U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

23–014 PDF 2005

S. HRG. 109–101

ICE AGE FLOODS NATIONAL GEOLOGIC TRAIL; LAND ADJACENT TO WALNUT CANYON NATIONAL MONUMENT; AMEND

THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT; AND INCLUDING

IN THE NPS CERTAIN SITES IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY,

TN

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

S. 206 S. 588

S. 556 S. 955

JUNE 28, 2005

(

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina, 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 

JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri 

CONRAD BURNS, Montana 

GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado

ALEX FLINT, Staff Director 

JUDITH K. PENSABENE, Chief Counsel 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming, Chairman 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Vice Chairman

GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia 

RICHARD M. BURR, North Carolina 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado

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

THOMAS LILLIE, Professional Staff Member 

DAVID BROOKS, Democratic Senior Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page

Alexander, Hon. Lamar, U.S. Senator from Tennessee ........................................ 5

Archuleta, Elizabeth, Chairman, Coconino County Board of Supervisors, Flagstaff, AZ ................................................................................................................ 18

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

Kleinknecht, Gary, Past President, Ice Age Floods Institute, Kennewick, WA . 22

McCain, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arizona ................................................... 2

Miller, Tom, Mayor, City of Franklin, TN ............................................................. 20

Murphy, Donald W., Deputy Director, National Park Service ............................. 7

Snead, Larry, Executive Director, Arizona Trail Association, Phoenix, AZ, 

accompanied by Lyn White ................................................................................. 25

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

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

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

APPENDIX II 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 37

(1)

ICE AGE FLOODS NATIONAL GEOLOGIC 

TRAIL; LAND ADJACENT TO WALNUT CANYON NATIONAL MONUMENT; AMEND THE 

NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT; AND INCLUDING IN THE NPS CERTAIN SITES IN 

WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TN 

TUESDAY, JUNE 28, 2005

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

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m. in room 

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

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CRAIG THOMAS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator THOMAS. We’ll call the meeting to order. I apologize for 

being late. This voting seems to interfere with our activities around 

here. So, I guess that’s the way it is. 

At any rate, good morning. May I welcome Deputy Director Don 

Murphy and our other witnesses to today’s subcommittee hearing. 

The hearing was originally scheduled for June 14, and I’d like to 

thank everyone for their patience and assistance in rescheduling. 

Our purpose for this hearing is receive testimony on four bills, 

which include studies of potential park units, the expansion of an 

existing unit, and one new designation: S. 206, a bill to designate 

Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail, and other purposes; S. 556, 

a bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 

Agriculture to jointly conduct a study of certain land adjacent to 

Walnut Canyon National Monument in the State of Arizona; S. 

588, a bill to amend the National Trail System Act to direct the 

Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly 

conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the Arizona Trail 

as a scenic national trail or a national historic trail; and S. 955, 

to direct a special resource study to determine the suitability and 

feasibility of including in the National Park System certain sites in 

Williamson County, Tennessee, relative to the Battle of Franklin. 

So, let’s see, before we go on, would you have any opening statements, Senator? 

[The prepared statement of Senator McCain follows:]

2

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

Mr. Chairman, I greatly appreciate the opportunity to offer my comments regarding S. 588, the Arizona Trail Feasability Act. First let me say that this bill has the 

full support of the entire Arizona congressional delegation. In the U.S. House of 

Representatives, my colleague, Congressman Jim Kolbe, has been integral in assembling a companion bill and I commend him for his hard work. S. 588 would authorize the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to conduct a joint study to determine 

the feasibility of designating the Arizona Trail as a National Scenic or National Historic Trail. I am proud to have sponsored a bill that promises to highlight the national recreational value of the Arizona Trail. 

The Arizona Trail is a beautifully diverse stretch of public lands, mountains, canyons, deserts, forests, historic sites, and communities. The Trail begins at the Coronado National Memorial on the U.S.-Mexico border and ends in the Bureau of Land 

Management’s Arizona Strip District on the Utah border. In between these two 

points, the Trail winds through some of the most rugged, spectacular scenery in the 

Western United States. 

For the past 10 years, over 16 Federal, state, and local agencies, as well as community and business organizations, have worked to form a partnership to create, develop, and manage the Arizona Trail. Designating the Arizona Trail as a national 

trail would help streamline the management of the Trail to ensure that this pristine 

stretch of diverse land is preserved for future generations to enjoy. 

The corridor for the Arizona Trail encompasses the wide range of ecological diversity in the state, and incorporates a host of existing trails into one continuous trail. 

The Arizona Trail extends through seven ecological life zones including such legendary landmarks as the Sonoran Desert and the Grand Canyon. It connects the 

unique lowland desert flora and fauna in Saguaro National Park and the pine-covered San Francisco Peaks, Arizona’s highest mountains at 12,633 feet in elevation. 

In fact, the Trail route is so topographically diverse that a person can hike from 

the Sonoran Desert to Alpine forests in one day. The Trail also takes travelers 

through ranching, mining, agricultural, and developed urban areas, as well as remote and pristine wildlands. 

With over 750 miles of the 800-mile trail already completed, the Arizona Trail is 

a boon to recreationists. The Arizona State Parks recently released data showing 

that two-thirds of Arizonans consider themselves trail users. Millions of visitors also 

use Arizona’s trails each year. In one of the fastest-growing states in the U.S., the 

designation of the Arizona Trail as a National Scenic or National Historic Trail 

would ensure the preservation of a corridor of open space for hikers, mountain 

bicyclists, cross country skiers, snowshoers, eco-tourists, equestrians, and joggers. 

S. 588 is the first step in the process of national trail designation for the Arizona 

Trail. If the study concludes that designating the Arizona Trail as a part of the national trail system if feasible, subsequent legislation would be needed to designate 

the Arizona Trail as either a National Scenic Trail or National Historic Trail. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I urge the subcommittee to pass this legislation.

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

FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you 

for holding today’s hearing and session so that we can hear about 

important projects, particularly one that impacts the Northwest. 

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail Designation Act. And I also appreciate the opportunity to publicly thank the co-sponsors of this legislation—Senators Smith, Craig, Burns, and Murray. This distinguished list of 

Northwest Senators supporting this legislation represents a bipartisan regional consensus on the need to authorize this national 

trail. 

I also want to thank Gary Kleinknecht for agreeing to testify in 

favor of this legislation. Gary and his colleagues at the Ice Age 

Floods Institute have played such a integral role in bringing attention to the issues, educating the public, and energizing the region 

around this specific idea. 

3

In many ways, the members of the institute serve as prote ́ge ́s of 

the University of Washington Professor Harlen Bretz and the 

USGS geologist Joseph Pardee, who together formed—and, many 

times, fought for—the incredible hypothesis about this historic experience, the Ice Age Floods. We certainly appreciate their work. 

Mr. Chairman, my legislation, S. 206, would authorize the National Park Services to oversee the creation of an Ice Age Floods 

National Geologic Trail, and the trail would be the first of its kind 

because of its extent over a four-State area in the Pacific Northwest. 

Some 12,000 to 17,000 years ago, at the end of the Ice Age, a series of cataclysmic floods swept across the Pacific Northwest. These 

epic floods fundamentally changed the geography and way of life in 

this region of the country. The coulees, buttes, boulder fields, lakes, 

ridges, gravel bars that they left behind still define the very unique 

landscape of the Northwest today. 

Scientific evidence has shown that, on a number of occasions between 12- and 17,000 years ago, many Pacific Northwest cities 

were under hundreds of feet of water. More than 500 cubic miles 

of water were blocked behind a glacial dam in a valley around the 

present-day Missoula, Montana. Periodically, that ice dam would 

fail, creating the greatest flooding ever known to science, sending 

water across four Northwest States. Scientists now believe that 500 

cubic miles of water in Ancient Lake Missoula would drain in less 

than 48 hours, sending water rushing across present-day Montana, 

Idaho, and Washington at speeds of more than 65 miles an hour. 

The impacts on the region have been breathtaking. High-water 

marks can be seen from foothills outside of Missoula, Montana, 

identifying the ancient shoreline of Lake Missoula, and previously 

baffling water ripples mark the landscape throughout Idaho Panhandle and other regions of the Pacific Northwest. In Oregon, there 

is evidence of water collecting in the Willamette Valley, up as the 

flood waters trying to squeeze through relatively narrow Kalama 

Gap. 

In my State of Washington, we have benefited from this beautiful 

scenery, the geological utility of the features molded by some awesome powers of racing floodwaters. The rolling farmlands of eastern 

Washington are interrupted by house-sized boulders, and scientists 

know that they have been carried by these torrent waters of flooding that happened in various points in time, and that parts of the 

Columbia River Channel and the Grand Coulee Dam site were 

formed, as large part, due to this force of water moving through our 

State. 

The remnants of massive waterfall, which is now known as Dry 

Falls, in the State of Washington, serve as a present-day evidence 

of the 3-mile-wide 350-foot waterfall that was part of the old channel of the Columbia River. This would have made—well, basically, 

this would have dwarfed the size of what we know right now of Niagara Falls. 

Mr. Chairman, these impacts are truly one of a kind and significant as it relates to science, geology, and the amazing history that 

happened. Creating a National Park Service Trail to recognize and 

interpret and celebrate how these floods were literally shaped and 

4

how they impacted the Northwest, I think, is an unparalleled educational resource for visitors across the country. 

I’m glad that, in February, the National Park Service Study, the 

Ice Age Floods-Study of Alternatives and Environmental Assessment seemed to arrive at the same conclusion. The study determined that the flood’s regional interest exceeded the basic requirements as nationally significant resource and that the Ice Age 

Floods Trail was suitable for inclusion in the national park system 

and concluded that the geological-trail approach seemed to be very 

feasible. 

To that end, this legislation would authorize this most effective 

and efficient management alternative that was recommended and 

the creation of an Ice Age Floods National Geological Trail from 

Montana to the Pacific Ocean. 

Mr. Chairman, I think I’ll submit the rest of my comments for 

the record, but just to say that the business, education, scientific 

community in the Northwest are very interested in the implementation of this concept, not just for the business and economic issues 

that are at hand, but because we think it’s a great resource to use 

as an educational tool for many generations to come. 

Thank you for holding this hearing and including this on the 

docket. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Cantwell follows:]

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

Thank you Chairman Thomas for holding this hearing today; I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail Designation Act. I 

also appreciate the opportunity to publicly thank the cosponsors of this legislation, 

including Senators Smith, Craig, Burns, and Murray. The distinguished list of Senators supporting the legislation represents a strong, bipartisan, regional consensus 

on the need to authorize this National Trail. 

I also want to thank Gary Kleinknecht (Cline-connect) for agreeing to testify in 

favor of this legislation. Gary and his colleagues at the Ice Age Floods Institute colleagues have played such an integral role in bringing attention to this issue, educating the public, and energizing the region around this idea. In many ways, the 

members of the Institute serve as the prote ́ge ́s of University of Washington professor J. Harlan Bretz and USGS geologist Joseph Pardee, who together formed and 

many times fought to make credible their hypothesis about the historic existence of 

the Ice Age Floods. We appreciate your work. 

Mr. Chairman, my legislation, S. 206, would authorize the National Parks Service 

to oversee the creation Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail. The trail would be 

the first of its kind and extend over a four state area in the Pacific Northwest. 

Some 12,000 to 17,000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age, a series cataclysmic floods swept across the Pacific Northwest. These epic floods fundamentally 

changed the geography and way of life in my region of the country. The coulees, 

buttes, boulder fields, lakes, ridges and gravel bars they left behind still define the 

unique landscape of the Northwest today. 

Scientific evidence has shown that on a number of occasions between twelve and 

seventeen thousand years ago, many Pacific Northwest Cities were under hundreds 

of feet of water. As the Cordilleran Ice Sheet progressed south from Canada, more 

than 500 cubic miles of water were blocked behind a glacial dam in the valley in 

and around present day Missoula, Montana. Periodically that ice dam would fail—

creating the greatest flooding event known to science—sending water ripping across 

four Northwest States. Scientists now believe the 500 cubic miles of water in Ancient Lake Missoula would drain in less than 48 hours—sending water rushing 

across present day Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon at speeds of more than 

65 miles an hour. 

The impacts on the region have been breathtaking. High. water marks can be 

seen on the foothills outside Missoula, Montana—identifying the ancient shoreline 

of Lake Missoula. Previously baffling water ripple marks scoured by the awesome 

power of the floods mark the landscape throughout the Idaho Panhandle and the 

5

Pacific Northwest. In Oregon, there is evidence of water collecting in the Willamette 

Valley up as the flood waters trying to squeeze through the relatively narrow 

Kalama Gap. 

In my State of Washington, we have benefited from the beautiful scenery and geologic utility of the features molded by the awesome powers of the racing floodwaters. 

The rolling farmlands and channeled scablands of Eastern Washington are interrupted by seemingly inexplicable house-sized boulders that scientists now know 

were carried like pebbles and deposited by the torrents of water. Parts of the Columbia River-Channel and the site Grand Coulee Dam, the bookend of the Federal 

Columbia River Power System, were formed in large part due to the scouring forces 

of the water. Remnants of a massive water fall, now known as Dry Falls, serves 

as present day evidence of a three-mile wide 350 foot high waterfall that was part 

of the old channel of the Columbia River and would have made dwarfed the size 

and power of Niagara Falls. 

Mr. Chairman, these impacts are truly one of a kind and I think its appropriate 

and necessary for the federal government to play an appropriate coordinating role 

in working with public and private entities, including Tribal, State, and Local governments to appropriately recognize this amazing geologic history. 

Creating a National-Park Service trail to recognize, interpret, and celebrate how 

these floods literally shaped the face of the Northwest will provide an unparalleled 

educational resource for visitors from across the country. Better coordination will 

also spur economic development in local rural communities across Eastern and Central Washington. 

I am glad that the National Park Service in their February 2001 study, ‘‘Ice Age 

Floods-Study of Alternatives and Environmental Assessment,’’ seemed to arrive at 

the same conclusions. The study determined that the floods region exceeded the 

basic requirements as a nationally significant resource, found the Ice Age Floods 

Trail suitable for inclusion into the National Parks System, and concluded the Geologic Trail-approach to be feasible. 

To that end, this legislation would authorize the most effective and efficient management alternative of that report—the creation of the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail from Montana to the Pacific Ocean. 

The 2001 Study noted that the National Parks Service does its best work when 

it collaborates on interpretation of resources with public and private entities 

throughout a given region—this legislation provides the authority NPS to play that 

role. My legislation would provide for an Interagency Technical Committee that 

would be the forum for collaboration between the NPS, federal agencies, private entities, civic organization landowners, and state, local, and tribal governments. 

This collaboration is important for the planning needed to appropriately interpret 

the geologic features across the trail. While Congress always reserves the right to 

provide additional funding in collaboration with the Trail collaborators, a modest 

half million dollars is authorized for the administration of the Geologic Trail 

through the National Parks Service. 

Despite the 2001 study being chock-full of reasons to authorize the creation of a 

federally designated Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail, I understand that the 

Park Service will testify against the bill today. While I will be interested in exploring this issue during questioning, I look forward to working with the Administration 

to address these issues. 

I am proud to note that the federal government has an entire region ready and 

waiting to collaborate—in fact, the 2001 study noted the strong regional support for 

federal designation. To date, more than 30 entities spanning state and local governments, Chambers of Commerce, and other civic and community organization support 

creation of the trail concept. 

Through this modest federal investment local, state, tribal, and private resources 

can be better leveraged and coordinated to tell the story of this one of a kind geologic story in the way that state and local communities best see fit. I look forward 

to the testimony that we will hear today from the Ice Age Floods Institute and the 

National Park Service and thank the subcommittee for the opportunity to share this 

legislation and important scientific story with you.

Senator THOMAS. Okay, thank you, Senator. 

Senator Alexander. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LAMAR ALEXANDER, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM TENNESSEE 

Senator ALEXANDER. Thanks, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 

holding the hearing. 

6

I’m here especially today to welcome my friend Mayor Tom Miller, of the city of Franklin, Tennessee, who’s—who will be testifying 

during the hearing. And I’ll have a statement to put in the record 

at the time, but I simply wanted to applaud him, call to the chairman’s attention—the whole Senate’s attention—the tremendous effort that the mayor and the city of Franklin are making to preserve 

the Franklin Battlefield. 

The Battle of Franklin, just before the Battle of Nashville, were 

two historic turning points in the Civil War. Six generals lost their 

lives in the Battle of Franklin, 9,000 soldiers. Franklin was one of 

the most rapidly growing areas in our State. And so, we have a 

fight on our hands to try to be able to keep that, preserve the battlefield there in the city. Ultimately, others in the community are 

really doing an excellent job trying to balance the competing needs 

of proper development and proper reservation. 

So, I’m here today to welcome the mayor and to thank the chairman and Senator Frist and others for a resolution to study whether 

the battlefield should be included in the National Park Service. 

Thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Alexander follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LAMAR ALEXANDER, U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE

Thank you Chairman Thomas. First, let me welcome Mayor Tom Miller of the 

City of Franklin, Tennessee. Mayor Miller is an old friend of mine, and he has been 

integral to efforts at protecting and preserving the historic Franklin Battlefield. Mr. 

Mayor, I really appreciate your leadership in the historic preservation underway in 

Franklin, and I thank you for taking the time to travel to Washington to tell us 

a bit more about your efforts and plans. 

Tennessee is second only to Virginia in the number of battles, engagements, and 

skirmishes during the Civil War, and the Battle of Franklin was one of the most 

important battles of the war. On November 30, 1864, Confederate soldiers led by 

Confederate General John Bell Hood charged the fortified Union line north of the 

Carnton Plantation in Franklin. 

The ensuing battle resulted in more than 9,000 casualties and decimated the 

Army of Tennessee, including six Confederate generals. Two weeks later, the Confederate defeat in the Battle of Nashville effectively ended the war in the western 

theater. The Battle of Franklin was truly a turning point in the War Between the 

States, and a critical moment in both Tennessee and U.S. History. 

The Franklin Battlefield was named this year as one of the ‘‘10 most endangered’’ 

Civil War battlefields in the nation by the Civil War Preservation Trust, America’s 

largest non-profit organization devoted to the preservation of our nation’s endangered Civil War battlefields. 

Efforts to protect this vital piece of our history have gained momentum in recent 

years, particularly as the City of Franklin has wrestled with the challenges of rapid 

development and economic growth. This development has overrun some of the sites 

of the Battle of Franklin, and other sites are being encroached on. Mayor Miller, 

City Aldermen, and local and national groups have responded well. With Mayor Miller’s leadership, the City of Franklin has pledged $2.5 million to acquire a piece of 

the battlefield near the Carnton Plantation. Local businesses and land owners have 

been supportive with money, land, and their time. I commend their efforts. 

I am proud to have cosponsored the Franklin National Battlefield Study Act with 

Senator Frist. The importance of the Franklin Battlefield and the local efforts in 

preservation merit study by the National Park Service, and the issues faced in 

Franklin will certainly have a bearing on future park feasibility studies. As more 

communities face municipal growth and prosperity, historic sites in Tennessee and 

other states will be in jeopardy. 

Franklin, Tennessee is already working to develop an appropriate balance between development and preservation, and I applaud the efforts of Mayor Miller and 

others in the community.

Senator THOMAS. Who won the battle? 

7

Senator ALEXANDER. Who won the Battle of Franklin? Well, six 

Confederate generals were killed, so that gives you an idea of—the 

Confederates charged, and the Union won, as I remember the history. 

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

Welcome to Deputy Director of the National Park Service, Mr. 

Murphy, if you will, please. 

STATEMENT OF DONALD W. MURPHY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Alexander, 

Senator Cantwell. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like my written testimony, which we 

have already provided for you, to be entered into the official record, 

if you will. 

Senator THOMAS. It will be entered. 

Mr. MURPHY. I’ll be taking up each of these bills, in turn. I’ll be 

starting my testimony on Walnut Canyon. 

The administration does not object to the enactment of S. 556. 

We also believe that any funding requested be directed toward 

completing previously authorized studies. Currently, 30 studies are 

in progress by the Department of the Interior, which hopes to complete and transmit 15 of these to Congress by 2005. 

Additionally, if the committee moves forward with S. 556, we 

suggest that the bill be amended in section 4(e) to make the report 

to Congress due 18 months after funds are made available. Also, 

section 4 may need to be further amended to specify that the draft 

study be available for public comment, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, and remove any potential violations of the recommendations clause, U.S. Constitution, article 2, 

section 3, by clarifying that any recommendations be made to Congress by the Secretaries would be discretionary, rather than mandatory. And, of course, we’ll be happy to work with the committee 

and the U.S. Department of Justice to develop alternate language 

for these portions of the bill. 

Moving on to the Arizona Trail, the Department—that’s bill S. 

588—it’s a bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly conduct a study on the feasibility of 

designating the Arizona Trail as a national scenic trail or a national historic trail. The Department supports S. 588, with an 

amendment regarding the appropriations language in the bill, and 

an amendment which would require the map described in subparagraph (a) to also be made available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the U.S. Forest Service. However, while the Department supports the authorization of the study, we also believe 

that any funding requested should be directed toward completing 

previously authorized studies. 

And moving on to the Battle of Franklin, this, of course, is a bill 

authorizing a study for the suitability and feasibility of designating 

sites relating to the Battle of Franklin in Williamson County, Tennessee, as a unit of the National Park System and for other purposes. The Department supports S. 955, with an amendment that 

would conform the bill to other similar study bills. And, while the 

Department supports the authorization of the study, we would also 

8

ask that funding requested should be directed toward completing 

previously authorized studies. 

As stated earlier, S. 955 would authorize the Secretary to complete a study on the suitability and feasibility of designating these 

sites relating to the Battle of Franklin as a unit of the national 

park system. 

In its 1993 report, the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

identified the site of the 1864 Battle of Franklin as a Class A battlefield, representing a high level of military importance. The Commission reported that the site represents an area that had a decisive impact on military campaign and a direct impact on the course 

of the war. The Commission also reported that the Franklin Battlefield is currently a fragmented site, with very little historical integrity remaining from that period. 

We suggest one amendment in section 4 of the bill to have the 

study completed 3 years after funding is made available, rather 

than 3 years after enactment. This will make the bill consistent 

with other similar bills. 

And now, Mr. Chairman, the comments on designating the Ice 

Age Floods National Geologic Trail. The Department opposes S. 

206, in its current form, although we recognize the national significance of the geologic features of the Northwest caused by the Ice 

Age floods. We believe that we can enhance the interpretation of 

these features, as described later in the testimony, without establishing a new entity within the National Park Service or spending 

Federal funds on development of interpretive sites or land acquisition. 

Rather than establishing a new entity for the purpose of interpreting the Ice Age floods, we recommend amending S. 206 to provide for expansion of interpretation of flood features at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, an existing unit of the National 

Park System, located in the State of Washington, about midway 

along the route of the trail proposed by S. 206. 

As part of an enhanced interpretation program, the park could, 

for example, make available to park visitors information about 

other flood features in the four-State region covered by the proposed trail. The National Park Service is involved in two other efforts, both of them in Wisconsin, to preserve and interpret the 

landscapes resulting from the last advance of the continental glaciers. That’s the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve and the Ice 

Age National Scenic Trail. 

The National Scientific Reserve, authorized in 1964, preserves 

outstanding features of the glacial landscape that are owned and 

managed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 

under a cooperative agreement with the National Park Service, and 

is an affiliated area of the national park system. 

In addition to expanding interpretation at Lake Roosevelt, the 

National Park Service could devote resources from other existing 

programs to promoting education and interpretation of sites associated with the floods. For example, the National Park Service’s Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program could provide 

technical assistance to State and local entities that want to enhance interpretation of sites in their areas. In addition, other National Park Service units in the vicinity of the proposed trail, such 

9

as the new Lewis & Clark National Historic Park, which includes 

areas along the lower Columbia River, could be brought into the effort to promote interpretation of these flood features. 

We acknowledge that in 2001 a study team headed by the National Park Service, and composed of 70 representatives of a broad 

range of public and private entities, included a 2-year special-resource study of the Ice Age floods. The study did find that the flood 

features met criteria for national significance and suitability for addition to the National Park System, as Ms. Cantwell said, but we 

felt that the size, breadth, and multitude of ownership throughout 

the region make the area not feasible to consider for a traditional 

national park, monument, or designation. 

And, as stated earlier in my testimony, we are ready and willing 

to enter into agreements with partners, and to find ways to interpret this very significant geological event in the history of the 

world. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony on these four bills. 

I’m prepared to take any questions the committee might have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Murphy follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DONALD W. MURPHY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK

SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

S. 206

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

Interior’s views on S. 206, a bill to designate the Ice Age Floods National Geologic 

Trail. 

The Department opposes S. 206 in its current form. Although we recognize the 

national significance of the geologic features in the Northwest caused by the Ice Age 

Floods, we believe that we can enhance the interpretation of these features, as described later in this testimony, without establishing a new entity within the National Park Service or spending Federal funds on development of interpretive sites 

or land acquisition. Devoting limited National Park Service funds to those purposes 

would detract from the Administration’s priority of reducing the deferred maintenance backlog in existing units of the National Park System. 

The cataclysmic floods that occurred 12,000 to 17,000 years ago, at the end of the 

last ice age, were some of the largest ever documented by geologists. These floods, 

which were caused by the ice and water bursting through ice dams at Glacial Lake 

Missoula, left a lasting mark of geologic features on the landscape of parts of Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon, and have affected the pattern of human settlement and development in parts of the Northwest. 

In 2001, a study team headed by the National Park Service and composed of 70 

representatives of a broad range of public and private entities, concluded a two-year 

special resource study of the Ice Age floods. The study found that the floods features 

met the criteria for national significance and suitability for addition to the National 

Park System, but that the size, breadth, and multitude of ownerships throughout 

the study region make the area not feasible to consider for a traditional national 

park, monument, or similar designation. However, the study found that it is feasible 

to interpret the floods story across the affected areas. It evaluated four management 

alternatives that would each provide a collaborative and coordinated approach for 

the interpretation of the Ice Age floods story to the public. The study’s preferred alternative called for Congressional designation of the floods pathways as a national 

geologic trail and authorization of National Park Service management of the trail 

in coordination with public and private entities. 

S. 206 would largely implement the study’s preferred alternative. It would designate the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail, to be managed by the National 

Park Service, along floods pathways. The trail would be an auto tour route along 

public roads and highways linking floods features starting in the vicinity of Missoula in western Montana, going across northern Idaho, through eastern and southern sections of Washington, across northern Oregon in the vicinity of the Willamette 

Valley and the Columbia River, to the Pacific Ocean. 

10

While the Department believes that the proposed auto tour route highlighting 

floods features is a viable concept, we do not support establishing a new program 

within the National Park Service to lead this effort. Although the study called for 

sharing the cost of the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail among a variety of 

public and private sources, it estimated that under the alternative that S. 206 would 

implement, the role that National Park Service would play would cost about 

$500,000 per year in operating expenses. The study also suggested that the share 

of capital development costs for the trail from all Federal sources might run between $8 million and $12 million over a period of several years. 

The study assumed that State and local governments would pay for parcels of 

land needed for improvements such as roadside pullouts and wayside exhibits where 

rights-of-way proved inadequate, so it did not suggest a Federal contribution toward 

land acquisition. However, S. 206 would authorize the National Park Service to acquire up to 25 acres of land, which would entail additional Federal expenditures. 

Rather than establishing a new entity for the purpose of interpreting the Ice Age 

Floods, we recommend amending S. 206 to provide for expansion of interpretation 

of floods features at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area, an existing unit of 

the National Park System located in the State of Washington about midway along 

the route of the trail proposed by S. 206. Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area 

contains the lake formed by Grand Coulee Dam, built across one of the coulees 

formed by the Ice Age Floods. The floods are the primary natural history interpretive theme at Lake Roosevelt. The recreation area also assists Washington State 

Parks in interpretation at Dry Falls State Park, one of the most significant floods 

features along the proposed trail. As part of an enhanced interpretation program, 

the park could, for example, make available to park visitors information about other 

floods features in the four-state region covered by the proposed trail. 

The National Park Service is involved in two other efforts, both in Wisconsin, to 

preserve and interpret the landscapes resulting from the last advance of continental 

glaciers the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve and the Ice Age National Scenic 

Trail. The national scientific reserve, authorized in 1964, preserves outstanding features of the glacial landscape that are owned and managed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources under a cooperative agreement with the National 

Park Service and is an affiliated area of the National Park System. The Ice Age National Scenic Trail in Wisconsin, authorized in 1980 as a part of the National Trails 

System, is a 1,200-mile hiking trail that traces glacial landscape features left by the 

advance and melting away of the last continental glaciers during the Wisconsin Glaciation approximately 15,000 years ago. This scenic trail is a hiking trail and differs 

from auto tour route that is proposed to be established in this bill as the Ice Age 

Floods National Geologic Trail. 

In addition to expanding interpretation at Lake Roosevelt, the National Park 

Service could devote resources from other existing programs to promoting education 

and interpretation of sites associated with the floods. For example, the National 

Park Service’s Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance program could provide 

technical assistance to State and local entities that want to enhance interpretation 

of sites in their areas. And, the National Park Service’s National Register of Historic 

Places program could develop Ice Age Floods as one of its ‘‘Discover Our Shared 

Heritage’’ on-line travel itineraries. In addition, other National Park Service units 

in the vicinity of the proposed trail, such as the new Lewis and Clark National Historical Park which includes areas along the lower Columbia River, could be brought 

into the effort to promote interpretation of floods features. 

As the National Park Service’s study suggested, interpretation of the floods should 

involve a collaborative and coordinated approach involving a broad range of public 

and private entities. One of the management alternatives considered by the study 

was having the state legislatures of Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon designate representatives to a four-state commission that would promote the coordinated interpretation of the floods story at the state and local level. We think that 

is an option that merits a second look. In addition, with or without a state-sponsored commission, tourist organizations could form a four-state consortium to generate interest in visiting these sites. The Ice Age Floods Institute, a non-profit scientific organization devoted to increasing understanding of the story of the Ice Age 

Floods, has played and will continue to play a large role in promoting public education about the floods. 

We would be happy to work with the committee to develop the appropriate language for amending S. 206 to provide for expanded interpretation of Ice Age Floods 

features by Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area rather than designation of a 

new national entity and establishment of a new program managed by the National 

Park Service. 

11

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

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

S. 556

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

to appear before you today to present the Administration’s views on S. 556, a bill 

to direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly conduct a study of certain lands adjacent to the Walnut Canyon National Monument 

in the State of Arizona. 

The Administration does not object to the enactment of S. 556. We also believe 

that any funding requested should be directed toward completing previously authorized studies. Currently, 30 studies are in progress by the Department of the Interior, which hopes to complete and transmit 15 to Congress by the end of 2005

S. 556 directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture, utilizing a third party consultant, to jointly conduct a study of approximately 31,000 

acres surrounding Walnut Canyon National Monument (monument). The study 

would evaluate how best to manage federal and State lands adjacent to the monument in the long term in order to protect the natural, cultural, and recreational values important to this area of Arizona. The bill directs the Secretaries, as well as 

local land managers, the Flagstaff City Council and Coconino County Board of Supervisors to review and comment on the draft study. The bill requires a report that 

includes findings, conclusions and recommendations for future management of the 

study area to be transmitted to Congress no later than 18 months after enactment. 

We estimate the total cost of the study to be approximately $300,000, to be divided 

between the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service. 

Walnut Canyon National Monument was established on November 30, 1915, by 

Presidential Proclamation with the specific purpose of preserving the prehistoric 

ruins of ancient cliff dwellings. The monument was expanded in 1938 and 1996 and 

now occupies approximately 3,600 acres. The purposes for which the area was originally established have expanded to include protection of natural and cultural resources that are known to be significant to contemporary native tribes and the ecological communities and geological resources that make the canyon an outstanding 

scenic resource. The monument and the surrounding lands of the Coconino National 

Forest provide a significant natural sanctuary and greenbelt surrounding the city 

of Flagstaff. 

The National Park Service released a Draft General Management Plan (GMP) for 

Walnut Canyon National Monument for public comment in 2003. Many of the issues 

identified for resolution in S. 556 were also identified as needs in the Draft GMP. 

The plan is being revised to address comments about boundary issues and is expected to be finalized after completion of consultations with the Fish and Wildlife 

Service in the next several months. The archeological and prehistoric resources preserved in the monument are nearly pristine, and provide not only scientific opportunities but also challenges for preservation. 

For several years, local communities adjacent to the monument have debated how 

the land surrounding the monument would be best protected from future development. A number of years ago, the Coconino County Board and the Flagstaff City 

Council passed resolutions concluding that the preferred method to determine what 

is best for the land surrounding the monument is by having a federal study conducted. Included within the lands to be studied that surround the monument are 

approximately 2,000 acres of State trust lands. We should note that it is our understanding that Arizona law prohibits state lands to be donated and that the Arizona 

Supreme Court has determined that the Arizona Constitution prohibits the disposal 

of certain state land except through auction to the highest and best bidder. Should 

the study’s conclusions involve these types of actions concerning state lands, we 

would have to await a determination on how the citizens of Arizona and their representatives would recommend proceeding. 

We understand the concern that National Forest System (NFS) lands between the 

Monument and the City of Flagstaff might eventually be sold or exchanged; allowing 

urban development to creep closer to the Walnut Canyon watershed, originally 

prompted local support for this proposed study. The proposed study area is within 

two miles of the campus of Northern Arizona University and is a prime recreation 

area for students, as well as for Flagstaff area residents. In fact, the area is the 

second most-used area for recreation in the greater Flagstaff area, behind only the 

San Francisco Peaks. 

The Forest Service has developed a Land Resource Management Plan for the 

Coconino National Forest, amended in early 2003, that closed the area to motorized 

access and removed the land encircling the Monument from consideration for sale 

12

or exchange. The Flagstaff-area Regional Land Use and Transportation Plan 

(RLUTP), approved by the Flagstaff City Council and the Coconino County Board 

of Supervisors in 2002, limits growth and does not allow for development within the 

study area. RLUTP specifically precludes two key sections of Arizona State Trust 

land between Flagstaff and the Monument as suitable for development. Those lands 

are identified in the plan for open space and greenways. These plans would be an 

important source of information to be considered during the study process. 

If the Committee moves forward with S. 556, we suggest that the bill be amended 

in section 4(e) to make the report to Congress due 18 months after funds are made 

available. Also Section 4 may need to be further amended to specify that the draft 

study be available for public comment, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, and to remove any potential violations of the Recommendations 

Clause, U.S. Const. art. II, sec. 3, by clarifying that any recommendations to be 

made to Congress by the Secretaries would be discretionary rather than mandatory. 

We will be happy to work with the Committee and the U.S. Department of Justice 

to develop alternate language for these portions of the bill. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present the Administration’s views on this bill. 

That completes my remarks and I will be happy to answer any questions you may 

have. 

S. 588

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. 

588, a bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture 

to jointly conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the Arizona Trail as a 

national scenic trail or a national historic trail. 

The Department supports S. 588 with an amendment regarding the appropriations language in the bill and an amendment which would require the map described in subparagraph (A) to also be made available for public inspection in the 

appropriate offices of the U.S. Forest Service. However, while the Department supports the authorization of this study, we also believe that any funding requested 

should be directed toward completing previously authorized studies. Currently, 30 

studies are in progress, and we hope to complete and transmit 15 to Congress by 

the end of 2005. We estimate the total cost of this study to be approximately 

$300,000, and recommend that paragraph D on Page 3 of the bill be amended to 

change the authorization to $300,000 with $150,000 made available to each Secretary. 

S. 588 directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to 

jointly conduct a study of the Arizona Trail which connects Arizona’s north and 

south borders across mountain ranges and deserts for approximately 790 miles. The 

study would determine whether or not the trail would be eligible to be designated 

as a scenic or historic trail, joining the current system of 24 nationally designated 

scenic and historic trails created by the National Trails System Act of 1968. 

These trails provide for outdoor recreation needs, promote the enjoyment, appreciation, and preservation of open-air, outdoor areas and historic resources, and encourage public access and citizen involvement. If the feasibility study recommends 

designation as a national scenic or historic trail, an act of Congress adding the trail 

to the National Trails System may follow. If the Arizona Trail were recommended 

for national trail designation, the study would also recommend the most effective 

and efficient management of the trail. 

National scenic trails are continuous, primarily non-motorized routes of outstanding recreational opportunity. Although the National Trails System Act does 

not include specific criteria for assessing proposed national scenic trails, we suggest 

that the study team use the following five criteria in making their determination: 

Significance: There should be nationally significant cultural, historic, natural, recreational, or scenic features along the trail. 

Length: The trail should be at least 100 miles long and continuous. 

Accessibility: The trail should complement other trails and recreation areas, and 

provide access where possible to nearby urban areas. 

Desirability: There should be an anticipated need for the trail, and it should be 

capable of attracting visitors from across the nation. It should offer an outstanding 

scenic and enjoyable outdoor recreational experience. There should be extensive 

local and regional support for the project. 

Trail Use: National Scenic Trails should be designated for hiking and other compatible non-motorized uses. 

National historic trails commemorate historic and prehistoric routes of travel that 

are of significance to the entire Nation. There are three criteria that must be met 

13

to be recommended as a national historic trail. The trail or route must be established by an historic use or determined to be historically significant as a result of 

that use; it must be of national significance with respect to any of several broad facets of American history and have had a far-reaching effect on broad patterns of 

American culture; and it must have significant potential for public recreational use 

or historic interest based on historic interpretation and appreciation. From what we 

know of its characteristics, the Arizona Trail is more likely to meet the criteria for 

a scenic trail rather than an historic trail. 

If designated by Congress either as an historic or scenic trail, we suggest that an 

independent non-profit trail partner organization be created to partner with the federal agency chosen to administer the trail. 

The Arizona Trail was conceived in 1985 as a continuous, 790-mile non-motorized 

trail from Mexico to Utah. Approximately 85% of the trail crosses federal land, 10% 

crosses State lands, and the remainder of the trail crosses private, municipal or 

county lands. The Trail was established as a primitive long-distance hiking, horseback, and mountain biking trail that links all of Arizona’s major physiographic 

zones (the mountains, canyons, deserts, forests, historic sites, and mesas) to local 

communities and Arizona’s major metropolitan areas. The Arizona Trail’s significance is found in the diversity of resources, landscapes and recreational opportunities that it represents. 

In 1993, the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Arizona State Parks developed a cooperative agreement to work together 

to develop this non-motorized trail. Since then more than 710 miles of trail have 

been opened to the public, maps and trail resource information have been developed, 

and routine trail maintenance has been carried out, while efforts continue to open 

the remaining 80 miles of trail. In 1994, the non-profit Arizona Trail Association 

(ATA) was founded ‘‘to coordinate the planning, development, management, and promotion of the Arizona Trail for the recreational and educational experiences of nonmotorized trail users.’’

The ATA has worked on a variety of issues and serves as the focal point for trail 

advocacy, preservation, planning and development. ATA volunteers do trail maintenance, fund-raising and planning. In all of their efforts, they work closely with landowners and local governments to assure that private property owners are aware of 

trail activities, and trail users respect property rights. The ATA has quickly proven 

to be a vibrant, creative, resourceful, and dynamic group of 500 members coordinating more than 40,000 hours of volunteer labor per year, in recent years. 

An important characteristic of all National Trails is the partnerships they generate. The Arizona Trail already has strong regional, state and local advocates, all 

of whom have worked hard at creating and maintaining a trail featuring the incredible natural and cultural diversity of the State of Arizona. The ATA has worked 

hard to raise funds and involve local communities, governments and businesses as 

they have worked to develop the trail. 

With all these efforts already underway, we believe that conducting a feasibility 

study for national designation is a next, logical step in the management and protection of this important resource corridor across Arizona. Although limited to one 

State, the Arizona Trail has already proven its recreational value to the nation. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to present the Department’s views on S. 588. 

That completes my remarks and I would be happy to answer any questions you may 

have. 

S. 955

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 955, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites relating to the 

Battle of Franklin in Williamson County, Tennessee, as a unit of the National Park 

System, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports S. 955 with an amendment that would conform the bill 

to other, similar study bills. While the Department supports the authorization of 

this study, we also believe that any funding requested should be directed toward 

completing previously authorized studies. Currently, 30 studies are in progress, and 

we hope to complete and transmit 15 to Congress by the end of 2005. We estimate 

the total cost of this study to be $250,000. 

S. 955 would authorize the Secretary to complete a study on the suitability and 

feasibility of designating sites relating to the Battle of Franklin as a unit of the National Park System. The Battle of Franklin on November 30, 1864, was a pivotal 

turning point of the Civil War. 

14

After the fall of Atlanta in the summer of 1864, General John Bell Hood, commander of the Confederate Army of Tennessee, attempted to draw Union General 

William Tecumseh Sherman northward by threatening the Union supply line to 

Chattanooga. Hood sought to move the war out of Georgia in an effort to reclaim 

lost Confederate territory, most importantly Nashville. Sherman followed Hood for 

only a short time, deciding to turn his attention back towards Georgia where he 

would soon embark on his ‘‘March to the Sea.’’ In his stead, Sherman detached 

George H. Thomas and the Army of the Cumberland to protect Tennessee against 

Hood’s advance. 

In November 1864, Hood pressed forward into Tennessee and confronted a Union 

force under the command of Major General John M. Schofield at Spring Hill. After 

several skirmishes there Hood immediately followed Schofield to the small town of 

Franklin, which had been a Federal military post since the fall of Nashville in early 

1862. At Franklin, Schofield positioned most of his 28,000 men behind extensive 

breastworks covering more than two miles of mostly open fields. Late in the afternoon on November 30, Hood, with an army of 18,000, hastily ordered a frontal assault against the well-positioned Union forces. After five hours of fierce fighting, 

much of it after dark, the Union army soundly defeated Hood’s army which suffered 

6,261 casualties, including the loss of 12 generals and 54 regimental commanders. 

Among those killed was General Patrick Cleburne, considered by many historians 

to be the Confederacy’s top battlefield commander. The Union’s casualties numbered 

2,326. With his army largely intact, Schofield ordered a nighttime withdrawal of 

Union forces to Nashville. 

Although the Battle of Franklin was a major setback for the Confederates, Hood 

wasted little time, advancing his remaining forces to Nashville where on December 

15 and 16, 1864, the Union Army of the Cumberland under Thomas swept Hood’s 

army from the field, essentially putting an end to the war in Tennessee. 

In its 1993 report, the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission identified the site 

of the 1864 Battle of Franklin as a ‘‘Class A’’ battlefield, representing a high level 

of military importance. The commission reported that the site represents an area 

that had a decisive impact on a military campaign and a direct impact on the course 

of the war. The commission also reported that the Franklin battlefield is currently 

a fragmented site with very little historical integrity remaining from the battle period. 

There are many sites in and around the city of Franklin and nearby areas in Tennessee that have an association with the battle. Perhaps most prominent among 

these are the many buildings that served as field hospitals to treat the wounded 

and dying such as the Carter House, which served as the Union army headquarters 

during the battle and was later used as a field hospital. The house and outbuildings 

were purchased by the State of Tennessee in 1951, opened to the public in 1953, 

and is a Registered Historic Landmark. The scars of war are visibly apparent as 

the buildings still show more than a thousand bullet holes from the battle. 

We suggest one amendment in section 4 of the bill to have the study completed 

three years after funding is made available, rather than three years after enactment. This will make the bill consistent with other similar study bills. 

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

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

Senator THOMAS. Okay, thank you very much. Appreciate that. 

A couple of questions. You mentioned two or three previously authorized studies. Are they ongoing? How long does a study take? 

Why aren’t they completed? 

Mr. MURPHY. Previously authorized studies—I mentioned in the 

bills that there were some previously authorized studies, and some 

of them have been funded, and some of them haven’t, and that was 

why I was stating in my testimony, at the beginning—we are asking that if funds are made available, that funding be done in a priority way that we can complete some of the studies that are done. 

Each of these studies average anywhere from $250,000 to $300,000 

to complete, and there is not all—there have not always been funds 

available to—we’ve gotten the authorization to go ahead with these 

studies, but appropriations have not always followed. And that’s 

what I was referring to. 

15

Senator THOMAS. I see. So, they are authorized to be funded, but 

have not been funded. 

Mr. MURPHY. That’s correct. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. I suppose it makes a difference which 

study it is, but how long, generally, does it take to make a study 

of these kinds? 

Mr. MURPHY. It usually takes anywhere from 2 to 3 years, and, on average, costs $300,000. And that’s on average. Some studies 

take a lot less time, because there’s already pre-work that’s been 

done. And we build upon other studies and other information that’s 

available; but, on average, it takes about 3 years. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. With regard to S. 206, the Ice Age, does 

the Park Service currently operate any interpretive services associated with this proposed trail? 

Mr. MURPHY. As I said earlier, at Lake Roosevelt there is some 

interpretive information on the flood. And, of course, I mentioned 

the two sites in Wisconsin that we work on, as well. So, there are 

three areas, and we look to expand those, as well, and that’s why 

we ask that the bill could be amended to allow for that expansion 

of interpretive efforts that are already underway. 

Senator THOMAS. I see, okay. In S. 556, Walnut Canyon, is the 

primary purpose to identify lands to prevent encroachment, or do 

you anticipate finding additional resources worthy of protection? 

Mr. MURPHY. Well, I think it’s probably a little bit of both. I 

think that—and the study will identify that. I don’t think it’s primarily to do either of those things, but both of those would be components of the studies, and, depending upon what the study finds—

for example, if it finds that the existing Walnut Canyon is in danger from encroachment, that would be one of the things that would 

be included to justify, perhaps, expanding the boundaries or somehow better protecting the existing Walnut Canyon boundaries. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. I’m sure there are different situations. 

Some of us are a little concerned about continued expansion. We 

need to get up a situation where we have a little exchange so that 

we don’t have a net gain, continuously, of Federal lands in a lot 

of these——

Mr. MURPHY. I think we would agree with that, and that’s why 

the study’s important to identify those things. And I don’t think 

there’s any prejudgment about expansion here at all. 

Senator THOMAS. This Arizona Trail study, how many other 

trails are there that the National Park Service has been asked to 

study? It seems like we hear about the trail thing an awful lot, and 

I’m sure they’re valuable, but how many units are we going to be 

looking at? Do you have any idea? 

Mr. MURPHY. I can certainly find that information out for you. 

I have, in my notes here, that we’re studying at least three other 

trails right now, but we can provide, for the record, the exact number. 

Senator THOMAS. You know, there’s merit in all these things. I 

just think we have to begin to set some priorities, in terms of how 

much activity and operations the Park Service can undertake. 

Civil War sites, same thing, seems like, and there’s tons of Civil 

War sites. And I know they’re all very valuable. Do you have any 

idea how many Civil War sites are set aside for Federal protection? 

16

Mr. MURPHY. Yes, I think I have it somewhere here in my notes, 

if—because we have several battle—or Civil War sites across the 

United States. I’ll be happy to provide that for the record, as well. 

Senator THOMAS. I wish you would. I think you’ll find there’s 

more than several, whatever ‘‘several’’ means, but it’s—and that’s 

great, but we’re going to have to start setting some priorities on all 

these things, and so on. So, okay, thank you. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. 

Murphy, for your testimony. 

I just want to see if I can understand, from your testimony today, 

the difference between the original 2001 analysis of what should be 

done, and alternatives, and what you’re recommending today. 

Mr. MURPHY. Right. 

Senator CANTWELL. So, could you tell me the difference between—for the previous study recommendations? 

Mr. MURPHY. Well, I think what the previous study recommended, and what I stated in my testimony, is that the study 

certainly found that—the geologic features that you so eloquently 

described, and that the study described, as well—are certainly significant and are the kind of resources that you typically see in the 

National Park Service and in the system. And so, the study found 

that they’re the kind of thing that could certainly be included, but, 

because of the—again, because of the breadth of the area that’s involved, and how spread out it is, and the noncontiguous nature of 

some of the areas, we simply felt, after considering what the study 

said, that perhaps it would be better to use existing units of the 

National Park Service to interpret that geologic occurrence, and to 

interpret what happened there, without creating another unit of 

the National Park System, that it would be far more cost effective, 

that we could still provide the education and interpretive information within existing units. I described Lewis & Clark, for example, 

the new park along the Columbia River, as well as Lake Roosevelt 

and the efforts that are underway in Wisconsin. And with an expansion of those, I think we—the National Park Service sincerely 

feels that we can still tell that story very well without creating another unit. 

Senator CANTWELL. So, in that regard, you’re saying, then, use 

a couple of designations that are already there in a couple of 

places. 

Mr. MURPHY. That’s correct. Use the existing national parks, like 

Lake Roosevelt, like Lewis & Clark, expand the interpretive efforts 

there, use our Rivers and Trails assistance programs to work with 

State and local governments to provide the technical assistance 

that would help them also develop other interpretive and educational programs. It’s a really important service that the National 

Park Service provides. We do it all over the Nation. And local communities find it very helpful. We assist in finding grants, we assist 

in finding educational and interpretive materials, and give guidance on how to develop these programs; and we just feel that would 

be a much more cost-effective way of approaching this, and still 

telling the same story, rather than, as I said, creating another unit 

in the National Park System. 

17

Senator CANTWELL. So, that would be a different recommendation than the 2001 alternatives that were discussed. I think what 

I’m hearing you say is, use existing resources that are already 

there. So, for example, in the interpretive center that—part of the 

Lewis & Clark Trail in Idaho—you’d have something there that 

would say something about the Ice Age floods, and maybe at Lake 

Roosevelt, you’d have something that would say something about 

the Ice Age floods. Those are designations, and, in some cases, may 

even be areas where the geological significance of the Ice Age flood 

aren’t even most apparent, or most interesting. 

I’m trying to understand whether you oppose the concept of a 

trail that designates the Ice Age Flood Trail, and the path that it 

took, and the great significant markers of that, obviously, interpreted by science and geologists, about what the most interesting 

geological features of that flood activity were. Are you saying that 

concept, juxtaposed with what was originally recommended in 

2001, is not a concept today, that—let’s just put some markers at 

these various spots—which, again, may or may not even be contiguous to telling the story. 

Mr. MURPHY. Yes. 

Senator CANTWELL. And, certainly, those sites are already telling 

a different story. 

Mr. MURPHY. Right. 

Senator CANTWELL. To me, then, you wouldn’t really have an Ice 

Age Flood Trail; you’d have some data about the Ice Age activity, 

at a couple of different sites. And I don’t even know if you’re recommending, today, like, how many of those sites would you want—you 

mentioned two. I don’t know if you’re saying there are more, or——

Mr. MURPHY. Well, there certainly could be more, and, as I was 

saying, working with our Rivers and Trails Assistance Program, 

you could certainly add more and work with local communities to 

effect the same outcome of providing the interpretation and the 

education in those significant areas. But what my testimony is 

really focusing on is whether or not we should add another unit to 

the National Park System to tell this extremely important story, or 

whether or not there are other means to tell it. And my testimony, 

and the position of the Department is, is that we feel that we can 

certainly tell this story, but not support adding another unit to the 

National Park System. That’s really the crux of the matter. 

Senator CANTWELL. Am I out of time, Mr. Chairman? 

Senator THOMAS. Go ahead. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I guess I’m a little surprised. I want to get to where the issues 

are, because, in the 2001 study, the executive summary said, ‘‘However, it is feasible to interpret the flood story along the flood pathway across Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon, provided 

that there is some degree of cooperation, and that the entities within those states participate.’’ So, that was the feasibility recommendation. 

I guess I look at the Oregon National Historic Trail as a multiState reasonable example of collaboration. Are we talking about 

something similar to that, or are we saying, now, we’re going to 

wait? 

18

Mr. MURPHY. I don’t at all want to give the impression that this 

is—the testimony relates to not thinking that these entities 

shouldn’t cooperate for the story, but I’m trying to be specific—my 

testimony really does relate to whether or not, then, the National 

Park Service should be the responsible entity, in terms of management and operation of that trail, and whether or not it should be—

become another unit of the National Park System. And the testimony is, is that we believe we can get that end, that was described 

in the 2001 feasibility study, without it becoming a unit of the National Park System. And I just gave some examples of how that 

happened. There are others, and there are other ways that the 

State and local governments across the States and across other 

local jurisdictions can cooperate to effect this trail without it becoming a unit of the National Park System. 

Senator CANTWELL. But would it be a trail—is my question? 

Mr. MURPHY. Well, it certainly could be, but it doesn’t have to 

be a unit of the National Park System. That’s the crux of our position in the Department. 

Senator CANTWELL. Right, and I want to distinguish, since we 

are talking about four States, that the significance of it is that’s a 

trail. 

Mr. MURPHY. Yes, I understand. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you. 

Senator Alexander. 

Senator ALEXANDER. No questions. 

Senator THOMAS. No questions? 

Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Appreciate it. We’ll be looking forward 

to talking to you on these. 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. Now let’s invite our panel No. 2 to come up, 

please: Elizabeth Archuleta, chairman, Coconino County Board of 

Supervisors, Flagstaff, Arizona—probably didn’t pronounce that 

properly; Mr. Tom Miller, mayor of the city of Franklin, Tennessee; 

and Mr. Gary Kleinknecht, president, Ice Age Floods Institute, 

from Washington State; and Mr. Larry Snead, executive director, 

Arizona Trail Association. 

Welcome, to each of you. We’ll just go by the way you’re listed 

on the panel here. And I don’t know whether they have the little 

thing turned on, but we’ll try and hold your statements to 5 minutes, if you can, please. And, if they’re longer than that, we’ll put 

your complete statements in the record. 

Ms. Archuleta. 

STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH ARCHULETA, CHAIRMAN, 

COCONINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, FLAGSTAFF, AZ 

Ms. ARCHULETA. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the National Parks 

Subcommittee. On behalf of Coconino County and the Flagstaff 

community, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you on the 

future of Walnut Canyon. 

I would also like to extend our gratitude to our Arizona Senators 

for their continued energy and invaluable support of the Walnut 

19

Canyon Study Act of 2005. Specifically, we would like to thank 

Senator McCain for his efforts on behalf of this bill. 

Before your committee is a bill that would direct the Secretary 

of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly conduct 

a study of certain land adjacent to Walnut Canyon National Monument, to evaluate the significance of the public uses and resource 

values of the study area, and to make a recommendation for the 

future management of the study area. Private land within the 

study area will not be affected. 

The land referred to as a study area, as pictured in the map in 

your materials, is comprised of approximately 31,000 acres, and includes Federal land, Arizona State land, private land, which, again, 

will not be affected, and the Walnut Canyon National Monument. 

Land within Walnut Canyon National Monument is managed by 

the National Park Service. All other non-private land within the 

study area is managed by the National Forest Service or the Arizona State Land Department. 

The study area surrounding Walnut Canyon contains important 

natural habitats, abundant and diverse flora and fauna, and truly 

unique archeological, topographical, scenic, and, in many ways, sacred grounds full of tradition and culture. The distribution, diversity, and location of historic sites are unique, and include the only 

cliff-dwelling architecture of the Northern Sinagua. Many contemporary tribes look at this area as the home of their ancestors, and 

want to see it protected. 

The natural and cultural resources within the monument are 

known to be significant to American Indian tribes, as evidenced by 

oral history, continuing practices, and the archeological record. In 

addition, land under management by the National Forest Service 

enjoys many valued public uses. The area’s unique characteristics 

also make it very desirable for development. The possible encroachment of development on land surrounding Walnut Canyon National 

Monument became a topic of significant community discussion in 

the fall of 2001. The issues of protection in perpetuity, management, and the appropriateness of current resources became focal 

points of the dialog. 

Due to widespread public interest and the diverse groups with 

vested interest in the land, there was extensive discussion to identify the most inclusive public-input process. On February 12, 2002, 

the Coconino County Board of Supervisors and the Flagstaff City 

Council conducted a joint meeting to discuss the issues. 

A ‘‘staff group’’ was then formed, including staff from the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the Arizona State 

Game and Fish Department, the city of Flagstaff, and Coconino 

County. Three public-input meetings were scheduled during the 

summer of 2002 to provide the public with agency introductions, resource information, known land uses, alternative land designations 

and options, an open house, and one-on-one public discussions. 

Upon conclusion of the meetings, there was a consensus that preservation within the study area was in the public interest, and current uses in the area should be retained. However, there was no 

agreement as to which agency’s management objective was best 

qualified to address these concerns in order that they may best do 

20

that job. There was also no consensus on what the final boundary 

should look like. 

Concurrently, a phone survey was conducted, including residents 

of the city of Flagstaff, as well as unincorporated areas of Coconino 

County. The results were remarkably similar to those of the publicinput meetings, with the vast majority of the participants being in 

favor of continued protection and continuation of current uses. In 

addition, hundreds of letters and calls from citizens were received 

for consideration. This public process, along with the team efforts 

of the staff group, resulted in a joint resolution by the Coconino 

County Board of Supervisors and the Flagstaff City Council calling 

for a study. 

On December 17, 2002, this is when the Board of Supervisors 

passed the resolution that is also in your packet. It was the public’s 

desire, arrived at through an open process, with citizen, Federal, 

State, and local participation, to determine the best manner in 

which to protect these lands and resources in perpetuity while allowing the continuation of current resources and uses. 

Ultimately, upon completion of the land-management study by 

an experienced third-party consultant, we envision recommendations will be made collaboratively with the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Forest supervisor of the 

Coconino National Forest, the superintendent of the Flagstaff area 

national monuments, the Flagstaff City Council, and the Coconino 

County Board of Supervisors. The study will, one, evaluate the significance of the public values and resources of the study area, as 

pertaining to the management objectives of the Forest Service and 

National Park Service; two, identify opportunities for maintaining 

existing public uses; and, three, recommend a range of options for 

best managing and conserving the same. 

Good stewardship of our land is a public value. In this spirit, we 

implore you to authorize the Walnut Canyon Study Act of 2005. 

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, on 

behalf of the Flagstaff community and Coconino County, thank you 

for your audience and for your consideration. And I would be happy 

to answer any questions you have. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Miller. 

STATEMENT OF TOM MILLER, MAYOR, CITY OF FRANKLIN, TN 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, Senator Alexander, Senator Cantwell, we thank you for the invitation to testify today about S. 955, 

which is a bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a 

feasibility study regarding the inclusion of sites related to the Battle of Franklin in the National Park System. 

I’m Tom Miller, mayor of Franklin, Tennessee. Today, I will 

briefly share with you the significance of the Battle of Franklin, as 

well as the current situation and local support for this effort. 

The Battle of Franklin took place on November 30, 1864, forever 

changing our community’s history and that of our Nation. Today, 

Americans are renewing their love of country while exploring our 

history and historic sites. Of the 384 significant conflicts that occurred during the Civil War, only 3.7 percent are considered principal battles. Franklin, while considered one of these principal batVerDate 0ct 09 2002 08:43 Aug 25, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\23-014 SENERGY1 PsN: RICHS
21

* The additional information and map have been retained in subcommittee files. 

tles, has a story that is lesser known than many others that it 

matches in significance, such as Gettysburg and Manassas. And, 

unfortunately, much of the battlefield, itself, has been lost to development. 

The community has been given an historic opportunity to take a 

step toward righting the wrong and reclaiming a significant piece 

of the battlefield. On the afternoon of November 30, General Hood, 

over the objection of at least three generals, ordered the Army of 

Tennessee to charge the well-fortified Union lines directly in front 

of them. During the roughly 5 hours of the battle, mostly fought 

in the dark, six Confederate generals were lost, and over 9,000 casualties were recorded. A private who fought that day said of the 

battle, ‘‘The private soldier sleeps where he fell, piled in one 

mighty heap. I cannot tell the number of others killed and wounded. God only knows that. We’ll all find out on the morning of the 

final Resurrection.’’ By the end of November 30, the Army of Tennessee was no longer a cohesive fighting force. 

In addition to the crucial role the Battle of Franklin played in 

the demise of the Confederacy, several key interpretive themes are 

identified in the Franklin Battlefield Preservation Plan recently 

completed through a grant from the American Battlefield Protection Program. These themes include the level of carnage, the significant loss of generals, Hood’s recklessness, and as non-combatrelated themes, such as the community-as-hospital, occupied 

Franklin, and reconstruction. 

Franklin, as an urban battlefield, has a unique opportunity to interpret the story of not only the fighting itself, but of the aftermath 

and the impact on the community. Since this battle was the last 

major conflict of the war, in a very real sense, the reconciliation of 

our great Nation began in Franklin, Tennessee—North and South, 

blacks and whites, brothers and brothers. 

Several of the sites associated with the Battle of Franklin are 

part of the national—excuse me—of the Franklin Battlefield National Historic Landmark. This includes four noncontiguous properties associated with various aspects of the conduct of the Battle 

of Franklin—the sites, the Carter House, the Carnton Plantation, 

and the adjacent Confederate Cemetery, Winstead Hill, and Fort 

Granger. Additional information about these sites has been submitted for the record, including a map.* 

Today, this battlefield has a chance for reclamation. Private citizens and the city of Franklin are working side by side to undertake 

one of the largest Civil War battlefield reclamation projects in the 

country. We intend to acquire the Country Club of Franklin property, consisting of 112 acres used as a golf course. It is the largest 

single remaining parcel of the battlefield. This property, which was 

the eastern flank of the battlefield, is adjacent to the Carnton Plantation and the Confederate Cemetery. 

The city of Franklin will purchase the golf course, with the intention of turning this property, and other already publicly owned 

properties, into a battlefield park. The country club property will 

serve as the starting point for visitors to the Battle of Franklin. 

22

From here, they will get an overview of the battle before visiting 

the many other important related sites. 

We are asking the National Park Service to undertake a feasibility study to consider the inclusion of these sites in the National 

Park System. We see opportunities for shared resources with 

Stones River National Battlefield Park, in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, and we offer a wealth of interpretive resources from our 

own community, such as the Battle of Franklin Historians, and the 

Civil War National Heritage Area, and Middle Tennessee State 

University. The city of Franklin has local support in both our community, as well as other areas around the county. 

Franklin’s Charge, a nonprofit coalition of preservation-related 

organizations, formed to secure half the funding, which will be 

matched by the city, for the purchase of the country club property. 

I’m very pleased to report today that the $5 million purchase price 

of the property has been raised. 

Franklin’s Charge includes representatives from the Save the 

Franklin Battlefield, Historic Carnton Plantation, the Heritage 

Foundation of Franklin and Williamson County, the Carter House, 

Williamson County Historical Society, the Williamson County African American Historical Society, the Harpeth River Watershed Association, Tennessee Land Trust, Tennessee Preservation Trust, 

and Tennessee Civil War National Heritage Area. 

S. 955 is timely and warranted, providing the opportunity to 

properly assess these resources and chart an appropriate course of 

action. Therefore, the city of Franklin is in full support of the legislation introduced by Senators Frist and Alexander, which has the 

opportunity to benefit the citizens of this great country for generations to come. 

Thank you for your consideration. I’m available to answer any 

questions you may have. 

Senator THOMAS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Kleinknecht. 

STATEMENT OF GARY KLEINKNECHT, PAST PRESIDENT, ICE 

AGE FLOODS INSTITUTE, KENNEWICK, WA 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 

hearing and for the opportunity to testify. I would also like to 

thank Senator Cantwell for sponsoring S. 206. 

I am Gary Kleinknecht, past president of the Lake Lewis Chapter of the Ice Age Floods Institute. I am currently president of the 

board of directors of the Institute. I am here today to speak in support of S. 206. 

My testimony will exceed the time limit today, so I would like to 

submit my entire statement for the record. 

Senator THOMAS. It will be included. 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Thank you. 

I also have several letters and documents of support that I would 

like to submit as testimony, if I may. 

Senator THOMAS. Fine. 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Thank you. 

About a century ago, a young high school teacher in Seattle, 

Washington, became fascinated with the geology of the State. He 

became so interested in the topic that he enrolled in the University 

23

of Chicago and earned a Ph.D. in geology. With his new career, he 

began a lifelong relationship with eastern Washington and the 

shrub-steppe of the Columbia Plateau. He spent summers hiking 

across this arid region, cataloging its geology. He found what appeared to be river channels carved into the native volcanic basalt 

bedrock. But the channels were dry, or had vastly undersized 

creeks flowing through them. He crossed broad areas of exposed basalt that were bordered by thick deposits of windblown topsoil, appearing as if some gigantic force had swept away the topsoil from 

the bedrock. 

He discovered a huge cataract, 400 feet high and over 3 miles 

across, with a series of plunge-pool lakes stretching 20 miles downstream. He also recorded large angular boulders resting on hillsides hundreds of feet above dry valley floors. These were granite 

and other rock types, some weighing over a hundred tons. The 

nearest possible source for such rocks is over a hundred miles 

away. 

To geologist J. Harlen Bretz, only one thing could explain these 

features. That thing is fast-flowing water, an unimaginable amount 

of water. Bretz originally called it the Spokane Flood, singular, but 

we now know that there were perhaps as many as 100 outbursts, 

and we call them the Missoula, or the Ice Age, Floods. 

The Pacific Northwest was the scene of the greatest series of cataclysmic outburst floods known to science. To be sure, other flooding occurred as continental ice melted, but nowhere else is there 

such dramatic evidence of repeated floods of this magnitude. 

Due, in part, to the efforts of Ice Age Floods Institute members, 

numerous State and local government officials, as well as other 

community organizations, have voiced their support of the trail 

concept to celebrate these amazing events. In fact, the Washington 

state legislature unanimously passed Senate Joint Memorial 8000 

earlier this year. The memorial asks Congress to pass legislation 

creating the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail. 

The benefits of the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail to the 

citizens of the Pacific Northwest in particular, and to the American 

public in general, are several. The development of tourism will 

boost local, in large part rural, economies. Establishment of interpretive centers will attract tourists from within and without the 

four Northwest States. 

A study conducted for the Ice Age Floods Institute’s Glacial Lake 

Missoula Chapter in 2002 examined the potential impact of an Ice 

Age Floods Interpretive Center located in Missoula, Montana. A 

conservative estimate of the amount of money generated by such 

an interpretive center by tourists from out of the State was over 

$2 million per year. Missoula is an eastern gateway of the trail. 

Many hundreds of miles of trail in numerous small towns and cities, with restaurants, hotels, and campgrounds lie to the west, in 

Washington, Idaho, and Oregon. 

Another related project provides similar information. Plans for 

the Hanford Reach Heritage Center, in Richland, Washington, are 

nearing completion. The Center, which is working in partnership 

with Washington State Parks and other groups, including our institute, will dedicate a significant portion of its display area to the 

topic of the Ice Age floods and could become an interpretive anchor 

24

for the floods trail. An economic study estimates between $5 million and $11 million per year will be generated by tourists visiting 

that facility. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kleinknecht follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GARY KLEINKNECHT, PAST PRESIDENT, ICE AGE FLOODS

INSTITUTE, KENNEWICK, WA 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing and for the opportunity to testify. I would also like to thank Senator Cantwell and Senator Burns, Senator Craig, 

Senator Murray and Senator Smith for their sponsorship of S. 206. 

I am Gary Kleinknecht, past president of the Lake Lewis Chapter of the Ice Age 

Floods Institute. I am currently president of Board of Directors of the Institute. I 

am here today to speak in support of S. 206, the Ice Age Floods National Geologic 

Trail Designation Act of 2005. 

My testimony will exceed the time limit today, so I would like to submit the 

unspoken portion of my testimony for the record. I also have several letters and documents of support that I would like to submit as testimony, if I may. 

About a century ago a young high school biology teacher in Seattle, Washington 

became fascinated with the geology of the state. He became so interested in the 

topic that he enrolled in the University of Chicago and earned a PhD in Geology. 

With his new career he began a life long relationship with eastern Washington and 

the shrub-steppe of the Columbia Plateau. He spent summers hiking across this 

arid region, cataloging its geology. He found what appeared to be river channels 

carved into the native volcanic basalt bedrock, but the channels were dry or had 

vastly undersized creeks flowing through them. He crossed broad areas of exposed 

basalt that were bordered by thick deposits of windblown topsoil, appearing as if 

some gigantic force had swept away the topsoil from the bedrock. He discovered a 

huge dry cataract, 400 feet high and over three miles across, with a series of plunge 

pool lakes stretching twenty miles downstream. He also recorded large angular boulders resting on hillsides hundreds of feet above dry valley floors. These were granite 

and other rock types, some weighing over 100 tons. The nearest possible source for 

such rocks is over 100 miles away! 

To geologist J Harlen Bretz only one thing could explain these features. That 

thing is fast flowing water, an unimaginable amount of water. Other geologists determined that during the final millennia of the latest glacial period, huge lakes were 

formed behind glacial dams in the mountain valleys of western Montana. The largest of these glacial lakes contained 500 cubic miles of water, the equivalent of Lakes 

Erie and Ontario combined. Bretz’s evidence for flooding was the result of ice dam 

collapse from the tremendous pressure exerted by a lake that reached a maximum 

depth of 2000 feet. Originally, Bretz wrote of one flood and called it the Spokane 

Flood. Today we refer to the Missoula floods or the Ice Age floods. There is evidence 

that as many as 100 floods burst from behind successive ice dams, reshaping the 

landscape of much of the Pacific Northwest as recently as 13,000 years ago. 

Over the past eight decades many other geologists have examined and reexamined 

Bretz’s evidence. And they have found more evidence of floods. But the conclusion 

remains essentially the same. The Pacific Northwest was the scene of the greatest 

series of cataclysmic outburst floods known to science. To be sure, other flooding occurred as continental ice melted, but nowhere else is there such dramatic evidence 

of repeated floods of this magnitude. Only in recent decades have those of us outside 

the realm of geologic academia been exposed to this amazing story. 

In 1994 the Ice Age Floods Institute was organized as an educational nonprofit 

group dedicated to bringing the story of the Ice Age Floods to the public. For the 

past decade the Institute has conducted public field trips and programs on the floods 

and worked to make the public aware of this fascinating legacy of natural history. 

Our membership extends throughout the region of the floods from western Montana 

to the mouth of the Columbia River. 

In 1999 a number of Ice Age Floods Institute volunteers as well as other interested parties participated in the Ice Age Floods Study of Alternatives and Environmental Assessment, a special resource study undertaken by the National Park Service. The report on the study, which was published in 2001, recommends that an Ice 

Age Floods National Geologic Trail be established. S. 206 is the product of this cooperative effort. 

Due in part to the efforts of Ice Age Floods Institute members, numerous state 

and local government officials as well as other community organizations have voiced 

their support of the trail concept in written statements. In fact the Washington 

25

State Legislature unanimously passed Senate Joint Memorial 8000 earlier this year. 

The memorial asks Congress to pass legislation creating the Ice Age Floods National 

Geologic Trail. 

The National Park Service is often referred to as our nation’s ‘‘story teller’’. It has 

broad experience and expertise in the management of other trail systems such as 

the Lewis and Clark Trail, Oregon Trail and Selma to Montgomery Trail. We in the 

Ice Age Floods Institute are confident that the National Park Service will do an excellent job of coordinating and partnering with the many federal, state, local, tribal 

and private groups throughout the trail region to interpret these truly amazing 

events. 

The benefits of the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail to the citizens of the 

Pacific Northwest in particular and to the American public in general are several. 

The development of tourism will boost local, in large part rural, economies. Establishment of interpretive centers will attract tourists from within and without the 

four Northwest states. A study conducted for the Ice Age Floods Institute’s Glacial 

Lake Missoula Chapter in 2002 by the Small Business Institute in the School of 

Business at the University of Montana examined the potential impact of an Ice Age 

Floods interpretive center located in Missoula, Montana. A conservative estimate of 

the amount of money generated by such an interpretive center by tourists from out 

of the state was over $2,000,000 per year. Missoula is an eastern gateway of the 

trail. Many hundreds of miles of trail and numerous small towns and cities with 

restaurants, hotels and campgrounds lie to the west in Idaho, Washington and Oregon. 

Another related project provides similar information. Plans for the Hanford Reach 

Heritage Center in Richland, Washington are nearing completion. The center, which 

is working in partnership with Washington State Parks and other groups, will dedicate a significant portion of its display area to the topic of the Ice Age floods and 

could become an interpretive anchor for the floods trail. An economic study conducted for the planning of the center estimates between $5,000,000 and $11,000,000 

per year will be generated by that facility. 

Existing tourism will also be benefited by the creation of the National Geologic 

Trail. Much of the floods region that sustains agriculture has its own tourism industry and will benefit from the new visitors traveling on the Trail. Washington’s and 

Oregon’s wine industries are successful, in part, due to the soils that were deposited 

by the floods in the Yakima, Walla Walla and Willamette Valleys. 

The National Geologic Trail will also provide educational benefits. Fifty years ago 

only a handful of geologists knew about these floods. Today the floods story is part 

of mainstream geology and the general public is becoming aware of this fascinating 

topic. A trail will provide a vehicle to reach more and more people, not only through 

tourism, but also as destinations for local school field trips and potential environmental centers. Interpretive programs will be developed to reach citizens of all ages. 

The trail will also make it more likely that producers of educational television 

programs and videos and travel book authors will address the topic of the Ice Age 

Floods. A NOVA one-hour science program on the topic of these floods is scheduled 

to be aired in September of 2005. Several videos on the floods are currently available and a tour-guide book of the floods in the Mid-Columbia Region is in the process of being published and should be available by early 2006. As more people learn 

about the floods, the market for such educational programs and materials will grow. 

Early in the effort to promote the designation of the trail there was concern about 

private property rights. Land acquisition and violation of property owner rights are 

not what this legislation is about. This bill limits the amount of land that may be 

acquired by the Secretary of the Interior to a total of 25 acres for administrative 

and public information purposes. Any land so acquired must also be from a willing 

seller. The bill also states that trail designation creates no new liability for property 

owners. 

Another issue that concerns some westerners is the amount of federally owned 

land in western states that is not on the local tax rolls. The trail concept uses public 

land to generate tourism trade. This is another way to put public land to work for 

the public. 

For the above stated reasons, I and the Ice Age Floods Institute urge the United 

States Congress to pass S. 206, the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail Designation Act of 2005.

Senator THOMAS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Snead. 

26

STATEMENT OF LARRY SNEAD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ARIZONA TRAIL ASSOCIATION, PHOENIX, AZ, ACCOMPANIED BY 

LYN WHITE 

Mr. SNEAD. Mr. Chairman and members of the National Parks 

Subcommittee, I am very pleased and honored to have this opportunity to offer my testimony on S. 588, the Arizona Trail Feasibility Study Act. 

My name is Larry Snead, and I’m the executive director of the 

Arizona Trail Association. 

Before I tell you about the Arizona Trail, I’d like to talk for just 

a minute about the Arizona Trail Association. Founded in 1994, the 

Arizona Trail Association was founded as a nonprofit organization 

dedicated to the completion of the Arizona Trail, a trail that is becoming one of the premier long-distance trails in the country. Our 

supporters greatly value the recreational resources of the Arizona 

Trail and are dedicated to ensuring its development and maintenance for the future enjoyment of others. 

For the past 10 years, the Arizona Trail Association has coordinated over 2,000 volunteers, and has partnered with more than 16 

Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as many businesses and 

organizations, all working together to plan, develop, and manage 

the Arizona Trail. In 2004 alone, a total of over 47,000 volunteer 

hours were recorded. 

A good example of the volunteer hours is—one of our board of directors is here today, Lyn White, to assist me in the testimony. 

On behalf of the Arizona Trail Association, our volunteers, and 

all Arizona Trail users, I thank the committee for providing this 

hearing. 

To my side, where Lyn is standing, is a general map of the Arizona Trail. This map is the same one that’s in a packet of the written testimony that we provided you, but it will provide you a 

chance to review this as I make just a few additional comments. 

The Arizona Trail is a non-motorized trail that stretches for 800 

miles through some of the State’s most renowned mountains, canyons, deserts, and forests. The trail links these special landscapes 

with people and communities. The trail begins in the Coronado National Memorial, at the U.S./Mexico border, and goes north, ending 

at the Arizona/Utah border. As it connects these two points, the 

trail winds through some of the most rugged, spectacular landscapes in our country. 

The Arizona Trail was first envisioned by Flagstaff Arizona 

school teacher and outdoor enthusiast Dale Shewalter in the 

1980’s. Today, Dale’s vision of a continuous border-to-border trail 

across Arizona’s unique landscapes has become a reality for hikers, 

equestrians, mountain bicyclists, and cross-country skiers who wish 

to experience the magnificent scenery Arizona has to offer. 

The Arizona Trail encompasses a wide range of ecological diversity as it crosses the State, passing through seven life zones, including such legendary landmarks as the Sonoran Desert and the 

Grand Canyon. It connects the lowland desert flora and fauna of 

Saguaro National Park and the pine and often snow-covered San 

Francisco Peaks, Arizona’s highest mountains, which are over 

12,000 feet in elevation. Seven hundred and eighteen miles of the 

Arizona Trail have been completed, signed, and are currently open 

27

to the public. We have 82 miles remaining to build, all of which 

will be on public land. 

The Arizona Trail passes through four national parks, memorials, and monuments, four national forests, with 12 different ranger districts, land managed by two different BLM field offices, one 

State park, and six wilderness areas. 

The Arizona Trail corporate community is very supportive of the 

Arizona Trail, and ATA is really pleased to have that kind of support, especially from Arizona icon companies, such as Phelps Dodge 

and Arizona Public Service, Salt River Project, Resolution Copper, 

REI, Wells Fargo, Southwest Gas, and National Bank of Arizona, 

just to mention a few. 

Thank you for the opportunity today to speak to you about the 

Arizona Trail. It is truly a recreational resource of national significance, and has all the qualifications to be a national scenic trail, 

which will become evident should a feasibility study be authorized 

by Congress. 

Before closing, I’d like to thank Senator John McCain and Senator John Kyl, who have been invaluable in their support of the Arizona Trail and have brought this legislation forward to this day. 

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, 

on behalf of the Arizona Trail Association Board of Directors, I 

would ask that you support the passage of S. 588. 

Thank you. And, with that, I’m available for questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Snead follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LARRY SNEAD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ARIZONA TRAIL

ASSOCIATION, PHOENIX, AZ 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Senate National Parks Subcommittee, I am 

very pleased and honored to have the opportunity to offer my testimony on S. 588, 

the Arizona Trail Feasibility Study Act. My name is Larry Snead and I am the Executive Director of the Arizona Trail Association. 

ATA

Before I tell you about the Arizona Trail, I’d first like to talk about the Arizona 

Trail Association. Founded in 1994, the Arizona Trail Association (or ATA) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to brining the Arizona Trail to completion—a trail that 

is now becoming one of the premiere long-distance trails in the county. Our supporters greatly value the recreational resource of the Arizona Trail and are dedicated to ensuring its development and maintenance for the future enjoyment of others. 

For the past decade, the Arizona Trail Association has coordinated over 2,000 

ATA volunteers and more than 16 federal, state and local agencies, as well as many 

businesses and organizations, to plan, develop and manage the Arizona Trail. In 

2004 alone, a total of 47,258 ATA volunteer hours were recorded in 2004. 

On behalf of the Arizona Trail Association, our volunteers, and all Arizona Trail 

users, I thank the committee for providing this hearing. 

AZ TRAIL

Mr. Chairman, to my side is a general map of the existing Arizona Trail. 

The Arizona Trail is a scenic, non-motorized trail that stretches for 800 miles 

through some of the state’s most renowned mountains, canyons, deserts and forests. 

The Trail links these special landscapes with people and communities. The Trail begins in the Coronado National Memorial at the U.S./Mexico border and ends at the 

Arizona/Utah border in the North. As it connects these two points, the Trail winds 

through some of the most rugged, spectacular landscape in the Western United 

States. The Arizona Trail encompasses a wide range of ecological diversity in the 

state, extending through 7 life zones, including such legendary landmarks as the 

Sonoran Desert and the Grand Canyon. It connects the lowland desert flora and 

28

fauna in Saguaro National Park and the pine-covered San Francisco Peaks, Arizona’s highest mountains at 12,633 feet in elevation. 

The Arizona Trail was first envisioned by Flagstaff schoolteacher and outdoor enthusiast, Dale Shewalter, in the 1970’s. Today, Dale’s vision of a continuous borderto-borer trail traversing Arizona’s unique landscape has become a reality for hikers, 

equestrians, mountain bicyclists, and cross-country skiers who wish to experience 

the magnificent scenery Arizona has to offer. 

718 miles of the Arizona Trail have been completed, signed and open to the public. We have 82 miles remaining to build, all of which is on federal land. 

The Arizona Trail passes through 4 National Parks, 4 National Forest, land managed by 2 BLM Field Offices, 1 State Park and 6 Wilderness Areas. 70% of the Arizona Trail is on National Forest, 10% on BLM, 10% on Arizona State Trust Land, 

8% on National Parks and 2% private (the Babbitt Ranches north of Flagstaff and 

the Babbitt Foundation is in the process of donating an Arizona Trail easement to 

Coconino County). 

The Arizona corporate community is very supportive of the Arizona Trail and the 

ATA is pleased to have the support of Arizona icon companies such as Phelps 

Dodge, Arizona Public Service, Salt River Project, Resolution Copper, REI, Wells 

Fargo, Southwest Gas, and National Bank of Arizona. 

With the help of our supporters, the ATA has completed the fieldwork, editing, 

and photography for the Official Arizona Trail Guidebook to be available in fall 

2005, and I would be happy to provide a copy to the subcommittee. I am also 

pleased to provide you with an ATA report on the progress of the Arizona Trail 

project. 

Thank you for the opportunity today to speak to you about the Arizona Trail. It 

is truly a recreational resource of national significance and has all the qualifications 

to be a National Scenic Trail which will become evident should a feasibility study 

be authorized by Congress. 

Before closing, I’d like to thank Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl who have 

been invaluable in their support of the Arizona Trail and have brought this legislation forward to this day. 

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the 

Arizona Trail Association Board of Directors I would ask that you support the passage of S. 588. 

With that, I am available to answer questions.

Senator THOMAS. Okay, thank you very much. 

Welcome, Lyn. What is your other chart? 

Ms. WHITE. This map shows the topography. It’s the same. You 

can see the trail. 

Senator THOMAS. Oh, I see. 

What is the big orange one up in the corner. Is that a reservation? 

Ms. WHITE. That’s the Navajo Reservation. 

Senator THOMAS. Okay. Well, thank you so much. We appreciate 

that very much. 

Ms. Archuleta, what——

Ms. ARCHULETA. Yes. 

Senator THOMAS. This is a proposed expansion, then, of an existing area? 

Ms. ARCHULETA. No, sir. Actually, if the monument was to be expanded, that would have to be determined by the resource study. 

But, basically, it’s the study area. The intention is to be able to see 

which management would best preserve—protect the area and also 

preserve the current uses, such as hunting, biking, grazing. The 

public was very specific about wanting to continue those uses of the 

land. 

Senator THOMAS. What is already there, in terms of this land? 

How is it controlled? 

Ms. ARCHULETA. By the U.S. Forest Service and the Arizona 

State Land Department. 

29

Senator THOMAS. I see. So, this is not an expansion; it’s a change 

of classification? 

Ms. ARCHULETA. It would—the classification would be determined by the study. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. 

Ms. ARCHULETA. So, if the study did say yes, this certain area 

of the monument should be expanded, then we’d have to talk about 

that. But what we’re hoping is that the study will tell us whether 

the monument needs to be expanded; but, more than that, tell us 

what type of management would best continue those uses and also 

protect the monument. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. Okay, thank you. 

Mr. Miller, what—this site that you talk about, then, part of it 

is a golf course. Would that continue to be a golf course? 

Mr. MILLER. No, sir. It would be closed upon the acquisition of 

the property, which, now that we have the funding, we’ll acquire 

that in October of this year, and the golf course will close. It will 

be immediately converted to an open field, in anticipation of developing a battlefield park. 

Senator THOMAS. And your golfers? 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MILLER. Well, this—we have gone elsewhere. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. Oh, well. Having been one of those who 

never could get associated with a game where the guy who hits the 

ball the most loses, I don’t feel strongly about it. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MILLER. Well, on the cost per stroke, I would imagine that 

it’s pretty cheap golf. 

Senator THOMAS. You mentioned, interestingly enough, 384 sites 

that you said were significant as historic sites? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. The battlefield historians have identified 

367, I believe it is——

Senator THOMAS. Sixty-seven? 

Mr. MILLER [continuing]. Battlefield sites. But only less than 4 

percent of those are considered significant. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. 

Mr. MILLER. The Battle of Franklin is one of those——

Senator THOMAS. That’s only 15. Really? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. 

Senator THOMAS. I wonder how many are designated as battlefield sites. Do you have any idea? 

Mr. MILLER. I do not know. 

Senator THOMAS. I think it’s more than 15, but I’m not sure. 

You mentioned that money had been raised. Tell me again who 

raised the money. 

Mr. MILLER. Half of the money, half of the $5 million was raised 

by the local community. 

Senator THOMAS. Yes. 

Mr. MILLER. And the city of Franklin challenged the local community by saying we would match them dollar for dollar up to $21⁄2

million of the purchase price. 

Senator THOMAS. So, this is local money, then. 

Mr. MILLER. This is all local money, yes, sir. 

30

Senator THOMAS. I see. Very good. Well, very interesting. Thank 

you. 

Mr. Kleinknecht, the Park Service, as they said this morning, 

has reluctance on this legislation. If it fails, what do you see, in 

terms of the degradation of resources? What do you see as happening, over time, without this act? 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Well, the floods, as a topic, is—it’s going to 

be interpreted. State and local efforts have already done so. The 

problem that I see in not developing a trail is, we’re not going to 

put the story together as one entire unit. We’re talking about four 

separate States. Within those States we have various local governments that have some of the property that the floods features are 

on. And, in my eyes, the purpose of a trail is to put this thing together as a cohesive story of the force of nature and how it’s 

shaped the planet we live on, at least the part in the Pacific Northwest. 

If the bill won’t pass, we keep on keeping on, but the best won’t 

happen. 

Senator THOMAS. Now, this, then—simplified, this same water 

that began, where, in Montana? 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Yes, well, essentially, the Bitterroot Valley 

and neighboring valleys. 

Senator THOMAS. That same pathway went all the way to the 

coast? 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Well, it took whatever pathway it wanted. 

Senator THOMAS. Mr. Snead, there are a number of trails. What 

would you say is most significant about the designation of this 

trail? 

Mr. SNEAD. Well, first of all, there’s no other national scenic trail 

that is in the Sonoran Desert. 

Senator THOMAS. You don’t have the Continental Divide Trail? 

Mr. SNEAD. The Continental Divide Trail goes into New Mexico 

out of the Sonoran Desert as the Pacific Crest Trail is in the Mojave Desert. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. 

Mr. SNEAD. So, this adds—it adds the Sonoran Desert, and it 

adds the Grand Canyon. 

Senator THOMAS. I see. 

Mr. SNEAD. And that’s the thing that really makes it unique, is 

the diversity in the State. 

Senator THOMAS. You cite on your chart the uncompleted trail. 

How are you going to complete it across the Grand Canyon? 

Mr. SNEAD. Well, we’re in the process of—we’re completing it 

right now. We have a 5-year plan, and we are——

Senator THOMAS. No bridge. 

Mr. SNEAD. What’s that? 

Senator THOMAS. No bridge. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. SNEAD. No bridge. 

Senator THOMAS. No bridge. 

Mr. SNEAD. No bridge, that’s correct. We’re using existing trails. 

The North Rim Trail has already been built and signed. The Inner 

Canyon, the South Kaibab and the North Kaibab, has been designated by the Park Service as the Arizona Trail. 

31

Senator THOMAS. I see. I was looking right above Flagstaff there. 

I thought that was Grand Canyon. Well, thank you very much. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Kleinknecht, thank you for your testimony. And I know it’s 

hard, particularly when individuals haven’t seen the geography of 

this area, to really totally comprehend the scientific significance 

and the magnitude of the floods, but certainly when you think 

about Dry Falls and the fact that it’s much bigger than Niagara 

Falls, and you realize that it’s a dry fall today, it’s very interesting, 

from a geological perspective. 

I know that NOVA is doing a 1-hour science program on this particular region, too, on its significance—but I wonder if you could 

help the committee today. Is there anything else on the planet, 

that has been discovered thus far, as far as the cataclysmic level 

of flooding and impact on a geography, on the planet? 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. I am told, by some of the leading geologists 

in the country in the Pacific Northwest, that this is the biggest 

such event ever on the planet. In fact, a couple of letters that I’m 

going to submit as supporting testimony find only that there are 

similar features on Mars. In fact, in the 1990’s, when NASA was 

conducting some research on the rovers that were going to be landed on Mars, they came to the Channeled Scablands of eastern 

Washington to use that as an analog. 

There is evidence of another flood, cataclysmic—similar story of 

an ice dam breaking—in Siberia. However, in terms of a series and 

the volume and that sort of thing, this is a one-of-a-kind. 

Senator CANTWELL. And the study of that, from a geological perspective and understanding is really—where would you say?—in its 

infancy or——

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. It’s a toddler. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Very briefly, if I may—in the 1920’s, J. 

Harlen Bretz first hypothesized this huge outburst flood—one flood, 

he thought, initially—and he was ridiculed by the geologic community. He was brought to Washington, D.C., and skewered in 1927. 

And he had started his career at the University of Washington as 

a professor, and eventually moved to his later—or earlier alma 

mater, the University of Chicago. He was awarded the Penrose 

Medal in the 1970’s, I believe it was, in his 96th year. The Penrose 

Medal is the highest award a geologist can be awarded. 

Back to my story, the story started with Bretz fighting for his 

professional credibility. And really not until the 1970’s did it become mainstream geology that these kind of things actually happened. And so, yes, this thing is growing rapidly. It’s in its youth 

and will continue to grow, I’m sure, over the coming decades. 

Senator CANTWELL. What are some of the—I know you mentioned economic benefits, but just from the pure geological field-trip 

understanding, to have this kind of a cataclysmic event be able to 

actually be studied and analyzed by geology students and——

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. I hate to say this, but it’s true: you have to 

see it to believe it. It is truly a mind-boggling experience to try to 

understand the force of the water that shaped that part of the 

country. 

32

I’m a high school teacher by profession. I was just told, this 

spring, by a graduating senior, that she was a little bit mad at me, 

because everywhere she drives in eastern Washington now, she’s 

catching herself gawking rather than looking at the road. And I’ve 

plead guilty to that for years. It’s an amazing thing. 

Senator CANTWELL. Isn’t there—just, if I could, Mr. Chairman—

is there any other geological cataclysmic event that—okay, besides 

flooding, because we—you just described that you don’t know of 

anything else like this on Earth—is there any other kind of cataclysmic event that you think that we are analyzing today or have 

done a good job of interpreting for either science, education, or public-interesting purposes? 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. I could think of a few examples, I suppose. 

Mount St. Helens, Yellowstone National Park has the huge caldera, 

the work that has gone on to identify the meteorite that apparently 

landed near the Yucatan Peninsula and established the KT boundary and the end of the dinosaurs. We’re talking significant stuff. I 

suppose, to someone who’s not been exposed to the flood story, I 

may sound a little wacko. But come take a look. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, I thank you, Mr. Kleinknecht. I think 

that you just described what the challenge is. Some of the other examples, I think, have enjoyed either long historic interpretations or 

activities, such as Mount St. Helens or other volcanic activity, so 

we’ve responded to that. And I think we—I think it is about wrapping people’s mind around the particular geological significance, 

and getting them to understand that. So, thank you very much for 

your testimony. 

Mr. KLEINKNECHT. Thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator THOMAS. Okay. Thank you. 

Well, thank all of you for being here. We truly appreciate you 

taking the effort to come. And I know this is not a very long presentation for all the travel you’ve done, but I hope you’ll contact 

some of your folks while you’re here and talk about these issues so 

that we can go forward with them. 

And I guess, more than anything, thank you for what you do locally to promote these things. I mean, that’s where it really needs 

to begin, and that’s where we get the kind of recommendations that 

should be taken up here, after they’ve been worked on, and will 

continued to be worked on, in the local areas. 

So, thank you all for being here. And if we have any further 

questions, why, we’ll get them to you. 

Thank you so much. The committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(33)

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

ICE AGE FLOODS INSTITUTE, 

July 7, 2005. 

Senator CRAIG THOMAS, 

Senate Subcommittee on National Parks. 

DEAR SENATOR THOMAS: Below are my responses to the questions you sent me 

concerning S. 206. Thank you, again, for the opportunity to offer testimony on this 

matter. 

Yours truly, 

GARY KLEINKNECHT.

Question 1. An Ice Age Trail currently exist in the Midwest. Will the geologic relationship between the two sites be told in any interpretive displays? Do you anticipate any future effort to join the two trails to form a single scenic or historic trail? 

Answer. The connection between the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail in the 

Northwest and the Ice Age National Scenic Trail in Wisconsin is that both present 

the effects of great ice sheets that occurred during the Pleistocene Epoch, but the 

stories are quite different. The Ice Age Floods Trail will interpret evidence left by 

a series of outbursts of tremendous volumes of water mainly from a huge icedammed lake in the mountain valleys of western Montana. These outburst floods 

amounted to the greatest series of floods recorded in the world and dramatically 

shaped the land across four states. The Ice Age Scenic Trail interprets features left 

by glaciers advancing and retreating across Wisconsin. 

Because of the Ice Age connection, it would be reasonable to make some reference 

to both areas in interpretive exhibits and literature, but physically or administratively connecting the two trails doesn’t seem practical. The two units are some 1200 

miles apart. 

Question 2. What type of interpretive facilities currently exist along the trail and 

what type do you envision having to construct to adequately interpret the area for 

visitors? 

Answer. As envisioned, the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail would emphasize using and enhancing existing interpretive facilities and would use major features on existing public lands in order to present the floods story to the public. Several interpretive facilities of varying scale and sophistication currently exist at important locations across the four Northwest states. Examples include facilities at 

Cabinet Gorge, Dry Falls, Palouse Falls, the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center and 

Crown Point. The Hanford Reach Heritage Center is currently in the design and development state. Most of these interpretive efforts are state and/or local facilities. 

However, the specific locations of trail routes and any new or enhanced facilities 

will be determined by the Management and Interpretive Plan called for in S. 206. 

The Plan would be accomplished through a public process and would include the Ice 

Age Floods Institute and the various land-holding and interpretive and scientific 

groups that have already participated or are now ready to participate in planning. 

Under the plan, actual development should be organized to proceed in logically ordered phases, recognizing needs, priorities and locating funding from appropriate 

sources. 

A tentative list of high-priority facilities and projects would probably include the 

following: 

34

1. An addition to the Montana Natural History Center in Missoula, Montana, 

which is located at the eastern gateway to the floods region. Visitors traveling 

from the east along Interstate 90 will be introduced to the floods story and to 

Glacial Lake Missoula at this location. 

2. Enhanced interpretive installations in the vicinity of the ice dam and outbursts at Farragut State Park and Cabinet Gorge Dam near the Idaho-Montana 

border. 

3. Enhancement or replacement of Washington State Parks’ Dry Falls Visitors 

Center, which is at one of the most significant geological sites. 

4. The new Hanford Reach Heritage Center in Richland, Washington, which 

is a project of the Richland Public Facilities District and is currently in the design and development stage. The Center will devote a large portion of its display space to floods interpretation along with other aspects of the region’s natural and cultural history. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is a principal partner due to its responsibilities for the Hanford Reach National Monument, and 

provisions for the Service and other public agencies have already been included 

in the plans. For the National Park Service, this may be an opportunity to secure office space for trail staff in centrally located facility. 

The NPS is not involved in either the construction, operation or funding of 

this facility. 

5. Development of an interpretive Kiosk at the Port of Walla Walla’s proposed 

Wallula Gap overlook at Wallula, Washington. 

6. Additional floods interpretive displays added to the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center at The Dalles, Oregon. 

7. Enhanced wayside exhibit at Oregon State Parks’ Crown Point facility 

overlooking the Columbia River Gorge. 

8. Additional exhibits about the floods at the Oregon Museum of Science and 

Industry At Portland, Oregon. 

There are also several federal wildlife refuges, such as the Turnbull and the Columbia Wildlife Refuges in Washington State, which are significant for their floods 

features and have already installed some related interpretive signing. 

The National Park Service will not be involved in the operation of any of the facilities mentioned above. As the manager and coordinator of the trail, the guiding 

principle is for the NPS to partner with the various federal agencies and the state, 

local and tribal governments and private groups that are already doing, or are prepared to do pieces of the interpretive job. The NPS will not be engaged in managing 

increased landholdings and facilities, but will be promoting good coordination and 

continuity of the interpretive message presented to the public. 

Erecting signs, development of a public trail map and brochure will be needed to 

mark the various highways that will be the trail route. Costs for road signs and 

waysides are envisioned as being shared by the NPS, the various state Departments 

of Transportation and other interested partners. Use of Federal D.O.T. enhancement 

funds and coordination with each of the state DOT’s would be sought wherever possible. 

Question 3. The National Park Service is opposed to this legislation. What, if any, 

degradation of the resources do you foresee if this legislation fails to pass in the 

109th Congress? 

Answer. The current opposition of the NPS does not seem to recognize that the 

basic concept of this project is that it will be a significant partnership of groups and 

agencies that already are committed to explain special features of the natural landscape. With the legislation, the National Park Service would be the coordinator for 

the presentation of the floods phenomenon and the one unifying partner of the many 

interested partners across the four Northwest states. 

We don’t expect to see significant degradation of resources resulting from a failure 

of this legislation to pass. However, if the bill fails to pass, there would very likely 

be a reduced level of activity by the various partners that are currently working to 

develop interpretive efforts. The resulting degradation would be in the form of omission, confusion and possibly error in presentations undertaken without the framework that would have been provided by S. 206. 

Since the release of the Ice Age Floods Alternatives Study Report in 2001, interest 

in presentation of the floods story has grown immensely. The various partners involved in the interpretive efforts mentioned in my previous answer have been working under the assumption that there will be an Ice Age Floods National Geologic 

Trail as recommended in the Alternatives Study Report and as originally supported 

by the Department of the Interior and the National Park Service as the ‘‘Most Effective and Efficient Management Alternative’’ when the final report was transmitted 

to Congress in August 2001. Partners have often expressed concern that they want 

their interpretive efforts to meet National Park Service standards, and that they 

35

want to be a part of a single, encompassing, well-coordinated project, with unambiguous national designation. 

Failure to develop the national trail will result in fragmented efforts. This story 

crosses four western states, each with a unique part of the story to tell. From personal experience we know that most people tend to see the story of the floods from 

the perspective of what is in their own local area. To a Montanan the floods are 

mainly Lake Missoula. To an Idahoan they are the Ice Dam. To a Washingtonian 

they are the Channeled Scablands. To an Oregonian they are the Columbia Gorge 

or the Willamette Valley. For the whole story to be told in a unified fashion there 

must be a coordinating, overseeing entity. We believe that the National Park Service, given their national expertise in resource interpretation, can best serve this role. 

Question 4. Is any of the area currently recognized by state of county statute as 

resources worthy of protecting? 

Answer. Several floods sites are already recognized for their interpretive value. 

Washington’s Palouse Falls and Dry Falls are both state parks. Idaho’s Farragut 

State Park is located at the point of flood outburst. Oregon’s Crown Point Scenic 

Corridor and Glacial Erratic State Park are similarly recognized as significant to 

the floods story. Benton County Parks (Washington) owns over one square mile land 

atop Bader Mountain as a preserve for public hiking and intends to partner with 

the Ice Age Floods Institute and perhaps others to develop a floods related viewpoint and install floods interpretive signs. 

Question 5. What role do you see the Ice Age Floods Institute related to the possible designation of the Ice Age Floods Trail? 

Answer. The Ice Age Floods Institute is an educational 501(c)(3) non-profit volunteer group. Our mission is to promote public awareness and understanding of the 

Ice Age Floods. Our efforts will continue to be educational in nature. 

If the trail is established as an NPS unit, the Institute would logically be the 

group that should become the principal affiliated private organization, and we believe that we would be effective in that capacity. 

As provided in Section 5 of S. 206, the Institute would participate in the Interagency Technical Committee’s work to assist in the development of the required 

Management and Interpretation Plan for the trail. 

The IAFI is considering the establishment of a related foundation that may promote research into floods topics, perhaps by providing grants and scholarships, and 

we have discussed supporting the reprinting of significant floods-related publications. 

We will continue to promote the development of K-12 curriculum materials to 

reach teachers and students. 

As in the past, the IAFI will continue to conduct public field tours to floods sites 

and to present programs to local audiences. We have reached thousands of people, 

including K-12 teachers, over the last nine years. 

An important role for the IAFI is to promote professionalism and peer review in 

the study of the floods. IAFI members who are experts in the various aspects of 

floods study will be available to ensure accuracy of interpretive efforts, and to assist 

writers and producers in the preparation of materials for general audiences. 

A number of IAFI members are involved in tourism and the hospitality industry. 

In a variety of ways, we could provide technical assistance in the development of 

relationships, activities and materials to promote tourism related to the trail and 

the floods. 

Given all these initiatives, in our role as a non-profit educational organization, the 

IAFI would be an augmentation and a complement to the NPS management of the 

trail, not a replacement of the important coordination and collaboration role the 

NPS would play. 

CITY OF FRANKLIN, 

Franklin, TN, July 12, 2005. 

Senator CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate, Committee on Energy and 

Natural Resources, Washington, DC. 

DEAR SENATOR THOMAS: I am writing on behalf of Mayor Tom Miller in response 

to the questions you posed in your letter dated June 28, 2005. I am the Historic 

Preservation Officer for the City of Franklin, Tennessee.

Question 1. How many visitors would you expect to travel to the site on an annual 

basis if it is designated as a unit of the national park system? 

Answer. The Stones River National Park in Murfreesboro, which is about 30 miles 

from Franklin, has over 200,000 visitors per year. We would fully expect to attract 

36

this many or more if the Battle of Franklin sites are designated as a unit of the 

national park system. 

Question 2. Are any structures currently located on the site of the Battle of Franklin and what would happen to those structures if this legislation is enacted? 

Answer. The potential battlefield park is currently operated as a golf course by 

the country club. It has a clubhouse and other buildings associated with the operation of the club and golf course. With the exception of the clubhouse itself, which 

will become a battlefield interpretation center, the other structures associated with 

the club will be removed. 

Question 3. Do you expect to raise funds from private donors for the acquisition 

and management of the site? 

Answer. As indicated in my testimony, a group of preservation-related non-profit 

organizations has come together under the name Franklin’s Charge to raise money 

for the battlefield acquisition. To date, they have raised nearly $2.5 million, which 

the City will match in order to acquire the property. 

Question 4. For how long has the site been used as a golf course and what impact 

has such use had on the integrity of the battlefield? 

Answer. The country club began in the early 1970s and has operated since that 

time. As would be expected, grading and other alterations to the site have occurred. 

However, the site’s context retains a great deal of integrity because it is bound by 

the Carnton plantation property, the Harpeth River and the historic Lewisburg 

Pike. 

Question 5. Does the City of Franklin interpret the Battle of Franklin? 

Answer. Currently, the City operates two parks related to the Battle of Franklin: 

Winstead Hill and Fort Granger. At these sites, interpretive signage and other special educational events are used to educate the public. The City participates as a 

partner with the private sector on projects related to the interpretation of the battlefield, such a producing brochures and other initiatives. Additionally, the Board of 

Mayor and Aldermen recently appointed a task force to oversee the implementation 

of the recently completed Battlefield Preservation Plan. The American Battlefield 

Protection Program of the National Park Service funded the plan. 

Please contact Mayor Miller or me if we can provide additional information. He 

can be reached at 615.791.3217 or at mayor@franklin-gov.com. I can be reached at 

615.550.6733 or at shanonw@franklingov.com. 

Sincerely, 

SHANON PETERSON WASIELEWSKI, 

Historic Preservation Officer. 

(37)

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

DEPARTMENT OF HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES, 

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA, 

Tucson, AZ, June 24, 2005. 

Senator CRAIG THOMAS, 

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR DISTINGUISHED COMMITTEE MEMBERS: I write in regard to the Ice Age 

Floods National Geologic Trail designation legislation that is before your committee. 

The proposed legislation will create a most worthy entity to be managed as a trail 

by the National Park Service. The science in regard to this trail, which I have pursued for nearly 40 years, will be absolutely fascinating for the nation’s public. The 

Trail will document what is arguably to the most spectacular geological phenomenon 

to have occurred on our planet in the past 20,000 years. The region was inundated 

by the largest and most energetic flows of fresh water that we know about in Earth 

history. About 16,000 years ago, these floods produced amazing landscapes that can 

best be appreciated by following their course from sources in western Montana 

through northern Idaho and into the Channeled Scabland of east-central Washington. The trail further follows the flooding pathway down the Columbia River valley between Washington and Oregon, ultimately leading to the abyssal plains of the 

Pacific Ocean. 

For the past two years I have been involved with a British television documentary 

team in making a program about these great floods. The production cost has run 

to nearly $2 million, and it only begins to introduce the magnificence of this story. 

How much more educational and enjoyable it will be for our citizens and visitors 

to follow this fantastic flood story by their travel along its actual path. 

The Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail will be a tremendous resource for 

science education. In the mid-1990s I worked with NASA scientists from the Pathfinder Mars Landing Mission to use the flood landscape of eastern Washington to 

prepare for the Mars landing. The landing site was in an ancient Mars flood channel, and the Ice Age Floods terrain was our only Earth analogue to this fantastic 

find on Mars. I think this will all have immense appeal for those who experience 

the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail. 

I most strongly urge the formal designation of the Ice Age Floods Geologic Trail 

as a fantastic opportunity to bring the nation’s public to this most fascinating geological story. 

Sincerely, 

VICTOR R. BAKER, 

Regents’ Professor. 

STATEMENT OF EUGENE KIVER, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY, EASTERN

WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, CHENEY, WA 

I wish to lend my enthusiastic support to the establishment of an Ice Age Floods 

National Geologic Trail administered by the National Park Service. We in the 

United States are blessed by an amazing variety of natural features, many of which 

are highlighted in the National Park System. Missing from the great variety that 

is showcased in our Park System is one of the most incredible geologic events to 

affect the earth’s surface and that impacted the four-state area in the Pacific Northwest. 

I am Dr. Eugene P. Kiver, Ph.D,. R.G. and am Professor Emeritus of Geology at 

Eastern Washington University in Cheney, Washington. I have taught geology full 

time for 32 years and part time for the past 4 years making a total of 36 years of 

teaching and geological research experience. I am a Registered Geologist in the 

38

State of Washington. I have authored or co-authored over 100 professional publications, technical reports, and geologic field guides, many of which deal with the subject on hand. I am also the lead author in ‘‘The Geologic Story of the National 

Parks’’ textbook published in 1999 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

The recognition that a catastrophic flood of epic proportions occurred on the face 

of the Earth was not believed by most of the scientific community when first introduced by J Harlen Bretz in the 1920s. No such event had ever been documented 

in the geologic record thus spawning a suspicion that this unorthodox explanation 

would not hold up to careful scrutiny. The story of the winning over of the skeptics 

by the use of solid and thorough field evidence through decades of careful work is 

in itself a major story in the history and methodology of Science. Finer details are 

still being refined and will be for many generations making the topic relevant and 

exciting to both scientists and lay people alike. 

Other areas around the globe have since been discovered where catastrophic 

floods, particularly those related to the recent Ice Age, are now known. The Missoula Flood events in the Pacific Northwest remain one of two large areas in the 

world affected, the other being in a relatively inaccessible area in Siberia on the 

Asian Continent. The type example of large-magnitude flood processes and by far 

the best-studied area is the Channeled Scabland of eastern Washington and the associated areas in nearby states. Each region along the floodpath has its own special 

story; hence the idea of a national geologic trail is a logical way to enable lay people, 

educators, and scientists to integrate the evidence located in widespread geographic 

locations. 

Because the geologic story involves a vast landscape that stretches from northwestern Montana, northern Idaho, and through Washington and Oregon and hundreds of miles out into the Pacific Ocean, this is not the type of story that can be 

documented at one locality. Thus a broad geographic perspective is needed where 

bits of evidence along the 800-mile-long flood path can be examined. Humans are 

basically driven by the need to explore and who seek out new experiences and 

knowledge. Learning is a lifetime endeavor for those who have a healthy need to 

better know the past. We need to provide those opportunities to those who pursue 

these rich experiences. 

The impact of a collapsing ice dam in northern Idaho that unleashed some 500 

cubic miles of water in a few days excites the imagination and appreciation for the 

rich history found in the landscapes of our northwestern states. The enormity of the 

floods would seem initially to be a story from Hollywood or Science Fiction. Yet the 

story is real. As a scientist who has studied these phenomena for over 30 years I 

feel that the story should be shared with others. I encounter great enthusiasm of 

students and community groups where I frequently present the topic. The idea of 

a wall of water hundreds of feet deep roaring across the landscape and in some 

cases exceeding the Interstate speed limits excites those who learn the story. When 

one compares the effects of the 25-foot-high Dec. 26, 2004 tsunamis in the Sumatra 

region with the hundreds of feet of water during the Ice Age floods it initially defies 

the imagination until the incredible landforms and the flood story are understood. 

To enrich the lives of our present and future citizens and visitors from other countries by making these experiences available would be a significant contribution and 

would contribute to our legacy for future generations. 

STATEMENT OF ROY BRECKENRIDGE, STATE GEOLOGIST, IDAHO; EDMOND DEAL, STATE

GEOLOGIST, MONTANA; VICKI S. MCCONNELL, STATE GEOLOGIST, OREGON; AND

RON TESSIERE, STATE GEOLOGIST, WASHINGTON

The Ice Age Floods that occurred periodically during the time of the great 

Cordilleran Ice Sheet profoundly influenced the shape of the land along the Columbia River basin from Montana to the mouth of the Columbia River. These glacial 

and flood events are responsible for the much of the present landscape and scenery 

as well as being the source of numerous geologic, soil, and water resources of the 

four state region. The floods were so large that it was not until we began to capture 

satellite images of the earth’s surface that scientists were able to determine the full 

extent of the floods and to confirm earlier geologist’s field observations and interpretations. These large-scale natural events have left us with a fascinating and important geologic legacy whose evidence remains visible to this very day. 

As the State Geologists of the four states affected by the Ice Age Floods we enthusiastically support the concept of developing a geologic trail to trace the path of the 

floods across our states. Such a trail would offer unparalleled opportunities to become an in-situ learning laboratory for the general public as well as furthering scientific research on the causes and effects of the floods. We understand and support 

39

the vision for partnering with tribal, state, and local entities to increase the scope 

of the trails and the possibilities for education and research. 

INTERNATIONAL MOUNTAIN BICYCLING ASSOCIATION, 

Boulder, CO, June 30, 2005. 

Senator CRAIG THOMAS, Chairman, 

Senator DANIEL AKAKA, Ranking Member, 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, National Parks Subcommittee, 

Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN AND RANKING MEMBER: The International Mountain Bicycling 

Association (IMBA) strongly supports S. 588, the Arizona Trail Feasibility Study 

Act. The Arizona Trail exemplifies how a trail can unify a community while accommodating many diverse interests. 

IMBA, a national education and advocacy organization, represents 32,000 individual members and 550 affiliated bike clubs. IMBA works to create, enhance, and 

preserve trail opportunities for mountain bikers coast to coast. 

The Arizona Trail has been designed and planned with shared uses in mind—hiking, bicycling, and equestrian use. This stands in contrast to the single-use, hikingonly approach adopted by proponents of the North Country National Scenic Trail 

and the complete ban on bicycling on the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trails. IMBA 

believes that most national scenic trails, which consume significant public resources 

and funds, should serve more than single user groups. IMBA will continue to support hiking-only sections of national trails, but because national scenic trails span 

thousands of miles, we believe there is enough room for all trail users to benefit. 

Mountain bikers have been instrumental in building and maintaining the Arizona 

Trail. Only this year, two new segments of the Arizona Trail were completed 

through the efforts of IMBA-affiliated mountain biking clubs in Arizona. The Arizona Trail is a remarkable example of what can be achieved when all non-motorized 

trail users work together. 

From the beginning, Arizona Trail advocates have welcomed and included mountain bike use. The Arizona Trail was originally conceived as a non-motorized, multiuser trail. Although parts of the Arizona Trail travel through Wilderness Areas, 

where mountain biking is not permitted, the Arizona Trail Association has committed to building alternative routes that will accommodate mountain bikes. In 

turn, cyclists have always respected those portions of the Arizona Trail upon which 

mountain bikers are not permitted. 

We were very pleased when the National Park Service agreed to allow bicycling 

on its section of the Arizona Trail north of the Grand Canyon. As you may know, 

the NPS bans bicycling from most trails; however, they made a decision to make 

this important connection shared-use. 

IMBA members are stellar public servants who collectively contribute almost one 

million hours of volunteer trailwork on public and private lands annually. IMBA believes that the bicycling community will increase its contribution of labor and resources as the Arizona Trail continues to evolve. 

We respectfully ask the committee to pass the Arizona Trail Feasibility Study Act. 

Signed,

MIKE VAN ABEL, 

IMBA Executive Director, 

Representative. 

SONYA OVERHOSER, 

IMBA Arizona.

Æ