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

97–780 PDF 2005

S. HRG. 108–739

PETRIFIED FOREST IN ARIZONA; QUINCENTENNIAL OF THE

DISCOVERY OF FLORIDA; HARRY S TRUMAN NATIONAL

HISTORIC SITE; HUDSON-FULTON-CHAMPLAIN COMMISSION;

AND ROAMING HORSES IN CAPE LOOKOUT NATIONAL

SEASHORE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

on 

S. 784 S. 1311

S. 2499 S. 2656

H.R. 2055

SEPTEMBER 21, 2004

(

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

(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

Clinton, Hon. Hillary Rodham, U.S. Senator from New York ............................. 2

Fitzgerald, Michael R., Owner, Twin Buttes Ranch, LLC, Holbrook, AZ ........... 27

Gillette, David D., Ph.D., Department of Geology, Colbert Curator of Paleontology, Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ ......................................... 30

Graham, Hon. Bob, U.S. Senator from Florida ..................................................... 15

Jones, Hon. Walter B., U.S. Representative from North Carolina ...................... 9

Kyl, Hon. Jon, U.S. Senator from Arizona ............................................................ 5

McCain, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arizona ................................................... 7

Pataki, Hon. George, Governor, New York State .................................................. 5

Smith, Daniel P., Special Assistant to the Director, National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior on: 

S. 784 ................................................................................................................. 10

S. 2656 ............................................................................................................... 13

S. 2499 ............................................................................................................... 18

S. 1311 ............................................................................................................... 19

H.R. 2055 ........................................................................................................... 20

Talent, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from Missouri ............................................ 7

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

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 37

APPENDIX II 

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

(1)

PETRIFIED FOREST IN ARIZONA; QUINCENTENNIAL OF THE DISCOVERY OF FLORIDA; HARRY S TRUMAN NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE; HUDSON-FULTON-CHAMPLAIN 

COMMISSION; AND ROAMING HORSES IN 

CAPE LOOKOUT NATIONAL SEASHORE 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2004

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in room 

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

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator THOMAS. Let us see if we can get started here. I want 

to welcome our witnesses for today’s National Parks Subcommittee 

hearing. 

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

House bill. They include: 

S. 784, to revise the boundary of Petrified Forest National Park 

in the State of Arizona, and for other purposes; 

S. 2656, to establish a national commission on the quincentennial 

of discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon; 

S. 2499, to modify the boundary of the Harry S Truman National 

Historic Site in the State of Missouri; 

S. 1311, to establish the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th commemoration commission, and for other purposes; and H.R. 2055, to 

amend Public Law 89-366 to allow for an adjustment in the number of free roaming horses permitted in Cape Lookout. 

So that is what we have on our agenda. 

So I thank you all for being here. Keep your statements limited 

somewhat. They will all be in the record, and then we will have 

some questions. We will include your entire statement. So we look 

forward to hearing your testimony and the opportunity to discuss 

these bills. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Clinton and a letter from 

Governor Pataki follow:]

2

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, U.S. SENATOR

FROM NEW YORK, ON S. 1311

Mr. Chairman, I want to open my testimony by extending my warmest thanks to 

you and to the ranking member, Senator Akaka, for including S. 1311 in today’s 

hearing. I am grateful to have been given this opportunity to discuss my legislation 

before your subcommittee. Senator Schumer is a co-sponsor of the bill. It is also important at the outset to mention the efforts of Congressman Hinchey, my colleague 

from New York, who has introduced companion legislation, H.R. 2528, in the House 

of Representatives. I know he is heartened by your decision to hold this hearing, 

particularly in light of the action recently taken on H.R. 2528 by the House Committee on Government Reform. On July 21, 2004, that committee’s Subcommittee 

on Civil Service and Agency Organization forwarded H.R. 2528 to the full committee, and on the same day the full committee ordered the legislation to be reported, as amended. 

Let me also take a moment to thank you for the committee’s past consideration 

of S. 1241, the Kate Mullany National Historic Site Act. As you know, following a 

hearing in your subcommittee and a full committee markup of S. 1241, the Senate 

passed the bill, as amended, on September 15, 2004. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to emphasize that the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 

400th Commemoration Commission Act has bipartisan support. As a notable example, I am submitting with my testimony a letter of support from Governor George 

Pataki of the State of New York. It is not surprising that there should be bipartisan 

support for this legislation, because the creation of the federal commission would 

help to celebrate some key events in the history of the great State of New York, 

the surrounding region, and North America as a whole. The three signal events I 

am referring to are the 400th anniversary (in 2009) of Henry Hudson’s pioneering 

exploration, in the service of Dutch interests, of what is now known as the Hudson 

River; the 400th anniversary (also in 2009) of Samuel de Champlain’s pioneering 

exploration of what is now known as Lake Champlain; and the 200th anniversary 

(in 2007) of Robert Fulton’s inauguration of the successful commercial use of steam 

navigation by way of his historic voyage from New York City to Albany, New York. 

Each of these events is remarkable and together they demonstrate how vital they 

are to an understanding of the development of my State, the region, and, indeed, 

our Nation. 

The Hudson River extends from the western edge of New York City and the 

northeastern edge of New Jersey, past the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, 

by Albany, farther northward into the Adirondack Mountains. Hudson’s 1609 exploration of the Hudson River, extending to a point near Albany, the capital city of 

New York, was followed by the establishment of Fort Orange, a Dutch, and later, 

English settlement in the area. Almost two hundred years after Hudson’s voyage, 

Robert Fulton’s introduction of successful commercial steam navigation on the Hudson River helped make that waterway a vital commercial highway and engine of development for the state and the region. The river remains a natural wonder that 

is extremely rich in history, outdoors life, wildlife, and artistic inspiration. 

In 1609, the same year that Henry Hudson, an Englishman, sailed north on the 

Hudson River, Samuel de Champlain traveled in the company of Native Americans 

and arrived at Lake Champlain. Lake Champlain itself is shared by two states—

New York and Vermont. In addition to its enduring natural grandeur, it has contributed renowned chapters to the military history of the Nation and served as a 

passageway to Canada, our neighbor, trading partner, and ally to the north. 

In keeping with the multilayered importance of these anniversaries, the proposed 

membership of the federal Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission is designed to bring together people with a wide variety of expertise and 

knowledge, including employees of the National Park Service. As envisioned in S. 

1311, the commission would be composed of 31 members. Three members would be 

appointed after consideration of recommendations by the Governors of New York, 

Vermont and New Jersey. Thirteen members would be appointed after consideration 

of recommendations by the members of the House of Representatives whose districts 

encompass the Hudson River Valley and Champlain Valley. Six members would be 

appointed after consideration of the recommendations from the members of the Senate from New York, New Jersey, and Vermont. Two members would be employees 

of the National Park Service, of whom one would be the Director of the National 

Park Service (or a designee), and one would be an employee of the National Park 

Service having relevant experience. Another member of the commission appointed 

by the Secretary would be an individual knowledgeable of the Hudson River Valley 

National Heritage Area. And six members of the commission appointed by the SecVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:33 Jan 13, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\97780.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
3

retary would have an interest in, support for, and expertise appropriate to, the commemoration. 

The purpose of the federal Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration 

Commission would be to: (1) ensure a suitable national observance of the Henry 

Hudson, Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain anniversaries through cooperation with and assistance to the programs and activities of New York, New Jersey, 

and Vermont; (2) assist in the appropriate development of heritage tourism and economic benefits to the United States; (3) assist in ensuring that Hudson-FultonChamplain observances provide an excellent visitor experience and beneficial interaction between visitors and the natural and cultural resources of the New York, 

New Jersey, and Vermont sites; (4) assist in ensuring that Hudson-Fulton-Champlain observances are inclusive and appropriately recognize the diverse Hudson 

River and Lake Champlain communities that developed over four centuries; (5) facilitate international involvement in the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain observances; 

and (6) support and facilitate marketing efforts for a commemorative coin, a commemorative stamp, and related activities for the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 2009 

observances. 

To carry out these responsibilities, the federal Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th 

Commemoration Commission would be required to: (1) plan, develop, and execute 

programs and activities appropriate to commemorate the three anniversaries; (2) facilitate Hudson-Fulton-Champlain-related activities throughout the United States; 

(3) coordinate its activities with State commemoration commissions and appropriate 

Federal Government agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, 

State, and Transportation, the National Park Service with respect to the Hudson 

River Valley National Heritage Area, and the American Heritage Rivers Initiative 

Interagency Committee established by Executive Order 13061, dated September 11, 

1997; (4) encourage civic, patriotic, historical, educational, religious, economic, and 

other organizations throughout the United States to organize and participate in anniversary activities to expand the understanding and appreciation of the significance of the voyages of Henry Hudson, Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain; 

(5) provide technical assistance to States, localities, and nonprofit organizations to 

further the commemoration; (6) coordinate and facilitate for the public scholarly research on, publication about, and interpretation of, the voyages of Henry Hudson, 

Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain; and (7) ensure that the Hudson-FultonChamplain anniversaries provide a lasting legacy and long-term public benefit by 

assisting in the development of appropriate programs and facilities. 

Thus, the federal Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission 

would coordinate educational, cultural and historical projects while cooperating and 

assisting the programs and activities conceived by New York, New Jersey and 

Vermont. The commission, as a federal entity, will naturally play a vital role in facilitating national and international celebration efforts, and helping to ensure the 

observances are inclusive and recognize the wonderful diversity of the communities 

that have inhabited the Hudson River and Lake Champlain regions over the last 

four hundred years. The commission would also play an important role in working 

with state commissions to help foster appropriate capital improvements that will 

help to attract heritage tourists from across the Nation and elsewhere. 

Since a vital element of a successful commemoration is the participation of the 

state commissions mentioned in the legislation, I am pleased to let you know that 

the states of New York and Vermont have already created state quadricentennial 

commissions and New York’s Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area, referenced in the bill, has already made a tremendous contribution to fostering heritage tourism, making it a significant element in the area economy. In 2002, Governor 

George Pataki of the State of New York signed legislation creating the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Quadricentennial Commission. Governor Pataki said in his announcement: ‘‘These legendary figures played a key role in the history of New York 

and this important new commission will play a key role in helping us celebrate and 

honor their legacies . . . . These upcoming celebrations will help energize communities all along the Hudson River and Lake Champlain . . . . 

New York’s Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Quadricentennial Commission was established with twenty-one members, including members appointed by the governor and 

elected officials of the state legislature, and members representative of relevant geographic areas. As set forth in Governor Pataki’s announcement, the state commission is responsible for, among other things: (1) seeking funding from private individuals, foundations and corporations to support capital improvements, preservation 

and conservation needs associated with the commemoration; (2) making existing cultural institutions, museums and libraries the focus of the commemoration; (3) coordinating forums to seek public ideas for the commemoration; (4) coordinating civic, 

educational, cultural and heritage organizations to develop public interest and inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:33 Jan 13, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\97780.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
4

volvement in the planning and development of the commemoration; (5) promoting 

and encouraging educational outreach programs, media and technology including 

electronic communications to achieve national and international impact; (6) coordinating the planning of commemorative events for all communities along the Hudson 

River, Lake Champlain, and elsewhere; (7) inviting other interested states and nations to participate; (8) coordinating and promoting conferences, seminars and conventions in Hudson River and Lake Champlain communities using the 

quadricentennial as an attraction and theme; and (9) coordinating and cooperating 

with local, state and federal entities, including any federal quadricentennial commission. 

Likewise, in 2003 Governor James Douglas of the State of Vermont established 

the Lake Champlain Quadricentennial Commission, with up to 26 members. The 

commission is charged with the responsibility to advise, assist and support regarding the commemoration of the 400th anniversary of Samuel de Champlain exploration of Lake Champlain. The creation of the New York and Vermont state commissions is an essential step in the commemoration effort. 

The federal-state cooperation envisioned by S. 1311 has an important precedent. 

Congress has acted before to help recognize the significance of the Hudson and 

Champlain commemorations by means of the creation of a federal commission. In 

1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation (Public Law 85-614) establishing a 350th anniversary ‘‘Hudson-Champlain Celebration Commission.’’ According to that statute, the commission was designed to ‘‘develop and execute plans for 

the celebration in 1959 of the three hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the exploratory voyages in 1609 of Henry Hudson and Samuel de Champlain which signaled 

the beginning of settlements whose influence on our history, culture, law, and commerce extend through generations to the present day, settlements whose significance is recognized not only by their parent countries, sister nations across the sea, 

but by untold others who have come from foreign lands to find in America a new 

homeland.’’

The year 1959 was also marked by the passage of S. J. Res. 59 (Public Law 86-

68) and the issuance of a presidential proclamation, according to the Congressional 

Research Service. The joint resolution noted the significance of the commemorations 

and called on the President of the United States to ‘‘issue a proclamation designating 1959 as the year of the Hudson-Champlain Celebrations, and calling upon 

all citizens to join in commemorating the explorations carried out by these heroic 

men . . . .’’ By proclamation issued June 25, 1959, President Eisenhower designated 1959 as the year of the Hudson-Champlain Celebrations and invited the 

citizens of the United States, and the ‘‘schools, patriotic and historical societies, and 

civic and religious organizations to participate’’ in the commemorations. 

The Final Report of the Hudson-Champlain Celebration Commission to the President and Congress of the United States (‘‘Final Report’’) describes the celebration 

period’s rousing success. ‘‘From New York City up through the Hudson and Champlain Valleys as far as Canada and then into Vermont, with a nod of recognition 

from New Jersey and counties of New York State which lie far to the west of the 

Hudson and Champlain areas, 1959 was a year of commemoration and 

celebration . . . . The character of the festivities ranged all the way from educational and religious projects, exhibitions of Dutch and French art, and continuing 

professional performances of music, drama and ballet to parades, waterama, fireworks, pageants, canoecades, historic re-enactments and exhibitions of the armed 

might of the United States.’’ The report also describes the involvement of the governments of The Netherlands, France, Canada and Great Britain, which no doubt 

served to bring allies in North America and Europe even closer to the United States 

during that period when the Cold War was a daily fact of life. The Final Report 

also describes an even earlier celebration laying the foundation for this legislation. 

Festivities were held in 1909 as part of the Champlain Tercentenary in the Champlain Valley and the Hudson-Fulton celebrations in New York City. 

Mr. Chairman, there are many significant voyages of exploration that led to the 

development of our Nation, but among the most significant are those of Hudson and 

Champlain. There are many acts of invention that have contributed to unleashing 

the full potential of America, and among the most significant is the contribution of 

Robert Fulton. These are some of the reasons I feel privileged to represent the State 

of New York. The history of New York and its waterways stretch back before the 

dawn of this great Nation. Native peoples knew the beauty and mystery and plenitude of this region. Those who arrived later—among them Hudson, Champlain, and 

Fulton—plied the magnificent rivers and lakes of New York in voyages of exploration. Crucial episodes in the American Revolution and other battles took place in 

this region. The story of these explorers and the waters they traveled upon are a 

part of the continuing story of New York, Vermont, New Jersey, and the Nation, 

5

because that determined spirit of exploration, discovery and invention still thrives 

today, and is one of the reasons our Nation is unique among the Nations of the 

world. 

Mr. Chairman, that is why it is so important to establish the Hudson-FultonChamplain 400th Commemoration Commission. The federal-state cooperation that 

took place nearly a half-century ago is evidence that the collaboration envisioned by 

S. 1311 has a crucial role to play in the proper commemoration of the significance 

of these events. I thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony in support 

of S. 1311 and I look forward to working with you and Senator Akaka to turn this 

legislation into a reality. Thank you. 

STATE OF NEW YORK, 

Albany, NY, September 17, 2004. 

Hon. CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Hon. DANIEL K. AKAKA, 

Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN THOMAS AND RANKING MEMBER AKAKA: It is my understanding 

that the Subcommittee on National Parks will soon consider legislation to establish 

the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission. S. 1311 seeks to 

celebrate and commemorate the anniversaries of events of major historic importance 

along these internationally significant waterways. I write in support of this legislation. 

The discovery of the Hudson River in 1609 by Englishman Henry Hudson, while 

in the service of the Netherlands, is a key moment in the history of New York. His 

exploratory voyage up the Hudson provided the Western world with its first view 

of the wonders of the New World and, in large measure, with the limitless potential 

of North America. In the same year, French explorer Samuel de Champlain was the 

first European to set eyes upon the lake that now bears his name. Since the tricentennial of Hudson’s exploration in 1909, when its commemoration was joined 

with that of the centennial of Robert Fulton’s voyage up the Hudson on the steamship Clearmont, both events have generally been celebrated together. 

In order to mark the significance of the 400th anniversary of these important 

events, New York State passed legislation in 2002 to create a statewide, commission. This commission will plan and develop the celebrations of these events by commemorating the rich heritage of the Hudson River and Champlain corridors, and the 

impact of these discoveries on our history, culture, and commerce. 

At the federal level, S. 1311 would recognize the national and international significance of the discovery of the Hudson-Champlain Waterways, and the role these 

waters played in the birth and development of our nation, and the entrepreneurial 

spirit that continues to be a hallmark of our national identity. The multi-state commission envisioned by the bill would assist the states and communities in the region 

by coordinating events and observances across the region, and by providing federal 

recognition and resources to programs designed to commemorate these important 

discoveries and historical and cultural heritage associated with them. 

I wholeheartedly support the bill and urge its swift passage. 

Very truly yours, 

GEORGE PATAKI, 

Governor.

Senator THOMAS. Senator Kyl, would you like to comment? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JON KYL, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA 

Senator KYL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very 

much for holding this hearing. 

I will be exceedingly brief, but just to note that the first I believe 

is the Petrified Forest National Park Expansion Act. Basically only 

6 miles of the 22-mile Chinle Escarpment that carries the Petrified 

Forest are currently in the park and what this legislation would do 

is significantly expand the land that would comprise the park. 

6

By the way, the bill is supported by the people in the area, by 

the Federal Government, by the State government, and so on. 

There is one change. The one thing that I would like to draw 

your attention to, Mr. Chairman, is there were concerns in one 

area raised by the administration. They were legitimate. The substitute that I will offer at the markup addresses those concerns. It 

has to do with the fact that we have a unique provision in our 

State constitution that does not permit the exchange of State lands 

with Federal lands. Our State trust lands have to be sold at auction to the highest bidder. As a result, this language will allow the 

State and the National Park Service to exercise the appropriate 

means available under the law to acquire the land at the time of 

acquisition and allow for a memorandum of agreement between the 

State and the NPS for management of the State trust lands included within the park boundary until the Park Service and the 

State can agree on the terms of acquisition. So to my knowledge, 

that is the only issue to be resolved and I think that will resolve 

it, and we will try to accomplish that at the time that we mark the 

bill up. 

But I want to thank you and I want to thank all the people from 

Arizona who are here in support of this legislation. 

Mr. Chairman, might I ask too that my full statement be inserted in the record? I also note that Senator McCain, a cosponsor 

of the legislation, also has a statement, and I would like to submit 

that for the record as well. 

Senator THOMAS. It will be included in the record. 

[The prepared statements of Senator Kyl and Senator McCain 

follow:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JON KYL, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA, ON S. 784

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on S. 784, the Petrified Forest 

National Park Expansion Act of 2004. This bill, which I am co-sponsoring with Senator McCain, would expansion the park to include some of the most unique natural 

and cultural resources contained anywhere in the world. 

The Petrified Forest National Park is something of an anomaly among national 

parks. Designated as a National Monument in 1906 to protect the large petrified 

tree trunks that once towered over Triassic swamplands, it may not quite fit the 

popular image of a national park. Nevertheless, it is, a treasure, worthy of National 

Park status for the unique educational experience it provides its visitors. No where 

else can you glimpse the fossil remains of an ancient wilderness ecosystem, as it 

existed 30 million years ago. 

Today we know that petrified wood is only a part of the globally significant record 

contained in the rock formation commonly known as the ‘‘Chinle Escarpment’’ which 

cuts across the park. Science has revealed numerous paleontological deposits and 

nationally significant archeological sites, including ancient Pueblo cultural sites. 

The Chinle Escarpment is now known to constitute the best record of Triassic period 

terrestrial ecosystems found anywhere in the world. Currently, however, only six 

miles of the 22-mile escarpment are within the park boundaries. 

S. 784 would expand the park to include an additional 120,000 acres. These acres 

include the east and west portions of the Chinle Escarpment which are believed to 

include additional globally significant paleontological deposits and potentially nationally significant archeological sites The proposed expansion areas are 

checkerboarded federal, state, and private lands. 

Although a large addition to the federal land mass, this expansion, like the park 

itself, is unique. The expansion permitted by S. 784 is not just about adding land 

to the park. S. 784 is needed to protect these resources, they are seriously threatened by illegal activities occurring in the region, such as the theft of petrified wood 

and fossils, pot hunting, vandalism to petroglyph sites and the environmental degradation caused by mineral exploration. 

7

This expansion has been in the works for nearly 10 years. It is supported by the 

private landowners, local communities, scientific and research institutions, state 

tourism agencies, and environmental groups such as the National Parks Conservation Association. 

Mr. Chairman, this bill may unlock answers to profound questions about our 

earth’s history and the changing environment. This bill is good for the state of Arizona and the nation. I plan to work with my colleagues to ensure that we pass it. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN MCCAIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA,

ON S. 784

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today on a number of important pieces of legislation, including S. 784, the Petrified Forest National Park 

Boundary Expansion Act, which I introduced with Senator Kyl. Support for this proposed boundary expansion is extraordinary, from the local community of Holbrook, 

scientific and research institutions, state tourism agencies, and environmental 

groups, including the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA). 

As this Subcommittee is well aware, the Petrified Forest National Park is a national treasure among the nation’s parks, renowned for its large concentration of 

highly colored petrified wood, fossilized remains, and spectacular landscapes. Upon 

visiting this Park, one is quick to recognize its wealth of scenic, scientific, and historical value. Preserved deposits of petrified wood and related fossils are among the 

most valuable representations of Triassic-period terrestrial ecosystems in the world. 

These natural formations were deposited more than 220 million years ago. Scenic 

vistas, designated wilderness areas, and other historically significant sites of pictographs and Native American ruins are added dimensions of the Park. 

The Petrified Forest was originally designated as a National Monument by former 

President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906 to protect the important natural and cultural 

resources of the area. It was designated as a National Park in 1962. While several 

boundary adjustments have been made, a significant portion of unprotected resources remain in outlying areas adjacent to the Park. 

Increasing reports of theft and vandalism around the area have activated Park 

authorities, local communities, and other interested entities to seek additional protections through a proposed boundary expansion. It has been estimated that visitors 

to the Park steal about 12 tons of petrified wood every year. Reports of destruction 

to archaeological sites and grave sites have also been documented. Based on these 

continuing threats to the Park’s resources, the National Parks Conservation Association listed the Petrified Forest National Park on its list of Top Ten Most Endangered Parks in 2000. 

A proposal to expand the Park’s boundaries was recommended in the Park’s General Management Plan in 1992, in response to concerns about the long-term protection needs of globally significant resources and the Park’s viewshed in nearby areas. 

For example, one of the most concentrated deposits of petrified wood is found within 

the Chinle Escarpment, of which only thirty percent is included within the current 

Park boundaries. 

S. 784 would revise the boundary of the Park to include approximately 130,000 

acres, continue current grazing rights on lands transferred to the Park, and within 

three years, authorize the development of a plan, in accordance with Federal and 

State law, for acquisition of State land or interests in State lands within the Park’s 

revised boundary. Since introducing the bill last year, we have been seeking the 

input of interested parties to ensure that the Park and all its wonderful resources 

are protected for future generations. I want to thank the major landowners and 

other witnesses today for their contributions to this effort. 

Again, I thank the Chairman and the Subcommittee members and hope this 

measure will be approved by the full Committee as soon as possible.

Senator THOMAS. Thank you very much. 

Senator. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JIM TALENT, U.S. SENATOR

FROM MISSOURI 

Senator TALENT. I thank the chairman. 

It is good to see Mr. Jones again. I am looking forward to his testimony. 

8

Again, I will also be brief about the Truman Farm Home Expansion Act, which we have on the calendar. I am grateful to the chairman for scheduling a hearing on that. I hope we can put it out and 

pass it. I cannot imagine anything less controversial. 

The former Truman Farm home, where Harry Truman worked in 

the early part of the last century, is located in Grandview in eastern Jackson County, Missouri. It is an historic site, about 5 acres. 

And because of encroachment of commercial development, wear 

and tear on the house, we need to expand it by about another 5 

acres. This will increase the educational opportunities for people 

who visit, protect the homestead from being threatened by commercial development, and open up a lot of other opportunities to really 

expand people’s opportunity to enjoy and learn from the site. 

So I am, again, grateful that you scheduled it, Mr. Chairman, 

and hope we can put it out so that the people of Missouri and, in 

fact, of the whole country can enjoy this opportunity to see where, 

according to Harry Truman’s mother, he got common sense, by 

working on that farm. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have a full statement to submit for the record. 

Senator THOMAS. It will be included. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Talent follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. TALENT, U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI

Chairman Thomas, thank you for holding this hearing today and thank you for 

including a bill that I introduced, the Truman Farm Home Expansion Act, to expand 

the boundaries of the Harry S Truman Farm Home in Grandview. 

The additional acreage to the site will be used to build a new visitors center and 

preserve the historic integrity of the farm by preventing additional commercial encroachment. This bill will permit the National Park Service to ensure the protection 

of the Farm Home and the historic grounds by removing non-historic uses. It will 

also offer increased educational opportunities to school children, residents, and visitors alike that are not currently available at this site. 

The Truman Farm Home is a very special place to the people of Grandview and 

the Greater Kansas City area. It is here that Harry S Truman’s mother said he got 

his common sense. 

Truman was 22 when his father called him to work on the Young and Truman 

farm in 1906. In describing his duties Mr. Truman said he, ‘‘. . . Plowed, sowed, 

reaped, milked cows, fed hogs, doctored horses, bailed [sic] hay, and did everything 

there was to do on a six hundred acre farm with my father and my brother.’’

Currently the Truman Farm is located on a 5.2 acre area. S. 2499 would nearly 

double the size of the Harry S Truman Historic Site by giving the government the 

authority to purchase approximately 5-acres of land on the south side of the property. This area is basically undeveloped except for a small retail paint store located 

at the west end and fronting on Blue Ridge Boulevard. The proposed 5-acre strip 

is the only undeveloped land that remains of the original 600-acre Truman Farm. 

The use of the existing paint store as a visitor contact center will permit the park 

to eliminate the administrative use of the Truman Farm Home’s screened-in side 

porch as a visitor welcome point and sales area. This will restore the historic integrity to the home, while removing the impact of the wear and tear on the historic 

structure. 

Since the existing portion of the Truman Farm is so small, there isn’t adequate 

space to plant vegetation that would have the potential of screening existing commercial development. Sen. Talent’s bill would give the park space to provide for 

those plantings without encroaching on the home. Eliminating views of commercial 

development, which surrounds the farm site, would help visitors better understand 

and appreciate the rural nature of the farm. 

I believe this preservation is needed to ensure that future generations can gain 

an understanding of the lives of our Presidents. I am hopeful that this committee 

will act on this bill and it can be passed by the Senate before we adjourn this year.

9

STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER B. JONES,

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NORTH CAROLINA 

Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I thank you and I thank the committee members for this opportunity to speak briefly on H.R. 2055. 

For 3 centuries, a herd of wild Spanish horses has occupied the 

Shackleford Banks, a barrier island in my district that is part of 

Cape Lookout National Seashore. H.R. 2055 would improve existing law by updating the science-based parameters that govern 

management of the horses. 

The bill is based on the research of two world-renowned genetic 

scientists who spent decades studying the herds, Dr. Dan 

Rubenstein of Princeton University and Dr. Gus Cothran of the 

University of Kentucky. 

This bill is supported by the National Park Service. We have 

worked together for over 8 years now, and this bill itself, all it is 

doing is just to ensure the future of the herds based on science. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER B. JONES, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE

FROM NORTH CAROLINA, ON H.R. 2055

Mr. Chairman, thank you for scheduling this hearing on H.R. 2055—a bill to adjust the number of free roaming horsed permitted on Shackleford Banks in the Cape 

Lookout National Seashore. Shackleford Banks is a barrier island off the coast of 

North Carolina that has been home to a herd of wild horses for over three centuries. 

In fact, experts believe the herd descended from Spanish stallions that were shipwrecked on the island during colonial times. 

Over the years, the Shackleford horses have become an integral part of the natural and cultural fabric of Eastern North Carolina. They are treasured by the local 

community and adored by the visitors who come from around the world to see them. 

To protect these beautiful creatures, in 1997 I introduced the Shackleford Banks 

Wild Horses Protection Act which the President later signed into law. The Act directed the Department of the Interior to enter into an agreement with a non-profit 

group—the Foundation for Shackleford Horses—to manage the herd. It also required the Department to allow a herd of 100 free-roaming horses in the Seashore, 

and it set out terms under which horses could be removed, including a prohibition 

on removal ‘‘unless the number of horses... exceeds 110.’’

As the National Park Service and the Foundation began to implement the Act, 

disagreement erupted over the law’s requirements on the size of the herd. The Park 

Service interpreted the Act to mean that the herd’s population should be kept between 100 and 110. However, as the author of the legislation, I can tell you this 

interpretation was inconsistent with Congressional intent—which was to allow the 

herd to hover above 110. 

The Park Service’s interpretation also conflicted with the established scientific 

consensus on the size of the herd. Studies by world-renowned genetic scientists Dr. 

Daniel Rubenstein of Princeton University, and Dr. Gus Cothran of the University 

of Kentucky, confirm that in order to maintain the herd’s long-term viability, its optimum size is around 120 animals. The experts also agree that the population 

should not dip below 110 and that it should be allowed to expand periodically to 

numbers at or above 130 in order to sustain the proper genetic diversity in the herd. 

It’s important to note that these numbers are well within the island’s carrying capacity. 

After years of disagreement on the issue of herd size, the Park Service met in the 

fall of 2002 with the Foundation for Shackleford Horses, Dr. Rubenstein, Dr. 

Cothran and other stakeholders to find middle ground. After two days of meetings, 

the parties emerged with an agreement that largely minors the scientific understanding of how the horses should be managed. 

H.R. 2055 seeks to codify this scientific consensus into law. It would allow a herd 

of not less than 110 free roaming horses, with a target population of between 120 

and 130 free roaming horses.’’ It would also clear up confusion on when horses can 

be removed from the island by mandating that removal can only occur if ‘‘carried 

out as part of a plan to maintain the viability of the herd.’’

10

Mr. Chairman, this non-controversial legislation is supported by the Park Service, 

the scientific experts, and the local community. It is a legislative fix based on sound 

science, and I urge the Subcommittee to support it.

Senator THOMAS. All right, sir. Thank you very much. 

I might say we have some extra wild horses in Wyoming, if you 

are interested. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. JONES. Senator, I know my colleague, Ms. Cubin, and we 

have had several discussions about our horses and your horses as 

well. 

Senator THOMAS. Ours are not used to the water, however. 

Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate your being here. 

Mr. JONES. I appreciate it. Thank you. 

Senator THOMAS. We are ready for our first panel then. It will 

be Mr. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the Director, National 

Park Service, the Department of the Interior. Welcome, Mr. Smith. 

STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO 

THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT 

OF THE INTERIOR, REGARDING S. 784

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I will try to be brief, and 

I will go through all these bills in hopefully short order. 

Mr. Chairman, the first bill is the Department of the Interior’s 

views on S. 784, a bill to revise the boundary of Petrified Forest 

National Park in the State of Arizona. 

The Department supports S. 784, and on June 15 of this year, 

we testified in support of H.R. 1630, which as introduced in the 

House was identical to S. 784. 

S. 784 does not include the number of acres, identify which acres 

are proposed for expansion, or cite a specific map reference. However, the NPS, in consultation with BLM, has developed a map 

that was incorporated in H.R. 1630 at markup. We suggest that S. 

784 be amended to reference the same map. 

Much of the proposed expansion land ownership is best described 

as a checkerboard, which is common in western lands bordering 

railroad corridors. The 128,000-acre addition includes Federallyowned, BLM-managed lands, about 14,500 acres; privately owned 

lands, about 79,000 acres; and lands owned by the State of Arizona, 

about 34,500 acres. 

Petrified Forest National Park was established in 1906 and has 

been expanded several times to preserve and protect the Petrified 

Forest, its outstanding paleontological sites and specimens, its associated ecosystem and specimens, cultural and historic resources, 

and scenic and wilderness values for present and future generations. This is a world-class site, Mr. Chairman. 

In addition to including the acreage and reference map, we would 

suggest two other amendments, which I think Senator Kyl alluded 

to. These are amendments that were included in H.R. 1630, and it 

involves an MOU with the State to deal with the possible purchase 

of the State-owned lands at a later date and management of those 

lands until that can be accomplished. 

That concludes my testimony on S. 784. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 784 follows:]

11

PREPARED STATEMENT OF A. DURAND JONES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK

SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ON S. 784

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

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

784, a bill to revise the boundary of Petrified Forest National Park in the State of 

Arizona. We thank Senators McCain and Kyl for their interest and support for including and protecting world-class paleontological and archeological resources as 

well as extensive petroglyph sites in Petrified Forest National Park. Congressman 

Renzi and the other members of the House delegation have introduced companion 

legislation, H.R. 1630. 

The Department supports S. 784. On June 15, 2004, the Department also testified 

in support of H.R. 1630, which as introduced was identical to S. 784. 

S. 784 would expand the boundary of Petrified Forest National Park and authorize the Secretary to acquire lands within the boundary expansion from a willing 

seller by purchase, donation, or exchange. Within two years of enactment, the Secretary would be directed to develop a plan for the acquisition of State land or interests in State lands. The bill also would direct the Secretary to transfer to the NPS, 

administrative jurisdiction over other federally owned lands within the boundary expansion and specifically would allow . grazing to continue on lands where grazing 

presently exists. And finally, S. 784 would require that the park’s General Management Plan (GMP) be amended within three years after this bill is enacted to address 

the use and management of additional lands. 

S. 784 does not include the number of acres, identify which acres are proposed 

for expansion, or cite a specific map reference. However, the NPS, in consultation 

with the BLM, has developed a map that was incorporated in H.R. 1630 at markup. 

We suggest that S. 784 be amended to reference the same map entitled ‘‘Proposed 

Boundary Adjustments, Petrified Forest National Park’’, numbered 110/80,044, and 

dated July 2004. This map would result in a total proposed expansion of approximately 128,000 acres. 

Much of the proposed expansion landownership is best described as a checkerboard, which is common in western lands bordering railroad corridors. The 128,000 

acres includes federally owned BLM-managed lands, privately owned lands, and 

lands owned by the State of Arizona. 

Under the bill, approximately 14,500 acres of BLM-managed public land would be 

transferred to the National Park Service. Approximately 79,500 acres are privately 

owned. There are four major private landowners within this area and each has expressed interest in selling, exchanging, or donating their lands or interests. Because 

the proposed boundary expansion has been discussed for more than ten years, some 

of the landowners are losing interest while others are facing economic hardship and 

may be forced to sell to other interests if the expansion is not completed soon. Much 

of the private lands adjacent to the park have been managed as part of large cattle 

ranches for the past 120 years, however, this historic use of the land that has preserved the scenic views seen from the park is starting to change. According to the 

park’s 1993 GMP, new land uses occurring within the past 30 to 40 years include 

large-scale, mechanized petrified wood mining on private lands (with no reclamation 

efforts)—and subdivision of square-mile sections into 40-acre ranchettes. Pot hunting and vandalism continue regularly, and the costs for patrolling are beyond the 

ability of most private owners to manage. 

The State of Arizona owns approximately 34,500 acres in the proposed expansion. 

In support of the bill, the State has closed these lands to surface and sub-surface 

applications, mineral location, and prospecting permit application. This closure was 

originally done on March 4, 1991 and was just renewed on May 26, 2004. 

We should note that two issues exist concerning the state-owned lands authorized 

for acquisition. First, State law prohibits lands to be donated. Second, it is our understanding that the Arizona Supreme Court has determined that the Arizona Constitution prohibits the disposal of certain state land except through auction to the 

highest and best bidder. We are told there is an effort to amend this provision in 

the Arizona Constitution on the November ballot. Given these remaining issues, we 

would have to await a determination on how the citizens of Arizona and their representatives would recommend proceeding should S. 784 be enacted. 

The average cost per acre in the proposed new boundary, based on appraisals 

completed by the Department of the Interior, is between $105 and $175. Recurring 

costs for the management of the new lands would be approximately $690,000, which 

includes planning, and compliance, resource inventory and monitoring, resource protection, and maintenance. We also expect to incur approximately $625,000 in nonrecurring costs for new fencing and the purchase and installation of site sensors to 

12

remotely monitor lands for illegal activities. Funding would be subject to NPS priorities and the availability of appropriations. 

Petrified Forest National Park was established in 1906 and has been expanded 

several times to preserve and protect the Petrified Forest, its outstanding paleontological sites and specimens, its associated ecosystems and specimens, cultural and 

historic resources and scenic and wilderness values for present and future generations. The Petrified Forest is located in the stark and beautiful high desert environment of badlands, dry washes, and sagebrush of northeastern Arizona. Where 200 

million years ago there were lush green forests, rich in vegetation and trees hundreds of feet high supporting a variety of life, and where dinosaurs once roamed, 

there are now vistas broken only by distant mesas and the remnants of that forest 

and life, preserved by forces of nature in the shape of petrified wood and delicate 

fossils. In this stark and remarkable place, the remains of the oldest known dinosaur on earth were discovered in 1985. 

The park contains some of the best fossil records of late Triassic ecosystems in 

the world, and nowhere else can one find the combination of world-class paleontology and nationally significant archaeological sites that one finds here. For the 

past 150 years, people have visited, researched and sometimes vandalized and 

looted these resources. The creation of the park and subsequent expansions has diminished the threat. 

However, historic research by institutions such as the American Museum of Natural History, The Smithsonian, and the University of California at Berkeley has 

shown that the areas outside the park contain an even richer record of Triassic fossils than the areas within the park. The proposed boundary expansion would bring 

into the protection of the park, the following resources:

• the Chinle Escarpment, which cuts across the park from East to West and includes resources that contain in their rock layers the story of the world’s only 

know complete Triassic era ecosystem—a remarkably rich concentration of information about a world that vanished more than 200 million years ago; 

• critical riparian habitat along the Puerco River, central to ancient human history of the region and important for the protection of plants and wildlife; 

• the Rainbow Forest Badlands, significant because it contains fossil-bearing strata that is a continuation of that protected within the park; 

• the Dead Wash Petroglyphs parcel, containing a wide variety of paleontological 

features, archeological resources and riparian habitat critical to the wildlife and 

water quality of the region; 

• the Wallace Tank Ruins parcel, containing a large ruin that may have played 

an important role in the closing phases of the area’s prehistoric settlement; and 

• the West Rim of the Painted Desert parcel, significant for its substantial number of archeological sites including three ruins, an ancient petrified wood quarry 

and a petroglyph site as well as several paleontological fossil beds adjacent to 

the Devils Playground bone site within the park.

These fossils are non-renewable, unique resources that face constant threat of destruction from erosion and theft, development pressures, and the attraction of commercial mining, particularly of petrified wood. Petrified Forest National Park has 

an established monitoring program within the park as one of many resource protection tools. The NPS would use that established monitoring program, as well as all 

law enforcement and resource protection tools in the expanded boundary. S. 784 

would ensure long-term protection of the valuable paleontological, archeological, cultural, and natural resources of the Petrified Forest for generations to come. 

In addition to including the acreage and map reference, we would suggest two 

other amendments. First, because of the checkerboard nature of the land ownership 

of the lands being considered under this bill, especially in the portion known as the 

East Chinle Escarpment, NPS is concerned about the ability to manage this area 

effectively. NPS would like to amend the bill to provide that the acquisition of the 

East Chinle parcel is authorized dependent upon a determination of the Secretary 

that either 1) federal lands elsewhere in the state of Arizona have been identified 

for exchange with the state lands or 2) that the state and the NPS have completed 

a Memorandum of Agreement that would allow the NPS to manage the state lands. 

Second, the bill should be amended to authorize the Department to acquire State 

land within the revised boundary of the Park by donation. These amendments were 

also suggested in the hearing on H.R. 1630 and were adopted in the markup of that 

bill. 

S. 784 would continue the long and respected tradition and commitment of the 

NPS to science, education, and protection of the special places in the country significant enough to be considered national parks. These lands and resources are the legacy of the American people and by protecting them we expand our knowledge and 

13

understanding of the history of the earth and how changes through time have affected it. 

That concludes my remarks. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO 

THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT 

OF THE INTERIOR, REGARDING S. 2656

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, the second bill is S. 2656, a bill that 

would establish a commission to commemorate the quincentennial 

of the discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon. 

The Department supports S. 2656 if amended as outlined in our 

testimony. 

S. 2656 would establish a Discovery of Florida Quincentennial 

Commemoration Commission to encourage, coordinate, and conduct 

the commemoration of the quincentennial, and to ensure that the 

anniversary will have lasting educational value. The commission 

would terminate on December 31, 2013. 

The Department suggests several clarifying amendments. We 

recommend that if a feasibility study is conducted, that the bill be 

amended to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct the 

study, rather than the commission, in accordance with generally 

accepted practices for suitability and feasibility studies that the 

Park Service uses. 

Also, while S. 2656 is quite specific in requiring the commission 

to consult with and encourage participation with governmental 

agencies, educational institutions, foreign governments, and private 

organizations, it is silent with regard to consultation with Indian 

tribes, and the Department recommends that consultation with 

tribes be included, especially the Seminole and the Miccosukee 

tribes of Florida. 

There is also a minor constitutional issue brought up by the Justice Department concerning dealing with the Government of Spain, 

and we would work with the committee to work on that clarifying 

amendment. 

This concludes our remarks in support of S. 2656. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 2656 follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF A. DURAND JONES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK

SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ON S. 2656

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

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2656, a bill that would 

establish a commission to commemorate the quincentennial of the discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon. 

The Department supports S. 2656 if amended as outlined in our testimony. We 

believe that establishment of the commission would help ensure that the lasting legacy of the discovery and colonization of Florida is understood and appreciated by 

all Americans. 

S. 2656 would establish a Discovery of Florida Quincentennial Commemoration 

Commission to encourage, coordinate, and conduct the commemoration of the quincentennial and to ensure that the anniversary will have lasting educational value. 

Specifically, the bill would establish a Commission composed of 12 members who 

are Presidentially appointed and have demonstrated a strong sense of public service 

and expertise that will contribute to the duties of the Commission. The duties of 

the commission would include conducting a study regarding the feasibility of creating a National Heritage Area or National Monument to commemorate the discovery of Florida, planning and developing activities appropriate to commemorate 

the Quincentennial, consulting with and encouraging appropriate governmental enVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:33 Jan 13, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\97780.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
14

tities as-well-as elementary and secondary schools, colleges and universities, foreign 

governments, and private organizations to organize and participate in Quincentennial activities, and coordinating activities throughout the United States and internationally that relate to the history and influence of the discovery of Florida. The 

Commission would terminate on December 31, 2013. 

As S. 2656 suggests, Juan Ponce de Leon, arriving in 1513, was likely the first 

European to set foot in what is now Florida, near present-day St. Augustine. Ponce 

de Leon’s quest for the fountain of youth has become an established legend that has 

also drawn fame and recognition to Florida and the United States. 

Spanish explorers and conquistadors who followed Ponce de Leon sought gold and 

other treasures, glory, and fame, like those who had previously made such discoveries in Mexico and Peru. Only in the New World was there the opportunity for 

quick advancement in diplomatic and Spanish military careers. Others came to advance the cause of the Inquisition, to convert all non-believers in the New World. 

Historians generally believe that Ponce de Leon landed at or near the present location of the City of St. Augustine. Spanish heritage is still reflected in local architecture and historic resources and attractions in the center of the old part of the 

city. The Castillo de San Marcos National Monument contains arguably one of the 

oldest and most important historic structures in the State and the nation. It is 

prominently located on the Matanzas River directly across the road from the Spanish Quarter of St. Augustine. These aspects of St. Augustine’s heritage combine to 

make it the ideal location for the offices of the Commission. 

The Department suggests several clarifying amendments for S. 2656. We recommend that if a feasibility study is conducted, as specified in Section 5(a)(1) of the 

bill, that the bill amended to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct the 

study, rather than the Commission, in accordance with generally accepted practices 

for suitability and feasibility studies, to determine what, if any, type of unit would 

be appropriate to commemorate the discovery of Florida within the National Park 

System. In addition to examining whether a unit of the National Park System would 

be appropriate, such a study would also examine other alternatives for a federal 

role, including whether designation of a National Heritage Area should be considered. 

Also, while S. 2656 is quite specific in requiring the Commission to consult with 

and encourage participation in the commemoration by governmental agencies, educational institutions, foreign governments, and private organizations, we note that 

it is silent with regard to consultation with and involvement of the Indian tribes 

of Florida, particularly the Seminole and Miccosukee tribes. The Department suggests that Section 5(a)(3) of the bill be amended to require the Commission to consult with Indian tribes in Florida, as well as with foreign governments and State 

and local governments. 

We recommend that Section 4(c)(3) be deleted due to concerns that the Department of Justice has raised regarding the constitutional authority of this provision 

of the bill. We will be happy to work with the Committee as well as the Department 

of Justice and the Department of State in order to find appropriate ways to involve 

the Government of Spain in activities regarding the Commission. 

Finally, S. 2656 authorizes appropriations that are necessary for each fiscal year 

from 2005 to 2013. We recommend that $250,000 a year be authorized for this effort 

given other competing priorities and the need to focus federal funds on our parks 

and other essential programs. 

Our suggested amendments are attached to this testimony. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions you or any members of the subcommittee might have. 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

S. 2656—QUINCENTENNIAL OF THE DISCOVERY OF FLORIDA

On page 5, line 1, strike paragraph (3) and renumber the following paragraph 4 

as 3. 

On page 6, line 18, strike ‘‘(1) conduct a study regarding the feasibility of creating 

a National Heritage Area or National Monument to commemorate the discovery of 

Florida;’’, and renumber the following paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 as 1, 2, and 3. 

On page 7, line 6, insert ‘‘tribal governments,’’ after ‘‘governments,’’. 

On page 16, line 14, strike all of subsection (a) and insert the following new subsection; 

15

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (b) there is authorized to be appropriated to carry out the purposes of this Act $250,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 

through 2013.’’

On page 16, following line 23, insert the following new section; 

‘‘SEC. 10. STUDY.—

The Secretary of the Interior shall—

(1) conduct a study regarding the suitability and feasibility of commemorating the 

discovery of Florida with a unit within the National Park System in accordance with 

Section 8(c) of Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-59(c)); and 

(2) submit a report to Congress that describes the findings of the study and any 

conclusions and recommendations of the Secretary not later than 3 years after the 

date on which funds are made available to carry out the study.’’

Senator GRAHAM. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator THOMAS. Yes, the Senator from Florida. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BOB GRAHAM, U.S. SENATOR

FROM FLORIDA 

Senator GRAHAM. I apologize for arriving late. I appreciate your 

putting this legislation on the schedule. 

The event that is going to take place seems like a long way away, 

but in terms of the ability to prepare for such an important celebration, I think it is timely. 

In 1513, the first European discovery of North America occurred 

when Ponce de Leon bumped into what is now St. Augustine in the 

State of Florida. That event commenced the development of our 

great continent, and it deserves, in my judgment, the kind of recognition that this commission would call for. 

I am going to raise some questions about the amendments that 

have been suggested. One is Spain has been a long, long ally of the 

United States and has been a participant most recently in the war 

in Iraq until there was a change of government. This is an important opportunity for Spain and the United States to recognize their 

many intersections in history, and the purpose of inserting that 

provision about Spanish participation was to accomplish that purpose. I can say that there is considerable interest in this in Spain 

as a means of celebrating the historic links between our country 

and our cultures. 

I think this would also be an important statement for the large 

Hispanic population in the United States, to recognize their heritage and their culture as an important part of the culture of the 

United States of America. 

So I would be open to work on language, but the idea of maintaining this relationship with Spain I think is an important part 

of the concept of this celebration. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Graham follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BOB GRAHAM, U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA,

ON S. 2656

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your including my bill on the agenda today. In 2013, 

our nation will celebrate the 500th anniversary of Ponce de Leon’s landing on the 

east coast of Florida. I introduced a bill that establishes a commission to determine 

how we can best commemorate his discovery of North America. For a country as 

young as ours, a Quincentennial is a rare milestone worthy of tribute. 

Juan Ponce de Leon landed on the coast of Florida, south of the present-day St. 

Augustine, in April of 1513. During the Easter holiday, he explored our coasts, visiting the southern half of the east coast, the Florida Keys and the southwest coast 

of Florida. The first European explorer to step foot on North American soil, Ponce 

de Leon opened Florida and the mainland of the Americas to the rest of the world. 

16

Florida owes its heritage to Ponce de Leon. Even the name Florida dates back to 

Ponce de Leon’s discovery. When he saw the lush terrain, Ponce de Leon named the 

area the ‘land of flowers’ or ‘Florida’ in Spanish. 

While there is no doubt that Ponce de Leon is a key part of Florida’s history, his 

landing in Florida is ingrained in our entire nation’s early history. Children read 

in their history books about the myths surrounding Ponce de Leon’s voyages. His 

quest for the fountain of youth has become a myth symbolic of the age of exploration. 

Other Europeans were encouraged to make the dangerous journey across the Atlantic toward the Americas, persuaded by the stories of Ponce de Leon’s explorations 

of the new lands of North America. Ultimately, his discovery opened the path for 

exploration and colonization of the Americas. 

I have drafted this bill with the assistance of a notable scholar accomplished in 

the field of early Florida history—Dr. Samuel Proctor, Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Florida. I would like to thank Dr. 

Proctor for all of his efforts in drafting this bill. I would also like to thank another 

eminent scholar at the University of Florida, Dr. Michael Gannon, Distinguished 

Service Professor Emeritus of History, for his testimony in support of the bill. 

Funding authorized by this legislation would support the activities of this commission and would allow for educational activities, ceremonies, and celebrations. Fittingly, the principal office for this operation would be located in St. Augustine, Florida. 

With the establishment of this commission, I want to not only commemorate 

Ponce de Leon’s arrival in Florida but also to enhance the American public’s knowledge about the impact of Florida’s discovery on the history of the United States and 

North America. I hope that my colleagues will recognize the importance of commemorating this historic event. 

The National Park Service has proposed a number of changes to the original bill, 

one of which shifts the responsibility of conducting a study as to creating a National 

Park Service site from the commission to the National Park Service. I hope that the 

National Park Service will not object to consulting with the commission in conducting the study. 

I have proposed several changes to the original bill. They reduce the number of 

commission members from 12 to 10, change the method of selecting commission 

members, and add a specific authorization figure. 

I hope the proposed changes meet the concerns of the National Park Service and 

Committee members. If not, I am willing to discuss the issues further. I hope we 

can work together to pass this legislation before Congress adjourns for the year. 

Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. Senator, it was my understanding that it was a very 

technical constitutional issue, and the Justice Department and Interior will coordinate. I believe it is certainly not to preclude——

Senator GRAHAM. It is not a policy issue. 

Mr. SMITH. No. It was a constitutional issue involving just how 

we deal with foreign governments. It certainly is not to preclude 

Spain. It is to find the correct language that will allow that type 

of participation to occur. 

Senator GRAHAM. Muy bien. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator GRAHAM. The second issue that I understand was being 

raised was the question of the authorization level for the amount 

of funding. I frankly cannot tell you with much confidence today 

what this is going to entail over the next several years. 

What would seem to me to be more appropriate would be to set 

an authorization level, for instance, similar to that which was provided in the Lewis and Clark Trail, and then allow the appropriators, on a year-by-year basis, to evaluate what was appropriate 

and make the judgment. With the number that I understood was 

being suggested, we would be setting a pretty tight cap for a celebration, which I hope is going to be as expansive as this. While 

much of it will focus on the St. Augustine point of landing, I would 

17

hope that this would become a celebration for the Hispanic role and 

influence throughout our country. 

Mr. SMITH. Senator, the amount of $250,000 suggested by the administration is done with all of the concerns that we have in the 

Park Service budget, whether it be heritage areas or new areas or 

studies. Obviously, we fully recognize the authorizing and appropriations committees will make those determinations as the bill 

moves forward. 

Senator GRAHAM. Well, my concern is if we start with an authorization of $250,000, then that at least appears to be a ceiling on 

what the appropriations might be, and I would suggest that we 

consider some number that would allow for flexibility over what is 

going to be a 9-year period between now and when this comes to 

fruition. 

Could we do this? Let me engage with the people in the administration. I assume this is primarily through the National Park Service. Which agency has suggested this? 

Mr. SMITH. The National Park Service, in consultation with 

OMB, Senator. Again, you would be correct, in having the history 

that you have, of what has gone on at Jamestown or Lewis and 

Clark or others. Obviously, the authorizing committee and the Appropriations Committee will consider that as it moves through. 

This was the recommended amount, rather than just leaving it as 

the usual language of ‘‘sums necessary to carry out the act.’’

Senator GRAHAM. Mr. Chairman, how do you want to proceed on 

this? 

Senator THOMAS. Well, we can make some conversation afterwards and so on. We do not do it here, of course, in the hearing, 

but whatever you would like to do. I happen to personally think 

there ought to be some level. We ought to decide. It makes you 

much more comfortable with a bill if you have some sort of a limit 

on what the authorizations can be. 

Senator GRAHAM. Are you anticipating that there will be a markup on this legislation? 

Senator THOMAS. Senator, I do not know. There could be because 

we do have some time, but frankly, I think the notion is unlikely 

that we will have a markup this year. Does anyone have any better 

information? 

Senator KYL. I am hoping. 

Senator THOMAS. I am not sure. 

Senator GRAHAM. Are you hopeful that we do? 

Senator KYL. I said I am hoping. 

Senator THOMAS. There is none scheduled. That does not necessarily mean there will not be one. 

Senator GRAHAM. Thank you. 

Senator THOMAS. Are you finished? 

Senator GRAHAM. The completes my comments, yes. Thank you. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you. 

All right. If you would like to go on ahead then with the other 

bills, please. 

18

STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO 

THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT 

OF THE INTERIOR, REGARDING S. 2499

Mr. SMITH. Yes, Senator. I had finished on that bill, and the next 

one is S. 2499, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 

modify the boundaries of the Harry S Truman National Historic 

Site in the State of Missouri. 

The Department strongly supports the enactment of S. 2499. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 2499 follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF A. DURAND JONES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK

SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ON S. 2499

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 2499, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to modify the boundaries of the Harry S Truman National Historic Site in the State of Missouri. The Department strongly supports enactment of S. 2499. The Administration transmitted a similar proposal to 

Congress on June 2. 

Harry S Truman National Historic Site is comprised of two separate units within 

the Greater Kansas City Metropolitan area in Missouri. The current acreage is 6.67 

acres with the 1.41-acre portion in Independence divided between four residential 

properties including the Truman Home. The 5.26-acre portion in Grandview includes the Truman Farm Home. S. 2499 would add approximately 5 acres of the 

original 600-acre Truman Farm that abut the Grandview unit. These two contiguous 

parcels are the only undeveloped land that remains of the original Truman Farm. 

This additional acreage would preserve the historic integrity of the Grandview site, 

provide improved on-site visitor amenities and interpretation, permit vegetative 

screening of existing development, and prevent additional commercial encroachment 

to the Truman Farm. 

This expansion is included in the park’s approved 1999 General Management 

Plan. It is the only land acquisition priority for this park. Both property owners are 

willing to sell their land to the National Park Service for the purposes defined in 

the park’s General Management Plan and Long-Range Interpretive Plan. Public 

Law 103-184 authorized the addition of the Truman Farm Home by donation from 

Jackson County, Missouri, and directs the Secretary to provide appropriate means 

to minimize the adverse effects of development and use of adjacent lands. 

The proposed 5-acre strip of land is basically undeveloped (3.82 acres) except for 

the small retail paint store (.95 acre) located at the west end and fronting on Blue 

Ridge Boulevard. The strip separates the park boundary on the south from a fivestory retirement housing facility. The paint store is connected to all utilities (water, 

sewer, electricity, and telephone) and has a paved parking area in front. The total 

land acquisition cost for both parcels is estimated at about $900,000, with a current 

economic price escalation factor of 3 percent per year. 

S. 2499 would allow the park to remove non-historic items, such as the existing 

paved parking area, the paved entrance road, temporary park maintenance shed, 

portable toilet, and flag pole from the historic scene and relocate them to the new 

visitor contact center in the renovated existing paint store and paved parking area. 

The historic earthen entrance lane would then be re-established and used by visitors 

as the walk-in entrance to the site. 

The use of the existing paint store as a visitor contact center would permit the 

park to eliminate the use of the Truman Farm Home’s screened-in side porch as a 

visitor welcome point and cooperating association sales area, which is not sheltered 

from inclement weather. This would restore the historic integrity to the home, remove the impact of the wear and tear on the historic structure, and provide visitors 

with a sheltered staging area for tours. In addition, indoor handicapped accessible 

restroom facilities and drinking water would be available to visitors. 

Passage of S. 2499 would have minimal impact on the park’s current budget. In 

order to convert the paint store building into a visitor contact center, the park would 

request a one time nonrecurring project sum estimated at $530,000 after acquisition 

of the 5 acres. The project would include minor remodeling of the paint store, development of an audiovisual program, and the construction of exhibits as well as restoration of the historic scene. The request for funds would be subject to National 

Park Service prioritization procedures for non-recurring project funding, so a specific 

timeframe cannot be identified for completion of this work. To operate the visitor 

contact center at current visitation levels from May 1 to October 15 would require 

19

an annual operating increase estimated at $103,000. This figure includes all staff, 

maintenance, and utility costs. 

Upon acquisition of the two parcels, the park would be able to increase the visitor’s experience, understanding, and appreciation of how Harry S Truman’s time 

spent as a farmer helped develop his character and principles. This would be done 

through restoring the historic scene and utilizing interpretive exhibits and audiovisual programs in the visitor contact center. The interpretive media in this center 

would help the visitor understand what it must have been like to work on and manage a 600-acre Missouri farm during the turn of the 20th century, before they go 

out to tour the farm home. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This concludes my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any questions you or other committee 

members might have.

STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO 

THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT 

OF THE INTERIOR, REGARDING S. 1311

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, the next bill is S. 1311, a bill to provide for the establishment of the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Commemoration Commission. 

The Department supports the enactment of this bill if amended 

to reduce the number of commission members and to cap the annual appropriations to the commission, much in the same way as 

we requested that for the Ponce de Leon commission bill. 

S. 1311 provides for the establishment of a commission to undertake the activities celebrating the contributions of Henry Hudson, 

Robert Fulton, and Samuel de Champlain to the history of our Nation. It proposes a commission of 31 members. We recommend that 

that be reduced to 15 to 17 members. We find that in the history 

of commissions, that is a much more workable number. 

And the Department does recommend that the authorizing level 

be at $250,000 per year during the period of its operation. 

That concludes my comments on S. 1311. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding S. 1311 follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF A. DURAND JONES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK

SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ON S. 1311

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1311, a bill to provide for the establishment of the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Commemoration Commission. The Department of the Interior supports this bill, if amended to reduce the number of commission members, 

to clarify Section (4)(d)(1), and to cap annual appropriations to the Commission. 

S. 1311 provides for the establishment of the Commission to undertake activities 

celebrating the contributions of Henry Hudson, Robert Fulton and Samuel de Champlain to the history of our nation. Henry Hudson, as the master of the vessel Half 

Moon, was the first European to sail up the river that now bears his name in 1609. 

In 1807, Robert Fulton navigated up the same river between New York City and 

Albany in the steamboat Claremont, revolutionizing the method of waterborne 

transportation and influencing forever commerce, the world’s navies, and transoceanic travel and trade. The French explorer, Samuel de Champlain, was the first 

European to discover and explore what is now called Lake Champlain in 1609. 

The Commission, composed of thirty-one (31) members, would be appointed by the 

Secretary of the Interior based, in part, on nominations from the governors of New 

York, New Jersey and Vermont and members of Congress from those states whose 

districts encompass the Hudson River and Champlain Valleys. Nine additional 

members would also be appointed by the Secretary including the Director of the National Park Service, or her designee, and one other NPS employee with relevant 

commemoration experience. The National Park Service would also provide administrative assistance to the Commission on a reimbursable basis. 

The duties of the Commission are to plan, develop, and execute appropriate commemorative actions, coordinate with federal and state entities, and encourage a 

20

wide range of organizations to participate in activities and expand understanding 

and appreciation of the significance of the voyages of these three men. It is granted 

broad powers to accomplish these tasks. 

The Department recommends several amendments. First, we believe that a thirtyone member commission is too large and would be difficult to establish in a timely 

manner, would probably not work effectively and efficiently, and would be too costly. 

We recommend a smaller commission, with perhaps fifteen to seventeen members. 

We would like to work with the committee to develop an amendment that would 

reduce the number of commission members while ensuring a continued role for 

House and Senate members and the Governors from the relevant areas in the selection process. 

Second, section (4)(d)(1) of the bill provides that the Commission may ‘‘disperse 

funds, and accept donations of personal services and real and personal property related to the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 2009 and of the significance of Hudson, Fulton, and Champlain in the history of the United States.’’ We suggest that the word 

‘‘money,’’ be inserted between the phrases ‘‘donations of’’ and ‘‘personal services’’ in 

this subsection. We believe that the Commission should be authorized to accept 

monetary donations, as well as those other donations to accomplish its tasks. 

Third, given other competing priorities and the need to focus federal funds on our 

parks and other essential programs, we also suggest an amendment to cap the appropriations to the Commission at $250,000 per year during its period of operation. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I will be happy to answer any questions of members of the Committee. 

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO S. 1311

Page 16, line 4, insert the following: 

‘‘(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the purposes of this Act not more than $250,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010. 

‘‘(2) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—Amounts appropriated under this section for 

any fiscal year shall remain available until December 31, 2010.’’

Page 16, line 4: renumber section 4 (i) as section 4 (j).

STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO 

THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT 

OF THE INTERIOR, REGARDING H.R. 2055

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, the final bill is the Department of the 

Interior’s views on H.R. 2055. This bill would increase the number 

of free roaming horses at Cape Lookout National Seashore. 

The Department supports H.R. 2055’s efforts to adjust the number of free roaming horses within Cape Lookout National Seashore. 

And it is my understanding that the House has passed a bill that 

the Department can support. We had recommended language that 

the bill specify a maximum of 130 horses, but the language in the 

bill does work to sustain this healthy, free roaming herd of wild 

horses on the Shackleford Banks of North Carolina. 

That, Mr. Chairman, concludes my statement before the committee and I look forward to answering any questions from the 

members. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones regarding H.R. 2055 follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF A. DURAND JONES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK

SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ON H.R. 2055

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the Department of the 

Interior’s views on H.R. 2055. This bill would increase the number of free roaming 

horses at Cape Lookout National Seashore. 

The Department supports H.R. 2055’s efforts to adjust the number of free roaming 

horses within Cape Lookout National Seashore (Seashore) with an amendment, as 

stated in this testimony, that clarifies the population range of the horses. On June 

21

24, 2003 the Department also testified in support of H.R. 2055 at a hearing before 

the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands. 

The Department is strongly committed to conserving, protecting, and maintaining 

a representative number of horses on the Shackleford Banks portion of the Seashore, as we have done in other units of the National Park System which contain 

horses, and believes that the number of horses on Shackleford Banks should be determined by the ecology of the island and by means which protect the genetic viability of the Shackleford Banks horses. Without this legislation, NPS would manage 

this herd consistent with P.L. 105-229 which provides for a herd of 100 free roaming 

horses. 

H.R. 2055 amends P.L. 89-366 by changing the number of free roaming horses at 

Cape Lookout National Seashore from 100, to not less than 110, and establishes a 

target population of between 120 and 130 horses. The bill also changes one of the 

criteria that the Secretary of the Interior may use to remove free roaming horses 

from the Seashore, allowing removal as part of a plan to maintain viability of the 

herd. 

Congress established Cape Lookout National Seashore (Seashore) on March 10, 

1966. Encompassing more than 28,000 acres of land and water about 3 miles off the 

mainland coast, the Seashore protects one of the few remaining natural barrier island systems in the world with excellent opportunities for fishing, shellfishing, 

hunting, beachcombing, hiking, swimming, and camping in a wild and remote setting. 

The enabling legislation for the Seashore did not address the issue of free-roaming 

wild horses on Shackleford Banks. Public comments on the Seashore’s 1982 Draft 

General Management Plan demonstrated widespread concern about, and interest in, 

the future of the horses on Shackleford Banks. The Final General Management Plan 

stated that a representative number of horses would remain on Shackleford Banks 

after the privately owned land on the island was purchased by the United States. 

In 1996, following a series of public meetings, as well as discussions with scientists and professional managers of wild horse herds, the Seashore developed an 

Environmental Assessment (EA) with alternatives for managing the Shackleford 

Banks horse herd. That plan, while acceptable to the public, was opposed by some 

groups who rejected the idea of any management intervention. The plan proposed 

to maintain a representative herd of horses by using a combination of contraceptive 

drugs and periodic roundups and removal of horses. 

On November 11, 1996, the National Park Service (NPS), with assistance from 

state veterinarians from the North Carolina Department of Agriculture, initiated a 

roundup of the Shackleford horses. State law required testing the horses for Equine 

Infectious Anemia (EIA). Out of the 184 horses on the island, 76 tested positive for 

EIA and were removed to the mainland for temporary quarantine. On the advice 

of the North Carolina Department of Agriculture, these horses were euthanized. 

In December 1996, the NPS established the Shackleford Banks Horse Council, 

representing a wide variety of interests and stakeholders, as a working committee 

to assist the park with plans for managing horses. In 1997, a second roundup and 

testing program was conducted on the Shackleford horses. Of the 103 horses on the 

island, five tested positive for EIA. By this time, the Foundation for Shackleford 

Horses, Inc. had secured a state-approved quarantine site and the five EIA positive 

horses were transferred to it. In the transfer document, the Foundation and the 

Service committed to develop a long-term Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to cooperate in the management of the Shackleford Banks horses. On an interim basis, 

the Service issued a special use permit to the Foundation to allow it to assist with 

the management of the herd. 

On August 13, 1998, Congress passed P.L. 105-229, ‘‘An Act To Ensure Maintenance of a Herd of Wild Horses in Cape Lookout National Seashore.’’ This act directed the NPS to maintain a herd of 100 free roaming horses and to enter into an 

agreement with the Foundation for Shackleford Horses, Inc. or another qualified 

nonprofit entity, to provide for the management of free roaming horses in the Seashore. In April 1999, a Memorandum of Understanding with the Foundation for 

Shackleford Horses, Inc. was signed. 

P.L. 105-229 requires an annual Findings Report that provides the public with information regarding the population, structure, and health of the horses on 

Shackleford Banks. Research, monitoring and record keeping, with the goal of informed decisions for removal and immunocontraception, is ongoing, as is consultation with internationally recognized advisors in the fields of equine behavior, genetics, virology, immunocontraception, management, humane issues, and island ecology. The NPS continues to work with the Foundation under the MOU and management decisions regarding the horses are reached jointly with the Foundation and 

with the advice of scientists. 

22

On October 29 and 30, 2002, the NPS hosted a roundtable meeting with the aim 

of reaching a consensus on the free roaming horse population range and the strategy for achieving that range. Participants included the Seashore Superintendent 

and staff, staff from Representative Jones’ office, and representatives from the 

Foundation for Shackleford Horses, Inc. Three leading scientists considered experts 

in their respective fields also participated: Dr. Dan Rubenstein of Princeton University, Dr. Gus Cothran of the University of Kentucky, and (by telephone) Dr. Jay 

Kirkpatrick of ZooMontana. 

Included in the discussion was the value of occasional herd expansion to maintain 

genetic variability in the population. The conclusion reached was that the population should be allowed to fluctuate between 110-130 individuals. The methodology 

of conducting removal and contraception toward this goal was also discussed and 

agreed upon. The range of 110 to 130 horses is based on sound science and provides 

the population changes, which are necessary for maintaining the genetic viability 

of the herd. 

Based upon the October roundtable discussion, we recommend an amendment to 

the bill that is attached to this testimony. We believe that this amendment will 

more clearly reflect the need to allow the population bloom necessary for maintaining the genetic viability of the herd. 

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

questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have. 

SUGGESTED AMENDMENT, H.R. 2055

On page 2, line 1, delete ‘‘with a target population of between 120 and 130’’ and 

insert, ‘‘allowing periodic population expansion of the herd to a maximum of 130 

horses’’.

Senator THOMAS. Thank you very much. 

Let me ask a couple of questions here. Let us go back to the Petrified Forest. This is a substantial increase in size, over 120,000 

acres. Is that correct? 

Mr. SMITH. Yes, 128,000 according to the map that we have now 

provided the committee, Senator. 

Senator THOMAS. Do you ever consider some kind of trade? My 

State is 50 percent owned by the Federal Government, so I am not 

anxious to increase the net numbers. Is there any way to talk 

about trades, or have you considered some kind of reduction in 

other Federal holdings in order to offset this 120,000 acres? 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, this is a complicated land pattern. 

About 15,000 of the acres would be BLM lands, which the Park 

Service would just do an exchange in that ownership. So that 

brings it down to about 103,000 or 104,000. The 79,000 of private 

ownership, obviously, I think you will hear later from witnesses 

here today that these are large ranches. They are willing to sell but 

I do not know what exchange possibilities would be there. 

And then, as Senator Kyl alluded to, the 34,000 or 35,000 acres 

of State land is really complicated right now with the way that Arizona has dealt with their public lands issues because they are a 

public lands State. So there are possibilities that something could 

be worked out, depending on if they change their State constitution, that we could enter into exchanges in the future, but there 

really are not exchange opportunities with what we are looking at 

here, and because the State cannot donate land, there really are 

not donation possibilities right now either. But this is still a little 

bit in movement because the State is going to consider whether 

they would change their constitution to allow that. 

The reason for the acreage, though—and believe me, this administration looks very carefully before we recommend land acquisition, looking at budgets, property rights and other issues in the 

23

country. But as Senator Kyl said, this is an amazing escarpment 

of world-class fossils. This is an attempt, 10 or 12 years of effort, 

to try to do something to put a boundary around these lands that 

will assure they are protected for future generations. 

Senator THOMAS. What about the county and the tribal? What is 

their point of view? 

Mr. SMITH. There are letters of support from the county. I believe 

the Hopi and the Navajo tribes have been in informal discussions 

with the superintendent, but I am not aware that there is anything 

official as far as a statement that they have made for the record 

yet. 

Senator THOMAS. What is the estimated cost of the acquisition of 

these lands? 

Mr. SMITH. Senator, that is always a difficult thing when you 

deal with appraisals, but it is my understanding that some work 

has been done on the ground out there. They have looked at the 

private acres, the private ownership, and they are looking at somewhere around $14 million at a high, $8 million at a low. But again, 

until you really appraise it and come to agreement on those values, 

that is just the range that has been looked at very briefly out 

there. But basically it does have a price tag in the tens of millions 

of dollars. 

Senator THOMAS. Before you agree to support it, would you not 

want to know what it is going to cost? 

Mr. SMITH. Well, in the world of appraisal, you really do not 

know until you get on the land. This is based on other actuals that 

have been completed in the area and whatever else. Again, this is 

the range. BLM and NPS have sort of looked at this range, and 

that is what I put on the record today, Senator. 

Senator THOMAS. It is my understanding Congress appropriated 

$2 million in 2000 for the acquisition. It could not be spent. Now 

we understand BLM has spent the money for wildfire suppression. 

What is the status of that? 

Mr. SMITH. Senator, it is my understanding that part of the 

money we spent on fire suppression. The Park Service also has to 

contribute to that, and as you all from the West know, we just had 

tremendous fire seasons. It is my understanding that some of that 

$2 million, which is an add-on to the administration’s request, was 

spent for fire suppression, and then, because BLM did some appraisals but could not get to an agreed-upon price with the willing 

sellers, they did reprogram part of that money through the Senate 

and House Appropriations Committees and did apply it to some 

lands in Idaho. 

I am not fully aware of the status of whether that money came 

back in a supplemental or not, but I would say it is very common 

that land acquisition money is utilized for fire management when 

it is necessary, and then we hope to get supplementals to replace 

that. To my knowledge, maybe $1.6 million has been made available, but I would have to look that up for the record, Senator. 

Senator THOMAS. On S. 2656, I do not think I have been involved 

in commemoration commissions before. Is this customary for the 

Park Service to be the lead agency on these? 

Mr. SMITH. Yes, to my knowledge it is. We have other examples. 

Lewis and Clark is a major commemoration that is going on right 

24

now. The Park Service is certainly involved in a very major way 

but with the other agencies in Interior and other governmental 

agencies. The commemoration for Jamestown, the 400th anniversary there, has the Park Service involved with a commission, and 

we certainly staff that for the commission. And there are others we 

could provide for the record, Senator. They escape me right now. 

Senator THOMAS. Senator, do you have any questions? 

Senator GRAHAM. Mr. Chairman, I have a statement which I 

would like to submit for the record at the appropriate place. 

Senator THOMAS. Absolutely. We will have it in the record. 

So the commemoratory commissions are a normal way to do this, 

but is there some end to it? Does the responsibility of the park terminate at some point? 

Mr. SMITH. Yes, Senator. Almost all of the commissions—the administration position is they do have a termination date, and in the 

case of the Ponce de Leon, that is 2013. It would terminate, I believe it is, on December 31 of that year. But yes, the legislation 

usually always does include a closeout date. 

Senator THOMAS. For the commission or for the Park Service’s 

role? 

Mr. SMITH. For the commission. 

Senator THOMAS. On S. 2499, is there any other land that has 

been identified for the future of the Harry Truman site? 

Mr. SMITH. Senator, it is my understanding this is the last available 5 acres and there is no intention of looking for other land. 

This land is immediately adjoining, protects the farm, and there is 

no discussion of any additional acreage that would have this importance in protecting the resources that are already part of the park. 

Most of the rest of the nearby land has been developed. 

And I would add that the landowners in this case are both willing sellers also, Senator. 

Senator THOMAS. Let us see then. We have another commemoration, the Hudson-Fulton-Champlain. What events do you expect to 

conduct to commemorate this event? 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I cannot go into specifics here today, 

but I will tell you that there is already a heritage area that identifies the Hudson. There are at least 6, if not 10, National Park Service sites along the Hudson, as well as many State and local areas 

of interest. Kingston, New York is there, the first capital of New 

York. So my feeling is that they would intertwine the commemoration of this in New York and up the Hudson and into Vermont in 

any number of key events in our history. That is such a historic 

river valley for our Nation. I can certainly try to provide some of 

that to you, but it obviously is an area of tremendous importance. 

Senator THOMAS. I guess I am curious, trying to identify what 

the role of the Park Service is going to be. We are talking constantly about not having enough money and having to pick up repairs from the past. Yet, we find ourselves now, what, with 389 

parks or whatever, doing heritage sites, doing more of these. So we 

have to sort of, I think, begin to take a look at what the role is 

and where the role is in all these different kinds of programs so 

that we do what is appropriate, that we do not find ourselves doing 

things that could logically be done locally. I am not suggesting this 

one could, but I think that is an issue that we have to look at in 

25

all these and make sure that there is an appropriate for the Federal Government. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, you are exactly correct. And this one, 

again, with the amendment to keep the authorized ceiling for the 

annual appropriations low, would say that there is a Federal role 

but it also does require a partnership role from State and local governments, from nonprofits, from interested citizens, and certainly 

that is the model we are looking for. So we certainly agree, those 

of us who look at these bills in the Department and at OMB. We 

do consider that they do carry costs and it is a concern of ours too. 

The testimony here says it is important, but we would reduce the 

role of the Federal dollar going toward the commission and hope 

that it would get support from State and local governments and 

nonprofits. 

Senator THOMAS. Well, I think we ought to keep working at this. 

As you know, we just tried to define what heritage areas ought to 

be. Of course, I understand in each one people have different views, 

and it is not as black and white as it could, but we need to do that. 

Wild horse. I am a little confused about this. Now, are you going 

to end up with a minimum number of horses that you would like 

to keep there, or does your suggested amendment change that? 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, when the bill was passed by Congress 

in 1998, we were taking a herd that had been at about 187 horses, 

was very sick with certain equestrian diseases and whatever else. 

And the original act stated that we would put the herd through a 

very major veterinarian type of review that was done by the State. 

As that herd was culled, for all the right reasons, as far as healthy 

animals, it came down at that time that we thought the best number that the herd would be able to sustain was about 100. 

That herd has been studied by both an expert in horses from 

Kentucky and an expert in horses from Princeton, and they have 

been down there with field teams every year through the 1990’s 

and through this last year. They are there every year. Those 

horses, through hurricanes and whatever else—they now really feel 

that the viability of that herd is to be able to have a maximum of 

130 horses on those Shackleford Banks. 

What they do now is they have a wonderful program, the 

Shackleford Banks Horse Association. When they do need to remove either sick or over-number horses, they do have a workable 

adoption program, a little bit different than maybe what you are 

used to with the wild horses in the West, but they are able to move 

those horses off the island and to have them adopted or to care for 

them at their center. The 130 horses from both of these university 

studies, very scientific—they have come to the conclusion that 130 

is the manageable number to work with. They can adjust to that 

and keep this herd very healthy and very viable. 

And if you ever get a chance to see it, Mr. Chairman, they are 

absolutely marvelous, little, miniature horses that somehow survive on those outer banks. Through hurricanes, they hunker down. 

Through dry weather or whatever, they have been there for 300 or 

400 years, and they are an amazing cultural and historic resource 

for that part of the country. 

Senator THOMAS. Did they hunker down here lately? 

[Laughter.] 

26

Mr. SMITH. The last storms missed them, but—what is our one 

from 2 years ago? Isabel. When Isabel did what it did to the east 

coast, they lost one mare, one young colt, and one mare and one 

colt swam about 2 miles across the inlet to get to safety. They are 

amazingly resourceful, and we hope that this bill continues to protect them out there on the banks. 

Senator THOMAS. I guess this is a different location, but normally 

you evaluate the resource that is available for feed and this and 

that and sort of set a scientific number. Is it unusual to legislate 

the numbers that ought to be grazing here? 

Mr. SMITH. Senator, unusual but not unprecedented. It was done 

at Ozark National Riverway in a situation sort of like this where 

those horses have a cultural and an historic meaning to the people, 

and the Park Service was managing them, actually calling them 

feral horses. People who live in these localities do not consider 

them feral. They consider that they have been there longer than 

most people have been. 

It is amazing that these horses do survive with the vegetation 

that is there. Of course, that is what dictates their size, being very 

small and whatever else. But any assessments that would be 

done—they have survived in that natural habitat for 300 years. So 

for anybody to really study it, they have been a major part of it 

that entire time. 

And the reason for this to be legislated rather than administratively done, as would normally be the case, the general management plan at one time for this unit of the park system, Cape Lookout National Seashore, considered eradicating them just as it 

would feral pigs or feral cows or whatever. And the people on the 

banks have long memories and this basically gives assurance that 

we will manage in accordance with a law rather than somebody 

being, at some time later, able to change the policy. It is an amazing history of what has happened down there on this, and that is 

why the administration does support a number rather than thinking we can do it administratively because of that long history and 

actually feeling that the Park Service might not manage to a number unless Congress legislated it. 

Senator THOMAS. If you had some sort of a change in the vegetation, you might have to come back to reduce them to the amount 

of resources available. 

Mr. SMITH. That is probably true, but I will tell you those 

banks—they move south and east, and they move all around, but 

somehow they all make do through storms and climate and whatever. They are amazing. 

Senator THOMAS. Yes, it must be interesting. 

We are thinking of a number in Wyoming, but it would be not 

to exceed a certain number. We seem to have more than we can 

handle. 

At any rate, thank you very much. Appreciate your testimony. 

Thank you for being here. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. All right. Let us see. We have panel 2: Mr. 

Mike Fitzgerald, Twin Buttes Ranch, Holbrook, Arizona, and Dr. 

David Gillette, Department of Geology, Museum of Northern Arizona in Flagstaff. 

27

Welcome, gentlemen. Mr. Fitzgerald, would you like to begin? 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. FITZGERALD, OWNER,

TWIN BUTTES RANCH, LLC, HOLBROOK, AZ 

Mr. FITZGERALD. Sure. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Michael Fitzgerald, owner of the Twin Buttes Ranch 

that borders a large portion of the Petrified Forest National Park 

in Navajo County. I appreciate the opportunity to state today my 

strong support of S. 784. I applaud Senator McCain’s and Senator 

Kyl’s leadership in sponsoring this important legislation and thank 

the chairman for scheduling this hearing. I cannot express how relieved I am that we have come to this long-awaited hearing, and 

I urge the subcommittee to act favorably and quickly on this bill. 

My family, which includes my wife Carol and our three children, 

have either lived on or worked this ranch since 1986, when we received it as a part of a three-way trade with the Federal Government after we felt compelled to cede our former ranch located on 

the eastern side of the park, as part of the Navajo-Hopi Relocation 

Act of 1974. We typically run a 600-cow/calf operation over the 

38,400 acres of the ranch, of which about 80 percent is deeded and 

20 percent is composed of State and BLM lands. 

By the time I had taken title to the ranch, I realized that the 

Park Service was interested in adding portions of the ranch to the 

park. At first, I was not interested in another land trade. But over 

the years, I have learned about the wealth of pueblo sites and rock 

art galleries contained within the ranch and, more recently, about 

the potential to hold fossils of great importance to scientific learning about the early age of the dinosaurs. I also understand that my 

maintaining the open range has benefited the park and its visitors, 

whose vistas of the Painted Desert and Chinle Escarpment from 

prominent viewpoints along the park’s road include large portions 

of my holdings. 

The ranch has remained well protected over the years as a result 

of our cattle ranching operation and its limited access from paved 

roads. Carol and I place a high priority on the innate value of the 

land and its wildlife and we have demonstrated this commitment, 

for example, by providing permanent water sources for wildlife. 

Even though our commitment to the land runs deep, we recognize 

that we cannot adequately police the ranch from pot hunters and 

thieves. And we have found we cannot rely on local law enforcement to help us combat the rising tide of encroachment by grave 

robbers. Further, because we do not control the mineral rights 

within our ranch, we are powerless to stop commercial-scale mining, with track hoes and unreclaimed spoil piles, that render our 

rangeland worthless by others who unearth buried petrified logs. 

These factors, combined with the economics of ranching in northeastern Arizona, have made us willing sellers, and we wish to see 

the ranch and its scientifically valuable artifacts protected within 

the park. Two years ago, we deferred our grazing privileges on the 

public lands and sold all our cattle. As a result of increases in artifact theft, the fluctuating beef market and drought, we simply cannot protect the land and its important resources as the Park Service could. And we would much rather see the ranch kept intact 

than having to sell it to a company that would subdivide it into recVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:33 Jan 13, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\97780.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
28

reational ranchettes. If this were to happen, the important fossils 

and archaeological sites would, of course, be lost. 

I am a willing seller and will consider either a cash purchase or 

land trade with the Federal Government for my holdings in the 

Twin Buttes Ranch, as long as such a sale or trade is in my family’s best interest. It is my understanding that the other primary 

landowners will also entertain a land trade. I will insist on my 

part, however, that the Government purchase my entire ranch and 

not leave me with an uneconomic remnant. It is my understanding 

that the proposal offered by Senators McCain and Kyl, and that is 

supported by the Park Service, accommodates this request. 

In closing, I would like the subcommittee to understand that my 

family has waited patiently for over 12 years to establish resolution 

to the Park Service’s proposal to purchase the Twin Buttes Ranch. 

There has been a lot of activity regarding this bill over the past 4 

years, and this is the second Congress to see an expansion bill introduced. At this point, we find ourselves needing to make longterm business decisions regarding the disposition of our ranch, and 

I respectfully request that you help us to immediately resolve this 

issue. 

Thank you very much for inviting me to be here, and I would be 

very delighted to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fitzgerald follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. FITZGERALD, OWNER,

TWIN BUTTES RANCH, LLC, ON S. 784

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Michael Fitzgerald, owner of 

the Twin Buttes Ranch that borders a large portion of Petrified Forest National 

Park in Navajo County. I appreciate the opportunity to state today my strong support of S. 784. I applaud Senator McCain’s and Senator Kyl’s leadership in sponsoring this important legislation and thank the Chairman for scheduling this hearing. I cannot express how relieved I am that we have come to this long-awaited 

hearing and I urge the subcommittee to act favorably and quickly on this bill. 

My family, which includes my wife, Carol, and our three children, have either 

lived on or worked this ranch since 1986, when we received it as part of a threeway trade with the federal government after we felt compelled to cede our former 

ranch, located on the eastern side of the park, as part of the Navajo-Hopi Relocation 

Act of 1974. We typically run a 600-cow/calf operation over the 38,400 acres of the 

ranch, of which about 80 percent is deeded and 20 percent is composed of state and 

BLM lands. 

By the time I had taken title to the ranch, I realized that the Park Service was 

interested in adding portions of the ranch to the park. At first, I was not interested 

in another land trade. But over the years I have learned about the wealth of pueblo 

sites and rock art galleries contained within the ranch and, more recently, about 

its potential to hold fossils of great importance to scientific learning about the early 

age of the dinosaurs. I also understand that my maintaining the open range has 

benefited the park and its visitors, whose vistas of the Painted Desert and Chinle 

Escarpment from prominent viewpoints along the park’s road include large portions 

of my holdings. 

The ranch has remained well protected over the years as a result of our cattle 

ranching operation and its limited access from paved roads. Carol and I place a high 

priority on the innate value of the land and its wildlife and we have demonstrated 

this commitment, for example, by providing permanent water sources for wildlife. 

Even though our commitment to the land runs deep, we recognize that we cannot 

adequately police the ranch from pothunters and thieves. And we have found we 

cannot rely on local law enforcement to help us combat the rising tide of encroachment by grave robbers. Further, because we do not control the mineral rights within 

our ranch, we are powerless to stop commercial-scale mining—with track hoes and 

unreclaimed spoil piles—that render our rangeland worthless by others who unearth 

buried petrified logs. 

29

These factors, combined with the economics of ranching in Northeastern Arizona, 

have made us willing sellers and we wish to see the ranch and its scientifically valuable artifacts protected within the park. Two years ago, we deferred our grazing 

privileges on public lands and sold all our cattle. As a result of increases in artifact 

theft, the fluctuating beef market and drought, we simply cannot protect the land 

and its important resources as the Park Service could. And we would much rather 

see the ranch kept intact than having to sell it to a company that would subdivide 

it into recreational ranchettes. If this were to happen, the important fossil and archaeological sites would be forever lost to science. 

I am a willing seller and will consider either a cash purchase or land trade with 

the federal government for my holdings in the Twin Buttes Ranch as long as such 

a sale or trade is in my family’s best interest. It is my understanding that the other 

primary landowners will also entertain a land trade. I will insist, however, that the 

government purchase my entire ranch and not leave me with uneconomic remnants. 

It is my understanding that the proposal offered by Senators McCain and Kyl, and 

that is supported by the Park Service, accommodates this request. 

The original proposal contained in the park’s 1992 General Management Plan 

would not be acceptable to me as it considered adding only the highlands portion 

of my ranch—the Ramsey Slide that contains the Chinle Escarpment—while leaving 

the lowland portions of the ranch presumably to be maintained as part of my cattle 

ranching operation. But this proposal was not feasible; as such a configuration 

would have bisected my ranch into two separate and far-removed pastures. It also 

would have greatly constricted my access between the two remaining pastures to a 

parcel of public land over which I would have no control. So this earlier proposal 

would have left me with a significant reduction in the number of cattle I could have 

run on the remaining lands, made my management of the ranch extremely difficult 

and, thus, would have left me with an unviable and uneconomic ranch. Therefore, 

I appreciate the fact that Senators McCain and Kyl, and the Park Service understand my situation and that their current proposal includes purchase or exchange 

for my entire ranch. 

The idea to incorporate our entire ranch into the park has the support of prominent paleontologists and archaeologists that I have had the good fortune to work 

with these past two years. Many important and promising paleontological and archaeological sites exist on the Twin Butte Ranch that were unknown to the Park 

Service when they prepared their proposal in 1992. This oversight is largely a result 

of the fact that the government did not have access to our private lands. 

Since 1992, when the Park Service first recommended its expanded boundary, paleontologists working in the area have discovered the immense significance of the 

upper portion of the Chinle Escarpment for their understanding the late Triassic period. 

The Twin Buttes Ranch includes substantial amounts of the upper Chinle. In addition, leading archaeologists at Northern Arizona University, most notably Dr. 

Kelley Hays-Gilpin, have mapped extensive archaeological sites on the Twin Buttes 

Ranch that either were not known or whose location was not well understood by 

the Park Service in 1992. Finally, including my entire ranch into the park would 

also capture miles of healthy riparian areas along the Puerco River, for which I understand the Park Service has made restoration and recovery of its vital wildlife 

habitat a high priority. 

In closing, I would like the Subcommittee to understand that my family has waited patiently for over twelve years to establish resolution to the Park Service’s proposal to purchase the Twin Buttes Ranch. There has been a lot of activity regarding 

this bill over the past four years and this is the second Congress to see an expansion 

bill introduced. At this point, we find ourselves needing to make long-term business 

decisions regarding the disposition of our ranch and I respectfully request that you 

help us to immediately resolve this issue. 

Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today and for considering my 

views. I would be happy to answer any questions.

Senator THOMAS. Thank you very much. A couple of quick questions and then we will go to Dr. Gillette. 

This acquisition is 128,000 I believe. Your ranch is what? 

Mr. FITZGERALD. It is about 38,000. 

Senator THOMAS. I have a little map. Is yours on that checkerboard land? 

30

Mr. FITZGERALD. No. It is that green portion on that map, if it 

is the colored one, on the west side of the Petrified Forest part of 

the park. 

Senator THOMAS. But you have had a split estate. Is that right? 

For the minerals and the surface? 

Mr. FITZGERALD. That is correct. I own the surface rights. 

Senator THOMAS. Dr. Gillette. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID D. GILLETTE, PH.D., COLBERT

CURATOR OF PALEONTOLOGY, MUSEUM OF NORTHERN

ARIZONA, AND RESEARCH PROFESSOR OF GEOLOGY, 

NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY 

Mr. GILLETTE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I 

am David Gillette, Colbert Curator of Paleontology at the Museum 

of Northern Arizona in Flagstaff, and I am also a research professor of geology at Northern Arizona University. I have been associated with Petrified Forest for more than 20 years, conducting scientific research and educational activities within the park, and I 

also participated in the production of the general management plan 

for the park in 1992, and I believe that is the most recent general 

management plan. 

I am testifying today on behalf of the Museum of Northern Arizona, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, the Sonoran Institute, 

National Parks Conservation Association, Northern Arizona University’s Department of Anthropology, the city of Holbrook, Arizona, the Holbrook Chamber of Commerce, Petrified Forest Museum Association, the city of Winslow, Navajo County, and a large 

number of independent scientists, including archaeologists and paleontologists in northern Arizona. 

Our organizations appreciate the opportunity to state our strong 

support of S. 784, and we appreciate the critical leadership of the 

sponsors of this important legislation. We thank you for scheduling 

this hearing. 

We enthusiastically urge the subcommittee to act favorably and 

quickly on this bill. 

Mr. Chairman, it is altogether fitting that we should be considering this bill today in the same day when we have the opening of 

the National Museum of the American Indian. The holdings in the 

expansion area include some nationally significant archaeological 

sites that have direct bearing on the early history of our indigenous 

ancestors and preservation of those is critical in light of recent activities with regard to pilfering and unauthorized collections. 

It is also important that we recognize the paleontological significance of this area, which is separate from the archaeological materials, but especially along the Chinle Escarpment we have what 

would otherwise be a common cliche when we say we have worldclass resources. But we really do have world-class resources because the Chinle Escarpment and the Petrified Forest represent 

the very earliest days of the age of dinosaurs. In fact, it is the reference standard for the global study of the earliest days of the age 

of dinosaurs for the Triassic Period. This area could, indeed, be 

called Triassic Park. 

More than 220 million years ago, the earth was in transition. 

Pangaea was the world continent and that was the dominant 

31

landmass. The Atlantic Ocean did not exist. The earliest dinosaurs 

roamed the land. 

We know these things because evidence from this interval of geologic time is frozen in the geologic record, and we know it best from 

the Petrified Forest National Park area, including the area of the 

expansion lands. In addition to evidence from around the globe, a 

treasure trove of information can be found at Petrified Forest National Park that goes beyond the spectacular petrified trees. The 

petrified logs represent a forest, a tropical forest, that is now 

strewn across a desert landscape. Fantastical life forms frozen in 

the rocks bespeak an age that is so alien that it stupefies the 

imagination. We had amphibians like frogs that weighed 500 

pounds. We had predators as large as crocodiles with 4-foot-long 

skulls and a battery of teeth that drove the evolution of the fleetfooted dinosaurs. Nearly 100 years after its establishment as a national monument by President Theodore Roosevelt, we now know 

that few places in the world contain such a rich fossil record of animals as well as the trees that have been preserved at the park. 

This bill would add more than 100,000 acres, including lands 

that encompass virtually the entire Chinle Escarpment. It contains 

a priceless natural heritage of fossils and artifacts. They are being 

today systematically pilfered. Black market dinosaur bones and archaeological artifacts bring thousands of dollars on the commercial 

market. Grave robbers supply that black market with artifacts 

from areas so remote even the cows get lost. Treasure hunters 

seeking pots and burial items held sacred by Arizona’s Native 

Americans have looted site after site in this area. 

These archaeological and paleontological stories should be developed in the interest of all Americans. This national inheritance 

cuts to the core of our existence as citizens and leaders. The mission cannot be conservation and protection alone. Preservation 

without education is like a library under lock and key. Here in the 

Petrified Forest area we can tell gut-wrenching stories of predatorprey interactions, floods that carried trees as large as giant redwoods into colossal logjams. This represents the very humble beginnings of our modern ecosystem. We cannot afford to lose these stories or the ability to share them. This is our national natural laboratory. 

Petrified Forest National Park and the expansion area hold the 

keys to education in the raw. This is the full surround sound, sunburn, flash flood experience. Here we teach teachers and students 

alike. We work elbow to elbow. Everybody is equal. We are all in 

this together. This is hands-on dinosaur excavations and application of technology to map archaeological sites. We can use high 

technology for remote sensing, and we can use traditional techniques of labor for the down and dirty work of hoisting 1,000-pound 

blocks of rock encased in burlap and plaster that contain dinosaur 

skeletons. This is the training ground for our next generation of 

scientists, historians, business executives, teachers, and yes, even 

politicians. 

Education is the only solution to understanding our modern 

world. This is the real experience. We teach the scientific method. 

We become professional skeptics. We test our understanding with 

discoveries of new sites and new fossils. At the Petrified Forest, the 

32

time dimension is the critical missing link. Can we understand the 

logs? Can we place them in perspective? Can we see the forest? 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would simply say that tragically 

every day prehistoric archaeological sites, historical sites, and paleontological sites in the United States are lost forever, along with 

the precious information they contain. We have the ability, the opportunity, and the responsibility to prevent this loss of our heritage, a loss that impoverishes both present and future generations. 

Promptly enacting S. 784 into law will be a marvelous and tangible 

step forward to meet these duties. Future generations will thank 

you for your wisdom to act now. 

Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today and for 

considering our views. I would be happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gillette follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID D. GILLETTE, PH.D., COLBERT CURATOR OF

PALEONTOLOGY, MUSEUM OF NORTHERN ARIZONA, AND RESEARCH PROFESSOR OF

GEOLOGY, NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY, ON S. 784

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am David Gillette, Colbert Curator of Paleontology at the Museum of Northern Arizona in Flagstaff, Arizona. I am 

testifying today on behalf of the Museum of Northern Arizona, The Society of 

Vertebrate Paleontology, The Sonoran Institute, National Parks Conservation Association, Northern Arizona University’s Department of Anthropology, City of Holbrook, Holbrook Chamber of Commerce, Petrified Forest Museum Association, City 

of Winslow, and Navajo County. I am also submitting for the record letters and resolutions from a number of these parties, as well as others who support this legislation. 

The Museum of Northern Arizona is a private, non-profit museum dedicated to 

research, collections, education, and outreach in cultural and natural sciences of the 

Colorado Plateau. Established seventy-five years ago, MNA has been deeply involved with archaeology and paleontology in the national parks throughout its existence. NPCA is a non-profit citizens’ organization, founded in 1919, dedicated to the protection and enhancement of the National Park System. NPCA has approximately 

300,000 members, including 6,850 in the State of Arizona. 

The Sonoran Institute is a non-profit organization that works collaboratively with 

local people and interests to conserve and restore important natural landscapes in 

western North America, engaging partners such as landowners, public land managers, local leaders, community residents, and nongovernmental organizations. 

The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology is a non-profit organization of professional 

and avocational paleontologists, with an international membership of approximately 

2000. The SVP has worked actively to promote responsible stewardship of paleontological resources on public lands. 

Our 10 organizations appreciate the opportunity to state our strong support of S. 

784. We appreciate the critical leadership of Senators McCain and Kyl in sponsoring 

this important legislation and thank the Chairman for scheduling this hearing. 

With enthusiastic support from all the major landowners, the State of Arizona, local 

governments, chambers of commerce, and scientists nationwide, we urge the subcommittee to act favorably and quickly on this bill. 

More than 220 million years ago, the Earth was in transition. Pangaea, the World 

Continent, was the predominant landmass, the Atlantic Ocean did not exist, and the 

earliest known dinosaurs roamed the land. 

We know these things because evidence from this interval of geologic time, called 

the Triassic Period, is frozen in time. In addition to evidence from around the globe, 

a treasure trove of information can be found at Petrified Forest National Park in 

northeastern Arizona. A vast forest of petrified logs, strewn across what is now a 

desert landscape, and fantastic life forms frozen in stone bespeak a time when a 

tropical swamp, filled with 200-pound ancestors of frogs and salamanders, and enormous crocodile-like beasts, existed where there is now arid, open land. 

Petrified Forest National Park, originally proclaimed a national monument by 

President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906, was designated a national park in 1962 and 

receives about 600,000 visitors each year. The park originally was set aside to preserve the spectacular concentrations of rainbow-hued petrified wood, scenic landscapes of the Painted Desert, rare shortgrass prairie, and more than 500 archaeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:33 Jan 13, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\97780.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
33

1Letter from Arizona Governor, Janet Napolitano, to National Parks Subcommittee Chairman 

George Radanovich, dated February 19, 2004

ological and historical sites that reflect a 10,000-year continuum of human history. 

We now know that few places in the world contain such a rich fossil record of the 

Triassic Period. The Petrified Forest National Park could easily claim the title 

‘‘Triassic Park’’ for its plant and animal fossils that represent the very roots of dinosaur history. 

Recent scientific work has revealed that petrified wood is only one part of the 

globally significant record contained within the Chinle Escarpment, the name given 

to the geological formation containing the ‘‘mineralized remains of the Mesozoic forest’’ that the park was established to protect. Only six miles of the 22-mile-long escarpment, which contains the world’s most significant record of late Triassic Period 

fossils, is currently within the park. The area outside the park may contain more 

and better fossils that can more readily increase our understanding of flora and 

fauna and the changing climatic and tectonic conditions on Earth during that era. 

It also presents a unique opportunity to educate the public. According to the current 

director of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, Dr. Adrian 

Hunt, Petrified Forest National Park is the most important place in the world to 

study the early evolution of dinosaurs, an assessment with which I heartily agree. 

S. 784 would add approximately 128,000 acres, including lands that encompass 

virtually the entire escarpment. These lands contain a priceless natural heritage of 

fossils and artifacts that are being systematically pilfered. Grave robbers supply the 

black market with artifacts from areas so remote even the cows get lost. Treasure 

hunters seeking pots and burial items held sacred by Arizona’s Native Americans 

have looted site after site. Fossils in the same area have come under similar pressure; dinosaur bones can bring thousands of dollars on the commercial market, but 

once they are removed, they are forever lost to science and the public domain. These 

activities led NPCA to place Petrified Forest National Park on its list of Ten Most 

Endangered Parks in 2000 and 2001. Since that time, the park has engaged in fruitful efforts to significantly reduce theft of petrified wood from within its boundaries, 

prompting NPCA to remove it from the endangered list in 2002. With the advent 

of high tech, low-cost mobile sensors and other non-intrusive measures aimed at 

educating and redirecting well-meaning park visitors, the Park has demonstrated 

that it is now in a much better position to protect this wealth of resources. 

STATE LANDS

Slightly more than half of the lands within the proposed expansion areas currently are in private ownership, and 45 percent are in state or federal ownership. 

The State of Arizona and the Bureau of Land Management recognize the significance of the paleontological resources on their lands and have expressed an interest 

in seeing them preserved In her letter to House National Parks, Recreation and 

Public Lands Subcommittee Chairman George Radanovich (in which she cc’d Senators Thomas and Akaka) dated February 19, 2004, Governor Janet Napolitano 

wrote: ‘‘Seldom does an opportunity arise to more fully protect an incredible national 

treasure like Petrified Forest with such broad, unequivocal support at the local, 

state and national levels.’’ .1 In that same letter, the State suggested a language 

change to the bill that the organizations I am representing here today all support. 

In addition, on May 28, 2004, the State closed approximately 36,000 acres adjacent 

to the park to both surface and subsurface applications to better protect these lands 

until they are added to the park. 

State lands within the park expansion proposal contain a wealth of paleontological and archaeological resources. For example, state lands within the Twin Buttes 

Ranch contain numerous unique and highly detailed petroglyph panels dating from 

600 to 1,000 years before present. One such panel appears to be a map of the constellations visible in the night skies each April. This panel has been photographed 

for the book Tapamveni: The Rock Art Galleries of Petrified Forest and Beyond and 

has been referred to as a work of ‘‘remarkable geometric intellect.’’

The State lands also include a significant amount of the Chinle Escarpment that 

is such an important addition to the park, by virtue of the world-class paleontological resources it contains. State lands along the Chinle Escarpment east of the park 

also contain a rare Chacoan Culture Great House dating back some 1,000 years to 

between A.D. 900 and 1130. This pueblo ruin maintains the distinctive ‘‘core and 

veneer’’ masonry of the Chacoan Culture, whose ceremonial center was located in 

northwestern New Mexico, and the great house included in the park expansion proposal is thought by some scholars to define the southwestern edge of the Chacoan 

system. Understanding of this system has become one of the most significant quesVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:33 Jan 13, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\97780.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
34

tions in Southwest archaeology and the inclusion of this great house into the park 

will protect the site’s context and likely will enhance scientific understanding of this 

remarkable culture. State lands are, to varying degrees, intermingled with the 

ranches of all four primary landowners. 

PRIVATE LANDS

Most of the private lands adjacent to the park have been managed as part of large 

cattle ranches for the past 120 years. This use of the land has preserved the scenic 

views seen from the park. However, this land use pattern is starting to change. 

More intensive land uses, such as subdivisions and mineral exploration and mining—including mechanized petrified wood mining on private lands—threaten to both 

destroy the scenic quality of the park and destroy irreplaceable resources. 

Four major landowners together own approximately half the total acreage of the 

expansion area, and all are highly supportive of the legislation and wish to see the 

cultural and scientific resources on their properties included in and protected by the 

National Park System. They have been patient since the Park’s General Management Plan recommended expansion in 1992, but cannot be expected to wait indefinitely while other development offers come their way. In fact, history demonstrates 

that delay poses further risks for this land. The private lands identified in 1992 in 

the park’s GMP were, at that time, held almost exclusively by 6 landowners. Since 

then, two of those landowners have subdivided and sold their holdings, and a portion of those lands is unfortunately not included in the current proposal. 

Expansion lands formerly owned by the New Mexico and Arizona Land Co and 

now owned by Mr. Bob Worsley contain the Wallace Tank Ruin, an immense Pueblo 

IV period ruin dating from about A.D. 1200 to 1325. The pueblo contains an estimated 400-600 rooms. Looting has occurred at this site, including looting with the 

use of heavy equipment. Nonetheless, archaeologists believe that 90% of the architecture is intact. These Pueblo IV sites in the Western Pueblo region are quite rare 

and they are critical in understanding how the Western Pueblos (Hopi, Zuni, Acoma, 

and Laguna) came to be. 

On the Twin Buttes Ranch, owned by Mr. Mike Fitzgerald, four Canyon Butte 

sites dating from about A.D. 1130 to 1325 (during the Pueblo III period) contain 

from 25 to 65 rooms each. These sites, originally recorded by Walter Hough of the 

Smithsonian Institution in 1901, represent the small hamlets that would later coalesce into large pueblos like Wallace Tank. More detailed analysis of these sites and 

their associated artifacts will allow them to be more precisely dated and will provide 

important information on the regional interactions that led to settled village life. 

On the Paulsell Ranch expansion lands owned by Mr. Marvin Hatch, a researcher 

from the University of Texas discovered a fully intact phytosaur while on a dig in 

2002. Phytosaurs were large, aquatic reptiles that were prevalent in the Petrified 

Forest of Triassic times. Also contained on these lands are Triassic era clamshell 

beds; the thickest that many paleontologists have ever seen. The Paulsell Ranch 

contains extensive portions of the Upper Triassic Chinle Formation. According to 

the park’s 1992 General Management Plan, the lateral exposures of the Chinle Escarpment are most likely the best exposure of this geologic sequence in the world. 

Paleontologists are convinced that the escarpment’s fossil resources are globally significant and that it has the potential to become the paleontological ‘‘gold standard’’ 

for late Triassic terrestrial life, since the fossil bearing rocks exposed here are even 

more continuous than those inside the park, which are now setting the standard. 

Other researchers have labeled the Hatch Ranch a ‘‘priceless outdoor lab for geologists, archaeologists, biologists, paleontologists and ecologists’’ and of ‘‘inestimable 

paleontological and geological importance.’’

BRINGING SCIENCE TO LIFE

These stories should be developed in the interest of all Americans. This national 

inheritance, both within the modern boundaries of the park and in the expansion 

area, cuts to the core of our existence as citizens and leaders. With leadership and 

vision, our parks and monuments can move to center stage where we need help the 

most—in solid, hard-nosed education. The mission cannot be conservation and protection alone, for preservation without education is like a library under lock and 

key. 

Petrified Forest is filled with information that could unlock a bonanza of secrets 

about current challenges, such as biodiversity, ecosystem health, the importance of 

fire to the health of an ecosystem, and endangered species. Gut-wrenching stories 

of predator-prey interactions, floods that carried trees as large as giant redwoods 

into colossal log jams, and the humble beginnings of our modern world can be pried 

from the rocks at Petrified Forest National Park and the expansion areas. We canVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:33 Jan 13, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\97780.TXT SENE3 PsN: SCAN
35

not afford to lose these stories or the ability to share them. This is our natural laboratory. 

Petrified Forest National Park, and the expansion area around its current perimeter, hold the keys to education in the raw, the full surround-sound, sunburn, and 

flash flood experience. Here we can teach teachers and students alike, elbow to 

elbow, with hands-on dinosaur excavations, application of Global Positioning System 

to mapping archaeological sites, high technology remote sensing, and the down-anddirty work of hoisting thousand-pound blocks of rock encased in burlap and plaster 

that contain dinosaur skeletons. This is a training ground for the next generation 

of scientists and politicians, historians and business executives. Education is the 

only solution to understanding our modern world. This is the real experience, where 

we teach the scientific method, where we become professional skeptics, where we 

can test our understanding with discoveries of new sites and new fossils. 

Modern technology makes our natural laboratories accessible to everyone. Why accept replicas and models? Our mission must be to educate our public first. At the 

Petrified Forest, the time dimension is the critical, missing link. We can understand 

the logs, but can we place them in perspective? Can we see the forest? I recently 

had the remarkable good fortune to participate in a live broadcast from my paleontology laboratory in Flagstaff to classrooms across North America, from Florida to 

Alaska. Students called in and asked their own questions. Some were so excited 

they could scarcely talk into the telephone. They watched us on their television 

screens, and listened. to our answers. We were ordinary people who were excavating 

an extraordinary dinosaur. Our laboratory became theirs. We were transported live 

to schools across the continent, and those students in turn were transported to our 

laboratory in Flagstaff. 

Now, at one of our national parks, Petrified Forest, we have the unique opportunity to enlarge and amplify that experience and build our future from the raw 

materials of field-based scientific exploration. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would simply say that tragically, every day, prehistoric and historic archaeological and scientific sites in the United States are lost 

forever—along with the precious information they contain. Congress has the ability, 

the opportunity, and the responsibility to prevent this loss of our heritage, which 

impoverishes both present and future generations. Promptly enacting S. 784 into 

law will be a marvelous and tangible step forward to meet these duties. Future generations will thank you for your wisdom to act now. 

Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today and for considering our 

views. I would be happy to answer any questions.

Senator THOMAS. All right, sir. Thank you very much. 

Where is this relative to Phoenix, for example? 

Mr. GILLETTE. North and a little west. I am sorry. North and a 

little east. 

Senator THOMAS. You already have 95,000 acres to work on. 

What will this additional do to you? Is it the same thing? Expanding the same materials? 

Mr. GILLETTE. Virtually all of the private land and most of the 

public land in the expansion area have been off limits to scientific 

investigations because ranchers, frankly, have not wanted paleontologists and archaeologists on their land and they have not wanted anybody on their land. In this area, the lands are virtually untouched from pilfering for fossils, although they are being decimated by pilfering for artifacts. 

But along the Chinle Escarpment, we have exposures of continuous rocks in the Chinle formation that now hold the secrets to 

questions we have been able to formulate from within the park. 

This becomes a substantial international laboratory. 

Senator THOMAS. But it is just more of the same thing, is it not? 

Mr. GILLETTE. No. There are more exposures and greater thickness of rocks there than in the park. 

36

Senator THOMAS. What generally, Mr. Fitzgerald, are the other 

owners like over on this checkerboard? What kind of private owners have those? 

Mr. FITZGERALD. I am probably the only one, other than Bill Jeffers who has just a small portion going—I am a fifth generation 

rancher, so to speak, and this is my life. This is my way of life. I 

do not want to give it up, but it is necessary at this point. Mr. 

Worsley, who owns the Milky Ranch to the southeast is a billionaire who owned this sky mall thing. Then Mr. Hatch is a businessman, a rancher, and has branched out into various other businesses as well. 

Senator THOMAS. So relatively few owners in the area. 

Mr. FITZGERALD. Oh, yes. We just mentioned four of us. 

Senator THOMAS. I guess that is about it. I do not know exactly, 

as was asked before, what we will be able to do this year. Perhaps 

we can move it if we have a chance. We might have a markup. If 

not, why, I think at least the hearing materials will go on over into 

the first part of next year and we could continue to move forward. 

So I appreciate your all taking time to be here. If anyone has any 

questions, we will leave the record open for 2 weeks in case somebody has some questions and would like to get in touch with you. 

Otherwise, thank you very much. 

We will close the hearing. 

[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(37)

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

DEPARTMNET OF THE INTERIOR, 

OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AND CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC, December 2, 2004. 

Hon. CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed are answers to the follow-up questions from the 

hearing held by the Subcommittee on National Parks on September 21, 2004, on S. 

784, S. 2656, S. 2499, S. 1311, and H.R. 2055. These responses have been prepared 

by the National Park Service. 

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to respond to you on this matter. 

Sincerely, 

JANE M. LYDER, 

Legislative Counsel. 

[Enclosure.] 

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR AKAKA

Question 1a. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: The bill authorizes acquisition of 

over 120,000 acres of land. The Federal government already owns a lot of land in 

the west and we need to be thinking about no net gain whenever land is acquired. 

Has the National Park Service examined the possibility of a land exchange instead of fee simple purchase? 

Answer. The boundary adjustment includes lands privately-owned, those owned 

by the United States and managed by BLM, and state-owned lands. BLM manages 

approximately 14,500 acres, which could be administratively transferred to NPS 

management should this bill be enacted. All four of the private landowners who 

could be involved in the expansion have indicated an interest in a combination of 

exchanges and purchase. However, as stated in our testimony, ranching is becoming 

more and more difficult with drought and other factors, and some of the owners 

have expressed interest in selling their land, either to NPS or other parties. These 

other potential purchasers may have interests that conflict with or impact resources 

valuable to the park. With regard to state-owned lands, the Arizona Supreme Court 

has determined that the Arizona Constitution prohibits the disposal of certain state 

land except through auction to the highest and best bidder. Given these remaining 

issues, we would have to await a determination on how the citizens of Arizona and 

their representatives would recommend proceeding should this bill be enacted. 

Question 1b. Has the National Park Service prioritized the land proposed for acquisition so that only parts of it could be acquired instead of the entire 120,000 

acres? 

Answer. The 1990 GMP lists priorities for the approximately 93,000 acres that 

were proposed as a boundary expansion in that document. As of now, these are the 

priorities identified in the GMP:

Chinle Escarpment (Fitzgerald & Hatch) 

Key Archeological Sites (Worsley & Jeffers) 

Visual Resource Protection (Jeffers—West Rim of the Painted Desert)

S. 784 also would direct the Secretary to revise the park’s GMP. Land acquisition 

priorities could be established as part of that process and a Land Protection Plan 

38

could be completed. Since the original GMP was completed, we have acquired additional information about park resources, which would be considered. Also, relationships with the owners have improved and we have had better access to determine 

what areas near the park boundary may be more critical than other areas. The 1990 

priorities are a place to start, but they will need to be revisited with the new knowledge we have acquired about these areas. 

Question 2. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: Have County or Tribal officials expressed support for the proposed legislation? 

Answer. We have letters of support from the City of Winslow, City of Holbrook, 

Navajo County Board of Supervisors, 4 landowners, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, and other professional societies. 

We have had informal consultation with two tribes (Hopi, Navajo). Neither have 

taken a public position on the proposal: 

Question 3. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: What is the estimated cost to acquire the private and state land covered by this bill? 

Answer. We estimate that there would be 79,500 acres of private land within the 

proposed boundary expansion that could be acquired. Based upon appraisals recently conducted by the Department of the Interior the average cost per acre for 

these lands is between $105 and $175. If all of the private land within the boundary 

expansion were acquired in fee, the estimated costs could range from $8,347,500 to 

$13,912,500. Acquisition through exchange, donation, or purchase of easements 

could reduce the cost. 

The Arizona constitution prohibits the disposal of State-owned lands except 

through auction to the highest and best bidder. We suggested amendments in our 

testimony that might help resolve the issue of management of State-owned lands, 

however, with regard to acquisition, we would have to await a determination on how 

the citizens of Arizona and their representatives would recommend proceeding 

should S. 784 be enacted. 

Question 4a. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: Congress appropriated $2 million 

in 2000 to use for acquisition of property in the proposed expansion area. The money 

could not be spent until authorizing legislation was enacted. We have heard that 

BLM may have spent the money for wildfire suppression. Is $2 million currently available for use towards acquisition of this land if the proposed authorizing language is enacted? Answer. The $2 million was appropriated to the Bureau of Land Management’s 

Land Acquisition Appropriation in FY 2001. This funding was used, along with 

other Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) funding, to pay for fire suppression costs in FY 2003. Some, but not all, of this funding was restored, reducing the 

total available to $1.6 million. The agencies in the Department have been under increasing pressure by the House and Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittees 

to spend unobligated LWCF balances. Because there was no imminent deal, earlier 

this year BLM, with the approval of the House and Senate Interior Appropriations 

Subcommittees, reprogrammed these funds for use in the acquisition of conservation 

easements within Idaho’s Upper Snake/South Fork Snake River Area of Critical Environmental Concern/Special Recreation Management Area, which is a high priority 

acquisition area for the Administration. 

Question 4b. What steps are necessary after enactment of the authorizing legislation before actual acquisition of property can begin? How long do you think it would 

take to complete those steps? 

Answer. NPS would develop priorities and if appropriations are made available, 

we would negotiate with landowners. If funds were available and all landowners 

were willing sellers, and the ‘‘due diligence’’ was completed, acquisition could be 

completed in 1-2 years. Due diligence includes researching title, conducting hazmat 

surveys, and completing appraisals. For large ranches, hazmat surveys could cost 

as much as $100,000 each, and appraisals $30,000 each. With land resources programs now centralized, each step could take 6 to 8 months to complete. This estimate is for privately held land and for the 4 primary owners. A portion of the area 

proposed for addition is composed of multiple, small landowners (North of the Rio 

Puerco River). This area could take longer to complete. 

State lands are not included in these estimates. As we have mentioned, State law 

prohibits lands to be donated, and it is our understanding that the Arizona Supreme 

Court has determined that the Arizona Constitution prohibits the disposal of certain 

state land except through auction to the highest and best bidder. Given these remaining issues, we would have to await a determination on how the citizens of Arizona and their representatives would recommend proceeding before we could complete ‘‘due diligence’’ on these lands. 

Question 5. S. 784, Petrified Forest Expansion: The bill allows grazing to continue 

on land acquired by the National Park Service for addition to the park Is cattle 

39

grazing currently allowed in the existing boundary of Petrified Forest National 

Park? If so, how many acres? 

Answer. Grazing does not exist within current park boundaries. 

Question 6. S. 2656, Ponce de Leon Commemoration Commission: Is it customary 

for the National Park Service to be the lead agency for implementing authorizing 

legislation for commission of this type? 

Answer. Yes. Often the National Park Service is directed to assume the lead on 

the Commission when the proposed legislation represents an historical theme. 

Question 7. S. 2656, Ponce de Leon Commemoration Commission: How many other 

commemorative commission laws is the National Park Service currently implementing and how much has been authorized for appropriation for each? 

Answer. Since 1997 there have been six Commissions enacted. Three of these 

Commissions authorize such sums as may be necessary to carry out the duties of 

the Commission. The remaining three have authorized a total of $7.5 million for the 

life of the Commissions. In addition to the Commissions that have been established, 

during the same time period there have been at least five additional Acts that either 

extended or made corrections to existing Commissions. These Acts did not authorize 

additional funds. In addition to S. 2656 and S. 1311, there are three additional bills 

involving Commissions that have been introduced in the 108th Congress. 

Question 8. S. 2499, Harry Truman Historic Site Boundary Adjustment: Other 

than the property included in S. 2499; has any other land been identified for future 

addition to the Harry S Truman Historic Site? 

Answer. No. This is the last 5 acres of undeveloped land of the original 600-acre 

Truman Farm and is the only acquisition priority for this park. No other land in 

the area has historic significance that would qualify for addition to the historic site. 

Question 9. S. 1311, Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission: What type of events do you expect to be conducted to commemorate the accomplishments of Hudson, Fulton, and Champlain? 

Answer. If established, the Commission might sponsor or facilitate a full range 

of celebrations and events at the local, state, regional and national level to commemorate the accomplishments of Hudson, Fulton and Champlain. The commission 

might also sponsor or support scholarly research, symposia, and papers regarding 

the importance of the explorations and steamboat to the history of the region and 

to the United States. The commission would be authorized to develop a coin(s) to 

commemorate these individuals, as well as assist in the development and implementation of interpretive exhibits at strategic venues and waysides along the routes and 

at landing sites traversed by the explorers and Fulton. These functions would not 

only commemorate the successes of these three individuals but would also explain 

the meanings of their contributions to modern society. Assistance in and development and dissemination of educational materials could also be a major activity. The 

National Park Service could be involved through activities coordinated through the 

Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area. 

Question 10. S. 1311, Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission: Would it be more appropriate for the State rather than the Federal government to sponsor such a commission and conduct special events? 

Answer. The states in the region that is the focus of the Commission (NY, NJ and 

Vermont) do plan to take an active role in commemorating this effect. The Federal 

government has, in the past, sponsored multi-state commissions, as well as encouraged and assisted national commemorative events. 

Question 11. S. 1311, Hudson-Fulton-Champlain 400th Commemoration Commission: If the State has already established a Hudson-Fulton-Champlain Commission, 

why is a Federal Commission needed? 

Answer. New York and Vermont have each established commissions for these 

commemorations. A Federal commission could promote coordination between the 

various State activities and extend the commemorative activities to other parts of 

the nation. Similar federal commissions were established for commemorations of 

Hudson, Fulton and Champlain’s accomplishments in 1909 and 1959. 

Question 12a. H.R. 2055, Cape Lookout Wild Horses: The bill specifies that at 

least 110 wild horses shall be allowed to roam freely on Cape Lookout. 

Is it common for the Congress to legislate specific resource levels in National 

Parks? 

Answer. It is not common, but as the Department’s witness answered at the hearing, Congress has done this in the past. At Ozark National Scenic Riverways, for 

example, Congress set specific limitations on the quantity of resources in the management of horses. 

Question 12b. Can this be worked out in a management plan for Cape Lookout 

instead of in legislation? 

40

Answer. This could be done administratively, but as the Department’s witness answered at the hearing, management plans often become contentious, can take years 

to complete, and can be changed, modified, or even reversed by subsequent plans. 

Question 13. H.R. 2055, Cape Lookout Wild Horses: The National Park Service has 

recommended a technical amendment to the bill. Is the amendment absolutely necessary or can the Park Service live with the bill in its current form? 

Answer. As the Department testified at the hearing, the Department supports the 

bill’s efforts with a technical amendment. 

(41)

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

TWIN BUTTES RANCH, 

Holbrook, AZ, October 5, 2004. 

Hon. CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR HONORABLE SENATOR THOMAS: This is a reply to your letter of September 

21, requesting my opinion about the possibility of grazing on the Petrified Forest 

National Park. This has to do with S. 784. I’m sorry that your letter only reached 

me yesterday, or I would have replied sooner. 

To answer your first question, this country used to carry approximately 10 cow 

calf units per square mile. This was before the drought became so severe in the mid 

Nineties, and continues on to this day. I sold the last of my cattle in January of 

’02. I know you understand ranching in Wyoming, well Northeastern Arizona is not 

all that different from parts of your state, as I’m sure you know. 

To answer your second question, as to my opinion about grazing on the Park. I 

must answer a reluctant ‘‘No’’. In the long run it would not be good. Your current 

Park Superintendent, Mr. Lee Biaza, is the best man this park has ever had in this 

position. But even he would probably have to give under the pressure of various naturalist and environmental groups. Also, he will probably only be here a few more 

years before he is replaced by who knows. I managed a grazing allotment on the 

National Forest for 10 seasons. Please, believe me, the change of personnel changes 

everything, from a man like Biaza with his feet on the ground to an environmentalist with their Socialistic ideals. I can remember helping my neighbor, Pat 

Paulsell, drive cattle across the Petrified Forest when I was 5 years old. I think we 

received more attention from the tourist of the mid-1950s than the sites of what was 

then a National Monument. So I have been aware of the problems of being a neighbor of this Park all my life. I’m sure from your opinion, Mr. Chairman, and mine 

as well, it would be better for the wildlife as well as the country in general to keep 

cattle on it. However, relating these practical truths to the population in general 

is not an easy undertaking. We presented our reasons for the expansion of the Park 

as a need to protect ‘‘world class’’ archaeological sites and artifacts, paleontological 

attributes, and viewshed. I could have talked for an hour or more at the hearing 

about the problems relating to cattle ranching in this nation at this time. 

If your questions are in anyway relating with what to do about government lands, 

my ranch is 80% deeded with only a few sections of BIM and State lands scattered 

throughout. It would be impossible to do anything different with any portion of it. 

The other ranches with their Checkerboarded deeded are State lands would be very 

similar since you can’t graze in one place and not the other without fences and 

water. In my opinion then, if it is to be a National Park then the Park Service must 

take care of it. Ranching on the other hard should be done on private land since 

we ranchers are such individuals with our differing opinions on how things should 

to done. 

Thank you for your kind interest in our situation. We are looking forward to hearing that S. 784 has been passed by the Senate very soon. 

Sincerely, 

MICHAEL R. FITZGERALD, 

Owner.

42

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL GANNON, DISTINGUISHED SERVICE

PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF HISTORY, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

April 2, 2013 will be an historical date of major national significance. It was on 

April 2, five hundred years before, that Europeans first sighted and landed on the 

part of the North American continent we call the United States. It was on that distant day, too, that the first geographic name of European origin, La Florida, was 

etched upon the maps of our country. 

The expedition that left us this legacy was led by the Spaniard Juan Ponce de 

Leo ́n, lately governor of Puerto Rico. On March 3, 1513, Juan Ponce (the short form 

of his name used by Spanish chroniclers) departed An ̃ asco Bay on the western side 

of Puerto Rico with two caravels and a bergantina. In addition to the Spanish crews 

these vessels carried two women, Beatriz and Juana Jimı ́nez, two African freemen, 

Juan Ga ́ rrido and Juan Gonzalez [Ponce] de Leo ́n, and two unnamed native Taino 

seafarer-guides from Puerto Rico. Florida’s discoverers were a multi-cultural body. 

Juan Ponce’s intended destination was a rumored island to the north of Puerto 

Rico named Bimini. According to legend, the island contained a fountain of waters 

that rejuvenated old men—the so-called ‘‘fountain of youth.’’ Our source for the legend is a questionable mention of the fountain a century later by the historian Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas. Today’s historians tend toward the view that the fountain was probably a gloss by Herrera, particularly given the fact that Juan Ponce’s 

asiento, or charter, from King Fernando II authorizing his voyage, which was meticulously detailed in its specification of the expedition’s purpose and goals, nowhere 

mentions such waters. 

Juan Ponce encountered the Florida peninsula by accident. Sailing through the 

chain of Bahama Islands, he was swept westward by winds and currents through 

the New Providence Channel and into the Florida Current, popularly called the Gulf 

Stream. Bearing westward as best he could, he was shouldered to the north by the 

three-knot current until he made a landfall just south of Cape Canaveral, probably 

at or near Melbourne Beach, where his tiny fleet anchored in forty-four feet of 

water. 

From Herrera’s redaction of Juan Ponce’s log we learn what followed: ‘‘And thinking that this land was an island, they called it La Florida [the flowery land], because it was very pretty to behold with many and refreshing trees, and it was flat 

and even; and also because they discovered it in the time of Flowery Easter [Pascua 

Florida], Juan Ponce wanted to give the land this name.’’

After remaining in the region for six days, the expedition sailed south against the 

Gulf Stream, Juan Ponce’s second great discovery, in an effort to circumnavigate the 

‘‘island.’’ In so doing he gave us seven more geographic names: Cabo de las 

Corrientes (Cape of the Currents, for a cape north of Lake Worth Inlet); La Cruz

(The Cross), for Jupiter River; Santa Marta (Saint Martha) for Key Biscayne; Pola

(meaning unknown), for one of the keys; Los Ma ́ rtires (Martyrs), for the entire chain 

of keys; Matanzas (Massacre), for Sanibel Island, where his party was attacked by 

Calusa natives; and Las Tortugas (Turtles), for the Dry Tortugas. Sanibel was the 

farthest north Juan Ponce ventured on the Gulf Coast before shaping course home 

to Puerto Rico. 

Unlike some of the would-be conquistadors who followed him to Florida, Juan 

Ponce did not of his own design employ violence against the native populations, 

though he himself was assaulted three times by clubs and arrows, near Lake Worth 

Inlet, at Jupiter Inlet, and at Sanibel. Of the first encounter Herrera wrote that 

Juan Ponce did not wish to do the natives harm but was forced to fight in order 

to save both his men’s lives and their boat, oars, and weapons. 

Delayed by family responsibilities, Juan Ponce did not return to Florida until winter 1521, when he arrived on the lower Gulf Coast, probably in the region of San 

Carlos Bay, with 200 male and female settlers, parish priests and missionary friars, 

horses and domestic animals, seeds, cuttings, and agricultural implements. The 

composition of this expedition indicates that he intended to build a permanent town 

and develop farmland. The presence of parish priests indicates that his settlement 

conducted the first Christian service (Mass) in North America north of Mexico. The 

presence of missionary friars indicates that he intended to approach the native peoples in a peaceful way, imparting to them the basic teachings of Judaeo-Christian 

religion, as well as the rudiments of European arts and crafts, as was done later 

in the Franciscan Florida missions of the 16th and 17th centuries. But such was 

not to be. 

Natives at the site attacked the Spaniards as they debarked, as they erected their 

buildings, and as they planted their crops and tended their cattle. When Juan Ponce 

himself received a painful, suppurating wound in a thigh, he ordered abandonment 

43

of the colony. The Spaniards sailed to Cuba where Juan Ponce could receive medical 

treatment, but shortly after arriving there he died from his infection. 

To the natives it was the invaders who were the infidels. And this was still their 

land. 

The effects of Juan Ponce’s discovery and enterprise were far-reaching. Over the 

following forty-four years, six more Spanish expeditions came to La Florida, including that of Pedro Menendez de Avile ́s, who in 1565 established St. Augustine, which 

proudly bears the title of first permanent European settlement in North America 

north of Mexico. By a half century after Juan Ponce’s exploits, his appellation La 

Florida was applied by Spain to the entire seaboard from the Florida Keys to Newfoundland, and westward indefinitely from the Atlantic. 

It is altogether fitting and proper that the name of our country’s First Discoverer 

should be writ large in the chronicles about early America, and that it should be 

celebrated by the entire nation in the years leading up to and including the 

Quincentenary Year of 2013. 

I strongly support the establishment of a National Commission on the 

Quincentenary of the Discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leo ́n. And I particularly endorse the Senate’s support of scholarly research, publications, lectures, conferences, 

and media presentations that will acquaint the American people with their largely 

unknown Hispanic heritage.

Æ