 50,000 acres envisioned to be 

protected under S. 2951. 

Other units of the National Park System have also identified opportunities for 

land acquisition to protect resources from encroaching development. The Administration proposes to begin addressing these needs with a request in the FY 2011 

budget of $106 million for National Park Service land acquisition-a significantly 

larger amount than has been requested or appropriated for many years. The FY 

2011 request is the first step toward the Administration’s goal of providing a total 

of $900 million a year—full funding—for federal land acquisition and other programs funded through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and it holds the 

hope that within a few years we will be able to better address the needs at many 

more of our units, including the Blue Ridge Parkway. 

As desirable as it would be to acquire more land at the Blue Ridge Parkway, we 

find the approach taken by S. 2951 problematic, as it would duplicate existing law 

in some instances and establish new law that would not be appropriate in others. 

It would also conflict with the Administration’s specific land acquisition priorities 

for FY 2011. 

Section 4 of S. 2951 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire up 

to 50,000 acres of adjacent land that is identified in the parkway’s Land Protection 

Plan or that meets the plan’s amendment criteria. However, the authority to acquire 

lands contiguous to the parkway already exists; therefore this language is unnecessary. Section 5(a) would authorize appropriations of $15 million for each of fiscal years 

2011 through 2015 for the land acquisition authorized by this bill. As with section 

4, this subsection is unnecessary because unlimited authority for appropriations for 

land acquisition at the parkway already exists. 

Although subsection 5(a) may be viewed as sending a message that Congress desires that $15 million a year for five years be appropriated for the parkway, we note 

that such funding is not included in the Administration’s FY 2011 budget request. 

Although we cannot predict what the Administration might request for specific land 

acquisition projects for the next four years, it would be unusual, even with higher 

overall levels of land acquisition funding, to request this much for one park. Any 

request for this park would be subject to the Administration’s prioritization process 

that uses consistent and merit-based criteria to select projects. 

Section 5(b) would authorize the Secretary to use funds appropriated for land acquisition at the Blue Ridge Parkway to award grants for certain purposes. This 

grant authority would be unprecedented. One purpose of the grants would be to acquire land and interests in land, although the bill does not specify what guarantee 

the taxpayer would receive that the lands would be permanently protected. We 

would like to consider how such authority might be used to supplement, yet not duplicate, the National Park Service’s own land acquisition capability, which is funded 

directly by Congress. We are fortunate to have an office that handles land acquisition for the Blue Ridge Parkway-the National Park Service’s National Trails Office 

in Martinsburg, West Virginia-that is so well regarded for its expertise in acquisition at linear units that other federal agencies have used its services for that purpose. We are also fortunate to have the expertise and leveraging capability of several nonprofit land conservation organizations in protecting lands that are critical 

to the integrity of the Blue Ridge Parkway. We need to employ both capabilities in 

this cause. 

Subsection 5(b) as introduced lacks provisions regarding intended recipients and 

requirements for disposition of the land acquired through grants, so we are unclear 

about exactly what is intended. However, this proposed authority may be the seed 

of an idea for better utilizing the capabilities of nonprofit land conservation organi-
27 

zations in the protection of the Blue Ridge Parkway. The organizations have at their 

disposal certain resources and tools that federal land acquisition officials lack. We 

would like to work with the committee and the bill’s sponsors to explore ways to 

enhance the use of the organizations’ capabilities in the cause of protecting the 

parkway. 

The second purpose of the grants would be to enter into cooperative agreements 

with nonprofit conservation organizations for technical expense assistance, such as 

appraisals and hazardous material surveys, for lands the organizations acquire for 

conveyance to the parkway. It is a common practice for conservation organizations 

to acquire land for potential addition to National Park Service units with the intent 

of holding the properties until the National Park Service is able to acquire them. 

However, in these cases, the expenses associated with acquiring these lands are 

borne by the organizations; they are not paid by the National Park Service unless 

arrangements are made in advance to coordinate the ordering of these services to 

avoid duplication of the expenses. We are concerned that paying for expenses associated with acquisition in advance of a conveyance would raise expectations about acquiring property that might not be met. In addition, setting this precedent for federal funding of non-federal administrative costs would treat land acquisition at the 

Blue Ridge Parkway differently than acquisition at every other unit of the National 

Park System, which would not be fair or appropriate. 

Finally, Section 5(d) makes clear that the cooperative agreement arrangements 

with nonprofit organizations that are contemplated in this legislation could entail 

annual payments of as much as $250,000 a year to defray the organizations’ ‘‘administrative expenses,’’ which would not necessarily be limited to costs associated directly with land acquisition. This could open the door to the reimbursement of costs 

that are unrelated to the purposes of the Land and Water Conservation Act. Since 

the act prohibits federal employees from being paid for any expenses not related to 

federal land acquisition from funds appropriated for land acquisition, it would run 

counter to the spirit of the act to allow non-federal employees to be paid for expenses not related to federal land acquisition. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any 

questions that you may have. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Wenk. 

Let us turn to Mr. Wilson for your statement, and then the ranking member and I will direct some questions and comments your 

way. 

So, Mr. Wilson, the floor is yours. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF D. REID WILSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, Chairman Udall and Ranking Member 

Burr. 

My name is Reid Wilson, and I am the executive director of the 

Conservation Trust for North Carolina. CTNC works to increase 

the amount of protected natural lands in our beautiful State, and 

we do this in 2 ways. 

First, we represent, promote, and assist 24 local land trusts, so 

that they can protect more land in the communities they serve. 

Second, we have the good fortune of being a land trust ourselves 

that focuses on protecting land along the Blue Ridge Parkway. 

I am presenting my testimony today on behalf of eight other land 

trusts in Virginia and North Carolina that work to protect parkway 

lands. We all strongly support the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection 

Act, S. 2951, introduced by Senator Burr and cosponsored by Senators Hagan, Webb, and Warner, and H.R. 4524, introduced by 

Representatives Shuler, Price, Boucher, and Perriello. 

I want to express our sincere thanks to you, Senator Burr, and 

to the other sponsors for introducing this important legislation and 

for your leadership. 
28 

These bills would provide much-needed funding to conserve lands 

to help ensure that the parkway is as awe-inspiring to future generations as it is to us today. There are 5 reasons why it is critically 

important to expand funding for land conservation along the Blue 

Ridge Parkway. 

First, parkway is the most visited unit of the National Park 

Service, but its most popular features are under threat. The parkway is a national treasure. Its 469 miles of spectacular vistas, mature forests, pristine streams, and hiking trails attract nearly 20 

million visitors per year. Yet it is an extremely fragile ribbon 

threatened by development. 

In most places, the parkway’s land corridor is only 800 feet wide, 

and most of the property that makes up the views is privately 

owned, vulnerable to development. In recent years, unplanned 

rampant growth has denuded forests, choked streams with silt, destroyed wildlife habitat, and ruined scenery. 

In a recent survey of parkway visitors, over 95 percent said that 

scenic vistas were extremely important or very important in their 

decision to visit the parkway. An earlier survey found that if scenic 

quality degrades, roughly one quarter of visitors would reduce their 

number of visits to the parkway and many would not return at all. 

So why is that important? This brings me to my second point, 

which is that the parkway is one of the strongest economic engines 

in the region, providing $2.3 billion to local communities in those 

2 States. 

As Senator Burr well knows, thousands of furniture and textile 

jobs in the mountains are gone, and they aren’t coming back, unfortunately. We can’t afford to allow the tourism industry to suffer the 

same fate as manufacturing. So we must conserve the parkway, the 

backbone of tourism in this region. 

Third, the corridor along the parkway is an incredible natural resource with rich and diverse wildlife habitat. The parkway contains 

600 miles of pure mountain streams. It also contains 43 species of 

amphibians, over 1,600 species of plants, and 9 federally listed 

threatened or endangered species. Adding more acres to the parkway would ensure that wildlife habitat is protected rather than 

fragmented. 

Fourth, this bill is urgently needed due to the effects of the recession. For one thing, there is less State funding available for conservation projects now. On the flip side, there is more land available for less money, due to falling real estate prices and distressed 

properties coming onto the market. 

While development along the parkway has slowed, its pace was 

furious before the recession and will, no doubt, pick up again. So 

there is no time to waste. 

Fifth, the parkway is celebrating its 75th anniversary this year. 

Passage of the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act and appropriation of funding would be a fitting way to mark the anniversary of 

this hugely popular, but chronically underfunded jewel of the National Park System. 

The bill itself is straightforward. It would authorize $75 million 

over 5 years to purchase properties and conservation easements adjacent to the parkway. All transactions would be done with willing 

land owners, no eminent domain. Only properties listed as prior-
29 

ities in the Blue Ridge Parkway’s Land Protection Plan would be 

eligible to receive funding. 

The bill would facilitate partnerships between the Park Service 

and nonprofit conservation organizations. Often these land trusts 

can move more quickly than the Government. The land trusts could 

buy the land or easement, hold it, manage it, protect it until the 

Park Service could supply its funding. Otherwise, you might lose 

the property to development. 

Then all fee simple purchases would be conveyed to the National 

Park Service and added to the parkway’s boundaries, and all properties with conservation easements would continue in private ownership, and easements would be held and monitored by the National Park Service. 

We understand that the National Park Service has some concerns about the bill as drafted. From my conversations with the 

staff of the bill’s lead sponsors, it is clear that there is a strong desire to work with the Park Service to resolve these issues. I just 

want to say that from the land trusts, who are very interested in 

this, we are equally eager to work with all those involved to come 

up with language that is agreeable to everyone. 

We all share a sense of responsibility to pass on to future generations clean rivers and streams, abundant wildlife habitat, ample 

opportunities to enjoy the outdoors, and a sound economy—in 

short, a high quality of life. The Blue Ridge Parkway Protection 

Act would help achieve all of those goals for those who come after 

us. 

I respectfully urge you to pass this important legislation and to 

work with the Appropriations Committee to secure funding in the 

next budget. Admittedly, our Nation faces extraordinary budget 

constraints. But just like 75 years ago when the parkway was created, this relatively small investment will save a treasured landscape at bargain prices and ensure that jobs are created and maintained in a region of the country with chronic high unemployment. 

Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any questions you 

might have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wilson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF D. REID WILSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CONSERVATION

TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA, 

S. 2951

Thank you, Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Burr, and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. My name is Reid Wilson, 

and I am the Executive Director of the Conservation Trust for North Carolina, 

based in Raleigh. CTNC works to increase the amount of protected natural lands 

in our beautiful state. We do this in two ways. First, we represent, promote and 

assist 24 local land trusts, so that they can protect more land in the communities 

they serve. Second, we are a land trust ourselves, and we focus on conserving the 

natural and scenic corridor of the Blue Ridge Parkway. 

I present my testimony on behalf of eight other local land trusts that do excellent 

work to protect lands along the Parkway—Blue Ridge Rural Land Trust, Foothills 

Conservancy of North Carolina, High Country Conservancy, Land Trust for the Little Tennessee, Piedmont Land Conservancy and Southern Appalachian Highlands 

Conservancy, all in North Carolina, and Western Virginia Land Trust and Valley 

Conservation Council in Virginia. 

The Conservation Trust for North Carolina has protected over 30,000 acres along 

the Blue Ridge Parkway in 39 locations. Properties we’ve conserved include the 

17,000-acre watershed that supplies drinking water for the city of Asheville, and the 
30 

8,000-acre watershed for the town of Waynesville. CTNC over the years has protected and conveyed 18 properties (all but two of them donated) totaling 1,321 acres 

to the National Park Service, and these lands have been added to the boundaries 

of the Parkway. We appreciate the close working relationship we have with the excellent staff at the Blue Ridge Parkway. 

We strongly support the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act, S. 2951, sponsored 

by Senator Burr and cosponsored by Senators Hagan, Webb and Warner, and H.R. 

4524, introduced by Representatives Shuler, Price, Boucher and Perriello. These 

bills would provide much-needed funding to conserve lands to help ensure that the 

Parkway is as awe-inspiring to future generations as it is to us today. 

There are five reasons why it is critically important to expand funding for land 

conservation along the Blue Ridge Parkway. 

• First, the Blue Ridge Parkway is the most visited unit of the National Park 

Service, but its most popular features are under threat. 

• Second, the Parkway is the economic lifeblood of nearby mountain communities. 

• Third, the Parkway is an incredible natural resource with rich and diverse wildlife habitat. 

• Fourth, right now is an outstanding time to buy land along the Parkway. 

• Fifth, the Parkway celebrates its 75th anniversary this year. 

Let me take each point in turn. 

First, the Parkway is a national treasure. Its 469 miles of spectacular vistas, mature forests, pristine streams and hiking trails attract nearly 20 million visitors per 

year to North Carolina and Virginia. Yet the Parkway is an extremely fragile ribbon, and its scenic, cultural, and natural integrity are threatened by development. 

In most places, the Parkway’s land corridor is only 800 feet wide, and most of the 

property that makes up its views is privately owned, vulnerable to development at 

a moment’s notice. 

In recent years, unplanned rampant growth along the Parkway has denuded forests, choked streams with silt, destroyed wildlife habitat, and ruined scenery with 

new subdivisions, roads, and shopping centers. In a recent survey of Parkway visitors, over 95 percent said that scenic vistas were extremely important or very important in their decision to visit the Parkway. An earlier survey found that if scenic 

quality declines, 22 percent of respondents in North Carolina and 26 percent of respondents in Virginia would reduce their number of visits to the Parkway. Many 

said they would not return at all. 

Clearly, people travel to the Parkway to see the views. The best way to protect 

those vistas is to conserve the lands that comprise them. 

Second, the Parkway is one of the strongest economic engines in the region, providing $2.3 billion per year to local communities. Visitors spend between $149 and 

$172 per person per day at the Parkway. Clearly, protecting the Blue Ridge Parkway is critical to future economic growth in neighboring communities. The growing 

tourism industry depends on a healthy Parkway. The furniture and textile industries have been hit hard in the mountains. Those jobs are gone, and aren’t coming 

back. We can’t afford to allow the tourism industry to suffer the same fate as manufacturing, so we must conserve the Parkway—the backbone of tourism in this region. 

Let me give you a couple of examples that show how fundamental the Parkway 

is to economic growth for dozens of towns up and down its length. Whenever a section of the Parkway is temporarily closed for repairs or by snow, Parkway staff receive numerous anxious phone calls from inn and restaurant owners. They want to 

know how soon the road will be reopened because their businesses are taking a hit. 

Now imagine if 10 percent or 20 percent fewer visitors came to the Parkway each 

year. We know from the Park Service survey that declines of that magnitude could 

take place if the views alone are degraded. This would devastate local businesses— 

outfitters, restaurants, guides, attractions, inns and hotels—that depend on tourists. 

Or take the Orchard at Altapass. This historic apple orchard and general store 

sits adjacent to the Parkway about an hour north of Asheville. It’s a hub of activity 

in spring, summer and fall. It’s a place where locals come to clog to live music, visit 

with their friends from neighboring hollows, purchase from among 75 varieties of 

delicious apples, and grab an ice cream cone when it’s hot. It’s a place where tourists flock, especially in the fall, to see stunning views of mountain foliage from the 

store’s patio. On one weekend alone last fall the orchard had 6,000 visitors. I can 

guarantee you that those numbers would have been cut by half or more, had the 

views been developed. Fortunately, CTNC helped broker a deal with the landowner, 

CSX Railroad, and the state of North Carolina to place a conservation easement on 

nearly 1,500 acres adjacent to the orchard. Not only will the views be protected for-
31 

ever, but so will jobs at the orchard and in the nearby tourism-dependent towns of 

Spruce Pine and Little Switzerland. 

Third, the corridor along the Parkway contains important natural areas that 

should be protected and expanded. The Parkway is home to the headwaters of 15 

watersheds and contains some 600 miles of pristine streams. Protecting water at the 

source means that downstream communities pay less to supply clean drinking water 

to their residents. The Parkway also contains 43 species of amphibians, over 1600 

species of plants, and nine federally listed threatened or endangered species. Juxtaposed with those numbers is the number of the Parkway’s adjacent landowners— 

roughly 4,500. The Parkway has surveyed the 29 counties it runs through to determine what plans they have for development, and based on that, staff believe that 

development will become an even more pressing problem in the years to come. Adding more acres to the Parkway would ensure that wildlife habitat is protected and 

not fragmented. 

Fourth, this bill is urgently needed due to the effects of the recession. For one 

thing, there is less state funding available for conservation projects. And, on the flip 

side, there is more land available to conserve, for less money, due to falling real estate prices and distressed properties coming onto the market. For instance, CTNC 

was able to purchase a 534-acre conservation property at a discount at the very end 

of 2008. And, we’re currently negotiating with a bank to purchase a foreclosed property. We have an outstanding opportunity to buy Parkway land, but it won’t last 

indefinitely. While development has slowed during the recession, its pace was furious before then, and will no doubt pick up again with the economy. There’s no time 

to waste. 

Fifth, the Parkway is celebrating its 75th anniversary in 2010, culminating in 

September. Passage of the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act and appropriation of 

funds would be a fitting way to mark the anniversary of this hugely popular but 

chronically underfunded jewel of the national parks system. 

Seventy-five years ago, the United States faced an economic crisis much like the 

one we’re in today. Rather than lock away its money, the federal government invested—funding public works programs that not only put hundreds of thousands of 

people to work, but created, protected and promoted some of the nation’s best-loved 

places, including the Blue Ridge Parkway. The Parkway has been an unqualified 

success. Continued federal investment in the Parkway is a must to ensure that it will 

thrive for generations to come. 

Fortunately, North Carolina and Virginia lawmakers have taken the lead on legislation to help save the Blue Ridge Parkway’s majestic views and natural areas. I 

want to thank Senators Burr, Hagan, Warner and Webb, and Representatives 

Shuler, Price, Boucher and Perriello for their leadership in introducing the Blue 

Ridge Parkway Protection Act. This legislation is desperately needed because a lack 

of funding has been a critical barrier to protecting the Parkway’s forests, streams 

and vistas. 

The bill is straightforward. Here are the highlights. 

• It would authorize $75 million over five years, beginning in FY 2010-11, to purchase fee simple properties and conservation easements adjacent to the Parkway, towards a goal of protecting an additional 50,000 acres. 

• All transactions would be done with willing landowners. Nothing would be 

taken by eminent domain claims. 

• Only properties listed as priorities in the Blue Ridge Parkway’s Land Protection 

Plan would be eligible to receive funding. 

• Any lands or easements purchased would have to be adjacent to the Parkway. 

• The bill would enable the Park Service to work in partnership with non-profit 

conservation organizations to conserve priority properties. Often these land 

trusts can move more quickly than the federal government to purchase a property or easement. The land trusts could buy the land or easement, hold it, protect it and manage it until the Park Service could supply funding to the land 

trust. The bill would ensure that these non-profits are reimbursed by the government after purchasing the properties or easements on behalf of the Park 

Service. 

• No purchase would be made over appraised value. 

• All fee simple purchases would be conveyed to the National Park Service and 

added to the Parkway’s boundaries as soon as feasible. All properties with conservation easements would continue in private ownership, and easements would 

be held and monitored by the National Park Service. 

Passage of this bill and subsequent appropriations would constitute a critical investment in the Blue Ridge Parkway’s scenic, natural, and cultural vitality, and in 
32 

the future economic well-being and quality of life of North Carolina and Virginia. 

Although the funds provided by the Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act would not 

be used for traditional brick and mortar projects, they would provide a long-term 

stimulus for small businesses throughout the Blue Ridge Mountains to maintain 

jobs that depend on tourism. 

We understand that the National Park Service has some concerns about the bill 

as drafted, specifically about the mechanism for providing the funding for specific 

properties. From my conversations with the staff of the bill’s lead sponsors, it is 

clear that there is a strong desire to work with the Park Service to resolve these 

issues. CTNC and other land trusts that work along the Parkway are similarly 

eager to work toward language that is acceptable to all. I’m happy to report that 

discussions between congressional staff and the Park Service are already underway. 

We all share a sense of responsibility to pass on to future generations clean rivers 

and streams, abundant wildlife habitat, ample opportunities to enjoy the outdoors, 

and a sound economy—in short, a high quality of life. The Blue Ridge Parkway Protection Act would help achieve all of those goals for those who come after us. 

I respectfully urge you to pass this important legislation and to work with the Appropriations Committee to secure funding in the FY 2010-11 budget and beyond. Admittedly, our nation faces extraordinary budget constraints, but just like 75 years 

ago, this relatively small investment will save a treasured landscape at bargain 

prices and ensure that jobs are created and maintained in a region of the country 

with chronic high unemployment. 

Thank you, and I’d be happy to answer any questions. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. 

Let me turn immediately to Senator Burr for his questions. 

Again, thanks for the testimony. 

Senator BURR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Wenk, glad to have you here as always. Reid, I can’t thank 

you enough for your willingness to come up here. I might say, for 

the chair’s own knowledge, he has agreed to be with us today while 

his son’s fifth grade class is in Washington, DC, and I think probably touring right now. So—— 

Mr. WILSON. They are in the Capitol somewhere. 

Senator BURR. So I appreciate you breaking away to do this. Let 

me say for members and for staff, the Blue Ridge Parkway is a 

unique treasure. If this were an initiative today between the Congress and the Park Service, we would find that path of land. We 

would construct a road. There would be no spot on that that there 

was only 800 feet of protected land. 

I think the one thing that we have seen with protection of our 

parks, we have gone back and we have added to, as we saw the 

value of a particular space and the need to preserve it. I think it 

is safe to say that the Park Service and the Blue Ridge Parkway 

have never gone through that process. 

The exchanges that have taken place over time between the Park 

Service and private land owners was a convenience item. It was the 

trade of this acre for that acre, trying to make sure that both could 

coexist. With few exceptions, there have been efforts to bring more 

land under the Blue Ridge Parkway for the purposes of preservation. This is a real effort. 

I think there is a way for us to find the right language to be able 

to do this. I think it is particularly special on the 75th anniversary 

that we would look at this as the single most used national park 

treasure that we have, and I might say it runs straight to the doorstep of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, which is the 

most visited national park in the country. 

I dare say if you put together the numbers, it may take the rest 

of the parks in total to equal the visitation—you like that, don’t 
33 

you—of the Great Smokies. Now we have had the 75th anniversary 

of the Great Smokies, and we had a wonderful event with Secretary Salazar. The only thing that could diminish the greatness of 

the Great Smokies is to diminish the highway that a lot of people 

use where they enjoy both park entities to get there. 

So, Reid, let me just turn to you. Talk to us just about the economic impact of the Blue Ridge Parkway. 

Mr. WILSON. Sure. To stress again, it really is the economic life- blood of the mountains these days in North Carolina, $2.3 billion 

per year. What we are talking about in this bill is just providing 

$15 million per year, which would help leverage keeping that $2.3 

billion going into local economies year after year by protecting the 

lands along the parkway. 

Let me just give you an example of one place along the parkway 

that I think shows how important economically the parkway is to 

local communities. There is a place called the Orchard at Altapass. 

It is near 2 little towns of Spruce Pine and Little Switzerland, and 

it is a gorgeous little place. Not only is it an apple orchard with 

75 different varieties, but it is sort of a country store and a gathering point for people throughout the hills and mountains nearby. 

Nine months of the year, people come from nearby communities 

to listen to live music and clog and eat ice cream when it is hot 

out and just catch up with their neighbors. But in the fall especially, it is an amazing draw for tourists all over the place coming 

to see that spot. On a typical weekend in the fall, there are 6,000 

people that go to this one apple orchard, on a given weekend in the 

fall. 

They are spending their money not only at the orchard, but in 

restaurants and inns and hotels in nearby communities. Just this 

past year, after more than 6 years of work, our organization was 

able to help broker a deal between the CSX Railroad, which owns 

1,500 acres next to this orchard, and the State of North Carolina 

to purchase a conservation easement on that property. 

So now it is guaranteed forever that that 1,500 acres, which is 

this unbelievable backdrop from the orchard’s patio, will be there 

and will continue to draw 6,000 people per weekend in the fall. 

There are stories like that up and down the Blue Ridge Parkway 

of these small towns that are just depending on tourists continuing 

to come to those attractions in the future. So you could tell that 

story in 100 different places. 

Senator BURR. I appreciate that, and for purposes again of our 

members, even the Smithsonian recognized the value of the Blue 

Ridge Parkway and built a facility off of the parkway which houses 

the bluegrass museum or the bluegrass inventory of the Smithsonian. I think it certainly recognizes the historic nature of music in 

that Appalachian region, and the Blue Ridge Parkway is that conduit to get to it. 

Dan, I know you mentioned in your testimony that you are sympathetic to the desire of supporters. There is a way to work this 

out, isn’t there? 

Mr. WENK. I think our concern is, first of all, many of the things 

that are in the bill already—for example, we can buy lands that are 

contiguous to the property. We have an unlimited authority to expend funds at the Blue Ridge Parkway on acquisition of lands. 
34 

There are some concerns in terms of the granting authority to an 

NGO, or not-for-profit organization to buy on our behalf. There is 

also some concern that we have in terms of the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund, for example, we cannot spend funds on ‘‘administrative expenses’’. 

However, there is an appropriation or there is a provision in this 

that would allow up to $250,000 to be granted, if you will, to notfor-profit organizations. Within the spirit of the law, they could use 

that for ‘‘administrative expenses’’ to acquire lands under Land and 

Water Conservation Fund. So I think that is conflict, if you will, 

with the spirit of the law. 

So we are very, very happy to work with you and your staff. We 

have the same goals, and that is to ensure the protection of the 

lands along the Blue Ridge Parkway and the scenic vistas that people do go to visit. 

Senator BURR. I think all would agree that in some cases, an 

800-foot swath is not protecting. More importantly, if you have encroachment on the area, there is a greater likelihood of the erosion 

that we have seen frequently along the parkway. When that road 

is shut down because of a rock slide or the loss of part of the road, 

it is a devastation to the local economy. So we want to make sure 

that there is as much protection as we can. 

If I could ask for the chair’s indulgence, just real quickly, I am 

going to go over to Dan to S. 1018, the center for Cane River Creole 

National Historic Park. Can you tell me whether this type of arrangement to build a national park facility on a non-Park Service 

land is common practice? 

Mr. WENK. It is not unprecedented. I can think of, for example, 

in Colorado at Dinosaur National Monument with Utah, with the 

State of Utah, we have a joint facility there. We have one at New 

Mexico, I believe, that is a facility that would house curatorial facilities. 

So it is not uncommon. It is not common, but there are examples 

of it in the system. 

It is the intention of the National Park Service to try to consolidate our museum collections wherever we can because we believe 

there is cost and power efficiencies to do that. 

Senator BURR. Are there benefits realized by having the center 

located on the university grounds versus on Park Service grounds? 

Mr. WENK. I think it is the synergy, if you will, between the 3 

organizations being able to combine their collections for scholarly 

work, for research, and the university has indicated that they have 

the space. The construction cost, we have done the preliminary design. The construction cost of the facility is about $12.5 million. 

The nominal cost that they were looking to charge for the lease, 

we understand to be $1-a-year. We believe it should be extended 

to a 40-year term to fully amortize the construction cost. 

Senator BURR. Does the university pick up any of that $12 million cost? 

Mr. WENK. My current understanding is no. That would be a construction cost borne by the National Park Service. 

Senator BURR. Then there would be a 40-year lease and a charge 

for the—— 
35 

Mr. WENK. One dollar a year for 40 years is my understanding 

of the nominal cost. 

Senator BURR. OK. Let me switch, if I could, very quickly to S. 

1017, the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission. Can you 

elaborate on the role of the Cane River National Heritage Area 

Commission? 

Mr. WENK. This commission, just as other commissions throughout the country at heritage areas, plays a critical role in the planning for and the administration of the national heritage area. This 

commission does expire, I believe, in August 2010. The legislation 

currently looks at a 15-year extension. 

I would just say, Senator, that if we were to do this the same 

as we did the areas that were established in 1996, included those 

a 5-year extension. So we do have some concern about a 15 year 

extension because the goal of this commission is to literally make 

themselves self-sustaining and to really take over the full management responsibilities within the period of time allotted. 

Senator BURR. Does the Park Service provide funds for the operation of the commission? 

Mr. WENK. The Park Service provides a limited amount. We have 

a limited amount of funding that is distributed between all the national heritage areas. That is, some of it is a base amount, and 

they can compete for more of those funds, but there is limited funding. I cannot tell you precisely what was provided to Cane River 

Creole last year or this year. 

Senator BURR. OK. For the record, could you supply that number 

for us? 

Mr. WENK. Yes. 

Senator BURR. I would appreciate it. 

Last thing, if I could, Dan, sort of going back to the Blue Ridge 

possible acquisition. There are some concerns regarding the loss of 

lands for recreation and hunting purposes if a bill were to pass. It 

is not the intent of the bill to limit hunting on acquired lands. Can 

you assure me that there would be no net loss of hunting land 

through land acquisition proposed within this bill? 

Mr. WENK. Senator, I am not totally familiar with the law as it 

reads pertaining to hunting at the Blue Ridge Parkway. I cannot 

provide you that assurance sitting here today, but I will look at 

what the law says in terms of if those lands came within the 

boundary of Blue Ridge Parkway, I would believe that they would 

come in under the same conditions of the rest of the land of the 

Blue Ridge Parkway. 

So I need to determine exactly what that is. 

Senator BURR. Thank you. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. So, Mr. Wenk, you took that for the record, and 

I assume you will respond to Senator Burr’s comments? 

Mr. WENK. Yes. 

Senator UDALL. Let me follow up on Senator Burr’s questioning 

on the Cane River National Heritage Area. Do you have any concerns with the commission and its operation that would be reauthorized by this bill? 
36 

Mr. WENK. No. We believe that the commission is an effective 

commission as any in the National Park System around the national heritage areas. Our only concern is the length of the term. 

Senator UDALL. The length. As I understand it, the commission 

has prepared a management plan, which the Park Service and the 

Governor of Louisiana both approved. If implementation of the approved plan is still underway, why wouldn’t the Park Service want 

the commission to continue its work? 

Mr. WENK. It is not that we don’t want them to continue the 

work. We are asking for program legislation, and we believe that 

program legislation will put all national heritage areas under the 

same basis of operation, and we believe that we should defer action 

on any of these until we have that program legislation, which we 

hope to get up to Congress for consideration soon. 

Senator UDALL. So, in part, this is about consistency and—— 

Mr. WENK. Correct. 

Senator UDALL [continuing]. Similar management approach and 

applying the same criteria to heritage areas across the country? 

Mr. WENK. The same criteria to establish them as well as for 

their continued management. 

Senator UDALL. In your view, is extending the authorization for 

the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission the same as 

extending the authorization of the heritage area itself? 

Mr. WENK. No, I don’t believe it is the same. I don’t think the 

heritage area itself is affected. The heritage area will still be there, 

but the management entity is what we are talking about with the 

commission. 

Senator UDALL. OK. Let me move to S. 1537, the Norman 

Borlaug National Historic Site. As we know, it would establish a 

new national historic site. Given the significance of Dr. Borlaug’s 

scientific and humanitarian achievements and since the property 

would be donated to the National Park Service, why is a formal 

study necessary? 

Mr. WENK. A formal study will do 3 things. It will determine the 

national significance and the suitability and feasibility of that site 

coming and being able to be effectively managed by the National 

Park Service. 

It will also look at what other options might be available for the 

preservation of that area. Is there a more appropriate entity that 

should perhaps have the jurisdiction over that area? So we really 

would have the test of national significance, suitability, and feasibility through a special resource study. 

Senator UDALL. That is fair enough. I look forward to hearing 

more about Dr. Borlaug. He sounds like quite an American story. 

I think it is appropriate that we are considering acknowledging his 

contributions. 

Mr. Wilson, I might turn to you. Senator Burr has a busy day. 

I know his staff are here. I just—I wanted to acknowledge the important work that the land trust world does in Colorado and in the 

West. Of course, we have seen an explosion of land trusts, who 

have this marvelous capacity to bring public and private sector 

viewpoints and resources together. 

Certainly, the advent of conservation easements and other tools 

to leverage dollars as well as work with fixed assets and illiquid 
37 

assets has really been a success story. So congratulations to you, 

and I know you work with your compatriots all over the country. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. We continue in the national park world to look 

for ways in which to create more buffer areas. I know, Mr. Wenk, 

you know this is a challenge that we face, and 100 years ago, 150 

years ago, those who had the first ideas about national parks didn’t 

realize the kind of pressures that might develop, although they did 

sense them. That was the very reason to create national parks. In 

effect, I think that is what you are asking to do is create more buffer zones. 

I was curious, you said this wonderful apple orchard, 9 months 

of the 12 months, the 3 months in the winter, is it closed? 

Mr. WILSON. They close it up because it is cold. 

Senator UDALL. It is cold. Is there snow on the ground? 

Mr. WILSON. Yes. Often the roads, especially the parkway is 

closed off when there is snow. 

Senator UDALL. The parkway is actually closed off. That area you 

mentioned, do Virginia and North Carolina compete for the business of those tourists that travel—— 

Mr. WILSON. Yes, but it is a friendly competition. 

Senator UDALL. Friendly competition, which I noted both Virginia Senators and both North Carolina Senators were supportive, 

as well as House members from both States. So that underlined the 

importance of working together to see if we can bring this legislation to fruition. 

Again, thank you both for your time and your testimony. I would 

like to thank both of you for your testimony. 

Some members of the committee may submit additional questions in writing. If so, we may ask you to submit additional answers for the record. We will keep the hearing record open for 2 

weeks to receive any additional comments. 

With that, the Subcommittee on National Parks is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

Æ