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) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

96–145 PDF 2004

S. HRG. 108–626

TIMUCUAN ECOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVE; MARTIN

LUTHER KING LAND EXCHANGE; ESTABLISH LEWIS AND

CLARK NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK; AND SAND CREEK

MASSACRE HISTORIC SITE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

S. 1672 S. 1789

S. 2167 S. 2173

H.R. 1616

MAY 20, 2004

(

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman 

DON NICKLES, Oklahoma 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado 

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri 

CONRAD BURNS, Montana 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JON KYL, Arizona 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

BOB GRAHAM, Florida 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

ALEX FLINT, Staff Director 

JUDITH K. PENSABENE, Chief Counsel 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming Chairman 

DON NICKLES, Oklahoma Vice Chairman 

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

CONRAD BURNS, Montana 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

JON KYL, Arizona 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Carolina 

BOB GRAHAM, Florida 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York

PETE V. DOMENICI and JEFF BINGAMAN are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee

THOMAS LILLIE, Professional Staff Member 

DAVID BROOKS, Democratic Senior Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page

Akaka, Hon. Daniel, U.S. Senator from Hawaii ................................................... 6

Alexander, Carol J., Executive Director, Ritz Theatre and LaVilla Museum, 

Jacksonville, FL ................................................................................................... 26

Brady, Steve, Sr., Co-Chair, Sand Creek Massacre Historic Site Project, Lame 

Deer, MT ............................................................................................................... 19

Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado ............................ 3

Cantwell, Hon. Maria, U.S. Senator from Washington ........................................ 2

Hoffman, Paul, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Fish and Wildlife and Parks, 

Department of the Interior .................................................................................. 7

Miller, Hon. Zell, U.S. Senator from Georgia ........................................................ 3

Nelson, Hon. Bill, U.S. Senator from Florida ........................................................ 4

Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from Wyoming ............................................... 1

Ziak, Rex, Lewis and Clark Author and Historian, Naselle, WA ........................ 23

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

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

APPENDIX II 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 39

(1)

TIMUCUAN ECOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC

PRESERVE; MARTIN LUTHER KING LAND 

EXCHANGE; ESTABLISH LEWIS AND CLARK 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK; AND SAND 

CREEK MASSACRE HISTORIC SITE 

THURSDAY, MAY 20, 2004

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:32 p.m., in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Craig Thomas presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator THOMAS. The committee will come to order. 

Welcome. Thank you for being here. I want to welcome the representatives from the Department of the Interior and other witnesses for today’s National Parks Subcommittee hearing. 

Our purpose is to hear testimony on four Senate bills and one 

House bill: S. 1672, a bill to expand the Timucuan Ecological and 

Historic Preserve in Florida; S. 1789 and H.R. 1616, to authorize 

the exchange of certain lands within the Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic site for lands owned by the city of Atlanta, 

Georgia, and for other purposes; S. 2167, a bill to establish the 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Park in the States of Washington and Oregon, and for other purposes; S. 2173, a bill to further the purposes of the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic 

Site Establishment Act of 2000. 

I would like also to mention that we originally had planned for 

S. 1808, a bill to provide for the preservation and restoration of historic buildings at historically women’s public colleges and universities, in this hearing. It has been removed from the agenda at the 

request of the sponsor. 

Let me again thank all the witnesses for being here, and I look 

forward to their testimony and the opportunity for us to discuss 

these five bills. 

Let me turn now to the Senator from Colorado. 

[The prepared statements of Senators Cantwell and Miller follow:]

2

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, U.S. SENATOR

FROM WASHINGTON, ON S. 2167

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a busy hearing, but I wanted to take a few 

moments to express my strong support for one of the bills before us, the Lewis and 

Clark National Historical Park Act of 2004. 

Lewis and Clark’s epic journey to explore and chart the western frontier of our 

fledgling nation has enormous significance in American history, particularly to those 

of us in the Pacific Northwest where the expedition achieved its momentous goal 

of reaching the Pacific Ocean almost 200 years ago. 

The Lewis and Clark expedition was America’s great odyssey, symbolic of our Nation’s core values of teamwork, courage, science, and opportunity. And teaching our 

children about their journey helps the next generation understand what makes 

America great. 

That’s why I was proud to introduce the bill before us in March along with my 

fellow Committee members, Senators Smith and Wyden, and my Washington State 

colleague Senator Murray. 

This bill protects three sites along the lower Columbia River that played crucial 

roles during the Corps of Discovery expedition. It will protect Clark’s Dismal Nitch, 

where the expedition first viewed the ocean and was trapped during a horrific sixday storm. 

It will also set aside Station Camp, where the group held a historic vote among 

all group members—including Sacagawea and York—on where the expedition 

should stay for the winter. Finally, this bill will preserve Cape Disappointment, 

marking the furthest point westward reached by Lewis and Clark, as well as create 

a national memorial there to commemorate Thomas Jefferson’s vision of a country 

‘‘from sea to shining sea.’’

The legislation also designates these sites as the ‘‘Lewis and Clark National Historic Park,’’ and includes Fort Clatsop National Memorial. The bill also authorizes 

management partnerships with Oregon’s Ecola State Park and Fort Stevens State 

Park, and Washington’s Fort Columbia State Park and Cape Disappointment State 

Park. Together, these federal and state lands will help tell the story of the explorers 

at the bicentennial next year and for many years to come. 

Mr. Chairman, I am proud of the overwhelming local and national support this 

effort has received. I’d like to submit for the record a letter supporting this bill from 

Washington State Senator Mark Doumit and State Representatives Brian Hatfield 

and Brian Blake, who represent this area in the state legislature. Their letter states 

that this bill ‘‘enjoys the broad support of local citizens, county, state, and municipal 

governments, port districts, civic groups, and public safety organizations.’’ And they 

noted that ‘‘Local stakeholders were involved with its development at every stage, 

providing input from inception until final drafting.’’

I would also like to note the letters of support from the States of Washington and 

Oregon, local county commissioners, nearby city governments, and several community organizations involved with Lewis and Clark commemorative activities. These 

letters are printed as part of the National Park Service’s boundary study. 

I also commend the State of Washington for committing approximately $6.5 million to realigning a highway and creating a riverside park at Station Camp that will 

commemorate this part of the Lewis and Clark story. If this bill becomes law, the 

State plans to generously donate the key portion of the site, about 15 acres, along 

with the new improvements to the National Park Service. 

Finally, I want to take this opportunity to publicly thank Interior Secretary Gale 

Norton, who recently traveled to the Pacific Northwest and expressed support for 

this bill. I look forward to working with the Interior Department to ensure that 

these sites can be opened next year to welcome the million plus visitors the region 

expects at the bicentennial celebrations. 

Mr. Chairman, much has been said about the incredible bravery of the Lewis and 

Clark expedition and the incredible hardships they overcame to achieve its mission. 

It took them a year and half and over 4,000 miles to reach the mouth of the Columbia River and we are still benefiting from the invaluable record of the native cultures and the flora and fauna they encountered along the way. 

But I’d also like to point out another crucial result of their expedition that I believe is too often overlooked. Prior to the expedition, the United States’ claim to the 

Pacific Northwest, which I now represent, was tenuous at best and based on American sea captain Robert Gray’s discovery of the Columbia River in 1792. Lewis and 

Clark’s expedition was crucial to securing the claim and the eventual creation of all 

the states in the Pacific Northwest. 

3

It is for these reasons I am especially pleased to have noted Lewis and Clark author and historian, and lifetime southwest Washington resident, Rex Ziak here 

today. 

Rex has devoted many years to researching the details of Lewis and Clark’s adventures near his home and he recently wrote a book ‘‘In Full View a True & Accurate Account’’ which chronicles the thirty days from November 7 to December 7, 

1805 when Lewis and Clark reached the Pacific Ocean. Rex, I appreciate you being 

here today and look forward to your testimony. 

Mr. Chairman, last week Illinois celebrated the 200-year anniversary of the Corps 

of Discovery’s point of departure from Camp River DuBois, then an outpost on the 

Western edge of our nation. 

That means we have a year and a half until the 200-year celebrations reach our 

Pacific shores in November of next year. So it is my sincere hope that I can work 

with you and the other members of the Committee, as well as the National Park 

Service and the States of Washington and Oregon, to ensure these sites are ready 

to educate, commemorate, and be enjoyed by Americans in time for next year’s 

Lewis and Clark Bicentennial in the Northwest. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ZELL MILLER, U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA,

ON S. 1789

I want to thank the Chairman and members of the committee for allowing me to 

express my support for S. 1789, the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site 

Land Exchange Act. 

As you know, S. 1789 would authorize the exchange of land owned by the National Park Service for land of equal or greater value with the City of Atlanta, by 

amending Public Law 94-428, the act that established the Martin Luther King, Jr. 

National Historic Site. 

Congressman John Lewis and I introduced this land exchange legislation because 

its passage would allow the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site to create 

emergency access to and from the site. The Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site Visitor Center and Museum is landlocked and currently has no emergency 

access, making it very difficult for firefighting equipment to reach the facility. The 

City of Atlanta will benefit from this exchange by acquiring property from the National Park Service and in turn encouraging commercial development in the community. 

I would like to note that both the National Park Service and the City of Atlanta 

are in strong support of this bill. 

I appreciate your holding this hearing and considering our bill. I ask for your support of this important legislation and its eventual passage by the entire Senate.

STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL,

U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO 

Senator CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me speak just 

for a moment on S. 2173, the Sand Creek Massacre Historic Site. 

I want to welcome Steve Brady who was at my office a little bit 

ago. Steve is one of the leaders of our traditional people in the 

Northern Cheyenne in Lame Deer, Montana, and he is co-chair of 

the Sand Creek Massacre Site Project, attended all the meetings, 

and he will be testifying. I appreciate him being here. 

On the morning of November 29, 1864, approximately 700 soldiers that were really Colorado militia, who mustered out after 

they did this heinous deed, attacked a peaceful encampment on the 

Cheyenne and Arapaho Indians located on the banks of the Sand 

Creek, which is in southeastern Colorado. The creek is not there 

anymore. It is pretty much dried up. But they used small arms and 

howitzer fire and many of the Indian warriors were not there. It 

was mostly just a few old men, women, and children. And they 

committed one of the most atrocious crimes in the American West. 

Some of the people who were being shot at managed to escape, but 

most of the elderly could not run. The children could not run. The 

4

women did not, and so they just systematically slaughtered about 

150 Cheyenne and Arapaho people. 

The following day, these same soldiers, if we can use that word 

very loosely, walked among the dead looking for survivors. And 

even after the people were dead, they committed some of the most 

heinous atrocities you ever heard of, cutting off parts of their bodies, putting them on their rifles. They later paraded through the 

streets of Denver and were commended for this action by the Rocky 

Mountain News at the time. 

That site has been known for a long time to the people of Colorado, and in the years that followed, many individuals have tried 

to raise the awareness of that Sand Creek Massacre and the enormity of what happened. Mr. Brady’s organization, really the Sand 

Creek Massacre Historic Site Project, has been a very strong part 

of that effort. 

In the 106th Congress I introduced the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Establishment Act, which the President, President Clinton at the time, did sign into law. That act authorized the 

Secretary of the Interior to begin acquiring land near the site of 

the massacre for the eventual establishment of a permanent memorial in remembrance of the lives that were so violently and senselessly taken. 

At the time of the enactment of that law, only a small portion 

of the significant land was available to be acquired, but since that 

time the Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes of Oklahoma have acquired 

a critical piece of property, which was called the Dawson Ranch. It 

belonged to a rancher and his wife. About 1,400 acres, as I remember, was in that parcel. But that is very crucial because of its size 

and location, right in the center of the massacre site. 

This bill before us today would take this land into trust for the 

Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes of Oklahoma to become part of the 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site. With the addition of 

this land, the National Park Service will be able to recommend to 

the Secretary that the site be officially established. 

I am very proud of the tribes’ commitment to this effort. I look 

forward certainly to hearing Mr. Brady’s testimony. 

With that, thank you for scheduling this hearing. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, Senator. 

The Senator from Florida. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, U.S. SENATOR

FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am happy to be here to tell you about a piece of land that has 

been donated to the National Park Service and the passage of this 

bill would memorialize that to be an accomplished fact. 

For only 81⁄2 acres, it might be somewhat unusual to be spending 

this much attention, but I will tell you that this particular area, 

which is the beach area of Amelia Island is one of my favorite 

places on the planet. Every chance that I get to go there, it is a 

wonderful place to let the pressures of Washington, D.C. just kind 

of melt away. 

Amelia Island is the northern-most barrier island on the Atlantic 

in the State of Florida. Its northern boundary is the St. Mary’s 

5

River, which is the State line, and which is the river that now our 

Trident submarines traverse in and out of as they are going to the 

big Trident sub base at King’s Bay, Georgia. 

To the south is this beautiful island that has been preserved, and 

it is now developed on a large part of it, but it has been developed 

in a high quality so that a lot of the natural beauty and the historical significance has remained. 

It is an interesting part of our history because we were a segregated society for so many years. Back in 1932 there was established what back then was known as the Black Beach. This has 

happened in other parts of the South. It is true also in Miami on 

one of the barrier islands there called Virginia Key. It became a 

beach that African-Americans would use and would own the adjacent land. A substantial African-American community is still there 

today. 

As part of this American Beach, there is a unique geological feature which has now been donated, offered to be donated, by the 

Amelia Island Plantation for a very high historic dune. Obviously, 

the point of all of this is to preserve this 81⁄2 acres, which is the 

highest point on Amelia Island. 

The American Beach Historic District was listed on the National 

Register of Historic places in recognition of its African-American 

cultural heritage, and the natural value of this 81⁄2 acre section of 

beach, known as Nana, we are seeking inclusion in the Timucuan 

Preserve. It is also not only the tallest natural dune on Amelia Island, but it is the habitat for the threatened loggerhead turtle and 

the critical calving grounds for the north Atlantic right whale. 

Companion legislation was passed in the House. This has been 

modified from 121⁄2 to 81⁄2. If there is any confusion about that, 

that is what has been donated. 

I appreciate the efforts of MaVynee Betsch. She is affectionately 

known as the Beach Lady. I appreciate the efforts of Carol Alexander, who you are going to hear from in just a few minutes, and 

of Jack Healen who is the president of the Amelia Island Plantation, all who have joined together to preserve this piece of AfricanAmerican history. 

The Beach Lady is the inspiration for this legislation. She is the 

great granddaughter of A.L. Lewis who was the first owner of this 

beach, and he was a longtime champion of protecting this dune, series of dunes called Nana. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I wanted to come. This was very important 

to me personally. I know it well. It is a beautiful part of our flora 

and fauna and it is a beautiful part of us trying to preserve the 

historical significance of this area. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, Senator. 

How do you pronounce the name of the preserve? 

Senator NELSON. Timucuan. It is a name that comes from an Indian tribe that was very early in Florida all throughout these parts 

of northeastern Florida. The land that was named La Florida, 

which as the land of flowers, came from the Spanish when they 

first came. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you. 

Senator THOMAS. The Senator from Hawaii. 

6

[The prepared statement of Senator Nelson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA,

ON S. 1672

I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for holding this National 

Parks Subcommittee hearing and receiving testimony on my bill S. 1672 which 

seeks to expand the boundaries of the Timucuan Preserve to include an 8.5 acre 

stretch of untouched beach that was one of the few integrated beaches in the 1930s. 

Today, American Beach which includes this 8.5 acre stretch at issue today, is the 

only remaining example of a beach resort established for use by AfricanAmericans 

during the divisive ‘Jim Crow’ era of American history. 

In January 2002, the American Beach Historic District was listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places in recognition of its AfricanAmerican cultural heritage. 

In terms of its natural value, the 8.5 acre section of beach known as ‘‘Nana’’ seeking inclusion in the Timucuan Preserve is the tallest natural dune on Amelia Island 

and habitat for the threatened loggerhead turtle and critical calving grounds for the 

North Atlantic Right Whale. 

The House passed companion legislation to this bill on May 18, 2004, slightly 

modifying the bill to correct the acreage donated from 12.5 acres to 8.5 acres which 

I support. 

I appreciate the efforts of MaVynee Betsch, affectionately referred to as the 

‘‘Beach Lady,’’ Carol Alexander, and Jack Healan, President of Amelia Island Plantation to preserve this piece of AfricanAmerican history. 

The Beach Lady is the inspiration for this legislation. She is the great grand 

daughter of A.L. Lewis, the first owner of this beach, and a long time champion of 

protecting ‘‘Nana.’’

Carol Alexander, who will testify today, has worked tirelessly to ensure this piece 

of African-American history is preserved. 

And Jack Healan, President of the Amelia Island Plantation, donated the untouched beach to the Park Service to make this possible. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to address this Subcommittee and I urge 

your support for this bill.

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, U.S. SENATOR

FROM HAWAII 

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. 

All of the bills of this afternoon’s agenda share an important new 

theme. For many years, the historic sites and monuments administered by the National Park Service focused principally on the history of European settlers. The composition of bills we are hearing 

today reflects the broad diversity of American culture, from the 

story of American Beach in Florida and its place in African-American family life from the 1920’s to the 1950’s, to the home of Martin 

Luther King and his role in the civil rights movement, from Lewis 

and Clark and their expedition into what was then uncharted territory for the American Government, to Sand Creek in Colorado, the 

site of a terrible massacre of members of the Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes. These bills cover quite a broad spectrum of American 

history. 

Mr. Chairman, I briefly reviewed these bills yesterday afternoon 

and it appears to me that most of them are noncontroversial, and 

I hope that we will be able to move them quickly through the committee. 

One of the bills on the agenda today is S. 2167, Senator 

Cantwell’s bill to establish the Lewis and Clark National Historical 

Park in Washington and Oregon. Senator Cantwell is unable to be 

here today. I know she is very disappointed not to be here because 

of her strong support for this bill. But I would ask, Mr. Chairman, 

7

that her statement and statements in support of the bill from several members of the Washington State legislature be included in 

the hearing record. 

Senator THOMAS. They will be included. 

Senator AKAKA. I would like to add my welcome to all of the witnesses and look forward to hearing their testimony. Thank you 

very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, Senator. 

Lewis and Clark did not make it quite to Hawaii, did they? 

Senator AKAKA. No. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator THOMAS. We have a good group of witnesses today. On 

the first panel, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Interior Paul 

Hoffman. I am always glad to have Paul here. He is with the Fish 

and Wildlife and Parks Department. Thank you, sir. 

STATEMENT OF PAUL HOFFMAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, FISH AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF 

THE INTERIOR 

Mr. HOFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. It is my pleasure to be here again to testify on these four 

bills. I will give you just a brief scorecard summary. 

S. 1672, the Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve Boundary Expansion Act. The Department of the Interior supports that 

bill. 

S. 1789, the Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic Site 

land exchange. The Department supports that bill. 

S. 2167, the Lewis and Clark National Historical Park’s name 

change and expansion. The Department supports that bill with 

some technical amendments, which I will discuss in a moment. 

And S. 2173, the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site 

land transfer. The Department supports that bill with some 

amendments, as well. 

I have submitted some written testimony, which I would like to 

be made part of the record. 

Senator THOMAS. It shall be. 

Mr. HOFFMAN. And I will take this opportunity to apologize for 

the late arrival of the Sand Creek Massacre testimony. 

S. 1672, Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve boundary expansion. As I indicated, the Department supports this bill. This is 

another theme that these bills represent and that is the theme of 

partnerships in the management of national parks. This is one of 

those partnership parks. The total acreage is 46,000 acres, of which 

less than 10,000 of those acres are owned by the National Park 

Service. The rest is county, State, city-owned lands, and those 

agencies share in the management of that park as well. 

This bill would add 12.5 acres to the preserve. It would be a noncontiguous unit. It is across the river on Amelia Island, as Senator 

Nelson noted. 8.5 of the acres are donated to the National Park 

Service by the Amelia Island Plantation. The other 4 acres are to 

be purchased by Nassau County. So this is a no-cost expansion to 

the National Park Service. 

American Beach does represent a significant piece of our history. 

It is an African-American beach from what is widely called the 

8

‘‘Jim Crow’’ era of segregation. It was established for use by African-Americans by an insurance executive, the CEO of the AfroAmerican Life Insurance Company, Abraham Lincoln Lewis. 

This expansion would preserve the only remaining piece of that 

beach that has got the historic integrity, dating back to the days 

of its use as American Beach. 

As I indicated, there is no cost in the acquisition of the lands, 

and there would be a cooperative management scheme, such that 

there is virtually no additional cost to the management of the park. 

And there is an awful lot of local support for this park expansion 

as well. 

Senator THOMAS. Let me interrupt. Did you say it was 46,000 

acres? 

Mr. HOFFMAN. The total park. 

Senator THOMAS. In the city of Jacksonville. 

Mr. HOFFMAN. Well, adjacent to it, to the north and east of it. 

There are a lot of wetlands and then there are a number of historical sites that are part of the park as well. 

Senator THOMAS. That is a lot. Thank you. 

Mr. HOFFMAN. S. 1789, the Martin Luther King, Junior, National 

Historic Site exchange. The Department supports this bill. 

It authorizes an exchange between the city of Atlanta and the 

National Park Service. Normally we require cities or counties to donate lands to national parks. In this particular instance, the city 

of Atlanta has already donated a substantial chunk of real estate, 

upon which the visitor center is constructed. This particular exchange would have the National Park Service getting 1.7 acres 

which will provide emergency access to the visitor center. Right 

now there is only foot access to the visitor center, and in exchange 

for that, the city of Atlanta would get one-third of an undeveloped 

acre on the back side of the park unit, upon which they would build 

a parking facility. 

This exchange would not only enhance the emergency access, ingress and egress, to the visitor center for the National Park Service, but it will enhance Atlanta’s efforts to revitalize and redevelop 

the Edgewood Avenue area of their city. It does require an equal 

value exchange, and we may adjust the acreage in order to make 

that an equal value exchange. 

The only cost to the Park Service as a result of this exchange would be $160,000 to pave the road into the visitor center to provide that access. 

S. 2167, the Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, a name 

change and expansion bill. The Department supports this bill with 

technical amendments. 

This bill will rename Fort Clatsop National Memorial to the 

Lewis and Clark National Historical Park. We believe that this will 

more accurately reflect the nature of the park and make it more 

readily identifiable to the American public, especially as we are 

about halfway through the bicentennial celebration of this historic 

mission of exploration. 

I believe that the significance of the Lewis and Clark bicentennial cannot be understated. The discovery expedition from 1803 to 

1806 is widely hailed as one of the most significant exploratory 

events of this country and perhaps even the world. The significance 

9

of the Fort Clatsop area is that is where the winter encampment 

of the expedition was during the winter of 1805 and 1806, before 

they returned to St. Louis the following summer. 

The Department supported and Congress passed a boundary expansion in 2002 and in conjunction with that, there was a study 

authorized to look into other potentials for expansion of the park 

down the road. The 2002 expansion took the Fort Clatsop National 

Memorial from 125 acres to 1,500 acres. It enabled the creation of 

a trail to the sea, to the area where the Lewis and Clark expedition 

boiled sea water to buildup their severely depleted salt supplies. 

The purchase of that additional acreage, to complete that expansion, is the No. 2 priority for land acquisitions within the Park 

Service. It is estimated to cost $6.5 million. 

This particular bill will add three new sites to the park unit, and 

these sites are currently State parks. We believe that this bill represents a four C’s effort. Secretary Norton has what she calls her 

four C’s which is conservation through cooperation, consultation 

and communication. Our leader in this effort out there at the park 

has been the superintendent of Fort Clatsop National Memorial, 

Chip Jenkins, who is here with us today, and he has really done 

an outstanding job of working with both the States of Washington 

and Oregon and the local communities on this effort. 

There will be cooperative management of the new units. There 

will be close coordination with both States and in the management 

of their other State parks and in the promotion of the newly expanded park. All the units, together with the State units, will be 

collectively identified as the Lewis and Clark National and State 

Historical Park, which is similar to what we do in California with 

the Redwood National Park adjacent to the California Redwood 

Park. 

The three units to be added include Cape Disappointment. This 

is the western-most point of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. The 

acreage to be added is currently Bureau of Land Management land 

which has been withdrawn from public use for the Army Corps of 

Engineers and the U.S. Coast Guard. We would like to work closely 

with the committee on the verbiage of an amendment to the bill to 

address the transfer of the administration of all the Cape Disappointment lands to the National Park Service. The bulk of the 

Cape Disappointment area would be managed by the State of 

Washington as a State park, but 20 acres within that would be the 

site of a memorial to Thomas Jefferson and managed by the National Park Service. 

The other unit to be added would be Clark’s Dismal Nitch. This 

is where the expedition nearly floundered. They got pinned against 

the cliffs there during a severe Pacific storm, and it was a very significant part of their arrival in that area. This is 30 acres of land 

to be donated to the National Park Service by the State of Washington, and it includes 160 acres which would be purchased for 

somewhere between $1.5 million and $2.3 million. 

The third unit to be added would be Station Camp. This is where 

the expedition finally reached the mouth of the Columbia River, 

and the most extensive surveying and location data documentation 

done by Meriwether Lewis was done at this site. 

10

This is also unique in that it is where the first known democratic 

action took place west of the Mississippi where the expedition voted 

on the location where they were going to over-winter that year. 

This involves 15 acres to be donated by the State of Washington, as well as about $6.5 million in road and infrastructure improvements that will be donated to the National Park Service by the 

State of Washington. It would also involve the acquisition of a conservation easement on 455 acres in the area. 

We are very excited about this particular bill. We think it represents a unique opportunity to make a dramatic statement about 

the bicentennial of the Lewis and Clark expedition, as well as highlight how we can expand and manage parks cooperatively with 

States and other entities in order not to make them a burden upon 

the Federal budget. 

The fourth bill, S. 2173, the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site land transfer bill. The Department supports this bill with 

amendments. 

This site, as Senator Campbell so well articulated, was authorized in 2000 for up to 13,000 acres with the Secretary of the Interior having the discretion to establish it as a unit of the National 

Park Service once adequate acreage was in the hands of the Park 

Service so as to make it a viable unit and to adequately be able 

to interpret and protect the site of the Sand Creek Massacre. 

This particular bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to receive 1,465 acres from the Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes. This 

would be a donation. It would be held in trust, but would be administered by the National Park Service for historic preservation 

purposes. That is the real need for this particular authorization. It 

is not the normal kind of trust relationship the Department has 

with tribal lands. 

The National Park Service has surveyed the area to determine 

the actual site of the Sand Creek Massacre and other significant 

resources in the area, and this 1,465 acres, together with the approximately 900 acres that the Park Service owns, will constitute 

a significant part of the actual site where the massacre took place. 

So we believe with the passage of this bill and the transfer of the 

land, that it is time to designate the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site as a National Park Service unit. 

We would like to work with the committee on some amendments 

to this bill. We would prefer that the bill not actually make this 

1,465 acres of land part of the Cheyenne and Arapaho reservation. 

That poses some administrative challenges, given that their reservation lands are actually in Oklahoma. 

We would like to clarify the language that addresses the Secretary’s role as trustee. 

And we would like to work with the committee on addressing the 

future management of the buildings on the 1,465-acre donation. 

There are some trust implications that come to bear on how buildings are managed, and we would prefer to see them managed according to national park standards, but we are more than willing 

to work with your staff and the committee to develop the language 

for these amendments. 

That concludes my comments, and I am prepared to take any 

questions the committee may have. 

11

[The prepared statements of Mr. Hoffman regarding S. 1672, S. 

1789, H.R. 1616, S. 2167, and S. 2173 follow:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PAUL HOFFMAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, FISH AND

WILDLIFE AND PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

ON S. 1672

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

to present the Department’s views on S. 1672, a bill to expand the Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve in Florida. 

The Department supports S. 1672. The bill would authorize the National Park 

Service (NPS) to expand the preserve boundary to include American Beach, a 

unique historic recreational area established in the 1920s for African-Americans 

during the segregated ‘‘Jim Crow’’ era. The 12.5 acre boundary expansion, including 

the existing structures and beachfront, will not result in additional operational costs 

to the NPS because the area would be managed with existing staff. 

S. 1672 authorizes a boundary expansion for the Timucuan Preserve to encompass 

12.5 acres of the remaining American Beach area. The 12.5-acre area is significant 

because it includes important remnants of the beach, natural dune, and remaining 

historic structures associated with the prominent era of American Beach resort use. 

Consistent with many other areas within the boundary of the Timucuan Preserve, 

the NPS would cooperate with other agencies and private landowners in managing 

land within its boundary. 

Inclusion of American Beach will facilitate preservation and understanding of this 

important site. Within the 12.5-acre expansion area, the NPS anticipates receiving 

8.5 acres by donation from the Amelia Island Plantation. The remaining four acres 

are in private ownership and are currently for sale. Although within the boundary 

expansion area, NPS has no plans to purchase these four acres. Like other areas 

of the Timucuan Preserve that are outside of NPS ownership, the NPS would work 

cooperatively with appropriate agencies and interested private landowners to help 

to manage and interpret American Beach resources. Nassau County officials and 

private citizens support expansion of the park boundary and donation of American 

Beach land to the NPS. 

Abraham Lincoln Lewis, co-founder and president of the Afro-American Life Insurance Company, founded American Beach in 1920 as a place where executives and 

employees of the company could enjoy ocean beach recreational activities in the ‘‘Jim 

Crow’’ era when such opportunities were severely limited. However, word soon 

spread and African-Americans from Atlanta, Tuskegee, and other parts of the south 

came to the beach town to buy property and spend their summers free from reminders of segregation and discrimination. The resort also had low rates that allowed 

the less affluent accessibility for day gatherings. The African-American working 

class came to the resort from farming towns across South Georgia, North Florida, 

and Alabama. 

In the 1940s and 1950s American Beach became the place where African-Americans went for recreation and relaxation without seeing a ‘‘Whites Only’’ sign, the 

rule for beaches in the southeast at that time. Many writers, artists, and entertainment and sports celebrities enjoyed the town’s special vacationland atmosphere. At 

American Beach, entertainers like Ray Charles and Duke Ellington played in the 

local clubs. 

The Amelia Island Plantation, a private corporation on Amelia Island, intends to 

donate 8.5 acres of the 12.5-acre expansion area to the NPS. The proposed donation 

would ensure that the legacy of conservation on behalf of Abraham Lincoln Lewis 

and the Afro-American Life Insurance Company is preserved. The 8.5-acre donation 

consists of a natural sand dune that is currently open to visitor use through a conservation easement, and associated scrub and maritime hammock habitat. The dune 

and surrounding habitat were protected from development in the original designs 

for American Beach. The Amelia Island Plantation Corporation later preserved the 

site intact when it purchased the property. Natural habitat values of the site include high species diversity with relatively little disturbance and few exotic species, 

and habitat for the threatened loggerhead turtle. 

The proposed expansion area also includes important remaining structures from 

the ‘‘Jim Crow’’ era, including the cotillion area where people gathered to be entertained by celebrities. One home (Ervin’s Rest) was listed on the National Register 

of Historic Places in 1998. In 2002 the American Beach Historic District was listed 

on the National Register in recognition of its African-American cultural heritage. 

The NPS, other agencies, and private landowners will cooperatively manage structures that remain within the boundary expansion area. 

12

Created by segregation and abandoned after integration, American Beach has 

struggled against a powerful tide. Development of large condominium and resort 

complexes on Amelia Island has encroached on the remnants of this African-American resort community. As a result, American Beach has decreased in acreage from 

its most prosperous size of 200+ acres to only 60 acres that remain today. Inclusion 

of the proposed 12.5 acres within the Timucuan Preserve will help preserve critical 

components of American Beach and its unique association with African-American 

heritage. 

The General Management Plan for the Timucuan Preserve outlines a partnership 

approach to management. Should the preserve boundary be expanded, management 

of American Beach would follow this partnership model. In particular, the NPS 

would work closely with County, State, federal, and private interests on lands 

owned by the NPS and in other sites outside of NPS ownership but within the preserve boundary. Through these partnerships, the NPS would work cooperatively to 

pursue restoration and protection of remaining historic and natural resources at 

American Beach. 

The proposed boundary expansion enjoys support from private landowners and 

local officials. Throughout Nassau and Duval Counties, Florida individuals and 

groups have demonstrated support for the protection and conservation of American 

Beach. American Beach has also been the subject of documentaries on the History 

Channel. As a result, high public interest in saving this resource has been generated. 

Mr. Chairman, this completes my testimony. I will be happy to answer any questions that you or any members of the Subcommittee may have now. 

ON S. 1789 AND H.R. 1616

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

to present the Department’s views on S. 1789 and H.R. 1616. These bills would authorize the exchange of lands within the Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic Site for lands owned by the City of Atlanta, Georgia. 

The Department supports both of these bills, which are identical. At a hearing on 

June 17, 2003, the Department testified in support of H.R. 1616, which passed the 

House without amendment on October 28, 2003. 

Both bills would allow the National Park Service (NPS) to exchange land currently owned on Edgewood Avenue for land of equal or greater value from the City 

of Atlanta (City). The exchange would provide the Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic Site (park) with emergency access to the park visitor center, and 

would help in the continuing revitalization of Edgewood Avenue. Although appraisals have not been completed, there would be no acquisition costs associated with 

this equal value exchange. Development of the newly acquired land, in order to provide paved access for emergency vehicles, is estimated to cost $160,000. There would 

be no increase in operational costs or the need to fund additional facilities. 

Both bills would amend Section 2(b) of P.L. 96-428, the act that established Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site, to allow the Secretary of the Interior 

to acquire land within the boundary of the park that is owned by the State of Georgia, or any political subdivision of the State, by exchange. Currently, P.L. 96-428 

only allows the Secretary to acquire such lands by donation. 

The park and nearby Preservation District, which includes Sweet Auburn, the economic and cultural center of Atlanta’s African-American community during most of 

the 20th century, were established in 1980 to preserve, protect and interpret the 

places where Dr. King was born, worked, worshipped, and is buried. Located near 

downtown Atlanta, the park consists of 34.47 acres, of which 13.04 acres is currently 

in federal ownership. 

Most of the park is self-guided, including the visitor center, Historic Ebenezer 

Baptist Church, Dr. King’s gravesite, Freedom Hall and Historic Fire Station No. 

6. Guided tours are provided for Dr. King’s Birth Home. In addition, the park preserves and maintains 22 historic properties. Most of these properties are located on 

the same block as the Birth Home and are restored to the 1930s period when Dr. 

King lived on Auburn Avenue. These historic properties are leased, as residential 

units, to the general public. 

In 1992, when the NPS began planning for a visitor center, the preferred location 

was determined to be the site of the City-owned Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center. In accordance with P.L. 96-428, land could only be acquired from the 

City of Atlanta by donation. The City, realizing the importance of having an NPS 

visitor center within the park, agreed to donate the community center to the NPS. 

13

Due in large part to the City’s generosity, the visitor center has been completed. 

However, emergency vehicles are unable to access the visitor center from nearby 

streets and additional land is needed to provide this emergency vehicle access. The 

City owns 1.71 acres that are adjacent to the visitor center, have easy access from 

Jackson Street, and could be developed to provide the needed emergency access for 

the visitor center. The City is interested in conveying all, or a portion, of this property to the NPS through an exchange. 

When the park was established, the boundary was created to ensure the preservation of Dr. King’s neighborhood. Included within the boundary is Edgewood Avenue. 

In order to assure preservation of the area NPS has gradually acquired several 

properties along Edgewood Avenue, which was a deteriorating commercial area. 

At the time the park was established, there were no local efforts to preserve properties along Edgewood Avenue. However, during the past 10 years several individuals and organizations, with the support of the City, have initiated restoration of 

the preservation district, including Edgewood Avenue. NPS ownership on Edgewood 

Avenue is no longer needed solely to ensure preservation and NPS has identified 

land along Edgewood Avenue that would be suitable for an exchange with the City, 

in order to acquire the parcel adjacent to the visitor center. 

That completes my testimony. I would be happy to answer any questions that you 

or any members of the subcommittee may have. 

ON S. 2167

Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today on S. 

2167, to establish the Lewis and Clark National Historical Park in the States of 

Washington and Oregon. 

The Department supports enactment of S. 2167. This bill, which would expand 

Fort Clatsop National Memorial to include sites in the state of Washington as well 

as Oregon and rename the unit the Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, is 

an Administration initiative, submitted to Congress in February of this year. S. 

2167 would facilitate a promising partnership between the National Park Service 

and the two states for coordinating management and interpretation of all the federal 

and state sites related to the Lewis and Clark Expedition in the lower Columbia 

River region. We urge the committee to move this legislation as quickly as possible 

in order to increase the likelihood of its enactment before the start of the Lewis and 

Clark Expedition 200th Anniversary events in Washington and Oregon, which are 

scheduled to begin in the summer of 2005. 

S. 2167 would implement the recommendations that resulted from the Fort 

Clatsop National Memorial boundary expansion study the National Park Service 

conducted of three sites along the lower Columbia River in the State of Washington 

that are important to the story of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. The study found 

that the three sites are nationally significant, and that they are suitable and feasible for addition to Fort Clatsop National Memorial. It recommended that two of 

the sites and part of the third site be added to Fort Clatsop. It also called for changing the name of Fort Clatsop to the ‘‘Lewis and Clark National Historical Park,’’ 

to reflect not only the addition of the Washington sites, but also the fact that the 

Fort Clatsop National Memorial now includes a much larger area in Oregon than 

just the site where Fort Clatsop stood. The study further recommended that the National Park Service enter into partnerships with the states of Oregon and Washington to coordinate management and interpretation at all of the federal and state 

sites in the area related to the Lewis and Clark Expedition, both for management 

efficiencies and to provide a more cohesive presentation to the public of the Expedition’s experiences upon their arrival and encampment on the Pacific coast. 

For the three Washington sites, the cost to the federal government for land acquisition is estimated to range from $1.5 million to $2.3 million, and for development, 

between $2.1 million and $4 million. Annual operating costs are estimated at about 

$127,000. 

Fort Clatsop National Memorial, near Astoria, Oregon, was established to commemorate the 1805-1806 winter encampment of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. 

The original site consists of a replica of the fort that was constructed through the 

efforts of the Junior Chamber of Commerce, Oregon and Clatsop County Historical 

Societies, Crown Zellerbach, other civic organizations and many individual volunteers. The donation of the reconstructed fort and acres of surrounding land in 1958 

allowed the establishment of the memorial. Public Law 107-221, the Fort Clatsop 

National Memorial Expansion Act of 2002, expanded the memorial from 125 acres 

to up to 1,500 acres of land adjacent to the site. These lands are a priority for acquisition in the Administration’s budget request for Fiscal Year 2005. The expansion 

14

also provides for a five-mile Fort To Sea Trail, which will enable park visitors to 

walk from Fort Clatsop to Sunset Beach. Like the original park, the trail is being 

designed and will be constructed largely through donated resources and volunteer 

labor. 

In addition to the expansion of Fort Clatsop, Public Law 107-221 also authorized 

the boundary study of three sites in Washington that became the basis for S. 2167. 

These sites are Clark’s Dismal Nitch, Station Camp, and Cape Disappointment. 

They would form the Washington state part of the new Lewis and Clark National 

Historical Park. 

Clark’s Dismal Nitch is the place where the Expedition nearly foundered as they 

were pinned against the cliffs by a fierce Pacific storm, just a few short miles from 

the mouth of the Columbia River. Approximately 30 acres would be donated by the 

State of Washington, and up to 160 acres would be acquired in fee or easement from 

a willing seller. 

Station Camp is the site where the Lewis and Clark Expedition finally reached 

the mouth of the Columbia River. It was at that location that Captain William 

Clark completed the most detailed survey of the entire journey, and the members 

of the Expedition launched reconnaissance trips north along what is now known as 

the Long Beach Peninsula in Washington. It is also the site where the members of 

the Expedition, including Clark’s slave York and the young Shoshone Indian woman 

Sacagawea, voted to decide where to spend the winter. As a result of the vote, the 

Expedition crossed over the Columbia River and built what we now know as Fort 

Clatsop. Washington State is currently investing approximately $6.5 million in realigning a highway and creating a riverside park at Station Camp that will be dedicated to commemorating this part of the Lewis and Clark story. If S. 2167 is enacted, the state would donate the key portion of the site, about 15 acres, along with 

the new improvements to the National Park Service. About 455 acres would be acquired in easement from a willing seller to protect the scenic backdrop. 

Cape Disappointment was the furthest point west the Expedition explored. It was 

there that the members of the Expedition first saw a full view of the Pacific Ocean. 

Land at Cape Disappointment is owned by the Federal government and managed 

as a state park. Under S. 2167, the National Park Service could be given administrative jurisdiction over 1,140 acres of Federal land at Cape Disappointment and, 

in that case, would enter into a cooperative management agreement with the state 

of Washington to allow that land to continue to be operated as a state park. Twenty 

acres within the state park would be managed by the National Park Service as a 

memorial to Thomas Jefferson to commemorate his vision of a country ‘‘from sea to 

shinning sea’’ and how the Lewis and Clark Expedition helped to achieve this vision. 

The language in Section 4(d)(5) of the bill that pertains to the disposition of Cape 

Disappointment, as described above, needs amending to facilitate the transfer in a 

timely manner and to ensure that the intent of that provision is clear. We would 

be happy to work with committee to develop an amendment for that purpose. 

The boundary study was undertaken in partnership with the Washington State 

Historical Society, the Washington State Park and Recreation Department, and the 

Oregon State Park and Recreation Department. Through this collaboration, the 

study team determined that nationally significant sites associated with the Lewis 

and Clark story are also under the management of the both Washington and Oregon 

Parks and Recreation Departments. These sites are found within Cape Disappointment State Park and Fort Columbia in Washington, and Fort Stevens State Park 

and Ecola State Parks in Oregon. 

As a result, the study called for the National Park Service to enter into cooperative management agreements with both states to operate the National Park Service 

units in close collaboration with these state park units, and S. 2167 specifically provides the authority for that purpose. Collectively, the parks would be identified as 

the ‘‘Lewis and Clark National and State Historical Parks.’’ This would be a similar 

arrangement to the one at Redwood National Park, where the federal and state 

park agencies share resources under a cooperative management agreement and 

identify the parks for public information purposes as ‘‘Redwood National and State 

Parks.’’

Mr. Chairman, in summary, S. 2167 offers an exciting and timely opportunity to 

expand the American public’s appreciation of the great achievements of the Lewis 

and Clark Expedition, and to do so through a very promising partnership with two 

states that are extremely supportive of this effort. That concludes my statement. I 

will be happy to answer any questions you or other members of the subcommittee 

may have. 

15

ON S. 2173

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. 

2173, a bill to further the purpose of the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic 

Site Establishment Act of 2000. We would like to thank Senator Campbell for his 

continued interest and support of this site. 

The Department supports S. 2173 if amended as described at the end of this testimony. S. 2173 would convey title to a section of land formerly known as the ‘‘Dawson Ranch’’ and existing structures on that land to the United States to be held in 

trust by the Secretary of the Interior and managed by the National Park Service 

strictly for the purposes for which Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site was 

authorized by P.L. 106-465. The purposes of that Act are to recognize the national 

significance of the massacre in American history, its ongoing significance to the 

Cheyenne and Arapaho people and descendants of the massacre victims, and the opportunity to involve the tribes and the State of Colorado in the development of plans 

and educational programs for the site. Under the bill, the property could only be 

used for historic, religious and cultural purposes that are compatible with the use 

of the land as a national historic site. S. 2173 also would require the completion 

of a survey of the ‘‘Dawson Ranch’’ to accurately establish the boundary of the proposed tribal trust lands. Finally, the bill would declare that the trust property become a part of the Indian reservation of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma. 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site is located in Kiowa County on the 

eastern plains of Colorado. Within the boundary of the site there are approximately 

12,500 acres of private and State land that has changed little since 1868. On November 29, 1864, a group of some 700 volunteer Colorado militiamen under the command of Colonel John Chivington, a Civil War hero, entered the Sand Creek camp 

occupied by about 500 people of the Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes. At the same 

time, Cheyenne Chief Black Kettle was conducting peace negotiations with the U.S. 

government on behalf of his people. Although the Cheyenne and Arapaho people believed they were under the protection of the U.S. Army, Chivington’s troops attacked 

and killed about 150 people, mainly women, children, and the elderly. 

The massacre resulted in almost instant controversy, which ultimately led to 

three federal investigations, all of which condemned Chivington’s actions. In 1865, 

the Treaty of Little Arkansas provided victims of Sand Creek minor compensation 

for their suffering and loss of property. 

As time passed, evidence of the massacre slowly disappeared. Although the event 

continued to be remembered, the only commemoration of the massacre was a simple 

granite marker placed near the site by the local community in 1950. Following the 

provisions of P.L. 105-243, the National Park Service completed a study of the area 

that determined the location and extent of the Sand Creek Massacre, and the feasibility of designating the site as a unit of the National Park System. Those findings 

were presented to Congress, and the national historic site was authorized by P.L. 

106-465. 

The law authorizing Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site required that 

‘‘sufficient’’ land be acquired from willing sellers ‘‘to provide for the preservation, 

memorialization, commemoration, and interpretation of the Sand Creek Massacre’’ 

before the area would be established as a national historic site. Since February 

2001, the Conservation Fund has purchased and conveyed to the NPS a total of 920 

acres from three willing sellers. The total cost of these purchases is $136,100. 

With the transfer of the Dawson Ranch, authorized in S. 2173, the NPS believes 

it would have sufficient land for establishment of the national historic site and 

would forward a recommendation to the Secretary to formally establish the park. 

The Dawson Ranch, which includes approximately 1,465 acres and four existing 

buildings, lies within the core area of the authorized site. It was purchased by 

Southwest Entertainment, Inc., in December 2002 for approximately $1.5 million. 

Southwest Entertainment, Inc., has conveyed the property and the buildings in fee 

to the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma. The tribes have expressed an 

interest in having the NPS manage the site and the authorizing legislation provides 

for substantial tribal input into the management planning process. The Dawson 

Ranch, combined with the existing 920 acres, would be of sufficient size and interest 

to provide opportunities for visitors and protect the area of the site containing the 

most sensitive and critical historic resources. 

Until the site is established, the NPS does not have authority to enforce federal 

laws and regulations on any of the lands within the site boundary, including the 

920 acres currently in NPS ownership. The NPS has surveyed the boundary and has 

posted signs, however no public access is permitted. The NPS has entered into a 

16

cooperative agreement with Kiowa County for wildland fire management and other 

assistance. We also have agreements with all four associated tribes to continue consultation in the development and management of the site and to provide for reasonable access for commemorative purposes and traditional cultural and historical observances. Research is being conducted so that management plans can be developed as quickly as possible should a national historic site be formally established. Sand Creek 

Massacre NHS has submitted a request to begin a general management plan 

(GMP). Until funding is available for the GMP, the Intermountain Region and park 

staff will develop an interim operation plan by the end of this year. The site currently receives $287,000 for operations in FY04. If S. 2173 is enacted, NPS would request an additional amount of $547,000 to operate the site ($104,000 

for initial law enforcement and an additional $442,000 for operations and FTE). Additional costs may be required for the structures, including four buildings, that 

would be placed into trust status under S. 2173. One of the buildings, a ranch 

house, is not in good condition and would cost $426,000 for rehabilitation. Discussions between NPS, the Tribal owners, and the Northern Cheyenne and the Northern Arapaho Tribes indicate a strong interest in removing this structure, which 

would cost approximately $106,000. Two buildings are sheds that would be used for 

storage, and one building is a large garage and ranch office that NPS and the Tribe 

could use as a maintenance building, office or temporary visitor contact station. NPS 

would need to make minimal repairs, if any, to these buildings at this time. 

One of the hallmarks of the history of the creation of Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site has been the cooperation and dedication of all interested parties. 

The tribes, descendants organizations, the local communities in Kiowa and other 

surrounding counties, the State of Colorado and other Federal agencies have developed excellent relationships and established lines of communication that have allowed us to be here in less than 10 years, on the brink of establishing a site that 

will tell an important story in this country’s history. 

We have three important amendments to offer that would clarify the purposes of 

the bill and the roles and responsibilities of the Secretary. The first two amendments are reflected in the amendment to Section 6, attached at the end of this testimony. We would like to work with the Committee and the Tribe to develop the third 

amendment before the bill moves forward. 

First, we suggest deleting the provision in Section 6(a), which declares the property to be a part of the Indian reservation of the Tribe. Declaration of a reservation 

is an action that is independent of transfer into trust status and seems unnecessary 

for the administration of the trust land as part of a national historic site. 

Second, we are concerned that S. 2173 does not specify what duties are required 

of the Secretary. We believe that Congress, when it mandates land be taken into 

trust, should specifically define the expectations of the beneficiary and the obligations of the Federal government. Both the Executive and the Judicial Branches, as 

well as the beneficiary, are faced with the question of Congress’ intent when it puts 

land into trust status. 

While S. 2173, as introduced, contains a provision indicating that the trust property shall be administered ‘‘in accordance with the law generally applicable to property held in trust by the United States for the benefit of Indian tribes’’, this provision is so potentially broad that it makes the duties of the Secretary with regard 

to the land and the structures that are to be held in trust even less clear. We suggest an amendment in Section 6 of the bill that would eliminate this confusing provision. The amendment also would consolidate existing provisions that require that 

the Secretary administer the property in accordance with the law establishing the 

national historic site and that the property be used only for historic, religious, or 

cultural uses and only if those uses are compatible with the national historic site. 

The amended provision would clarify the scope of the trust responsibility. 

Even with this amendment, guidance in the bill with regard to the duties of the 

Secretary is limited, particularly with respect to the structures taken into trust status. As you know, the President has made a commitment to addressing the deferred 

maintenance backlog in our national parks. Toward this effort, the NPS has, for the 

first time ever, developed a comprehensive system to grade the condition of facilities. With this system, the NPS can set targets each year to improve facility grades 

and achieve an overall acceptable condition for facilities. To ensure that these management decisions can be made in a timely manner, we would like to work with the 

Tribe and the Committee on a possible amendment to the bill which would convey 

the existing buildings in fee title to the Secretary, while placing the real property 

into trust status. We also would like to include a provision that would require the 

Secretary to consult with the Tribe concerning the uses of the buildings. Given the 

strong interest expressed by both the Tribe and the NPS to remove the ranch house, 

17

the terms of the conveyance would require further discussion. We would like to work 

with the Committee and the Tribe on such an amendment that would be acceptable 

to all parties. 

We appreciate the committee’s interest in this legislation. That concludes my remarks and I would be happy to respond to any questions that you may have. 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

On page 4, strike lines 11 through 24 and insert, 

SEC. 6. ADMINISTRATION AND USE OF TRUST PROPERTY.—

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The trust property shall be administered in perpetuity by the 

Secretary only for historic, religious, or cultural uses and only those uses that are 

compatible with the use of land in accordance with the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Establishment Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; Public Law 106-

465).’’.

Senator THOMAS. Thank you very much. I just have one. 

That Lewis and Clark thing is kind of complicated. What is the 

bottom line in terms of the cost to the Federal Government in this 

bill? 

Mr. HOFFMAN. The exact cost is not determined yet because appraisals are not in yet, but we are looking at the range of about 

$6.3 million for the 160-acre acquisition of the Dismal Nitch and 

the 455-acre conservation easement at Station Camp. 

Senator THOMAS. So does this bill authorize that expenditure? 

Mr. HOFFMAN. That is my understanding. 

Senator THOMAS. Senator. 

Senator AKAKA. Mr. Hoffman, on S. 2173, I understand that the 

administration’s position is that when Congress mandates that 

land be taken into trust for the benefit of the Indian tribe, it 

should specifically define the obligations of the Federal Government. That is my understanding. 

Since the bill requires the trust property to be administered in 

accordance with the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site 

Establishment Act, what is the administration’s recommendation 

for what the scope of trust responsibility should be? 

Mr. HOFFMAN. It is our intent that the bill would authorize the 

Secretary to manage these lands in trust for the tribes, but in 

order to carry out the purposes of the original act, which is to interpret and protect the historic resources at the Sand Creek Massacre 

site. Typically trust management for tribal lands and resources requires the Secretary to manage those to maximize the benefit to 

the tribes, and in this particular case, it seems to us that everybody is in agreement that the highest and best use of these lands 

would be to manage them to interpret, tell the story of the Sand 

Creek Massacre, and protect those lands for future generations. 

Senator AKAKA. In my opinion it will be very difficult for this 

committee to begin addressing Indian trust issues on public land 

or national park bills. It appears from your testimony that the formal establishment of the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic 

Site is contingent on acquiring the Dawson Ranch property. If the 

committee decides not to define the scope of trust responsibility in 

this bill, does that change the administration’s support of the bill? 

Mr. HOFFMAN. I am not sure I can provide you with a definitive 

answer to that, Senator. We certainly believe that the caveats we 

expressed relative to the trust responsibilities are essential to the 

successful management of this as a National Park Service site. 

18

Senator AKAKA. I want to thank you for your statements in support of the other bills. 

Mr. Chairman, the other bills seem to be relatively noncontroversial, and I do not have any further questions. 

Senator THOMAS. Senator Campbell. 

Senator CAMPBELL. I have a couple on this same bill. Senator 

Akaka, in fact, asked one of them already and got an answer to it. 

Looking at your testimony, though, Mr. Hoffman, on page 4 in 

the last paragraph, you mention that the Park Service has some 

potential costs for operation for a number of things. One of them 

included the ranch house, which is not in good condition. It would 

cost $426,000 for rehabilitation. Then it goes on to say between discussions with the NPS, the tribal owners, and the Northern Cheyenne and the Northern Arapaho tribes and so on, they indicate a 

strong interest in removing the house, and that would still cost 

$106,000. 

I can certainly understand $426,000 for renovating a home, but 

why would it cost that much to get rid of an old house? It just recently came to my mind. On our ranch, we had an old house we 

wanted to get rid of and we called the local fire department and 

they did it for nothing. They used it for a training thing and they 

set the thing on fire, and they trained their firemen. And what do 

you know. It was all gone. We just buried the remains in a hole 

and that was that. Can you not do that or something along that 

line? 

Mr. HOFFMAN. Well, I would think that we would want to explore 

whatever means are possible. This is just a rough estimate in order 

to have some discussions about the priorities that we should take. 

Should we restore it, should we tear it down? I do not think we are 

necessarily held to $106,000, and we can certainly seek other 

means. I think whatever we do, we want to make sure we do it in 

a way that is consistent with the overall protection of the integrity 

of the site and to ensure that we do not burn somebody else’s building down in the process. 

Senator CAMPBELL. Yes. Well, you might consider that anyway. 

In fact, I probably know a few Cheyennes who would help you burn 

a few buildings down. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CAMPBELL. As I understand it, the tribes may use the 

trust land for cultural ceremonies. That land really takes on religious significance to Cheyenne and Arapaho people, as you know, 

because so many of their ancestors died there. How do you foresee 

the Park Service working to accommodate cultural uses? Through 

an MOU, an advisory committee, or something along that line? 

Mr. HOFFMAN. We have a Native American liaison with the National Park Service, and we take very seriously our responsibilities 

to work closely with tribes to enable them to conduct their religious 

ceremonies and their cultural traditions on national parks. So I am 

not sure that it requires an MOU or something along those lines. 

We do that as a matter of course at a great number of national 

parks. 

Senator CAMPBELL. I used to know the liaison, Barbara Sutteer. 

She is gone now, retired from the Park Service. Who is the liaison 

now? 

19

Mr. HOFFMAN. Pat Parker. 

Senator CAMPBELL. Thank you. 

I think I have no further questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. Mr. Secretary, thank you. 

Mr. HOFFMAN. Thank you, sir. It is always good to be here. 

Senator THOMAS. We are very glad to see Pete Lucero over there 

with you. He spent quite a bit of time here with the committee. We 

are glad to see you back, sir. 

Mr. HOFFMAN. You trained him well, sir. 

Senator THOMAS. All right, our panel two. Mr. Steve Brady, cochairman, Sand Creek Massacre Historic Site Project, Lame Deer, 

Montana; Mr. Rex Ziak, Lewis and Clark author and historian, 

Naselle, Washington; Ms. Carol Alexander, executive director, Ritz 

Theatre, Jacksonville, Florida. So if you all would come forward. 

If you have written statements, they will be included in the 

record in their entirety, and if you would like to summarize your 

statement, we would be grateful. We will go by the way we are listed here. 

Mr. Brady. 

STATEMENT OF STEVE BRADY, SR., CO-CHAIR, SAND CREEK 

MASSACRE HISTORIC SITE PROJECT, LAME DEER, MT 

Mr. BRADY. Good afternoon. My name is Steve Brady, Sr. I am 

the president of the Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Descendants, 

and I co-chair the Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Massacre Historic Site Project Committee with the tribal president, Geri Small 

and the vice president of the tribe, John Woodenlegs, and I am the 

Headsman of the Northern Cheyenne Crazy Dog Society. 

I would like to have my statement entered into the record, as 

well as the resolution of support for the Northern Cheyenne tribe, 

which DOI 68-2004, as well as letters of support to Senator Campbell, Senator Domenici, and Congressman Pombo. 

Senator THOMAS. We will do that. 

Mr. BRADY. I also would like to have an addendum to my written 

statement and that is ‘‘land will be taken into trust as part of the 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site in perpetuity. The second change removes a limitation in the existing statute which 

states that land acquired from the State of Colorado can only be 

conveyed through donation. Striking this limitation will give the 

National Park Service additional flexibility in acquiring additional 

land for the site.’’ I would like to have that added. 

Senator THOMAS. We will include it in your statement. It shall 

be. 

Mr. BRADY. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge 

some longtime supporters of the Sand Creek Massacre project, if 

they would just stand. Dr. David Halaas and Andy Masich have 

been involved in the Sand Creek Massacre project since 1993. They 

were originally with the Colorado Historical Society. They were 

some of the ones that started this project initially. They are now 

with the Senator John Heinz Museum in Pittsburgh. Our new and 

first superintendent, Alexa Roberts, at the Sand Creek Massacre 

National Historic Site; Dr. Pat Parker, the Native American liaison 

for the National Park Service; Jack Trope, Association on American 

20

Indian Affairs, executive director; all these folks have been longtime supporters of our project. 

Senator THOMAS. Good. We welcome you all here. 

Mr. BRADY. As was summarized by Senator Campbell, the village 

was attacked November 29, 1864 by Colonel John Chivington and 

his Federal troops. Cheyenne Chief Black Kettle attempted to raise 

the U.S. flag with a white truce flag underneath it, symbolizing a 

peaceful relationship with the United States. Cheyenne Chief 

White Antelope told his people to gather around him and that no 

harm would come to them and donned a peace and friendship 

medal given to him personally by the President of the United 

States. With a small contingent of men, the village was primarily 

comprised of women and children. Many of the men were out hunting. The Cheyenne were well within the confines of their reservation as established by previous treaties. 

The village situated at the intersection of Smokey Hill Trail and 

Big Sandy was initially under heavy barrage of artillery referred 

to as mountain howitzers. Then the raping of the Cheyenne culture, women began, the disemboweling of pregnant women, the 

butchering of infants, the bashing of their heads, babies heads, the 

mutilation of elders. This was to last on into the next day. This 

was totally unprecedented and appalling. The village was completely burnt to the ground including piles of burned bodies. Cheyenne Chief White Antelope laid amongst his people with his peace 

and friendship medal in plain, obvious view, scalped, his nose and 

ears and privates cutoff. The Europeans had now come to introduce 

civilization to the Cheyenne people. 

Cheyenne Chief Black Kettle survived the Sand Creek Massacre 

only to be assassinated by General Custer’s sharpshooters at 

Washita Massacre on November 27, 1868. Despite the maltreatment, it is well known that neither of the Cheyenne Chiefs, Black 

Kettle or White Antelope, had ever raised a weapon against the 

United States or any of the European settlers and maintained their 

word of peace to their very end. 

Last year on November 29, at the fifth annual Sand Creek Spiritual Healing Run, we honored Captain Silas Soule. It was him and 

Lieutenant Cramer who submitted letters of writing in objection to 

what was committed at Sand Creek, and those letters were read 

by Senator Campbell at a hearing in September 2000 when the 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site legislation was pending. 

We have also used and often refer to the Bent’s Map. George 

Bent’s father was a white and his mother was Cheyenne, and he 

lived and grew up amongst the Cheyenne people. He eventually 

was sent back east to be educated and apparently was very well 

educated for his time. That map we often refer to as Cheyenne people because he was fluent in the language, because he was very 

knowledgeable of the Cheyenne culture and was very well educated. We often refer to that. George Bent was also evidenced in 

the Cheyenne Dog Soldier Ledger book. 

Right now, currently the Northern Arapaho, the Cheyenne and 

Arapaho tribes of Oklahoma, and the Northern Cheyenne are working on the repatriation of human remains from the Sand Creek 

Massacre. Currently the Colorado History Museum holds human 

21

remains from the Sand Creek Massacre, as well as the University 

of Nebraska at Lincoln and Sam Nobles Museum in Oklahoma. We 

have gained legal custody of these human remains and we are in 

the process of getting physical possession in the hopes of eventually 

taking them back to the Sand Creek Massacre site for burial. 

When the Sand Creek Massacre Study Act was enacted, there 

was an 18-month timeframe. One of the first, if not the very first, 

significant pieces of evidence that was found that specifically located and identified the site was the shrapnel from a mountain 

howitzer. This was the only time that this type of weaponry was 

used in that area by the U.S. military against Cheyennes, and it 

was unquestionably, unequivocally confirming the Sand Creek 

Massacre site. So that pretty much answered the question as to the 

ambiguity, the question of the site. 

That particular area intersects with the Smokey Hill Trail and 

the Big Sandy Creek, and that is the Dawson property. That is the 

property that we are here today discussing and has been acquired 

by a casino business partner, Southwest Entertainment of the 

Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes, and was then conveyed to the Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes. We are now supporting as tribes this legislation to put this area, the 1,400-plus acres referred to as the 

Dawson property, into Federal trust. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brady follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF STEVE BRADY, SR., PRESIDENT, NORTHERN CHEYENNE

SAND CREEK DESCENDANTS, CO-CHAIR, NORTHERN CHEYENNE SAND CREEK MASSACRE HISTORIC SITE PROJECT, ON S. 2173

I would like to thank the distinguished members of the United States Senate for 

allowing me to provide testimony this afternoon, I would like to especially thank 

Senators Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Wayne Allard for introducing and cosponsoring S.2173. I would also like to acknowledge Laird and Colleen Cometsevah for 

all their hard work for the past half a century for keeping the memory of Sand 

Creek alive. 

Colonel John Chivington and his federal troops attacked at dawn on November 

29th, 1864, a known peaceful Cheyenne encampment at the intersection of Smokey 

Hill Trail and the Big Bend of Big Sandy in the Territory of Colorado in a premeditated attack. Cheyenne Chief Black Kettle raised a United States flag with a white 

truce flag underneath symbolizing a peaceful relationship with the United States. 

Cheyenne Chief White Antelope told his people to gather around him and that no 

harm would come to them and donned a peace-and-friendship medal given to him 

personally by the President of the United States. With a small contingent of men 

in camp, the village was primarily comprised of women, children and elders. Many 

of the men were out hunting. The Cheyenne were well within the confines of their 

reservation as established by previous treaties. 

The village situated at the intersection of Smokey Hill Trail and Big Sandy was 

initially under heavy barrage of artillery referred to as mountain howitzers. Then 

the raping of women, the disemboweling of pregnant women, and the butchering of 

infants and elders by Colonel Chivington’s federal troops began and was to last until 

the next day. Totally unprecedented and appalling, the village completely burned to 

the ground including piles of burned bodies. Cheyenne Chief White Antelope laid 

amongst his people with his peace-and-friendship medal in plain obvious view, 

scalped, his nose, ears and privates cut off. Europeans had now come to introduce 

civilization to the Cheyenne people. Cheyenne Chief Black Kettle survived the Sand 

Creek Massacre only to be assassinated by General Custer’s sharpshooters at the 

Washita Massacre on November 27th of 1868. Despite the maltreatment, it is a 

well-known fact that neither of the Cheyenne Chiefs, Black Kettle or White Antelope had ever raised a weapon against the United States or any of the European 

settlers and maintained their word of peace to their very end. 

To our knowledge, the most well documented written evidence closest in time to 

the Sand Creek Massacre incident were the letters written by Capt. Silas Soule and 

Lt. Joe Cramer, each of whom commanded about one hundred troops and ordered 

22

their men not to get involved in the carnage. Soule’s letter was dated December 

14th, 1864 and Cramer’s letter was dated December 19th, 1864 addressed to Major 

Wynkoop, providing in graphic detail as to what occurred. These same letters were 

presented and read as evidence by Senator Campbell in a previous Senate Hearing 

in September of 2000. 

Capt. Soule testified against Colonel Chivington for the atrocities committed by 

him and his troops. Chivington was never held accountable for the acts of genocide. 

The U.S. Congress promised reparations through Cheyenne and Arapaho Treaty of 

Little Arkansas of 1865, specifically Article 6. This promise of reparations presently 

remains unfulfilled. As for Capt. Soule, he was assassinated by Chivington’s supporters on the streets of Denver shortly before the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln in the spring of 1865. Last fall, at the 5th annual Sand Creek Spiritual 

Healing Run (November 29th, 2003) held in Colorado, we took the time to honor 

Capt. Silas Soule for his courage and commitment to the Cheyenne people. 

Another documented piece of evidence that the Cheyenne often refer to is what 

is known as ‘‘Bent’s Map,’’ drawn by George Bent whose father was white and mother was Cheyenne. George Bent was in camp at the time Chivington’s troops attacked the village at Sand Creek. George Bent was wounded at Sand Creek and 

drew the map sometime after the incident. Bent grew up amongst his mother’s people, very knowledgeable of the Cheyenne culture as evidenced in the Cheyenne Dog 

Soldier Ledger book of 1865, fluent in the Cheyenne language he served as an interpreter for the Cheyenne people. Moreover, educated in the western sense and apparently very well educated for his time. 

In July of 1993, Cheyenne human remains consisting mostly of crania from various conflicts during the plains Indian war era, including the Sand Creek Massacre, 

Fort Larned, Fort Zarah and Summit Springs (the last major fight of the Cheyenne 

Dog Soldiers) were repatriated to Concho Agency in Concho, Oklahoma from the 

Smithsonian Institution under the National Museum of American Indian Act. 

While the Cheyenne people had maintained within their oral histories the horrible 

details of the Sand Creek Massacre and on occasion went to the site for ceremonies, 

for almost a century and a half, the exact location of the Sand Creek Massacre Site 

seemed to remain ambiguous. Then in 1993, Dr. David Halaas and Andrew Masich 

of the Colorado Historical Society decided to confirm the exact location of the Sand 

Creek Massacre Site, and after searching a broad area their results remained inconclusive at end of their project in 1997. 

Legislation was introduced in early 1998, by the Honorable Ben Nighthorse 

Campbell, to acquire what had become known as the ‘‘Dawson Property’’ and was 

generally thought to be the Sand Creek Massacre Site. This legislation became 

known as the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Study Act of 1998, authorizing an 18-month study rather than acquiring the ‘‘Dawson Property.’’

In May of 2000, in a field survey the first artifact found was a piece of cannon 

ball shrapnel from a mountain howitzer. There were no other incidents where similar weaponry was used by the U.S. military at anytime in that area. Thus, confirming unequivocally that this was indeed the Sand Creek Massacre Site. 

A Senate hearing was held as a result of the findings of the Site Study Act, which 

subsequently authorized the Sand Creek Massacre Site Establishment Act of 2000. 

This legislation designated more than 12,000 acres of the Sand Creek Massacre Site 

in southeastern Colorado. However, the land had to be acquired from willing sellers 

only. The legislation also authorized the National Park Service, the Cheyenne and 

Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma, the Northern Arapaho Tribe, the Northern Cheyenne 

Tribe and the state of Colorado to work in partnership to achieve the purposes of 

the act. 

Currently the National Park Service has acquired more than 900 acres from private land-owners, and through Southwest Entertainment, a business partner of the 

C&A Tribes of Oklahoma, has acquired the ‘‘Dawson Property’’ from Mr. & Mrs. 

William Dawson, encompassing more than 1400 acres and located at the intersection of Smokey Hill Trail and the Big Bend of Sand Creek—Thus, the village site 

of the Sand Creek Massacre of November 29th, 1864. 

The ‘‘Dawson Property’’ was acquired for 1.5 million dollars, 5 times the appraised 

value, but having said that, Mr. Dawson has been the owner/caretaker of that area 

for more than 30 years and has kept that area in a rather pristine state. All of the 

artifacts that were found on the ‘‘Dawson Property’’ during the site study phase 

were kept by Mr. Dawson and he will be donating them to the project in honor of 

the late Last Bear (Luke Brady). 

The C&A Tribes of Oklahoma, the Northern Arapaho Tribe and the Northern 

Cheyenne Tribe have been working diligently under the provisions of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) on the repatriation of Cheyenne and Arapaho human remains taken from the Sand Creek Massacre and curVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:10 Oct 01, 2004 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\96145.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
23

rently stored at the Colorado Historical Society, the University of Nebraska at Lincoln and the Sam Nobles Museum of Oklahoma. Provided everything goes as it 

should, the tribes will repatriate these victims of genocide back to the Sand Creek 

Massacre Site as established by federal law. 

Laird and Colleen Cometsevah have done an exceptional amount of work in genealogy and oral histories in keeping the memory of the Sand Creek Massacre alive. 

The Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Massacre Historic Site Project is doing similar 

work as well and will archive at the Chief Dull Knife College for curriculum development, research and other purposes. Western education does not often include 

shameful incidents like the Sand Creek Massacre and remains consistently repressive. 

S. 2173 proposes to put the C&A tribal property in Kiowa County of Colorado into 

federal trust under the Secretary of the Interior for the purposes authorized by the 

Sand Creek Massacre Site Establishment Act of 2000, on behalf of the consulting 

partnership: the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma, the Northern Arapaho 

Tribe, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, state of Colorado, the National Park Service, 

and especially the descendants of the Sand Creek Massacre. We urge immediate 

passage of S. 2173 entitled the ‘‘Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Trust Act 

of 2004.’’

We understand that an agreement or lease will be negotiated between the National Park Service and the three tribes, providing for the inclusion of the Dawson 

Property as the core element of the National Historic Site, and the management of 

the Dawson Property by the National Park Service in consultation with the three 

tribes in accordance with the purposes and provisions of the Sand Creek Massacre 

Site Establishment Act of 2000. We look forward to working on that agreement or 

lease. 

While the Sand Creek Massacre Site is in the process of being restored through 

federal legislation, the actual on-site work to preserve the site in perpetuity is only 

now just getting started—We have many years of hard work ahead of us. It is essential that we have the continued support of U.S. Congress, it was after all a federal 

project to begin with. 

Again, distinguished members of the United States Senate, thank you for allowing 

me to testify today on a matter of profound significance to the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma, the Northern Arapaho Tribe and the Northern Cheyenne 

Tribe and especially, for the descendants of the Sand Creek Massacre of November 

29th, 1864. 

ADDENDUM

Mr. Chairman, there are two minor amendments to the bill as introduced. Both 

changes were made at the request of the National Park Service. 

The first change clarifies that this land will be taken into trust as part of the 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site in perpetuity. 

The second change removes a limitation in the existing statute which states that 

land acquired from the State of Colorado can only be conveyed through donation. 

Striking this limitation will give the NPS additional flexibility in acquiring additional land for the site.

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, sir. I appreciate your statement. 

Now let us go on to Mr. Ziak, please. 

STATEMENT OF REX ZIAK, LEWIS AND CLARK AUTHOR AND 

HISTORIAN, NASELLE, WA 

Mr. ZIAK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and distinguished Senators. I really appreciate this opportunity to have this 

time to address you. 

In October 1806, the President of the United States received one 

of the most extraordinary letters ever sent to a President. The first 

two sentences of this letter must have caused him to jump up to 

his feet. The letter read—and I quote—‘‘Sir, it is with pleasure that 

I anounce to you the safe arrival of myself and party at 12 O’Clk 

today at this place with our papers and baggage. In obedience to 

your orders we have penitrated the Continent of North America to 

the Pacific Ocean.’’

24

The author of this letter was Meriwether Lewis, and what he 

was doing was writing to President Thomas Jefferson informing 

him that this risky and dangerous expedition that they had 

planned across the continent to the ocean had been a success. And 

from that moment on, this becomes known as the Lewis and Clark 

Expedition, and its details and its events become so amazing in the 

minds of Americans that it just captivates the American population. And here we are 200 years later still studying and admiring 

this American history. It is in fact one of the most popular events 

in all of American history and studied and explored from the 

youngest of school children in our public schools to gray-haired 

scholars in the libraries of our universities. 

However, that moment of their arriving at the Pacific Ocean, 

that whole story has never been told. We do have Fort Clatsop, 

which preserves their winter camp site. However, that is simply 

part of the story. There is another half of the story that has not 

been explained, and this is Lewis and Clark’s arrival at the Pacific 

Ocean. And these are sites that occur on the Washington shoreline 

prior to their arrival at Fort Clatsop. 

This arrival story is extremely compelling. There are three significant sites associated with this. The first one is one that Clark 

called Dismal Nitch. This is where, after traveling 20 or 30 miles 

a day down the Columbia River, they come to the final point of 

land between them and the Pacific Ocean. Here they are stopped 

for 5 days. This is the part of the journals, just 6 or 8 miles from 

the ocean, where everything goes wrong. This is where, pinned 

down against the shore, waves wash over them, hail, thunder, 

lightning, rocks roll down on them. They have to abandon their 

camp and bury their canoes under rocks and take off on foot. This 

is where their clothes are falling apart on their bodies. William 

Clark writes in his journal, this is the most disagreeable time I 

have ever experienced. Dismal Nitch. 

Once they make it around this point after 5 days, they coast 

down river a couple miles, and here is another point of land and 

in front of them the Pacific Ocean. And William Clark says, I landed the canoes and formed a camp. This I could plainly see would 

be the extent of our journey by water in full view of the ocean, and 

this is the western end of the Lewis and Clark journey. This is 

where the men camped for 10 days in full view of the ocean. This 

is where they now begin to make plans for their homeward bound 

journey, and this is where they had that moment where they consulted the opinions of all the men, including Clark’s slave and the 

Indian woman, Sacagawea, consulting their opinions, sort of a vote 

as to what they should do next. Station Camp is what Clark called 

it. 

The third site is the tip of Cape Disappointment. This is a rugged peninsula of volcanic black basalt rock extending out into the 

ocean, washed on one side by the ocean, on the other side by the 

waters of the Columbia River. Both Lewis and Clark made excursions down to this peninsula and camped there. This is, in fact, the 

only known place where Meriwether Lewis had direct contact with 

the Pacific Ocean. 

These three sites, when combined with the existing Fort Clatsop 

over in Oregon, as well as other historic sites in Oregon, will create 

25

an unparalleled historic experience. It will be possible for the public to travel down the Columbia River and follow along in Lewis 

and Clark’s footsteps from place to place to place and, 200 years 

after they made this journey, be able to recreate this journey down 

to the ocean and crossing over to Fort Clatsop. 

Local people are very excited about this. They have been planning for years for hosting the people coming to the bicentennial, 

but this is something different. This is going to transform the region into a historic destination, and it is going to create opportunities, local businesses, cottage industries that do not exist now. The 

local community is very excited. 

For my own part, I strongly recommend that the committee approve S. 2167. Lewis and Clark and their party risked their lives 

and suffered unheard of hardships to reach that Pacific Ocean, and 

this is an experience that the public should be allowed to retrace 

and enjoy today and bring back to light this long overlooked chapter of great American history. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ziak follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REX ZIAK, HISTORIAN, NASELLE, WA, ON S. 2167

Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this 

opportunity to testify on Senate Bill 2167, which will create the Lewis and Clark 

National Historic Park in Washington and Oregon at the mouth of the Columbia 

River. I represent not only myself, but also the vast majority of the residents of this 

region as well as historians and enthusiasts from around the country, when I tell 

you that I wholeheartedly support this bill. 

In October 1806, the President of the United States received an extraordinary letter. The first two sentences must have caused him to leap to his feet with excitement. The letter read: ‘‘Sir, It is with pleasure that I anounce to you the safe arrival 

of myself and party at 12 O’Clk today at this place with our papers and baggage. 

In obedience to your orders we have penitrated the Continent of North America to 

the Pacific Ocean.’’

The author of this historic letter was Meriwether Lewis, and he was announcing 

to President Thomas Jefferson that the risky, dangerous expedition across the continent had been a success. 

The journey described to the president soon became known as the Lewis and 

Clark Expedition. It immediately captured the public’s attention and has held that 

attention for two hundred years. It is, in fact, one of the most popular moments of 

this nation’s history, captivating children as well as adults from coast to coast. 

However, the western end of the story of Lewis and Clark has never been correctly interpreted. Although there exists a replica of their winter campsite called 

Fort Clatsop, that is only half of the story. 

The other half of this history is missing. It is the story of Lewis and Clark’s arrival at the ocean. This episode of their story has been misunderstood and overlooked until recently. and that is what Senate Bill 1267 will resolve and correct. 

The arrival story takes place at three separate locations in the lower Columbia 

along the Washington shore. First there is Dismal Nitch. This is the place where 

the explorers were stuck for five days; where rocks rolled down upon them, their 

clothes fell apart, they buried their canoes and abandoned camp. It was the scene 

of hardship and danger. Clark said it was the most disagreeable time he had ever 

experienced. 

The second site is Station Camp. This is the western end of the Lewis and Clark 

journey, where they arrived in full view of the ocean. The explorers camped at this 

picturesque site for ten days and this is where they took the now famous vote, 

which included the opinion of a slave and an Indian woman. 

The third site is the tip of Cape Disappointment. This rugged peninsula of ancient, basalt rock extends far out into the ocean and creates the northern side of 

the mouth of the Columbia River. Lewis and Clark both explored this site and 

camped here. It was, in fact, Lewis’ only direct contact with the waters of the Pacific 

Ocean. 

26

These three locations, when combined with the existing Fort Clatsop, will create 

an unparalleled historic experience. This rare opportunity to connect these historic 

sites will allow the public to walk in the footsteps of history by retracing Lewis and 

Clark’s final dozen miles to the ocean in the exact order and the exact location it 

was done 200 years ago. 

Local residents are excited about the expansion plans and look forward to hosting 

the visitors who will follow Lewis and Clark across the continent. This park will 

transform our region. The millions of expected visitors during the Bicentennial will 

provide an enormous boost to the local communities by attracting tourism vital to 

economic development. And it will not end with the Bicentennial. These historic 

sites when connected are of such importance and are so compelling that this region 

will become a historic destination. Citizens will continue to come to this place to see 

and experience what Lewis and Clark described when they finally reached the edge 

of the continent. 

For my own part, I strongly recommend that this committee approve Senate Bill 

2167. Lewis and Clark’s party risked their lives and suffered unimaginable hardship 

in order to reach the Pacific Ocean. The public wants to know this story. Senate 

Bill 2167 will allow access to these significant sites and bring to light this long-overlooked chapter of a great American history.

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, sir. Do you have your nickel? 

Mr. ZIAK. I have one, sir. 

Senator THOMAS. The new Lewis and Clark nickel. Great. 

Ms. Alexander. 

STATEMENT OF CAROL J. ALEXANDER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

RITZ THEATRE AND LaVILLA MUSEUM, JACKSONVILLE, FL 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and other members of 

the subcommittee. I am Carol Alexander, executive director of the 

finest arts institution in Jacksonville, Florida, and that is the Ritz 

Theatre and LaVilla Museum. Professionally and personally it is 

my mission to preserve the history and legacy of African-Americans 

both in Florida and in the United States of America. 

Preserving the history and land of American Beach specifically is 

a very big passion of mine, both as a landowner and as an historian. Preserving that 60-foot sand dune, which is a part of the endangered maritime forest, from developers has been something that 

the people of that beach have been concerned about, have been 

worried about because they want to protect that sand dune. It is 

imperative to protect and preserve this dune in perpetuity because 

it is one that protects or is a barrier to that island. For that reason, 

we request that it be included in the Timucuan Preserve National 

Park so that they can manage the dune. 

I would like to thank the committee and also I would like to 

thank Senator Nelson for championing this bill and also Congressman Crenshaw for introducing Senator Nelson’s bill in the House. 

It has passed through the House already. 

I would like to add that the actual acreage donated by Jack 

Healen, president of the Amelia Island Plantation, is 8.5 acres. 

Senator Nelson alluded to that and also Mr. Hoffman has alluded 

to that. It is not the 12.5 as we initially thought it would be. 

In 1935, A.L. Lewis, president of the Afro-American Life Insurance Company, purchased this beach property as a leisure and entertainment haven for African-Americans. This beach property is a 

little bit different than the property of Virginia Beach that is in the 

Keys that Senator Nelson mentioned. That beach property was set 

aside for African-Americans to enjoy leisure time on the beach. 

This beach property was bought and owned by the Afro-American 

27

Life Insurance Company. A.L. Lewis named it American Beach. It 

is an historic beach community in Nassau County, Florida, as you 

well know, and it is still primarily owned by African-Americans, 

many of whom are descendants of the original owners. To name a 

few, Dr. Johnnetta Cole, who is president of Bennett College for 

Women in North Carolina, and also she is now the chairman of the 

United Way of America. And also Chief Justice Leander Shaw, who 

was the first black Supreme Court Justice in Florida. 

The Afro-American Life Insurance Company was originated in 

Jacksonville, Florida, and it was the first insurance company of 

Florida, either black or white. Mr. Lewis’ great granddaughter, 

MaVynee Betsch, affectionately known as the Beach Lady, still resides on the beach and is revered for her colorful life as an environmentalist and for her work to preserve American Beach from development and environmental degradation. 

The history of American Beach began in America’s most divided 

years of the 20th century when segregation laws did not allow African-Americans to frequent white beaches and resorts. American 

Beach was originally built as a beach resort for recreation and leisure for African-Americans to enjoy the beautiful ocean and the 

sand. 

Today the sand due, affectionately known as Nana, is part of the 

endangered maritime forest. It stands as one of the tallest. It is 60 

feet tall and the last undeveloped, untouched dune system in Florida. 

The dune needs to be preserved for environmental and historical 

reasons. Environmentally, the dunes protect the natural resources 

of marine life and the development and protection of the flora and 

fauna in the vast southeast region of Florida. Historically, Nana is 

a sacred monument of history and legacy that reveals the stories 

of generations past. Developers are slowing moving in to change 

the course of history and to destroy the property that holds a chapter in America. 

MaVynee Betsch, the Beach Lady, all of you should know and 

meet her. She is not an elder and environmental champion. She is 

a member of 60 environmental organizations. She has been saluted 

and celebrated for her work in several ways, but in particular, with 

a dedication in the Audubon Society Handbook for Butterfly Watchers by Dr. Robert Pyle, and the most endangered marine mammal, 

the right whale number 1151 is named in her honor. The community wants her dream of preserving the beach and including Nana 

in the Timucuan Preserves for the protection of the wetlands and 

the uplands as a healthy, functioning environmental system, as 

well as an historic site for future generations to enjoy. 

As I mentioned earlier, Jack Healen, president of the Amelia Island Plantation Resort, generously donated Nana, the 8.5 acres of 

untouched beach and sand dune, to the National Park Service to 

make its inclusion in the Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve possible. 

I hope this committee will feel the passion of preserving Nana 

and move this bill swiftly to the full Senate so this legislation can 

pass. It is up to us to protect and to preserve the beauty and majesty of America’s natural treasures. Especially as we approach 

28

2005, which will be the 70th anniversary of the founding of Florida’s oldest African-American beach community, American Beach. 

We have heard testimony from three of us of treasures of America. We have to contain, protect, preserve and behold both the joys 

and the horrors and the sacredness of America. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Alexander follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAROL J. ALEXANDER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, RITZ

THEATRE AND LAVILLA MUSEUM, JACKSONVILLE, FL 

My name is Carol J. Alexander and I am the Executive Director of the historic 

Ritz Theatre & LaVilla Museum in Jacksonville, Florida. Professionally and personally it is my mission to preserve the history and legacy of African-Americans both 

in Florida and nationally. 

Preserving the history and land on American Beach, specifically preserving the 

60 ft. sand dune, which is a part of the endangered maritime forest from developers, 

has been my passion as a landowner for several years. It is imperative to protect 

and preserve the dunes in perpetuity, hence, the request for the Timucuan Preserve 

National Park Service to acquire and manage the dunes. 

For this reason, I must thank the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

for considering bill S. 1672, to expand the Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve. I thank Senator Nelson for championing this bill in the Senate and Congressman Crenshaw for introducing Senator Nelson’s bill in the House of Representatives. I would add that the actual acreage donated by Jack Healen, President of 

Amelia Island Plantation, to the Timucuan is 8.5 acres not 12.5 acres—this has 

been corrected in the House version and I would ask that it be corrected in the Senate version too. 

In 1935, A.L. Lewis, President of the Afro-American Life Insurance Company purchased the beach property as a leisure and entertainment haven for African-Americans. He named it American Beach, a historic beach community in Nassau County, 

Florida still owned primarily by African-Americans, many who are the descendents 

of the original owners. To name only a few, Dr. Johnnetta Betsch Cole, renowned 

anthropologist and President of Bennett College for Women and Chairperson of the 

United Way of America and also Chief Justice Leander Shaw, first black Supreme 

Court Justice in Florida. 

The Afro-American Life Insurance Company of Jacksonville, Florida was the first 

insurance company owned by any Floridian, either black or white. Mr. Lewis’ great 

granddaughter, MaVynee Betsch, affectionately referred to as the ‘‘Beach Lady,’’ 

still resides on American Beach and is revered for her colorful life as an environmentalist and for her work to preserve American Beach from development and environmental degradation. 

The history of American Beach began in America’s most divided years of the 20th 

century, when segregation laws did not allow African-Americans to frequent white 

beaches and resorts. American Beach was originally built as a beach resort for the 

recreation and leisure for African-Americans to enjoy the beauty of the ocean and 

sand. 

Today, the sand dune known affectionately, as ‘‘Nana’’ is part of the endangered 

maritime forest. It stands as one of the tallest (60 ft.) and the last undeveloped, untouched dunes system in Florida. The dune needs to be preserved for environmental 

and historical reasons. 

Environmentally, the dunes protect the natural resources of marine life and the 

development and protection of the flora and fauna in the vast southeast region of 

Florida. 

Historically, ‘‘Nana’’ is a sacred monument of history and legacy that reveals stories of generations past. Developers are slowly moving in to change the course of 

history and destroy the property that holds a chapter in America. 

MaVynee Betsch, the ‘‘Beach Lady’’, now an elder and an environmental champion 

is a member of sixty environmental organizations. She has been saluted and celebrated for her work in several ways but in particular with a dedication in the Audubon Society Handbook for Butterfly Watchers by Dr. Robert Pyle and the most endangered marine mammal, the Right Whale #1151 is named in her honor. The community wants to make her dream of preserving the beach and including ‘‘Nana’’ in 

the Timucuan Preserves for the protection of the wetlands and upland as a healthy 

functioning environmental system as well as an historic site for future generations 

to enjoy. 

As I mentioned earlier, Jack Healen, President of Amelia Island Plantation Resort, generously donated, ‘‘Nana’’ the 8.5 acre of untouched beach sand dune to the 

29

National Park Service to make its inclusion in the Timucuan Ecological and Historic 

Preserve possible. 

I hope that this Committee will feel the passion of preserving ‘‘Nana’’ and move 

this bill swiftly to the full Senate so that this legislation can pass. It is up to us 

to protect and preserve the beauty and the majesty of America’s natural treasures. 

Especially as we approach 2005, the 70′′’ Anniversary of the founding of Florida’s 

oldest African-American beach community... American Beach! 

I thank you.

Senator THOMAS. We thank all of you for your testimony. 

Just one quick question. See if you can kind of sum it up a little 

bit. What has been the nature? This Lewis and Clark thing puts 

together a number of different parcels of land, I understand. Are 

they now parks or what is the ownership of these lands now? 

Mr. ZIAK. No, sir, they are not parks. One is, in fact, underneath 

a highway. The other is a rest stop area owned and administered 

by the State that will be expanded slightly. The third, part of the 

Cape Disappointment, is actually a Coast Guard station, a State 

park, and there is BLM land there. So there will actually be the 

realignment of a highway that unfortunately borders right along 

the shore line of the Columbia River preventing any public access. 

So we will be straightening out, actually erasing that rather dangerous curve, making it a safer highway and creating access for the 

public to stand very, very close to where Lewis and Clark ended 

their westward journey. 

But, no, they are fragmented. These men would, of course, load 

up in their canoes and move, and so their course is kind of a hopscotch as they move along. But you are capturing, by doing this, 

this point where they come so close and are stopped. 5 days for 

them is an eternity, but rather than give up, they just keep pressing and pressing, perseverance. And they make it around this final 

point, and then there is the western end. Then further on down 

where they made the excursion to the ocean before crossing to Fort 

Clatsop. 

Senator THOMAS. Are these accessible to people now? 

Mr. ZIAK. Barely. Dangerous. One is not. You really cannot stand 

at the point because it really is under a highway without any 

shoulder. 

Senator THOMAS. Under a highway? 

Mr. ZIAK. Yes. 

Senator THOMAS. What are you going to do with the highway? 

Mr. ZIAK. It is just asphalt, sir. 

Senator THOMAS. Are you going to do away with it? 

Mr. ZIAK. They are planning. They have a landscape architect already looking at this. 

Senator THOMAS. So this is going to cost about $6 million. Is that 

right? 

Mr. ZIAK. The realignment of the highway? I do not know. There 

are land acquisitions involved. There are other people that will 

have to answer that. 

Senator THOMAS. I asked the Secretary. I think he said about $6 

million, was it not? 

Mr. ZIAK. There are three different sites. Does that include the 

Oregon site, Chip? The $6 million? 

Mr. JENKINS. Yes. 

Mr. ZIAK. It does. 

30

Mr. JENKINS. The movement of the highway is paid for by the 

State and the creation of the park is paid for by the State. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you. 

Senator Akaka. 

Senator AKAKA. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I want to commend our witnesses and thank you so much for your descriptive statements of 

the parks that you are talking about. I cannot help but think of 

how easy it is to remember Nana and also the trail all the way to 

the Pacific, as well as the Sand Creek Massacre site. I want to 

thank you for your descriptions. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to tell you that it is great to be able to 

support them. Thank you. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you, sir. 

Senator Campbell. 

Senator CAMPBELL. I have a couple of small questions, Mr. 

Chairman. Maybe it is a little bit loaded, Mr. Ziak. It is along a 

related question I have had in my mind for a couple of weeks. 

Since you are interested in the Lewis and Clark Expedition, you 

know that the Mint is talking about taking Sacagawea’s picture off 

the silver dollar. You have heard that or know that? 

Mr. ZIAK. I have not heard that, sir. 

Senator CAMPBELL. Senator Dorgan of North Dakota and I both 

wrote a letter of opposition to them doing that, but if you have not 

heard about it, then I guess I cannot ask you what your view is 

on it either, or can I? 

Mr. ZIAK. All I can say is I rarely run into them out in the public. I rarely get them back as change. 

Senator CAMPBELL. That is because collectors usually buy those 

up before the public ever sees them. But they say the reason they 

want to take her picture off it is that collectors are not buying 

them very fast, and our contention is they are not marketing them 

very well. Maybe they would sell faster if they wanted to. 

Well, it is not really an important question. 

Thank you for your very nice, testimony, Ms. Alexander. It was 

very eloquent. I was trying to listen carefully but I think I missed 

a couple things. Whose language is Timucuan? 

Mr. ALEXANDER. The Indians, the Timucuan Indians. 

Senator CAMPBELL. From a tribe. I see. Good. That was all. 

Maybe to my brother, Steve Brady. The Sand Creek site is really 

close to becoming a reality. There is really not any opposition to 

this bill, a few minor changes. The Park Service supports it too. 

How do you sense how the tribes would work with the Park Service 

using some of that land for cultural purposes or religious purposes 

or reburial of remains or things of that nature? 

Mr. BRADY. Well, it is in my testimony. It says we understand 

that an agreement or lease will be negotiated between the National 

Park Service and the tribes, providing for the inclusion of the Dawson property, the continuation of ongoing consultation and management and access. Ceremonial access especially I think is really important. 

Senator CAMPBELL. Do you envision some kind of an interpretive 

center there some day? 

Mr. BRADY. Possibly, with the consultation of all the tribes and 

NPS and certainly the State. 

31

Senator CAMPBELL. But right now, the tribes have no plans for 

buildings or putting anything there. 

Mr. BRADY. I do not think we have reached that point yet. 

Senator CAMPBELL. No further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. Well, thank you again. There may be some 

other questions in the next day or two. If there are, we will forward 

them to you. Otherwise, thank you all for being here. 

The committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:36 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(33)

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 

OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AND CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC, August 4, 2004. 

Hon. CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed are answers to the follow-up questions from the 

hearing held by the Subcommittee on National Parks on May 20, 2004, on S. 1672, 

S. 1789, H.R. 1616, S. 2167, and S. 2173. These responses have been prepared by 

the National Park Service. 

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to respond to you on this matter. We 

apologize for the delay in our response. 

Sincerely, 

JANE M. LYDER, 

Legislative Counsel. 

[Enclosure.] 

S. 1672, TIMUCUAN PRESERVE

Question 1a. The bill proposes to acquire 12.5 acres. This has been reduced to 8.5 

acres because certain property owners objected to the proposal. How does the local 

community view the donation of this land? 

Answer. The local community supports the donation to the National Park Service, 

as proposed in S. 1672. 

Question 1b. What is the view of Starwood Hotels and Resorts (owner of the 

neighboring Sheraton Resort)? 

Answer. We are not aware of any Sheraton Resort or Starwood Hotels and Resorts’ property-on Amelia Island. 

Question 1c. Does the Park Service plan to eventually obtain the entire 12.5 

acres? 

Answer. We understand that Amelia Island Plantation plans to donate 8.5 acres 

to the NPS. At this time, the NPS has no plans to acquire the other 4 acres currently owned by two other private individuals. The 12.5-acre area, proposed to be 

added to the boundary, include natural and cultural resources important to the 

story of American Beach. Currently, more than 50 governmental entities and several hundred private landowners work together to protect the resources found within the Timucuan Preserve. Protection of these lands can be achieved through partnerships similar to the ongoing partnerships within the Preserve and would not require NPS to own the entire 12.5 acres. 

Question 2a. The Amelia Island Plantation has arranged to donate the land at 

American Beach to the National Park Service. Who currently manages the land? 

Answer. The land is currently managed as conservation and buffer lands by the 

Amelia Island Plantation Corporation. 

Question 2b. Will the Park Service be expected to compensate Amelia Island Plantation for the land? 

Answer. No. 

Question 3a. The ‘‘Nana’’ sand dune was mentioned in the hearing as ecologically 

important as a barrier during storms and as endangered species habitat. Have any 

other areas been identified with similar characteristics for future acquisition? 

34

Answer. No, the only remaining undeveloped dune associated with Nana in this 

area is divided from the main dune by a road. This dune is included in the 12.5 

acres proposed for inclusion in the boundary. The only other undeveloped dunes that 

are in the area are incorporated within current units of the Florida Park System. 

Some of these parks are within the current boundary of the Timucuan Preserve and 

are managed by the Florida Park Service. There are no federally listed endangered 

or threatened species present in this area. 

Question 3b. What is the approximate size of Amelia Island (in acres)? 

Answer. According to the Nassau County Property Appraisers Office, Amelia Island occupies approximately 17,540 acres. 

Question 3c. What is the approximate size of Timucuan Preserve (in acres)? 

Answer. The Timucuan Preserve encompasses approximately 46,000 acres. 

Question 3d. Which endangered or threatened species can be found on ‘‘Nana’’ and 

approximately how much of their habitat (in acres) has been lost to development 

on the island? 

Answer. The dune does not contain any federally listed endangered or threatened 

species. In a 1992 evaluation of 191 acres, the Florida Natural Areas Inventory 

ranked the dune and maritime hammock as outstanding based on species diversity, 

structure, degree of disturbance and exotic invasion. The evaluation also concluded 

that, of the 191 acres, only 22 acres which included the dune and maritime hammock were preserved, 4 acres were donated to the County for Burney Park, 35.7 

acres were developed as a golf course and the remaining approximately 129 acres 

was developed for homes, commercial and resort properties of Osprey Village, Amelia Island Plantation and Summer Beach. 

S. 1789 AND H.R. 1616, MARTIN LUTHER KING NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE LAND EXCHANGE

Question 4. If an appraisal has not been conducted, how do you know the lands 

to be exchanged are of equal value? 

Answer. A formal appraisal has not been done on these properties. However, in 

2001, in anticipation of this exchange, the NPS Southeast Region conducted an informal appraisal and determined that the lands were of approximately equal value. 

If a difference does exist, we expect that the NPS property would have the slightly 

higher value. The city of Atlanta has an additional two acres of land adjacent to 

the city land proposed for exchange and is agreeable to including additional city 

land to make the lands exchanged to be of equal value if necessary. 

Question 5. You stated that the properties on Edgewater Avenue were purchased 

by the NPS to preserve them, once the land exchange is completed what local agreements or ordinances are in place to assure that the exchanged property will be protected in the future? 

Answer. The land to be exchanged is within the Martin Luther King, Jr. Historic 

District. Atlanta’s Urban Design Commission must approve any changes to properties in the District. The commission, whose mission is to identify, protect, enhance 

and perpetuate the use of buildings, sites, and districts of special character, historic 

interest, or aesthetic value, nominates and regulates designated buildings and districts identified as historic. The NPS has been consulted on all matters within the 

district and actively participates in consultations regarding proposed changes within 

the district. This area also has active community organizations that are committed 

to protecting the historic integrity of the neighborhood. 

S. 2167, LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Question 6a. The sites to be included in the historical park are spread out over 

a large area. How will the park visitor get coordinated information about all the 

sites at the Historical Park? 

Answer. In anticipation of possible passage of S. 2167, the NPS, Washington State 

Parks and Oregon State Parks managers have discussed how to coordinate visitor 

services. The managers recognize that providing visitors coordinated information, 

including trip planning information, local logistical information, and interpretation, 

is a top priority. 

In addition, park managers are working with local Lewis and Clark Bicentennial 

organizers to produce a prototype trip planner for the region, and to develop a common web portal to provide visitor information. Park managers also are working 

more closely with four-Chambers of Commerce, which operate five visitor contact 

stations in the local communities. Discussions are now underway with the Chambers of Commerce to see if the Bicentennial trip planner could be adapted to serve 

the needs of the parks and local businesses beyond the bicentennial years. 

Question 6b. What are the benefits to the visitor of this consolidated management? 

35

Answer. Our efforts to coordinate visitor information will make planning a visit 

to the Lewis and Clark related parks much easier. Currently, visitors must contact 

each of the five individual federal and state parks to obtain information and make 

reservations. Eventually, we anticipate that visitors will be able to access information about the five parks at the same time as well as consolidate the payment of 

entrance fees through the purchase of a common pass. Greater coordination also will 

ensure that visitors are provided a more comprehensive picture of the Lewis and 

Clark story, whether they choose to tour historic sites, view interpretive exhibits, 

or participate in other activities in the parks. 

Question 7a. Are all sites being recommended for inclusion currently being managed by the National Park Service? 

Answer. No. S. 2167, as amended, would include in the new boundary of the 

Lewis and Clark National Historical Park a significant amount of land not currently 

managed by NPS. First, S. 2167 authorizes the NPS to acquire and manage the 

areas known as Clark’s Dismal Nitch and Station Camp. In a third area, Cape Disappointment, federal lands would immediately be transferred to NPS management 

while federal lands subject to any withdrawals, for the most part, would be transferred at a later date. The bill would, however, revoke the withdrawal of a 20-acre 

parcel of federal land and direct the Secretary to establish a memorial to Thomas 

Jefferson on that parcel. 

While the bill would provide for NPS management at Cape Disappointment, it 

also would authorize the Secretary to enter into an agreement with the State of 

Washington to administer land. Washington State Parks currently administers 

many of these lands through agreements with other federal agencies. The NPS fully 

intends to continue such an arrangement with the State for all lands managed by 

NPS at Cape Disappointment, except for the 20-acre parcel for the memorial to 

Thomas Jefferson. 

Question 7b. Is any land proposed for acquisition? 

Answer. Yes, the NPS would acquire additional land within the new proposed 

boundary if S. 2147 is enacted, if funds are made available for the purchase of private land from willing sellers, and if, as planned, the State of Washington transfers 

some of its property to the NPS. At Dismal Nitch, NPS would acquire by donation 

about 30 acres from the State of Washington and would purchase 160 acres from 

private owners. At Station Camp, NPS would acquire by donation about 15 acres 

from the State of Washington and would purchase in fee or an easement on approximately 455 acres from private owners. At Cape Disappointment, the NPS would 

eventually acquire about 1,140 acres through transfer of federal lands. The NPS anticipates that all but the 20-acre parcel for the memorial to Thomas Jefferson would 

be managed by Washington State Parks. 

In addition, S. 2167 would retain the authority for the National Park Service to 

acquire up to 1,375 acres at Fort Clatsop that was enacted in 2002. 

Question 8a. S. 2167 is a joint effort by the states of Oregon and Washington and 

the Federal government. What is the role of each state? 

Answer. We have agreed upon the general responsibilities of each state, however, 

if the legislation passes, more specific roles will be discussed. The responsibilities 

discussed this far are as follows: 

Washington State

• Maintain and operate Cape Disappointment State Park in accordance with applicable federal laws, regulations and policies. 

• Maintain and operate Fort Columbia State Park. 

• Realign Highway 101, construct a new park at Station Camp and donate this 

new park to the NPS. 

• Construct new visitor facilities at Clark’s Dismal Nitch and donate these to the 

NPS. 

• In partnership with the NPS and Oregon State Parks, develop and implement 

appropriate plans for providing visitor services and resource protection in the 

context of the entire Lewis and Clark National Historical Park. 

• Provide technical assistance to the NPS for the management of the park. 

Oregon State

• Maintain and operate Fort Stevens and Ecola State Parks. 

• In partnership with the NPS and Washington State Parks, develop and implement appropriate plans for providing visitor services and resource protection in 

the context of the entire Lewis and Clark National Historical Park. 

• Provide technical assistance to the NPS for the management of the park.

Question 8b. What is the role of the Federal government? 

36

Answer. The Federal government:

• Maintain and operate all of the units under federal jurisdiction within the 

Lewis and Clark National Historical Park in accordance with applicable laws, 

regulations and policies. • Work as a partner with Washington State Parks and Oregon State Parks, other 

state agencies, and local entities to develop and implement plans for providing 

visitor services and resource protection. • In partnership with these state agencies, provide technical assistance for the 

management of the affiliated areas.

Question 8c. How much will it cost to complete the entire proposal including realignment of the highway and restoration of the current highway location? Answer. We estimate that land acquisition for the added areas will cost $2.2 mil- lion to $3.0 million. This estimate includes $700,000 spent by the State of Washington to acquire the land for the realignment of Highway 101. We estimate that 

development costs for visitor facilities will cost approximately $5.1 million to $7 million. This estimate includes $3 million spent by the State of Washington to develop 

a park at Station Camp and visitor facilities at Clark’s Dismal Nitch, and about 

$2.8 million to realign Highway 101. Operations and maintenance costs are estimated at $127,000 per year for the new NPS sites. 

Question 8d. How much of the total cost will be borne by each state and the Federal government? 

Answer. 

Estimated land acquisition costs

• $1.5 million to $2.3 million for the NPS. • $700,000 for the State of Washington to acquire land for the realignment of 

Highway 101. 

Estimated development costs

• $2.1 million to $4 million for the NPS. • $3 million for the State of Washington for park facilities, and $2.8 million for 

the realignment of Highway 101. 

Estimated operations and maintenance costs:

• $127,000 for minimal operations of the new NPS sites.

Question 8e. How will the maintenance backlog be affected by implementation of 

this project? 

Answer: Funds NPS uses from its construction budget for development of the new 

areas of the park would not be available for maintenance backlog projects within 

the National Park System. However, as noted above, much of the development costs 

associated with the new sites included in the Lewis and Clark National Historical 

Park would be assumed by the State of Washington, so the impact on the NPS’ construction budget would be far less than might normally be the case with an expansion of this size. 

S. 2173, SAND CREEK MASSACRE

Question 9a. Can the public visit and receive interpretive material at the Sand 

Creek National Historical Site? 

Answer. The law authorizing Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site required that ‘‘sufficient’’ land be acquired from willing sellers ‘‘to provide for the preservation, memorialization, commemoration, and interpretation of the Sand Creek 

Massacre’’ before the area would be established as a national historic site. Therefore, the site is closed to the public until established. However, the public can receive interpretive material via the park website, by mail, and through interpretive 

programs provided off-site by a National Park Service Ranger. 

Question 9b. When do you expect it to be open to the public? 

Answer. If this legislation passes and the Secretary establishes the site, it is estimated that the site could be fully open to the public in approximately two years. 

Two years allows for the development of plans, visitor facilities, parking, restrooms, 

and other facilities. Once established, it may be possible to open the site on a limited basis prior to it being fully open. 

Question 10a. The testimony states that the land will be transferred to DOI and 

held in trust by the Secretary. What will be the duties and responsibilities of the 

Secretary in managing the Trust? 

Answer. As we mentioned in testimony, S. 2173, as introduced, contained several 

provisions concerning the Secretary’s trust responsibility that were confusing and 

37

unclear. We suggested several clarifying amendments during testimony and appreciate that S. 2173, as amended by the Committee, reflects these concerns. S. 2173, 

as amended, states that the trust property be administered ‘‘. . . as part of the 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site, only for historical, traditional, cultural, 

and other uses in accordance with the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site 

Establishment Act . . . .’’

Thus, the parameters of the Secretary’s trust responsibilities for this land are 

more clearly prescribed in S. 2173, as amended. For example, the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Establishment Act (Act) provides, among other things, 

that the Secretary manage the site to protect and preserve the site including the 

topographic features, artifacts, other physical remains, and the cultural landscape 

and that the Secretary interpret the natural and cultural resource values of the site, 

provide for public understanding and appreciation of and preserve for future generations those values, and to memorialize, commemorate and provide information to 

visitors. Other provisions in the Act describe the Secretary’s management responsibilities, including the need to provide reasonable access to the site by descendants 

and tribal members. 

Question 10b. Will any income be generated for the land and managed as part 

of the Indian Trust Fund? 

Answer. No plans currently exist that will generate income for the land that will 

be managed as part of the Indian Trust Fund. 

NORTHERN CHEYENNE SAND CREEK OFFICE, 

NORTHERN CHEYENNE SAND CREEK MASSACRE HISTORIC SITE COMMITTEE, 

Lame Deer, MT, July 13, 2004. 

Hon. CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Re: S. 2173

DEAR SENATOR THOMAS: Thank you for your letter of June 14, 2004. The following 

responds to the questions about the above bill posed in that letter. 

Please let me know if I can provide any additional information regarding this very 

important bill. We have been working with congressional staff on final adjustments 

for the upcoming mark-up, and look forward to passage of the bill during the current session. 

Very truly yours, 

STEVE BRADY, SR., 

Co-Chair. 

[Enclosure.] 

Question 1a. The National Park Service currently owns about 920 acres at the historic size. S. 2173 (sic) authorizes the transfer of an additional 1,465 acres. How 

much additional land, including private and state land, is within the boundary of 

the entire historic site? 

Answer. The Sand Creek National Historic Site Establishment Act of 2000 provides (in section 4(b)(1)) that the historic site consists of approximately 12,480 acres. 

After deducting the 920 acres and the 1,465 acres, the remaining site acreage will 

be 10,095 acres. 

Question 1b. Do you anticipate adding additional land to the National Park site? 

Answer. We hope to acquire additional land within the 12,480 acres. We do not 

anticipate expanding the site beyond 12,480 acres. 

Question 2. The land proposed for addition to the historic site includes four buildings. Will the buildings be retained and used after transfer? 

Answer. The four structures on the 1,465 acres covered by S. 2173 include a ranch 

house, shop building, corrals and a small lean-to type structure adjacent to the corral. At the last consultation meeting between the National Park Service and the 

three tribes (Northern Cheyenne Tribe of Montana, Northern Arapahoe Tribe of Wyoming, Cheyenne and Arapahoe Tribes of Oklahoma), a general consensus was 

reached that the ranch house should be eliminated due to the amount of renovation 

that would be necessary to make it usable. The shop, corrals and associated stalls 

may all be used after the transfer. 

(39)

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

WASHINGTON STATE LEGISLATURE, 

Olympia, WA, May 18, 2004. 

Hon. CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS: We are writing to express our support for Senator Cantwell’s Senate Bill 2167, which will be heard by your committee 

on Thursday, May 20, 2004. 

As you know, next year is the 200th anniversary of the Lewis & Clark Corps of 

Discovery Expedition. The area which we represent in southwest Washington is the 

location of several critically important historical sites of the Lewis & Clark Expedition. Although many important sites exist all along the Lewis and Clark National 

Historic Trail, the extraordinary history related to the Lewis & Clark Expedition’s 

arrival at the Pacific Ocean is best realized at three sites on the lower Columbia 

River. Senate Bill 2167, if passed into law, would provide overarching coordination 

between the States of Washington and Oregon, by establishing a, National Historical Park in Oregon and in Washington. We are convinced that the new designation 

provided in Senator Cantwell’s bill will allow for the best operation and security of 

these precious historical sites. 

We are proud to represent the 19th Legislative District in Washington’s State 

Legislature. Senate Bill 2167, which would designate Clark’s Dismal Nitch, Station 

Camp, and Cape Disappointment as part of the Lewis and Clark National Historic 

Park, are all located within our district. It was at Station Camp that Meriwether 

Lewis and William Clark held an election in order to determine the safest and best 

location for the group to spend the winter. Every single man and woman was allowed one vote—including Sacajawea, a Native American woman, and York, an African-American. What occurred at Station Camp is something to be proud of in this 

nation’s history. 

Senate Bill 2167 enjoys the broad support of local citizens, county, state mid municipal governments, port districts, civic groups, and public safety organizations. 

Local stakeholders were involved with its development at every stage, providing 

input from inception until final drafting. 

They brought forward and addressed important issues regarding tourist accommodation and rest rooms facilities, highway safety and signage, public boating and 

swimming safety. Because of the integral participation on the part of local entities, 

the legislation has wide support in the region. 

With passage of this bill, we anticipate maximum cooperation between Oregon’s 

and Washington’s departments which oversee and regulate transportation, tourism, 

agriculture, fisheries and public health. The upcoming bicentennial events will bring 

hundreds of thousands of visitors to our rural areas. Creation of a Lewis & Clark 

National Historical Park, as envisioned in Senator Cantwell’s bill, will help manage 

this anticipated influx of visitors by providing an oversight and decision making institution. 

We hope that you will favorably consider Senator Cantwell’s proposal. It has our 

support and that of our constituents. 

We greatly appreciate your attention and consideration. 

Respectfully, 

MARK L. DOUMIT, 

State Senator,

BRIAN HATFIELD, 

BRIAN BLAKE, 

State Representatives.

40

NORTHERN CHEYENNE TRIBE, 

Lame Deer, MT, March 30, 2004. 

Hon. PETE DOMENICI, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, 

DC. 

Hon. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

Hon. RICHARD W. POMBO, 

Chairman, Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Re: S. 2173, Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Trust Act of 2004

DEAR SENATOR DOMINICI: On behalf of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe and the 

Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Massacre Historic Site Project Committee, submitted herewith is a letter of support for the proposed legislation Senate Bill S.2173 

entitled the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Trust Act of 2004’ pending 

before U.S. Congress. 

The Northern Cheyenne Tribe and the Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Massacre 

Historic Site Project Committee support the immediate enactment of the proposed 

Senate Bill S. 2173 to place in federal trust as a part of the Reservation of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma, the Sand Creek Massacre village site formerly known as the ‘‘Dawson Property,’’ located in Kiowa County in the state of Colorado solely for the purposes authorized by the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Act. 

The Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council has consistently supported the efforts to 

protect and preserve the Sand Creek Massacre Site in southeastern Colorado. The 

Tribal Council, subject to their review and enactment, currently has a draft resolution of support pending for their consideration. 

Please forward all concerns to: Otto Braided Hair, Director, Northern Cheyenne 

Sand Creek Office, PO Box 1350, Lame Deer, MT. 59043, Ph# (406) 477-8026, Fax 

(406) 477-8021 or E-mail: sandcreek@rangeweb.net. 

Respectfully submitted, 

JOHN J. WOODENLEGS, 

Vice President. 

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

NORTHERN CHEYENNE AGENCY, 

Lame Deer, MT, April 14, 2004. 

GERI SMALL, 

President, Northern Cheyenne Tribe, Lame Deer, MT. 

DEAR PRESIDENT SMALL: Enclosed is the original of Northern Cheyenne Tribal 

Resolution No. DOI-068 (2004) enacted by the Council on April 7, 2004 and received 

in this office on April 7, 2004. 

Resolution No. DOI-068 (2004)—supports Senate Bill S. 2173 entitled ‘‘Sand 

Creek Massacre National Historic Site Trust Act of 2004’’. 

Resolution No. DOI-068 (2004) is hereby noted. The Northern Cheyenne Tribal 

Council has the authority to take this action via Article IV, Section 1(r) of the 

Tribe’s Amended Constitution and Bylaws. 

All necessary copies of this resolution have been retained for our files 

Sincerely, 

MARJORIE EAGLEMAN, 

Superintendent. 

[Enclosure.] 

TRIBAL COUNCIL OF THE NORTHERN CHEYENNE TRIBE NORTHERN 

CHEYENNE RESERVATION LAME DEER, MONTANA 

A RESOLUTION of the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council supporting Senate Bill 

S. 2173 entitled ‘‘Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Trust Act of 2004,’’ 

now pending before the U.S. Congress that proposes to place in federal trust as part 

of the reservation of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma, the Sand 

Creek Massacre village site, formerly known as the ‘‘Dawson property,’’ located in 

Kiowa County in the State of Colorado that was acquired by Southwest Entertainment and subsequently gift deeded to the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma. 

41

WHEREAS the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council is the governing body of the 

Northern Cheyenne Tribe, as authorized by its amended Constitution and Bylaws, 

approved by the Secretary of the Interior on May 31, 1996; and 

WHEREAS the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council is empowered to cultivate and 

preserve the culture of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe under Article IV Section 1.(l) 

of the Constitution of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe as amended in 1996; and 

WHEREAS Colonel John Chivington and federal troops attacked without provocation the peaceful Cheyenne village of Cheyenne Chiefs Black Kettle and White 

Antelope at Sand Creek in the Territory of Colorado on November 29h of 1864 

where many Cheyenne women, children and elders were brutally massacred; and 

WHEREAS U.S. Congress admitted responsibility to the atrocities committed at 

Sand Creek and promised reparations through Article 6 of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Treaty of Little Arkansas of 1865 and this treaty obligation remains unfilled; 

and 

WHEREAS the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council supported by resolution in 

1993 the repatriation of Cheyenne victims of Sand Creek Massacre from the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. to Concho Agency of the Cheyenne and 

Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma in Concho, Oklahoma; and 

WHEREAS the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council supported by resolution the 

‘‘Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Study Act of 1998’’ (Public Law 105-

243) and the ‘‘Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Establishment Act of 

2000’’ (Public Law 106-465) (the ‘‘Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Act’’); 

and 

WHEREAS the Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Massacre Historic Site Project 

Committee (the ‘‘Committee’’) is delegated and authorized to represent the Northern 

Cheyenne Tribe and the Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Descendants by Northern 

Cheyenne Tribal Council Resolution DOI-145(01) on all matters appertaining to the 

‘‘Sand Creek National Historic Site Establishment Act of 2000’’ (Public Law 106-

465); and 

WHEREAS the ‘‘Committee’’ is currently working with representatives from Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma and the Northern Arapaho Tribe of Wind 

River Reservation for the repatriation of human remains of victims of the Sand 

Creek Massacre from the Colorado Historical Society in Denver, Colorado, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, Nebraska and the Sam Noble Museum of Norman, 

Oklahoma back to the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site in southeastern 

Colorado; and 

WHEREAS the Sand Creek Massacre Village Site formerly known as the ‘‘Dawson 

Property’’ located in Kiowa County in the State of Colorado acquired by Southwest 

Entertainment and subsequently gift deeded to the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes 

of Oklahoma; and 

WHEREAS that the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council supports the taking of 

Sand Creek Massacre Village Site into federal trust, on the condition that it be 

managed and used as part of the National Historic Site solely for the purposes authorized by the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Act, including access 

and use by the Northern Cheyenne Tribe and its members as provided in the Sand 

Creek Massacre National Historic Site Act, and the foregoing would be accomplished 

by enactment of Senate Bill S. 2173; now 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council 

hereby supports the immediate enactment of Senate Bill S. 2173; and 

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council has authorized by Resolution DOI-145(01) the Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Massacre 

Historic Site Project Committee to represent the Northern Cheyenne Tribe and the 

Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Descendants on all matters appertaining to the 

Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Act. 

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council 

with nine (9) votes for passage and adoption and zero (0) votes against passage and 

adoption this 7th day of April, 2004. 

ATTEST: 

CHARLENE ROBINSON, 

Secretary, Northern Cheyenne Tribe,

GERI SMALL, 

President, Northern Cheyenne Tribe.

Æ