U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

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

70–701 PDF 2011

S. HRG. 112–124 

VARIOUS NATIONAL PARKS BILLS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON

S. 114 S. 404 

S. 127 S. 508 

S. 140 S. 535 

S. 161 S. 564 

S. 177 S. 599 

S. 247 S. 713 

S. 279 S. 765 

S. 302 S. 779 

S. 313 S. 849 

S. 323 S. 858 

S. 403 

MAY 11, 2011 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

DANIEL COATS, Indiana 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

MCKIE CAMPBELL, Republican Staff Director 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

MARK UDALL, Colorado, Chairman 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

DANIEL COATS, Indiana 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

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

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator From New Mexico ........................................ 15 

Burr, Hon. Richard, U.S. Senator From North Carolina ..................................... 13 

Carper, Hon. Tom, U.S. Senator From Delaware ................................................. 17 

Coons, Hon. Chris, U.S. Senator From Delaware ................................................. 17 

Holtrop, Joel, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, Forest Service, Department of Agriculture .............................................................................................. 43 

Loretto, Raymond, Chairman, Valles Caldera Trust ............................................ 50 

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

Whitesell, Stephen E., Associate Director, Park Planning, Facilities, and 

Lands, National Park Service, Department of the Interior .............................. 21 

Wyden, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator From Oregon ...................................................... 16 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 55 

APPENDIX II 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 59 

(1) 

VARIOUS NATIONAL PARKS BILLS 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m., in room 

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

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

FROM COLORADO 

Senator UDALL. The Subcommittee on National Parks will come 

to order. 

This afternoon, the Subcommittee on National Parks is holding 

a hearing to consider 21 pending bills. I would like to welcome our 

administration witnesses and look forward to hearing their testimony in just a few minutes. 

We have 21 bills on today’s agenda, which is an unusually high 

number of bills, even for this subcommittee. All of these bills were 

considered by the subcommittee last Congress and majority reported by the committee on a bipartisan basis. 

The purpose of today’s hearing is to simply update the record on 

these bills and to allow members, especially those who are new to 

the subcommittee, an opportunity to ask any questions they may 

have. 

I want to make it clear that this hearing is a one-time event. It 

is my intention to return to our standard format with fewer bills 

for future legislative hearings. 

I know Senator Burr and I are both interested in pursuing a 

more active oversight role for this subcommittee, and by hearing all 

of these bills at one time instead of over several months, we will 

have more time for oversight hearings. 

Because of the number of bills on today’s agenda, I won’t read 

through the list, but at this time I will include the complete list 

of bills in the hearing record. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

S. 114, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a cooperative agreement for a park headquarters at San Antonio Missions National Historical Park, to 

expand the boundary of the Park, to conduct a study of potential land acquisitions, 

and for other purposes; S. 127, to establish the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage 

Area in the State of Texas, and for other purposes; S. 140, to designate as wilderness certain land and inland water within the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in the State of Michigan, and for other purposes; S. 161, to establish Pinnacles 

National Park in the State of California as a unit of the National Park System, and 

for other purposes; S. 177, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire the 
2 

Gold Hill Ranch in Coloma, California; S. 247, to establish the Harriet Tubman National Historical Park in Auburn, New York, and the Harriet Tubman Underground 

Railroad National Historical Park in Caroline, Dorchester, and Talbot Counties, 

Maryland, and for other purposes; S. 279, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to 

carry out a study to determine the suitability and feasibility of establishing Camp 

Hale as a unit of the National Park System; S. 302, to authorize the Secretary of 

the Interior to issue right-of-way permits for a natural gas transmission pipeline in 

nonwilderness areas within the boundary of Denali National Park, and for other 

purposes; S. 313, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for a 

microhydro project in nonwilderness areas within the boundaries of Denali National 

Park and Preserve, to acquire land for Denali National Park and Preserve from 

Doyon Tourism, Inc., and for other purposes; S. 323, to establish the First State National Historical Park in the State of Delaware, and for other purposes; S. 403, to 

amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate segments of the Molalla River 

in the State of Oregon, as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and for other purposes; S. 404, to modify a land grant patent issued by the 

Secretary of the Interior; S. 508, to establish the Chimney Rock National Monument 

in the State of Colorado; S. 535, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to lease 

certain lands within Fort Pulaski National Monument, and for other purposes; S. 

564, to designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve as a unit of the National 

Park System, and for other purposes; S. 599, to establish a commission to commemorate the sesquicentennial of the American Civil War; S. 713, to modify the 

boundary of Petersburg National Battlefield in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and 

for other purposes; S. 765, to modify the boundary of the Oregon Caves National 

Monument, and for other purposes; S. 779, to authorize the acquisition and protection of nationally significant battlefields and associated sites of the Revolutionary 

War and the War of 1812 under the American Battlefield Protection Program; S. 

849, to establish the Waco Mammoth National Monument in the State of Texas, and 

for other purposes; and S. 858, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 

a special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating 

the Colonel Charles Young Home in Xenia, Ohio as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. 

Senator UDALL. I would like to briefly comment on two Colorado 

bills, S. 279 and S. 508, both of which have the support of my colleague, Senator Bennet. 

The first, S. 279, directs the Secretary of the Interior to study the 

feasibility and suitability of establishing Camp Hale as a unit of 

the National Park system. The second bill, S. 508, establishes 

Chimney Rock National Monument in southern Colorado. Both of 

these bills provide an important opportunity to protect these critical natural resources. I look forward to working with the Administration to assure their passage. 

If I might at this moment, I want to include several statements 

for the record that the committee has received from the following 

senators: Bennet, Boxer, Cardin, Carper, Cornyn, Gillibrand, 

Hutchison, Levin, and Webb. Without objection, these statements 

will be included in the hearing record along with any other statements submitted. 

[The prepared statements of several Senators and Representatives follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA, 

ON S. 161 AND S. 177 

Thank you, Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr, for considering the Pinnacles National Park Act and the Gold Hill-Wakamatsu Preservation Act in today’s 

hearing. 

S. 161, the Pinnacles National Park Act, would elevate the Pinnacles National 

Monument to a National Park. I am pleased to have worked with Senator Feinstein 

and Representative Sam Farr on this legislation. 

A National Park designation generally signifies a greater variety and higher value 

of resources than a National Monument designation. The Pinnacles have a breadth 

of important geological, ecological, cultural, and recreational resources that warrant 
3 

the area’s elevation to a National Park. As Ken Burns and Dayton Duncan, creators 

of the documentary The National Parks: America’s Best Idea, wrote, ‘‘A Pinnacles 

National Park would preserve a unique portion of our land: not only a critical record 

of geological time. . . but also a rare habitat for condors, a wide array of flowers, 

and 400 species of bees.’’ 

Established by President Theodore Roosevelt, the Pinnacles National Monument 

highlights the spectacular remains of the Neenach Volcano. Colossal monoliths, 

sheer-walled canyons and talus caves exhibit millions of years of volcanic evolution 

and tectonic plate movement. The Pinnacles are a rare example of Mediterranean 

habitat, which comprises less than two percent of the Earth’s surface area. They are 

also home to the critically endangered California condor. The area has a rich cultural history, and has held significance for several Native American tribes, early 

Spanish settlers, and Western homesteaders. 

Today, the Pinnacles are a global destination for naturalists and outdoor enthusiasts of all kinds, who are attracted by the park’s scenic trails, natural resources, 

and some of the most unique rock-climbing in the world. The Pinnacles National 

Monument is an important driver of the local tourist economy and jobs, and elevating this site to a National Park will draw even more attention to this incredible 

destination. 

Originally 2500 acres, the monument has grown to encompass 26,000 acres of diverse California wildlands. The recent expansion of the Monument further warrants 

its elevation to a National Park status. 

My legislation also authorizes the further expansion of the Pinnacles through the 

purchase of the neighboring Rock Springs Ranch, which will help showcase the features of the San Andreas Fault and protect an important condor nesting area. However, I understand that the National Park Service has recently completed a study 

examining the feasibility of acquiring this site, and that some potential obstacles 

were identified. I would like to point out that the provision in my bill is permissive 

rather than mandatory, but I look forward to discussing this issue further with the 

National Park Service and working to address their concerns. 

In addition to changing the Monument’s designation, my bill would also rename 

the current Pinnacles Wilderness as the Hain Wilderness after Schuyler Hain, a 

local rancher and early conservationist whose efforts led to the designation of the 

Monument in 1908. The bill would further expand this wilderness by 2905 acres. 

My bill has strong local support from San Benito and Monterey Counties, the 

owner of the Rock Springs Ranch, as well as the California Wild Heritage Campaign, a coalition of over 500 businesses and organizations. I am pleased to have 

worked with Congressman Sam Farr on this legislation, and look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress to advance it. 

S. 177

S. 177, the Gold Hill-Wakamatsu Preservation Act, would authorize the Bureau 

of Land Management to acquire the Gold Hill Ranch in western El Dorado County— 

the location of the first Japanese settlement in the United States. I am pleased to 

have worked with Representative Tom McClintock on this bill. 

In 1869, 22 Japanese expatriates fled the turmoil of Japan’s Meiji restoration and 

made their way across the Pacific Ocean to California. There, they purchased land 

in the heart of gold rush country, and began producing traditional Japanese crops 

such as mulberry trees for silk, bamboo roots, tea seeds, grape seedlings, and shortgrain rice. 

The Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony, as it was called, played an important role 

in bridging Japanese and American cultures. The colonists and surrounding community learned about each others’ customs and agricultural techniques, and stories of 

the colony were reported in newspapers such as the San Francisco Chronicle and 

New York Times. Unfortunately, drought and financial problems forced the colonists 

to disperse and settle throughout California beginning in 1871, and the 272-acre 

property was purchased by the neighboring Veerkamp family. 

Despite the colony’s short history, its contributions to American history have endured. The significance of this site for Japanese Americans has been compared to 

that of Plymouth Rock or Jamestown for European Americans. The successful migration and assimilation of these first Wakamatsu colonists established California 

as the gateway for waves of Japanese immigrants entering our nation in the late 

19th and early 20th centuries. The new agricultural products they introduced contributed to California’s eventual preeminence as an agricultural and economic leader. 

Many of the original structures on the site remain intact, including a farmhouse, 

the grave of a young girl named Okei, artifacts, and agricultural plantings. Japa-
4 

nese-Americans and other visitors come to see the site and place offerings on Okei’s 

grave. Governor Reagan recognized the property as a state historic site in 1969, and 

the site was listed in 2010 on the National Register of Historic Places at the national level of significance. 

Mr. Chairman, I have received numerous letters of support for this project and 

would like to ask that they be entered into the record. These supporters include the 

Japanese American Citizens League, the National Japanese American Historical Society, People-to-People International, the Consulate General of Japan in San Francisco, the American River Conservancy, the California Rice Commission, the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors, the El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce, 

and many local elected officials, businesses, and constituents. 

The remarkable history of the Wakamatsu colonists, and their lasting impact on 

the State of California and our nation of immigrants, is a story that must carry on 

for future generations. I look forward to working with my Senate colleagues to pass 

this legislation so that we can preserve this site for future visitors. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CORYN, U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS, ON S. 849 

Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr, thank you for the opportunity to submit my remarks for the record regarding my legislation, the Waco Mammoth National Monument Establishment Act of 2011 (S. 849), before the Subcommittee 

today. I introduced this legislation on April 14, 2011, which Senator Hutchison has 

cosponsored. A companion bill in the House of Representatives was also introduced 

by Rep. Flores. 

S. 849 would make the Waco Mammoth Site in Waco, Texas, a new unit of the 

National Park Service (NPS). The Waco Mammoth Site holds the biggest concentration of Columbian mammoths in North America, ranging from 3 to 55 years of age, 

which appear to have died around 68,000 years ago. The first bones at site were 

discovered in 1978, and since that time Baylor University staff, students and volunteers have spent countless hours excavating the site. 

As the Subcommittee is aware, the NPS previously found that the Waco site met 

all the criteria for designation as a unit of the National Park System, and proposed 

that the site be managed by the Park Service in partnership with the City of Waco 

and Baylor University. In the last Congress, I introduced similar legislation along 

with Rep. Edwards in the House of Representatives (S. 625/H.R. 1376) which passed 

the House 308-74 on July 27, 2009, and was reported by the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee on December 16, 2009. The bill was not considered by 

the full Senate due in part to its cost and the considerable backlog of maintenance 

needs within the National Park System. The CBO estimated that implementing 

H.R. 1376 would cost about $1 million over three years to develop a management 

plan for the site and construct exhibits and interpretive facilities, and about 

$400,000 a year thereafter for the federal share of annual operating costs. The Interior Department estimated deferred maintenance for the NPS for FY2009 at between $8.23 billion and $12.11 billion, with a midrange figure of $10.17 billion. 

The bill being considered at today’s hearing shares the same important goal as 

last Congress’ version (S. 625/H.R. 1375)—to establish the Waco Mammoth site as 

a unit of the National Park System, however, the bill has been revised—recognizing 

the hurdles to securing new authorization of federal funding. S. 849 is supported 

by the local partners who have worked tirelessly to protect the Mammoth site— 

while seeking national recognition of it. The actions taken by the City of Waco, 

Baylor University and the Waco Mammoth Foundation, which raised $4M, demonstrate their commitment to bringing this discovery to the public. These funds allowed them to build a structure to protect the fossils and allow the public to visit 

the site. The Waco Mammoth Site now includes a dig shelter and a suspended walkway provides a stunning overhead view of the mammoths. 

S. 849 would not confer any federal burden for construction, maintenance, or operation and all costs for acquisition of the five acre site and the development of the 

visitor center will be borne locally. The property is owned by the City of Waco, and 

would be transferred to the NPS. The bill requires a general management plan for 

the site to be completed with the Secretary of Interior in consultation with the University and the City of Waco to include measures to preserve the site and develop 

the use of the site. Local partners would take responsibility for the annual management and operations costs, and only non-federal funds could be used to develop a 

management plan for the site and construct exhibits and interpretive facilities. 

Through ticket sales, fundraising, and City of Waco’s general funds, there is a local 

commitment to bear all associated costs now and in the future in order to achieve 

the national recognition this site deserves. Further demonstrating the local commit-
5 

ment, if the local partners cannot sustain the park without federal funding, then 

they would lose the national park designation. 

While I recognize this is an unorthodox approach to establishing a National Park 

unit, due to our fiscal restraints—I believe we must consider allowing local partners 

to support this worthy site. There will be questions and possibly concerns raised by 

the NPS about this approach, and I stand ready to work with them and my colleagues to address any issues to allow this legislation to move forward. 

The uniqueness of this site makes the landmark a national treasure that should 

be preserved for public enjoyment, scientific study, and historical integrity for generations to come. I encourage support for the goal of establishing this National Park 

unit and for Senators to learn more about this incredible discovery in Waco, Texas. 

Thank you, Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS, 

ON S. 114 AND S. 127 

I want to thank Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Murkowski of the 

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee for holding today’s joint hearing 

between the Subcommittee on National Parks and Subcommittee on Public Lands 

and Forests to consider the lands bills which are important to Texas. Two bills in 

particular, S. 114, the San Antonio Missions National Historical Park Boundary Expansion Act of 2011, and S. 127, the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area Act, are 

of particular concern to many of my constituents. 

The first bill, S. 114, the San Antonio Missions National Historical Park Boundary Expansion Act, would authorize a boundary study that would identify possible 

lands for inclusion in the park within Bexar and Wilson Counties. The San Antonio 

Missions played an important historical role in the City of San Antonio. 

The San Antonio Missions National Historical Park not only honors an important 

time period in San Antonio and the United States but also encompasses the largest 

concentration of historical Catholic missions in North America. In addition, the park 

showcases some of the best preserved Spanish colonial architecture in the United 

States. 

In the 1700s, Spanish explorers travelled through modern-day Texas while accompanied by missionaries and soldiers. The missionaries and soldiers built forts and 

missions along the way, becoming what is now the San Antonio Missions National 

Historical Park. The missions were originally established to protect Spanish land as 

well as spread the influence of Spain’s expanding empire. The San Antonio Missions 

National Historical Park preserves four of the five Spanish frontier missions and 

provides visitors opportunities to learn about the significant influence of the area 

in vocational and educational training during the 18th Century. 

This legislation enjoys the strong support of officials from Bexar County, Wilson 

County, the City of San Antonio, the City of Floresville, the San Antonio River Authority, the San Antonio Conservation Society, Los Compadres, and others. This bill 

would further the preservation and interpretation of the missions for current and 

future generations. 

The second bill being considered today, S. 127, the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area Act, would designate the Buffalo Bayou as a National Heritage Area. The 

Buffalo Bayou was an important part of Texas’ history during the Battle of San 

Jacinto. Along the Buffalo Bayou’s banks, General Sam Houston guided the Texas 

Army to final victory over Mexico’s General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, leading 

Texas to independence. 

The Buffalo Bayou is also a major economic access point into the United States. 

Currently, the 52 miles of the Buffalo Bayou is the nation’s number one port in foreign cargo and one of the largest in the world. The petrochemical plants of the Buffalo Bayou employ more than 35,000 people. As an important part of Houston’s 

economy, 13 percent of the nation’s oil and gas refining capacity is based along the 

bayou. 

In 2002, Congressman Gene Green and I introduced the Buffalo Bayou National 

Heritage Study Act which required the National Park Service (NPS) to study the 

area in order to verify the Buffalo Bayou was eligible for designation. The NPS 

study showed the Buffalo Bayou is critical to oil refining, commercial trade, and petrochemical production. In addition, the study concluded the Buffalo Bayou is eligible for and would benefit from the designation. 

The Buffalo Bayou truly has played an important role in the history of the State 

of Texas as well as the United States. Nationally, the history of the oil industry 

along the Buffalo Bayou has played a critical role in our country having the strongest economy in the world. These important factors have led me to introduce S. 127, 
6 

the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area Act, to designate the Buffalo Bayou for 

National Heritage Area designation. 

In addition to these two bills, I would also like to extend my support to S. 849, 

the Waco Mammoth National Monument Establishment Act of 2011 which the committee will also consider today. The bill would establish a Columbian mammoth discovery site in Waco, Texas as a national monument. I am pleased to be a co-sponsor 

of this legislation introduced by Senator John Cornyn. 

Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Murkowski, I am certain today’s hearing will provide the committee a more complete understanding of why these regions 

are important to our nation’s history, and why legislation is important in preserving 

the San Antonio Missions, the Buffalo Bayou Heritage Area, and the Waco Mammoth Site. I thank you for your attention to these three pieces of legislation. 

Thank you. 

PREPARED STATEMENTS OF HON. CARL LEVIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN, ON

S. 140 AND S. 404 

S. 140

Thank you, Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr for holding this hearing 

on the Sleeping Bear Dunes Conservation and Recreation Act, which would designate 32,557 acres of Michigan land as wilderness, permanently protecting this 

land from harmful development and other impacts. I also want to thank Senator 

Stabenow for co-sponsoring this bill and for supporting it as a member of this subcommittee. I am also pleased that Congressman Huizenga is sponsor of a companion 

bill in the House of Representatives, and that this bill has eight cosponsors. 

This legislation reflects a lengthy public outreach process, and I am pleased there 

is broad public support for this bill, including by a local organization, Citizens for 

Access to the Lakeshore (CAL), that had initially organized to oppose a wilderness 

designation. Today CAL is submitting testimony in strong support of this bill. 

Located in the Northwest corner of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula on Lake Michigan, Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, as its name reflects, features ancient 

sand dunes that are the products of wind, wave, and ice action over thousands of 

years, and are truly one of nature’s great masterworks. Nature lovers and photographers, hikers and children eager to roll down the sandy dunes, all enjoy this natural wonder. The Lakeshore, which encompasses more than 70,000 acres, also protects and interprets an extraordinary history of Native Americans, early pioneers, 

farmsteads, and maritime activities. This wilderness designation would allow the 

area’s immense recreational opportunities and historic preservation efforts to continue to thrive, while providing important protections for natural areas. 

This bill is not only about conservation, but about access, recreation, and historic 

preservation. The lakeshore is meant to be enjoyed by the public, and yet because 

of a requirement included in a 1982 law (P.L. 97-361) directing the National Park 

Service to manage areas included in a 1981 ‘‘Wilderness Recommendation’’ as wilderness, the public cannot access some roadways and historic areas. This restriction 

is due to the fact that the 1981 wilderness recommendation included county roads 

and other areas the local community did not believe should be managed as wilderness. Our legislation excludes these features from the wilderness designation to ensure that access, recreation, and historic preservation are provided at the Lakeshore, reflecting community input. The 1982 law specified that its directive apply 

‘‘until Congress determines otherwise.’’ This bill provides the Congressional direction the 1982 law envisioned. 

The wilderness designation before you redefines the areas that should be managed as wilderness to reflect a balanced approach to conservation, recreation, and 

historic preservation, which are all important goals of this lakeshore. The wilderness areas are undeveloped and possess significant and valuable natural characteristics. In contrast, developed county roads and state highways, boat launches and 

many historical structures have all been excluded from the wilderness designation 

to maintain access and recreational opportunities and ensure preservation and interpretation of historical resources. Hunting, fishing, trail use, and camping at 

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore would continue. Motor boats would still 

be allowed offshore of the dunes, and allowed to beach in areas adjacent to the wilderness area. 

This Lakeshore is emblematic of the rich natural and cultural history of Michigan. 

I urge the Committee to approve this legislation to protect these resources for current and future generations, and to enable thousands more to enjoy the scenic beau-
7 

ty and appreciate the generations of farmers, hunters, and mariners who came before. 

S. 404

Thank you, Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr, for holding this hearing 

on the land patent modification bill for the Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical Society, a not-for-profit organization. This measure is simply a technical correction to 

a land patent involving about eight acres of land that was originally issued in 1998 

to the Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical Society for the interpretation and preservation of maritime history at the United States Coast Guard Whitefish Point Light 

Station in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. 

Whitefish Point sits on the southern shore of the mighty Lake Superior. When 

this area was first settled, its bountiful fishing and mineral deposits brought commercial vessel traffic to the area, but the treacherous waters of Lake Superior also 

took a terrible toll in shipwrecks and lost lives. Lake Superior’s first lighthouse was 

constructed at Whitefish Point in 1848 and began operation in 1849. The lighthouse 

was essential to safe passage through these dangerous waters, marking the turning 

point for vessels entering and exiting Lake Superior. 

In 1970, the light tower at Whitefish Point was automated, and the station no 

longer needed to be manned. Sadly, the buildings surrounding the light station fell 

into disrepair. The Great Lakes Shipwreck Society, through volunteer efforts and 

fundraising, took on the mission to preserve, restore and interpret the maritime history at this site, among others. Through an agreement with the U.S. Coast Guard, 

the society established the Great Lakes Shipwreck Museum, where about 60,000 

people visit each year. The museum tells the story of the sailors who braved the 

treacherous waters of Lake Superior and those in the U.S. Life Saving Service, the 

predecessor to the U.S. Coast Guard, who risked their own lives to save others. 

The current land patent, originally issued in 1998, allows for development consistent with the Whitefish Point Comprehensive Plan of 1992 or for a gift shop. Pursuant to a court-ordered settlement agreement, a new plan, the Human Use/Natural 

Resource Management Plan for Whitefish Point of December 2002, was prepared for 

the land. The 2002 plan was developed by consensus of the parties to the litigation: 

the Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical Society, the Michigan Audubon Society, and 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. While the 2002 plan should guide development 

at the site, the land patent still references the 1992 plan. The bill under consideration by this committee would modify the land patent such that development of new 

facilities and the expansion of existing facilities and infrastructure would be consistent with the 2002 plan instead of the obsolete 1992 plan. 

In addition to the historic maritime assets of Whitefish Point, the area is also an 

important birding area and a stopover for migratory birds. The 2002 plan includes 

restrictions during bird migration as well as other restrictions on humans to protect 

sensitive shoreline habitats, including that of the endangered piping plover. Recommended management practices are also included in the 2002 plan to protect environmentally sensitive habitat. The 2002 plan also specifies that implementation of 

the plan would be led by a ‘‘Joint Committee,’’ comprised of representatives from 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical Society, 

and the Michigan Audubon Society. By having all of these entities involved with the 

plan implementation, protection of natural resources and management of human 

uses can be better ensured. 

I urge you to favorably report this bill so that the full Senate could promptly consider it and Michigan’s rich maritime history and wildlife habitat at Whitefish Point 

can be preserved and interpreted for the public. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL F. BENNET, U.S. SENATOR FROM

COLORADO, S. 508 

Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Burr, I thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on S. 508, the Chimney Rock National Monument Establishment Act. 

As you know, I introduced this legislation last Congress and it was favorably reported out of this committee on July 21, 2010. 

Unfortunately the full Senate was not able to consider this legislation in the 

111th Congress, but I am hopeful and optimistic that we’ll be able to pass this popular bill into law this time around. 

I introduced this legislation in the 112th Congress this past March. Chairman 

Udall, I want to extend a special thanks to you for joining me as an original cosponsor. 
8 

I write today to express my strong support for S. 508, the Chimney Rock National 

Monument Establishment Act. The parcel of land in question is the Chimney Rock 

Archeological Area, located roughly 20 miles west of Pagosa Springs—in the southwest part of my home state of Colorado. 

This 4,700 acre site is located on San Juan National Forest land and is recognized 

by archeologists the world over as perhaps the most significant historical site managed by the entire US Forest Service. 

The twin spires of Chimney Rock attracted the ancestors of the modern Pueblo 

Indians to this area nearly a thousand years ago. 

This unique culture had their main settlement in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, 

and had a settlement at what is now Mesa Verde National Park near Cortez, Colorado. 

The Chaco People established a remote outpost at the base of Chimney Rock 

called The Great House Pueblo. The Great House is situated just south of the twin 

spires and also shown beside me. 

The House was built from six million stones, 5,000 logs and 25,000 tons of earth 

and clay. All of these materials were arduously hauled 1,000 feet up from the valley 

floor. 

We think they established this outpost to observe a rare lunar event. A so-called 

‘‘major lunar standstill,’’ occurs once every 18.6 years when the moon appears to rise 

in the exact same spot three nights in a row. 

The Chaco People built the Great House Pueblo to observe this spectacular celestial event. There are only two other places in the world where archeologists have 

found evidence that ancient people used stone structures to mark a lunar standstill. 

Stonehenge is one of them. 

Chimney Rock has incredible historical and cultural significance. Yet the site 

lacks a designation equal to that stature. This discrepancy is why countless preservation groups got involved with Chimney Rock. 

This constituency, coupled with a bipartisan group of local officials, local Colorado 

counties, municipalities and tribes have joined in an effort to give Chimney Rock 

the proper designation. 

They came together and asked me to carry legislation to designate Chimney Rock 

a National Monument. I was happy to answer that call. This legislation will provide 

much-needed protection, and much-deserved recognition, for the site. 

Passage of this bill will also provide increased tourism and economic development 

in southwest Colorado, one of the many reasons the legislation enjoys unanimous 

support from the local city and county governments. 

This bill was drafted with the help of the US Forest Service, the Archuleta County Commissioners, the Pagosa Springs Town Council, historic preservation groups, 

and Native American Tribes in the region. 

Through this robust stakeholder process, we’ve written a commonsense piece of 

legislation for this important archeological treasure. I would draw the Committee’s 

attention to a number of letters I’d like to submit for the record today: 

A letter of support from the Archuleta County Commissioners from Archuleta 

County, Colorado, dated February 4, 2011 

The Pagosa Springs Area Chamber of Commerce 

These letters are in addition to several other support letters from local governments and historical preservation groups submitted to the Committee when this legislation received a hearing in the 111th Congress. 

The bill is largely the same as it was last Congress, though I have made small 

changes to reflect recommendations from your Committee and stakeholders in Colorado. 

One particular change I would draw the Committee’s attention to is contained in 

section 4(h) of the legislation where we outline the designation of a Manager for the 

Monument. This clarifies my legislative language from last Congress to clarify that 

the Monument Manager at Chimney Rock is not precluded from fulfilling other obligations within the San Juan National Forest. 

The people of southwest Colorado deserve to have a dedicated Manager to be the 

steward of this remarkable archeological treasure. 

I know the Forest Service sought this clarification when they testified on the bill 

last year and I now understand they’re supportive of the concept of a dedicated 

Manager, provided that Manager can fulfill other duties on the Forest. 

My staff and I stand ready to work with the members of the committee, and the 

Administration, to address the Manager provision as well as any other concerns that 

arise with the legislation as drafted. 
9 

It is my hope that we can work collaboratively to improve and strengthen the legislation. It is then my hope that the Committee will support the bill and once again 

favorably report it out for consideration by the Full Senate. 

Thank you again Chairman Udall and Senator Burr for allowing me the opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of this measure. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM

MARYLAND, ON S. 247 

Thank you Chairmen Bingaman and Udall and Ranking Members Murkowksi and 

Burr for holding today’s hearing and for placing my bill, S. 247, The Harriet Tubman National Historical Park and The Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park Act. This bill is to pay fitting tribute to one of America’s most 

remarkable heroes. I am pleased to have my colleagues Senators Schumer, Mikulski, and Gillibrand as original co-sponsors. 

The woman, who is known to us as Harriet Tubman, was born in approximately 

1822 in Dorchester County, Maryland and given the name Araminta (Minty) Ross. 

She spent nearly 30 years of her life in slavery on Maryland’s Eastern Shore. As 

an adult she took the first name Harriet, and when she was 25 she married John 

Tubman. 

Harriet Tubman escaped from slavery in 1849. She did so in the dead of night, 

navigating the maze of tidal streams and wetlands that, to this day, comprise the 

Maryland Eastern Shore landscape. She did so alone, demonstrating courage, 

strength and fortitude that became her hallmarks. Not satisfied with attaining her 

own freedom, she returned repeatedly for more than 10 years to the places of her 

enslavement in Dorchester and Caroline counties where, under the most adverse 

conditions, she led away many family members and other slaves to freedom in the 

Northeastern United States. Tubman became known as ‘‘Moses’’ by African-Americans and white abolitionists. She is the most famous and most important conductor 

of the network of resistance known as the Underground Railroad. 

During the Civil War, Tubman served the Union forces as a spy, a scout and a 

nurse. She served in Virginia, Florida and South Carolina. She is credited with leading slaves from those slave states to freedom during those years. 

Following the Civil War, Tubman settled in Auburn, New York. There she was 

active in the women’s suffrage movement, and she also established one of the first 

incorporated African-American homes for aged. In 1903 she bequeathed the home 

to the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in Auburn. Harriet Tubman died 

in Auburn in 1913 and she is buried there in the Fort Hill Cemetery. 

Slaves were forced to live in primitive buildings even though many were skilled 

tradesmen who constructed the substantial homes of their owners. Not surprisingly, 

few of the structures associated with the early years of Tubman’s life still stand. 

The landscapes of the Eastern Shore of Maryland, however, remain evocative of the 

time that Tubman lived there. Farm fields and forests dot the landscape, which is 

also notable for its extensive network of tidal rivers and wetlands. In particular, a 

number of properties including the homestead of Ben Ross (her father), Stewart’s 

Canal (where he worked), the Brodess Farm (where she worked as a slave), and others are within the master plan boundaries of the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge. 

Similarly, Poplar Neck, the plantation from which she escaped to freedom, is still 

largely intact in Caroline County. The properties in Talbot County, immediately 

across the Choptank River from the plantation, are today protected by various conservation easements. Were she alive today, Tubman would recognize much of the 

landscape that she knew intimately as she secretly led black men, women and children to their freedom. 

In New York, on the other hand, many of the buildings associated with Tubman’s 

life remain intact. Her personal home, as well as the Tubman Home for the Aged, 

the church and rectory of the Thompson Memorial AME Zion Episcopal Church, and 

the Fort Hill Cemetery are all extant. 

In 1999, the Congress approved legislation authorizing a Special Resource Study 

to determine the appropriateness of establishing a unit of the National Park Service 

to honor Harriet Tubman. The Study has taken an exceptionally long time to complete, in part because of the lack of remaining structures on Maryland’s Eastern 

Shore. There has never been any doubt that Tubman led an extraordinary life. Her 

contributions to American history are surpassed by few. Determining the most appropriate way to recognize that life and her contributions, however, has been exceedingly difficult. Eventually, the National Park Service determined that designating a Historical Park that would include two geographically separate units would 
10 

be an appropriate tribute to the life of this extraordinary American. The New York 

unit would include the tightly clustered Tubman buildings in the town of Auburn. 

The Maryland portion would include large sections of landscapes that are evocative 

of Tubman’s time and are historically relevant. The Special Resource Study, completed by the National Park Service in the Fall of 2008, confirmed these findings 

and on July 15, 2009, the National Park Service endorsed S. 227 as introduced in 

the 111th Congress during a legislative hearing in the Senate Energy and Natural 

Resources Committee. 

During the process of preparing S. 227 for markup in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Bingaman, drafted 

a substitute amendment of the bill. The contents of the Bingaman substitute are 

the result of his work to accommodate concerns that the Ranking Member on the 

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee had with S. 227 as introduced. 

An agreement was reached on the contents of the substitute amendment. An opportunity to markup S. 227, consider the Bingaman substitute, and hold a vote in Committee never happened in the final months of the 111th Congress. 

My bill incorporates the proposed changes from the Bingaman substitute to S. 

227. The bill establishes two parks. 

The Harriet Tubman National Historical Park is comprised of important historical 

structures in Auburn, New York. They include Tubman’s home, the Home for the 

Aged that she established, the African Methodist Episcopal AME Zion Church, and 

the Fort Hill Cemetery where she is buried. 

The Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park includes 

historically important landscapes in Dorchester, Caroline and Talbot counties, 

Maryland, that are evocative of life of Harriet Tubman. 

In Dorchester County, the parcels would not be contiguous, but would include 

about 2,775 acres. All of these parcels are located within the established master 

plan boundaries of the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge but are not currently 

owned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The four parcels located within the 

Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge Boundary, are sites significant to the life of 

Harriet Tubman. These parcels include the Anthony Thompson plantation parcel 

where Harriet Tubman likely was born, The Brodess Plantation parcel where Tubman worked as a young girl, the Cook Plantation parcel where as a teenager Harriet Tubman worked as a seamstress, and the Jacob Jackson parcel which is believed to be the location of one of the first safe houses along the Underground Railroad. The Park would be established upon the fee simple acquisition, by the National Park Service, of any of these parcels located within the current boundary of 

the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge. 

Additional areas that would comprise the Harriet Tubman historic area include 

about 2,200 acres in Caroline County that comprise the Poplar Neck plantation that 

Tubman escaped from in 1849. The 725 acres of viewshed across the Choptank 

River in Talbot County would also be included in the Park. These parcels are authorized to come under protection through conservation easements held by the private property owners. 

The bill authorizes such sums as necessary to meet the goals and objectives of 

the bill. Funds can be used for the construction of the Harriet Tubman Park Visitors 

Center (through a cost sharing requirement), for easements, or acquisition of the 

designated parcels eligible for fee simple acquisition. 

Harriet Tubman was a true American patriot. She was someone for whom liberty 

and freedom were not just concepts. She lived those principles and shared that freedom with hundreds of others. In doing so, she has earned a nation’s respect and 

honor. 

This year, I introduced the bill on February 1st to mark the first day of Black 

History Month. Harriet Tubman is one of many great Americans that we honor and 

celebrate every February during Black History Black Month. In schools across the 

country, American History curriculums teach our children about Tubman’s courage, 

conviction, her fight for freedom and her contributions to the greatness of our nation 

during a contentious time in U.S. history. Now it is time to add to Tubman’s legacy 

by preserving, protecting and commemorating the places evocative of Harriet Tubman’s extraordinary life. 

I once again want to thank the subcommittee for hearing my bill today and I look 

forward to working with my colleagues on the committee to establish this important 

and fitting tribute to Harriet Tubman, a life worthy of recognition. 

I am also submitting the following letters of support for my bill to be inserted into 

the subcommittee Record with my statement. 
11 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW

YORK, ON S. 247 

Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr and members of the Subcommittee, 

I thank you for your attention to these important bills, which help to protect America’s history and our natural resources. 

Today, I lend my support to S. 247, the Harriet Tubman National Historical Parks 

Act. This legislation would establish two national parks to preserve and promote the 

legacy of Harriet Tubman, one of the strongest leaders in the anti-slavery and women’s suffrage movements in our nation’s history. 

Harriet Ross Tubman has a deep history in both New York and Maryland. The 

National Historic Park in Maryland will highlight the years leading up to Tubman’s 

escape from slavery and her involvement in the Underground Railroad. The National Historic Park in Auburn, New York will focus on Tubman’s later years as a 

leader in the movement for women’s suffrage, where she also established one of the 

first incorporated homes for aged African Americans. 

In November 2008, the National Parks Service released the results of a multi-year 

study outlining how best to preserve and promote the substantively rich, but geographically varied sites that comprise Tubman’s legacy. 

As we approach the 100th anniversary of Tubman’s death in 2013, it is absolutely 

critical that we establish these national parks to commemorate and preserve the 

legacy of this visionary American hero. 

The National Historic Park in Auburn would provide an important place where 

men, women and children of all backgrounds can come together to learn and reflect 

on the significance of Tubman’s life, and her many accomplishments at a time when 

women of color had little influence over national politics. 

I thank you for your interest in this important legislation, and urge your support 

to honor Harriet Tubman’s legacy by making these lands an everlasting part of 

America’s story. 

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

S. 599 AND S. 713 

Thank you, Chairman Udall and members of the National Parks Subcommittee 

of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. I appreciate the Subcommittee’s attention to legislation I have introduced: S. 599, the Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act, and S. 713, the Petersburg National Battlefield Boundary Modification Act. S. 599 and S. 713, respectively, seek to ensure the future remembrance of the Civil War as a whole, and to highlight one of the most significant 

time periods of the entire conflict, the ‘‘Petersburg Campaign.’’ Both bills were considered by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee last Congress, and 

I urge their approval this year as well. 

As someone with ancestors who fought on both sides of the American Civil War, 

the 150th anniversary has personal significance to me. It is important that all 

Americans remain aware of the many sacrifices made by soldiers and civilians on 

both sides, and of the long-term impact of the Civil War on our country. The intent 

of S. 599 is to ensure the proper recognition of the sesquicentennial by establishing 

a federal Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission that would consist of scholars, federal agency directors and experts in historical preservation. I envision the commission as building upon previous legislative efforts to support education and commemoration of this turning point in American history. The commission, along with 

grant funding authorization, will help coordinate and enhance the activities that 

state and local Civil War commissions currently have underway. 

The Civil War sesquicentennial is a time to reflect and commemorate the bloodiest conflict this country has ever seen. This anniversary should look to improve on 

the challenges the centennial faced, and properly tell all stories and perspectives of 

the American Civil War. That is why the National Park Service has supported this 

concept in a similar hearing during the last Congress. 

Along with action by state and local actors in the commemoration of the Civil 

War, many federal agencies, like the National Park Service, have been preparing 

for the Civil War’s 150th anniversary. A federal commission will be able to provide 

technical assistance and additional benefits for many of the events and actions being 

planned such as the current forums, ancestry website, and remembrances the Commonwealth of Virginia have organized for the coming four years. This opportunity 

will translate to a more efficient, effective, and memorable set of activities to mark 

this significant remembrance. 

Beyond the coordination and leadership provided by the federal commission itself, 

the grant funding authorized in S. 599 will aid these various state and county Civil 
12 

* See Appendix II. 

** See Appendix II. 

War commissions and provide for deeper and more valuable ‘‘legacy projects’’ for future generations. 

I ask to submit for the record a letter* of support that prominent Civil War and 

historical preservation groups have authored on behalf of S. 599. These are the 

groups and individuals who do noteworthy work year in and year out, and are dedicated to ensuring the best possible sesquicentennial. 

I would also like to discuss S. 713, the Petersburg National Battlefield Boundary 

Modification Act. The Petersburg National Battlefield is one memorable Civil War 

site that will attract attention during the 150th anniversary, which is why my legislation is timely and needed. S. 713 proposes to modify the boundary of Petersburg 

National Battlefield, adding 7,238 acres to the battlefield, including authorizing a 

small land transfer between the National Park Service and the Department of Army 

within the adjacent Fort Lee Military Reservation. This is bipartisan legislation that 

was approved by this full committee last Congress and has wide local support, as 

well as that of the National Park Service. 

In drafting this legislation, I was very specific in my intent that the land acquisitions authorized by the National Park Service come from willing sellers. Previously, 

the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the approximate cost of S. 713 to 

be a manageable $5 million. I am confident that this cost, coupled with funds to 

operate and maintain these lands, will be more than recouped by the local communities. In addition, the historical preservation and remembrance of the ‘‘Petersburg 

Campaign’’ will be beneficial to many outside the Commonwealth. 

Founded in 1926, and transferred to the National Park Service in 1962, the Petersburg National Battlefield saw nearly one quarter of the Civil War fought in its 

surrounding area. The preservation of these battlefields is important for future generations to understand and appreciate the significance of our nation’s history. It is 

estimated that the Petersburg National Battlefield currently attracts more than 

150,000 visitors and generates more than $9 million in local revenue each year. 

The conflicts at Petersburg were the most extensive and complex battles of the 

entire war. I introduced S. 713 to further protect and honor this location and those 

involved in the dramatic battles that took place from June of 1864 to April 1865, 

which led to the eventual surrender of Robert E. Lee’s forces (the Army of Northern 

Virginia) at Appomattox Court House just days later. 

This legislation is necessary to help the Petersburg community and the National 

Park Service protect vulnerable acres in which these battles took place, from 

present and future development pressures. These pressures were outlined in the 

Final General Management Plan the National Park Service issued in 2005 that recommended the full 7,238-acre boundary expansion identified in the Assessment Integrity Report ‘‘to protect significant core battlefield areas.’’ 

As with the Civil War Commission legislation, I ask to submit for the record a 

letter** of support for S. 713 from many prominent Civil War and historical preservation groups. 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, these bills provide long term preservation and economic benefits, and I again respectfully urge the 

National Parks Subcommittee and the full Senate Energy and Natural Resources 

Committee, to pass these bills. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the 

Senate towards final passage on the Senate floor. 

Thank you. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BILL HUIZENGA, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM

MICHIGAN, ON S. 140 

Thank you Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Burr for holding this hearing 

on the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Conservation and Recreation Act. 

This legislation, which would designate approximately 32,557 acres as wilderness, 

enjoys broad public support in Michigan, bipartisan sponsorship in Congress and 

protects an important and popular unit of the National Park System in our state. 

I would also like to thank Senator Levin for partnering with me in this effort and 

being the lead Senate sponsor. 

The road to introduction for this legislation was not easy. Originally, the National 

Park Service ignored public input in developing the management plan. As a result, 

the Park Service recommendations were flawed and were rejected by the public and 

the Michigan delegation. However, rather than trying to move ahead, the Park 

Service, with prodding from the Congressional delegation, went back to the drawing 
13 

board and engaged in a transparent process with extensive discussions with the 

local citizens and stakeholders. The result, embodied in this legislation, is a balanced proposal that will ensure access to this popular resource while protecting its 

most fragile aspects. 

An important responsibility of Congress is to hold the Executive Branch accountable for their actions particularly when they do not consult with the public. However, Congress should also recognize and act on those policies and recommendations 

in which the public has been fully engaged. An example of this is S. 140. The Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Conservation and Recreation Act demonstrates 

how the process can and should work. The local citizens and stakeholders have invested significant time and effort in working with us and with the National Park 

Service in developing the appropriate policies for this area. 

Again, I would like to thank the Committee for recognizing the high level of local 

involvement by scheduling S. 140 for action, and it is my hope that the House of 

Representatives will soon take similar action on my companion legislation. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN, DELEGATE OF

NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, ON S. 590 

Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Murkowski: Thank you for introducing S. 590, legislation that conveys certain submerged lands to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and is a companion to my own bill, H.R. 

670. As you understand, the Commonwealth is the only U.S. jurisdiction that does 

not have ownership of the submerged lands three miles off its shores. S. 590 corrects that anomaly, providing the same interest in submerged lands around the 

Northern Mariana Islands as is now enjoyed by American Samoa, Guam, and the 

Virgin Islands. 

Yesterday, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, 

Oceans and Insular Affairs held a legislative hearing on H.R. 670 and I can report 

that the measure continues to receive support from the Administration and from the 

Commonwealth government. 

The legislative language under consideration is the same as that which passed the 

House of Representatives unanimously on July 2009 and which was reported favorably by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in May 2010. The bill 

was made part of Senate Majority Leader Reid’s The America’s Great Outdoors Act 

of 2010, which was formulated in the closing days of the 111th Congress. However, 

the Senate did not have the opportunity to act on that legislation before adjournment. 

I would like to underscore how important the conveyance of submerged lands is 

to the people of the Northern Mariana Islands. For thousands of years, our people 

fished the seas and harvested the marine resources around our islands. Yet, on February 25, 2005 the people of the Mariana Islands awoke to learn that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had concluded that these waters and the submerged lands 

below them did not belong to the people of the Northern Marianas, but were the 

property of the United States. Recognizing, perhaps, the oddity of this conclusion, 

the Court did point out in its decision that Congress could return these lands to the 

people of the Northern Mariana Islands. And S. 390 does exactly that. 

I request that this letter be made a part of your Committee’s bearing record on 

S. 590. It is my hope that this bill will be reported favorably and enacted quickly, 

so that the people of the Northern Mariana Islands will get back the land that they 

have always believed belonged to them. 

Senator UDALL. Let me at this time recognize my friend and 

ranking member, Senator Burr, for his opening. 

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

NORTH CAROLINA 

Senator BURR. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and good afternoon. As 

we convene the first legislative hearing of the new Congress today 

before the National Park Subcommittee. 

I know what I might say is an unfortunate circumstance with 

this hearing being called despite the continued objections of Republican members of the committee over the record number of bills. 

This is not to single out any bill that we are going to take up today, 
14 

but it is the sheer volume of bills. Twenty-one bills is simply too 

many for one hearing to thoroughly understand. My suggestion 

would still be that this should have been split into two hearings. 

While I certainly understand the need and the desire to push legislation forward, it is very difficult and overly burdensome for both 

staff and members, especially those new to this committee, who are 

not acquainted with these bills or the overarching issues to adequately prepare for 21 individual bills. 

In the past we have routinely capped out hearings at about 10 

to 12 bills, and I hope that we can return to that policy soon, Mr. 

Chairman. 

I have to admit that I am disappointed to be beginning this year 

in such a contentious fashion, not to mention that it is the second 

National Park Subcommittee legislative hearing out of the past 

three where there has been objections by the minority at proceeding forward with a hearing. Last year, when such a hearing 

was called over one party’s objection, I remarked then that there 

had never been a hearing scheduled in such a manner during, at 

least my time on the committee. Just last Congress, it is difficult 

for me to imagine that it bodes well for these particular bills in 

front of us today making it through the committee process on an 

expedited basis. 

I might also note that the House has been very candid about 

their lack of desire at moving these types of bills. So, for those 

members and for those interested parties today, I would not get my 

hopes up. 

Part of my decision to accept the ranking membership of this 

subcommittee was the history of the bipartisanship and working 

relationship of both members and staff. I continue to cherish that 

and hope that this will not serve as a permanent blemish on the 

subcommittee. 

I certainly have great affection for the chairman of the subcommittee as well as the full committee, and I certainly enjoy 

working with both and look forward to continued work for another 

54 minutes before I have to relinquish my role on the Energy Committee and become a member of the Finance Committee. I apologize for such late notice, but that just took place about a half hours 

ago. I thank the chairman for the guidance and accommodations he 

has made to me while I have been a member of the Energy Committee. 

Senator UDALL. Let me thank the ranking member, note his stalwart and consistent, insightful service on the committee. Congratulations as well. This is an important assignment. I know Senator 

Bingaman, the chairman of the full committee, serves on Finance, 

will be somebody to whom I know you can look, and I know he will 

welcome you as well. 

I more than duly note your concerns, and there are serious concerns. As we move forward, we will respond to the legitimate points 

that you have made. Thank you for doing so. 

I know we have got a busy afternoon. I wanted to give Senator 

Wyden a chance to make a brief statement, as well as Senator 

Coons and then Senator Bingaman as well. 
15 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I think all of my colleagues are sort of in the same boat where we want to just a few 

minutes. So, I can go after Senator Bingaman and Senator Coons. 

As a member of the Finance Committee, I want to welcome Senator Burr as well. He is going to be a great addition. But I will 

defer to the chairman of the full committee. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF BINGAMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

NEW MEXICO 

The CHAIRMAN. That is very kind. Thank you very much. 

Let me also tell Senator Burr we will miss him here on the Energy Committee, but we will welcome you on the Finance Committee. So, that will be good. 

On the issue that you raise about the number of bills, there are 

a lot of bills here. My hope was in my discussions with Senator 

Murkowski were that this hearing would be a chance to identify 

any bills that needed additional hearings, and we can have additional hearings on any bills that need additional hearings. But that 

these are all bills that were considered in the previous Congress, 

were passed out of committee in the previous Congress. The 

thought was that we should get going if we are 4 months into this 

year, this new Congress, and we needed to move ahead. So, this 

was the course we decided on, as I say. This does not mean that 

this is the one and only opportunity for people to express concerns, 

ask questions, get further elaboration on some of these bills. 

Let me just speak very briefly, Mr. Chairman, about a bill that 

I am particularly interested in, S. 564. Senator Tom Udall and I 

co-sponsored this to transfer jurisdiction of the Valles Caldera National Preserve in northern New Mexico to the National Park Service. Like other bills on today’s agenda, this is a carryover from the 

previous Congress, during which it received a favorable hearing. It 

was reported out of the committee. 

We have had a lot of discussion in New Mexico about what the 

best management structure is for this preserve dating back to 

when the Federal Government acquired the Baca Ranch in 2000. 

In recent years, there has been a growing consensus that the 

Valles Caldera Trust, which is an independent government corporation that manages the preserve, will be unable to meet the requirements in the enabling legislation, that it be financially self-sufficient, and that a different management structure might be better 

for the long-term success of the preserve. 

In my opinion, the National Park Service is the agency best suited for the long-term management of the Valles Caldera. It is my 

hope that inclusion of the preserve in the national park system will 

improve public access, while allowing the Park Service to protect 

the cultural and natural resources. 

Dr. Raymond Loretto, the chairman of the board, is here to testify today. I welcome him. Also with him is Dr. Ken Smith, a member of the board. I welcome him as well and look forward to their 

testimony and the testimony, of course, of the National Park Service and the Forest Service witnesses. 

Thank you for your courtesy in letting me make a short statement. 
16 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are always grateful when you are here and for your leadership. Again, I apologize 

for overlooking you initially. 

I owe Senator Wyden a great deal of gratitude. 

Senator Wyden. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM OREGON 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, and I will be brief. I know Senator 

Coons wants to speak, too. 

Suffice it to say, the history of this, you know, committee and 

this subcommittee has always been to work in a bipartisan way. 

So, Senator Burr’s point is one that we are going to have to address. We are going to find a way to do it. There has got to be a 

way, and I thought Chairman Bingaman made the key point. We 

have always got to find a way with the schedule to get going. At 

the same time, we have got to be sensitive to the bipartisanship 

that has been a big part of this committee’s legacy. I think we will 

always continue it. We are going to conscript Senator Burr into 

that bipartisan effort on tax reform that Senator Coates and I 

have. We will save that for another time. 

Let me just be very brief and say that today we are going to be 

looking at two bills that are especially important to Oregon, S. 765, 

the Oregon Caves Revitalization Act, and S. 403, the Molalla River 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 

I just wanted to say a quick word about the Oregon Caves legislation, Mr. Chairman. This is a piece of legislation that would, in 

effect, expand the monument boundary by incorporating land currently managed by the Forest Service and the National Park Service land. 

It also includes a voluntary grazing donation of—that has been 

agreed to by environmental folks, by the permittee, all of the folks 

on the ground, timber people, environmental people, and the like. 

There have been reservations by the Administration. This is the 

third time we have been able to do it, and it has consistently been 

about the Forest Service and the Park Service talking about how 

they could work out something of their own volition, a monument 

of agreement, something along those lines. 

While all of this talking goes on, we continue to have the problems we have now got, the Forest Service clear cutting right up to 

the monument boundary, leading to a road collapse and a shutdown of the public water supply because the turbidity was so high 

that the Park Service folks could not even treat it. 

So, we have been at this discussion of trying to work this out 

through a memorandum of agreement. It seems like the longest 

running battle since the Trojan War. As of today, almost 3 years 

since we have been told that we were going to get a memorandum 

of agreement, we still have not actually got a memorandum of 

agreement signed. The same concerns about protecting the cave resources exist today as we had 3 years ago. 

I just do not think this is going to get done unless the committee 

goes forward in a bipartisan kind of fashion. I am committed to 

doing that. 
17 

I thank you. Chairman Bingaman has been very supportive of 

this effort in the past as well. I look forward to working with colleagues. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Wyden. 

Senator Coons is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHRIS COONS, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM DELAWARE 

Senator COONS. Thank you very much, Chairman Udall, and 

thank you. Congratulations to Senator Burr both for your service 

on this committee and subcommittee and for your new opportunity 

to join my senior senator from Delaware, a committee of great importance to our Congress and our country. 

I appreciate the chance, Mr. Chairman, to speak briefly in support of S. 323 to establish the first national historical park in the 

State of Delaware and for other purposes. 

As the chairman knows, my own twin boys are here today, and, 

thus, I may excuse myself briefly before we got to other matters so 

that I could visit with them. My wife and I as parents have had 

the opportunity to visit many national parks with our children. National parks are a critical part of what it means to be Americans 

and to have an opportunity to appreciate and understand the natural beauty, and the history, and the diversity of our Nation’s wild 

lands and of our history. 

Delaware is the only State without a national park, and I want 

to commend my senior senator, Tom Carper, for his tireless work 

on behalf of this bill and on behalf of the concept of creating a national park in Delaware. This proposed park would showcase the 

first Atunichrol in shaping the founding of our Nation, and would 

offer an opportunity for all Delawareans to reconnect with our past 

and share a bit of our valued history with the rest of the country. 

So, as a co-sponsor, I just want to speak in support of that bill. 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of the testimony 

I know will be given be Senator Carper of Delaware. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Coons. 

Now, it is my great privilege to recognize the senior senator from 

Delaware, Senator Carper, for his statement. Senator Carper. 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM CARPER, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM DELAWARE 

Senator CARPER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want 

to join in the congratulations to Senator Burr. Welcome to the Finance Committee as well. 

Mr. President, as you know, Senator Coons and I and Congressman John Carney and I go back and forth on the train just about 

every day, every night, to Delaware. My first year in the Senate, 

2001, I got off the train, and I was invited over to speak to the 

Greater Wilmington Visitors and Convention Bureau, a pretty big 

dinner. I got there, and they introduced me to speak and talked 

about the economy, talked about how tourism figures into the economy. Then we had a Q&A. One of the first questions that was 

raised was, why do we not have a national park, Senator? You 

have been there like 6 months, and we still do not have one. I said, 
18 

well, you know, that is a pretty good question. I said, well, let us 

see if we can gather some ideas. We actually used the Internet to 

do this. But asked the people of our State, is this a good idea? 

Should we have a national park, and in this distinction of, although they are the first State to be the only State without a national park. We got hundreds of people responding from throughout 

the State and said, yeah, we ought to do this. Some said no, but 

most said, yeah, this would be a most fitting thing. 

The next thing we did was we said, well, give us some ideas. 

Give us some ideas for a national park. A whole slew of ideas. One 

was the, you know, the first Swedes and Fins came to America 

through Delaware. Wilmington, Delaware was the colony of New 

Sweden. There are more Swedish-Americans now than there are 

Swedes. I think there are more Finnish-Americans than there are 

Fins. But they came to this country through Wilmington, Delaware. 

They established Fort Christiania. They established the Old 

Swedes Church, which is still there functioning after all these hundreds and hundreds of years. 

Almost 400 years ago, the Dutch settled a place called Louis, 

Delaware. If you have ever been to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, just 

north of there is Louis where we have the oldest house in Delaware, over 350 years old, one of the oldest houses in America, the 

Ryves Holt House. 

We have in Old Newcastle land deeded by William Penn over 300 

years ago where our first capital—our first State capital was where 

the courthouse still stands today, and along with the sheriff’s house 

right alongside of it. 

Going down to Kent County in the central part of our State, we 

have the Gold Fleece Tavern, at least where it stood, where the 

Constitution was first ratified on December 7, 1787. Before any 

other State had done that, we did. 

A few miles south of there, the Dickinson Mansion where a fellow named John Dickinson, the pin man of the American Revolution grew up as a child. 

The other things we have to be proud of, the Underground Railroad used to run the length of our State and dropped off and literally freed slaves and what is now Tubman-Garrett Park on the 

other side of Christiania River; Fort Delaware in the middle of the 

Delaware River where 30,000 Confederate soldiers lived during— 

as prisoners of war during the Civil War; the DuPont Company established over 200 years ago with growing out of some powder 

mills along the Brandywine River; ship wrecks. One of the neatest 

ideas that was suggested to us was the idea of having off of Cape 

Henlopen State—off of Cape Henlopen where you have dozens and 

dozens of shipwrecks over the years, and to provide for a place for 

divers to dive. The only way you can get to the park is to dive on 

to the park and go down with your snorkeling gear. 

We had all kinds of ideas and a lot to work. We put together a 

citizens group. They barnstormed the State, had a lot of public 

meetings and asked people for their input. They worked the National Park Service, the State park folks, the Division of Culture— 

Historical and Cultural Affairs. They came up with an idea, and 

the idea was this: not just to have one place or one site for a national park, but to take advantage of the existing attractions—Old 
19 

Swedes Church; Fort Christiana, which was once the colony of New 

Sweden; the beautiful old colonial town of New Castle, much like 

the town of Williamsburg deeded by William Penn all those years 

ago; Dover, Delaware, where we have the—where the Constitution 

was first ratified there on the green; the home—the childhood 

home of John Dickinson, who was the pin man of the American 

Revolution; and then the Ryves Holt House in Louis, Delaware, the 

oldest house in Delaware, one of the oldest houses in North America. 

That was the concept, and the idea that sort of grew out of the 

National Park Service when they did their study and went all over 

the State themselves was a way to link all these together and a 

theme that makes sense and makes Delaware unique. Here is what 

they came up with. 

They came up the idea of focus on Delaware to say, why do we 

not say we are going to create a national park that links together 

early colonial settlement—Swedes, Fins, Dutch, Brits—and tie that 

together leading up to the ratification of the Constitution? That indeed is what now two administrations have endorsed—the George 

W. Bush Administration and now the Obama Administration. We 

are very grateful for the opportunity to work with all of them. 

The last thing I want to say, others have talked—Chris Coons 

talked about his own family and vacations. My family—my boys 

are 21 and 22 now. Many a summer getting ready for our August 

recess, we would plan our summer vacations, and we would do it 

by going to the National Park website. We went to places as close 

by as Philadelphia, as far away as Denali in Alaska. We went to 

the Grand Canyon. We went to Utah to the national parks there. 

We went to the Bryce and the Zion National Parks. We went all 

over this country visiting national parks. 

Every day people go in this country and around the world to the 

National Park website looking for places to spend their vacation 

and, frankly, their money—hotels to stay in, motels, campgrounds, 

restaurants to eat in, grocery stores to shop in, souvenirs to buy, 

other things. Collectively, the amount of money invested through— 

in our National Park Service, I had no idea what it was. The National Park Service actually has calculated the economic value that 

flows out of every national park in America. 

They include—I would just say in the State of—I don’t have 

them all here, but State of Arizona, where there are 13 national 

parks, the economic benefit for the tourism—visitors can go to 13 

national parks. You ready for this—$300 million. We also asked 

them to look at North Carolina, and North Carolina, which has— 

let us see, not quite as many national parks, but the economic benefit for North Carolina—ready for this—$700 million. So, in Delaware you get to the economic benefit for Delaware from our national park? It’s a zero. Quite frankly, we have a lot to be proud 

of. 

In the early part of the settlement of our country and the history 

of our country leading up to the Constitution and all is a story that 

needs to be told, and it is the story we would be privileged to tell, 

not just to people in Delaware, but people in this country, people 

around the world. 
20 

I will close with this, Mr. Chairman. Ken Burns came to Delaware about 2 weeks, visited Old New Castle. You know, he is a documentary filmmaker—great film ‘‘Baseball,’’ ‘‘Jazz,’’ all kinds of 

stuff, America’s best idea of the national park. He actually grew up 

in Delaware from the age of 2 to 10 and comes back from time to 

time. He said, there is a real irony here, that the State—the first 

State to ratify the Constitution, the State that literally was the 

whole the Unites States of America for a short while, is the only 

State that does not have a national park. That said, that is a distinction that I think the time has come to end. 

I am grateful to you for your kindness and your support and to 

the chairman of the committee and the ranking member. We just 

look forward to working with you as we take what I think is a pretty good idea. It has been cooked long enough. I think it is ready 

for prime time, and we look forward to bringing it to the committee 

and hopefully the full Senate and the House later this year. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Carper. Your enthusiasm is 

always infectious. Delaware was first, and now it will be 50th, and 

they are both a reason to celebrate. 

Senator CARPER. What does it say in the Bible in the New Testament, ‘‘The first shall be last, and the last shall be first.’’ So, I 

think it is our turn. 

Senator UDALL. Ken Burns, of course, is an iconic figure, and 

that is important news that he made the trip to Delaware and he 

has the connection to Delaware. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Done. We look forwarding to working with you 

in bringing this to fruition. 

I would like to turn to the chairman if he had any questions for 

Senator Carper. 

The CHAIRMAN. No. I commend Senator Carper for his initiative 

here, and strongly support it. 

Senator CARPER. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Carper. We will direct some 

additional questions, I am sure, to you through the record. 

Senator CARPER. Do you think Senator Burr has anything to say 

in his last 30 minutes on this committee? I should be careful. 

Senator BURR. A $700 million impact is a little undershooting 

the impact of our national park presence in North Carolina, but we 

are grateful to you for your initiative. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. We will never be a $300 million or 

$700 million, but we can do better than zero. We can do a lot better 

than that, and we should. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Senator Carper. 

With that, let us call the Administration witnesses forward, and 

we look forward to hearing from your—the witnesses when they get 

settled in their chairs. 

We have been joined by Stephen Whitesell, who is the associate 

director of park planning, facilities, and lands from the National 

Park Service, Joel Holtrop, who is the deputy chief, the National 

Forest System, Department of Agriculture, and Dr. Raymond 

Loretto, who is chairman of Valles Caldera Trust. 
21 

Let us start with Mr. Whitesell. If you can—we are on a tight 

schedule. If you could keep your remarks under 5 minutes, it would 

be greatly appreciated. Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHEN E. WHITESELL, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF PARK PLANNING, FACILITIES, AND LANDS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. WHITESELL. I will certainly try to do that, Mr. Chairman. 

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

this subcommittee to present the Department’s views on 20 of the 

bills on today’s agenda. Seventeen of these bills relate to the National Park Service and three to the Bureau of Land Management. 

Robert Towne, Deputy Assistant Director for the BLM, is accompanying me today and will be happy to answer questions regarding 

S. 177, S. 403, and S. 404, the 3 BLM bills on today’s agenda. 

I would like to submit our full statement for each of the subjects 

for the record and briefly summarize the Administration’s positions 

on these bills. 

The Department supports the following bills: S. 114, which would 

authorize a cooperative agreement, a boundary adjustment, and a 

boundary study for San Antonio Missions National Historical Park 

in Texas; S. 127, which would establish the Buffalo Bayou National 

Heritage area in Texas; S. 140, which would designate a wilderness 

area at Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in Michigan; S. 

247, which would establish the Harriet Tubman National Historical 

Park in New York and the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad 

National Historical Park in Maryland; S. 279, which would authorize a special resource study of Camp Hale in Colorado; S. 302, 

which would authorize right of way permits for a natural gas pipeline through Denali National Park in Alaska; S. 313, which would 

authorize permits for microhydro projects and a land exchange also 

at Denali National Park; S. 323, which would establish the First 

State National Historical Park in Delaware; S. 403, which would 

designate 15.1 miles of the Molalla River and 3.2 miles of the Table 

Rock Fork of the Molalla in Oregon as part of the National Wild 

and Scenic River System; S. 404, which would modify the land patent for the Whitefish Point Light Station in Michigan; S. 535, 

which would authorize a lease of property at Fort Pulaski National 

Monument in Georgia; S. 564, which would designate the Valles 

Caldera National Preserve in New Mexico as a unit of the National 

Park System; S. 599, which would establish a Civil War Sesquicentennial Commemorative Commission; S. 713, which would modify the boundary of Petersburg National Battlefield in Virginia; S. 

779, which would expand the American Battlefield Protection Program to include battlefields for the Revolutionary War and the War 

of 1812; and finally S. 858, which would authorize a special resource study of the Colonel Charles Young home in Ohio. 

The reasons for our support for these bills are explained in our 

full statements. 

For several of the bills I just mentioned, we are requesting that 

the committee make minor amendments to the bill language. Explanations of these requested amendments are also contained in 

our full statements. 
22 

In addition, the Department supports the goals of S. 177, which 

would authorize the acquisition of the Gold Hill Ranch in California by the BLM. But the Bureau would like to work with the 

sponsoring committee to clarify this legislation. 

Regarding S. 161, which would make several changes to Pinnacles National Monument in California, the Department supports 

the redesignation of the monument as a national park, the expansion of wilderness areas within the park, and the renaming of the 

wilderness as the Hane Wilderness. 

However, the Department does not support authorizing the acquisition of the Rock Springs Ranch, an 18,200 acre property that 

is geographically separated from the park. The National Park Service recently completed a reconnaissance survey that found that the 

Rock Springs Ranch does not appear to be a feasible addition to the 

park based on high costs for land acquisition, resource protection, 

staffing, and visitor services. 

Regarding S. 765, which would modify the boundary of Oregon 

Caves National Monument, the Department supports the intent of 

the legislation as consistent with the general management plan for 

the park, but recommends deferring action on the bill as we continue exploring ways to maintain interagency coordination with the 

U.S. Forest Service. 

Finally, regarding S. 849, which would establish the Waco Mammoth National Monument in Texas, the Department supports establishing a unit of the National Park system at this site consistent 

with the study of the National Park Service completed in 2008. 

However, we oppose S. 849 in its current form. 

S. 849 contains significant changes to the versions of this legislation introduced in the last Congress. It requires the Secretary of 

the Interior to administer the national monument as a unit of the 

National Park system, but prohibits the Secretary from expending 

any Federal funds to do so. That would create an untenable situation. We would like to work with the sponsor and the committee 

on revising the bill so that we can support it. 

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

pleased to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statements of Mr. Whitesell follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENTS OF STEPHEN E. WHITESELL, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF PARK

PLANNING, FACILITIES, AND LANDS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

S. 114

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

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

114, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a cooperative agreement 

for a park headquarters at San Antonio Missions National Historical Park, to expand the boundary of the park, to conduct a study of potential land acquisitions, 

and for other purposes. 

The Department supports S. 114. On September 29, 2010, the Department testified in support of S. 3524, an identical bill, before this subcommittee, during the 

last Congress. 

S. 114 would amend Section 201 of Public Law 95-629 to direct the Secretary of 

the Interior (Secretary) to conduct a study of lands in Bexar and Wilson Counties 

to identify lands that would be appropriate to include within the boundaries of San 

Antonio Missions National Historical Park (Park). The Secretary is directed to report on the findings of the study three years after funds are made available. S. 114 

also authorizes the Secretary to enter into a cooperative agreement with the City 
23 

of San Antonio, or its designee, for operation of a facility outside the boundary of 

the park to provide visitor facilities and office space for a headquarters and operational support for the park. Funding for the cooperative agreement would be subject to appropriations. Finally, the boundary of the park would be expanded by approximately 151 acres. 

San Antonio Missions National Historical Park preserves a significant link to 

Mexico and Spain that has influenced the culture and history of the United States 

since before its inception. San Antonio is now the seventh largest and third fastest 

growing city in the United States. The city grew 68 percent between 1980 and 2007 

and now almost entirely surrounds the Park with urban development, threatening 

areas that contain significant Spanish colonial resources historically associated with 

the Park. 

Park headquarters for San Antonio Missions are currently inadequate; they do not 

meet fire, safety or security standards; and are in an expired lease space not adjacent to the Park. The Park’s maintenance operations are dispersed in three separate 

locations. The Park’s curatorial collection, which contains almost one million Spanish Colonial period objects, is stored in four different locations, including two locations that do not meet National Park Service (NPS) Curatorial Storage Standards. 

The City of San Antonio, Texas (City) has acquired lands adjacent to Mission San 

Jose ́ and has proposed a partnership with the Park and one of its partners for the 

construction of a park headquarters. A cooperative agreement, such as the one described in S. 114, would provide the NPS with the ability to enter into an agreement 

with the City or an entity of the City’s choosing such as Los Compadres de San Antonio Missions National Historical Park (Los Compadres), to assist with operation 

of visitor facilities and office space for a park headquarters. 

S. 114 would also expand the boundary of San Antonio Missions National Historical Park by approximately 151 acres, of which 118 acres are either currently owned 

by the NPS, are being donated, or are being transferred through a land exchange 

to the Park. All costs associated with the land exchange will be paid for by the San 

Antonio River Authority with the NPS only paying for minimal transaction costs. 

Thirty-three acres would either be purchased by the NPS from willing sellers or donated to the Park. It is estimated that the acquisition of these 33 acres could cost 

as much as $3,587,110 and operational costs associated with adding the 151 acres 

of land are not expected to exceed $100,000 per year. Associated land acquisition 

funding requests would be subject to the Administration’s prioritization process that 

uses consistent and merit-based criteria to select projects, and the availability of appropriations. 

The Park’s General Management Plan and Land Protection Plan acknowledge 

that the current boundary is insufficient to fully achieve the Park’s purpose. The 

Park’s most recent feasibility study recommended a much larger area to best protect 

the cultural resources associated with the Park. Numerous areas that contain significant Spanish colonial resources historically associated with the Park still remain 

outside the boundary. In addition, the Park has acquired lands that are outside the 

current boundary and is in the process of accepting additional lands that will be included within the boundary as a part of a land exchange with the San Antonio River 

Authority and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to facilitate restoration of the San Antonio River. 

S. 114 would also authorize the Secretary to conduct a study of lands within 

Bexar and Wilson counties, in the State of Texas, to identify lands that would be 

suitable for inclusion within the boundaries of the Park. The study should also explore management alternatives that would best ensure public access, preservation, 

protection, and interpretation of the Missions. We estimate that this study will cost 

approximately $350,000. 

This legislation enjoys the strong support of officials from Bexar County, Wilson 

County, the City of San Antonio, the City of Floresville, the San Antonio River Authority, the San Antonio Conservation Society, Los Compadres, and others. It would 

help guarantee the preservation, protection, restoration, and interpretation of the 

missions for current and future generations. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer 

any questions you or any other members of the Subcommittees may have. 

S. 127

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

Interior’s views on S. 127, a bill to establish the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage 

Area in Texas, and for other purposes. 

The Department recognizes the appropriateness of designating the Buffalo Bayou 

National Heritage Area, but recommends deferring action on S. 127 until program 
24 

legislation is enacted that establishes criteria to evaluate potentially qualified national heritage areas and a process for the designation and administration of these 

areas. We recommend that Congress enact national heritage area program legislation in this Congress. The Department previously testified before this subcommittee 

with the same position on S. 3261, an identical bill, on September 29, 2010, during 

the last Congress. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program 

legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines for successful planning and management, 

clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing timeframes 

and funding for designated areas. Program legislation was introduced in the 109th 

and 110th Congresses, and we look forward to continuing to work with Congress on 

this very important issue. 

S. 127 would establish the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area (NHA) in Harris 

County, Texas, with the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area Corporation designated as the National Heritage Area’s Management Entity. The National Park 

Service (NPS) completed a suitability and feasibility study on the proposed Buffalo 

Bayou NHA in April 2010 that determined that the NHA met the NPS criteria for 

establishment. 

When brothers Augustus Chapman Allen and John Kirby Allen established the 

city of Houston in 1836, they envisioned a great new city, but could not have imagined Houston’s role in fueling the rise of the United States as a world power in the 

20th century. The Houston town site was located along the Buffalo Bayou, which 

was the only semi-navigable waterway running east and west in Texas. The bayou 

eventually became a major economic access point into the Southwest and a corridor 

to the Gulf of Mexico and beyond. 

Houston’s oil industry helped draw and meld cultures that helped define its regional character and the economic growth of the Buffalo Bayou as a center for oil 

and petrochemical production shaped the community’s character. 

Adjacent to the Buffalo Bayou ship channel is the San Jacinto Battleground State 

Historic Site, where Texas gained its independence as a republic. A National Historic Landmark and State Park, the San Jacinto Battleground provides the cultural 

and natural landscape for the second major theme of the proposed National Heritage Area: Texas independence. The historic site also includes the USS Texas battleship, also designated as a National Historic Landmark, which was built in the 

‘‘dreadnought’’ era and launched in 1912. After serving in World War I, the ship was 

updated for service in World War II, and participated in the amphibious invasions 

of Normandy, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. 

Historian Lynn M. Alperin has stated that ‘‘Buffalo Bayou has been transformed 

from a meandering stream into a vast industrial complex.’’ That transformation has 

not been without environmental consequences. However, as with most cities 

throughout the United States in the second half of the 20th century, Houston has 

worked to balance economic development with environmental protection. Parts of 

the story of the proposed Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area are environmental 

and recreational initiatives, supported by its industries, including wetlands restoration, trails development, prairie restoration, riverfront park development, and natural preserves. These efforts are part of the story of the community’s efforts to improve the quality of life for Houston’s two million people. 

A potential Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area, through its historical, natural, 

cultural, and recreational resources, its network of partner organizations, its diverse 

population, and consistent with the area’s economy, would represent a distinctively 

American story about the nation’s growth. The nationally significant themes of 

Houston as the Nation’s ‘‘Energy Capital’’ and Texas independence are significant 

chapters of our history. These important American stories are best told through the 

framework of a National Heritage Area by the people of the Buffalo Bayou themselves and the partner organizations that represent them. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer 

any questions you or any other members of the subcommittees may have. 

S. 140

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. 

140, a bill to designate the Sleeping Bear Dunes Wilderness at Sleeping Bear Dunes 

National Lakeshore in the State of Michigan. 

The Department strongly supports enactment of S. 140. This legislation would 

designate 32,557 acres, or 46 percent, of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore 
25 

* Stynes, Daniel J. ‘‘National Park Visitor Spending and Payroll Impacts: 2009.’’ National 

Park Service, 2011. 

in Michigan’s Lower Peninsula as federally protected wilderness. Management of 

the wilderness area would be in accordance with the 1964 Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 

1131 et seq.). 

P.L. 91-479 established Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore on October 21, 

1970, in order ‘‘. . .that certain outstanding natural features including forests, 

beaches, dune formations, and ancient (glacial) phenomena. . .be preserved in their 

natural setting and protected from developments and uses which would destroy the 

scenic beauty and natural character of the area. . .for the benefit, inspiration, education, recreation, and enjoyment of the public.’’ This bill clearly supports the intent 

of that law. 

The park extends nearly 30 miles along the eastern shore of Lake Michigan. It 

also includes two large Lake Michigan islands with an additional 35 miles of shoreline. The park protects and preserves superlative scenic and recreational resources 

including towering perched sand dunes that rise as high as 450 feet above Lake 

Michigan. The park contains several federally threatened and endangered species, 

including the Piping Plover, Pitcher’s Thistle and Michigan Monkeyflower. The park 

also includes many historic features, including a lighthouse and three U.S. life-saving service stations, coastal villages, and picturesque farmsteads. Permanent wilderness designation will ensure protection of these significant natural, cultural and historical resources. 

The park receives nearly 1.2 million visitors each year who enjoy the beaches, 

over 100 miles of backcountry trails and eight campgrounds. The region surrounding 

the park is a popular vacation and summer home destination as visitors and residents take advantage of a variety of recreational opportunities, including hiking, 

camping, backpacking, hunting, fishing, bird watching, boating, cross-country skiing 

and snowshoeing. The National Park Service estimates that the presence of the National Lakeshore brings nearly $78 million of economic benefit to the local community each year.* Designation of the wilderness area will not limit public access or 

change the way the area is currently being managed for public use and enjoyment. 

Native American use of the area extends some 3,000 years into the past and is 

represented today primarily by the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa 

Indians. Nothing in S. 140 would modify, alter, or affect any treaty rights. 

The park encompasses a total of 71,291 acres; about 58,571 acres of land and 

12,720 acres of water. Over 30,000 acres of the proposed 32,557-acre wilderness area 

have been managed as wilderness since 1981, when a wilderness proposal produced 

under the park’s first comprehensive General Management Plan (GMP) was published. Since that time, the five areas of the park proposed as wilderness have provided outstanding recreational opportunities for hikers, backpackers, anglers, paddlers, and hunters with hunting being allowed in accordance with State regulations. 

A network of hiking trails and numerous camping opportunities will continue to be 

maintained in this portion of the park, even with the wilderness designation. The 

additional acres in the current proposal arise from the inclusion of the Sleeping 

Bear Plateau, an area only suitable for foot travel that continues to offer outstanding opportunities for solitude. Since formal wilderness designation would not 

change the way in which visitor use is currently managed in the area proposed as 

wilderness, there is no reason to believe it would have any detrimental impact on 

visitation or the local economy, and formal designation may actually have a beneficial impact. 

The proposed wilderness area does not include any existing county roads or areas 

managed primarily for historic resources. This is to ensure the continued availability of the county roads for visitors accessing remote trailheads, beaches, 

backcountry areas and historic areas. Although the park’s boundary extends onequarter mile out into Lake Michigan, none of the waters of Lake Michigan are proposed as wilderness. S. 140 would authorize the use of boat motors on the surface 

water of Lake Michigan adjacent to the wilderness and beaching of those boats, subject to applicable laws. This is to ensure continued access by boaters to the shoreline 

beach adjacent to the wilderness area. These have been areas of significant public 

concern. Between 2006 and 2009, the NPS developed an updated GMP for the park. Because of public concern over the 1981 wilderness proposal, and its inclusion of county roads and historic sites, a formal Wilderness Study was conducted as part of this 

comprehensive planning effort. After extensive public involvement, review, and comment, including overwhelming public support for wilderness designation, the preferred alternative in the final GMP/Wilderness Study was approved by the Midwest 

Regional Director on January 6, 2009. The area of proposed wilderness was mapped 
26 

at 32,557 acres, with a portion in all five eligible areas, and is the same as the proposed wilderness designation in S. 140. The final GMP/Wilderness Study does not 

propose wilderness in several eligible areas, including those areas fragmented by 

the road corridors near the Otter Creek area of the Lakeshore; the land within the 

Port Oneida Rural Historic District; the lands in the historic ‘‘Cottage Row’’ on 

North Manitou Island; the area in the South Manitou Island historic farm loop; an 

area near the historic Bufka Farm identified for a bicycle trail; and the congested 

area at the top of the Dune Climb. 

Passage of S. 140 would support the vision in the new GMP. The bill has very 

strong, broad-based public support. The overwhelming majority of local officials, the 

conservation community, and the Michigan delegation are united in their support 

for this bill as a winning resolution to an issue that has been debated since the 

park’s establishment in 1970. Parties that had been bitterly polarized over earlier 

proposals have reached consensus that this bill strikes an appropriate balance between preserving access and guaranteeing outstanding primitive recreational opportunities. 

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

members might have. 

S. 161

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

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 161, a bill to establish 

Pinnacles National Park in the State of California as a unit of the National Park 

System, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports the provisions of S. 161 that would redesignate Pinnacles National Monument as Pinnacles National Park, expand the park wilderness 

by 2,715 acres, and rename the wilderness as the ‘‘Hain Wilderness’’ in honor of an 

early park proponent. The Department does not support authorization of acquisition 

of Rock Springs Ranch as provided for in Section 3(g)(2) of the bill. 

The bill would add 2,715 acres to the designated wilderness at the monument and 

rename the Pinnacles Wilderness as the ‘‘Hain Wilderness.’’ Congress has recognized wilderness characteristics at Pinnacles by previously designating more than 

one-half of the monument’s 24,000 acres as wilderness. The additional acreage is appropriate for wilderness designation. Naming the wilderness as the ‘‘Hain Wilderness’’ would commemorate the establishment of Pinnacles National Monument by 

immigrant homesteaders from Michigan who first arrived at the Pinnacles in 1886. 

The Hain families were farmers and community pioneers who established the first 

post office and county road. In 1893, Schuyler Hain conceived the idea of designating the Pinnacles as a public park or even a national park. Mr. Hain successfully 

championed the establishment of the Pinnacles Forest Reserve in 1906 and Pinnacles National Monument in 1908. The National Park Service (NPS) considers it 

a high honor to be permanently commemorated in a unit of the national park system and seeks to reserve this honor for cases where there is a compelling justification for such recognition. We believe that there is a compelling justification in this 

case. 

The bill would authorize acquisition of 18,200 acres of land known as the ‘‘Rock 

Springs Ranch Tract.’’ The Rock Springs Ranch Tract contains open space for wildlife habitat conservation and contributes to the rural character of the area. The NPS 

recently completed a reconnaissance survey and found that the Rock Springs Ranch 

Tract resources are potentially nationally significant and suitable for inclusion in 

the national park system. The survey also found, however, that the Rock Springs 

Ranch Tract does not appear to be a feasible addition to the system based on high 

costs for land acquisition, resource protection, and staffing and visitor services for 

this large property that is geographically separated from Pinnacles National Monument. The NPS is exploring opportunities to work with community members, nonprofit entities, the Bureau of Land Management, and other partners to create a public-private conservation strategy for the ranch lands. These strategies would maintain open space and traditional working ranch activities with or without direct federal ownership. 

If the committee moves this legislation forward and includes the Rock Springs 

Ranch Tract authorization, we would like to work with the committee on amendments to that section that would identify the lands authorized to be acquired by reference to a map. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased 

to respond to any questions that you may have. 
27 

S. 177

Thank you for the invitation to present testimony on S. 177, the Gold HillWakamatsu Preservation Act, which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to acquire the Gold Hill Ranch—by donation, exchange, or purchase from a willing 

seller with donated or appropriated funds—to preserve it as a site of historical and 

cultural value. Preservation of cultural and historical resources is a priority for the 

Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The BLM 

supports the goals of the bill but notes that BLM can make this acquisition under 

its existing authorities, and we would like to work with the sponsor and the Committee to clarify S. 177. 

Background 

The Wakamatsu Colony is an early settlement site of great cultural significance 

to the Japanese-American community. It is the oldest known cultural site in North 

America associated with Japanese immigration. The colony was founded in 1869 by 

twenty immigrants from Aizu-Wakamatsu, Japan. These colonists fled Japan during 

the political upheaval that accompanied the Meiji Restoration. The colonists purchased land at Gold Hill in western El Dorado County, California, and established 

a tea and silk plantation. The colony operated for 2 years, after which the land— 

known as the Gold Hill Ranch—was acquired by the Veerkamp family in 1871. The 

Veerkamps recognized its historic and cultural significance and in 2010 sold the 

property to the American River Conservancy (Conservancy), a local land trust. The 

Conservancy would like to transfer ownership of the property to a government entity for long-term preservation of the site. 

The 272-acre site includes a home from the 1860s that was occupied by the colonists, the mulberry trees they planted, and the grave of Okei Ito. Her grave is 

thought to be the oldest grave of a Japanese immigrant in North America. Adjacent 

to the site is the Gold Trail Elementary School, which since 1980 has maintained 

a sister-school relationship with Higashiyama Elementary School in Aizu 

Wakamatsu. The school property hosts a monument dedicated by then-Governor 

Ronald Reagan that established the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Farm Colony as California Registered Historical Landmark Number 815. 

Several Japanese-American civic and cultural groups and others have written to 

the BLM to express their support for preservation and restoration of the 

Wakamatsu Colony site. The Gold Hill region is an historic California gold rush 

landscape that is urbanizing rapidly, and this legislation could prevent the loss of 

an important pioneering site. Members of that community, including the Japanese 

American Citizens League, U.S. Representative Doris Matsui, and California State 

Assemblyman Alan Nakanishi, worked with the Conservancy to raise the funds 

needed to purchase the site. Their goal is to establish an endowment that would 

fund future restoration, interpretive operations, and maintenance of the site. Citing 

the BLM’s highly successful management of other nearby acquired lands, local Japanese-American community organizations and the Conservancy are advocating that 

the BLM take title to the property. 

Acquisition of the Gold Hill Ranch would be consistent with the goals of the 

BLM’s Sierra Resource Management Plan. The BLM’s nearby Mother Lode Field Office already manages several acquired properties for their historical and conservation values, including the historic Chung Wah Chinese cemetery about 15 miles to 

the west of the Ranch, which was donated to the BLM by the Chinese-American 

community in 2007, and the Pine Hill Preserve, a rare plant preserve totaling 4,000 

acres across dozens of parcels about 5 miles southwest of the Ranch. 

S. 177 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the BLM, to 

acquire the Gold Hill Ranch—by donation, exchange, or purchase from a willing seller with donated or appropriated funds—to preserve it as a site of historical and cultural value. The BLM supports the goals of the bill and acknowledges the efforts 

to date by the private sector to raise funds for the acquisition and long-term maintenance of the property. The BLM notes that it can make the acquisition under its 

existing authorities, subject to budget priorities and the availability of appropriations. However, this project was not included in the land acquisition priority lists 

for the 2011 and 2012 budgets. 

The legislation gives the Secretary discretion to enter into a cooperative agreement with public or nonprofit entities to interpret the history of the site and related 

pioneer history. The bill also provides that the cooperative agreement may include 

provisions for the design and development of a visitor center. The cooperative agreement provides an excellent opportunity for further expression of community support 

for preservation and restoration of this historic site. 
28 

The BLM would like to work with the sponsor and the Committee to clarify the 

purposes for which the BLM would be authorized to expend appropriated funds. 

Conclusion 

Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony in support of the goals of S. 

177. 

S. 247

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 247, a bill to establish the Harriet Tubman National Historical Park in Auburn, New York, and the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad 

National Historical Park in Caroline, Dorchester, and Talbot Counties in Maryland. 

The Department supports enactment of S. 247, with two technical amendments 

attached to this testimony. The Department testified in the House of Representatives on March 24, 2009, and in the Senate on July 15, 2009, in support of similar 

bills introduced during the 111th Congress. 

Harriet Tubman is truly an iconic American. Born circa 1822 as an enslaved person in Dorchester County, Maryland, she courageously escaped her bondage in 1849, 

returned on many occasions to Dorchester and Caroline Counties to free others including members of her family and remains known, popularly and appropriately, as 

‘‘The Moses of her People.’’ She was a leading ‘‘conductor’’ along the Underground 

Railroad guiding the enslaved to freedom at great risk to her own life. Her accomplishments were admired and extolled by her contemporaries including the abolitionist leader and former slave Frederick Douglass. In 1868 Douglass wrote to Tubman: 

Most that I have done and suffered in the service of our cause has been 

in public, and I have received much encouragement at every step of the 

way. You, on the other hand, have labored in a private way. I have wrought 

in the day—you in the night. . .The midnight sky and the silent stars have 

been the witnesses of your devotion to freedom and of your heroism. 

Harriet Tubman served honorably during this nation’s Civil War as a cook, nurse, 

scout, and spy for Union forces in Virginia, South Carolina, and Florida, always at 

personal risk and always advancing the quest for freedom by providing assistance 

to other enslaved people. In June 1863, she guided Union troops in South Carolina 

for an assault along the Combahee River resulting in the emancipation of hundreds 

of the enslaved. 

At the invitation of then U.S. Senator and later Secretary of State William H. 

Seward, Harriet Tubman purchased land from him in Auburn, New York, where she 

lived and cared for members of her family and other former slaves seeking safe 

haven in the North. In later life, she became active in progressive causes including 

efforts for women’s suffrage. Working closely with activists such as Susan B. Anthony and Emily Howland, she traveled from Auburn to cities in the East advocating voting rights for women. Harriet Tubman gave the keynote speech at the first 

meeting of the National Federation of Afro-American Women upon its founding in 

1896. 

Harriet Tubman was an intensely spiritual person and active in the African Methodist Episcopal (A.M.E.) Zion Church. In 1903 she donated land to the Church in 

Auburn for the establishment of a home ‘‘for aged and indigent colored people.’’ She 

died on March 10, 1913, at this home for the aged and was buried with full military 

honors at Fort Hill Cemetery in Auburn. Booker T. Washington, also born into slavery, journeyed from Alabama a year later to speak at the installation of a commemorative plaque for her at Auburn City Hall. 

Harriet Tubman is an American figure of lore and legend. Today, she is an enduring inspiration to those who cherish individual freedom and strive for human rights 

throughout the world. 

On January 12, 2009, the Department transmitted the Harriet Tubman Special 

Resource Study to Congress. The study, authorized by Public Law 106-516, the Harriet Tubman Special Resource Study Act, concluded that the resources associated 

with Harriet Tubman in Auburn, New York, and Caroline, Dorchester, and Talbot 

Counties, Maryland met the national significance, suitability, feasibility, and need 

for National Park Service management criteria for potential units of the National 

Park System. After an intensive and lengthy public involvement process, the study 

found that there is extensive public support, including support by affected private 

property owners within the boundaries proposed by S. 247 in New York and Maryland, for the establishment of the two units. Locally elected officials in both states 

have also expressed their support. 
29 

S. 247 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish a unit of the National Park System, the Harriet Tubman National Historical Park in Auburn, New 

York, upon determination that sufficient land or interests in land has been acquired 

to constitute a manageable park unit. The park would consist of the Harriet Tubman Home, the Home for the Aged, the Thompson Memorial A.M.E. Zion Church, 

which is no longer used for religious services, and its parsonage. The Secretary 

would be authorized to enter into cooperative agreements and provide technical and 

matching financial assistance to the A.M.E. Zion Church and others for historic 

preservation, rehabilitation, research, maintenance, and interpretation of the park 

and related Harriet Tubman resources in Auburn, New York. The Secretary would 

be further authorized to provide uniformed National Park Service staff to operate 

the park in partnership with the Church and to conduct interpretation and tours. 

In Maryland, S. 247 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish a 

unit of the National Park System, the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park, in nationally significant historic landscapes associated with 

Harriet Tubman in Caroline, Dorchester, and Talbot Counties, upon determination 

that sufficient land or interests in land have been acquired to constitute a manageable park unit. This agricultural, forest, and riverine mosaic largely retains historic 

integrity from the time that Tubman was born enslaved, worked in the fields and 

forests, emancipated herself, and helped others there to escape to freedom. 

The Secretary of the Interior would be authorized to provide matching grants to 

the state of Maryland for the construction of a visitor services facility to be jointly 

operated by the state and uniformed staff of the National Park Service. The Secretary would be further authorized to enter into cooperative agreements with various organizations and property owners, and provide grants for the restoration, rehabilitation, public use, and interpretation of sites and resources related to Harriet 

Tubman. Because a number of closely related Harriet Tubman resources exist on 

lands adjacent to the proposed park at Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, which 

is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or on lands scheduled for future 

refuge acquisition, the bill provides for an interagency agreement between the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service to promote compatible 

stewardship and interpretation of these resources. 

The estimated cost for the annual operations and maintenance for each unit would be approximately $500,000 to $650,000. The estimated cost for any acquisitions and the federal share of capital improvements is approximately $7.5 million 

for the Harriet Tubman National Historical Park in Auburn, New York. The cost 

of land acquisition and the federal share for the visitor center at the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park in Maryland is estimated to 

be up to $11 million. The estimated cost for the completion of the general management plan for each unit would be approximately $600,000 to $700,000. All funds are 

subject to NPS priorities and the availability of appropriations. 

Mr. Chairman, it is not every day that the Department comes before the committee to testify on a bill to establish two units of the National Park System to 

honor an enslaved woman who rose from the most difficult and humble beginnings 

imaginable to indelibly influence the causes of human justice and equality in our 

society, and to have such a significant impact on our national story. We do so with 

full understanding of the life and contributions of Harriet Tubman and suggest that 

nearly 100 years after her death the time for this abundantly deserved honor has 

finally arrived. 

That concludes my testimony Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to respond to any 

questions from you and members of the committee. 

Proposed amendment to S. 247 

On page 7, line 6, strike ‘‘Public Law 91-383 (commonly known as the 

‘‘National Park Service General Authorities Act’’)’’ and insert ‘‘the National 

Park Service General Authorities Act.’’ 

On page 12, line 21, strike ‘‘Public Law 91-383 (commonly known as the 

‘‘National Park Service General Authorities Act’’)’’ and insert ‘‘the National 

Park Service General Authorities Act.’’ 

S. 279

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. 

279, the Camp Hale Study Act. The U.S. Forest Service (White River National Forest) currently manages Camp Hale as a part of the National Forest System. 

The Department supports S. 279, with an amendment to section two to include 

the U.S. Forest Service in a joint study with the National Park Service for the future management of Camp Hale and to delete section three. However, we feel that 
30 

priority should be given to the 40 previously authorized studies for potential units 

of the National Park System, potential new National Heritage Areas, and potential 

additions to the National Trails System and National Wild and Scenic River System 

that have not yet been transmitted to Congress. The Department testified in support of an identical bill in the last Congress, S. 1418, before this subcommittee on 

July 22, 2009. 

S. 279 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to conduct a special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating Camp 

Hale as a unit in the National Park System. The study would also determine the 

methods and means for protection and interpretation of the Camp Hale site by the 

National Park Service, other federal, State, or local government entities, or private 

or nonprofit organizations. Not later than three years after funds are made available, the Secretary is directed to submit the results and recommendations of the 

study to Congress. The bill includes language to assure the study would not impact 

valid existing water rights in place upon the date of enactment. S. 279 also specifies 

that the study would not impact the ability to construct and operate infrastructure 

necessary to develop and use those water rights. We estimate that this study will 

cost approximately $300,000. 

Located in and managed by the White River National Forest, in west-central Colorado, Camp Hale was established in 1942 to provide winter and mountain warfare 

training during World War II, because of the natural setting of a large, flat valley 

bottom, surrounded by steep hillsides suitable for training in skiing, rock climbing 

and cold weather survival skills. The size of Camp Hale varied between 5,000 and 

247,243 acres when it was an active military installation. 

Managed by the U.S. Forest Service (White River National Forest), the Camp 

Hale Formerly Used Defense Site is now used year-round by the public as a recreation area and is included on the National Register of Historic Places. 

Since the time Camp Hale was used for military training, there have been numerous discoveries of unexploded ordinance (UXO) there. As recently as 2003, during 

efforts to contain a wildfire, UXO used during the training of U.S. troops in World 

War II was found on the site. 

Efforts to remediate public risk from any remaining UXO at Camp Hale continue. 

The funding for any response actions at Camp Hale will depend on how the UXO 

sites there rank nationally. Depending on that rank, and available federal dollars, 

the remedial investigations for some or all Camp Hale munitions may not occur for 

several years. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment has discussed evaluating the hazard liabilities and remediating the site with the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers prior to a transfer. 

The story of Camp Hale and the men and women who trained there reflects the 

adaptability that our nation showed during World War II. Studying and determining how best to preserve and protect Camp Hale and to commemorate the sacrifice and heroism so many Americans exhibited as a result of their training is laudable. 

We suggest that S. 279 be amended in section two to include the U.S. Forest Service in the study to determine the future of Camp Hale and to remove section three, 

which includes language concerning water rights. The proposed study would examine the suitability and feasibility of designating Camp Hale as a unit in the National Park System, including evaluating all current uses and rights associated with 

the land. Since the bill only authorizes a study of the site, there is no possibility 

of the study having any effect on any water rights. As such, we believe the water 

rights language in the bill is unnecessary and redundant and we recommend the 

section be deleted. 

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

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

S. 302

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify and provide the views of 

the National Park Service (NPS) on S. 302, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the 

Interior to issue right-of-way permits for a natural gas transmission pipeline in nonwilderness areas within the boundary of Denali National Park, and for other purposes. 

The Department has no objection to the bill as written. 

The potential owners and operators of such a pipeline have not, at this time, determined whether such a line carrying natural gas to south-central Alaska is financially feasible, nor have they determined the best route for a pipeline. This legislation provides flexibility for the backers of a proposed pipeline, and provides assur-
31 

ance to the NPS that the National Environmental Policy Act analysis will be completed before any permit for work in the park would be issued by the Secretary. 

The legislation also provides authority for the Secretary to permit distribution 

lines and related equipment within the park for the purpose of providing a natural 

gas supply to the park. We support this provision, but remind the committee that 

at this time no decisions have been made about the financial or engineering feasibility, nor the exact configuration of equipment needed to facilitate tapping the larger line to allow local use of natural gas in or near Denali National Park. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify and we would welcome any questions you 

or other members may have. 

S. 313

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.313, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 

issue permits for a micro-hydro project in non-wilderness areas within the boundaries of Denali National Park and Preserve, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports this legislation with amendments and recognizes improvements made from the similar bill introduced in the previous Congress. S. 313 

would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for micro-hydro 

projects in a limited area of the Kantishna Hills in Denali National Park. The legislation would also authorize a land exchange between the National Park Service 

(NPS) and Doyon Tourism, Inc. (Doyon) involving lands near the historic mining 

community of Kantishna that would be mutually beneficial to the NPS and Doyon. 

This legislation will reduce the use of fossil fuels in the park, and thus lessen the 

chance of fuel spills along the park road and at the Kantishna lodges. It will lower 

the number of non-visitor vehicle trips over the park road, lessen the noise and 

emissions from diesel generators in the Moose Creek valley, and support clean energy projects and sustainable practices while ensuring that appropriate review and 

environmental compliance protects all park resources. 

Doyon Tourism, Inc., a subsidiary of Alaska Native Corporation Doyon, Ltd., has 

requested permits from the NPS to install a micro-hydroelectric project on Eureka 

Creek, near their Kantishna Roadhouse. The NPS supports the intent of this 

project, however, neither the Secretary nor the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has the statutory authority to issue permits for portions of hydroelectric projects within national parks or monuments. We believe that the authorization contained in this legislation is necessary to enable the NPS to allow this microhydroelectric project within the park. 

The Kantishna Roadhouse, at the end of the 92-mile-long Denali park road, has 

been in business for 28 years, hosts approximately 10,000 guests per summer, and 

currently uses an on-site 100 kilowatt (KW) diesel generator to provide power for 

the facility. The proposed hydroelectric installation would reduce use of the diesel 

generator at the lodge. Currently, delivery of diesel fuel to the lodge requires a 

tanker truck and trailer to be driven the entire length of the Denali park road. 

Noted for its undeveloped character, the road is unpaved for 77 miles of its 92-mile 

length, crosses high mountain passes without guardrails, and is just one to 11⁄2

lanes wide with pullouts. The road is justly famous for wildlife viewing opportunities and in order to protect wildlife as well as the road’s scenic wilderness character, 

vehicle traffic is limited. Reducing the amount of diesel fuel hauled over this road 

in tanker trucks protects park resources by reducing the risk of accident or spill, 

and simultaneously reduces overall vehicle use of the road. 

Eureka Creek is a 4-mile-long stream that drains a 5 square-mile watershed and 

discharges about 15 cubic feet per second (cfs) during the summer. Most of the floodplain has been disturbed by past placer mining, but no mining claims exist on the 

creek now and no other landowners besides Doyon and the NPS own any property 

near this floodplain. The project would include an at-grade water intake, with no 

impoundment, about one mile upstream of where Eureka Creek crosses the park 

road. 

Camp Denali, another lodge in the Kantishna Hills, is within the area addressed 

by this legislation. Camp Denali opened in 1952 and the owners installed a microhydro generator system prior to the 1978 Presidential proclamation that included 

Kantishna as a part of what is now Denali National Park. After 1978, Camp Denali 

became a private in-holding surrounded by the park, and found that parts of its 

micro-hydro power system were within the park, a situation that the NPS lacks the 

authority to permit or retain. This legislation, if amended, would allow the NPS and 

the owners of Camp Denali to work out permit conditions for those parts of the existing hydro project that are now on park land. Besides the Kantishna Roadhouse 
32 

and Camp Denali, two other lodges in Kantishna may pursue similar projects in the 

future and thus would benefit from the authority granted in this legislation. 

Doyon owns 18 acres on the patented Galena mining claim in the Kantishna Hills 

and would like to exchange that acreage for park land in Kantishna of equal value 

near its other properties. The NPS would also like to pursue this exchange to consolidate land holdings in the area. Existing land exchange authority under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) and other legislation is sufficient to affect this exchange. Thus, while we believe that this provision is unnecessary, we support its intent. 

Our concerns with the bill are as follows: 

1) The bill as introduced requires the Secretary to complete National Environmental Policy Act compliance within 180 days of enactment. While the Department supports a speedy response to the applicant, we suggest the 180-day clock 

start upon submission of a complete application to the NPS. 

2) The permitting authority provided by this bill would apply to several 

micro-hydroelectric projects in the Kantishna area, yet various elements of the 

bill as introduced appear to apply solely to a project by Doyon. Technical corrections to address this are identified in an attachment to this testimony. 

We believe that the permitting authority granted in S. 313 would provide a tool 

that the Secretary could use to lower fossil fuel use in Denali National Park, while 

protecting park resources, and that a land exchange would be hastened through passage of this legislation. We would welcome the opportunity to work with the sponsor 

and this committee to address our concerns and recommendations. 

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

questions that you may have. 

ATTACHMENT

The NPS suggests the following technical corrections to H.R. 313 

1) On p. 1, line 2 of the long title, strike ‘‘for a microhydro project in nonwilderness’’ and insert ‘‘for microhydro projects in nonwilderness’’. 

2) On p. 3, line 1, strike ‘‘(i) the intake pipeline located on Eureka Creek, approximately 1⁄2 mile upstream from the Park Road, as depicted on the map;’’ 

and insert ‘‘(i) intake pipelines;’’ 

3) On p. 3, line 8, strike ‘‘line’’ and insert ‘‘lines’’. 

4) On p. 3, line 14, strike ‘‘PROJECT’’ and insert ‘‘PROJECTS’’. 

S. 323

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

Interior’s views on S. 323, a bill to establish the First State National Historical Park 

in the State of Delaware. 

The Department strongly supports the establishment of a unit of the national 

park system in Delaware as proposed by S. 323. 

In 2008, pursuant to Public Law 109-338, the National Park Service completed 

a Special Resource Study of the coastal area of Delaware and identified a number 

of resources of national significance that were determined suitable and feasible to 

administer as a unit of the national park system. These included historic resources 

that were instrumental in early Swedish, Dutch, and English settlement in the 

United States, and others associated with Delaware’s role as the nation’s first state. 

Although the bill provides the Secretary of the Interior the discretion to determine 

which sites in the State would be included within the boundary of the historical 

park, we anticipate that only resources that met the Special Resource Study criteria 

for establishment as a national park unit would be considered for inclusion. 

In 1638, Peter Minuet led Swedish colonists to present day Wilmington, Delaware, and established New Sweden at a point known as ‘‘the rocks’’ on the Christina 

River. The settlers constructed Fort Christina at this location and this site is now 

a National Historic Landmark. In 1698, Swedish settlers established Holy Trinity 

(‘‘Old Swedes’’) Church near the fort, the oldest church building standing as originally built in the United States and also a National Historic Landmark. 

In 1651, Peter Stuyvesant led Dutch settlers from New Amsterdam and constructed Fort Casimir at a place he named ‘‘New Amstel,’’ in present day New Castle, Delaware. Conflicts between the Swedish and Dutch colonists resulted in changing occupations of the fort with the Dutch regaining control in 1655. In 1665, the 

English arrived at New Amstel and seized control of the settlement, renaming it 

‘‘New Castle.’’ William Penn landed in New Castle in 1682 and took possession of 

the city. In 1704, Penn established Delaware’s Assembly and New Castle remained 
33 

the colonial capital of Delaware until 1776. The New Castle Historic District, which 

contains multiple resources from the time of earliest settlement through the Federal 

era, including the Old New Castle Courthouse, is a National Historic Landmark. 

Delaware’s representatives to the Continental Congress and the Constitutional 

Convention played important parts in the adoption of the Declaration of Independence and crafting of the United States Constitution. On June 15, 1776, the Delaware 

Assembly, meeting in New Castle, voted to sever its ties with the English Crown, 

three weeks prior to the signing of the Declaration in Philadelphia on July 4th. National Historic Landmarks associated with these early revolutionary leaders include 

the homes of John Dickinson (the ‘‘Penman of the Revolution’’), Gunning Bedford, 

Jr., and George Read. The Dover Green witnessed Delaware’s vote to become the 

first state to ratify the nation’s new Constitution. 

S. 323 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish the First State 

National Historical Park consisting of any resources listed in Section 3(b) of the bill 

that the Secretary acquires. The staff of the new park would be authorized to interpret related resources outside of the boundary, within the state of Delaware. The 

Special Resource Study estimated annual operating costs for the park at $450,000 

to $550,000 and costs associated with a general management plan at $600,000. All 

funding would be subject to NPS priorities and the availability of appropriations. 

A study of additional resources related to the purpose of the park is also authorized 

to assess their potential eligibility for National Historic Landmark designation and 

options for maintaining the historic integrity of such resources. 

S. 323 also proposes to allow including within the park boundary the Ryves Holt 

House—a part of the historic district in Lewes, Delaware. This district and the 

Ryves Holt House are listed on the National Register of Historic Places at the local 

level of significance and the National Register nomination for the district indicates 

that today its significance is based primarily on its fine examples of Victorian architecture. Although the bill provides the Secretary with the discretion to decide which 

properties may be included within the boundary of the park, the Department questions allowing the Ryves Holt House to be eligible for addition to the park boundary, 

since it is not a National Historic Landmark, does not meet the required national 

significance criterion for unit designation, and is inconsistent with the park’s purpose as outlined in Section 3(a) of S. 323. 

However, we note that Section 4(c) of S. 323 permits interpretation of resources 

related to the purposes of the park but located outside of its boundary. Any extant 

resources in Lewes, either within or outside of the historic district, which relate to 

early Dutch, Swedish, and English settlement or to Delaware’s role as the first 

state, would thus be eligible for interpretation without including this district in the 

park boundary. Such resources would also be candidates for further analysis as to 

their National Historic Landmark potential under the bill’s study provisions in Section 5. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be happy to respond to any 

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

S. 403

Thank you for inviting the Department of the Interior to testify on S. 403, the 

Molalla River Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

supports S. 403. 

Background 

The Molalla River begins its journey to the sea on the western slopes of the Cascade Mountains of Oregon. At an elevation of 4,800 feet, the Molalla flows 

undammed for 49 miles west and north until it joins the Willamette River. For 

years, the Molalla suffered from too much negative attention from its visitors, including vandalism. To address these problems, local residents joined together several years ago and formed the Molalla River Alliance (MRA). The MRA, a nonprofit 

all volunteer organization, has over 45 public and private partners, including Federal, State, and local government agencies, user groups, and conservationists. Working cooperatively with BLM’s local field office, the MRA has provided the Molalla 

the care it needed. Today, we are pleased that this subcommittee is considering designating approximately 21 miles of the river as a component of the National Wild 

and Scenic Rivers System. 

The Molalla River is home to important natural and cultural resources. Protection 

of this watershed is crucial as the source of drinking water for local communities 

and the important spawning habitat it provides for several fish species, including 

salmon and steelhead. Within an hour’s drive of the metropolitan areas of Portland 

and Salem, Oregon, the Molalla watershed provides significant recreational opportunities for fishing, canoeing, mountain biking, horseback riding, hiking, hunting, 
34 

camping, and swimming. A 20-mile hiking, mountain biking, and equestrian trail 

system draws over 65,000 visitors annually. 

S. 403 proposes to designate 15.1 miles of the Molalla River and 6.2 miles of the 

Table Rock Fork of the Molalla as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. In earlier planning analyses, the BLM evaluated the Molalla River and 

the Table Rock Fork of the Molalla River and determined that most of these two 

rivers should be considered for designation as wild and scenic rivers. As a result, 

the designation called for in S. 403 would be largely consistent with management 

currently in place, and would cause few changes to BLM’s current administration 

of most of this area. The 5,500-acre Table Rock Wilderness, designated by Congress 

in 1984, is embraced by the Molalla and Table Rock Fork, and designation of these 

river segments would reinforce the protections in place for the wilderness area. 

Wild and scenic rivers are designated by Congress in one of three categories: wild, 

scenic, or recreational. Differing management proscriptions apply for each of these 

designations. S. 1369 specifies that these river segments be classified as recreational. This classification is consistent with the strong recreational values of this 

area, as well as the presence of roads along the course of the river segments and 

numerous dispersed campsites along its shorelines. 

Conclusion 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of these important Oregon designations. The Department of the Interior looks forward to welcoming these units 

into the BLM’s National Landscape Conservation System. 

S. 404

Thank you for the invitation to present testimony on S. 404, legislation to modify 

a land patent pertaining to the Whitefish Point Light Station (Michigan). Although 

the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) role under the legislation is ministerial, 

preservation of historic lighthouses such as the Whitefish Point Light Station is a 

priority for the Department of the Interior. The BLM supports S. 404. 

Background 

In the late 18th and 19th centuries, the United States built a series of lighthouses 

in and around Lake Michigan, Lake Huron, and Lake Superior to aid in navigation 

of the Great Lakes. The role played by these lighthouses in the westward expansion 

and economic growth of the United States is part of our national heritage, with 

ships and shipwrecks recalled in story and song. The Great Lakes lighthouses—including the Whitefish Point Light Station at issue in S. 404—are listed on the National Register of Historic Properties. 

The U.S. Coast Guard retains responsibility for aid to navigation in the Great 

Lakes, as it (or its predecessor, the Revenue Marine) has since 1790. In the mid1990s, concerns reached the Congress that the Coast Guard, in carrying out its mission in the Great Lakes, was unable to assure preservation of the historic lighthouses. Interest in preserving the Whitefish Point Light Station led the Congress, 

in 1996, to convey land adjacent to the Light Station to two non-profit organizations 

dedicated to conservation and historic preservation—an 8.27 acre parcel to the 

Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical Society (Historical Society) and a 2.69 acre parcel 

to the Michigan Audubon Society (Audubon Society) of Chippewa County—and a 33 

acre parcel to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) (Public Law 104-208, Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 1997, Section 5505). 

This law contains limitations on development at the historic lighthouse, and explicitly requires compliance with the ‘‘Whitefish Point Comprehensive Plan of October 1992.’’ The patents the BLM issued under this authority (including the most recent, number 61-2000-0007, issued March 10, 2000, to the Historical Society) contain this reference. 

In 1999, the Audubon Society brought suit against the Historical Society and the 

FWS over plans to develop a museum at the site. The parties reached a settlement 

agreement under which the three groups developed the ‘‘Human Use/Natural Resource Plan for Whitefish Point, December 2002,’’ to supersede the Whitefish Point 

Comprehensive Plan of 1992. 

S. 404 directs the Secretary of the Interior to modify patent number 61-2000-0007 

by striking reference to the Whitefish Point Comprehensive Plan of October 1992 

and inserting the ‘‘Human Use/Natural Resource Plan for Whitefish Point, dated 

December 2002.’’ S. 404 affirms the applicability of the National Historic Preservation Act to the Whitefish Point Light Station. S. 404 requires that the property be 

used in a manner that does not impair or interfere with its conservation values. The 

BLM supports this legislation. 
35 

Conclusion 

Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony in support of S. 404. 

S. 535

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 535, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 

lease certain lands within Fort Pulaski National Monument, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports this legislation, which would allow the Savannah Bar 

Pilots Association to lease the land on Cockspur Island within Fort Pulaski National 

Monument in the State of Georgia that the association has used continuously since 

1940. 

In 1940, the National Park Service authorized by special use permit exclusive use 

of National Park Service land and improvements to the Savannah Bar Pilots Association to operate a vessel piloting business. The National Park Service has issued 

a series of permit renewals during the ensuing 70 years. However, in recent years, 

the National Park Service has been advised by the Department’s Solicitor’s Office 

that the association’s use of this land should be based on more certain legal authority than the special use permitting process. The National Park Service believes that 

a non-competitive lease, which would be authorized by S. 535, would be the best 

option in this unique circumstance to enable the Savannah Bar Pilots Association 

to continue traditional operations from its Fort Pulaski location. The Bar Pilots 

serve a function that is vital to the state’s deepwater ports and inland barge terminals, including directing ship traffic and assisting in navigation in the Savannah 

Harbor. 

There are no other known locations from which Savannah Bar Pilots Association 

can operate more efficiently than its current location. Deep water accessibility and 

the relatively short distance to embarking and disembarking ships in Savannah 

Harbor render the current Cockspur Island site the ideal location for continued operations. The Savannah Bar Pilots have been operating at the current location with 

virtually no adverse impact on park resources, on the visitor experience, or on park 

operations. Fort Pulaski National Monument derives revenue from the current special use permit and would continue to do so from a lease. The Savannah Bar Pilots 

enjoy local support from both the City of Savannah and the Georgia Port Authority. 

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

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

S. 564

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

appear before you today to present the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 564, 

to designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve as a unit of the National Park 

System, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports the protection of the nationally significant natural and 

cultural resources found at the Valles Caldera National Preserve as provided in S. 

564. In the last Congress the Department testified before this subcommittee on S. 

3452, a similar bill. 

S. 564 would designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve (Preserve), in New 

Mexico as a unit of the National Park System, transferring administrative jurisdiction of the Preserve to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary). The bill would terminate the Valles Caldera Trust (Trust) 180 days after enactment unless the Secretary determines that the termination date should be extended to facilitate the 

transitional management of the Preserve. All assets and liabilities of the Trust 

would be transferred to the Secretary. The bill would also authorize the Secretary 

to coordinate management and operations of the Preserve with Bandelier National 

Monument and produce a management plan no later than three fiscal years after 

funds are made available. If S. 564 is enacted, we look forward to working with the 

Trust, the Secretary of Agriculture, Indian Tribes and Pueblos, State and local governments, and the public to develop a management plan and capitalize on the proximity of Bandelier National Monument for efficiency of operations, while applying 

Service First principles of sharing resources as appropriate with the surrounding 

National Forest. 

S. 564 would authorize grazing, hunting, and fishing to continue within the Preserve and the bill would require the Secretary to ensure the protection of traditional 

cultural and religious sites including providing tribal access to the sites and temporarily closing specific areas of the Preserve to protect traditional uses. The National 

Park Service (NPS) has a long history of consultation with First Americans in the 

preservation and continuation of traditional practices. 
36 

Finally, S. 564 would require that eligible Trust employees be retained for at least 

180 days from the date of enactment and the Secretary and the Secretary of Agriculture would be authorized to hire Trust employees on a noncompetitive basis for 

comparable positions at the Preserve or other units under the jurisdiction of the two 

Secretaries. 

The Valles Caldera National Preserve is an 88,900 acre unit of the National Forest System located in the Jemez Mountains of north central New Mexico. The Preserve was established by Public Law 106-248, the Valles Caldera Preservation Act 

of 2000, and is managed by the Valles Caldera Trust, a wholly owned government 

corporation established under the Act. The Trust is charged with mixing elements 

of both private and public administration while working to achieve resource protection, public enjoyment, and financial self sufficiency goals. 

The Valles Caldera is considered to be one of the world’s best intact examples of 

a resurgent caldera (the remains of a huge and ancient volcano with a prominent 

uplift at its center, in this case present-day Redondo Peak) and is of sufficient size 

and configuration to allow for long-term sustainable resource protection and visitor 

enjoyment. The geologic features of the Preserve retain a high degree of integrity 

and the Preserve’s unique setting of expansive grasslands and montane forests provides outstanding scenic values and an array of opportunities for public recreation, 

reflection, education, and scientific study. The Preserve also would expand and enhance the diversity of volcanic sites represented within the National Park System. 

The national significance of the geological resources of the Valles Caldera was formally recognized in 1975 when the area was designated a National Natural Landmark. Moreover, Valles Caldera offers the opportunity to illustrate the connection 

of human history in the region that is showcased at Bandelier National Monument 

with the geologic history that shaped the surrounding mesa and canyon landscape. 

As early as 1899, the area around Valles Caldera was proposed as a site to be 

studied for national park designation, and the resulting report proposed that 

153,620 acres be set aside for ‘‘Pajarito National Park’’. A portion of this area later 

became Bandelier National Monument, established in 1906. Additionally, the Valles 

Caldera was the subject of site investigations and new area studies that were completed by the National Park Service (NPS) in 1939, 1964, 1977, and 1979. An Update Report on the NPS 1979 New Area Study was completed by the NPS in December 2009, at the request of Senators Bingaman and Tom Udall. All of these NPS 

studies found that the Valles Caldera was nationally significant, suitable and feasible for designation as a unit of the National Park System, and the 2009 Update 

Report reaffirmed the results of the prior studies. All of these studies found that 

the Valles Caldera was suitable and feasible for designation as a unit of the National Park System. 

If added to the National Park System, Valles Caldera would be managed in accordance with the 1916 Organic Act and other Acts that have guided the NPS for 

nearly one hundred years ‘‘to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner 

and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations’’, with recognition that the bill allows for continued, sustainable grazing, 

hunting, and fishing. The NPS has experience with these activities in our other 

nineteen preserves. 

Based on current expenses for Valles Caldera and the cost to operate park units 

comparable in size and assets, we anticipate the annual cost to operate and manage 

the park would be approximately $22 million for developmental costs and $4 million 

for annual operational costs, although more complete cost estimates would be developed through the general management plan. In addition, our 2009 Update Report 

identifies 5 parcels of private property within the proposed park boundaries, totaling 

40 acres. Although appraisals have not been completed, the expected costs to acquire this private property and any transfer costs are expected to be minimal. 

Funds would be subject to the availability of appropriations and NPS priorities. 

The Valles Caldera is a spectacular landscape containing nationally significant resources that are worthy of preservation and protection. We look forward to continuing to caring for these resources in the fine manner that the Trust and the U.S. 

Forest Service has cared for them to continue to allow for their enjoyment by all 

Americans. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer 

any questions that you or any other members of the Committee may have. 

S. 599

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

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 599, a bill to establish 

a commission to commemorate the sesquicentennial of the American Civil War. 
37 

The Department supports S. 599 with amendments discussed in this testimony. 

This legislation is similar to S. 1838, introduced in the last Congress, which the Department supported in testimony before this subcommittee on December 3, 2009. 

The Department of Justice advises us of constitutional concerns with the bill, and 

in particular with regard to the composition of the commission, which the Department of Justice will address directly with the sponsor and the committee. We defer 

to the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Government Ethics for 

matters related to the status of the commission’s members and employees for purposes of various laws governing Federal employment. Lastly, we defer to the National Endowment for the Humanities for any concerns about the grant program authorized by Section 7 of the bill. 

S. 599 would establish a Civil War Sesquicentennial Commemoration Commission 

to plan, develop, and carry out programs and activities to commemorate the 150th 

anniversary of the Civil War and to coordinate activities related to the commemoration by other federal, state, and nongovernmental entities. The bill also authorizes 

a grant program through the National Endowment for the Humanities for appropriate activities relating to the sesquicentennial. S. 599 authorizes $500,000 for each 

fiscal year from 2012 through 2016 for the commission and $3.5 million for the 

grant program. 

The Civil War was, in the words of Robert Penn Warren, ‘‘the great single event 

of our history.’’ It was the both the greatest disaster that has ever befallen our nation, and also our era of greatest achievement. It was a wrenching conflict that resulted in the loss of 620,000 lives, the liberation of four million African American 

slaves, and the ratification of three Constitutional amendments that forever 

changed the face of American democracy. S. 599 is mindful of this reality as it 

makes a purpose of the Commission to recognize the experiences and points of view 

of all people affected by the Civil War and to provide assistance for the development 

of programs, projects, and activities on the Civil War that have lasting educational 

value. 

As steward of more than 100 battlefields, historic homes and other original sites 

associated with the Civil War and the resulting struggle for civil rights, the National Park Service has begun commemorating the 150th anniversary by initiating 

a number of activities to provide Americans the opportunity to understand and discuss this country’s greatest national crisis, while exploring its enduring relevance 

in the 21st century. These activities include hundreds of commemorative programs, 

special events, and symposia planned for the anniversary years. The National Park 

Service has also developed a new website that has a calendar of all anniversary programs and events, as well as historical features and timelines designed to illustrate 

the relevancy of events that occurred 150 years ago. And, the National Park Service 

is developing new interpretive media, including a new handbook, The Civil War Remembered, that was published in April. Museum galleries, wayside exhibits, and 

audio visual programs are being upgraded at Civil War parks throughout the country. 

With its experience and expertise on the subject of the Civil War and its causes 

and consequences, the National Park Service is well-positioned to assume the responsibilities assigned to it by S. 599. The legislation provides for the Director of 

the National Park Service or his designee to serve on the commission, and for the 

National Park Service to provide support services to the commission on a reimbursable basis. The establishment of the commission would complement the work the 

National Park Service has already planned. It would provide a means for coordinating entities from all levels of government and across a spectrum of the private 

sector who are involved or who want to be involved in the sesquicentennial commemoration. The commission would be able to give a kind of visibility, stature, and 

reach to the sesquicentennial commemoration beyond what the National Park Service can provide, even with the help of the many partners and community groups the 

Service has engaged in this effort. 

The Department recommends that the bill be amended in the following ways: 

First, we recommend that the bill allow for 180 days instead of 60 days for the selection of the commission members, consistent with the time period it normally requires to process commission appointments. Second, we recommend that the size of 

the commission be reduced from 25 members to perhaps 15 or 17 members. A smaller commission would improve the panel’s ability to work efficiently and effectively, 

and reduce the cost of the commission. Third, we recommend changing the deadline 

for the commission’s final report from December 30, 2015, to September 30, 2016, 

to provide more time after the full sesquicentennial has passed to complete that 

work and for consistency with the authorization of appropriations through fiscal 

year 2016 provided by the bill. We would be pleased to work with the committee 

to develop amendments for these purposes. 
38 

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

questions you or other members of the subcommittee might have. 

S. 713

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

to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 713, a bill that would 

modify the boundary of Petersburg National Battlefield in the Commonwealth of 

Virginia. 

The Department supports S. 713 with one technical amendment. 

S. 713 would authorize two modifications to the boundary of Petersburg National 

Battlefield in the Commonwealth of Virginia. First, the bill would expand the currently authorized boundary of Petersburg National Battlefield by an additional 

7,238 acres. The boundary expansion proposal results from an analysis of ‘‘core battlefields’’ and a subsequent boundary adjustment study conducted as part of Petersburg National Battlefield’s General Management Plan completed in 2005. Second, 

the bill authorizes a transfer of administrative jurisdiction between the Secretary 

of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army for a 1.171 acre parcel of land to accommodate a security perimeter fence at Fort Lee Military Reservation. 

The City of Petersburg lies in the corridor of intensive growth from Washington, 

D.C., to south of Richmond, Virginia. The region surrounding Petersburg National 

Battlefield has been and is currently experiencing significant development pressures 

impacting areas immediately adjacent to the park and unprotected battlefield sites. 

This development not only threatens park resources and public enjoyment, but also 

the core portions of the battlefields. The park commemorates the Petersburg Campaign, the longest sustained combative military front on American soil, in both time 

and distance. When Congress created the park in 1926, only a fraction of the battlefield acreage associated with the 26 major battles of the Petersburg Campaign was 

included in the original boundary. The additional battlefields proposed to be added 

to the park by S. 713 will allow the public to better understand the size, complexity, 

and duration of the 9‡ month Petersburg Campaign and siege while offering protection to existing park resources. 

In January 2002, in response to significant development pressures in the region 

surrounding the park and as part of its General Management Plan process, Petersburg National Battlefield undertook a detailed assessment of battlefields in the Petersburg Campaign cited in the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC) report of 1993 entitled ‘‘Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields.’’ The CWSAC 

report identified 100,000 acres of the Petersburg battlefields as ‘‘core battlefields’’ 

encompassing all of the critical phases defined for a battle. Of the 100,000 acres 

cited, 23,000 acres were determined to retain historic integrity. 

During its more detailed analyses of the 23,000 acres, the park concentrated on 

those portions of the battlefields that were south of the Appomattox River and directly associated with the siege or defense of Petersburg, and that were identified 

as Class A (decisive) and Class B (major) by the CWSAC. Additionally, the park 

used historical maps and documentation to further refine the acreage to that constituting the portion of the battlefield on which both armies were engaged directly and 

that had a bearing on the outcome for each battle. Park staff further analyzed the 

integrity of these areas and their potential for public access and interpretation. The 

analyses disclosed that 7,238 acres met the criteria for integrity and 

interpretability. 

The estimated time period for acquisition of the 7,238 acres of these nationally 

significant lands is 15-20 years. Virtually all of the land subject to the boundary 

adjustment represents a mixture of private and non-profit organization-owned parcels. Agricultural and conservation easements will be the preferred method of acquisition for most parcels. Easements enable protection of these battlefields from inappropriate development while retaining private ownership and compatible use of the 

land. Where easements are not possible, and there is interest by the landowners, 

a range of acquisition methods, such as donation and fee simple acquisition from 

willing sellers based on available funding, will be utilized for battlefield preservation. 

If all the lands were acquired by the National Park Service through fee simple 

means, the total estimated cost would be $29.7 million. Protection of land resources 

through easements and donations will likely significantly lower acquisition costs. 

The estimated costs for capital expenses (trails, wayside exhibits, rehabilitation of 

existing visitor contact station, etc.) and expansion-related costs (surveys, hazardous 

materials studies, etc.) are an additional $1.74 million. Development of visitor services and interpretation at these new battlefield locations would be minimal and include small parking areas, wayside exhibits, and trail and other enhancements to 
39 

the sites. The annual increase in operations and management is estimated to be approximately $484,000. All numbers are in 2008 dollars. All funds are subject to NPS 

priorities and the availability of appropriations. 

Public response to the General Management Plan and the proposed boundary expansion have been uniformly favorable among local governments, organizations, and 

individuals. The Dinwiddie County Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution supporting future legislation to expand the boundary of the park as outlined in the 

General Management Plan. Many civic organizations in the Petersburg region have 

also indicated support for the proposal. 

The second main provision of the bill would authorize a transfer of administrative 

jurisdiction between the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Interior for 

a less than two-acre parcel of land. Following September 11, 2001, the Army was 

required to erect a perimeter fence around Fort Lee Military Reservation, located 

adjacent to Petersburg National Battlefield. The fence intruded slightly into the 

boundary of the park. The land exchange would transfer to the Army land where 

the perimeter fence is located, in return for a parcel of equal size from the military 

reservation. The Secretary of the Army is supportive of this provision. There is no 

cost associated with this authorization. 

The Department recommends an amendment to correct the map referenced in 

Section 3(b) to correctly reflect the acreage numbers for the proposed land exchange 

between the park and the military reservation. As introduced, the map referenced 

in S. 713 uses acreage numbers of 1.70 and 1.71. The correct acreage numbers are 

1.170 and 1.171. The NPS will provide a new map with the correct acreage. 

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

questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have regarding the 

proposed boundary expansions. 

S. 765

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

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 765, a bill to modify the 

boundary of the Oregon Caves National Monument, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports the intent of S. 765 as consistent with the General 

Management Plan (GMP) for the park, but recommends deferring action on the bill 

as we continue exploring ways to maintain interagency coordination. 

S. 765 would adjust the boundary of Oregon Caves National Monument to include 

the addition of approximately 4,070 acres to enhance the protection of resources associated with the monument and to increase quality recreation opportunities. The 

lands that would be added are currently managed by the U.S. Forest Service as part 

of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

S. 765 directs the Secretary to revise the fire management plan for the Monument 

to include transferred lands and carry out hazardous fuel management activities 

under that plan. Existing Forest Service stewardship or service contracts would continue to completion under the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture. 

The bill would authorize the Secretary to permit hunting and fishing within the 

Preserve. It also provides flexibility in managing the resources within the preserve 

by allowing the Secretary, in consultation with the Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife, to limit hunting and fishing in designated zones and over certain time periods. Based on information collected during the public participation process for the 

GMP, we would prefer to terminate hunting within the preserve after five years 

with the acreage being converted to national monument status. Of the 892 comments received on the plan, only 8, less than one percent, expressed concern about 

the loss of hunting should the added acres be designated as part of the national 

monument. 

S. 765 would authorize the Secretary to allow grazing to continue within the Preserve at a level not greater than authorized under existing permits or leases at enactment. It would also require the Secretary to accept voluntary donation of a grazing lease or permit for the Big Grayback Grazing Allotment (managed by the U.S. 

Forest Service) and the Billy Mountain Grazing Allotment (managed by the Bureau 

of Land Management) and terminate the donated lease or permit and ensure a permanent end to grazing on the land covered by the permit or lease. Claim to any 

range improvements on those lands would be waived. It is our understanding that 

the same individual runs livestock on both the Big Grayback and Billy Mountain 

Allotments. We note that the Billy Mountain Grazing Allotment is approximately 

15 miles from the boundary of the proposed monument expansion. We would like 

the opportunity to work with the Committee and sponsor to further explore these 

grazing provisions. 
40 

This bill would also designate the subterranean segment of Cave Creek, known 

as the River Styx, as a scenic river under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Additionally, the bill would authorize a study of segments of Cave Creek, Lake Creek, No 

Name Creek, Panther Creek and Upper Cave Creek—all within the Monument and 

Preserve—under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 

In 1907, the Secretary of the Interior withdrew approximately 2,560 acres for the 

purposes of establishing a national monument. The 1909 presidential proclamation 

establishing Oregon Caves National Monument included only 480 acres. The monument was managed by the U.S. Forest Service until its administration was transferred to the National Park Service in 1933. The remaining withdrawal outside of 

the monument is administered by the USFS as part of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. S. 765 would mirror the 1907 withdrawal and adds some additional 

lands to conform the monument boundary to the watershed. 

The explorer Joaquin Miller extolled ‘‘The Wondrous marble halls of Oregon!’’ 

when speaking about the newly proclaimed Oregon Caves National Monument in 

1909. Oregon Caves is one of the few marble caves in the country that is accessible 

to the public. This park, tucked up in the winding roads of southern Oregon, is 

known for its remoteness, the cave majesty and unusual biota. The stream flowing 

from the cave entrance is a tributary to a watershed that empties into the Pacific 

Ocean. This is the only cave in the national park system with an unobstructed link 

to the ocean. 

The caves are nationally significant and a favorite visit for school kids and travelers alike. They remain alive and healthy because of the watershed above them. 

The park recognized this when developing the 1998 GMP and accompanying Environmental Impact Statement. The plan recommended the inclusion of the watershed 

into the park to provide for better cave protection and to protect the surface and 

subsurface hydrology and the public water supply. 

If S. 765 were enacted, there would be no acquisition costs associated with the 

boundary expansion and we estimate National Park Service’s management, administrative, interpretive, resource protection, and maintenance costs to be approximately $300,000 to $750,000 annually. The National Park Service is committed to 

coordinating with the U.S. Forest Service on topics such as recreation management, 

management of cave resources, public signing, livestock grazing, trail maintenance 

and construction, fire protection, and fuels reduction among others. Mr. Chairman, 

this concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any questions that you 

may have. 

S. 779

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

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 779, to authorize the acquisition and protection of nationally significant battlefields and associated sites of 

the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 under the American Battlefield Protection Program. 

The Department supports S. 779. This legislation would expand the American 

Battlefield Protection Program to include both the War of 1812 and Revolutionary 

War battlefields in addition to Civil War battlefields, which are covered under the 

current program. It would authorize $10 million in grants for Revolutionary War 

and War of 1812 battlefield sites, as well as $10 million in grants for Civil War battlefield sites, for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2022. The American Battlefield 

Protection Program is currently authorized through fiscal 2013. 

In March 2008, the National Park Service transmitted the Report to Congress on 

the Historic Preservation of Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 Sites in the 

United States, which identified and determined the relative significance of sites related to the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. The study assessed the short 

and long-term threats to the sites. Following the success of the 1993 Civil War Sites 

Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, this study similarly provides alternatives for the preservation and interpretation of the sites by 

Federal, State, and local governments or other public or private entities. 

The direction from Congress for the study was the same as for a Civil War sites 

study of the early 1990s. As authorized by Congress for this study, the National 

Park Service looked at sites and structures that are thematically tied with the nationally significant events that occurred during the Revolutionary War and the War 

of 1812. The result was a more thorough survey that represents twice the field effort 

undertaken for the Civil War study. 

Building upon this study, S. 779 would create a matching grant program for Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 sites that closely mirrors a very successful 

matching grant program for Civil War sites. The Civil War acquisition grant pro-
41 

gram was first authorized by Congress in the Civil War Battlefield Protection Act 

of 2002 (Public Law 107-359), and was reauthorized through FY 2013 by the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11). That grant fund has 

been tremendously successful in allowing local preservation efforts to permanently 

preserve Civil War battlefield land with a minimum of Federal assistance. 

With the release of the Report to Congress on the Historic Preservation of Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 Sites in the United States, communities interested 

in preserving their Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 sites can take the first 

steps similar to what the Civil War advocates began doing nearly two decades ago. 

If established, this new grant program can complement the existing grant program 

for Civil War battlefields and, in doing so, become a benefit to the American people 

by providing for the preservation and protection of a greater number of sites from 

the Revolutionary War and War 1812. All funds would be subject to NPS priorities 

and the availability of appropriations. 

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

questions from you and members of the committee. 

S. 849

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

to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 849, a bill to establish 

the Waco Mammoth National Monument in the State of Texas, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports establishing a unit of the National Park System to commemorate and protect the Waco Mammoth site consistent with the study the National Park Service (NPS) completed in 2008. However, we oppose S. 849 in its current form. The Department testified in support of S. 625, a similar bill, before this 

subcommittee on July 15, 2009, during the last Congress. As we explain in this testimony, S. 849 contains significant changes to the last Congress’s bill by requiring 

the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to administer the national monument as 

a unit of the National Park System; but prohibiting the Secretary from expending 

any federal funds to do so. We would like to work with the sponsor and the committee on revising the bill so that we could support it. 

S. 849 would establish a new unit of the National Park System, the Waco Mammoth National Monument (monument), near the city of Waco, Texas. The bill directs 

the Secretary to administer the monument in accordance only with the provisions 

found in the bill and with any cooperative agreements entered into with Baylor University and the City of Waco. The bill also authorizes the Secretary to acquire land 

for the monument by donation from the City of Waco. The Secretary is authorized 

to complete a General Management Plan for the monument within three years after 

enactment, but prohibited from expending any federal funds to do so. Finally, no 

federal funds are authorized to be used to pay for costs associated with the monument, and designation of the monument as a unit of the National Park System shall 

terminate if the Secretary determines that federal funds are required to operate and 

maintain the monument. 

The NPS was directed to complete a Special Resource Study (SRS) of the Waco 

Mammoth site by Public Law 107-341. This study evaluated a 109-acre site owned 

by the City of Waco and Baylor University and found that the site met all the criteria for designation as a unit of the National Park System. 

The Waco Mammoth Site area is located approximately 4.5 miles north of the center of Waco, near the confluence of the Brazos and the Bosque rivers. Baylor University has been investigating the site since 1978 after hearing about bones emerging 

from eroding creek banks that led to the uncovering of portions of five mammoths. 

Since then several additional mammoth remains have been uncovered making this 

the largest known concentration of mammoths dying from the same event. 

The discoveries have received international attention and many of the remains 

have been excavated and are in storage or still being researched. The SRS determined that the combination of both in situ articulated skeletal remains and the excavated specimens from the site represents the nation’s first and only recorded nursery herd of Pleistocene mammoths. The resource possesses exceptional interpretive 

value and superlative opportunities for visitor enjoyment and scientific study. 

From the time the site was discovered until the present, the University and the 

City have managed the site responsibly. The SRS examined a range of proposed options for the NPS involvement at the site. We believe that NPS joining in partnership with the city of Waco, Baylor University, and others would offer the most effective and cost-efficient management of this unique resource. 

The provisions in S. 849 contradict each other by requiring the Secretary to administer the monument as a unit of the National Park System, but then deleting 
42 

the reference to the laws applicable to such units, and prohibiting the expenditure 

of federal funds to carry out the administration of the monument. Expenditure of 

funds is specifically prohibited for carrying out the cooperative agreement for management of the monument, acquiring land, developing a visitor center, operating or 

maintaining the monument, constructing exhibits, or developing the General Management Plan. 

The National Park Service preserves and protects areas of the country that are 

found to be nationally significant. If the Waco Mammoth site were designated a unit 

of the National Park System to be administered by the Secretary, then the laws applicable to such units would need to apply and federal funds would be needed to 

carry out those responsibilities, as they are for all other units of the National Park 

System. 

The ambiguity as to the applicable laws and the lack of certainty and continuity 

of non-federal funding could create an untenable situation for staffing the park and 

providing consistent visitor services. This uncertainty could lead to the NPS not 

knowing from month to month whether the park would be open. Also, federal land 

acquisition policies generally do not allow the federal government to accept lands 

acquired with a reverter clause attached, as proposed in the bill. 

We would be happy to work with the committee to revise the bill into a form that 

we could support, such as S. 625 from the 111th Congress. In that version of the 

bill, the monument would be established based upon the management alternative 

recommended in the SRS, where we estimated that the costs to create the monument would include $8.1 million from the identified partners to develop the facilities 

at the monument, with the NPS providing an additional $600,000 for enhanced interpretive media. Total operational costs are estimated to be $645,000 with the NPS 

contributing approximately $345,000 for NPS staffing of four full-time equivalent 

positions and associated supplies, materials, and equipment. All funds would be 

subject to NPS priorities and the availability of appropriations. 

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

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

S. 858

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

Department of the Interior’s views on S. 858, a bill to authorize a special resource 

study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the Colonel Charles 

Young Home in Xenia, Ohio, as a unit of the National Park System. 

The Department supports enactment of S. 858. However, we believe that priority 

should be given to the 40 previously authorized studies for potential units of the 

National Park System, potential new National Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the National Trails System and National Wild and Scenic River System that 

have not yet been transmitted to the Congress. 

S. 858 authorizes a special resource study, in consultation with the Secretary of 

the Army, to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the Colonel 

Charles Young Home as a unit of the National Park System, and to consider other 

alternatives for preservation and protection of the home and interpretation of the 

life and accomplishments of Colonel Young for future appreciation by the public. 

The bill also authorizes consultation and collaboration with the Ohio Historical Society, Central State University, Wilberforce University and other interested Federal, 

State or local governmental entities, private and nonprofit organizations or individuals in accomplishing the resource study. The home is a National Historic Landmark. We estimate the cost of this study to range from $200,000 to $250,000, based 

on similar types of studies conducted in recent years. 

Colonel Charles Young was the third African-American to graduate from West 

Point, and a distinguished African-American officer in the United States Army, commanding troops in combat in the Spanish-American War and the Mexican expedition against Pancho Villa. Colonel Young was one of the first military attaches in 

the United States, serving in Haiti and Liberia, and a pioneer of techniques in military intelligence. The experience of Colonel Young in the Army between 1884 and 

1922 illustrates the changing nature of race relations in the United States during 

a period spanning from the end of the Civil War to the beginning of the Civil Rights 

movement. 

Colonel Young was a friend and associate of other distinguished African-Americans of the period, including poet Paul Laurence Dunbar from nearby Dayton, Ohio; 

and as the commander of an Army unit assigned to protect and develop Sequoia National Park and General Grant National Park in the State of California, Colonel 

Young is recognized as the first African-American to be the superintendent of a National Park. 
43 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to answer 

any questions that you or other Committee members may have regarding this bill. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Whitesell. 

I will turn to Mr. Holtrop now. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JOEL HOLTROP, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL 

FOREST SYSTEM, FOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Mr. HOLTROP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Bingaman, 

Ranking Member Burr, thank you for the opportunity to provide 

the Department’s views on the 4 bills affecting Valles Caldera, Oregon Caves, Chimney Rock, and Camp Hale. 

You have my written statement, and I would like to quickly emphasize some key points. 

Regarding Valles Caldera, the Department supports the protection of the nationally significant natural and cultural resources 

found at the Valles Caldera National Preserve, and has worked 

with the Trust to accomplish these goals over the past several 

years. 

Given the historical and ecological importance of these lands and 

the work that is required to restore them, there are various jurisdictional options for the long-term management of the Valles 

Caldera National Preserve that could be considered. 

There is no debate about the outstanding natural resources of 

the 88,980 preserve with its extraordinary flora, fauna, water, and 

geologic resources. Its spectacular scenic values are among the finest in the National Forest system. 

Its archaeological and cultural resources are of major significantly to native American Pueblo people. 

It is important to note that restoration and resource management issues are already being managed by the Forest Service, not 

only at Valles Caldera, but also on approximately 895,000 acres on 

National Forest System land and the Jemez Mountains surrounding the preserve on the preserve’s southeast corner adjacent 

to Bandelier National Monument. 

The connectivity of forests, range lands, and waters in the Jemez 

Mountains of central and northern New Mexico allows for the continuity of natural resource management and for efficient restoration practices to be implemented on a landscape scale. It is important to keep this all lands cross boundary approach. 

The spirit of cooperation would be paramount for all agencies to 

work together for the thoughtful stewardship of the Valles Caldera 

National Preserve, regardless of Congress’s decisions regarding administrative jurisdiction. The U.S. Forest Service has long cared 

deeply about the Valles Caldera and will continue to care about it 

and its place in the broader landscape. 

Regarding Oregon Caves, I would like to take this opportunity to 

discuss the current status of cooperative management of the Rogue 

River Siskiyou National Forest and the Oregon Caves National 

Monument and provide a few comments on the bill. 

Interagency cooperation will carry out the purpose of the bill to 

enhance the protection of the resources associated with the monument in National Forest System lands and increase public recreation opportunities. 
44 

To this end, the local U.S. Forest Service and National Park 

Service units have been committed to coordination on topics such 

as recreation management, management of cave resources, public 

signing, livestock grazing, trail maintenance and construction, fire 

protection, and fuels reduction, among others. 

The U.S. Forest Service remains and will remain committed to 

cooperative management across our respective jurisdictions. 

Regarding Chimney Rock, the Department strongly supports S. 

508. Designated as an archaeological area and national historic 

landmark in 1970, Chimney Rock lies on 4,100 acres of the San 

Juan National Forest surrounded by the Southern Ute Indian reservation. 

The Forest Service values archaeological and cultural resources 

and considers it an important part of the agency’s mission to preserve and interpret them for the public. 

We believe the rich history, spectacular archaeological, cultural, 

scientific, watershed, and scenic resource values, as well as community support merits the designation of the area as a national monument. 

Regarding Camp Hale, this bill would direct the Secretary of Interior to carry out a study to determine the suitability and feasibility of establishing Camp Hale as a unit of the National Park system. 

Camp Hale is located in the White River National Forest and is 

managed by the U.S. Forest Service. We would request that the 

U.S. Forest Service be a full partner in the study to determine the 

best management options and recommendations for Camp Hale so 

as to provide a complete picture of management options. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I will be pleased 

to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Holtrop follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOEL HOLTROP, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM, 

FOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

S. 564, S. 765, S. 508, AND S. 279

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Burr, and members of the Subcommittee: Thank 

you for the opportunity to provide the Administration’s views on S.564 (Valles 

Caldera), S.765 (Oregon Caves), S.508 (Chimney Rock), and S.279 (Camp Hale) 

S.564 VALLES CALDERA

I am pleased to testify today on S. 564 regarding the long-term management of 

the Valles Caldera National Preserve, one of the Nation’s preeminent scenic and 

natural areas. The Valles Caldera Preserve Management Act would repeal the 

Valles Caldera Preservation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-248) abolish the Valles 

Caldera Trust, terminate the Preserve’s inclusion in the National Forest System and 

turn over administration of the land to the National Park Service (NPS). This legislation gives us the opportunity to assess the long term management of the Preserve. 

The Department supports the protection of the nationally significant natural and 

cultural resources found at the Valles Caldera National Preserve and have worked 

with the Trust to accomplish these goals over the past several years. We would like 

to work with the committee to determine the management structure that will provide the best level of protection and care for the unique resources that are found 

within the Valles Caldera. Given the historical and ecological importance of these 

lands and the work that is required to restore them, there are various jurisdictional 

options for the long-term management of the Valles Caldera National Preserve that 

could be considered. 

There is no debate about the outstanding natural resources of the 88,900-acre 

Preserve with its extraordinary flora, fauna, water, and geologic resources. Its spec-
45 

tacular scenic values are among the finest in the National Forest System. Geologically, the Valles Caldera is one of the Nation’s best examples of a resurgent caldera. 

Its archaeological and cultural resources are of major significance to Native American Pueblo people. The challenge before the Congress and the Administration is 

how best to manage and restore the forested and rangeland watersheds, while sustaining the traditional uses of a working ranch and the majesty of a National Preserve for the Nation. 

Role of the Forest Service 

To assess appropriate future management, some history may be helpful. In 2000, 

at the hearings for the original Valles Caldera Preservation Act, the Forest Service 

was complimented as the ‘‘unsung heroes’’ in the great effort to preserve and protect 

what was then referred to as the Baca Ranch. That accolade is as valid today as 

it was ten years ago. Beginning in 1990, the Forest Service engaged the ranch owners, the Dunigan family, in what turned out to be a decade long effort to acquire 

the Baca Ranch. In 1993, the Forest Service cooperating with interested parties including the National Park Service, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and affected 

Indian tribes completed a major study, the Report on the Study of the Baca Location 

No. 1 which provided the scientific and public policy underpinnings for Federal acquisition of the Ranch in 2000 (PL 106-248). From 1995 to 2000, the Secretary of 

Agriculture assigned resource managers and used Department of Agriculture legal 

expertise to negotiate the purchase of the Baca Ranch for $101 million. The acquisition of the Baca Location No. 1 by the Federal government also resulted in the expansion of the Bandelier National Monument in the upper watershed of Alamo 

Creek as authorized by Public Law 105-376. The acquisition of the Preserve also 

permitted the Secretary of Agriculture to assign to the Pueblo of Santa Clara rights 

to acquire at market value approximately 5,045 acres of the northeast corner of the 

Baca Location No. 1 in the Santa Clara Creek watershed to promote watershed 

management within the Santa Clara Indian Reservation. More recently, significant 

effort and expense has been invested in acquiring privately owned geothermal rights 

within the Caldera. With some exceptions, the Administration can report today that 

due to the efforts of the Forest Service and the Department of Justice, the Federal 

government is now in possession of title to the Preserve and the land is permanently protected from private development. All this is to say, the Department of Agriculture and the Forest Service have a lot of equity invested in the Valles Caldera 

Addition to the National Forest System—Valles Caldera National Preserve 

Upon the enactment of the 2000 Act on July 25, 2000, the Valles Caldera National 

Preserve was added to the National Forest System and the boundary of the Santa 

Fe National Forest was adjusted to include the National Preserve. Hailed as a new 

experiment in public, multiple-use land management, the nearly 89,000-acre National Preserve, formerly known as the Baca Location No. 1, was assigned to a ninemember Board of Trustees responsible for the protection and development of the 

Valles Caldera National Preserve. The President of the United States appoints 

seven members and two Federal employees are ex-officio members who serve by virtue of their positions as Forest Supervisor of the Santa Fe National Forest and Superintendent of the Bandelier National Monument. The Trust is the managing 

board for the National Forest System lands that comprise the Valles Caldera National Preserve. The Preserve employees report to an Executive Director, who is 

overseen by the Trust Board members. Funding for the Preserve comes from the annual Forest Service appropriation, which is $3.5 million for FY 10 and from revenues generated by the Preserve for entry and use. In fiscal year 2009, the Trust 

generated approximately $650,000. In fiscal year 2010, visitation increased by 59 

percent and the Trust generated just over $700,000. In 2011, in a year of a declining 

budget, the Preserve was funded at the same level as it was in 2010. 

Because the Valles Caldera National Preserve is part of the National Forest System, it has the ability to draw upon the considerable resources of the Forest Service. 

The Deputy Areas for National Forest Systems, Research and Development and 

State and Private Forestry, as well as Business Operations support and assist the 

Trust and Preserve managers with services and expertise needed to manage the 

Preserve. The Southwest Region and the Rocky Mountain Research Station support 

the Preserve managers through special assignments; such as on-the-ground consultations and specific disciplinary investigations or services. Santa Fe National 

Forest and Cibola National Forest employees with a wide array of skills are within 

a short driving distance of the Preserve and are available for immediate consultation on management direction or service program delivery. Wildland fire suppression and management resources, including equipment and personnel, are directly 

provided to the Preserve as part of the Santa Fe National Forest mission. Over the 
46 

last decade, the Forest Service has worked closely with the Trust to assist with National Preserve operations, including archaeology, forestry, law enforcement, infrastructure, technical assistance, resource management and wildfire suppression. The 

Forest Service also provides the Trust with administrative assistance in financial 

services and property management. The future success of the Preserve under whatever management oversight, will need this sort of support as the base minimum to 

succeed. 

Maintaining a Working Ranch, While Managing a National Preserve 

The debate a decade ago was over how to best manage the newly acquired Baca 

Ranch. The consensus then was that the land should be preserved as a working 

ranch where fishing, hunting, grazing, and some limited timber management might 

be retained. Then Congressman Tom Udall noted in the hearings in March, 2000, 

that a working ranch would permit both cattle and wildlife to thrive on the land 

and traditional New Mexican families should have the opportunity to join others 

who had previously been able to use the land. The concept of a working ranch was 

widely endorsed. Over the past decade the Trust, with the assistance of the Forest 

Service, has implemented the concept of the working ranch. 

The October 2009 report ‘‘Valles Caldera’’ by the Government Accountability Office found that the Trust had made progress in rehabilitating roads, buildings, 

fences, and other infrastructure, created a science program, experimented with a variety of grazing options, taken steps to manage its forests, expanded recreational opportunities for the public, and taken its first steps toward becoming financially selfsustaining. However, according to GAO, the Trust is at least 5 years behind the 

schedule it set for itself. Through FY2009, the Trust lacked a strategic plan and annual performance plans and it had not systematically monitored or reported on its’ 

progress. The Trust’s financial management has also been weak and the Trust is 

challenged to become self sustaining by the end of FY2015. The GAO recommended 

that the Trust work with the relevant Committees to seek legislative remedies as 

appropriate for the legal challenges confronting the Trust. The Trust has since responded in writing with suggested legislative actions. 

Forest and Rangeland Restoration 

It is important to note that restoration and resource management issues are already being managed by the Forest Service on approximately 895,000 acres of National Forest System lands in the Jemez Mountains surrounding the Preserve and 

on the Preserve’s Southeast corner adjacent to Bandelier National Monument. The 

connectivity of the forests, rangelands and waters in the Jemez Mountains of central 

and northern New Mexico allows for the continuity of natural resource management 

and for efficient restoration practices to be implemented on a landscape scale. It is 

important to keep this ‘‘all-lands’’ cross-boundary approach. Active management will 

be needed to maintain a functioning ecosystem at a landscape scale. The Forest 

Service is well positioned to provide landscape and restoration management in the 

Jemez Mountains, as envisioned by the Administration’s priorities for maintaining 

and enhancing the resiliency and productivity of America’s forests. 

The paramount priority for the Preserve is to continue and increase watershed 

restoration work across the Preserve and the surrounding National Forest System 

lands. The land’s long history as a ranch where timber and mining activities occurred degraded much of the landscape. In addition, drought and insect activity 

threatens the forest and makes catastrophic fire a major challenge. Restoration 

work in this regard has been initiated and environmental and watershed assessments for developing future restoration projects are in process. 

Some of this restoration work has and will continue to deal with roads. When the 

Baca Ranch was purchased there were approximately 1,400 miles of logging roads 

on the land. Initially, it was determined that the existing road system and surface 

design could not be used to support recreational opportunities, administration and 

management or uses such as grazing. 

The Trust, with the assistance of the Forest Service, has upgraded over 25 miles 

of road to all-weather gravel standards so they are usable for passenger vehicles and 

are more environmentally stable. To enhance safety and public viewing of the preserve, the kiosks, scenic turnouts, and a new gate have been installed. In addition, 

the entry to and exit from New Mexico Highway 4, the main access road to the preserve, has been reconfigured to meet traffic and road safety requirements. To date, 

approximately 900 miles of the 1,400 have been inventoried and once the inventory 

is completed a determination would be made on the number of miles of road required for management of the Preserve. Through forest restoration efforts, the existing roads that are unneeded for future administrative use would then be closed, decommissioned or obliterated. Rehabilitating deteriorating infrastructure such as 
47 

buildings, roads and water systems has proven to be an expensive and time-consuming endeavor, perhaps more so than originally envisioned. Many of these obligations will need to be addressed in any future management regime for the Preserve. 

Approaches to Grazing Management 

Given that the 2000 Act requires maintaining the Preserve as a working ranch, 

grazing has been a central activity. Over the years, the grazing program’s objectives, 

scope, and size have changed repeatedly, in response to annual scientific assessments of forage availability, as well as shifting directives from the Board. The ultimate goal is to manage the Preserve’s livestock operations for multiple aims, including, environmental benefits, local community benefit, research, and public education. 

The Development and Expansion of Recreational Opportunities 

For the public, especially New Mexicans, the Baca Location No.1 was an intriguing curiosity. Projected on maps as a prominent rectangle of white surrounded by 

National Forest System lands and on the Preserve’s Southeast corner adjacent to 

Bandelier National Monument, there were great expectations by the Public for recreating and exploring the new National Preserve. At the outset of Forest Service 

and Trust management, the National Preserve was closed to public entry. Beginning 

in 2002, the Preserve was opened to public recreation which was confined to guided 

hikes or van tours. Over the next several years, access to the Preserve for varied 

summer and winter activities was allowed, including but not limited to access for 

fishing, hunting, hiking and various other recreational activities provided by outfitters and guides such as horse drawn wagon and sleigh rides, stargazing and viewing, group tours and birding. 

Given the successful history of Forest Service efforts, its commitment to the Preserve and the National Forest System stewardship of the vast majority of lands surrounding the Preserve, management by the Forest Service is a viable option for the 

Preserve’s future. There is ample national precedent for Forest Service administration of such lands. The agency currently manages 38 Congressionally designated 

areas (in addition to hundreds of Wilderness Areas and Wild and Scenic Rivers), including 21 National Recreation Areas, 6 National Monuments (2 of which are national volcanic monuments), and 11 National Scenic Areas. For example the Santa 

Fe National Forest is managing the 57,000-acre Jemez National Recreation Area established to conserve the recreational, ecological, cultural, religious and wildlife values of the Jemez Mountains 

The Preserve presents many resource management challenges that must be addressed and accounted for if any change in management is considered. The largest 

elk herd in New Mexico has to be carefully managed in cooperation with the New 

Mexico Department of Game and Fish. The land needs to be restored after decades 

of grazing and logging use. Indeed, for the Secretary of Agriculture, restoration of 

forest and rangelands watersheds is one of the highest management priorities. 

Under the Forest Landscape Restoration Title of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 7303), which established the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Fund (CFLRF), the Valles Caldera National Preserve, Santa Fe 

National Forest, the Nature Conservancy and the New Mexico Forest and Watershed Restoration Institute have developed a proposal for a cross jurisdictional planning process to implement a landscape-scale forest restoration strategy in the Jemez 

River Watershed. A key collaborator for this proposal, among many, is Bandelier 

National Monument. This proposal was one of ten approved in the nation by the 

Secretary for funding in FY 2010. To achieve the goals of restoration and resiliency 

under the CFLRF active management prescriptions utilizing timber and forest vegetation harvesting and removal, prescribed fire, road closures and obliteration, as 

well as controlled livestock herbivory, would be required to achieve restored and resilient forest and watershed ecological conditions. Currently, CFLRF funding is limited to lands administered by the Forest Service. 

Congressional Request for Reconnaissance Study by the National Park Service 

At the request of New Mexico Senators Jeff Bingaman and Tom Udall (June 24, 

2009), the National Park Service performed a reconnaissance study of the National 

Forest System lands comprising the Valles Caldera National Preserve for its inclusion in the National Park System. We recognize that the Secretary of the Interior 

could also be an appropriate steward of the National Preserve and the Forest Service will work cooperatively with all parties to achieve the best outcome for the National Preserve. 

If it is the decision of the Committee that permanent Trust management of the 

Preserve is not in the public interest and the land is ultimately managed by the 

Park Service, the Forest Service or some other arrangement, then we would request 
48 

a thorough and orderly transfer of responsibilities from the Trust. In the interim, 

we should assure adequate funding for continued operations. In that respect, I note 

the Administration is funding the Trust at $3.4 million for FY 2011. 

This bill would repeal the Valles Caldera Preservation Act (VCPA), in which Congress authorized the acquisition of a fractional mineral interest under the Valles 

Caldera Preserve. Although the condemnation action related to the mineral interest 

has concluded, the judgment and some fees have not yet been paid. Accordingly, we 

believe that the bill should state explicitly that it is not intended to affect the authority for the condemnation or the amount or source of any outstanding obligations 

of the United States related to the condemnation of the fractional mineral interest 

under the Preserve 

In closing, I would note that the spirit of cooperation would be paramount for all 

agencies to work together for the thoughtful stewardship of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, regardless of the Congresses’ decisions regarding administrative jurisdiction, the U.S. Forest Service has long cared deeply about the Valles Caldera 

and we will continue to care about its place in the broader landscape. Forest restoration is important to us and we look forward to engaging our expertise and capabilities in working across boundaries. If a change in administrative oversight were 

to occur because of this legislation, we look forward to collaborating in the achievement of restoration goals with the surrounding National Forest. 

S.765 OREGON CAVES

S.765 would modify the boundary of the Oregon Caves National Monument to include approximately 4,070 acres of land currently managed by the Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forest. The resulting Monument would be designated as the Oregon Caves National Monument and Preserve. The bill would also designates one 

river segment as part of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and it would 

provide for possible termination of grazing use on a Forest Service-managed grazing 

allotment, a portion of which is located within the proposed boundary of the Preserve. USDA believes that interagency coordination and cooperation, with joint public involvement, is the most effective way of managing the Oregon Caves National 

Monument and surrounding National Forest System land. 

I would like to take this opportunity to discuss the current status of cooperative 

management of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest and the Oregon Caves 

National Monument and provide a few comments to the bill. 

We believe interagency cooperation would carry out the purpose of the bill to enhance the protection of the resources associated with the Monument and NFS lands 

and increase public recreation opportunities through a joint public involvement and 

review process, to ensure that public concerns and desires are addressed. To this 

end, the local U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service units have committeds 

to coordination on topics such as recreation management, management of cave resources, public signing, livestock grazing, trail maintenance and construction, fire 

protection, and fuels reduction among others. 

Boundary Adjustment and Management 

Section 3 of the bill would transfer management of the National Forest System 

Lands from the Secretary of Agriculture to the Secretary of the Interior, and adjust 

the boundary of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest accordingly. The 1998 Oregon Caves National Monument General Management Plan by the Department of 

the Interior (DOI), developed through the public National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) process, recommended a similar boundary expansion. However, no coordinated study or formal dialogue between the Departments (beyond that provided 

under NEPA during development of the DOI’s 1998 plan) has taken place on the 

issue of Monument expansion. 

The U.S. Forest Service is committed to cooperative management across our respective jurisdictions. 

The land managers of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest have three priorities for this area: 

Maintaining and protecting cave resources, hydrologic resources, watersheds, and view sheds.—Critical landscapes, including cave resources and 

watersheds, are managed by interagency collaboration. These resources, 

and the need to manage them in a cooperative manner, extend well beyond 

the proposed Monument boundary. 

Improving forest health by addressing hazardous fuels.—Most of the proposed expansion area is designated in the Land and Resource Management 

Plan as ‘‘Late-Successional Reserve’’ (LSR) as defined under the Northwest 

Forest Plan. These areas are intended to serve as habitat for late-succes-
49 

sional and old-growth related species. A majority of the LSR landscape 

within this watershed, and the larger surrounding landscape managed by 

the Forest Service, is in fire condition class 3—high risk of damaging wildfire. Currently the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is removing hazardous fuels using timber contracts to reduce fuels, both around the immediate vicinity of the Monument and across watersheds. The Forest plans to 

treat approximately 1550 acres to reduce hazardous fuels within the proposed expansion area. These treatments are designed to restore fire to this 

ecosystem and will help ensure that the forest attributes intended for the 

LSR, including bigger, older, more fire resistant trees, remain intact. About 

150 acres of treatment have been completed and another 100 acres are 

under contract. To that end, we fully endorse the intent of section 4(b) of 

the proposed legislation to have forest restoration activities continue on the 

proposed expansion area. The hazardous fuel challenge in this region and 

the danger of catastrophic fire cross all jurisdictions and is one we all must 

work together to address and thus a seamless management regime is an 

important goal. 

Managing for multiple uses while minimizing any potential impacts from 

harvest, grazing, mining, and road construction.—On National Forest lands 

surrounding the Monument, timber harvesting, grazing and special forest 

product harvesting (i.e. bear grass, firewood, mushrooms, etc.) are allowed 

only if they meet resource objectives, as described above. Road management 

is limited to maintenance and reconstruction activities; no new roads are 

planned. Moreover, interagency collaboration provides additional oversight 

of these multiple-use activities. 

Relinquishment and Retirement of Grazing Permits 

Section 4(d) of the legislation would require the Secretary of the Interior to permit 

livestock grazing at a level not greater than the level at which grazing exists on 

the date of enactment. Section 5 also would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to 

accept any donation of a grazing permit by the permit holder for grazing on the Forest Service managed Big Grayback grazing allotment and if such a donation is received, ensure an end to grazing on the entire allotment. Under this legislation, only 

a small portion of the Big Grayback allotment would become part of the proposed 

Preserve, but the legislation would end grazing on a large area of land outside the 

Preserve. We look forward to working with the Committee to address grazing management issues. The agency is committed to closing the Big Grayback allotment if 

the permit is donated. 

Recreational opportunities 

Current recreation on the portion of the National Forest proposed to be transferred includes horseback riding, hunting and fishing, gathering, camping, backpacking, and hiking. We support the requirement in section 4 that fishing, hunting 

and trapping be permitted in the proposed National Preserve. 

S. 508 CHIMNEY ROCK NATIONAL MONUMENT ACT OF 2010

The Department strongly supports S. 508. Designated as an Archaeological Area 

and National Historic Landmark in 1970, Chimney Rock lies on 4,100 acres of San 

Juan National Forest land surrounded by the Southern Ute Indian Reservation. Between A.D. 900 and 1150, the ancestors of modern Pueblo Indians occupied the 

lands surrounding Chimney Rock, and the site remains of archaeological and cultural significance to many descendant tribes. At 7,600 feet, Chimney Rock is also 

the most northeasterly and highest Chacoan site known. Chacoan culture refers to 

the way of life of ancient ancestors of modern Pueblo Indians and continues to be 

important to the native people in the region. 

The Forest Service values archaeological and cultural resources and considers it 

part of the agency’s mission to preserve and interpret them for the public. We believe the rich history, spectacular archaeological, cultural, scientific, watershed, and 

scenic resource values, as well as community support, merits the designation of the 

area as a National Monument. 

Section 3(a) of S. 508 would establish the Chimney Rock National Monument in 

the State of Colorado by designating 4,726 acres surrounding the Chimney Rock Archaeological Area within the San Juan National Forest as a National Monument. 

The purpose of the monument would be to preserve, protect, and restore archaeological, cultural, historic, geologic, hydrologic, natural, educational and scenic resources in the area as well as provide for public interpretation and recreation consistent with the protection of these resources. Section 4(b)(2)) of the bill would also 
50 

provide for continued use by Indian tribes to sites within the National Monument 

for traditional ceremonies and as a source of traditional plants and other materials. 

Section 3(b)(2) would authorize the Secretary to make minor boundary adjustments to the monument to include significant archeological resources discovered on 

adjacent public land. Under section 4©, the Secretary would be authorized to carry 

out vegetative management treatments; except that timber harvest may only be 

used when the Secretary deems it necessary to address the risk of wildfire, insects, 

or disease. 

Section 5 would require the development of a management plan, not later than 

3 years after the date of enactment, and in consultation with Indian Tribes with 

a cultural or historic connection to the monument. In developing the management 

plan, the Secretary would provide an opportunity for comment to the public and 

such entities as State, Tribal government, local, and national organizations. The 

San Juan National Forest land management plan would have to be amended to incorporate the management plan for the monument. Because of the importance of 

creating a successful management plan in collaboration with the community, Tribes, 

and the public, and the time needed to achieve this, the Department recommends 

the bill language be changed to state that the management plan shall be completed 

no later than five (5) years after the date of enactment. 

S. 279 CAMP HALE

This Bill would direct the Secretary of Interior to carry out a study to determine 

the suitability and feasibility of establishing Camp Hale as a unit of the National 

Park System. Currently Camp Hale is located in the White River National Forest 

and managed by the U.S. Forest Service. We would request that the U.S. Forest 

Service be a full partner in the study to determine the best management options 

and recommendations for Camp Hale so as to provide a complete picture of management options so as to provide a complete picture of management options.. Thank you 

for the opportunity to testify and I am pleased to answer any questions you may 

have. 

Senator UDALL. Mr. Holtrop, thank you very much. 

Dr. Loretto, welcome. We are eager to hear your testimony. 

Thank you for making the trip to Washington, DC. 

STATEMENT OF RAYMOND LORETTO, CHAIRMAN, VALLES 

CALDERA TRUST 

Mr. LORETTO. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 

I am Raymond Loretto, chairman of the board of trustees for the 

Valles Caldera Trust. I am on behalf of the Presidentially appointed members of the board of trustees to express our views on 

S. 564, the Valles Caldera National Preserve Management Act. 

The Trust supports the management and protection of the nationally significant natural and cultural resources found at the 

Valles Caldera National Preserve. Since the Trust inherited the 

preserve 11 years ago, our capable staff has led in efforts to improve the ecological conditions on the landscape, while increasing 

public access and use. 

Of special note, our staff, in collaboration with personnel from 

the Santa Fe National Forest and several other organizations, competed for funding in the USDA collaborative forest landscape restoration program, and restoration and monitoring activities will 

proceed across the preserve this summer. 

In addition to improving the ecological condition of the preserve, 

our science and education programs have blossomed, and the preserve now holds numerous research and educational art weeks’ 

projects. 

Although public access to the preserve is limited by the lack of 

infrastructure and a need for environmental analysis, we increased 
51 

participation in our recreational program last year, and we anticipate even higher numbers of visitors in the coming season. 

Since the Trust was formed in 2000, one of our mandates was 

to operate the preserve as an economically self-sustaining organization. In the past decade, the board of trustees made an honest effort to take the necessary steps to achieve this goal. But during 

this period, it has become clear that the capital improvements to 

make the preserve financially self-sufficient are either too costly or 

unacceptable to the major stakeholders in the region. 

Although approximately 20 percent of our annual operating costs 

are covered by revenues from our various programs on the preserve, it now appears that the Valles Caldera Trust will not meet 

the financial self-sufficiency goal that was a major objective of our 

legislation. 

In light of this fact, a majority of the Presidential appointees on 

the board of trustees feel that the proposed transfer of the preserve 

to the National Park Service is justified. 

At this time, I would like to briefly comment on four sections of 

the proposed legislation. 

First, the board of trustees recognizes the proposed bill’s stated 

goal to retain all eligible employees currently working for the preserve. 

We also applaud another bill’s stated goal to protect the traditional cultural and religious sites within the preserve in consultation with Indian tribes and the Pueblos. 

The bill also requires the Secretary to undertake activities to improve the health of the forest, grasslands, and ripe, aerent areas 

within the preserve. 

Should the S. 564 be enacted, we hope that the restoration of the 

forest and the watersheds that have planned and implemented by 

the Trust and the Forest Service at the preserves will continue 

under the management of the National Park Service. 

In addition, we hope that S. 564 continues the science and education programming established under Public Law 106–248, the 

Valles Caldera Preservation Act. 

In conclusion, we believe that the outstanding landscape that is 

the Valles Caldera National Preserve deserves the best stewardship possible, situated in a stable administration structure that is 

permanent and adequately funded for public use and appreciation 

The board of trustees of the preserve believes the National Park 

Service will provide that home; thus, we support S. 564, the Valles 

Caldera National Preserve Management Act. 

Thank you, and I will happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Loretto follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RAYMOND LORETTO, CHAIRMAN, VALLES CALDERA

TRUSTON S. 564 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am Raymond Loretto, Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Valles Caldera 

Trust, and I am here on behalf of the Presidentially appointed members of the 

Board of Trustees to express our views about S. 564, the Valles Caldera National 

Preserve Management Act. The Trust supports the management and protection of 

the nationally significant natural and cultural resources found at the Valles Caldera 

National Preserve. 

Since the Trust inherited the Preserve eleven years ago, our capable staff has led 

an effort to improve the ecological conditions on the landscape while increasing pub-
52 

lic access and use. Of special note, our staff, in collaboration with personnel from 

the Santa Fe National Forest and several other organizations, successfully competed 

for funding in the USDA’s Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program and 

restoration and monitoring activities will proceed across the Preserve this summer. 

In addition to improving the ecological condition of the Preserve, our science and 

education programs have blossomed, and the Preserve now hosts numerous research 

and educational outreach projects. Although public access to the Preserve is limited 

by a lack of infrastructure and the need for environmental analysis, we increased 

participation in our recreational programs last year, and we anticipate even higher 

numbers of visitors in the coming season. 

Since the Trust was formed in 2000, one of our mandates was to operate the Preserve as an economically self-sustaining organization. In the past decade, the Board 

of Trustees made an honest effort to take the necessary steps to achieve this goal, 

but during this period, it has become clear that capital improvements to make the 

Preserve financially self-sufficient are either too costly or unacceptable to the major 

stakeholders in the region. Although approximately 20% of our annual operating 

costs are covered by revenues from our various programs on the Preserve, it now 

appears that the Valles Caldera Trust will not meet the financial self-sufficiency 

goal that was a major objective of our enabling legislation. In light of this fact, a 

majority of the presidential appointees on the Board of Trustees feels that the proposed transfer of the Preserve to the National Park Service is justified. 

At this time, I would like to briefly comment on four sections of the proposed legislation. First, the Board of Trustees recognizes the proposed bill’s stated goal to retain all eligible employees currently working for the Preserve. We also applaud another of the bill’s stated goals, to protect the traditional cultural and religious sites 

within the Preserve, in consultation with Indian tribes and pueblos. The bill also 

requires the Secretary to undertake activities to improve the health of forest, grassland and riparian areas within the Preserve. Should S. 564 be enacted, we hope that 

the restoration of forests and watersheds that have been planned and implemented 

by the Trust and the Forest Service at the Preserve would continue under the management of the National Park Service. In addition, we hope that S.564 continues 

the Science and Education Program established under PL 106-248 (Valles Caldera 

Preservation Act). 

In conclusion, we believe that the outstanding landscape that is the Valles 

Caldera National Preserve deserves the best stewardship possible, situated in a stable administrative structure that is permanent and adequately funded for public use 

and appreciation. The Board of Trustees of the Preserve believe that the National 

Park Service would provide that home, thus, we support S. 564, the Valles Caldera 

National Preserve Management Act. 

Thank you and I would be happy to answer any questions. 

Senator UDALL. Dr. Loretto, thank you for that testimony. I 

know how important how this is to you, your people, and the people 

of New Mexico. 

Mr. LORETTO. Right. 

Senator UDALL. We look forward to working with you to make 

this a reality. 

Mr. LORETTO. Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. We do have a very tight schedule today. I hope 

you will accept my apologies and the ranking member’s as well. 

Given that context, I am going to submit my questions for the 

record. 

With that, I would like to turn to Senator Burr for any questions 

he might have. 

Senator BURR. Mr. Chairman, I am going to do exactly the same 

thing. All my questions will be submitted in writing to all the appropriate people. 

I appreciate all of you willingness to come in. 

Mr. Whitesell, it will not surprise you that my questions are rooted in an understanding of what our current backlog is for maintenance and why we would consider diverting any other moneys 

away from maintenance to additions to the Park Service. So, just 

to give you a head’s up as to the spirit of those questions. 
53 

I thank the chair. 

Senator UDALL. I thank the ranking member. I truly will miss 

him, and I will spend the next 10 minutes trying to talk him out 

of his decision to join the Finance Committee. I think I will be unsuccessful, but I will still make the effort. 

If there are no further questions, I would like to thank our witnesses for their testimony this afternoon. 

The hearing record will be open for 2 weeks to receive any additional statements and questions. 

With that, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:12 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(55) 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

RESPONSES OF STEPHEN E. WHITESELL TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MARK UDALL

Question 1. Mr. Whitesell, I noticed in your testimony for S. 279, the Camp Hale 

Study Act, a suggestion to include the Forest Service in the study to determine the 

future of Camp Hale. The legislation directs the NPS to carry out the study and 

provides for the inclusion of other Federal entities to have a role in the protection 

and interpretation of Camp Hale. What role do you see the Forest Service playing 

in the study and ultimately, in the future management of Camp Hale? 

Answer. The majority of the land currently within the Camp Hale boundaries is 

managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and located in the White River, San 

Isabel, and Arapaho National Forests. In addition, the LISTS is a partner in the 

Camp Hale Military Munitions Project, a project to improve public safety and reduce 

the public’s risk of exposure to hazardous military munitions in the Camp Hale 

project area remaining from past military training. Based upon their long-term 

management of the site and the intimate knowledge they possess of resource issues 

impacting the site, the USFS would be a logical partner in completing the study. 

When completed, the study would present a recommendation on the management 

of Camp Hale and the role that agencies such as USES and the National Park Service (NPS) will play in that management. 

Question 2. I have concerns about S. 849, the Waco Mammoth National Monument. In your testimony, Mr. Whitesell, you made it very clear that the language 

in the bill is contradictory and that without the use of Federal funds, establishing 

a Federal Monument is not feasible. Of the almost 400 units on the National Park 

System, are there any other areas where the Park Service is prohibited from spending Federal funds? Finally, how do you envision a cooperative agreement with the 

City of Waco, and Baylor University to manage the park unit? 

Answer. No, there are not any other units of the National Park System where the 

NPS is prohibited from spending federal funds. 

The details regarding possible cooperating agreements between the NPS, the City 

of Waco, and Baylor University were conceptualized in the Waco Mammoth Site 

Special Resource Study, completed by the NPS in 2008. The management framework recommended by the Study would have the NPS prepare a General Management Plan to guide managers of the site by defining what level of resource conditions and visitor experiences should be achieved over time. NPS would take the lead 

responsibility for ensuring the protection, scientific study, and visitor enjoyment of 

the paleontological resources of the site, enlisting the help of partners to accomplish 

this mission. The Cityof Waco or other partners would take the lead for initiating 

additional recreational, interpretive, and environmental education opportunities on 

the site. 

Question 3. S. 858, the Colonel Charles Young Home Study Act, includes a new 

provision that requires that the study be carried out ′′using existing funds of the 

National Park Service.′′ I’m not sure whether the intent is to authorize funding for 

the study or not, but I’m concerned this language could be interpreted to authorize 

the use of other park funds for the study. Do you have any concerns with this provision? 

Answer. It is not clear to us what this language means. If this language means 

that we could only use funds that the NPS has on hand at the time the bill is enacted and there is no funding available at that time, then the study could not be 

conducted. 
56 

RESPONSES OF STEPHEN E. WHITESELL TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BURR

FIRST STATE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK/HARRIET TUBMAN NATIONAL PARK

Question 1. Is creating the First State National Historical Park or Harriet Tub- man National Historical Park a greater priority than the over $9 billion maintenance backlog? If not, should we then wait until the backlog is paid down before 

these new units are established? 

Answer. The proposed First State National Historical Park, which has been found 

to meet the NPS criteria for new units, would be an important addition to the National Park System. Its designation should not have to be postponed because there 

is a maintenance backlog within existing units of the National Park System. 

Question 2. Can you please outline for me the costs associated with the creation 

of each of these new Park Units as well as the annual operation costs? Which maintenance backlog projects would these funds go to were they not being used to create 

new parks? 

Answer. First State National Historical Park—The Special Resource Study esti- mated annual operating costs for the park at $450,000 to $550,000, which would 

fund from five to seven FTEs. There would be a one-time cost associated with completing the general management plan of $600,000. The federal share to rehabilitate 

the Old Sheriffs Office as well as other park properties would cost up to $5 million. 

We anticipate that all of the properties within the park boundaries would be acquired through either donation or through easements at no cost to the federal government. 

Harriet Tubman National Historical Park (Auburn, NY)—The Special Resource 

Study estimated annual operating costs for the park at $500,000 to $650,000 which 

would fund five to seven FTEs. S. 323 limits the federal share for exhibits and preservation, restoration, and/or rehabilitation activities to $7.5 million, which is consistent with the SRS estimate. The one-time cost for the general management plan 

is estimated at $600,000 to $700,000. 

Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park (Caroline, Dorchester, and Talbot Counties, MD)—The Special Resource Study estimated an annual operating cost for the park between $500,000 to $650,000, which would fund 

five to seven FTEs. The federal share for the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad visitor center and land acquisition related to the park is estimated at up to 

$11 million. Due to the complexity of the site, the SRS estimates a one-time cost 

of $600,000 to $700,000 to prepare a general management plan. 

Maintenance Backlog—Any proposed funding for newly authorized units of the 

National Park System, and any proposed funding for reducing the maintenance 

backlog, would be determined through the Administration’s budget priority-setting 

process. Spending for new units would not necessarily offset spending for the maintenance backlog. 

Question 3. We have another new Park Unit bill before us, S. 849 Waco Mammoth 

National Monument, which is using little to no federal funds for the creation or operation, should we model future new park designations after Waco Mammoth? 

Answer. As we stated in our testimony, we cannot support S. 849 in its current 

form which would require the Secretary of the Interior to administer the national 

monument as a unit of the National Park System; but would prohibit the Secretary 

from expending any federal funds to do so. Without federal funding it would be difficult to preserve, protect, and interpret the resources of the proposed national 

monument to the level found at other National Park System units. As such, we feel 

that it would not be a good model to pursue for future additions to the system. 

Question 3a. Don’t you believe that this type of creative alterative is necessary 

to create new Units of the National Park System during these difficult economic 

times? 

Answer. No. The National Park System was created to preserve and protect for 

future generations resources Congress finds to be nationally significant. Prohibiting 

the expenditure of federal funds for that preservation and protection makes little 

sense. 

RESPONSES OF JOEL HOLTROP TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MARK UDALL

S. 508, CHIMNEY ROCK NATIONAL MONUMENT ESTABLISHMENT ACT

Question 1. The national archeological community has some concern about continued access for research once the Monument is established. μWould you support a 

minor amendment to the legislation to clarify that archeological and scientific research is allowed within the Monument boundaries? 
57 

Answer. Current rules and regulations that the US Forest Service operates under 

already allow for scientific research. In fact this is an important priority for the 

agency. Therefore, the Department would not object to an amendment that clarifies 

that archeological and scientific research is allowed. 

Question 2. Does the Forest Service support section 4(h) of S. 508, which allows 

for the designation of a Monument manager, but clarifies that such manager shall 

not be precluded from fulfilling other duties on the San Juan National Forest? 

Answer. Yes, the Department supports section 4(h) of S. 508, 112th Congress. 

(59) 

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

February 10, 2011. 

Hon. JIM WEBB, 

U.S. Senate, Senate Russell 248, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR WEBB: We, the undersigned organizations, are writing to express 

our support for legislation to establish a commission to commemorate the sesquicentennial of the American Civil War. This federal commission will serve as a helpful tool in the efforts already underway by states, localities and the National Park 

Service to promote the 150th anniversary of the conflict. In addition, the funding 

that would be provided as a result of this legislation would help ensure the sesquicentennial anniversary leaves a legacy of lasting educational value through the development of new scholarship, academic programs and curriculum, as well as the 

preservation of key battlefield lands that serve as outdoor classrooms for current 

and future generations of Americans. 

The American Civil War was a defining experience in our national history, and 

its legacy continues to exercise a tight hold on the imaginations of millions of Americans. The Sesquicentennial of the Civil War will begin in earnest with the 150th 

anniversary of the opening guns in April 2011, a date that is fast approaching. Unfortunately, at present, there is no federal commission to coordinate, help fundraise 

and assist with the Sesquicentennial commemorations being planned by states. The 

absence of a federal commission could result in a piecemeal commemoration that 

lacks cohesion and inclusion on a national level. 

Our generation has been given a rare moment during which to explore the legacies of the Civil War and Reconstruction and in the process better understand how 

the events of that era shape contemporary issues such as federalism, contested regional heritage, race, and civil rights. These last two are especially salient topics 

for consideration, for the years of the Sesquicentennial—2011 through 2015—coincide with the fiftieth anniversary of many of the signature events of the American 

Civil Rights Movement. 

Although time is running out—with the anniversary of the firing on Fort Sumter 

just a few months away—we believe that with your timely leadership, Americans 

across the country will work to create a meaningful commemoration that will empower America’s communities of historians, educators, preservationists, librarians, 

and archivists to present educational and commemorative activities for children and 

adults alike to the lasting benefit of all Americans. 

For these reasons, we support the creation of a federal commission to commemorate the sesquicentennial of the Civil War and the provisions for adequate funding 

to provide opportunities for lasting legacies of educational value. We believe that the 

creation of a federal commission is essential to the creation of a meaningful commemoration on the national level. A thoughtful engagement of this important anniversary at the national level will be to the ultimate benefit of all Americans. 

Thank you for your consideration. Please let us know if you or your staff has any 

questions. 

Respectfully submitted, 

American Association of Museums, 

American Association for State and Local History, 

Association for the Study of African American Life and History, 

Civil War Trust, 

Federation of State Humanities Councils, 

History Channel, 

National Coalition for History, 

National Council on Public History, 

National Council for the Social Studies, 

National History Day, 
60 

Society for Military History, 

Southern Historical Association. 

THE CONSERVATION FUND, 

Arlington, VA, May 11, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 304 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Hon. RICHARD BURR, 

Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 304 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, 

DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL AND RANKING MEMBER BURR: As America commemorates 

the sesquicentennial of the Civil War, we write to express our strong support of S. 

713, the Petersburg National Battlefield Boundary Modification Act, and to urge the 

Senate Subcommittee on National Parks to hold a hearing on this important legislation that enjoys broad local, federal and private sector support. Identical legislation 

was reported favorably out of your Subcommittee in the 111th Congress. We appreciate the bipartisan leadership of Senator Webb and Senator Warner, along with 

Representative Randy Forbes, to expand the boundary of the Petersburg National 

Battlefield to conserve important historic lands and help tell the story of this remarkable battle to the public and for the benefit of future generations. 

As one of the great battles of the Civil War, the 292-day siege of Petersburg set 

the stage for the end of the war at Appamottox. The siege took its toll on soldiers 

and civilians alike as 70,000 combatants became casualties while some civilians 

were driven from their homes. Almost a quarter of the entire Civil War was fought 

around the city of Petersburg as Generals Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee came 

head-to-head in their effort to control the rails and other supply lines which the 

Confederacy so desperately needed for its survival. Over the course of the nine-anda-half months and 108 separate engagements covering more than 176 square miles, 

the conflicts at Petersburg were the most extensive and complex battles of the entire 

war. The outcome of the longest siege in American history proved pivotal as well 

and set the stage for the surrender of the Confederacy only seven days after the 

fall of Petersburg. 

The Petersburg National Battlefield faces threats to physical resources and to the 

visitor experience from incompatible residential, commercial and industrial development along park borders due to the impact of high growth in its surrounding counties. Several important portions of nationally significant battlefields related to the 

Petersburg Campaign have already been lost with development of an industrial 

park, a steel recycling plant and residential housing. Concerned about these losses, 

National Park Service (NPS) staff developed an Assessment of Integrity Report that 

identified nationally significant battlefield lands critical to the park’s mission that 

lie outside its boundaries. Twelve nationally significant battlefields totaling approximately 7,238 acres met NPS criteria for integrity, interpretability, suitability and 

feasibility for protection. These battlefield areas were included in the Final General 

Management Plan and within the recommended boundary expansion for the park. 

If enacted, S. 713 and H.R. 1296, companion legislation introduced by Rep. 

Forbes, would further the Petersburg National Battlefield General Management 

Plan by: 

• Providing NPS with the authority to acquire land, on a willing seller basis, or 

via donation within the 7,238-acre boundary expansion area, as recommended 

by NPS in 2005 as part of its Final General Management Plan. 

• Authorizing the Secretary of Interior and the Secretary of the Army to move 

forward with a small exchange of land (approximately 1.17 acres/each) between 

the Petersburg National Battlefield and the Fort Lee Military Reservation adjacent to the Park. 

We wish to commend Senator Jim Webb and Senator Mark Warner for their outstanding leadership to help preserve the unprotected hallowed ground on the battlefields in the Petersburg area by introducing this legislation to expand the boundary 

of the Petersburg National Battlefield. We urge the Subcommittee to commemorate 

the Civil War sesquicentennial by approving S. 713 and companion House legislation (H.R. 1296) this Congress. In addition to honoring those brave men who fought 

and died on these fields, this legislation would increase heritage tourism in Virginia, 

bringing in tourism dollars that are extremely important to the local economy. The 

expanded boundary will also enable current and future generations of Americans to 
61 

learn more about Petersburg’s critical role in the final year of the Civil War and 

better understand how those events shaped contemporary issues such as race and 

civil rights. 

With the Civil War’s sesquicentennial beginning this year, Congressional approval 

and enactment of this boundary expansion legislation during the 112th Congress 

would appropriately commemorate this chapter of America’s history. Thank you for 

your leadership on this important initiative. 

Sincerely, 

DAN SAKURA, 

Vice President for Government Relations & Director of Real Estate, 

The Conservation Fund. 

JIM CAMPI, 

Policy & Communications Director, 

Civil War Trust. 

PAMELA E. GODDARD, 

Chesapeake & Virginia Program Manager, 

Mid-Atlantic Regional Office, 

National Parks Conservation Association. 

DR. FRANK SMITH, 

Executive Director, 

African-American Civil War Memorial Museum. 

AMERICAN RIVERS, 

RIVER PROTECTION, 

Washington, DC, May 10, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

Hon. RICHARD BURR, 

Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL AND RANKING MEMBER BURR: On behalf of American Rivers’ members and supporters in Oregon and throughout the United States, thank 

you for holding a hearing on S. 403, the Molalla River Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 

and S. 765, the Oregon Caves Revitalization Act of 2011. American Rivers supports 

both S. 403 and S. 765. 

Molalla River 

The Molalla River is a true remnant of the historical Oregon landscape. From its 

headwaters near the Cascade Mountains, this river winds its way through cedar, 

hemlock, old-growth Douglas-fir forests and basalt rock canyons, then travels 

through fertile agricultural lands and the cities of Molalla and Canby before entering the Willamette River. 

The Molalla River is a vital resource for human and natural communities and is 

especially worthy of Wild and Scenic protection. One of the most important attributes of the Molalla River is its role as the primary drinking water source for 

the cities of Canby and Molalla. Protecting the water quality of the river for the 

future is vital to the health and well-being of 20,000 local residents. 

The River is a recreation destination for thousands of visitors every year. In 2008, 

tourism along the corridor increased 33 percent. The City of Molalla and Clackamas 

County support designation as it will further increase tourism along the river, help 

boost jobs and the local economy, and protect a source of drinking water. 

The recreational and cultural importance of the river to the local community has 

resulted in the creation of the Molalla River Alliance, an all-volunteer coalition of 

more than 45 local and conservation groups, federal, state and local agencies, user 

groups, individual conservationists and local property owners. The Alliance strongly 

supports designation of the Molalla River. 

The Molalla River is also an important resource for native fish and other aquatic 

species. It provides critical habitat for several native fish species, including a stronghold population of native winter steelhead, a threatened population of spring Chinook salmon, a naturalized population of Coho salmon, and resident rainbow and 

cutthroat trout. The river corridor also serves as an important wildlife corridor containing breeding and rearing habitat for northern spotted owl, pileated woodpecker, 

red tree vole, red-legged frog and pacific giant salamander. 
62 

Oregon Caves 

The Oregon Caves National Monument (Monument), located in the botanically 

rich Siskiyou Mountains, hosts a spectacular cave system with a rich geologic history and a river systems which provides clean drinking water for the Monument, 

and is nationally significant for its hydrological, ecological and geological features. 

The River Styx is a unique segment of Cave Creek that flows underground 

through the cave system and significantly shapes the subterranean geologic formations and biological processes with the caves. The chemical interactions underground create unique formations inside the cave system. Changes in the chemical 

and biological composition of the water can permit changes in the processes affecting the cave. Protecting the River Styx as the first underground Wild and Scenic 

River is fundamental to protect and maintain these subterranean processes and 

unique features 

Cave Creek and its tributaries are part of the larger Wild and Scenic Illinois 

River watershed, which itself is a tributary of the Wild and Scenic Rogue River watershed. The cold waters and miles of spawning and rearing habitat provided by 

these watersheds for salmon and steelhead are critical not only for the survival of 

these fish, but for the economic livelihoods of the multi-million dollar sport and commercial fishing industries that rely on healthy native fish runs in southern Oregon. 

For all of the reasons described above, American Rivers supports Wild and Scenic 

designation of the Molalla River and the River Styx, as Wild and Scenic Rivers. We 

thank you for holding a hearing to protect these Oregon treasures, and we look forward to working with the committee to advance this legislation. 

Sincerely, 

DAVID MORYC, 

Senior Director. 

STATEMENT OF JEANNETTE A. FEEHELEY, PRESIDENT, CITIZENS FOR ACCESS TO THE

LAKESHORE (CAL) CITIZEN, BENZIE COUNTY, MI, ON S. 140 

Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Burr, and Members of the Subcommittee, 

Thank you for allowing me to submit this testimony to express our organization’s 

support of S. 140. Its introduction represents the result of over nine years of work 

by the National Park Service (NPS) and input by us and hundreds of other organizations and individuals into NPS proceedings to establish a new General Management Plan and Wilderness Study for Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore 

(SLBE), which runs for seventy gorgeous miles along prime Lake Michigan shoreline 

in Benzie and Leelanau Counties in Northwest Michigan. The NPS in 2009 finalized 

and adopted its new General Management Plan for this Lakeshore, but significant 

parts of it cannot be implemented unless and until its accompanying Wilderness 

proposal is adopted by Congress and signed into law. 

We are extremely grateful to the Senate sponsor of this bill, the Honorable Carl 

Levin, who has been of immense aid to us and others in our negotiations over the 

years with the NPS, and to the Senate co-sponsor, the Honorable Debbie Stabenow. 

We are likewise grateful to our current and previous Congressmen for Benzie and 

Leelanau Counties, who also have long been highly engaged in this bi-chamber, bipartisan effort. A similar bill to S. 140, H.R. 977, has been introduced in the U.S. 

House of Representatives by the Honorable Bill Huizenga and co-sponsored by eight 

Michigan House members, including the Honorable Dave Camp, whose district includes a portion of SLBE. 

In 2002, a public outcry erupted in Benzie and Leelanau Counties where the 

Lakeshore is located over the then current General Management Plan (GMP) proposals that were nearing their final stage and well on their way to adoption by the 

NPS. Until the 2002 NPS Newsletter had been released that gave details of Four 

Alternatives the NPS was considering at that time, along with their Preferred Alternative, most of the general public in the area were unaware of its implications. A 

few members of the public began publicizing those implications, and many in the 

area became incensed. After studying the matter and attending NPS hearings on 

such, some of my neighbors and I realized that there was no public nor local governmental body nor volunteer organization sufficiently manned to mount the sustained 

effort it would take to get the NPS to listen and respond to our concerns, so we 

formed Citizens for Access to the Lakeshore (CAL) as a nonprofit, citizen advocacy 

group to do so. We recruited membership, elected a Board of Directors and collected 

dues and donations sufficient to support our newsletters, public presentations, educational outreach and the development and maintenance of a CAL Web Site. 

At our founding, CAL never expected it would take nine years for the issues to 

get addressed, nor had we any idea that it would require new legislation to be 
63 

passed by Congress, but the tedious and painstaking efforts by all concerned will 

be worth it if the legislation before you is passed. The bill is needed in order to 

allow the Park Service to implement the 2009 outcome of NPS proceedings and negotiations with the public which became, over eight years time, a true collaboration, 

in our view, among the Park Service and all its stakeholders. 

We are very grateful to SLBE Superintendent Dusty Shultz for the new GMP and 

Wilderness Study subsequently developed and approved at the agency level in 2009. 

Superintendent Shultz had not been a part of the development of the former GMP 

proposals in the early 2000’s, having arrived at the Park as its new Superintendent 

after they had already reached their final stage. When the Secretary of Interior, in 

response to public outrage, requested withdrawal in October 2002 of that previous 

GMP, Superintendent Shultz responded by thenceforth devoting much staff time 

and resources to learning why the community was so alarmed and why the NPS 

had been so taken by surprise by the outrage. 

Those early years also saw the appointment of a new Director of the NPS Midwest 

Region, Mr. Ernie Quintana, who came to SLBE to view the Lakeshore, which had 

become one of his new responsibilities. During that visit, he was kind enough to 

meet with CAL Board members in the presence of Superintendent Shultz. After listening to us, he expressed his view that we seemed to have legitimate concerns, that 

the NPS could address them, and that he would be supportive in that effort. He has, 

indeed, been supportive at all crucial, NPS/internal review and approval stages over 

the many years on these efforts, and we are very grateful to Director Quintana and 

his Midwest Region Staff in Omaha. 

One of the first steps taken by the NPS during that contentious time was to send 

new personnel to SLBE who had expertise in public relations. CAL and others wondered at the time if Mr. Tom Ulrich had been sent simply to tell the local population 

that we didn’t know or understand anything and to admonish us for having dared 

to question the federal bureaucracy. However, we soon learned that Mr. Ulrich was 

not sent for window dressing or simply to smooth ruffled feathers. Instead, we found 

him to be a dedicated public servant who was committed to listening to the concerns 

of the agency’s stakeholders and who adeptly helped establish a working relationship among what had become, by that time, two distinct adversaries: the National 

Park Service vs. the SLBE’s surrounding local communities. 

CAL strongly believes that, from 2002-2009, these two sides learned to listen and 

talk with each other as never before, and that the NPS adopted a new view that 

it is better to aggressively publicize its processes and actively and genuinely solicit 

input up front rather than assume all is well only to learn late in the game that 

its stakeholders had not understood the implications of what it planned to do. The 

materials developed by the NPS in this particular effort are a vast improvement 

over what was available to the public before. For instance, after the GMP process 

was resumed in 2006, inter-active communication tools were newly available to the 

public on an improved NPS Web Site that made it much easier for the general public to access, read and submit formal comment on each NPS proposal. It also appeared that the NPS liberalized, or, at least, publicized better, that any citizen who 

so desired could be put onto their mailing list to receive NPS proposals each step 

along the way where there was opportunity for public input. 

In addition, ever since 2002, CAL had been speaking at local and county government meetings, road commission hearings, Chamber of Commerce meetings, Rotary 

Clubs, etc., in an attempt to inform as many people as possible about our discoveries 

of the implications of the NPS proposals. So the NPS spent the time and resources 

necessary to do the same and more: Superintendent Shultz and Deputy Superintendent Ulrich and other NPS staff began to attend meetings of their stakeholders/customers’ organizations to make themselves available for questioning at 

their stakeholders’ convenience and on their stakeholders’ own territory. And, once 

the new GMP process was restarted in 2006, the NPS developed a Power Point 

Presentation they took ‘‘on the road’’ rather than relying on the few standard NPS 

Open Hearing dates which the public may or may not be able to attend. 

As for the substance of the problem, it was, in a nutshell, that in 1981 the NPS 

had concluded a Wilderness Study and made a wilderness recommendation at a very 

young Park still deep in a contentious acquisition phase, its enabling legislation 

having only been passed in 1970. The full impact of that Study would not become 

apparent to the public until much later, after most of the land had come under Park 

Service ownership. Two and a half decades passed with issues simmering in seemingly piecemeal NPS actions that the public only saw as separate, isolated irritants. 

However, the full implications of the 1981 Wilderness Study and its inherent incompatibility with reality surfaced explosively in the 2002 GMP. 

Complicating matters was that this Park had not originated with vast amounts 

of never-used or never-privately-owned land, but of land that had been mostly held 
64 

and used by small, private landowners for two centuries, along with two small areas 

of state park land. In order for the Park to become a reality, most of those private 

owners had to be removed from their land after the 1970 enabling legislation was 

passed. Many of the land parcels had been in the owners’ families’ possession for 

generations. Some were very willing to sell, some were not, and some were taken 

by eminent domain or its perceived threat. Another acquisition method was a sale 

in which the owners were allowed to reside for a specified time, usually through a 

twenty-five year lease. 

Although generally beloved by the most of the local populace now, the Park’s very 

creation had been wrenching and painful. Indeed, it had taken the whole decade of 

the nineteen sixties for proponents of a new federalized Park to win sufficient support inside the State of Michigan for the 1970 enabling legislation to pass. The 

promise held out to all at the time was that, by taking the land and making it a 

federal Lakeshore, its woods and dunes and beautiful beaches would forever more 

be saved for the recreational uses of the general public rather than swallowed up 

and transformed by large-scale private developers. 

So, in 1981, the general public had little idea that ‘‘wilderness’’, if applied where 

roads already existed, would require the removal of those roads. The Wilderness 

acreage recommended in 1981 did, indeed, include many county roads in both 

Benzie and Leelanau Counties, roads which have provided the historical access to 

the beaches. The general public also had little idea that the 1981 ‘‘wilderness’’ would 

be interpreted by the NPS as a call for the destruction of many historical features 

throughout the Park. Indeed, it took two other citizens’ groups, with the help of Senator Levin, to get the NPS to recognize that there were historical resources and cultural viewscapes worth saving within a Park where acquisition and a return-to-nature agenda were on full throttle. Never-the-less, enough was understood about the 

1981 Wilderness Recommendation that it was politically highly contentious from its 

inception: the Secretary of Interior would not approve it nor move it along for further approval. The Congress at that time reacted to the Secretary’s inaction by inserting a few sentences about the 1981 Wilderness Study in a 1982 amendment to 

the Park’s 1970 enabling legislation. The purposes of the 1982 amendment had 

mostly to do with making the acquisition process fairer to all property owners and 

with removing certain areas of land around Glen Lake from the Park boundaries. 

Even though the 1982 legislation’s intent and purposes had nothing to do with wilderness, Congress inserted language into that bill that instructed the NPS to manage all the land within the 1981 Wilderness Study as if it was ‘‘wilderness’’ unless 

and until Congress said otherwise. The effect, as noted in the Congressional Record 

at the time, was a wilderness designation imposed by the back door, a de facto wilderness where none had been formally designated by Congress according to the procedures of the Wilderness Act. 

Over the years, the NPS attempted, from time to time, to acquire the county 

roads within those de facto wilderness areas, per the 1982 Congressional action. 

However, for thirty years, the Counties have adamantly resisted federal acquisition 

of their roads, having no wish for their residents and tourists to lose public access 

to the beaches. The Park Service was never successful in eliminating the historical 

vehicular access on the mainland, but was successful on the Park’s two islands, 

North and South Manitou, by disallowing use of the landing piers by cars and by 

a 1987 letter to South Manitou residents. 

The building tension over the NPS’s repeated attempts to acquire the counties’ 

roads came to a head in the 2002 GMP proposals. Having little familiarity with the 

long forgotten 1981 Wilderness Study and having little acquaintance with the fact 

that the Study’s effects had become federal law in 1982, most local people were completely dumbfounded in 2002 on a number of levels: 

• Why did the 2002 GMP call for the acquisition and demolishment of the county 

roads, which provide the only vehicular access of the general public to the 

beaches? 

• Why did the 2002 GMP propose ‘‘mouldering’’ many of the area’s historical resources? 

• Why did the 2002 GMP proposals portray half the Lakeshore as a place where 

the human foot had left no mark and where only ‘‘wilderness’’ had existed? 

In this aspect, the GMP’s tone, as well as the content, was highly offensive to 

local people who themselves or their parents had been uprooted from the very 

land now called a ‘‘wilderness’’ where, allegedly, no one had ever settled. In reality, the local populace had first hand knowledge that said lands had been 

farmed, settled and lumbered for generations, and that Native Americans and 

lumbering companies had worn trails that still exist and are used to this day. 

South Manitou Island, with its great natural harbor and nautical refuge in 
65 

Lake Michigan, had been settled, farmed and lumbered even before the City of 

Detroit was developed. The 2002 GMP proposals were not only offensive for proposing that the general public lose its access to the beaches, the very purpose 

of the enabling legislation, but added insult to injury by attempting to wipe out 

the magnificent human history of the area’s forebears. 

• And why did Park Service staff, in attempting to explain these matters to an 

outraged citizenry, keep saying that it had all been ‘‘mandated’’ by Congress? 

It took CAL much study of past legislation and NPS documents to track down all 

the historical events leading to the disastrous 2002 collision between the Park Service and SLBE’s local communities. 

Once CAL identified the 1981 Wilderness Study and the 1982 law as the cause 

of much of the problem, CAL sought to have the offending lines in the 1982 legislation removed, which would have freed the Park Service from any wilderness ‘‘mandate’’ and would have allowed them to begin afresh a new GMP unencumbered with 

de facto wilderness. However, we ascertained, to our initial disappointment, that 

there was no Congressional, political or agency will for such. It appeared that doing 

so might be interpreted and maybe contested by wilderness proponents as a removal 

of ‘‘wilderness’’ from the Lakeshore, even though such had never been officially designated. 

However, our Senators and Congressmen actively supported the public’s desire to 

be heard, and, at the same time, they actively supported the Park Service’s desire 

to allow for a cooling off period and to give the NPS time to look anew at the problems and situation. Our Senators and Congressmen supported the NPS’ entering 

into a long, multi-year, continuing dialogue with the local communities. Our elected 

officials also supported CAL whenever it appeared to us that the NPS was not listening nor understanding us. Thanks to our Senators and Congressmen, we learned 

to read and speak Park Service-ese, and the NPS learned to understand us, even 

though we weren’t always conversant or familiar with the multitudinous NPS procedures, policies and technical terms. 

It worked! The 2009 GMP/Wilderness Study addresses and corrects all the unresolved issues of the previous Wilderness Study. Now the areas proposed for wilderness make sense, and will provide that the primitive, natural areas can remain as 

much of the local population wishes—in their natural state—without cutting off 

public access where it is needed. 

The bill before you, if adopted, will finally, finally throw out the flawed 1981 Wilderness Study that has had our Lakeshore tied up for so long in administratively 

applied wilderness sanctions where they were inappropriate and unenforceable, and 

will replace it with the new 2009 Wilderness recommendation that puts the Lakeshore’s counties’ roads, beaches, fundamental historical resources and all remaining 

private inholdings outside wilderness jurisdiction. At the same time, the bill would 

give a true, Congressionally approved wilderness designation to those areas of the 

Park, a good half of its acreage, where a wilderness designation is appropriate and 

can be easily enforced by the Park Service and supported by its stakeholders. 

The bill is a win/win for proponents of wilderness and conservation as well as proponents of public access and varied recreation usage. It is not a bill where the proponents give grudging, reluctant support, feeling compromised and unhappy about 

something. Rather, this is a bill wherein almost everyone involved has emerged 

quite satisfied. 

CAL highly supports this bill and respectfully asks your consideration for its passage. 

CIVIL WAR TRUST, 

Washington, DC, May 9, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, U.S. Senate, National Parks Subcommittee, 304 Senate Dirksen Office 

Building, Washington, DC. 

Hon. RICHARD BURR, 

Ranking Member, U.S. Senate, National Parks Subcommittee, 304 Senate Dirksen 

Office Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL AND RANKING MEMBER BURR: On behalf of the 55,000 

members of the national nonprofit Civil War Trust, I am writing to express our 

strong support for S. 599, legislation to establish a commission to commemorate the 

sesquicentennial of the American Civil War. This federal commission will serve as 

a helpful tool in the efforts already underway by states, localities and the National 

Park Service to promote the 150th anniversary of the conflict. In addition, the fund-
66 

ing that would be provided as a result of this legislation would help ensure the sesquicentennial anniversary leaves a legacy of lasting educational value through the 

development of new scholarship, academic programs and curriculum, as well as the 

preservation of key battlefield lands that serve as outdoor classrooms for current 

and future generations of Americans. 

The American Civil War was a defining experience in our national history, and 

its legacy continues to exercise a tight hold on the imaginations of millions of Americans. The Sesquicentennial of the Civil War officially began with the anniversary 

of the firing on Fort Sumter on April 12. Unfortunately, at present, there is no federal commission to coordinate, help fundraise and assist with the Sesquicentennial 

commemorations being planned by states. The absence of a federal commission could 

result in a piecemeal commemoration that lacks cohesion and inclusion on a national level. 

Our generation has been given a rare moment during which to explore the legacies of the Civil War and Reconstruction and in the process better understand how 

the events of that era shape contemporary issues such as federalism, contested regional heritage, race, and civil rights. These last two are especially salient topics 

for consideration, for the years of the Sesquicentennial—2011 through 2015—coincide with the fiftieth anniversary of many of the signature events of the American 

Civil Rights Movement. 

Although the sesquicentennial is already underway, we believe that with your 

timely leadership, Americans across the country will work to create a meaningful 

commemoration that will empower America’s communities of historians, educators, 

preservationists, librarians, and archivists to present educational and commemorative activities for children and adults alike to the lasting benefit of all Americans. 

For these reasons, we support the creation of a federal commission to commemorate the sesquicentennial of the Civil War and the provisions for adequate funding 

to provide opportunities for lasting legacies of educational value. We believe that the 

creation of a federal commission is essential to the creation of a meaningful commemoration on the national level. A thoughtful engagement of this important anniversary at the national level will be to the ultimate benefit of all Americans. 

Thank you for your consideration. Please let us know if you or your staff has any 

questions. 

Respectfully submitted, 

O. JAMES LIGHTHIZER, 

President. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN R. DIAL, CONSTITUENT, GLENVILLE, NY, ON S. 279 

I am writing to urge you to support ‘‘S. 279—the Camp Hale Study Act.’’ The 

Camp Hale Study Act is a bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to carry out 

a study to determine the suitability and feasibility of establishing Camp Hale as a 

unit of the National Park System. Please note, this bill does not authorize any appropriation of money. 

As you may know, Camp Hale, Colorado is a completely unique former military 

post in the United States. It is the original training ground of the 10th Mountain 

Division, the ancestor of the light infantry division currently posted at Fort Drum, 

New York. I am a resident of New York State, and a veteran of the 27th Infantry 

Brigade, a New York Army National Guard unit that was the round-out brigade for 

the 10th Mountain Division at the time I served in it. I am also a member of the 

National Association of the 10th Mountain Division. As a soldier during peacetime, 

I was humbled and proud to be associated with such a glorious military heritage. 

While there have been many splendid and courageous military units in America’s 

history, there has been only ONE mountain or alpine division—the 10th during 

World War 2. In addition to fighting in numerous significant battles in Italy during 

the war, veterans of the 10th Mountain Division went on after the war to become 

pioneers and leaders in the U.S. skiing and outdoor industry, including the National 

Park Service. There has never been another division like the 10th Mountain in the 

history of the United States. It would be a grand honor to have Camp Hale recognized by the National Park Service before all of these aging World War 2 veterans 

are gone. It would also be an honor to the many Fort Drum 10th veterans who currently live and vote in New York. 

Please consider supporting this bill—S. 279: the Camp Hale Study Act. Below are 

some links with more information about Camp Hale and the 10th Mountain Divison. 

Thank you for your time and consideration, and for your public service to our nation. 
67 

STATEMENT OF AARON SCHUTT, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF OPERATING

OFFICER, DOYON, LIMITED, ON S. 313 

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

to provide written testimony on S. 313, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for a micro hydro project in non-wilderness areas within the 

boundaries of Denali National Park and Preserve, to acquire land for Denali National Park and Preserve from Doyon Tourism, Inc., and for other purposes. I would 

especially like to thank my home state Senators. Senator Lisa Murkowski, Ranking 

Member of the full Committee, is the sponsor of this legislation. Senator Mark 

Begich is a co-sponsor this year and was the lead sponsor of the bill last year. My 

name is Aaron Schutt, I am the Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer 

of Doyon, Limited. 

Doyon is one of thirteen Alaska Native Regional Corporations, formed under the 

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA). Doyon has more than 

18,000 Alaska Native shareholders, and we are proud of our record on behalf of 

those shareholders. Our mission is to promote the economic and social well-being 

of our shareholders and future shareholders, to strengthen our Native way of life 

and to protect and enhance our land and resources. 

The issue that brings my interest to you today involves Doyon’s effort to improve 

our energy efficiency and environmental footprint on our in-holdings within the 

Denali National Park. The Kantishna Hills Renewable Energy Act provides an avenue for Doyon to develop a renewable energy system to provide electrical power to 

the Kantishna Roadhouse. The Kantishna Roadhouse is a full service wilderness 

lodge providing overnight accommodations to Denali National Park visitors. 

Owned and operated by Doyon Tourism, a wholly-owned Doyon subsidiary, the 

Kantishna Roadhouse is located on an in-holding within Denali National Park. 

Kantishna Roadhouse serves thousands of Park visitors each year. As it is located 

100 miles inside the Park, the Roadhouse is not connected to any utility grid and 

must produce 100% of its electrical energy onsite. Currently, our power comes from 

a diesel generator. This system requires trucking several thousand gallons of diesel 

fuel through the Park each year. We run the generator on a twenty four hour basis 

through the entire operating season. Doyon Tourism strives to provide our services 

in the Park and on our lands in the most environmentally respectful way. 

Doyon is facing several problems with the construction of this renewable energy 

project, thus the need for this legislation. Of primary concern is the land ownership. 

While Doyon currently owns the proposed location of the micro-hydro power plant, 

it does not own some of the land needed for the project. This legislation addresses 

this problem. 

In early 2010, Doyon received a Tribal Renewable Energy Grant from the Department of Energy. We wanted to use part of that grant to install a micro-hydro power 

generation system at the Kantishna Roadhouse. However, due to time limitations 

on the use of those funds, restricted access periods to our facility inside the Park, 

the limited construction season in Alaska and the lack of an access permit from the 

National Park Service we do not believe we will be able to make use of this grant 

at this time. Doyon remains committed to this project, however, if the land ownership issues can be addressed. 

This micro-hydro project is modeled after the system installed at the Park Service’s recently renovated Eielson Visitors Center, also located deep within Denali National Park and Preserve. This renewable energy system would potentially provide 

up to half of our current electrical energy needs, offsetting an equivalent amount 

of diesel usage and its incumbent environmental footprint. 

Doyon has worked with the National Park Service for the past year to develop 

this legislation. S. 313 has two parts. First, it allows the Park Serve to issue a permit to Doyon Tourism to build the proposed renewable energy project. Second, it 

calls on the Park Service to exchange lands with Doyon so that all of the lands 

needed for the construction and operation of the micro-hydro project are owned by 

Doyon Tourism. In exchange, Doyon would provide an equivalent amount of acreage 

on a value-for-value basis from its other land holdings in the vicinity of the 

Kantishna Roadhouse. Under the current agreement, six to seven acres would be 

exchanged between each of the two parties. 

It is Doyon’s understanding that the Park Service wished to broaden the scope 

of this bill to include other existing renewable energy projects in the Kantishna 

Hills region of the Park. While Doyon does not have any ownership or involvement 

with these other projects, we do not oppose the NPS effort to use this legislation 

to address their other concerns, as long as each of those efforts are treated separately in the permit and land exchange process. 
68 

In conclusion, I would like to reinforce my comments that this legislation is good 

for all the parties involved. HR. 441 will allow Doyon to move forward with a small 

renewable energy project. The project will substantially reduce all aspects of environmental footprint related to our current power generation system: fewer truckloads of diesel trucked in over the remote Park roads which in turn results in cleaner local air quality and less sound pollution in this remote area. Doyon believes this 

project mirrors the recent efforts of the National Park Service to achieve greater use 

of renewable energy at its facilities. 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the subcommittee today. I 

would be pleased to provide written responses to any questions the Members of the 

Subcommittees may have regarding the Kantishna Hill Renewable Energy Act of 

2011. 

STATEMENT OF PEARL ALICE MARSH, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT, MAXVILLE HERITAGE

INTERPRETIVE CENTER, WALLOWA, OR, ON S. 271 

Dear Chairman Widen and Subcommittee Members: 

I thank you for taking the time to consider my written testimony in support of 

S. 271, ‘the Wallowa Forest Service Compound Conveyance Act’. This bill is extremely important to the restoration and preservation of the social history of the 

logging communities in Wallowa County and the state of Oregon generally. 

My family migrated from Louisiana and Arizona to Maxville, Wallowa County, 

Oregon, in 1939. My grandfather, father, and their co-workers were drawn to 

Maxville in search of work during the depression. As new arrivals, they and their 

families created a vibrant community of African American loggers and shared work 

and friendships with many others in the logging industry who had migrated from 

other parts of the country. Many of their ancestors were German, Irish, Scottish, 

and English and brought with them their traditions. These newcomers met the indigenous Native people and together creating a rich cultural legacy for Wallowa 

County. 

This bill will allow Wallowa County and its local communities to restore and utilize the Wallowa Compound’s historic structures for a public center that will revive 

the social and cultural history of the County and become a major attraction for the 

tourism economy. The facilities also will serve as a major repository of original historical materials documenting the county’s past. 

As a descendant of this historic place, I look forward to contributing our family 

archival materials to turn the Wallowa Compound into a culturally bountiful place. 

STATEMENT OF JIM STRATTON, ALASKA REGIONAL DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARKS

CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, ON S. 313 AND S. 302 

The National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) works to protect, preserve, 

and enhance America’s national parks for present and future generations. On behalf 

of NPCA’s 325,000 members, and especially the national parks in Alaska, we appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments for the record. 

The National Parks Conservation Association generally supports the purpose and 

basic concept behind S. 313, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to exchange parcels of non-wilderness lands within Denali National Park and Preserve 

for parcels owned by Doyon Tourism, Inc. for the purpose of supporting a microhydro project in the non-wilderness areas within the boundaries of Denali National 

Park and Preserve. We understand that the permit language in the bill is no longer 

needed and will be removed during mark-up as Doyon’s timetable for micro-hydro 

construction no longer calls for immediate permitting. 

This bill would direct the Park Service and Doyon to enter into a land exchange 

agreement that would bring the land necessary to support Doyon’s micro-hydro site, 

and other lands adjacent to the existing Doyon properties in Kantishna, into 

Doyon’s ownership in exchange for a Doyon-owned parcel identified by the Park 

Service as a priority for acquisition and inclusion in the park. 

The land exchange resulting from this legislation would help Doyon’s businesses 

in the Kantishna region of Denali National Park & Preserve reduce its dependency 

on diesel powered electrical generation in favor of power produced by micro-hydro 

sites. As such, this switch to renewable hydro energy would also reduce the number 

of trips that fuel trucks would have to make over the park road to deliver diesel 

to power the existing generators. The micro-hydro site proposed by Doyon for its 

Kantishna Roadhouse property would occur on a stream that was mined as recently 

as 1995. This is definitely not wilderness. 

Given the purpose of this bill is to promote the use of micro-hydro by private businesses in the Kantishna Region, we would urge lawmakers to work with the Na-
69 

tional Park Service on additional language that would authorize NPS, after careful 

environmental review, to authorize micro-hydro facilities on NPS lands for other 

Kantishna businesses, such as Camp Denali. 

The National Parks Conservation Association also supports the purpose and concept behind S. 302, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue rightof-way permits for a natural gas transmission pipeline in non-wilderness areas within the boundary of Denali National Park. Our interest in this bill lies in the fact 

that if the natural gas pipeline is built down the Parks Highway corridor the rightof-way would be located either through or around the Nenana Canyon and Denali 

National Park & Preserve. 

The apparent logical environmentally preferable choice for the gas pipeline 

through this area is along the six miles of highway corridor as the Parks Highway 

passes through Denali National Park & Preserve. This routing seems to make the 

most sense from both an engineering and an environmental perspective as going 

around the park would necessitate construction of new road into what is now de 

facto wilderness to the east of the park boundary. Key to making this bill work is 

the language and understanding that NPS will issue a right-of-way permit through 

the park only if the environmental review finds that the route along the highway 

poses the least environmental impact. Without that language in the bill, NPCA 

would not be supportive. 

It is important to note that this legislation would not negate the need for an 

ANILCA Title XI review, but it would allow the Park Service to make the decision 

and issue a right-of-way permit without any additional review by the administration 

or Congress. 

Assuming the route is found to be the environmentally preferred choice, there are 

several potential benefits to the National Park Service. We applaud the opportunity 

for the potential for a pathway to be constructed atop the pipeline ROW and a new 

pedestrian bridge across the Nenana River at McKinley Village. We feel this expansion of the existing front-country trail system would be a benefit to park visitors 

and would link the many visitors at McKinley village into the park entrance area 

by trail and we strongly urge this to be included in any mitigation package. In addition, we encourage investigation into how the Park Service could benefit from a lateral gasline into the park to support both the energy needs of the park headquarters 

complex and also possible use of natural gas for park buses. 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 

NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, 

Washington, DC, May 9, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate. 

Hon. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN BINGAMAN AND RANKING MEMBER MURKOWSKI: On behalf of our 

thousands of members, we write to thank you for reconsidering several bills that 

were placed on the Senate Calendar but not given the opportunity for a vote on the 

floor before the end of the 111th Session of Congress. Many of these bills were 

strongly supported by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and we are 

grateful you have scheduled a hearing for them in the Subcommittee on National 

Parks on May 11, 2011. In particular we strongly support: S. 508, the Chimney Rock 

National Monument Establishment Act; S. 564, the Valles Caldera National Preserve Management Act; S. 177, Gold Hill-Wakamatsu Preservation Act; S. 858, Colonel Charles Young Home Study Act; and S. 279, Camp Hale Study Act. 

We are pleased to see the addition of several additional bills for consideration in 

the hearing that we have supported in the 111th Congress and continue to support 

including: S. 247, Harriet Tubman National Historical Parks Act; S. 713, Petersburg 

National Battlefield Boundary Modification Act; and S. 779, American Battlefield 

Protection Program Amendments Act of 2011; S. 599, Civil War Sesquicentennial 

Commission Act; S.161, Pinnacles National Park Act; S. 323, First State National 

Historical Park Act; S. 114, San Antonio Missions National Historical Park Boundary Expansion Act of 2011; S. 127, and Buffalo Bayou National Heritage Area Act. 

For over 20 years, the National Trust for Historic Preservation has worked to preserve irreplaceable historic and cultural resources located on federal public lands 

throughout the United States, including the National Park Service, U.S. Forest 

Service, the Bureau of Land Management and the National Landscape Conservation 

System. The preservation of America’s irreplaceable historic and cultural resources 
70 

benefits American’s today and our future generations as well as supporting heritage 

tourism which supports diverse and vibrant local communities. 

The National Trust for Historic Preservation is a non-profit membership organization bringing people together to protect, enhance and enjoy the places that matter 

to them. With headquarters in Washington, D.C., nine regional and field offices, 29 

historic sites and partner organizations in all 50 states, we provide leadership, education, advocacy and resources to a national network of people, organizations and 

local communities committed to saving places, connecting us to our history and collectively shaping the future of America’s stories. 

Sincerely, 

PATRICK J. LALLY, 

Acting Senior Director of Government Affairs. 

NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, 

Seattle, WA, May 10, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

U.S. Senate, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, DC. 

RE: Support for S. 765 

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN: On behalf of the National Parks Conservation Association, I write in support of S. 765—Oregon Caves Revitalization Act of 2011 and encourage the committee to vote in favor of it. 

In 1998, the National Park Service (NPS) finalized a general management plan 

with a proposed action calling for the expansion of Oregon Caves NM by roughly 

3,400 acres. According to NPS the expansion will better protect the monument’s 

cave hydrology, surface forest environment, public water supply and park 

viewsheds. 

Besides protecting the monument’s ecology and wildlife, the Oregon Caves expansion has the added benefit that it will require no private lands. All land proposed 

for the monument expansion is already owned by the federal government within the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Transfer would merely require Congressional 

authorization. 

The Oregon Caves expansion may also produce significant economic benefits for 

gateway communities. Research shows that national parks are huge economic engines, generating $4 in value for every federal dollar invested in them. Further, national parks support approximately 267,000 jobs nationwide and pump $13 billion 

into the national economy. Perhaps more importantly, park gateway communities 

have higher economic growth rates than non-park communities. 

Support for the expansion is growing. Local papers including the Oregonian and 

the Eugene Register Guard have come out in support of the effort. Meanwhile, citizens from the surrounding and gateway communities recognize the benefits of this 

bill and are voicing their approval as well. 

Some have argued that the expansion land should be left under Forest Service 

management. Primarily it’s argued that only the Forest Service has the ‘‘authority, 

ability and know-how to manage the forest appropriately by reducing the risk of catastrophic wildlife.’’ This is simply not true. The Park Service has conducted at least 

19 fuel reduction projects this year alone. NPS treatment projects including one at 

Oregon Caves National Monument in 2007 range in size from a few acres to thousands and include both mechanical and prescribed fires to reduce fuel loads. These 

efforts have been highly successful. A ten-year fuel reduction program at Lake Chelan that saved every threatened building in Stehekin Washington during the roughly 8,000 acre Flick Creek fire in 2006. We are glad to see the current bill makes 

accommodations for continued necessary fire management. 

Oregon Caves National Monument is a northwest gem. The monument’s cave, as 

well as the area ecology, wildlife and surrounding communities deserve the higher 

level of recognition, the benefits and protection that would come from their inclusion 

within the national preserve. NPCA urges the committee’s support for S. 765. 

Sincerely, 

SEAN SMITH, 

Policy Director. 
71 

May 11, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN, We write in strong support of S. 161, the Pinnacles 

National Park Act, and ask that our comments be made a part of the official hearing 

record for this important legislation. 

Introduced by Senator Barbara Boxer, S. 161 will establish the existing Pinnacles 

National Monument as a component of the National Park System and designate additional wilderness within Pinnacles. According to the National Park Service (NPS), 

national monuments receive their designation because they contain objects of historic, prehistoric, or scientific interest. However, national parks are deemed to feature the inspirational, educational, and recreational values—all of which we believe 

are robustly represented at Pinnacles. The existing national monument status for 

Pinnacles ensures the protection of important natural and cultural resources and ecological processes of the central California coast—including one of its newer missions to serve as a release site for the reintroduction of the endangered California 

condor. We believe national park designation will enhance visitors’ experience and 

enjoyment of Pinnacles, while also improving the protection of this unique natural 

area. 

While not as large as many of our classic national parks, we believe Pinnacles 

is of sufficient size ‘‘to yield to effective administration and broad use,’’ as NPS criteria suggests. 

The legislation also proposes expanding the Pinnacles Wilderness by 2,715 acres 

and will mark the second expansion of the wilderness since its original designation 

in 1976. This will bring the total wilderness acreage to nearly 16,000 acres. The bill 

will also rename the Pinnacles Wilderness as the Hain Wilderness in honor of brothers Arthur and Schuyler Hain, early homesteaders in the area, recognizing their efforts that lead to the creation of the original 2,500 acre National Monument in 1908. 

In conclusion, we strongly support both the designation of Pinnacles National 

Monument as a national park and the addition to its wilderness areas. We encourage the Committee’s support of this public lands legislation. 

Sincerely, 

JIM MATHEWS, POLICY MANAGER. 

Campaign for America’s Wilderness. 

RYAN HENSON, SENIOR CONSERVATION DIRECTOR, 

California Wilderness Coalition. 

GORDON JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, 

California Wilderness Project. 

PAUL MCFARLAND, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

Ventana Wilderness Alliance. 

DAN SMUTS, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, 

The Wilderness Society. 

NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, 

PACIFIC REGIONAL OFFICE, 

San Francisco, CA, May 10, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Energy and Natural Resources Committee, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, DC. 

RE: Testimony in Support of S. 161 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL: On behalf of the National Parks Conservation Association, I am writing to extend our support for S.161, ‘‘Pinnacles National Park Act.’’ 

Pinnacles National Monument was established in 1908 by President Roosevelt as a 

result of its unique rock formations, and since that time, the park has grown tenfold to around 26,000 acres. We support its redesignation as a national park. 

Today, the park unit protects more resources than it did previously and has several thousand acres designated as wilderness, protecting the natural heritage of this 

park. The park is home to more than 30 state and federally protected species, including the endangered California condor. Two years ago, a California condor nest 

was documented in the region for the first time in more than 70 years. The involvement of the National Park Service was critical to this success and other recovery 

efforts for the condor. Pinnacles offers visitors to the region a superb, unique night 
72 

sky viewing experience, an opportunity to explore caves, and to hike in wilderness 

terrain amongst unique, jagged spires. 

Pinnacles National Monument and the surrounding area provide the visitor an excellent example of plate tectonic movement and other geological occurrences. S.161 

would protect more than 2,500 acres of naturally significant lands as wilderness. 

In summary, NPCA supports Senator Boxer and Feinstein’s important legislation 

to provide Pinnacles with the designation of national park. 

Sincerely, 

NEAL DESAI, 

Associate Director. 

AMERICAN RIVER CONSERVANCY, 

Coloma, CA, May 10, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Dirksen Senate Office Building, SD-304, Washington, DC. 

Hon. RICHARD BURR, 

Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy 

and Natural Resources, Dirksen Senate Office Building, SD-304 Washington, 

DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL AND RANKING MEMBER BURR, We write to express enthusiastic support for S. 177, the Gold Hill Wakamatsu Preservation Act. Given the recent tragedy in Japan, we believe this legislation takes on more significant importance demonstrating the shared cultural ties and enduring bond between our two 

nations. 

This legislation would authorize the Bureau of Land Management to acquire and 

manage the Gold Hill Ranch near Coloma, California. This site was the location of 

the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony from 1869 to 1871, recognized by the State 

of California and Japanese American Citizens League as the first Japanese settlement in the United States. More recently it was listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places receiving a designation of National Significance. 

After Commodore William Perry opened Japanese ports to U.S. trade, the weakness of Japan’s shoguns was exposed, leading to a revolution and return to imperial 

rule under the Meiji emperor. In 1869, seven Japanese individuals and a European 

expatriate fled the turmoil in Japan and sailed across the Pacific to San Francisco 

aboard a side wheeler called the ‘‘China.’’ The group made their way eastwards and 

purchased land in Gold Hill just above the site where John Marshal first discovered 

gold in California. Within two years, the colony grew to 22 Japanese settlers and 

began producing traditional Japanese crops such as tea, silk, rice, and bamboo. 

These agrarian feats introduced many important crops to California now the largest 

and most diverse agricultural state in the nation. Local and San Francisco newspapers wrote about the colony, and the settlers began to receive acceptance in American society. 

Unfortunately, the colony was short-lived—drought and financial problems forced 

the group to disperse and settle throughout California beginning in 1871. The 

Veerkamp family, which owned neighboring lands, purchased the property in 1875. 

Despite the short history of the colony, it was an important milestone that helped 

bridge Japanese and American cultures and paved the way for large-scale emigration of Japanese settlers to the United States. It also contributed to major Japanese 

influences on the agricultural economy of California. 

Many of the original structures on the site remain intact, including a farmhouse, 

the grave of a young girl named Okei, numerous artifacts, and agricultural plantings. Japanese-Americans and other visitors come to see the site and place offerings 

on Okei’s grave. As a testament to the cultural exchanges that occurred at this site, 

the Gold Trail Middle School, located on an in holding carved out of this site, now 

maintains an exchange program with a sister school in Wakamatsu, Japan. Governor Reagan recognized the property as a state historic site in 1969, and the site 

is currently being considered for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. 

The 272-acre ranch encompassing the original colony site has been passed down 

for generations through the Veerkamp family. Thanks to the hard work of the 

American River Conservancy and Wakamatsu Gold Hill Colony Foundation as well 

as the generous accommodation of the Veerkamp family, the site has been preserved 

for visitors to come and learn about the history of the Wakamatsu colonists and 

Japanese-American culture. The site provides multiple other benefits, including 

wildlife habitat, open space with numerous hiking trails and picnic areas, and grazing and pastureland. The family and non-profit partners agree that federal acquisi-
73 

tion would help guarantee that the site’s cultural history, agricultural character, 

and open space are permanently preserved for generations to come. The Bureau of 

Land Management is well-suited to manage this site since it has an excellent relationship with the local community and manages several other sites nearby. 

We note with emphasis that this project is supported by a wide and diverse representation of national, state and local organizations including the Japanese American Citizens League, the National Japanese American Historical Society, the Consul General of Japan, the Governor of Fukushima Prefecture and the Mayor of 

Wakamatsu in Japan, People-to-People International, the El Dorado County Board 

of Supervisors, the El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce, numerous elected officials including Assemblyman Ted Gaines, who represents this district, and numerous other members of the local community. 

The significance of this site for Japanese Americans has been compared to the significance of the Mayflower journey and Plymouth Rock landing for European Americans. This site is testament to Japanese history, California’s agricultural economy, 

and the American tradition of bringing together people of diverse cultures in the 

common pursuit of freedom and prosperity. 

Sincerely, 

ALAN EHRGOTT, 

Executive Director. 

STATEMENT OF LAURIE EDWARDS, CONSTITUENT, CAMERON PARK, CA, ON S. 177 

I am writing to express enthusiastic support for SB 177, the Gold Hill Wakamatsu 

Preservation Act. This legislation would authorize the Bureau of Land Management 

to acquire and manage the Gold Hill Ranch near Coloma, California. This site was 

the location of the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony from 1869 to 1871, recognized 

by the State of California and Japanese American Citizens League as the first Japanese settlement in the United States. More recently it was listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places receiving a designation of National Significance. 

As you are well aware of the historical significance of this site from personal 

knowledge and review of other letters submitted, I will provide you with a local resident’s perspective. I was raised in the Gold Hill area and attended Gold Trail Elementary School, which is adjacent to the site. I was a third grade student in 1969, 

when then Governor Ronald Reagan was one of the keynote speakers during the 

100-year anniversary ceremony of the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony. Gold Trail 

Elementary School also has a sister school in Aizu Wakamatsu. I have visited this 

school, Higashiyama Elementary School, on three occasions and have served as an 

ambassador when their school officials have visited. I have stayed with host families 

and visited the duplicate gravesite for Okei each time I visited Aizu Wakamatsu. 

Currently, I am serving as a docent at the Gold Hill Ranch. 

Due to the ongoing efforts of the American River Conservancy and Wakamatsu 

Gold Hill Colony Foundation, as well as the generous accommodation of the 

Veerkamp family, I am very pleased and proud that the 272-acre ranch has been 

preserved for visitors to come and learn about the history of the Wakamatsu colonists and Japanese-American culture. Many of the original structures remain intact, 

including a farmhouse, the grave of a young girl named Okei, numerous artifacts, 

and agricultural plantings. 

This ranch provides multiple other benefits, including wildlife habitat, open space 

with numerous hiking trails and picnic areas, and grazing and pastureland. Federal 

acquisition would help guarantee that the site’s cultural history, agricultural character, and open space are permanently preserved for generations to come. The Bureau of Land Management is well-suited to manage this site since it has an excellent relationship with the local community and manages several other sites nearby. 

In addition to the important historical, cultural, agricultural, and wildlife aspects, 

preserving this site will continue to build relations and goodwill between our two 

countries. Given the recent tragedy in Japan, it is my opinion that this legislation 

takes on more significant importance demonstrating the shared cultural ties and enduring bond between our two nations. 

As the late President Eisenhower once said, ‘‘Peaceful relations between countries 

begin with peaceful relations between people.’’ I have witnessed firsthand the closeness citizens from our two nations have become during exchange homestays. In fact, 

one of the nicest and most gracious men I met in Aizu Wakamatsu was a former 

bomber pilot from World War II, who tearfully apologized for his role in World War 

II. He also told me, ‘‘We were once enemies but are now friends.’’ 

Thank you for your support on this very worthwhile bill. 
74 

NATIONAL JAPANESE AMERICAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY, 

San Francisco, CA, May 6, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Dirksen Senate Office Building, SD-304, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL, We write to express enthusiastic support for S. 177, the 

Gold Hill Wakamatsu Preservation Act. The National Japanese American Historical 

Society, Inc, is dedicated to the collection, preservation, authentic interpretation, 

and sharing of historical information of the Japanese American experience for the 

diverse broader national and global community. It has been supportive of this 

project over the years. Given the recent tragedy in Japan, we believe this legislation 

takes on more significant importance demonstrating the shared cultural ties and enduring bond between our two nations. 

This legislation would authorize the Bureau of Land Management to acquire and 

manage the Gold Hill Ranch near Coloma, California. This site was the location of 

the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony from 1869 to 1871, recognized by the State 

of California and Japanese American Citizens League as the first Japanese settlement in the United States. More recently it was listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places receiving a designation of National Significance. 

After Commodore William Perry opened Japanese ports to U.S. trade, the weakness of Japan’s shoguns was exposed, leading to a revolution and return to imperial 

rule under the Meiji emperor. In 1869, seven Japanese individuals and a European 

expatriate fled the turmoil in Japan and sailed across the Pacific to San Francisco 

aboard a side wheeler called the ‘‘China.’’ The group made their way eastwards and 

purchased land in Gold Hill just above the site where John Marshal first discovered 

gold in California. Within two years, the colony grew to 22 Japanese settlers and 

began producing traditional Japanese crops such as tea, silk, rice, and bamboo. 

These agrarian feats introduced many important crops to California now the largest 

and most diverse agricultural state in the nation. Local and San Francisco newspapers wrote about the colony, and the settlers began to receive acceptance in American society. 

Unfortunately, the colony was short-lived—drought and financial problems forced 

the group to disperse and settle throughout California beginning in 1871. The 

Veerkamp family, which owned neighboring lands, purchased the property in 1875. 

Despite the short history of the colony, it was an important milestone that helped 

bridge Japanese and American cultures and paved the way for large-scale emigration of Japanese settlers to the United States. It also contributed to major Japanese 

influences on the agricultural economy of California. 

Many of the original structures on the site remain intact, including a farmhouse, 

the grave of a young girl named Okei, numerous artifacts, and agricultural plantings. Japanese-Americans and other visitors come to see the site and place offerings 

on Okei’s grave. As a testament to the cultural exchanges that occurred at this site, 

the Gold Trail Middle School, located on an in holding carved out of this site, now 

maintains an exchange program with a sister school in Wakamatsu, Japan. Governor Reagan recognized the property as a state historic site in 1969, and the site 

is currently being considered for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. 

The 272-acre ranch encompassing the original colony site has been passed down 

for generations through the Veerkamp family. Thanks to the hard work of the 

American River Conservancy and Wakamatsu Gold Hill Colony Foundation as well 

as the generous accommodation of the Veerkamp family, the site has been preserved 

for visitors to come and learn about the history of the Wakamatsu colonists and 

Japanese-American culture. The site provides multiple other benefits, including 

wildlife habitat, open space with numerous hiking trails and picnic areas, and grazing and pastureland. The family and non-profit partners agree that federal acquisition would help guarantee that the site’s cultural history, agricultural character, 

and open space are permanently preserved for generations to come. The Bureau of 

Land Management is well-suited to manage this site since it has an excellent relationship with the local community and manages several other sites nearby. 

We note with emphasis that this project is supported by a wide and diverse representation of national, state and local organizations including the Japanese American Citizens League, the National Japanese American Historical Society, the Consul General of Japan, the Governor of Fukushima Prefecture and the Mayor of 

Wakamatsu in Japan, People-to-People International, the El Dorado County Board 

of Supervisors, the El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce, numerous elected officials including Assemblyman Ted Gaines, who represents this district, and numerous other members of the local community. 
75 

The significance of this site for Japanese Americans has been compared to the significance of the Mayflower journey and Plymouth Rock landing for European Americans. This site is testament to Japanese history, California’s agricultural economy, 

and the American tradition of bringing together people of diverse cultures in the 

common pursuit of freedom and prosperity 

Thank you for your support. 

Very sincerely yours, 

ROSALYN TONAI, 

Executive Director. 

STATEMENT OF MYRNA HANSES, PAST PRESIDENT, EL DORADO COUNTY CALIFORNIA, 

CHAPTER OF PEOPLE TO PEOPLE INTERNATIONAL

I write to you with enthusiastic support for S. 177, the Gold Hill Wakamatsu 

Preservation Act. This legislation means a great deal to Japanese-Americans in 

California, to people of Japanese ancestry around the world and all Californians 

who love and cherish our history. 

This act gives the Bureau of Land Management acquisition of the Wakamatsu Tea 

and Silk Farm Colony near Gold Hill, California, which was the destination of a 

mere 20 (twenty) Japanese colonists in 1869 who fled Aizu Wakamatsu for the peace 

and safety of California. Though the colonists were few in number, their attempt 

to establish an agricultural colony had a huge impact on the future of Californianow the largest, most varied producer of food for the world. 

This property includes the gravesite of the first Japanese woman who died and 

was buried in North America, the original house used by the Japanese colonists, a 

wetlands, a wild-life habitat and pastureland. Federal acquisition would help guarantee that the site’s cultural history and natural open space beauty would not be 

lost, but could and would provide a bridge of understanding and appreciation for our 

past. 

JAPANESE AMENCAN CITIZENS LEAGUE, 

San Francisco, CA, May 10, 2011. 

Hon. MARK UDALL, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Dirksen Senate Office Building, SD-304, Washington, DC. 

Hon. RICHARD BURR, 

Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy 

and Natural Resources, Dirksen Senate Office Building, SD-304, Washington, 

DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN UDALL AND RANKING MEMBER BURR, We write to express enthusiastic support for S. 177, the Gold !fill Wakamatsu Preservation Act. This legislation would authorize the Bureau of Land Management to acquire and manage the 

Gold Hill Ranch near Coloma. California. This site was the location of the 

Wakamatsu Tea and Silk Colony from 1869 to 1871. recognized by the State of California and Japanese American Citizens League as the first Japanese settlement in 

the United States. More recently it was listed on the National Register of Historic 

Places receiving a designation of National Significance. 

After Commodore William Perry opened Japanese ports to U.S. trade in 1854, the 

foreign policy weakness of Japan’s shoguns was exposed, leading to a revolution and 

return to imperial rule under the Meiji emperor. In 1869, seven Japanese individuals and a European expatriate fled the turmoil in Japan and sailed across the Pacific to San Francisco aboard a side wheeler called the ‘‘China.’’ The group made 

their way eastwards and purchased land in Gold Hill just above the site where John 

Marshal first discovered gold in California. Within two years, the colony grew to 22 

Japanese settlers and began producing traditional Japanese crops such as tea, silk, 

rice, and bamboo. These agrarian feats were the beginning of the introduction by 

Japanese farmers of many important crops to California, now the largest and most 

diverse agricultural state in the nation. Local and San Francisco newspapers wrote 

about the colony, and the settlers began to receive acceptance in American society. 

Unfortunately, the colony was short-lived—drought and financial problems forced 

the group to disperse and settle throughout California beginning in 1871. The 

Veerkamp family, which owned neighboring lands, purchased the property in 1875. 

Despite the short history of the colony, it was an important milestone that helped 

bridge Japanese and American cultures and paved the way for large-scale emigra-
76 

* List has been retained in subcommittee files. 

tion of Japanese settlers to the United States. It also contributed to major Japanese 

influences on the agricultural economy of California. 

Many of the original structures on the site remain intact, including a farmhouse, 

the grave of a young girl named Okei, numerous artifacts, and agricultural plantings. Japanese-Americans and other visitors come to see the site and place offerings 

on Okei’s grave. As a testament to the cultural exchanges that occurred at this site, 

the Gold Trail Middle School, located on an in holding carved out of this site, now 

maintains an exchange program with a sister school in Wakamatsu, Japan. Governor Reagan recognized the property as a state historic site in 1969, and the site 

is currently being considered for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. 

The 272-acre ranch encompassing the original colony site has been passed down 

for generations through the Veerkamp family. Thanks to the hard work of the 

American River Conservancy and Wakamatsu Gold Hill Colony Foundation as well 

as the generous accommodation of the Veerkamp family, the site has been preserved 

for visitors to come and learn about the history of the Wakamatsu colonists and 

Japanese-American culture. The site provides multiple other benefits, including 

wildlife habitat, open space with numerous hiking trails and picnic areas, and grazing and pastureland. The family and non-profit partners agree that federal acquisition would help guarantee that the site’s cultural history, agricultural character, 

and open space are permanently preserved for generations to come. The Bureau of 

Land Management is well-suited to manage this site since it has an excellent relationship with the local community and manages several other sites nearby. 

We note with emphasis that this project is supported by a wide and diverse representation of national, state and local organizations including the Japanese American Citizens League, the National Japanese American Historical Society, the Consul General of Japan in San Francisco, the Governor of Fukushima Prefecture and 

the Mayor of Wakamatsu in Japan, People-to-People International, the El Dorado 

County Board of Supervisors, the El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce, numerous elected officials including Assemblyman Ted Gaines, who represents this district, and numerous other members of the local community. 

The significance of this site for Japanese Americans has been compared to the significance of the Mayflower journey and Plymouth Rock landing for European Americans. This site is testament to Japanese history, California’s agricultural economy, 

and the American tradition of bringing together people of diverse cultures in the 

common pursuit of freedom and prosperity 

Please support S. 177, the Gold Hill Wakamatsu Preservation Act so the history 

of our most successful trade partnership remains intact. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

LARRY ODA, 

Past National President. 

May 5, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 304 Dirksen Office 

Building, Washington, DC. 

Hon. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 709 Hart Office Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN BINGAMAN AND RANKING MEMBER MURKOWSKI: 

We are respectfully writing to thank you for scheduling a hearing on S. 322, the 

Alpine Lakes Wilderness Additions and Pratt and Middle Fork Snoqualmie Rivers 

Protection Act. As you know, this bill, introduced by Senator Murray and cosponsored by Senator Cantwell, would protect over 22,000 acres of Washington 

forestlands as wilderness and would designate the Pratt River and key segments of 

the Middle Fork Snoqualmie as wild and scenic rivers. 

We are part of the broad, locally based support for Senator Murray’s proposal. 

This group includes more than 100 businesses, locally-elected officials, hunter and 

angler organizations, conservation and outdoor recreation groups and religious leaders. For your information, we have included a full list* of the supporters of this legislation. 

The broad support for S. 322 is the result of several factors. These areas are within an hour’s drive of Washington’s major population center and will be a key addi-
77 

** Other signatures have been retained in subcommittee files. 

tion to the existing Alpine Lake Wilderness, one of our nation’s most popular wilderness areas. In addition, the Pratt, Middle Fork and South Fork watersheds are 

sources of clean water, important for downstream fisheries and commercial and residential water users. Preserving these areas will ensure maintenance of flow during 

the dry summer months and aid in flood control. 

The broad base of support for this legislation also reflects the strong work of Senator Murray in reaching out to all interested parties in developing this legislation. 

Through this collaborative approach, the Senator was able to minimize conflicts and 

gain support by blending a wilderness bill with complementary companion designation protections of Wild and Scenic Rivers. For example, the wilderness boundaries 

exclude a popular mountain bike trail. As a result, this bill is supported by the local 

biking group, the Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance and the International Mountain Bicycling Association. 

The level of support for S. 322 was reflected in Congressional action last year. Not 

only was S. 322 favorably reported by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

but it was the only wilderness designation bill approved by the full House of Representatives. 

We hope that you will look at this strong legislative record and favorably move 

S. 322 in the near future. Thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely,** 

DANIEL J. EVANS, 

Former Governor of Washington and Former U.S. Senator. 

FREYA BRIER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL, 

Eddie Bauer LLC. 

REAGAN DUNN, COUNCIL MEMBER (R-9), 

King County Council. 

DAN BREWSTER, GENERAL MANAGER, 

The Summit at Snoqualmie. 

STATEMENT OF CLIFFORD LUCERO, CHAIR, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, 

ARCHULETA COUNTY, PAGOSA SPRINGS, CO, ON S. 508 

By a vote of 2-1, we are pleased to convey to you, on behalf of the citizens of 

Archuleta County, our support for the proposed legislation to designate Chimney 

Rock Archeological Site as a National Monument. 

We have reviewed the proposed legislation language and are in agreement that 

the designation of this important landmark as a National Monument would bring 

this area national attention and serve as a significant economic driver. 

Our community is very excited about the prospect of the National Monument designation and is looking forward to the completion of the management plan as soon 

as possible. 

Finally, we would like to commend you for your vision and support for this legislation to protect what we know to be a valuable geologic and cultural resource for this 

nation. If there is anything we can do to assist you or provide additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. 

STATEMENT OF MIKE ALLEY, CHAIR, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, PAGOSA SPRINGS

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ON S. 508 

On behalf of the many people who live, work and play in Southwest Colorado, the 

Pagosa Springs Community Development Corporation is pleased to extend its support for S.508, the Chimney Rock National Monument Establishment Act. We appreciate your leadership toward accomplishing the designation of national monument status for the Chimney Rock Archeological Area. 

The Pagosa Springs Community Development Corporation is committed to enhancing the quality of life for the citizens of the area by creating quality new jobs, 

encouraging capital investment and creating a business friendly environment. 

The economic development and tourism opportunities that this designation would 

bring to this area are numerous and the Pagosa Springs Community Development 

Corporation is supportive of such an endeavor. 
78 

STATEMENT OF MARY JO COULEHAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PAGOSA SPRINGS, AREA

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, PAGOSA SPRINGS, CO, ON S. 508 

I am writing on behalf of the Pagosa Springs Chamber of Commerce in support 

of the national monument designation for the Chimney Rock Archeological Site in 

Archuleta County, Colorado. 

Chimney Rock is one of the gems of the Pagosa Springs area and a popular visitor 

attraction. Especially with the recent Major Lunar Standstill phenomenon, Chimney 

Rock has received a considerable amount of public attention. Combine this natural 

phenomenon with the increased marketing efforts of the organization, and you find 

that visitor numbers continue to increase; a boon to our tourism based economy here 

in Pagosa Springs. Chimney Rock Archeological Area is of substantial importance 

to our community and they have worked over the years to improve the actual site, 

the tours, and the information that is available to visitors. 

Given its proximity to Mesa Verde and Chaco Canyon, national monument designation for the Chimney Rock site will increase heritage tourism as well as providing a significant boost to the town of Pagosa Springs in an economy where every 

economic opportunity is necessary. The additional stewardship and protection of the 

Chimney Rock site provided by national monument designation will also ensure conservation of this regional landmark. The site is maintained by the hard working efforts of the US Forest Service supported by thousands of hours of dedicated volunteers honored to share their love and knowledge of this archeological site with those 

who come to visit. 

We hope that you too will support our efforts to attain national monument designation for this important Native American heritage site. We would appreciate 

your favorable consideration and support of this initiative. 

STATEMENT OF THE CALDERA ACTION, ON S. 564 

Caldera Action, together with twenty-two organizations from New Mexico and 

across the nation, supports S. 564 to transfer the management of the Valles Caldera 

National Preserve (VCNP) to the National Park Service (NPS) as a national preserve. Caldera Action is inspired by the majesty of the Valles Caldera; we envision the 

restoration and protection of its unique natural and cultural heritage so that 

present and future generations can experience the sense of wonder that comes from 

individual discovery in this ecologically and culturally significant landscape. 

Caldera Action and its predecessor organization, the Valles Caldera Coalition, 

have been continuously and deeply involved with the VCNP since well before the 

acquisition of the property by the federal government in 2000. We have worked with 

the VCNP staff and have closely watched the struggles of the Preserve as it has 

tried to deal with the conflicting demands of the original legislation, a continually 

changing Board of Trustees, and the public’s expectations for its management. 

This experience has led us to conclude that the long-term preservation and public 

enjoyment of this landscape cannot be achieved by the present trust structure. We 

therefore fully support S. 564 to transfer VCNP to the National Park Service to be 

operated as a Preserve where hunting and fishing are allowed. 

We are joined in this effort by a large number of local, statewide, and national 

organizations who have formally indicated their support for this position. A list of 

these organizations is included in this statement. 

PREVIOUS TESTIMONY

On June 24, 2010, Caldera Action submitted testimony in support of S. 3452, the 

Valles Caldera Preserve Management Act of the 111th Congress. That testimony detailed the flaws in the original legislation that created the VCNP, failures of management of the Trust created by the original legislation (P.L. 106—248), and the 

many advantages that would accrue to the land and to the American people from 

National Park Service management of the VCNP. We ask that our previous testimony on S. 3452 be entered into the record of S 564. A copy of that testimony is 

included with this submission. 

COLLABORATIVE FOREST RESTORATION

Over the past several years, the staff of the VCNP has been engaged in a landscape-scale planning effort focused on the restoration of natural ecological processes 

to the forested landscape of the southwest Jemez Mountains in New Mexico, including the VCNP. These efforts have included a diverse group of stakeholders in a 

science-based plan that 
79 

(1) encourages ecological, economic, and social sustainability; 

(2) leverages local resources with national and private resources; 

(3) facilitates the reduction of wildfire management costs, including through 

reestablishing natural fire regimes and reducing the risk of uncharacteristic 

wildfire; and 

(4) demonstrates the degree to which 

(A) various ecological restoration techniques 

(i) achieve ecological and watershed health objectives; and 

(ii) affect wildfire activity and management costs; and 

(B) the use of forest restoration byproducts can offset treatment costs 

while benefitting local rural economies and improving forest health. 

In 2010, these efforts resulted in a successful application to the Secretary of Agriculture for funding from the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program 

(CFLRP) established under Title IV of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act 

of 2009 (P.L. 111-11). The project, anticipated to extend over 10 years, will do much 

to restore ecological functions to the forests of the VCNP and the watershed of the 

Jemez River, upon which many rely for their drinking water, irrigation, and spiritual sustenance. 

Title IV of P.L. 111-11 encourages multijurisdictional projects and anticipates application of the CFLRP to lands administered by the Secretary of Interior. However, 

Section 4003 c 3 B requires an approved funding plan for projects on lands under 

separate jurisdiction. It clearly would have been impossible for the Secretary of Interior to have provided a plan when the grant was developed because the VCNP is 

presently under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture. The future of this 

program is essential to the long-term ecological health of the Preserve and surrounding lands. Caldera Action believes that S. 564 should include a provision requiring the Secretary of Agriculture to recognize the National Park Service as successor to the Valles Caldera Trust with respect to the funding of the CFLRP grant 

awarded in 2010 or should include report language to that effect. 

AIRCRAFT OVERFLIGHTS

One of the greatest values of the VCNP is the sense of quiet isolation that prevails in most areas of the Preserve. In particular, commercial air-tour flights should 

be prohibited above the VCNP. In order to preserve the soundscape of the Preserve, 

Caldera Action believes that the airspace above the VCNP should be withdrawn 

from general or commercial aviation below an altitude of 22,500 ft or should include 

report language to that effect. 

SUMMARY

The original legislation created an experimental model that has provided important lessons, both positive and negative, for public land management. However, the 

experience of the last ten years has demonstrated overwhelming deficiencies and 

shortcomings of that legislation and its implementation. This requires a new approach. S. 564 eliminates the shortcomings and deficiencies of the original 2000 act 

that created the Valles Caldera National Preserve. S.564 will ensure that this magnificent national preserve will be permanently protected and professionally managed 

by the National Park Service for the benefit and enjoyment of all citizens of New 

Mexico, the nation, and visitors from around the world. Inclusion of language in response to the two concerns expressed above would strengthen the management of 

the Preserve and help ensure a quality experience for visitors. 

GROUPS THAT HAVE EXPLICITLY ENDORSED TRANSFER OF THE VALLES CALDERA

NATIONAL PRESERVE TO NATIONAL PARK SERVICE MANAGEMENT

Audubon including 

National Audubon Society (NY) 

The New Mexico Audubon Council 

Sangre de Cristo Audubon Society (Los Alamos-Santa Fe) 

Southwestern New Mexico Audubon Society (Silver City) 

Center for Biological Diversity (Tucson) 

Coalition of National Park Service Retirees (Tucson) 

Los Alamos Mountaineers 

Los Alamos Ski Club 

National Parks and Conservation Association (Washington DC) 
80 

NM Mountain Club 

NM Native Plant Society 

NM Trout 

NM Wilderness Alliance 

NM Wildlife Federation 

People United for Parks (Wash DC) 

Republicans for Environmental Protection (New Mexico) 

The Sierra Club, including 

The Rio Grande Chapter (New Mexico) 

The Pajarito Group (Los Alamos) 

The Central Group (Albuquerque) 

Trout Unlimited 

VallesCaldera.com 

Wild Earth Guardians 

STATEMENT OF THE CALDERA ACTION, ON S. 3452 

Caldera Action together with twenty-two organizations from New Mexico and 

across the nation supports S. 3452 to transfer the management of the Valles 

Caldera National Preserve (VCNP) to the National Park Service (NPS) as a national 

preserve. 

Caldera Action is inspired by the majesty of the Valles Caldera; we envision the 

restoration and protection of its unique natural and cultural heritage so that 

present and future generations can experience the sense of wonder that comes from 

individual discovery in this ecologically and culturally significant landscape. 

Caldera Action and its predecessor organization, the Valles Caldera Coalition, 

have been continuously and deeply involved with the Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP) since well before the acquisition of the property by the Federal Government in 2000. We have worked with the VCNP staff and have closely watched 

the struggles of the Preserve as it has tried to deal with the conflicting demands 

of the original legislation and a continually changing Board of Trustees. 

This experience has led us to conclude that the long-term preservation and public 

enjoyment of this landscape cannot be achieved by the present trust structure. We 

therefore fully support S. 3452 to transfer VCNP to the National Park Service to 

be operated as a Preserve where hunting and fishing would be allowed. 

We are joined in this effort by a large number of local, statewide, and national 

organizations who have formally indicated their support for this position. A list of 

those organizations is included in this statement. 

Our support is based on three main points: 

1. The Valles Caldera Trust Model Established in 2000 Is Fatally Flawed 

The ‘‘trust’’ model put in place for the VCNP in 2000 has also been tried at the 

Presidio, an old Navy facility in San Francisco, California. The objective of the trust 

model was to create an experiment in public land management strongly influenced 

by private-sector principles, including managers from outside the public land system. The trust model was intended to introduce private-sector ideas into public land 

management by allowing private development to fund the VCNP. While these ideas 

may be applicable in certain urban conditions, they have proven to be unworkable 

at the VCNP. 

The VCNP’s enabling legislation (PL 106-248) instructed the Board of Trustees to 

protect and preserve the scientific, scenic, geologic, watershed, fish, wildlife, historic, 

cultural, and recreational values of the Preserve while achieving financial self-sufficiency by 2015 and operating the Preserve as a ‘‘working ranch.’’ Different Boards 

of Trustees have interpreted these conflicting ‘‘mandates’’ in varying ways during 

the first nine years of operation. The fact that the primary purpose of the legislation 

is preservation and protection is often ignored. 

• The requirement for financial self-sufficiency has biased and restricted public 

access opportunities and resulted in fees higher than those charged at similar 

public lands. Even the current Trustees have admitted that the requirement for 

financial self sufficiency cannot be met; 

• The original legislation said that the VCNP is to be operated as a ‘‘working 

ranch.’’ That language has been used to justify prioritizing livestock production 

at the VCNP over other programs, even though livestock grazing has produced 

questionable economic returns for the Trust while resulting in direct conflicts 

with environmental protection mandates and the public recreational fishing program. The ‘‘working ranch’’ language has been a constant source of confusion 

and conflict. 
81 

• The Trust has focused on the ‘‘financial self-sufficiency’’ language of the current 

legislation in the last two years to the detriment of comprehensive planning. In 

2008, the Trust contracted with ENTRIX Inc. to study options for increased revenue, including such ideas as privatizing elk-hunting permits, building hotels, 

an RV park, and providing food and alcohol services. However, the study’s highest income sources for the VCNP—green burials and private elk tags—proved 

not to be politically feasible and have been eliminated from consideration. Without these, the Preserve cannot be projected to achieve financial self-sufficiency. 

The present Board of Trustees has acknowledged this reality. • Since the VCNP is public land, the U.S. government would own any facilities 

built, and the funding for construction presumably would come from the taxpayer. Funding for infrastructure to support financial self sufficiency would be 

better spent improving visitor services at the Preserve under the National Park 

Service. • The Trustees for the VCNP have been drawn largely from the private sector. 

However their lack of experience in public land management has created a multitude of problems for the staff and the public. Since the work of a public land 

agency requires an understanding of the importance of strategic planning, performance monitoring, and compliance with federal environmental and administrative standards, the staff and public have continually struggled to get an everchanging Board of Trustees to recognize these critical issues. • The Trustees have term limits, which causes the makeup of the Board to 

change every two years. Consequently, the Trustees’ priorities have changed 

markedly over time, with the result that large, expensive, previous work products have been discarded and a continuing education process for new Board 

members is necessary. Further, this turnover has led to dissonance with the 

staff as shown by an excessive turnover of executive directors at the VCNP and 

a constantly shifting set of priorities being imposed upon lower-level staff, many 

of whom have also left. • The Board of Trustees is appointed by the President of the United States. Seats 

on the Board open up relatively frequently, and this legislative requirement 

often results in delays of several months while the White House tends to nationally important appointments. It is inappropriate for public land managers to be 

politically appointed in this way, and the White House should not be involved 

in such appointments. • The current system of political appointments allows the majority party senator 

from New Mexico to choose and send to the White House nominees for the 

Board of Trustees. The result is Trustees from the political party in power. This 

system gives the appearance of patronage and ideological bias on the part of the 

Board of Trustees, which should function fully outside of partisan politics. • The Trust effectively lies outside the federal system of public land agencies and 

is, in effect, an orphan. As a consequence, no agency advocates for its financial 

needs in Washington. Thus the Trust has been forced to lobby for its budget 

every year. This process has led to uncertainty for the public and staff and has 

added an unnecessary tension and political dimension to annual VCNP funding. 

Putting the VCNP in the National Park System would embed the VCNP’s budget in the normal Department of the Interior appropriations process. • The Trust exists outside the system of federal land management agencies that 

provides a network of scientific and logistical services. The Trust must borrow 

law enforcement and resource management staff from other agencies, contract 

for services, or build its own resources management from scratch at great expense. • Because the Trust is not within the federal insurance system that covers federal 

land agencies, it must procure private liability insurance for its operations. Liability concerns have been used by the Trust (and perhaps its insurance underwriters) to severely limit public access to the Preserve. 

2. Failure of the Trust’s Management of the Valles Caldera National Preserve 

Beyond these structural problems with the Trust model and inconsistencies in the 

enabling legislation, there have been recurring problems with the management of 

the Preserve as practiced by the Trust. 

• The General Accountability Office analyzed documents and financial records, 

and interviewed staff and stakeholders to determine the Trust’s progress between 2000 and 2005 and reported to Congress in November, 2005, that the: 

’’Valles Caldera: Trust Has Made Some Progress but Needs to Do More to Meet 

Statutory Goals’’ (GAO-06-98). 

• The GAO presented a second report to Congress on progress since the 2005 report. They considered the extent to which the Trust has fulfilled its obligations 
82 

as a government corporation, and the challenges the Trust faces to achieve the 

Preservation Act goals. The results of the second study were published in an 

October 2009 Report to Congress, concluding that ‘‘The Trust Has Made 

Progress but Faces Significant Challenges to Achieve Goals of the Preservation 

Act.’’ (GAO-10-84). The Trust has failed to implement an effective management 

program and management controls as required for all government corporations 

under federal law (GPRA and GCCA Acts). 

• The Trust has failed to produce the Comprehensive Management Program 

(CMP) required by Section 108 of the VCNP’s enabling legislation. A CMP is 

a basic tool from which all public-land planning starts and has been required 

by courts and agencies as a basic part of the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) process. The Trust’s failure to complete a comprehensive management 

plan after ten years has led to disconnected, haphazard planning that could 

lead to serious environmental damage, wasted funding, and legal challenges. As 

a result, isolated initiatives such as the Forage Plan do not take into account 

broader public use, environmental, and cultural issues. 

3. Advantages of the National Park Service as the Manager for the VCNP 

The National Park Service (NPS) has existed since 1916 and manages 89 million 

acres of some of the most important, high value, and sensitive public lands in America including eighteen other national preserves The National Park Service has experience with managing a wide variety of landscapes and structures from national 

parks and monuments in Alaska that cover millions of acres to single buildings in 

areas requiring complex natural resources management. The agency manages many 

lands where hunting and fishing are allowed and some where limited livestock grazing are allowed. The National Park Service specializes in scientifically based land 

management and visitor services and management. 

Management as a Preserve by the National Park Service, as call for in S. 3452 

would: 

• bring almost 100 years of experience with managing a wide variety of landscapes, specializing in scientifically-based land and visitor management services; 

• Increase public access and enjoyment of this extraordinary national treasure 

while protecting and restoring its unique natural resources; 

• Integrate the VCNP into the National Park System budget process through the 

Department of the Interior. Integration would ensure annual budgeting through 

the normal agency process, eliminating the need for individual budget requests 

now required for the VCNP; 

• Provide comprehensive land management planning at the onset of NPS management as called for in Section 3 (b) (4) of S. 3452 by developing a general 

management plan for the Preserve and then preparing specific management 

plans for visitor services, natural resource management and cultural resource 

protection. this integrated planning process will provide for public input and financial efficiencies; 

• Provide visitor services using their long experience with the public, which would 

include a visitation management plan tailored to the attractions and constraints 

of the VCNP; 

• Provide career-track, well-vetted professional management personnel to lead the 

existing staff at the VCNP, replacing the current politically appointed Trust; 

• Provide law enforcement to protect the VCNP and its visitors. The NPS has a 

long tradition of intensive and careful law enforcement focused on protecting 

natural and historic sites; 

• Provide natural resource management based on decades of experience over millions of acres of wild land throughout the United States. Resource management 

involves using science-based techniques to restore plant communities, wildlife 

populations, watersheds, and airsheds. The NPS has a well-developed, flexible, 

and professional natural resources management approach tailored to each of its 

units. The Trust has developed an outstanding and effective adaptive management program that should be maintained and expanded and could be a model 

for other NPS units; 

• Continue to provide sensitive protection for active cultural use sites such as 

Pueblo religious sites, prehistoric sites such as the obsidian mines in the Preserve, and protection and restoration for historic sites; 

• With its national presence, the NPS would provide the VCNP with linkage to 

key management and science capabilities with, for example, the US Geologic 

Survey, which provides science research for Bandelier and other National Park 

Service units. It could continue and enhance the science programs developed 
83 

under Dr. Bob Parmenter at the VCNP while providing an expanded youth and 

teacher education and university research program. 

The original legislation (P.L. 106—248) created an experimental model that has 

provided important lessons, both positive and negative, for public land management. 

However, the experience of the last ten years has demonstrated overwhelming deficiencies and shortcomings of that legislation and its implementation. This requires 

a new approach. S. 3452 eliminates the shortcomings and deficiencies of the original 

2000 Act that created the Valles Caldera National Preserve. S.3452 will ensure that 

this magnificent national preserve will be permanently protected and professionally 

managed by the National Park Service for the benefit and enjoyment of all citizens 

of New Mexico, the nation, and visitors from around the world. 

Caldera Action urges Congress to pass S. 3452 transferring the VCNP to the National Park Service at the earliest opportunity. 

May 15, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Senator, Energy & Natural Resources Committee Office, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN, 

On behalf of the undersigned organizations we are writing to thank you for your 

work and leadership in crafting and re-introducing the Valles Caldera National Preserve Management Act, S. 564. 

Valles Caldera is one of just three supervolcanoes in the U.S. and the oldest of 

the three. It is one of the western United States’s great outdoor places—often referred to as New Mexico’s Yellowstone. The public gained a great treasure when the 

Valles Caldera was brought into public ownership over a decade ago. 

However, the public has rightfully been frustrated by the experimental management system that was established based on an urban public space—the Presidio in 

San Francisco, California. 

As a result of this experimental management system, public access to the Valles 

Caldera National Preserve has been severely restricted in comparison to other public lands and has sometimes been seen to be run more like a private ranch than 

a public natural heirloom. 

Hunters and anglers in particular have been frustrated by the experimental mandate to achieve ‘‘self-sufficiency’’ often having to fight off proposals for outrageously 

high access fees of tens of thousands of dollars to hunt our own public land. In fact, 

for 6 of the 16 total annual wild turkey hunts in the Caldera, many hunters are 

currently excluded by astronomical access fees ($1,200 per hunter) that limit the 

turkey hunting opportunities to just a wealthy few. 

Fishing fees have also been unusually high in comparison to other public lands, 

with a half-day of fishing for a family of four exceeding $100. 

As a result of these elite access fees and restricted public access local businesses 

are also not experiencing the full economic potential of the Valles Caldera. 

S. 564 would fix these problems by transferring management of the Valles 

Caldera to the National Park Service as a National Preserve where hunting and 

fishing are mandated by law to continue. We believe the National Preserve model 

is a good fit for Valles Caldera. It ensures a sufficient staffing level to manage visitors and prevent overuse or abuse of the resource, but also guarantee that important hunting and fishing opportunities will continue and be brought back within 

reach of the average citizen who equally owns and enjoys our public lands. 

The adjacent management infrastructure of Bandelier National Monument is already in place and operational, and it is clear that S. 564 will provide considerable 

long term cost savings through management efficiency. 

In short S. 564 will bring management of one of New Mexico’s and the Nation’s 

top national treasures back in line with the great American tradition of equality of 

access to public land hunting and fishing opportunities, save taxpayer dollars and 
84 

provide a needed boost to local economies. We thank you for your leadership on this 

critical issue. 

Sincerely, 

BILL SCHUDLICH, STATE COUNCIL CHAIRMAN, 

Trout Unlimited NM. 

TONER MITCHELL, PRESIDENT, 

Truchas Chapter, Trout Unlimited. 

JEREMY VESBACH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

New Mexico Wildlife Federation. 

OSCAR SIMPSON, CHAIR, 

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, NM Chapter. 

BEN BROWN, NEW MEXICO FIELD REPRESENTATIVE, 

Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. 

DR. SANFORD SCHEMNITZ, CHAIR, 

Southwest Consolidated Sportsmen. 

JESSE DEUBEL, CHAIR, 

United Bowhunters of New Mexico. 

LOS AMIGOS DE VALLES CALDERA, 

Santa Fe, NM, May 10, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Energy and Natural 

Resources Committee Office, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, DC. 

Re: SB564 

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN: As we have mentioned to you before, the most critical 

work to be accomplished on the Preserve in the foreseeable future is the restoration 

of the forest ecosystem to a manageable condition and restoration of the wetlands 

damaged in part by indiscriminate logging in the 1960s and 1970s. 

The Southwest Jemez Mountains Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP) Project has been funded by the Department of Agriculture, under 

legislation that you sponsored because of your concern for forest health in New Mexico. That project, which has begun, is designed to improve the resilience of ecosystems on the Preserve and on the Santa Fe National Forest to recover from 

wildfires and other natural disturbances and sustain healthy forests and watersheds 

by thinning and prescribed burning to restore more natural fire regimes. 

The July 16, 2010 letter from Laura Joss, Acting Regional Director of the National Park Service, Intermountain Region, about the CFLRP proposal seems to indicate that the Park Service is not setting aside any money to continue this muchneeded forest restoration to replace the USDA’s approximately $1 million a year for 

10 years for the Preserve if it transfers to the Department of the Interior. They have 

indicated only that they will ‘‘initiate’’ a project fund request in competition with 

other Park Service requests. This potentially means that the funding and the restoration values it represents would be lost to the Preserve. 

This is a major concern to Los Amigos, the Trust, and the neighbors of the Preserve. If forest restoration is not accomplished in the near future, the Preserve will 

be at great risk for a catastrophic fire. We in New Mexico are already in the midst 

of a dangerous fire season. The moisture at the Preserve is at only 65% of normal 

for this time of year. This is frightening, given the forecast for continued lack of significant precipitation in the area. 

The CFLRP project on the Preserve is being financed with USDA funds and those 

funds are not available to the Department of Interior without specific, special reallocation. This is something that has almost never been done between Departments. 

We hope that you will consider this. We feel that forest restoration being of such 

great concern, it might be best to leave the Preserve under Trust management until 

this work is completed. Forest restoration is not part of the Park Service mission 

and therefore might not be successfully accomplished as quickly as needed. 

If the Preserve is transferred to the Park Service, it would be critical to place restrictions on overnight camping—or any other fire related activities—until needed 

forest restoration is accomplished. 
85 

We appreciate your ongoing willingness to consider and address our concerns. 

Thank you. 

Very truly yours, 

DOUG FRASER, CHAIR, 

Board of Directors. 

NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, 

SOUTHWEST REGIONAL OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, May 10, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

U.S. Senate, 703 Hart, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN: 

Valles Caldera National Preserve is a national treasure. For decades, this extraordinary landscape has been regarded as a place worthy of protection a nd management in such a way as to promote opportunities for recreation, interpretation for 

visitors of its geology and scientific inquiry. The National Parks Conservation Association, America’s leading voice for our national parks with a membership of over 

325,000, fully supports Senate Bill 564 that would transfer management responsibility for this publically owned landscape to the National Park Service. 

We believe that this remarkable and unique landscape, its unique geology and 

profound connection to the culture at nearby by Bandelier NM is ideally suited for 

inclusion and management by the National Park Service. Your proposed legislation 

reflects the appropriate public purpose of protecting this rich and varied resource 

while providing and managing recreational opportunities and insightful interpretive 

services for visitors. It further identifies the responsibility to develop a management 

plan that recognizes the rights of indigenous Pueblos and honors hunting, fishing 

and grazing practices. Furthermore, Senate Bill 564 reinforces and sustains the continuation of a strong and vibrant culture of science and research at the Caldera. 

Balancing resource protection with public enjoyment, recreation, interpretation and 

traditional uses is what the National Park Service does well and efficiently. This 

is absolutely the core function and mission of the National Park Service and we regard this change in management responsibility reflected in this bill, one of our most 

important national priorities. 

Since 2000, Valles Caldera has been publically owned by managed in an experimental fashion by a congressionally appointed Trust. Based upon a Government Accounting Office report completed in October 2009 that evaluated this experiment ten 

years on, it is apparent that core goals from this Trust management model have not 

been achieved. There continues to be a high level of uncertainty about achieving any 

level of self sufficiency, visitation and recreational opportunities have been meager 

at best and development of infrastructure to accommodate visitors is scant. On 

many levels, it is apparent that the bold experiment has not been successful. 

In contrast, the recently completed suitability study that Senator Bingaman requested that was completed in December, 2009 underscores how appopriate and 

compatible a Valles Caldera National Preserve as part of the national park system 

and indeed, as a special and comprehensive complement to Bandelier NM, would 

serve. It would further burnish these iconic and culturally significant landscapes 

with the special luster of national park designation. 

NPCA fully and enthusiastically endorses this proposed legislation. By an measure or standard, national park designation and management responsibility is overdue. 

Sincerely, 

DAVID NIMKIN, 

Director. 

TROUT UNLIMITED, 

Washington, DC, May 11, 2011. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, 304 Dirksen Senate Building, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN BINGAMAN, 

On behalf of Trout Unlimited’s 140,000 members nationwide, including more than 

1,000 in New Mexico, I write to thank you for your leadership and hard work in 

developing S. 564, the ‘‘Valles Caldera National Preserve Management Act.’’ Trout 

Unlimited strongly supports this bill, which would direct the Park Service to take 
86 

over management of the Valles Caldera in a way that protects the Preserve’s unparalleled natural and cultural resources. 

The Valles Caldera National Preserve’s current management system runs the resource more like a private ranch than a public natural heirloom. It has always been 

exclusive rather than inclusive in its management approach. 

Furthermore, the GAO reports that the Preserve is at least five years behind 

schedule in the development of an effective management control system and that 

the requirement to achieve financial self-sustainability by 2015 is the Trust’s biggest challenge and will be difficult to achieve. It also notes that the revenue enhancement study commissioned by the Trust estimated the need for at least $21 

million for infrastructure improvements to support greater public access. 

S. 564 provides better access, a strong commitment to traditional land uses like 

hunting and fishing, promotes responsible and sustainable management practices 

and considerable long term cost savings by combining agencies. The adjacent management infrastructure of Bandelier National Monument is already in place and 

operational. Additionally, the measure strengthens protections for tribal cultural 

and religious sites and ensures access by pueblos to the area. Clearly, the Park 

Service is best equipped to manage the Caldera for myriad reasons. 

Trout Unlimited and its New Mexico membership stand in full support of S. 564. 

The Valles Caldera is undoubtedly New Mexico’s most iconic sub-alpine ecosystems—the ‘‘Yellowstone’’ of New Mexico. Your efforts to preserve the cultural and 

biotic integrity of this superlative natural wonder are greatly appreciated. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH CURLEY, 

Director of Government Affairs. 

Æ