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

75-529 PS 2002

H.R. 38 AND H.R. 1925

LEGISLATIVE HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION,

AND PUBLIC LANDS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

October 4, 2001

Serial No. 107-64

Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house

or

Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov

(II)

COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES

JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman

NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member

Don Young, Alaska,

Vice Chairman

W.J. ‘‘Billy’’ Tauzin, Louisiana

Jim Saxton, New Jersey

Elton Gallegly, California

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee

Joel Hefley, Colorado

Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland

Ken Calvert, California

Scott McInnis, Colorado

Richard W. Pombo, California

Barbara Cubin, Wyoming

George Radanovich, California

Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Carolina

Mac Thornberry, Texas

Chris Cannon, Utah

John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania

Bob Schaffer, Colorado

Jim Gibbons, Nevada

Mark E. Souder, Indiana

Greg Walden, Oregon

Michael K. Simpson, Idaho

Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado

J.D. Hayworth, Arizona

C.L. ‘‘Butch’’ Otter, Idaho

Tom Osborne, Nebraska

Jeff Flake, Arizona

Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana

George Miller, California

Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan

Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon

Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa

Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii

Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas

Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey

Calvin M. Dooley, California

Robert A. Underwood, Guam

Adam Smith, Washington

Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Islands

Ron Kind, Wisconsin

Jay Inslee, Washington

Grace F. Napolitano, California

Tom Udall, New Mexico

Mark Udall, Colorado

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey

James P. McGovern, Massachusetts

Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico

Hilda L. Solis, California

Brad Carson, Oklahoma

Betty McCollum, Minnesota

Allen D. Freemyer, Chief of Staff

Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel

Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk

James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director

Jeff Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION,

AND PUBLIC LANDS

GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California, Chairman

DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands Ranking Democrat Member

Elton Gallegly, California

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee

Joel Hefley, Colorado

Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland

Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Carolina,

Vice Chairman

Mac Thornberry, Texas

Chris Cannon, Utah

Bob Schaffer, Colorado

Jim Gibbons, Nevada

Mark E. Souder, Indiana

Michael K. Simpson, Idaho

Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan

Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa

Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey

Tom Udall, New Mexico

Mark Udall, Colorado

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey

James P. McGovern, Massachusetts

Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico

Hilda L. Solis, California

Betty McCollum, Minnesota

(III)

CONTENTS

Page

Hearing held on October 4, 2001 ............................................................................ 1

Statement of Members:

Bereuter, Hon. Doug, a Representative in Congress from the State of

Nebraska ........................................................................................................ 2

Prepared statement on H.R. 38 ............................................................... 4

Edwards, Hon. Chet, a Representative in Congress from the State of

Texas .............................................................................................................. 5

Prepared statement on H.R. 1925 ........................................................... 5

Haynes, Gary, Professor and Chair, Department of Anthropology,

University of Nevada, Letter submitted for the record on

H.R. 1925 ............................................................................................... 7

Radanovich, Hon. George P., a Representative in Congress from the State

of California ................................................................................................... 1

Prepared statement on H.R. 38 and H.R. 1925 ..................................... 2

Statement of Witnesses:

Maurstad, Hon. David I., Former Lieutenant Governor, State of

Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska ....................................................................... 12

Prepared statement on H.R. 38 ............................................................... 14

Riedesel, Laureen, President, Friends of Homestead National Monument

of America, Inc., Beatrice, Nebraska ........................................................... 17

Prepared statement on H.R. 38 ............................................................... 19

Smith, Dr. Calvin B., Chairman, Department of Museum Studies, and

Director, Mayborn Museum Complex, Baylor University, Waco, Texas .. 28

Prepared statement on H.R. 1925 ........................................................... 30

Soukup, Dr. Michael, Associate Director, Natural Resource Stewardship

and Science, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,

Washington, DC ............................................................................................ 8

Prepared statement on H.R. 38 ............................................................... 10

Prepared statement on H.R. 1925 ........................................................... 11

(1)

LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 38, TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL LANDS TO BE

INCLUDED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF

THE HOMESTEAD NATIONAL MONUMENT

OF AMERICA IN THE STATE OF NEBRASKA;

AND H.R. 1925, TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY

OF THE INTERIOR TO STUDY THE SUITABILITY AND FEASIBILITY OF DESIGNATING

THE WACO MAMMOTH SITE AREA IN WACO,

TEXAS, AS A UNIT OF THE NATIONAL PARK

SYSTEM.

Thursday, October 4, 2001

U.S. House of Representatives

Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands

Committee on Resources

Washington, DC

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in

Room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. George Radanovich, [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE GEORGE RADANOVICH, A

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. RADANOVICH. Good morning, and welcome to today’s hearing

of the National Parks Subcommittee of the Committee on Resources. The Subcommittee will come to order, and this morning

the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands

will hear testimony on two bills: H.R. 38 and H.R. 1925.

The first bill, H.R. 38, as introduced by Congressman Bereuter,

provides for additional lands to be included within the boundaries

of the Homestead National Monument of America in the State of

Nebraska. The additional land will allow the Park Service to build

a modern visitors center to enhance the educational experience and

better protect the 17,000 artifacts stored at the monument.

The other bill is H.R. 1925, introduced by Congressman Chet

Edwards. It directs the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designing the Waco Mammoth Site Area

near Waco, Texas, as a unit of the National Park System. The

2

Waco Mammoth Site Area is an important site for scientific study

and has attracted international attention.

Mr. RADANOVICH. I want to thank Congressmen Edwards and

Bereuter for introducing these bills and look forward to today’s testimony.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Radanovich follows:]

Statement of the Honorable George P. Radanovich, Chairman,

Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands

Good morning and welcome to the hearing today. The Subcommittee will come to

order. This morning, the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public

Lands will hear testimony on two bills - H.R. 38 and H.R. 1925.

The first bill, H.R. 38, introduced by Congressman Doug Bereuter, provides for

additional lands to be included within the boundaries of the Homestead National

Monument of America in the State of Nebraska. The additional land will allow the

Park Service to build a modern visitor center to enhance the educational experience

and better protect the 17,000 artifacts stored at the Monument.

The other bill, H.R. 1925, introduced by Congressman Chet Edwards, directs the

Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the

Waco Mammoth Site Area in Waco, Texas, as a unit of the National Park System.

The Waco Mammoth Site Area is an important site for scientific study and has attracted international attention.

I want to thank Congressmen Edwards and Congressman Bereuter for introducing these bills and look forward to today’s testimony. At this time, I would like

to ask unanimous consent that Congressman Edwards and Congressman Bereuter

be permitted to sit on the dias following their statements. Without objection

[PAUSE], so ordered.

I would like to thank all of our witnesses for being here today to testify on these

bills and now turn the time to the Ranking Member, Ms. Christensen for an opening

statement.

Mr. RADANOVICH. At this time I would like to ask unanimous

consent that Congressman Edwards and Congressman Bereuter be

permitted to sit at the dais following their statements. Obviously,

no objection, so ordered.

And I would like to thank all of our witnesses for being here

today to testify on these bills, and I would want to then, I think,

go ahead with the opening statements.

I just wanted to mention to the audience we have got a lot on

the agenda in Washington today with the farm bill on the floor and

quite a few other things. So I am sure that there will be members

coming in and out, and our ranking member, Mrs. Christensen,

couldn’t be here because of a death in the family, and our prayers

and thoughts are with her at this time.

So, with that, I would like to introduce Congressman Doug Bereuter. Doug, welcome, and have at it.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. DOUG BEREUTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and congratulations on your Chairmanship of this Subcommittee. As I

mentioned to you, I spent my first 4 years on this Subcommittee

and enjoyed that experience. In fact, I will have to go to the floor

for the ag bills shortly myself since I have four amendments they

want to take up.

I am pleased to testify on behalf of H.R. 38, which I introduced

this year. In the past Congress, I introduced the same legislation,

and as a matter of fact, it is not in my written testimony, but

3

$400,000 in appropriation was received to implement this boundary

change in the last Congress. And so we have been waiting anxiously to see the expansion of the Homestead National Monument

by approximately 38 acres.

I am very pleased, too, that David Maurstad, the former mayor

of Beatrice, the closest community to the Homestead National

Monument, and the former State senator from the area and the

man who served as our Lieutenant Governor until last week when

he resigned to become FEMA Director for the Rocky Mountain region, is here to testify today, as well as Laureen Riedesel, the

president of the Friends of Homestead and the chief librarian for

the city of Beatrice, who is here to speak and will follow me.

The legislation is rather a straightforward bill. It is also, I think,

noncontroversial. The bill would simply adjust the boundaries of

the Homestead National Monument to permit the acquisition of

four small parcels to the Homestead. It is consistent with the General Management Plan, which calls for a minor boundary expansion

exactly in these areas. The acquisition outside the existing boundaries as recommended by the General Management Plan would

allow a new Homestead Heritage Center to be constructed outside

the floodplain. The current one is within the 100-year floodplain,

and they have not been able to expand it for some period of time.

They have not been able to display so many of the tremendous artifacts that they have.

So when we are able to purchase the additional land, this would

enable us then to come to the Congress at a later date and seek

funds for a new center to replace the existing one.

As the bill makes clear, the land for the Heritage Center would

be acquired on a willing-seller basis. It is my understanding that

all of the individuals—and the State of Nebraska, which owns part

of it, a small part—that would be involved in the boundary adjustment have expressed a willingness to sell for a negotiated price.

The Homestead National Monument of America commemorates

the lives and the accomplishments of all the pioneers and the

changes to the land and the people as a result of the Homestead

Act of 1862. This is said to be the first or perhaps one of the first

two or three homesteads filed that first day that the Homestead

Act was implemented.

I think it is a truly unique treasure among the National Park

System jewels. The authorization legislation makes it clear that

Homestead was intended to have a special place among the Park

Service units, and I have given you some details from the original

document that established it here.

Clearly, I think, Mr. Chairman, this authorizing legislation will

help us meet some lofty goals, but I believe that H.R. 38 is a small

step but necessary step so that we can use the appropriation received by the last Congress to expand by a total of about 38.5

acres.

I would be happy to answer any questions you might have, and

I know the two people accompanying me will be anxious to provide

any details that you might like as well.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bereuter follows:]

4

Statement of the Honorable Doug Bereuter, a Representative in Congress

from the State of Nebraska

Chairman Hefley, Delegate Christensen, and members of the Subcommittee: I

would like to begin by thanking you for the opportunity to present testimony regarding H.R. 38, a bill I introduced on January 3, 2001. During the past 106th Congress,

I introduced the same legislation.

I am pleased that David Maurstad, the former mayor of Beatrice (the closest community to the Homestead National Monument), the former state senator for the

area, and the man who served as Lieutenant Governor of Nebraska until this past

week when he resigned to become the FEMA director of the Rocky Mountain region

will testify today. Also, I’m very pleased to have Laureen Riedesel, President of the

Friends of Homestead, here to speak in support of H.R. 38.

This legislation, the Homestead National Monument of America Additions Act, is

a straightforward bill. It is also non-controversial. The bill would simply adjust the

boundaries of Homestead National Monument of America and allow a small amount

of additional land to be included within its boundaries.

The bill reflects the recommendations in the recently completed General Management Plan (GMP) calling for a minor boundary expansion for Homestead National

Monument. Unfortunately, the current visitor center is located in a 100-year flood

plain. The acquisition of land outside the existing boundaries as recommended in

the GMP would allow a new ‘‘Homestead Heritage Center’’ to be constructed outside

the floodplain. This would offer greater protection to the Monument’s collections, interpretive exhibits, public research facilities, and administrative offices.

As the bill makes clear, the land for the Heritage Center is to be acquired on a

willing-seller basis. It is my understanding that all of the individuals who would be

involved in the boundary adjustment have expressed a willingness to sell for a negotiated price.

Homestead National Monument of America commemorates the lives and accomplishments of all pioneers and the changes to the land and the people as a result

of the Homestead Act of 1862, which is recognized as one of the most important

laws in U.S. history. This Monument was authorized by legislation enacted in 1936.

The fiscal year 96 Interior Appropriations Act directed the National Park Service

to complete a General Management Plan to begin planning for improvements at

Homestead. The General Management Plan, which was completed last year, made

recommendations for improvements that are needed to help ensure that Homestead

is able to reach its full potential as a place where Americans can more effectively

appreciate the Homestead Act and its effects upon the nation.

Homestead National Monument of America is truly a unique treasure among the

National Park Service jewels. The authorizing legislation makes it clear that Homestead was intended to have a special place among Park Service units. According to

the original legislation:

‘‘It shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Interior to lay out said land

in a suitable and enduring manner so that the same may be maintained

as an appropriate monument to retain for posterity a proper memorial emblematic of the hardships and the pioneer life through which the early settlers passed in the settlement, cultivation, and civilization of the great

West. It shall be his duty to erect suitable buildings to be used as a museum in which shall be preserved literature applying to such settlement

and agricultural implements used in bringing the western plains to its

present state of high civilization, and to use the said tract of land for such

other objects and purposes as in his judgment may perpetuate the history

of this country mainly developed by the homestead law.’’

Clearly, this authorizing legislation sets some lofty goals. I believe that H.R. 38

would help the Monument achieve the potential which was first described in its authorizing legislation.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thanks, Doug. And I know that this is well

thought out, and all the people involved seem like they support it.

So I am looking forward to the testimony of the witnesses, and I

certainly understand your need to leave if you have to. But it

sounds like a good project.

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you.

5

Mr. RADANOVICH. Okay. Good morning, Mr. Edwards, and I know

you are here to provide an opening statement on—what is it?— H.R. 1925.

Mr. EDWARDS. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Feel free to speak about your project.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. CHET EDWARDS, A

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be very brief. In

fact, I will probably join with Mr. Bereuter in saying that we would

ask our friends and constituents and others who are going to testify to forego their testimony if you would like to just pass this bill

by unanimous consent of the Committee this morning.

[Laughter.]

Mr. RADANOVICH. You know, I think I could right now.

Mr. EDWARDS. Hearing no objection.

Thank you so much. I will be brief because of the others testifying. But basically we are simply asking that the Secretary of Interior be directed to do a study to determine whether the Waco

Mammoth Site should be a part of the National Park System. We

don’t draw any conclusions today. We simply ask the Committee’s

consideration of having the Secretary actually evaluate that and report back to the Committee and Congress over the next 6 months.

It is obvious why someone from Waco, Texas, might support this

idea, but let me just briefly quote, and then I will finish. I would

like to quote from Dr. Gary Haynes, who is the Chairman of the

Department of anthropology at the University of Nevada. He is an

anthropologist and archaeologist who has worked at the Smithsonian Institution as well as at Catholic University, George Washington University, as well as his present university in Nevada. He

says, ‘‘In my view, the Waco Mammoth Site is worth preserving

with the most vigor and support the United States Government can

provide. It is a part of America’s rich heritage from the far past,

when a much diverse animal community populated the continent.’’ Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that this is the largest

single site in the country where a herd of mammoths died at the

same event 28,000 years ago, even the remains of one female mother mammoth who was trying to push one of the babies up above

the mudslide. It is a spectacular site, and I just appreciate your

consideration of this bill and that of the Committee.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Edwards follows:]

Statement of the Honorable Chet Edwards, a Representative in Congress

from the State of Texas

Chairman Radanovich, Ranking Member Christensen, and Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for allowing me to testify today on the significance of the Waco Mammoth Site, located in my district, and the need for this site to be added as a unit

of the National Park System. I appreciate the subcommittee’s interest in this very

important issue and for giving it the consideration of this hearing.

The Waco Mammoth Site is the largest known concentration of prehistoric elephants dying from the same event in the world. That is what makes it a significant

national site.

The Site is found within the city limits of Waco, Texas, where the Brazos and

Bosque rivers merge. First discovered in 1978, this site has been excavated by numerous Baylor University researchers. Twenty-three Columbian mammoths have

been unearthed so far.

6

The mammoths were suddenly overcome by a mud flood over 28,000 years ago,

and while not able to move to safety, were able to form a protective stance over

their young. In fact, the mud engulfed one 45 year-old female elephant as she tried

to lift her young to safety. This motherly instinct is the first known recording in

history.

Experts such as Dr. Gary Haynes of the University of Nevada at Reno have said

that the Waco Mammoth Site is a valuable and unique treasure that should not be

lost. Dr. Haynes states that the Mammoth site ‘‘is a part of America’s rich heritage

from the far past, when a much more diverse animal community populated the continent.’’

The Waco Mammoth Site has the complete backing of the Waco community. More

specifically, individuals, corporations, foundations, and other special interest groups

are committed to preserving the Mammoth Site, and making it a part of the National Park System. As a national park, the Mammoth Site will attract numerous

tourists and travelers wanting to learn more about this paleontological discovery

and our early beginnings. The Mammoth Site can also be a valued learning tool for

school children of various grade levels throughout much of Texas.

I believe that a study will show the value of the Waco Mammoth Site and its importance to the scientific community. Thank you for your consideration of funding

such a study.

[A letter attached to Mr. Edwards’ statement follows:]

7

8

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thank you, Mr. Edwards. And one of the nicest

things about being Chairman of this Committee is you become familiar with a lot more interesting sites all across the country. So

I, too, am looking forward to the testimony of the witnesses today,

and I appreciate both of you coming to the Committee to share

your views on these bills.

Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you very much.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thank you very much.

Mr. RADANOVICH. With that, we will call Panel 2, which is Dr.

Michael Soukup, the Associate Director of National Resource Stewardship and Science, National Park Service, the Department of Interior, in Washington, D.C., to speak on both issues, both bills. And

I think that we are going to go ahead and combine Panel 2 and

Panel 3, and so with that we will call up the Honorable David

Maurstad, who is Lieutenant Governor of the State of Nebraska;

Ms. Laureen Riedesel, president of the Friends of the Homestead— I heard that pronounced—it looks like Beatrice, but it is Beatrice?

Ms. RIEDESEL. Beatrice.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Beatrice, Nebraska. And ten Dr. Calvin Smith,

Chairman of Museum Studies and director of the Mayborn Museum Complex at Baylor University in Waco, Texas.

Good morning to everybody and thank you for being here today.

Mr. Soukup, we will begin with your testimony, and just to give

you a rundown on the lighting structure here, you will see these

little boxes in front of you. Green means talk, yellow means sum

up, and red means don’t say another word. I just want to make

sure that everybody gets their information out today, but if you can

do it within that 5-minute time frame, that would be just terrific.

If you need to go on, just ask, but, you know, just little guidelines.

Doctor, welcome and please begin if you would like.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL SOUKUP, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,

NATURAL RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP AND SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Mr. SOUKUP. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to

present our views of the Department on these two bills. I am not

certain how you want to proceed. Would you like me to do both

bills at one time?

Mr. RADANOVICH. That would not be a problem. Go ahead and

address both at the same time.

Mr. SOUKUP. Okay. Let me summarize our testimony on both

bills and proceed.

The Department supports the enactment of H.R. 38. We believe

it is a very important bill for us. Homestead National Monument

of America was established in 1936. The language was to provide

‘‘...a proper memorial emblematical of the hardships and the pioneer life through which the early settlers passed in settlement, cultivation, and civilization of the Great West...’’ If enacted, the bill

will add four small but important parcels of land to the Monument.

The total amount of land, in our calculation, is less than 30 acres,

and the private landowners, as you previously heard, have agreed

in principle to this proposed legislation, and the State of Nebraska

has agreed, as well, to donate its land as provided in the bill.

9

The four parcels to be added are as follows:

The Graff Property, 15.98 acres adjacent to and overlooking the

Monument’s grounds. Addition of these lands would serve two purposes. First, it would ensure protection of the Nation’s oldest restored prairie. Second, this property, located on higher ground, as

you previously heard, could be used as an alternative location, outside of the floodplain, for the Monument’s primary cultural resource, the Palmer-Epaid cabin, as well as the visitor facility.

The Pioneer Acres Green parcel consists of approximately 3 acres

of privately owned land. Inclusion of this property in the boundary

would provide additional protection to park resources, and it is

owned by a willing seller.

A segment of State Highway 4 consists of approximately 1.4

acres of Nebraska State Highway 4, and its addition would protect

natural and archaeological resources and provide a site to support

education efforts through interpretive wayside exhibits.

The State Triangle lands would be a parcel containing approximately 8.3 acres and is bounded by the Monument on two sides

and by State Highway 4 on the third side. This property is immediately adjacent to the site of the original homestead cabin and will

allow for maximizing interpretive efforts and maintaining the integrity of the Monument’s boundaries.

Mr. Chairman, the Department supports the enactment of

H.R. 38, and we thank you for the opportunity to provide these

comments.

This concludes my remarks and I will now refer to my other testimony.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Why don’t you move on to 1925.

Mr. SOUKUP. Okay. Thank you, sir.

H.R. 1925 will require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a

study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the

Waco Mammoth Site in Waco, Texas, as a unit of the National

Park System.

The Department supports this legislation in concept and believes

that it is wholly appropriate for the National Park System to undertake a study of this nature. However, in light of the President’s

commitment to reducing the backlog of deferred maintenance needs

within the National Park System, we would not anticipate funding

or beginning the study until at least fiscal year 2003. Funds for

this fiscal year have already been committed to ongoing and newly

authorized studies, and the first budget that we could get it into

would be the fiscal year 2003 budget.

Additionally, our support for this legislation should not be interpreted to mean that the Department would necessarily support

designation of a new area.

H.R. 1925 calls for the completion of a study of the Waco Mammoth Site that determines the suitability and feasibility of designating the site as a unit of the National Park System. The bill calls

for this study to be completed under the guidelines in Public Law

91-383 and submission of the study results to Congress 30 days

after it has been completed.

As you just heard, the Waco Site is located near the confluence

of the Brazos and the Bosque rivers in Central Texas, not far from

10

the city of Waco. It is the largest known concentration of

mammoths dying from the same event.

We recommend some technical amendments to this bill that

would make it consistent with the requirements for studying new

areas to be added to the National Park System that are specified

in Section 303 of the National Park System Omnibus Management

Act of 1998. That is Public Law 105-391. This public law requires

studies of new areas to consider whether the area under study possesses nationally significant natural or cultural resources and represents one of the most important examples of a particular resource

type in the country, and is a suitable and feasible addition to the

system.

To make the terms of this study consistent with those that the

Park Service uses to study other potential new sites of the National

Park System, we recommend referring to the study as a ‘‘special resource study,’’ and to specifically state that the study should determine the ‘‘national significance, suitability and feasibility’’ of adding the Waco Mammoth Site Area to the National Park System.

Also, studies of this type often involve consultation with many

State and local groups and are difficult to complete within the 6-

month time frame specified in the bill. We suggest that the report

to Congress in subsection 1(c) be required within 3 fiscal years

after the funds are first made available, which reflects the standard timing for submitting studies of this type.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement, and I would be

pleased to answer any questions you might have.

[The prepared statements of Mr. Soukup follow:]

Statement of Dr. Michael Soukup, Associate Director, Natural Resource

Stewardship and Science, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the

Interior, Concerning H.R. 38

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department on H.R. 38. This bill provides for additional lands to be included within the

boundaries of Homestead National Monument of America in the State of Nebraska.

The Department supports the enactment of H. R. 38. Acquisition of these additional lands has been recommended by the Homestead National Monument of America’s 1999 General Management Plan, and costs to administer this boundary modification are expected to be minimal. Funding to acquire the privately owned properties was included in the Fiscal Year 2001 Interior Appropriations Act, and we anticipate that management of the acquired lands can be accomplished with existing

park resources.

Homestead National Monument of America (Monument) was established in 1936.

The Monument’s enabling legislation states that the purpose of the Monument is

to establish ‘‘...a proper memorial emblematical of the hardships and the pioneer life

through which the early settlers passed in settlement, cultivation, and civilization

of, the Great West...’’ The legislation also specifies that the Secretary of the Interior

will ‘‘...erect suitable buildings to be used as a specific museum in which shall be

preserved literature applying to such settlement and agriculture implements used

to bring the western plains to its present state of high civilization, and to use the

said tract of land for such other objects and purposes as in his judgment may perpetuate the history of this country mainly developed by the homestead law.’’

If enacted, the bill will add four small, but important, parcels of land to the Monument. These additions will allow the opportunity for greater protection of the Monument’s primary cultural resource, will protect the Monument from encroaching development, and will provide the opportunity for improved visitor and interpretive

services. The total amount of land to be added is less than 30 acres. The private

landowners affected have agreed in principle to this proposed legislation and the

State of Nebraska has agreed, as well, to donate its lands as provided for in the

bill.

11

The four parcels to be added to the Monument and the purposes for the addition

of each are as follows:

THE GRAFF PROPERTY:

This privately owned parcel consists of approximately 15.98 acres adjacent to and

overlooking the Monument’s grounds. Addition of the property would serve two purposes. First, it would ensure protection for the nation’s second oldest restored prairie, which holds important educational, research, and scientific values. Second, this

property, located on higher ground, could be used as an alternative location, outside

of the floodplain, for the Monument’s primary cultural resource, the Palmer–Epaid

cabin, as well as the visitor facility.

PIONEER ACRES GREEN:

This parcel consists of approximately 3 acres of privately owned land. Inclusion

of this property in the boundary will provide additional protection to park resources

from nearby development.

SEGMENT OF STATE HIGHWAY 4:

This parcel consists of approximately 1.4 acres of Nebraska State Highway 4 and

its addition will protect natural and archeological resources and provide a site to

support education efforts through interpretive wayside exhibits. The State of Nebraska is currently examining proposals to reroute State Highway 4, which would

allow for this existing road to serve as an access road to the Monument.

STATE TRIANGLE:

This parcel consists of approximately 8.3 acres and is bounded by the Monument

on two sides and by State Highway 4 on the third side. The property is immediately

adjacent to the site of the original homestead cabin and will allow for maximizing

interpretive efforts and maintaining the integrity of the Monument’s boundaries.

At the request of the landowner, the property described in subsection (b)(1) the

Graff Property must be acquired within five years after the date of the enactment

of this Act. The family, which has been a strong supporter of the Monument, made

this request in order to better plan for the future and to minimize the impacts on

their lives. If this legislation is enacted, meeting the request should not be difficult

since the funds for acquisition have already been appropriated.

Mr. Chairman, the Department supports the enactment of H. R. 38, and we thank

you again for the opportunity to appear today. This concludes my prepared remarks.

I will be pleased to answer any questions you or other committee members might

have.

Statement of Dr. Michael Soukup, Associate Director, Natural Resource

Stewardship and Science, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the

Interior, Concerning H. R. 1925

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

Interior’s views on H. R. 1925. This bill would require the Secretary of the Interior

to conduct a study to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the

Waco Mammoth Site in Waco, Texas as a unit of the National Park System.

The Department supports this legislation in concept and believes that it is wholly

appropriate for the National Park Service to undertake a study of this nature. However, in light of the President’s commitment to reducing the backlog of deferred

maintenance needs within the National Park System, we will neither request funding for this study in this fiscal year, so as to focus available time and resources on

completing previously authorized studies, nor be able to begin the study until at

least fiscal year 2003, as there are 39 authorized studies that are pending, and we

only expect to complete a few of those this year. Furthermore, in order to better

plan for the future of our national parks, we believe that studies should carefully

examine the full life cycle operation and maintenance costs that would result from

each alternative considered. Additionally, our support of this study legislation

should not be interpreted to mean that the Department would necessarily support

designation of a new area.

H.R. 1925 calls for the completion of a study of the Waco Mammoth Site that determines the suitability and feasibility of designating the site as a unit of the National Park System. The bill calls for the study to be completed under the guidelines

in P.L. 91–383 and submission of the study results to Congress 30 days after it has

been completed.

The Waco Mammoth Site area is located near the confluence of the Brazos and

the Bosque rivers in Central Texas, not far from the city of Waco. Baylor University

12

has been investigating the site since 1978 after hearing about bones emerging from

eroding creek banks that led to the uncovering of portions of five mammoths. Since

then several additional mammoth remains have been uncovered - making this the

largest known concentration of mammoths dying from the same event.

The discoveries have received international attention, with archaeologists and paleontologists from Sweden and Great Britain visiting the site. Many of the remains

have been excavated and are in storage or still being researched. The University

and the city of Waco have been working together to protect the site, as well as develop further research and educational opportunities.

We recommend some technical amendments to the bill that would make it consistent with the requirements for studying new areas to be added to the National

Park System that are specified in Section 303 of the National Park System Omnibus

Management Act of 1998 (P.L. 105–391). P.L. 105–391 requires studies of new areas

to consider whether the area under study possesses nationally significant natural

or cultural resources and represents one of the most important examples of a particular resource type in the country, and is a suitable and feasible addition to the

system.

To make the terms of this study consistent with those the National Park Service

uses to study other potential new areas of the National Park System, we recommend

referring to the study as a ‘‘special resource study,’’ and to specifically state that

the study should determine the ‘‘national significance, suitability and feasibility’’ of

adding the Waco Mammoth Site Area to the National Park System. Also, studies

of this type often involve consultation with many State and local groups and are

difficult to complete in the six-month time period specified in the bill. We suggest

that the report to Congress in subsection 1(c) be required within three fiscal years

after the funds are first made available, which reflects the standard timing for submitting studies of this type. The proposed technical amendments are attached to

this testimony.

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

questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have.

Proposed technical amendments to H.R. 1925, Waco Mammoth Site Study

On page 1, line 5, strike ‘‘6 months’’ and insert ‘‘three years’’.

On page 1, lines 7 and 8, strike ‘‘a study regarding the suitability and feasibility’’

and insert ‘‘a special resource study regarding the national significance, suitability,

and feasibility’’.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thank you, Mr. Soukup.

I think we will hear from Mr. Maurstad and Ms. Riedesel, and

then perhaps open up for questions, and then move to 1925 afterwards.

If that is okay, then, Mr. Maurstad, welcome and we are glad to

have you here.

STATEMENT OF DAVID MAURSTAD, FORMER LIEUTENANT

GOVERNOR, STATE OF NEBRASKA, LINCOLN, NEBRASKA

Mr. MAURSTAD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to request that the full extent of my written testimony be made a part

of the record.

Mr. RADANOVICH. There being no objection, so ordered.

Mr. MAURSTAD. I am very honored to appear before you today as

the former Lieutenant Governor of Nebraska, mayor of Beatrice,

and a Nebraska State senator.

I have lived in Beatrice nearly all my life and own a small, independent insurance agency located on main street.

While not a part of his administration anymore, I can assure you

that Governor Mike Johanns is in full support of H.R. 38, and I

am here today to express my strong support for H.R. 38.

Homestead National Monument has existed since 1936 to commemorate and interpret the profound influence of the Homestead

13

Act upon the Nation and the world, as well as its influence on you,

me, and millions of other individuals.

The idea of ‘‘free land’’ that culminated with President Abraham

Lincoln’s signature of the Homestead Act in 1862 had its roots in

the earliest days of our Republic. ‘‘As few as possible should be

without a little portion of land,’’ wrote Virginia planter Thomas Jefferson.

Interestingly, much of the land later opened to homesteading was

acquired by the United States through the Louisiana Purchase,

which was made at the direction of President Thomas Jefferson.

Both of these events represent the pioneer spirit that played such

a large role in the westward expansion of our great country.

Nearly every aspect of American life was somehow touched by

the passage of the Homestead Act. Immigration and migration patterns were greatly altered. The agricultural production of our Nation also skyrocketed thanks to the Homestead Act. In response to

the demand for newer, better, and stronger agricultural implements, many Eastern mills and factories were forced to modernize

their operations. It may be said that the Homestead Act was one

of the driving forces behind this Nation’s Industrial Revolution.

The Homestead Act also severely affected American Indian tribes

throughout the West. These few examples demonstrate the national and international scope and importance of homesteading history.

In 1936, it was decided to construct a national monument to commemorate the influence of the Homestead Act in honor of the accomplishments of all homesteaders. That same year, the Secretary

of the Interior was authorized to purchase the original homestead

claim of Daniel Freeman.

Freeman was among the first to claim a homestead on January

1, 1863. His 160-acre tract in Beatrice was seen as an ideal place

to demonstrate to the public the great changes brought about to

the land and to America by the Homestead Act.

Since 1936, the National Park Service has ably administered the

Homestead National Monument and shared the important and fascinating history of homesteading with hundreds of thousands of

visitors from all over the country and the world.

Today, however, the monument has reached an impasse. Increasing visitation has rendered the current visitor center too small to

accommodate everyone, including those with special needs. The exhibits inside the museum are not adequate. Cultural resources are

at risk due to being located within a 100-year floodplain.

Deficiencies also exist within the cultural landscape, where the

interpretive story is missing 36 years of artifacts out of a possible

74 due to a lack of space. An additional 11,000 items are stored in

a facility 45 miles away because of this lack of storage.

H.R. 38 represents the next important step in realizing the future plans of the monument as well as addressing its current shortfalls and challenges. Most important, H.R. 38 will allow the National Park Service to obligate funds already appropriated by Congress for this boundary expansion.

Last year I had the opportunity to meet Representative Ralph

Regula when he toured Homestead National Monument with our

own representative, Doug Bereuter. I very much enjoyed the time

14

I was able to spend with them as they walked through the museum

and wandered across the 100 acres of tallgrass prairie. Like all

visitors to the monument, they were able to get a real sense of the

truly epic scope of the Homestead Act. They were also able to witness firsthand the tremendous amount of local, State, and regional

support for Homestead National Monument.

In order to present this story as fairly and accurately as possible,

Homestead National Monument of America must be given the

means to modernize and improve its facilities. With the approval

of H.R. 38, this Congress can continue that process and take the

next step forward in providing information, education, and inspiration to the citizens of this Nation and the world.

Today I urge you to support passage of H.R. 38, not only for the

benefits of the present but also for the honoring of the past and the

promise of the future.

We really appreciate Congressman Bereuter’s continued and

strong support for Homestead National Monument of America, and

that will conclude my comments.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Maurstad follows:]

Statement of the Honorable of David I. Maurstad, Former Lieutenant

Governor of Nebraska

Members of the Committee:

I am very honored to appear before you today as a former Lieutenant Governor

of Nebraska. I resigned that position earlier this week to accept the appointment

by President Bush to serve our nation as the Director of Region VIII of the Federal

Emergency Management Agency. Previously I served as Mayor of Beatrice, Nebraska from 1991 to 1994 and as a Nebraska State Senator representing the Beatrice and Gage County area from 1995 to 1998.

I have lived in Beatrice nearly all my life and own a small, independent insurance

agency located on main street.

I am here today to express my strong support for H.R. 38, known as the ‘‘Homestead National Monument of America Additions Act.’’

Homestead National Monument of America has existed since 1936 to commemorate and interpret the profound influence of the Homestead Act upon the nation and

the world, as well as its influence on you, me, and millions of other individuals in

our nation and across the globe.

The ‘‘free land idea’’ that culminated with President Abraham Lincoln’s signature

of the Homestead Act in 1862 had its roots in the earliest days of our republic. A

piece of land to call one’s own was a goal of nearly every American even prior to

the revolution against England. Many who took up arms in rebellion were rewarded

for their service with land grants from the new government. Veterans of the War

of 1812 and other military actions also received land bounties as rewards for their

service to America. However, some of our country’s most famous dignitaries supported the idea of giving land not just to veterans, but to everyone who met certain

criteria. ‘‘As few as possible should be without a little portion of land,’’ wrote Virginia planter Thomas Jefferson. ‘‘The earth is given as a common stock for man to

labor and live on. The small landholders are the most precious part of the state.’’

Interestingly, much of the land later opened to homesteading was acquired by the

United States through the Louisiana Purchase, which was made at the direction of

President Thomas Jefferson. The upcoming bicentennial of the Lewis and Clark expedition presents a wonderful opportunity to link the histories of the Louisiana Purchase and the Homestead Act. Both of these events represent the pioneer spirit that

played such a large role in the westward expansion of our great country.

The debate over free land for settlers continued through the sectional disputes of

the 19 th century. The first homestead bill to pass both houses of Congress was vetoed by President James Buchanan in 1860. During his presidential campaign of the

same year, Abraham Lincoln announced his support for the homestead bill and stated that he would sign it if elected to the presidency. He made good on this promise

by affixing his signature to the Homestead Act on May 20, 1862.

The Act, which became effective on January 1, 1863, permitted qualified individuals to file for claims of up to 160 acres of the public domain. Filing fees totaling

15

18 dollars were the only financial payments required to make a homestead claim.

Settlers had to remain on their claims for a five-year residency period; cultivate a

certain percentage of the land; construct a home on the property; and make other

general improvements to the land. When the five-year period had passed and all filing and paperwork procedures had been completed, the homesteader was granted

the title, or patent, to that piece of property. It was now that person’s private property, free and clear.

The Homestead Act represents the largest giveaway of land to private individuals

ever undertaken by the U.S. government. Many later amendments and separate

land laws changed some aspects of the Homestead Act. For example, the Kinkaid

Act of 1904 permitted homesteaders in the dry Sandhills of western Nebraska to

claim a full section of 640 acres rather than merely a quarter section of 160. In

1889, Congress’s annual Indian Appropriations Bill allowed for many millions of

acres of American Indian reservation lands to be opened to homesteading as well.

This set off the first of several famous Oklahoma Land Rushes. However, the overall

design and purpose of the Act remained the same: it provided people an opportunity

to become independent landowners and farmers.

Nearly every aspect of American life was somehow touched by the passage of the

Homestead Act. Immigration and migration patterns were greatly altered. Many

citizens of other nations now came to America specifically to claim homesteading

lands. Since the Homestead Act did not require a claimant to be an American citizen-only to declare an intention to become one-hundreds of thousands of immigrants from five of the seven continents entered this nation and proceeded west to

stake out their homesteads.

The agricultural production of our nation also skyrocketed thanks to the Homestead Act. So many thousands of new farmers began producing unprecedented

amounts of crops that by the early 20th century the United States was being called

the ‘‘breadbasket of the world.’’ In response to the demand for newer, better, and

stronger agricultural implements, many eastern mills and factories were forced to

modernize their operations. It may therefore be said that the Homestead Act was

one of the driving forces behind this nation’s Industrial Revolution.

As mentioned previously in the example of Oklahoma, the Homestead Act also severely affected American Indian tribes throughout the west. These few examples

demonstrate the national and international scope and importance of homesteading

history.

The Homestead Act remained valid and legal in the 48 contiguous United States

until 1976. It remained so in Alaska until 1986. This span of time from the Act’s effective date of January 1, 1863 until its final repeal in 1986 represents 123 years

of American history. During this almost unfathomable number of years, some two

million individuals filed homestead claims in 30 different states. Under the provisions of the Homestead Act, the federal government gave to settlers approximately

285 million acres of land-about ten percent of all the land in the lower 48 states.

In 1936, while homesteading was still going on in many parts of the country, it

was decided to construct a national monument to commemorate the influence of the

Homestead Act and honor the accomplishments of all homesteaders. That same

year, the Secretary of the Interior was authorized to purchase the original homestead claim of Daniel Freeman from his descendants for the purpose of constructing

this Monument on the property.

Freeman was among the first to claim a homestead on January 1, 1863, the very

day the Act became effective. His 160-acre tract in Beatrice, Nebraska was seen as

an ideal place to demonstrate to the public the great changes brought about to the

land and to America by the Homestead Act.

Since 1936, the National Park Service has ably administered Homestead National

Monument of America and shared the important and fascinating history of homesteading with hundreds of thousands of visitors from all over the country and the

world.

Today, however, the Monument has reached an impasse. Increasing visitation has

rendered the current visitor center too small to accommodate everyone, including

those with special needs. The exhibits inside the museum are not adequate. They

are narrow in focus, promote stereotyping, and are not engaging to the young. Cultural resources such as the Palmer–Epard Cabin and the 6,000-item museum collection are at risk due to being located within a 100-year floodplain.

Deficiencies also exist within the cultural landscape, where the interpretive story

is missing 36 years of artifacts out of a possible 74 due to a lack of space for museum pieces. An additional 11,000 items are stored in a facility 45 miles away because of this lack of storage space. Government property is at risk due to improper

storage. Working conditions are cramped, and the Monument’s legislation has not

been realized.

16

The Act of Congress that created the Monument in 1936 specifically directed the

Secretary of the Interior to ‘‘retain for posterity a proper memorial emblematical of

the hardships and the pioneer life through which the early settlers passed the settlement and cultivation of the Great West’’ and to ‘‘erect suitable buildings to be

used as a museum in which shall be preserved literature applying to such settlement and agricultural implements used in bringing the western plains to its present

high state of civilization.’’ The most important types of such literature are the original case files of all two million homesteaders.

On a daily basis, visitors to Homestead National Monument of America ask to see

the homestead records of ancestors. These citizens of our nation are entitled to have

convenient access to these records. What better place to view copies of homestead

records than the one national park dedicated solely to the commemoration of the

Homestead Act?

Homestead records are among the most useful, informative, and fascinating primary sources available to researchers and genealogists. They may contain information about where a homesteader constructed fences; what types of animals were

kept on the property; where wells were dug, and what crops were planted. They

may also include the names and birth dates of any children born on the land; information about military service for homesteaders who were veterans; naturalization

papers for those who immigrated to the United States; and other information not

readily available anywhere else.

For example, the homestead case file of Charles Ingalls-father of author Laura

Ingalls Wilder and among the most celebrated of all homesteaders-states that his

family left their property for two consecutive winters so that his children could attend school. For obvious reasons, these records are much sought after by historians,

researchers, and genealogists, as well as the millions of living descendants of homesteaders.

H.R. 38 represents the first important step in realizing the future plans of the

Monument as well as addressing its current shortfalls and challenges. Specifically,

H.R. 38 will allow the National Park Service to do the following:

1. Purchase the approximately 16-acre private property owned by the Graff family. This land is in a perfect location to house the new Homestead Heritage

Center approved in the Monument’s 1999 General Management Plan. It provides a wide, complete view of the Monument’s restored tallgrass prairie. It is

also outside the 100-year floodplain, so artifacts and the historic 134-year old

Palmer–Epard cabin would be much safer from flooding.

2. Acquire 1.4 acres of Nebraska State Highway 4. This will aid in the protection

of the park’s natural and cultural resources as well as provide education by facilitating the establishment of a parkway-style setting complete with roadside

exhibits. It will also provide continuity between the segments of the road presently found within the Monument.

3. Purchase the 3-acre Pioneer Acres Green. This is privately owned land located

next to a housing unit directly adjacent to the Monument’s boundary. Acquisition of this land will prevent future development and intrusion on the scenic

landscape.

4. Acquire the 8.3-acre area known as the ‘‘State Triangle.’’ This land also lies adjacent to the Monument. By purchasing it, the National Park Service will be

able to maximize interpretive efforts and maintain the integrity of the Monument’s restored tallgrass prairie.

With this boundary expansion, H.R 38 presents the National Park Service with

the opportunity to be a good neighbor in that the government will only secure land

from willing sellers. From what I understand, all landowners involved in this plan

have indicated a willingness to negotiate with the National Park Service. We are

very fortunate that this federal park site has such neighbors who are interested in

aiding the nation in telling and understanding the incredible story of homesteading.

H.R. 38 will also allow the National Park Service to obligate funds already appropriated by Congress for this boundary expansion.

Interest in and support of Homestead National Monument of America and H.R.

38 has received a great deal of attention through our regional media outlets. Many

different governmental organizations and citizen groups are demonstrating their

commitment to the Monument in a number of ways.

The Nebraska Education Task Force has provided resources to develop plans for

educational opportunities centered around the implementation of the Monument’s

General Management Plan.

17

The Southeast Nebraska Distance Learning Consortium is presently working to install $200,000 worth of distance learning technology that will allow the Monument

to reach students in both rural and urban environments.

Numerous organizations have expressed an interest in partnering with the Monument to acquire copies of homesteader case files.

The Nebraska Department of Roads is engaged in planning activities that will remove from the Monument a state highway traveled by heavy trucks. The Department of Roads also recently named a 40-mile stretch of road between Beatrice and

the state capital of Lincoln the ‘‘Homestead Expressway.’’ As you can tell from these examples, Nebraskans and Americans of all walks of

life hold Homestead National Monument of America in very high esteem.

Last year I had the opportunity to meet Representative Ralph Regula when he

toured Homestead National Monument of America with our own representative,

Doug Bereuter. I very much enjoyed the time I was able to spend with them as they

walked through the museum and wandered across the 100 acres of tallgrass prairie.

They rediscovered the lessons taught in a one-room school and felt the quiet but

massive power of a 22,000-pound steam powered tractor.

Like all visitors to the Monument, they were able to get a real sense of the truly

epic scope of the Homestead Act just by visiting the place. They were also able to

witness first hand the tremendous amount of local, state, and regional support for

Homestead National Monument of America. This story must be preserved so that

it can be presented to our next generation, and the next, and the next.

In order to present this story as fairly and accurately as possible, Homestead National Monument of America MUST be given the means to modernize and improve

its facilities. With the approval of H.R. 38, this Congress can begin that process and

take the first step forward in providing information, education, and inspiration to

the citizens of this nation and the world.

Today I urge you to support the passage of H.R. 38, not only for the convenience

of the present, but also for the honoring of the past and the promise of the future.

Thank you.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thank you, Mr. Maurstad.

Ms. Riedesel?

STATEMENT OF LAUREEN RIEDESEL, PRESIDENT, FRIENDS

OF HOMESTEAD NATIONAL MONUMENT

Ms. RIEDESEL. Thank you. As a citizen, I think I am in charge

of show-and-tell. I am also here in support of this. My name is

Laureen Riedesel, as you said, and I am the president of Friends

of Homestead. I am also lucky enough to be the descendant of

homesteaders. I have four homesteaders on every line of my family.

Unlike Dave, I have not lived in Beatrice my whole life. I chose to

move there, and the edge was Homestead National Monument of

America. It is a very exciting portion of history.

To show you an example of local support, I am going to just do

that: show it to you. This poster was paid for completely by private

funds, and over 500 of them were produced. And if you visit any

of the Nebraska Representatives, they should have one framed here

in Washington and also in their offices back in Nebraska, I believe,

as well. And this one is yours. I apologize. I thought it was too dangerous to bring it in a tube on a plane, so it got folded to fit into

my suitcase. But it is here for you.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thank you very much.

Ms. RIEDESEL. I also wanted to show you something else that

happened. We found the last homesteader this year, which was

very exciting. It is not often that our local newspaper—Beatrice is

a town of 12,000. In Nebraska, that is the 14th largest town but,

still, there are only 12,000 of us. We paid to send a reporter and

also to have someone from the Park Service visit the last homesteader, and this is a special edition of all those news articles, and

18

I brought a copy for every member of the Committee. So I wanted

you to be able to see for yourselves.

I also tested airport security to show you what an artifact can

involve. You hear about Nebraska as the cornhuskers. This is the

kind of tool that makes you a real cornhusker. This was used as

a peg to shuck corn. It doesn’t belong to the Park Service yet, but

the local individual whose husband spent his life collecting these

is donating artifacts, the whole set, to the Park Service. I started

out with seven different examples to show you how this evolved as

farmers tried different tools. I was afraid it would look like some

kind of uprising, so I brought only the one that I thought was the

most interesting along for you.

We look for supporters everywhere, and as a result, I am happy

to tell you that you and all the members of the Committee are now

members of the Tallgrass Prairie Club as volunteers. This entitles

you to come and visit, and when you are here, we will put you to

work. But never fear, we are counting on you working for us here

in Washington as well. So although we would love to have you

come and visit, we know you can do some good work here.

I also wanted to make sure that you, like me, we can advertise

Homestead National Monument wherever we go. So I did bring you

three different forms of pins, and, again, there should be one here

for every Committee member so that we are not far from your

thoughts.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thank you.

Ms. RIEDESEL. You are welcome. That is my gift. Now, of course,

for what I want.

When I was hearing them talk about the people and supporters,

there is something I think you should know about the Graff family.

When Daniel Freeman went off to Brownville to file that first

claim—and he did that classic thing of even getting them to open

the land office at 1 minute after midnight so that he could be number one, and locally he got people to call him ‘‘Old Number One.’’

He was promoting Homestead National Monument of America before it ever existed.

The people who took care of his cattle and who made sure that

he could leave were the Graff family. In other words, if it weren’t

for the Graff family, he wouldn’t be able to do that. These folks are

very committed to this project. They have served as officers within

the Friends of Homestead organization, and this is a voluntary

sale. And I just wanted to assure you of that, that they sat in on

as many meetings as they thought were appropriate. And we even

had a situation of men sending their wives to public meetings because they didn’t want anything to appear to be improper. So we

have been working with the neighbors, and this is something that

they truly do support.

When I came here, I flew into Baltimore this time, and so I had

a little jaunt over here, 31 miles, or whatever it is. And I was in

a car with three other ladies, or in a shuttle bus, and everyone was

telling why they were coming and what kind of trips they had had.

It turned out to be two nuns and an organizational development

consultant. They are all over at Washington University today

studying.

19

When they heard why I was coming, I immediately had a nun

from St. Louis tell me a homesteading from Kansas story from her

family. This happens to me continually. People from coast to coast

have homesteading connections. This is one of those stories that

underlines so much of our history that we can’t even see it anymore. There are so many homesteaders, so many people living on

homesteaded land. It is such a draw. Even people who never lived

on a farm have that connection from people who dreamed about

free land. And they may never have even made it out of New York

City or Baltimore or the other port cities. But they were so excited,

they went for it.

I know I am supposed to stop, but I will just say one more thing.

Mr. RADANOVICH. That is fine.

Ms. RIEDESEL. It is those homesteaders that overran Castle Garden and created Ellis Island. If it weren’t for this free land promise, many, many people never would have left Europe.

Thank you for your time. As I mentioned, obviously I am support

of this, and I am counting on all the things I didn’t get to say,

which was a 20-minute speech, going into the official record. Thank

you very much.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Riedesel follows:]

Statement of Laureen Riedesel, President, Friends of Homestead National

Monument of America, Inc.

My name is Laureen Riedesel. I am President of the Friends of Homestead National Monument of America here to testify in support of H.R 38. I am honored to

be speaking to all of you, but I feel most honored to be speaking on behalf of the

two million homesteaders, their families and descendants. These people claimed

land in thirty states and, in the process, helped to make this country the great land

that it is today. Today, those thirty states produce a gross product of $4.63 trillion,

54.2% of the Gross Domestic Product, according to the latest statistics available

from 1998. The earliest homesteaders came West from states that were the original

thirteen colonies, such as Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, New Jersey

and Virginia, and other states located east of the Mississippi, such as Tennessee,

so the Homestead story begins with a truly national emphasis. However, the great

impact of the Homestead Act was international in scope. With the notable exception

of the Chinese and other Far Eastern people, individuals from other countries could

come to America and file for government land, based upon their intention to become

citizens. And they did both. Despite the restrictions, people with ancestry from five

continents came to the United States and homesteaded. Millions of people came to

America because of the promise of ‘‘free land.’’ Many of them never left New York

City or the other ports where they arrived, but that dream of a place of their own

had drawn them like a magnet across the ocean. Others traveled to Chicago or St.

Louis or other larger cities in the United States before they, too, settled down in

businesses they knew from home, but it was that homestead idea that gave them

the courage to move. Many made it to smaller communities and settled there rather

than braving the adventures of turning the sod, being the first to claim individual

ownership of 160 acres of land, and walking ten miles to plow just one acre! Still

others saw the homestead land that was available and decided to work and save

to buy someplace else, like Texas! None of these people were homesteaders under

the definition of the 1862 Homestead Act passed by Congress, but the homesteading

promise brought them to this country where they and their children became part

of the reality of the great ‘‘American Dream.’’

What about the two million who actually filed? They are the people we honor at

Homestead National Monument, the ones who followed their hearts to new places

and committed all they had and more to make undeveloped federal land into their

homes. Many of them succeeded and passed along that land, so that it is still in

their families to this very day. Others used one homestead to finance the next and

moved from heartland states like Iowa and Nebraska to coastal states like Oregon

and Washington, all because of the Homestead Act. Some failed for reasons as varied as their abilities as farmers, the marginal nature of the land, the climate, the

economy and combinations of all these factors and more. However, these first-genVerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:01 Jun 27, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 J:\DOCS\75529.SF HRESOUR2 PsN: HRESOUR2
20

eration homesteaders’ failures became the foundation for the next landowners’ successes. Congressman Bereuter’s family purchased land that had originally been an

unsuccessful homestead claim; he represents that large group of hardy settlers who

were able to understand the land and transform it into successful farm operations.

These pioneers sometimes characterized themselves as the true homesteaders because they made the dream a reality; they created the American Bread Basket that

today feeds the world.

Homestead National Monument of America is unusual. It is not beautiful like the

Grand Tetons, although there is certainly beauty in acres of native tall-grass prairie. It is not a patriotic symbol like the Statue of Liberty, although an 1867 handhewn log cabin is certainly an American icon. Nor is it considered hallowed ground

such as Gettysburg, although there is something sacred about growing the food that

sustains life. However, it is significant at both the national and international levels.

This former farm in Nebraska represents the millions of farms and millions of

dreams of Americans who took up the U.S. Congress’ offer of ‘‘free land.’’ It represents a second chance for many citizens who moved into new territories, and it

represents a new life for many immigrants who had come to find a home. The possibilities seemed as unlimited as the prairie horizon and the hope seemed as great

as the stars in the sky. And all of that promise did lead to stars - on the flag. When

the Homestead Act was passed in 1862, there were 35 states. When in ended in

1986, there were, of course, 50.

Homestead National Monument of America is located on one claim that was selected to represent many. Appropriately, it was one of the many ‘‘first’’ claims filed

on January 1, 1863, and it is THE FIRST of those that were ‘‘proved-up’’ five years

later to become the personal property of Daniel Freeman. Because it is just one of

the literally millions of claims, the responsibility of educational interpretation is

enormous. The Monument was founded in 1936 during the Great Depression, the

time of the greatest challenge to American agriculture since the passage of the

Homestead Act. At a time when virtually no one was thinking about the value of

native prairie, a decision was made to attempt to restore a tall-grass prairie at the

newly-established Homestead National Monument of America. Of all the choices

that could have been made, this is probably the one that has the most to offer today’s visitor. In a rural state like Nebraska, it is possible to see farming everywhere,

the modern-day version of the original farms created by the homesteaders. It is not

that easy to find acres of native prairie, particularly the tall-grass variety, and yet

that is what the early homesteaders saw and transformed into farms. The result of

taking the Homestead National Monument land back to its origins is the second oldest restored tall-grass prairie in this country, now a landmark in itself. However,

this is only one of the landforms that greeted (or intimidated) homesteaders. The

Monument cannot use just its own landscape to tell the full story of homesteading

and the variety of land that was made available for claims. It is only if the Homestead National Monument is able to utilize a full range of technological options that

the true scope of the Homestead Story can be understood.

As part of a National Park improvement program in the late sixties, a Visitor

Center was constructed at Homestead National Monument of America. It emphasized the basic legislative history of the Homestead Act as well as information about

the Beatrice, Nebraska location. These exhibits have served the Park Service well

because they are still in place over thirty years later. Unfortunately, the Visitor

Center did not meet the original mission established for Homestead National Monument of America when it was founded in 1936, and it certainly does not meet it

today.

There are a number of key elements missing from both the interpretation and the

services offered. I will begin with the interpretation. First, there is no exhibit about

the displacement of native people. One of the ironies related to the Homestead Act

is that, in the process of making homesteads available to some, others were relocated from their traditional homes. Second, there is no significant mention of the

immigrants who did so much to make the Homestead Act as popular as it was; the

people who left virtually everything behind to pursue that promise off ‘‘free land.’’

These new arrivals actually overwhelmed the immigrant facilities at New York’s

Castle Garden and created the need for Ellis Island. Although many of the immigrants did not homestead, the promise of owning their own land pulled them across

the Atlantic from the places where they were born. While the Homestead Act is not

remembered in many families any more that the names of the ships that brought

them, the ‘‘free land’’ possibility became part of the larger promise of freedom that

was as compelling to their nineteenth century ancestors as it had been to the

Mayflower pilgrims in 1620! For many African–Americans, the Homestead Act provided their first chance to file for land of their own after years of living as slaves

21

in this country. It was also an opportunity for women to claim land in their own

right at a time when they were still decades from the right to vote.

Another missing element in the exhibits at Homestead National Monument of

America is the power of the Homestead Act as a catalyst for the continuation of the

Industrial Revolution through agriculture. In order to realize the potential of the

acres and acres of land in America, new equipment and supplies had to be developed - from sod cutters to barbed wire. Nebraska’s Representative Tom Osborne will

be happy to know that his homesteading relatives could have been true Cornhuskers

with newly-patented husking pegs developed for the farms of the Great Plains. This

was the time of transition from farming by hand to farming with machines, with

the government’s offer of ‘‘free land’’ as a driving force behind this national phenomenon. The Homestead Act began in Nebraska and ended in Alaska. This represents many different climates, crops, and machines. As the sole symbol of this

huge story, Homestead National Monument of America is not currently equipped to

tell it effectively.

A service that is lacking at Homestead National Monument relates to its mission

of persevering historic equipment in order to trace the development of American agriculture. Recently, a local group of steam engine enthusiasts raised money to purchase a 1912 Case steam-powered tractor. They consider it a real bargain at

$10,000! This magnificent machine has been characterized as a ‘‘locomotive off the

rails’’ by Mark Engler, Homestead National Monument’s Superintendent. He is absolutely correct. This incredible piece of history is always a big attraction when it

is brought to the Monument for special occasions. Its whistle cannot be ignored! The

steam engine organization would like to have this housed permanently at Homestead National Monument, and the staff agrees that it is a perfect fit in telling an

important part of Homestead story. However, no appropriate facility exists for exhibit or storage. This is one of the many needs that could be addressed in a new

facility.

Although I have mentioned the end in 1986, most homesteading activity took

place between 1863 and 1937. That was a long time ago, and it requires more imagination than the average person has to envision the reality of that period. This becomes more challenging as the audience becomes more urban, since this is an account of early rural life. On the subject of audience, the most important group to

impress with the value of history is the young. They are also the most challenging

group to convince. While the restored prairie provides a unique experience, it is located beside a State Highway and across the road from a modern housing development. In order to better understand the homsteaders’ reality, the best of modern

technology is needed to invoke the experiences that are the very foundations of a

work ethic that characterizes Americans to this very day. The homesteaders’ tenacious hold on their dreams is one of the most valuable lessons we can pass on to

our children, particularly at this challenging time in our history.

From the beginning, Homestead National Monument of America was given the responsibility of creating a comprehensive library related to the Homestead Act and

homesteading. (This is the one missing service I mentioned earlier.) The reality of

this goal has never been fulfilled because the full scope of this mission could never

be realized until now. In addition to all the books and other published information

about homesteading that could and should be at Homestead National Monument

(and isn’t!), I am referring to the files of the two million homesteading claims, including an estimated thirty million records. The second-most asked question at

Homestead National Monument of America is ‘‘Can I find out about a homesteader

in my family? I am not sure exactly where he homesteaded, but I do know his

name.’’ This is a perfectly reasonable request based on the perfectly reasonable expectation that the one national monument dedicated to telling the story of the

Homestead Act would have access to these records. In the past, it has never been

possible to provide this information because there is only one copy of each record

located, appropriately enough, in the National Archives. There is no index available

by personal name or common geographic area. These are land records, and it requires section and range information to access them. Now it is possible to copy these

records and use automation technology to create files by both name and geographic

headings. Just as immigration records are vital to Ellis Island, the homestead

records are vital to Homestead National Monument of America. However, the difference is that records are available at Ellis Island; they are not available at Homestead National Monument. The people of this country, many of them descendants

of these homesteaders, have the right to expect to find this valuable public information available to them at and through Homestead National Monument of America.

This year, the current Homestead web site has received over 7,000 hits per month.

Just imagine its potential for providing information from homestead records to peoVerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:01 Jun 27, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 J:\DOCS\75529.SF HRESOUR2 PsN: HRESOUR2
22

ple worldwide and how much it would be used if these records were available from

this source.

Homestead National Monument recognizes this responsibility and has received

funding to develop the plans for copying and indexing the homestead files. As part

of the planning process, I was fortunate enough to be allowed to travel with Park

Service employees to visit the Bureau of Land Management and Archives I and II.

As a professional librarian, the closed storage areas of the National Archives are

one of the most exciting places I ever expect to be! I had the opportunity to look

at the early homestead records from the Brownville, Nebraska Land Office where

our area’s earliest claims were filed. The only thing that could have made me

happier would have been seeing the records of my own relatives. I have homesteaders on four sides of my family. Two of my relatives homesteaded at least twice.

All of them proved-up on at least one claim. Unfortunately, I do not know the location of many of these claims, so I cannot access those records. If this seems whimsical or like an exercise in historical trivia, I would point out that many homesteaders moved from one side of this country to the other. They left family members

along the way, people who lost track of each other. In a day and time of tissue

matches and donor organs, I believe that these records may actually help relatives

find each other and even save lives!

All of this requires a different type of facility than the one that currently exists

at Homestead National Monument of America. It also needs to be located in a different place. One of the most basic concepts in the Homestead Act was the division

of land into 160-acre claims. Today, that amount of land is virtually meaningless

to people accustomed to lots and blocks. The new plan for Homestead National

Monument would allow the visitor to see what 160 acres means, something that is

difficult to visualize while standing on the land rather than viewing it as a whole

from a nearby location. The acquisition of land (the Graff plot) overlooking the

Monument would fulfill this need in a way that no other available land can.

The ‘‘free land’’ promise defines America. I visited England this past June and

had the chance to visit the birthplace of my great-great grandfather in Cornwall.

While waiting for the bus to his little village, I was asked why I was visiting this

remote place. When I explained about my family, the first question they asked was

‘‘Did he get any land?’’ When I told them about his 60-acre farm in Wisconsin, they

were disappointed. ‘‘What about that 160 acres he could get from the government?’’ They didn’t refer to the Homestead Act, but that’s what they meant. I explained

that his son had married a homesteader’s daughter, so that the 160 acres came into

the family that way. They just beamed, ‘‘He got land,’’ they said, ‘‘he got land.’’ I also visited one of the oldest tourist sites in England - Canterbury. I met an

eighty-year old miner who wanted to know something about where I lived in America. I just mentioned the words ‘‘First Homestead’’ when he interrupted me to tell

me his version of the Sooners in Oklahoma. He certainly understood about the eagerness to get that government land. And, of course, the Sooners are some of the

most famous of the homesteaders! I didn’t even try to explain the differences between Nebraska and Oklahoma. As he had already told me, ‘‘You don’t have a country - you have a continent.’’ He was correct in this and in his understanding that

it was the government’s free land offer the encouraged settlement ‘‘from sea to shining sea.’’

We haven’t been able to transform all of that interest in the ‘‘free land’’ into visitors to Homestead National Monument of America, but we would certainly appreciate your help in our effort to do so in the future. Homestead National Monument

has over 40,000 visitors a year. This is a mere trickle compared to the true potential

of this site. Like the country as a whole, tourism is the number three contributor

to the economy in Nebraska. We are working to make this a stronger number three.

Homestead National Monument is located 50 minutes from Interstate 80, the busiest cross-country roadway in the United States. The present Visitor Center was an

improvement when it was built in the 1960s. (The first center I visited as a child

is now used as a the maintenance building.) And the Visitor Center should have a

continued use as an Education Center, linking our corner of the world to many other

corners of the world via telecommunication. We even have a planning grant from

a local, educational non-profit organization to help implement this. But the present

Visitor Center is not the facility that is needed to tell the Homestead story. We

want to place a wonderful new facility on the gentle rise just beyond the graves of

the Freemans, our first homesteaders, so that our visitors can look over this beautiful 160-acre spread with its restored tall-grass prairie, winding tree-lined creek,

and historic Osage Orange hedge planted to mark the property line before barbed

wire was even invented.

Today, we find ourselves valuing our country anew. We are thinking about those

characteristics that are special about the United States and the experiences that are

23

uniquely American. One of the most important of these is homesteading. It is a true

story of this country that has become mythic in the slogan ‘‘free land.’’ The Homestead Act is legislation that made the American dream a reality for thousands of

people. It gave five generations of Americans economic opportunities unavailable

anywhere else in the entire world. It began with Daniel Freeman, a Civil War Veteran and ended with Ken Deardorff, a Vietnam Veteran. It taught us that people

from many different places with many different experiences could come together and

create something bigger and better than any of them had ever imagined. It encouraged us to believe in ourselves and cooperate with our neighbors. After all, nobody

raises a barn alone! The fact is that the 1862 Homestead Act had a big hand in

making us what we are today as Americans. We need to remember this story and

comprehend its meaning in order to face our future!

We are just beginning to really understand this story. It was not until the 1990s

that a political publication identified the Homestead Act as Number Three on a Top

Ten list of the most important legislative acts in America. All of you have a better

idea than I do about how many acts have been passed by Congress. I just know that

it is very significant to have made it to the Top Ten of that large number! There

is still much that we are just learning, and we do want to thank you for making

it possible to have a historian to help with this quest. We do know that Willa Cather

wouldn’t have written the books she did without the Homestead Act. For that matter, neither would Laura Ingalls Wilder. Who would want to miss out on Little

House on the Prairie? Yes - you guessed it - a homestead story! George Washington

Carver was a homesteader, and you thought he was just famous for all those clever

uses of peanuts! Perhaps Lawrence Welk would have made Champagne Music without the Homestead Act, but fortunately we don’t have to find out of that is true!

Lawrence Welk’s parents homesteaded in North Dakota, where they played music

during those long, cold nights on their homestead. The rest is history!

Without the Homestead Act, we know the world would be a very different place.

We would literally not be the people we are if our ancestors from different states

and countries had not met in America. Many problems of the Old World (increased

population, crop failures, political unrest) would have had different outcomes without the solution offered by emigration to the New World. And Thomas Jefferson’s

prediction that it would take a ‘‘full forty generations just to explore the full United

States’’ might have been more accurate without the incentive for settlement offered

by the Homestead Act.

There are two million stories to tell, accounts from states as varied as Florida and

Minnesota, from climates that range from subtropical to arctic, and from desert to

tundra. Nebraska is a wonderful state full of amazing contrasts, but this is too

much for even it to handle! In fact, no one place can tell the story of the others

without help, and that is what we are asking of you. We want you and every other

visitor to enter a building where the variety of climates, structures and daily life

of the homesteaders can be experienced vicariously through both authentic artifacts

and technological re-creations. We want you to be able to research your homesteading relations by simply entering their names in a computer, or by entering that

places name where you know some relative once lived. And if you don’t have any

homesteading connections, then we really want you to visit and to learn how important it is!

There was never any ‘‘free land.’’ People paid all along the way. This is a story

of sweat equity, of deep despair and wild success, of dashed hopes and dreams come

true! It is the story of America. It is a story that makes us understand where we

came from, who we are and, if we are really paying attention, it may just help us

figure out where we are going!

[Attachments to Ms. Riedesel’s statement follow:]

24

25

26

27

Mr. RADANOVICH. Thank you very much. I appreciate your enthusiasm for the monument.

I think if it is okay, I am going to start off with a couple of questions, and I wanted to ask Dr. Soukup, tell me about the Homestead Heritage Highway, Doctor. Is that part of the National Park

Service’s plan for this monument? And I guess I am thinking of— I am near Yosemite, born and raised near Yosemite National Park,

and there is a Park Service program that allows the park to spend

time and money outside the park to dedicate highways. I am wondering if it is similar to the one that is expressed here, and how

important is Heritage Highway to the monument itself?

Mr. SOUKUP. As I understand it, the original part of the Heritage

Highway will be that part that is ceded by the State of Nebraska,

that part that is within the monument boundary. That road is

going to serve as an access road, but also be used as an interpretive opportunity with waysides and pullouts and perhaps a radio

station kind of access for the visitor to understand what they see.

It is hoped that the additional section of road in the direction of

Beatrice will become the rest of that Heritage Highway, but this

bill doesn’t speak to that, and our testimony really concerns only

that part of the road that is within the boundary or within that

area of the park.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Right, okay. Mr. Maurstad, I want to congratulate you on your recent appointment as director of region—what

would it be?—8 of FEMA.

Mr. MAURSTAD. Yes, sir.

Mr. RADANOVICH. I want to congratulate you on that, and I appreciate the job that you are doing in this time of terror in the

United States. I appreciate the work that you are doing there and

wish you good luck.

Ms. Riedesel, tell me how you think that the additional land that

would be added to the monument would help you meet some of the

shortcomings or problems that you would see facing it, if I can get

an idea of how you would view this addition of property to help out

some of the problems you are facing there.

Ms. RIEDESEL. I will just deal with three of them and set the

Graff property aside. Three of them just basically make official

things that look to the passerby like they belong to the monument.

So that is just almost land housekeeping, if there is such a concept.

And, again, they often relate to the highway and the change in the

highway from the past and then, again, what we are hoping to do

in the future in terms of better integrating that highway into a

linkage between the sites rather than having it be such a barrier

and a division and distraction.

The fourth part of the property, the Graff property that overlooks

the land, I think is very important both to offer an overview—part

of the story is the 160 acres, and it will allow a person to look over

the native prairie and actually see that land, see how it is laid out.

It also would allow a modern, state-of-the-art, if you will, type of

museum, not just a visitors center but actually an opportunity to

exhibit artifacts and to make the interpretation of this more appropriate to the 21st century. We have done very well with the exhibits we have had, but they are now about 40 years old and that does

show.

28

More importantly yet, it gives us an opportunity in terms of the

records. Like Ellis Island, the records for homesteading are pretty

crucial. And as we have seen with the recent World Trade Center,

it is pretty important to have records more than one place, and to

be able to access those records at the very site that is dedicated to

homesteading and the Homestead Act seems both natural to the

people who come there to visit, and this facility would allow it to

be done in a way that would be a modern library research type setting.

Then, of course, there is the whole issue of people who are used

to Disneyland-style experiences. Not being able to imagine—just

taking them on the prairie does not help them. And taking them

on the prairie doesn’t help them understand the tundra or the

Alaska or Arizona adventures in homesteading.

So we are looking for a facility that will actually use technology

to provide that vicarious experience.

Mr. RADANOVICH. I see. Okay. Thank you very much.

Doug, did you have any questions?

Mr. BEREUTER. No. Thank you.

Mr. RADANOVICH. Well, I want to thank you for being here, and

I think with that we are going to move on to H.R. 1925, and, Mr.

Smith, welcome, and please take your time to comment on the

project.

STATEMENT OF CALVIN B. SMITH, CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT

OF MUSEUM STUDIES, AND DIRECTOR, MAYBORN MUSEUM

COMPLEX, BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, WACO, TEXAS

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. It is a privilege to be here. I

would like to mention that I had three colleagues lined up to assist

in the testimony, all of which are now at the Society of Vertebrate

Paleontology Annual Meeting, so they couldn’t be here this week.

Four things I think make the Waco Mammoth Site unique. First

of all, it is the largest concentration of a single herd dying from the

same event known to science in the world. That is considering, certainly, those sites like South Dakota, Hot Springs, South Dakota,

and those sites in Eurasia where there are many more animals, but

it happened over thousands of years. So this was a single event

that occurred between the Bosque and the Brazos rivers some

28,000 years ago.

Secondly, there were actually two—Congressman Edwards mentioned the 45-year-old female that was trying to extricate the juvenile. There was also—and the only time that this has been recorded, the only bull in the herd was trying to extricate a 13-yearold animal and went down in what we call the sudden death syndrome position, and that has been cast in situ, making it the largest field cast ever made. And it is now an exhibit called ‘‘Elephants’’ that is touring the country.

Then, thirdly, these two protective behavioral examples are the

first in prehistoric proboscidean behavior that have been recorded.

So this becomes unique to this particular site, and certainly from

the standpoint of comparison between this site and modern

proboscidean behavior, it becomes an example of study.

The fourth thing which makes it important globally is that potentially this is the most significant contribution the Mammoth

29

Site can offer in the areas of research and interpretation, is the evidence that the herd was under severe environmental stress. Now,

this occurs at the end of one of the major glacial periods at the late

Pleistocene. So perhaps this study will lead to further investigations that might reveal extreme droughts at the end of each glacial

period, which is a brand-new thought, brand-new concept. I have

been requested by researchers from both Great Britain and Sweden

to come and visit this site.

The site was actually—the bone mass was—the land where the

bone mass is was donated by Mr. Sam Jack McGlasson to the city

of Waco in 1996, and then in the past 2 years, with the help of Mr.

and Mrs. Buddy Bostick and Don and Pam Moes of Waco, we have

been able to acquire the 100 acres adjacent to this particular site.

So it solidifies our need for a buffer to make sure that there is no

further development in that immediate area.

But now that the land has been acquired and the site is secure

with a fence, the number one objective from our point is to protect

the existing skeletal material remaining in situ. The only way to

do this without removing and then destroying much evidence is literally to build a structure over the site. The pavilion, by necessity,

would need to encompass the original discoveries, current specimens, and future potential excavations, which we know that there

is one more animal, the 24th animal, about 70 feet away. The facility would need to be about 140 by 140, approximately 20,000

square feet. It would need an ADA-accessible ramp allowing the experience of seeing how the site was discovered and an overview of

the entire investigations leading to the interpretive and administrative support areas.

The key in this venture is to identify who is taking the lead during the development process and at what point the land transfers— and I mean literally from Baylor to who, the city, the Nation,

whomever—might be made to maximize their effectiveness in

matching grants and funding to establish the resulting parameters

for the maintenance and operations of the site.

Dr. Gary Haynes made this comment the last time he was on the

site, and he said this is ‘‘the most important paleontological site of

its kind in the world today.’’ Very rarely does a university, a city,

a State, or even a nation have something of this magnitude and

significance to make it truly one of the world’s largest or one of the

most important anything.

Recognizing existing priorities, strained budgets, and uncertain

income of national, State, municipal, and academic organizations,

this project necessitates an innovative approach to successfully

reaching its full potential. In other words, I am thinking that we

all need to get together and make this happen.

To save not only the integrity of this globally unique site but also

the significance of what it can provide the immediate area, which

we just received an economic analysis stating that this would assist

the city of Waco and the immediate area some $8 to $10 million

per year if it were made—if we were able to develop this. It can

provide entertainment, tourism, education, and continued contributions to the scientific community, and that should be a major consideration in the decisionmaking process of all the entities that

would derive benefit from the investments made.

30

The enactment to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the Waco Mammoth Site as a unit of the National Park System would honor the city of Waco, Baylor University, and the

Mayborn Museum Complex, our patrons, the foundations who have

supported us, and would enable all interested partners to work toward an educational and recreational facility second to none in the

field of proboscidean research and interpretation.

Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]

Statement of Calvin B. Smith, Chairman, Department of Museum Studies

and Director, Mayborn Museum Complex, Baylor University, Waco, Texas

The Waco Mammoth Site located between and just above the confluence of the

Bosque and Brazos Rivers within the city limits of the City of Waco, Texas represents the largest concentration of prehistoric proboscideans (elephants) dying from

the same event in the world.

In 1978 Paul Barron and Eddie Bufkin found a bone eroding out of the bank of

a small tributary of the Bosque River and brought it to the attention of David Lintz

of Baylor University’s Strecker Museum and thus the paleontological discovery was

brought to light.

Thusfar, twenty-three Mammuthus columbi (Columbian mammoths) have been

excavated by researchers from Baylor University since the site was discovered.

Caught in a sudden and probably severe deluge they were entrapped by a mudflow

some 28,000 years ago. Although the adults of the nursery herd had time to form

a defensive posture around the young they were covered quickly and completely by

the catastrophe that preserved their remains until the small tributary of the Bosque

was created within the past century.

One of the specimens, a 45 year old female was entombed as she tried to extricate

a juvenile from the mire and went down in an upright position with her tusks still

under its chest and belly.

The herd bull, a 55 year old male, with 8-foot tusks would have stood 13.5 feet

at the shoulder, weighted 5–6 tons, required up to 600 pounds of food and 35 gallons

of water a day also succumbed to the ravages of the event with his right tusk under

another juvenile in an attempt to save the youth by lifting it to safety. Both of these

specimens have now been cast in situ (as they were exposed) still in matrix (the

soil) that surrounds them resulting in the largest field cast ever made which is

being shown in a traveling exhibition called ‘‘Elephants’’ currently touring the

United States and to date it has been seen by over 1 M people.

These two protective behavioral examples are the first ever recorded in prehistoric

settings and was part of a presentation made to the 30th International Geological

Congress held in Beijing, China during the summer of 1996, by site Director, Calvin

Smith, making it well known globally in the scientific community.

Approximately five acres encompassing the existing discoveries was donated by

the late Mr. Sam Jack McGlasson to the City of Waco in 1996. Plans for the future

development include a pavilion to be placed over the site, with interpretive exhibits,

gift shop, offices, meeting room, curatorial lab and restroom facilities.

In 2000 purchase of an additional 55 acres was made by Baylor, which secured

access to the Bosque River with gifts from Mr. and Mrs. Buddy Bostick and Don

and Pam Moes of Waco.

This year with a major reduction of the initial cost by Mrs. McGlasson and additional funding received from Mr. and Mrs. Bostick Baylor purchased the 50 acres

leading up to Steinbeck Bend Road providing access from a major highway and

enough frontage for entry and a 250-space parking area.

Estimates for future attendance to the site (without National Parks Service designation) range between 100,000 to 200,000 per year with excellent regional appeal

and special interest group participation expected. The only other similar presentation with on-going proboscidean excavations that can be viewed by the general

public is the Hot Springs, South Dakota site which has over 100,000 visitors per

year.

Promotion of this attraction will help Waco in their effort to become a destination

for tourists who might be lured off the Interstate simply because it affords and even

greater diversity of cultural and educational opportunities for the traveler. Visitors

from as far away as the Dallas–Fort Worth Metroplex, Austin, San Antonio and

Houston areas can be expected as the offerings are made known and are made

available to the public.

31

Special interest groups, other individuals, corporations, and foundations within

the community are interested in helping assure the permanency of the site, but a

comprehensive plan is needed with all of the participants in agreement with all of

the future responsibilities and operational parameters clearly understood.

Now that the land has been acquired to secure the site from unknown questionable future development, the number one objective is to protect the existing skeletons remaining in situ. The only way to preserve the bone in its original context

is to establish a climate-controlled structure over the site.

This pavilion would by necessity need to encompass the original discoveries, current specimens, and future excavations. The minimal projected size is 140-ft. X 140

ft. or approximately 20,000 square feet. The facility would provide an ADA accessible ramp allowing the experience of seeing how the site was discovered and an

over view of the entire investigations leading to interpretive and administrative support areas.

The exit would allow visitors to go back to the parking lot or enter the nature

trail leading to a nature center and the Bosque River.

Utilization of the 55 acre tract would follow the proposals made by Don and Pam

Moes which fits ideally with the purposes an requirements outlined in the Texas

Parks and Wildlife grant.

These two objectives are totally compatible and each could be pursued simultaneously and/or jointly depending on the interest of the donors and/or other granting

agencies.

The additional 50 acres leading up to the main vehicle artery to and from the

Waco Regional Airport opens many avenues to future funding from TX DOT as well.

The key in this venture is to identify who is taking the lead during the development process and at what point land transfers might be made to maximize their

effectiveness for matching grants/funding and establish the resulting parameters for

the eventual maintenance and operations of the site and faculties.

‘‘The most important paleontological site of its kind in the world today’’, according

to Dr. Gary Haynes formerly with the Smithsonian Institution now at the University of Nevada, is in danger. The remaining specimens located in situ are experiencing bone degradation at an escalating rate making their preservation the most

critical issue in considering what happens next.

Very rarely does a University, a City, State or even a Nation have something of

this magnitude and significance to make it truly ‘‘one of the world’s largest or most

important’’ anything.

Recognizing existing priorities, strained budgets, and the uncertain income of national, state, municipal, and academic organizations this project necessitates an innovative approach to successfully reach its full potential.

To save not only the integrity of this globally unique site but also the significance

of what the immediate area can provide in the way of entertainment, tourism, education, and continued contributions to the scientific community is, or should be, a

major consideration in the decision making process of all the entities who will derive

some benefit form the investments made.

The enactment to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the Waco

Mammoth Site Area as a unit of the National Park System would honor the City

of Waco, Baylor University the Mayborn Museum Complex, patrons and foundations, and would enable all the interested partners to work toward an educational

and recreational facility second to none in the field of proboscidean research and interpretation.

Thank you, for this opportunity to testify before your committee.

Recommendations for the Waco Mammoth Site

1. Protection of a resource unique in the world for understanding behavioral pattern

of extinct proboscideans

a. Nothing to inhibit future research and excavation

b. Secure buildings and fences with mechanical interior and perimeter monitoring

c. Control of entrance and exit to the park

2. Creation of a world-renown tourist destination with use fees partially supporting

maintenance and operation

a. Adequate parking and restroom facilities

b. Buffer from residential areas to the east and west

c. Maintenance facilities and service roads

3. Creation of multiple educational programs for under standing current and past

ecosystems of a river bottom biome supporting rich and diverse plant and animal

life

32

a. A climate controlled pavilion over the on-going excavation site, which contains

interpretive exhibits on the process of paleontological research, restrooms, gift

shop, and tours by trained docents.

b. Facilities for summer day camps and mini conferences

c. Youth and family paleontology ‘‘dig’’ area

4. Provide a continuous green corridor through the fastest growing area of Waco

with open space remaining to meet future family recreation, entertainment, and

educational needs of Waco citizens as defined by the Waco Parks Plan.

a. Bird attracting habitat and viewing stations

b. Native plant display gardens

c. Tall and short grass prairie restoration project

SUMMARY

1978 Waco Mammoth Site discovered by Paul Barron and Eddie Bufkin

1978–1981 Waco Mammoth Site excavations led by David Lintz and George

Naryshkin unearthed five Mammuthus columbi in a thanatocose assemblage and were reported on by Naryshkin in a senior geology thesis entitled, ‘‘The Significance of the Waco Mammoth Site to Central

Texas Pleistocene History’’

1984 February: Calvin Smith, Director of the Strecker Museum finds portions of

three additional mammoths eroding from the bank of the small draw in the

immediate vicinity of the original discoveries

March: First grant received from the Cooper Foundation of Waco to continue excavations

May: Datum and 1-meter squares established, and all of the matrix sifted trough

1/4 inch and window screens. No artifacts, gnaw marks or cut marks found associated with the bone

July: Announcement to the media that eleven specimens had been found and an

educational exhibit prepared for use at the local Heart of Texas Fair, Richland

Mall, etc.

Oct: A 5 1/2 inch rain inundates the site with some dislocation of bone material

(most of which was recovered) exposing additional specimens including a 45 year

old female with her tusks under a juvenile in an attempt to extricate it from the

mire

Nov: A second grant is received from the Cooper Foundation that allows the museum to construct a diversion dam around the site, put up a tent over the exposed

bone and hire Ralph Vinson as the chief excavator

Dec: A total of 15 mammoths are evident making the site the largest concentration of a single herd of prehistoric proboscideans dying from the same causative

event known to science

1985 C–14 analysis dating by Dr. Herbert Haas of Southern Methodist University

produces a date of 28670 +/- 720 BP

1987 Baylor University, The Cooper Foundation and the Strecker Museum host

the Symposium ‘‘Mammoths, Mastodons and Human Interaction’’ in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Texas Archaeological Society. Over

500 attend prompting the gathering to be called the ‘‘Woodstock of

Proboscidean Research’’

1990 The remaining excavated specimens are field jacketed and relocated to storage with the help of numerous volunteers and a grant of $16,975 from the

Cooper Foundation and continuing inkind contributions of equipment and

operators by F. M. Young of Waco

1991 The Sixteenth mammoth is excavated in direct association with the sixth individual found indicating protective/rescue behavior

A trench is begun above the 45-year-old female attempting to save the juvenile

in an effort to determine an escape route and stratigraphic sequences running

into the bone concentration

1992 Proceedings of the Symposium are published as Proboscidean and Paleo–Indian Interactions, by the Markham Press Fund of Baylor University Press

1990–1994 Numbers seventeen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty, twenty-one, twenty

two and camel are excavated including the only bull in the herd who

also had a juvenile on top of his right tusk making it the only such

occurrence of its kind ever recorded

During this period three grants totaling $34,775 from the Cooper Foundation were

received for tents, supplies, limited salaries and preservation materials

Between April 1 and June 3 of 1994 the bull and juvenile were cast in situ by

Joe Taylor of Mt. Blanco Fossil Casing Co. from Crosbyton, Texas which involved

forty-five separate sections and became the largest field cast ever made

33

The Cooper Foundation provided an additional $14,300 for the necessary materials and labor to create the cast

1995 Dr. Gary Haynes returns to the site to age the bull (55), juvenile (13) and

to identify number twenty, the smallest/youngest member of the group, a

malnourished, diminutive 3 1/2 year old lending further credence to the herd

being under sever environmental stress

1996 Department of Geology at Baylor University conducts Ground Penetrating

Radar and Magnetometer surveys and a Geology/Museum Studies major

drills test holes to determine the exact location of the bone concentrations

on the third terrace above the current Bosque River stream bed. The sixth

and final boring reveals another mammoth (number twenty-four) at the

same depth and seventy feet from number twenty-three. This most recent

discovery assures years more of actual excavations are required to fully explore and understand the extent and scientific importance of the site

1999 The first Development Plan for the proposed ‘‘Park’’ was produced for study

and evaluation by all interested parties

2000 A follow-up, reduced, revised, plan is published resulting in support from

several donors to protect the site from future encroachment

The 55 acres connecting the site with the Bosque River is purchased with gifts

from Mr. & Mrs. Buddy Bostick, Don and Pam Moes and Mike Bradle

2001 The 50 acres leading up to Steinbeck Bend Road (the Airport Highway) is

purchased after additional gifts from the same donors as the cost is reduced

by Mrs. McGlasson

[Attachments to Mr. Smith’s statement follow:]

34

35

36

37

Mr. RADANOVICH. All right. Thank you, Mr. Smith. I appreciate

your testimony. It is very, very interesting.

Can you tell me, I am sure not all archaeological sites are considered for entry into the National Park System. In your view—and

it seems to me that, you know, you want to be able to study and

sometimes keeping people out would be preferable to keeping them

in. What is the idea behind making it a monument or a national

park?

Mr. SMITH. Because of its uniqueness. I think that the opportunity to use this as an educational facility, at all levels, from the

young students who would come through all the way from DallasFort Worth to Houston, plus the opportunity to have researchers

able to come in and work on the site while the visitors are there.

This is an opportunity for everyone to learn more about archaeological and paleontological techniques and methods and appreciate

the discovery, that in case they find something, that they would

then bring it to the attention of professionals and not try to do it

themselves.

Mr. RADANOVICH. I see. And I noticed a map here that showed

quite a few different archaeological sites, at least in Texas, in the

State of Texas, notwithstanding the rest of the country.

Mr. SMITH. Right.

Mr. RADANOVICH. And in your view, this is one of the major

ones?

Mr. SMITH. Absolutely. And, again, from the standpoint of—we

have looked for humans the last 18 years and haven’t found them.

This was unique in that way as well, because we can now compare

the assemblage with those sites that do have human involvement

and see—even if we don’t know, we can help determine differences

in analysis relating to the different types of sites.

Mr. RADANOVICH. I see. Dr. Soukup, and I realize that we are

looking at a bill that would authorize a study. But do you care to

comment on what you think this—whether you think it is worthy

for the National Park Service designation? You know, this is not

a typical unit, although it may very well be—it looks to me like it

would qualify. But you have got—how would you—you know, part

of the charter of the National Park Service is for visitation and

such. Do you see problems there that might be—you know, to protect, I guess, the resources against some of the people that would

really deserve to see it?

Mr. SOUKUP. Mr. Chairman, I don’t think that would be a problem. We are trying to develop the idea that parks are in a sense

living laboratories and inviting a lot of scientific effort in parks to

understand how they work. And the public is very interested in

how we know what we know about national parks and how much

we know about how they actually work and how we are going to

protect them for the future. So I don’t see that as a problem.

We would have a very diverse team look at this. A lot of professional societies would be approached, and we have, you know, archaeological teams within the National Park Service, and they

would look at that whole spectrum of significance and suitability

as well as feasibility. Can you protect the site and still accommodate visitors? But I don’t think the access of visitors would be a

problem, and it might be a great opportunity.

38

Mr. RADANOVICH. I see. Well, I want to thank you, everyone, for

the testimony on these two bills, and it does, I think, bring us to

the close of the hearing, unless I need to say anything in particular.

Ms. Riedesel, I am looking forward to all those gifts, and I

appreciate— [Laughter.]

Ms. RIEDESEL. I was just going to ask, I will leave them all behind.

Mr. RADANOVICH. We will make sure they get distributed as well.

Ms. RIEDESEL. Thank you.

Mr. RADANOVICH. With that, this hearing is adjourned, and,

again, thank you very much.

[Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

Æ