[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 3802, H.R. 4870, H.R. 4917, H.R. 4919 and H.R. 4952
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND
FOREST HEALTH
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
June 20, 2002
__________
Serial No. 107-132
__________
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
______
80-292 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska, George Miller, California
Vice Chairman Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Jim Saxton, New Jersey Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Elton Gallegly, California Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Samoa
Joel Hefley, Colorado Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Ken Calvert, California Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Scott McInnis, Colorado Calvin M. Dooley, California
Richard W. Pombo, California Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Adam Smith, Washington
George Radanovich, California Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Islands
Carolina Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Mac Thornberry, Texas Jay Inslee, Washington
Chris Cannon, Utah Grace F. Napolitano, California
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Tom Udall, New Mexico
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Mark Udall, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Greg Walden, Oregon Hilda L. Solis, California
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Betty McCollum, Minnesota
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona
C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana
Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND FOREST HEALTH
SCOTT McINNIS, Colorado, Chairman
JAY INSLEE, Washington, Ranking Democrat Member
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania, Tom Udall, New Mexico
Vice Chairman Mark Udall, Colorado
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Betty McCollum, Minnesota
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona
C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 20, 2002.................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Gallegly, Hon. Elton, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California, Prepared statement on H.R. 4917....... 35
Hansen, Hon. James V., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Utah.............................................. 2
Prepared statement on H.R. 4870.......................... 3
Hayworth, Hon. J.D., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Arizona........................................... 25
Prepared statement on H.R. 3802.......................... 26
Prepared statement on H.R. 4919.......................... 31
McInnis, Hon. Scott, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Colorado, Prepared statement of................... 2
Peterson, Hon. John, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Pennsylvania...................................... 7
Prepared statement on H.R. 4952.......................... 9
Statement of Witnesses:
Baliunas, Dr. Sallie, Deputy Director, Director of Science
Programs, Mount Wilson Institute........................... 13
Prepared statement on H.R. 4952.......................... 15
Ferguson, Jerrell, Diamond Point Summer Homes Association.... 33
Prepared statement on H.R. 4919.......................... 33
Huntress, Dr. Wesley T., Jr., Director, Geophysical
Laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington............. 11
Prepared statement on H.R. 4952.......................... 12
Thompson, Tom L., Deputy Chief, National Forest System,
Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Oral
statement on H.R. 3802..................................... 27
Oral statement on H.R. 4870.............................. 4
Oral statement on H.R. 4917.............................. 37
Oral statement on H.R. 4919.............................. 32
Oral statement on H.R. 4952.............................. 10
Prepared statement on H.R. 3802, H.R. 4870, H.R. 4917,
H.R. 4919 and H.R. 4952................................ 5
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 4870, ``MOUNT NAOMI WILDERNESS BOUNDARY
ADJUSTMENT ACT''; H.R. 4952, ``MOUNT WILSON OBSERVATORY PRESERVATION
AND ENHANCEMENT ACT''; H.R. 3802, TO AMEND THE EDUCATION LAND GRANT ACT
TO REQUIRE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE TO PAY THE COSTS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS WITH RESPECT TO CONVEYANCES UNDER THAT ACT; H.R.
4919, ``TONTO AND COCONINO NATIONAL FORESTS LAND EXCHANGE ACT''; H.R.
4917, ``LOS PADRES NATIONAL FOREST LAND EXCHANGE ACT OF 2002''
----------
Thursday, June 20, 2002
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:35 a.m., in
room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. John E.
Peterson presiding.
Mr. Peterson. The Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health
will come to order.
Under Committee rule 4(g), the Chairman and the Ranking
Minority Member can make openings statements. If any other
statements, they can be included in the hearing record under
unanimous consent.
Mr. Peterson. Representative McInnis, who normally Chairs
this Committee, had to fly to Colorado to one of the major
fires there. He flew out there this morning. We keep him in our
thoughts and prayers as he enters that fire zone. We hope they
can get them under control. We commend him for going back to
his district at this time.
I am Congressman Peterson, Vice Chair, filling in for him.
I will share his statement first and then we will go on to the
first bill.
STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT McINNIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO
Mr. Peterson. The Subcommittee is meeting today to hear
testimony on five bills. The first bill, H.R. 4870, introduced
by Chairman Hansen would adjust the boundary of the Mount Naomi
Wilderness area to exclude roughly 31 acres that contain
utility lines and other developments that aren't compatible
with wilderness values and would add approximately 31 acres at
the northern boundary to compensate for this exclusion.
The second bill, H.R. 4852 introduced by myself would
convey land containing the Mount Wilson Observatory in the
Angeles National Forest in California to the Mount Wilson
Institute. The Mount Wilson Institute currently operates the
Mount Wilson Observatory on land that is leased from the Forest
Service. When the land is transferred, the Mount Wilson
Institute would assume the obligations of the Forest Service
under the current lease.
Third, H.R. 3802 proposed by Mr. Hayworth would amend the
Educational Land Grant Act to require the Secretary of
Agriculture to pay the cost of environmental reviews with
respect to conveyances under that act.
The fourth, H.R. 4919, again introduced by Mr. Hayworth,
would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to perform two land
exchanges in the Tonto and Coconino National Forests in
Arizona.
Finally, the fifth, H.R. 4917, introduced by Mr. Gallegly,
would provide for an exchange of lands with the United Water
Conservation District of Cal to eliminate private inholdings in
the Los Padres National Forest and for other purposes.
Mr. Peterson. Now, we will recognize Ms. McCollum on behalf
of the minority for any opening comments.
Ms. McCollum. No, thank you.
Mr. Peterson. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hansen was detained at another meeting. So, I will now
begin the discussion on the first bill and share his testimony
with you.
STATEMENT OF JAMES V. HANSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF UTAH
Mr. Peterson. Mount Naomi is located in the Wasatch-Cache
National Forest near Logan, Utah. It is a beautiful area
composed of approximately 44,523 acres, making it one of the
largest wilderness areas in the State of Utah. It is host to
many different families of both plants and animals and
undoubtedly deserves wilderness protection.
Mount Naomi was designated a wilderness area by the Utah
Wilderness Act of 1984, which he sponsored. However, some
complications have arisen because of the close proximity of the
wilderness boundary to Logan city limits.
Management and maintenance problems have been reported by
the Forest Service in Logan City, within the southwest corner
of the wilderness boundary. Living adjacent to Logan City
limits is a utility corridor with sever lines, including power,
communications and water lines. This utilities corridor existed
prior to the designation of the wilderness area. Because no
motorized or mechanized equipment is allowed to operate within
the wilderness area, maintenance of these facilities is
difficult, if not impossible, to conduct.
A simple adjustment of the wilderness boundary would
provide a common sense solution to both the utilities
corridor's maintenance and the Forest Service management
problems. The legislation would adjust the wilderness boundary
to exclude the 31-acre parcel that houses the utilities
corridor. The new boundary would follow the natural contour
lines of Mount Naomi to compensate for this adjustment and
prevent a net loss of wilderness.
The Forest Service has identified a separate 31-acre parcel
with wilderness characteristics located adjacent to the
southern boundary of the wilderness area to be added. The
adjustment would thus provide a manageable natural boundary for
the wilderness area.
This legislation has support from the local Forest Service,
Logan City and Cash County and is the smallest area needed to
accomplish this purpose.
Additionally, a small portion of the Bonneville Shoreline
Trail has been proposed within the 31 acres adjacent to the
Logan City limits. This portion of the trail would connect with
a number of other trails in the Bonneville Shoreline Trail
system and provide outstanding recreational opportunities for
thousands of people each year.
When completed, the trail system will travel along the
shoreline of the ancient Lake Bonneville, which stretched from
northern Utah to southern Utah, near present-day Cedar City.
This trail system has been incredibly popular for hikers,
mountain biker and equestrian traffic. This is the only portion
of this trail that lies within the wilderness area.
This is good legislation, non-controversial. I urge all of
the colleagues to support Mount Nebo Wilderness Boundary
Adjustment Act.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hansen follows:]
Statement of The Honorable James V. Hansen, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Utah
Mount Naomi is located in the Wasatch-Cache National Forest near
Logan Utah. It is a beautiful area composed of approximately 44,523
acres making it one of the largest wilderness areas in the state of
Utah. It is host to many different families of both plants and animals,
and undoubtedly deserves wilderness protection.
Mount Naomi was designated a Wilderness Area by the Utah Wilderness
Act of 1984, which I sponsored. However, some complications have arisen
because of the close proximity of the wilderness boundary to Logan City
limits. Management and maintenance problems have been reported by the
Forest Service and Logan City. Within the southwest corner of the
wilderness boundary, lying adjacent to Logan City limits, is a utility
corridor with several lines, including power, communication, and water
lines. This utility corridor existed prior to the designation of the
wilderness area. Because no motorized or mechanized equipment is
allowed to operate within the wilderness area, maintenance of these
facilities is difficult, if not impossible, to conduct.
A simple adjustment of the wilderness boundary would provide a
common-sense solution to both the utility corridor's maintenance and
the Forest Service's management problems. This legislation would adjust
the wilderness boundary to exclude the 31-acre parcel that houses the
utility corridor. The new boundary would follow the natural contour
lines of Mount Naomi. To compensate for this adjustment, and prevent a
net loss of wilderness, the Forest Service has identified a separate
31-acre parcel with wilderness characteristics located adjacent to the
southern boundary of the wilderness area to be added. The adjustment
would thus provide a manageable, natural boundary for the wilderness
area. This legislation has support from the local Forest Service, Logan
City, and Cache County, and is the smallest area needed to accomplish
this purpose.
Additionally, a small portion of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail has
been proposed within the 31 acre area adjacent to the Logan City
limits. This portion of the trail would connect with a number of other
trails in the Bonneville Shoreline Trail system, and provide
outstanding recreational opportunities to thousands of people each
year. When completed, the trail system will travel along the shoreline
of the ancient Lake Bonneville, which stretched from northern Utah to
southern Utah, near present-day Cedar City. This trail system has been
incredibly popular for hikers, mountain bikers, and equestrian traffic.
This is the only portion of this trail system that lies within the
wilderness area.
This is good legislation, and non-controversial. I urge all of my
colleagues to support the Mount Naomi Wilderness Boundary Adjustment
Act.
______
Mr. Hansen. Good work, Mr. Chairman. I do appreciate it.
Thank you so much.
I had to give a speech this morning and I couldn't get out
in time. Am I excused?
Mr. Peterson. You are excused.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you.
Mr. Peterson. Now, we will introduce the witnesses for our
first bill, for H.R. 4870, we had our Chairman of the
Committee, Mr. Hansen.
Next is Mr. Thompson, Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
Mr. Thompson, we urge you to proceed.
STATEMENT OF TOM L. THOMPSON, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
SYSTEM
Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and
members of the Committee, I thank you for this opportunity to
appear before you today.
I am Tom Thompson, Deputy Chief of the National Forest
System, Forest Service. I am here to provide the
Administration's comments on five separate bills. The first one
I will talk about is H.R. 4870, which is the Mount Naomi
Wilderness Boundary Adjustment Act.
The Department supports H.R. 4870, a bill that would adjust
the boundary of Mount Naomi Wilderness in the Wasatch-Cache
National Forest in Utah. We believe that this boundary
adjustment will add to a higher level of wilderness value,
including areas of solitude, scenery and pristine qualities.
The boundary adjustment would exclude approximately 31
acres of land currently part of the Mount Naomi Wilderness and
would add, in accordance with valid existing rights, 31 acres
to the wilderness area.
The bill also requires the secretary to manage these 31
additional acres pursuant to the Utah Wilderness Act of 1984,
which was Public Law 98-428. This is adjustment would provide
for the alignment of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail, which is a
multi-county recreation trail.
The trail is designed predominately for non-motorized use,
which does not conform to a wilderness trail. The boundary
adjustment would also eliminate the need for a power line
easement within the wilderness area which is also a non-
conforming use.
So, the department supports H.R. 4870. I would be happy to
answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson follows:]
Statement of Tom Thompson, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, Forest
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I am Tom Thompson, Deputy Chief
for National Forest System, Forest Service. I am here today to provide
the Administration's comments on five bills:
H.R. 3802 a bill to amend the Education Land Grant Act,
Public Law 106-577, to require the Secretary of Agriculture to pay the
costs of environmental reviews for conveyances under that act.
H.R. 4870 a bill to make adjustments to the boundaries of
the Mount Naomi Wilderness Area, and for other purposes.
H.R. 4952 the Mount Wilson Conveyance.
H.R. 4919 the Tonto and Coconino National Forests Land
Exchange Act
H.R. 4917 the Los Padres National Forest Land Exchange
Act of 2002
The Department supports H.R. 4870 and H.R. 4917 and does not object
to H.R. 3802, H.R. 4952 or H.R. 4919. The Department would like to work
with the Committee to improve H.R. 4952.
H.R. 3802--A bill to amend the Education Land Grant Act to require the
Secretary of Agriculture to pay the costs of environmental
reviews.
H.R. 3802 amends Section 202 of the Education Land Grant Act (ELGA)
by requiring the Secretary of Agriculture to pay the costs of
environmental reviews for conveyances under ELGA.
The Department does not object to the bill. However, the measure
would prohibit a school district from paying the cost of environmental
reviews if they choose. In some situations, the exchange process may be
delayed because the Forest may have other funding priorities or funding
limitations. In these instances, a school district may be able to
expedite the exchange process by paying the cost of environmental
reviews.
To meet this requirement, the Department would likely need to
reprogram funding to effectively implement the bill.
H.R. 4870--Mount Naomi Wilderness Boundary Adjustment Act
The Department supports H.R. 4870, a bill that would adjust the
boundary of the Mount Naomi Wilderness in the Wasatch-Cache National
Forest in Utah. We believe the boundary adjustment will add to a higher
level of wilderness value, including the areas solitude, scenery and
pristine qualities.
The boundary adjustment would exclude approximately 31 acres of
land currently part of the Mount Naomi Wilderness and would add, in
accordance with valid existing rights, 31 acres to the wilderness area.
The bill also requires the Secretary to manage the 31 additional acres
pursuant to the Utah Wilderness Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-428).
This adjustment would provide for the alignment of the Bonneville
Shoreline trail, which is a multi-county recreational trail. The trail
is designed predominately for heavy non-motorized use, which does not
conform to a wilderness trail. The boundary adjustment would also
eliminate the need for a power line easement within the wilderness
area, which is also a non-conforming use.
H.R. 4952--Conveyance of Mount Wilson Observatory
The Department has concerns with H.R. 4952 and would like to work
with the Committee to improve the bill. The bill would convey 110 acres
of National Forest System land without consideration to the Mount
Wilson Institute. Approximately, 45 acres of the lands to be conveyed
are currently leased to the Carnegie Institute of Washington, which in
turn permits the Mount Wilson Institute to operate and maintain the
Mount Wilson Observatory.
The bill also specifies that if the observatory is ever used for
any reason other than scientific, educational, historic, or other
public purposes it shall revert to the United States.
The Department believes it is in the public interest for this land
to remain available for public recreational use. The area surrounding
the observatory has extremely high recreational value as public open
space and for dispersed recreation. Mt. Wilson is the center of the
densest cluster of trails in the San Gabriel Mountain Range a key
destination on an extensive and highly used trail system and connects
to approximately 100 trails stretching across the San Gabriel
Mountains. A large part of Mount Wilson's popularity is due to an
almost 360-degree panoramic view that includes a view of the entire Los
Angeles Basin.
The Department also recognizes and supports improving the manner in
which the land surrounding the observatory is maintained. For that
reason, Regional Forester Jack Blackwell has directed the Forest
Supervisor of the Angeles National Forest to address the maintenance
issues raised by the Mount Wilson Institute, including hazardous tree
removal, adequate water supply and the upkeep of public restrooms. It
is my understanding some hazardous trees have already been removed and
other efforts are underway to address the other identified maintenance
concerns.
Also, the Department would like to ensure that any conveyance of
land surrounding the observatory be pursued in a fiscally responsible
way. The value of the 110-acre parcel identified in the bill has not
yet been determined. It is important that this value be factored into
the conveyance proposal.
H.R. 4919--Tonto and Coconino National Forests Land Exchange Act
H.R. 4919 directs the Secretary to exchange approximately 108 acres
of land within the Tonto National Forest, northeast of Payson, Arizona
and currently occupied by 45 residential cabins under special use
permits for 495 acres of non-federal land (known as the Q Ranch) within
the Tonto National Forest, east of Young, Arizona. This exchange is
identified in the bill as the Diamond Point/Q Ranch Land Exchange.
The bill also directs the Secretary to exchange approximately 222
acres of National Forest System land adjacent to the Town of Payson
near the municipal airport for roughly 157 acres of private land (owned
by Montezuma Castle Land Exchange Joint Venture) adjacent to the
Montezuma Castle National Monument and nearly 143 acres of private land
known as Double Cabin Park Lands. Both of the private parcels are
within the Coconino National Forest boundary.
H.R. 4919 requires that the values of the non-Federal and Federal
land to be exchanged to be equal or equalized as determined by the
Secretary through an appraisal by a qualified appraiser and performed
in conformance with the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976.
The bill requires the Secretary to execute the Montezuma Castle and
Diamond Point Land Exchanges within 6 months after receipt of an offer
from the private landowners, unless the Secretary and the private
landowners mutually agree to extend such deadline.
The Department supports the concept of exchanging the National
Forest System lands, which were identified in H.R. 4919; however, we
can meet this objective by utilizing existing statutory authorities. In
fact, the Diamond Point Land exchange is currently being evaluated
through our administrative exchange process and we anticipate
completing the environmental analysis and making a decision on this
proposal in March 2003. However, passage of legislation could conclude
this process more quickly.
We have completed an initial review relative to the conveyance of
the National Forest System lands adjacent to the Payson, Arizona
airport. We believe a competitive exchange process, utilizing competing
market forces would best meet the public interest in identifying
priority private lands for acquisition. Due to the rapidly changing
market variables in this major growth area and multiple interests
anticipated for this Federal parcel, this competitive approach would
serve as the most reliable means of estimating the market value of the
Federal lands.
The Forest Service intends to initiate this competitive proposal
this calendar year and all interested parties will be encouraged to
participate in this process.
H.R. 4917--To provide for an exchange to eliminate private inholdings
in the Los Padres National Forest, and for other purposes
H.R. 4917 authorizes the Secretary to exchange approximately 420
acres of National Forest System land for approximately 340 acres of
inholdings in the Los Padres National Forest. The United Water
Conservation District of California (UWCD) owns the inholdings.
This exchange would consolidate interior land boundaries on the
Ojai Ranger District of the Los Padres National Forest and would
provide UWCD with contiguous ownership around Lake Piru.
The bill requires the UWCD to construct a gravel parking area upon
UWCD lands for the Potholes trailhead of the Los Padres National
Forest. It also would protect the existing Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission License for less than a 5-mega watt generator at the
outfall.
The Department supports H.R. 4917, but we are concerned about the
control the bill would give UWCD regarding restricting public vehicle
access. Any decisions on regulating vehicle access should be made in
consultation with the Los Padres Forest Supervisor. Additionally, the
bill does not specify whether the Forest Service or United Water
Conservation District of California will pay for the associated cost of
the land exchange. We believe it is in both parties interest to have
UWCD significantly share in the costs of processing this transaction.
Finally, we believe that any receipts from cash equalization that are
deposited into the Sisk Act Fund should be used to acquire replacement
lands within the Los Padres National Forest instead of being used
toward facilities. We would like to work with the Committee to address
these concerns.
Conclusion:
This concludes my statement. We look forward to working with the
Committee on making the suggested modifications as noted above, and I
would be happy to answer your questions.
______
Mr. Peterson. Thank you very much. Do we have any questions
of the witness?
We thank you for appearing. We will move on to the next
issue.
Mr. Peterson. Dr. Wesley T. Huntress, Jr., Director of the
Geophysical Laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington; and
Dr. Sallie Baliunas, Deputy Director, Director of Science
Programs, Mount Wilson Institute.
Let me remind the witnesses that under our Committee rule
you must limit your oral statement to 5 minutes, but your
entire statement will appear in the record.
I will start with my opening statement and then I will hear
the witnesses.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN PETERSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. Peterson. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity
to present my position on H.R. 4952 of the bill to preserve and
enhance Mount Wilson Observatory for the purpose of
safeguarding the special, splendid national treasure.
I favor the research done there by the scientists at Penn
State University in my district and other universities
throughout our country. The Penn State researchers developed
and used their unmatched state-of-art device costing
approximately $5 million to study infrared light from stars in
fine detail.
Majestically poised in the San Gabriel Mountains north of
Los Angeles, Mount Wilson Observatory has the calmest air of
any site on the North American continent. The steady air and
strings of clear nights so typical on Mount Wilson have made
the site a premier resource for astronomy since 1889 when
Harvard first placed a telescope there.
In 1904, the visionary American scientist, George Ellery
Hale of Carnegie Institution of Washington founded the complex
of instruments that were home to the largest telescopes in the
world and would dominate astronomy for the first half of the
20th Century.
With the mighty 100-inch telescope, the great American-born
astronomer, Edwin Hubble and his colleague, Milton Humason,
once a mule driver, found the evidence for the unimaginably
vast distance between galaxies and for the expansion of the
universe.
With the largest telescope in the world, the genius of
Hubble took the last step in the Copernican Revolution. The
earth is not the cosmos. The sun is not the center. Our galaxy
is not the center. There is no center. Instead, we see
everywhere expansion from a beginning about 15 billion years
ago.
Beyond the historical important of Mount Wilson, the calm,
clean air of the mountain has led to a renaissance in research
there. With advances in technology, Mount Wilson is now home to
the most powerful new telescopes in the world. Georgia State
University is just completing a 1,000-foot diameter optical
interferometer and Berkeley is expanding its Infrared
Interferometer.
The two arrays of telescopes are showing with unprecedented
detail ``star and planet nurseries,'' distant solar systems,
and death throes of stars. Georgia State's CHARA array
condition see detail as fine s a quarter held 10,000 miles
away, or as small as a footprint on the moon. The new
technology telescopes work best at Mount Wilson's unequaled
skies
The Observatory's revitalization owes to the non-profit
Mount Wilson Institute, which has the authority to manage the
site into the 22nd century. The institute has preserved this
astronomical treasure and opened its invaluable sky resources
to American scientists who come to build 21st telescopes that
offer light on humankind's place in the cosmos.
Telescopes have been peering at the starry skies atop Mount
Wilson as far back as 1889. For 87 years Mount Wilson's
telescopes worked on private land. In 1976, 1100 acres of land,
including the approximately 40-acre Observatory parcel and 60
acres that formed the entryway and public face of the
Observatory were deeded from private ownership the United
States Forest Service.
Over the last 20 years the U.S. Forest Service facilities
have deteriorated to such a degree that the health and welfare
of the forest, public and Observatory are at risk. The
scientists and dedicated personnel of the Observatory have paid
with scarce research funds and sweat equity to preserve the
health of the land and forest. Their contributions have been
especially beneficial to the 60-acre gateway parcel that is
entirely under U.S. Forest Service ownership.
The Institute has demonstrated that it is best suited to
own and care for the land for the public good.
My bill seeks to legitimize the de facto preservation that
Mount Wilson Institute has been providing to the public site
and needs to enhance the facility.
I ask that approximately 110 acres composed of the
Observatory and its gateway be conveyed to the Institute. The
United States benefits from the conveyance in at least two
ways. First the cost of preserving and enhancing the facility
for the greatest scientific, historical and educational good
would shift to the private, rather than the public resources.
Second, if the site were not used for scientific or educational
purposes, the land would revert back to the Forest Service.
A precedent for this transfer has recently been set by the
Department of Interior and National Park Service which is now
deeding 313 historic lighthouses to qualified nonprofit groups
who will preserver them for generations to come.
Mount Wilson is a priceless historic shrine, and an
irreplaceable astronomical resource. To preserve and enhance
Mount Wilson's exploration of the cosmos, the land of this
unique facility should be transferred to the Institute, which
cares enough to have invested heavily in its new future for all
humankind.
I guess basically my theory is, why should the Forest
Service who gets $1 for the lease, have to use their very
scarce resources when they are billions of dollars behind in
maintenance all over their system?
Why should we use National Forest Service money when this
Institute can raise private funds to keep this facility in fine
shape?
It just makes sense. If it would ever stop being used in
the scientific way that it is being used, it would then go back
to the Forest Service. So, it would remain in public ownership.
The Institute really serves all the institutions that serve
there.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Peterson (H.R. 4952)
follows:]
Statement of The Honorable John Peterson, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Pennsylvania, on H.R. 4952
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present my position
on H.R. 4952, a bill to preserve and enhance Mount Wilson Observatory
for the purpose of safeguarding this splendid national treasure. I
favor the research done there by the scientists at Penn State Univ. in
my district, and other universities throughout our country. The Penn
State researchers developed and use there an unmatched, state-of-the
art device costing approximately $5 million to study infrared light
from stars in fine detail.
Majestically poised in the San Gabriel Mountains north of Los
Angeles, Mount Wilson Observatory has the calmest air of any site on
the North American continent. The steady air and strings of clear
nights so typical on Mount Wilson have made the site a premier resource
for astronomy since 1889 when Harvard first placed a telescope there.
In 1904, the visionary American scientist George Ellery Hale of
Carnegie Institution of Washington founded the complex of instruments
that were home to the largest telescopes in the world and would
dominate astronomy for the first half of the 20th century. With the
mighty 100-inch telescope, the great American-born astronomer Edwin
Hubble and his colleague Milton Humason, once a mule driver, found the
evidence for the unimaginably vast distance between galaxies, and for
the expansion of the Universe. With the largest telescope in the world,
the genius of Hubble took the last step in the Copernican Revolution:
the earth is not the center of the Cosmos, the sun is not the center,
our galaxy is not the center--there is no center. Instead, we see
everywhere expansion from a beginning about fifteen billion years ago.
Beyond the historical importance of Mount Wilson, the calm, clear
air of the mountain has led to a renaissance in research there. With
advances in technology, Mount Wilson is now home to the most powerful
new telescopes in the world. Georgia State University is just
completing a 1,000-foot diameter optical interferometer, and Berkeley
is expanding its Infrared Interferometer. The two arrays of telescopes
are showing with unprecedented detail ``star and planet nurseries,''
distant solar systems, and death throes of stars. Georgia State's CHARA
array can see detail as fine as a quarter held 10,000 miles away, or as
small as a footprint on the moon. The new technology telescopes work
best at Mount Wilson's unequaled skies.
The Observatory's revitalization owes to the non-profit Mount
Wilson Institute, which has the authority to manage the site into the
22nd century. The Institute has preserved this astronomical treasure
and opened its invaluable sky resources to American scientists who come
to build 21st century telescopes that offer light on humankind's place
in the Cosmos.
Telescopes have been peering at the starry skies atop Mount Wilson
as far back as 1889. For 87 years Mount Wilson's telescopes worked on
private land. In 1976, 1100 acres of land including the approximately
40-acre Observatory parcel and 60+ acres that form the entryway and
public face of the Observatory were deeded from private ownership to
the USFS.
Over the last twenty years the USFS facilities have deteriorated to
such a degree that the health and welfare of the forest, public and
Observatory are at risk. The scientists and dedicated personnel of the
Observatory have paid with scarce research funds and sweat equity to
preserve the health of the land and forest. Their contributions have
been especially beneficial to the 60-acre gateway parcel that is
entirely under USFS ownership.
The Institute has demonstrated that it is best suited to own and
care for the land for the public good.
My bill seeks to legitimize the de facto preservation that Mount
Wilson Institute has been providing to the public site, and needs to
enhance the facility. I ask that approximately 110 acres composed of
the Observatory and its gateway be conveyed to the Institute.
The United States benefits from the conveyance in at least two
ways. First, the cost of preserving and enhancing the facility for the
greatest scientific, historical and educational good would shift to
private, rather than public resources. Second, if the site were not
used for scientific or educational purposes, the land would revert to
the USFS.
A precedent for this transfer has recently been set by the Dept. of
Interior and National Park Service, which is now deeding 313 historic
lighthouses to qualified nonprofit groups who will preserve them for
generations to come.
Mount Wilson is a priceless historic shrine, and an irreplaceable
astronomical resource. To preserve and enhance Mount Wilson's
exploration of the Cosmos, the land of this unique facility should be
transferred to the Institute, which cares enough to have invested
heavily in its new future for all humankind.
______
Mr. Peterson. We are going to keep going here. There is a
journal vote at 10. At some point in time we will have to run
for that.
I now recognize Mr. Thompson for his statement.
STATEMENT OF TOM L. THOMPSON, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
SERVICE
Mr. Thompson. Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of
the Subcommittee. I will now present the Administration's
position on H.R. 4952 which is the conveyance of Mount Wilson
Observatory.
The department has concerns with H.R. 4952 and would like
to work with the Committee to improve the bill. The bill would
convey 110 acres of National Forest Service System land without
consideration to Mount Wilson Institute.
Approximately 45 acres of the lands to be conveyed are
currently leased to the Carnegie Institute of Washington, which
in turn permits the Mount Wilson Institute to operate and
maintain Mount Wilson Observatory.
The bill also specifics that if the Observatory is ever
used for any reason other than scientific, educational,
historic or other public purposes, it shall revert to the
United States. The Department believes that it is in the public
interest for this land to remain available for public
recreation use. The area surrounding the observatory has
extremely high recreation value as public open space and for
dispersed recreation.
Mount Wilson is the center of the most dense cluster of
trails on the San Gabriel Mountain Range, a key destination on
an extensive and highly used trail system and connects with
approximately 100 trails stretching across the San Gabriel
Mountains. A large part of Mount Wilson's popularity is due to
an almost 360-degree panoramic view that includes a view of the
entire Los Angeles Basin.
The Department also recognizes and support improving the
matter in which the land surrounding the Observatory is
maintained. For that reason, Regional Forester Jack Blackwell
has directed the forest supervisor of the Angeles to address
the maintenance issues raised by the Mount Wilson Institute
including hazardous tree removal, adequate water supply and
upkeep of public restrooms.
It is my understanding that some hazardous trees have
already been removed and other efforts are underway to address
the other identified maintenance concerns. Also, the department
would like to ensure that any conveyance of land surrounding
the Observatory be pursued in a fiscally responsible way.
The value of the 110-acre parcel identified in the bill has
not yet been determined. It is important that this value be
factored in to the conveyance proposal.
Now that is my testimony and I would be happy to answer
questions.
Mr. Peterson. Thank you, and now we recognize Dr. Huntress.
STATEMENT OF WESLEY T. HUNTRESS, JR., DIRECTOR, GEOPHYSICAL
LABORATORY, CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON
Mr. Huntress. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Wesley
Huntress, Jr. I am the Director of the Geophysical Laboratory,
which is one of the five scientific research institutions at
the Carnegie Institution of Washington.
I am here representing Maxine Singer, who is President of
the Carnegie Institution, but was unable to attend.
I would like to give the Committee a kind of a sense of the
history of the Institution's involvement with Mount Wilson and
the Forest Service. Carnegie Institution is a Congressionally
chartered institution, founded and endowed by Andrew Carnegie
100 years ago this year, as a matter of fact. Its mission is to
discover new knowledge through scientific research, achieving
that through the support of exceptional individuals, one of
whom you have mentioned already, George Ellery Hale, who in
1904 received approval from the Carnegie Institution to
establish the Mount Wilson Observatory. Over the next 20 years,
he built telescopes for the study of the sun and two large
optical telescopes, the 60-inch and 100-inch, which is still
there today.
In their time, they were the largest telescopes in the
world. That lasted until 1948 when the Carnegie Institution and
Cal Tech inaugurated the 200-inch on Mount Palomar. So, for the
first half of the last century, the 20th century, the Mount
Wilson Observatory set the standard for astronomy and made the
United States the world leader in these sciences.
The greatest astronomers of that period were, in fact,
Carnegie staff members, including Edwin Hubble, who joined the
staff in 1919 and over the 20 years following that he
transformed our understanding of the universe. As you have
heard this morning, he made major discoveries with that 100-
inch telescope.
But of greater significance, he demonstrated that the
universe is made up of many galaxies in addition to our own
Milky Way and that all distant galaxies are moving away from
us. In other words, the universe is expanding.
In the 1970's, driven by an interest to study objects in
the southern skies, the Carnegie set up an observatory in
northern Chile. During the 1980's, the light pollution over the
Los Angeles Basin became an increasing threat to the use of
Mount Wilson. So, at the end of that decade, the Institution
decided to put all of its resources in astronomy in Chile and
to close Mount Wilson.
Nevertheless, there was much useful work that could still
be done at Mount Wilson, particularly in education. So, the
Carnegie Institution was quite pleased when the independent
Mount Wilson was formed and proposed to operate the mountain
and its facilities.
We had a formal agreement established in 1991. But Carnegie
Institution remains the owner of the Observatory. The land on
which the Observatory stands is currently leased to the
Carnegie Institution by the U.S. Forest Service and
anticipating the end of this 99-year lease in 2003 and in view
of the request by the Mount Wilson Institute and its productive
scientific activities, the Carnegie Institution applied to the
Forest Service for a 99-year extension of this is lease which
was granted in March of this year.
We learned of the current proposed legislation about 3
weeks ago. We do have some questions with regard to our
ownership and responsibility for the buildings and equipment on
Mount Wilson and our legal relationship with the Mount Wilson
Institute.
I would like the Committee to know that we have a very good
relationship with the Mount Wilson Institute. We are not
adverse to the bill. We wish only to make a considered
judgment. Our principal interest is in the protection and the
preservation of those historic buildings on the land.
Thank you for your attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Huntress (H.R. 4952)
follows:]
Statement of Dr. Wesley T. Huntress, Jr., Director, Geophysical
Laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.
Good morning. My name is Wesley T. Huntress, Jr. and I am Director
of the Geophysical Laboratory, one of the five scientific research
departments of the Carnegie Institution of Washington. I am here for
Maxine Singer, President of the Carnegie Institution, who was unable to
attend. I would like to give the Committee a sense of the history of
Institution's involvement with Mt. Wilson and the Forest Service. The
Carnegie Institution is a Congressionally chartered institution founded
and endowed by Andrew Carnegie 100 years ago this year. Its mission is
to conduct fundamental scientific research to discover new knowledge,
in the words of the founder, ``for the benefit of man''. Andrew
Carnegie stated that this mission was to be achieved through the
support of 'exceptional' individuals.
One of the first of these exceptional individuals was George Ellery
Hale. In 1904 he received approval from the Carnegie Institution to
establish the Mount Wilson Observatory and the Observatory's offices in
nearby Pasadena, California. There, over the next 20 years, he built
telescopes for study of the sun and two large optical telescopes, one
with a 60-inch mirror, and one with a 100-inch mirror. They were in
their time the largest telescopes in the world and would remain so
until 1948 when the Carnegie Institution and the California Institute
of Technology inaugurated the 200-inch telescope at Palomar. For the
first half of the 20th century, the Mount Wilson Observatory set the
standard for astronomy and astrophysics and made the United States the
world leader in these sciences. The greatest astronomers of that period
were Carnegie staff scientists including perhaps the most famous of
them all, Edwin Hubble.
In 1919 Edwin Hubble joined the staff of the Mount Wilson
Observatory. Over the next 20 years Hubble transformed our
understanding of the universe. He made many major discoveries with the
100-inch telescope, but of greatest significance he demonstrated that
the universe is made up of many galaxies in addition to our own Milky
Way and that all the distant galaxies are moving away from us; in other
words, the universe is expanding. After Hubble's death in 1953, staff
member Allan Sandage continued the thrust of Hubble's work on the
expansion of the universe and to this day works on the question of the
rate of the expansion and thus the age of the universe.
In 1969, driven by an interest in studying the objects seen from
southern skies, the trustees of the Institution obtained property in
northern Chile and constructed the Las Campanas Observatory. During the
1980's, light pollution over the Los Angeles area became an increasing
threat to the use of the Mount Wilson telescopes. By the end of that
decade, the Institution decided to put its resources for astronomy at
Las Campanas and to close Mount Wilson. Nevertheless, there was much
useful work that could still be done at Mount Wilson. The Institution
was therefore pleased when the independent Mount Wilson Institute was
formed and proposed that it operate the mountain and its facilities. A
formal agreement was established in 1991 between the two institutions.
The agreement involves no flow of funds in either direction but does
require certain periodic reports from the Mount Wilson Institute to the
Carnegie Institution, which remains the owner of the Observatory.
The land on which the Observatory stands is currently leased to the
Carnegie Institution by the U.S. Forest Service. Anticipating the end
of this 99-year lease in 2003, and in view of a request by the Mount
Wilson Institute and the productive scientific activities carried out
on the mountain under its auspices, the Carnegie Institution applied to
the Forest Service for a 99-year extension of this lease. The extension
was approved by the Forest Service in March of this year following the
payment of one dollar. We only recently learned of this proposed
legislation to transfer title of the land on which the Mt. Wilson
Observatory stands from the Forest Service to the Mt. Wilson Institute,
and we have not had sufficient time to understand the implications with
regard to our ownership and responsibility for the buildings and
equipment on Mt. Wilson or on our legal relationship with the Mt.
Wilson Institute. We have many questions that remain to be answered in
this regard, so that at the present time we cannot say whether we can
support or oppose.
Thank you for your attention. I will be pleased to respond to your
questions.
______
Mr. Peterson. Thank you, Dr. Huntress.
Our next witness is Sallie Baliunas.
STATEMENT OF SALLIE BALIUNAS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SCIENCE
PROGRAMS AT MOUNT WILSON INSTITUTE
Ms. Baliunas. Thank you Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the Committee. I am grateful for the opportunity to
provide information on H.R. 4952. Since 1989, I have been
Deputy Director of Mount Wilson Institute. I have worked at the
Observatory conducting research for 26 years.
In the 21st century, Mount Wilson's calm air remains a
priceless resource to astronomers. They have built cutting edge
research and new technology telescopes and instruments. Our
scientists come from all over the world, most notably
scientists from Berkeley, Georgia State, Penn State, University
of Illinois, Harvard, Smithsonian, UCLA, USC, JPL, Cal Tech,
Hawaii, Chicago, the National Optical Astronomy Observatories
all rely on this priceless calm air of the skies above Los
Angeles.
As a result of this, Mount Wilson Institute, just in the
last 10 years, has overseen approximately $62 million
investigated from public and private sources in new telescopes,
new assets, improvements and maintenance both on our facility
and on the adjacent public lands of the Forest Service which
are critical for the access to our facility.
Now, the history of this is that in 1976, 1100 acres were
given to the Forest Service from a private company. Forty-five
acres are the leasehold for the observatory and there is
approximately 60 acres of a front gateway. In that front
gateway area to the Observatory it includes roads built by the
private company, two parking lots, restrooms, drinking
fountains, stairs, picnic facilities, retaining walls, fences
and several dilapidated buildings that have been abandoned.
Through my 26 years of research at the Observatory, these
public facilities have deteriorated from terrible to
disrespectful. In the last 10 years Mount Wilson Institute has
been requesting that the Forest Service meet its obligations,
both on the entryway parcel whose facilities have severely
deteriorated, and on the Observatory grounds.
Visitorship has fallen from about 1500 people per weekend
to about 50. Now the public is ill served by this. The Forest
Service no longer, for example, opens and shuts the security
gate. Mount Wilson Institute is forced to open and shut the
Forest Service security gate in order to allow the public
entryway to the public land.
We provide the security. We have often swept the trash
away. We now provide the toilet facilities for the public.
There is just one immediate concern that is very hazardous and
that is the extreme risk of fire. This year may be the worst
for fire risk in the 112-year history of the mountaintop
Observatory.
On the Observatory parcel, the 1905 lease requires the
Mount Wilson Institute and the Forest Service to share the
burden of reducing fire hazard. This includes removing the
trees and shrubs too close to buildings and other code
requirements.
My current and prior site supervisors report that the
Forest Service has rarely met its share of risk abatement. That
has left the Institute bearing essentially all the cost in
order to protect not only its employees, their families,
visitors and the public, but also the forest and its facility.
Now, as for trees, the Institute has for several years been
requesting permission to remove trees that are fire and falling
hazards or that interfere with the operation of the telescopes.
Only recently, but we are extremely grateful, that inspection
and permission to remove some of these trees has been granted.
The backlog of just serious tree problems is so great that 100
trees need to be removed as quickly as possible.
On the Forest Service parcel that is the gateway to the
Observatory, we have urged for some time that fire hazards be
addressed. A related and extremely serious issue is the nearly
empty 300,000-gallon cistern that is the only firefighting
water for about one-half mile.
The pump for this Forest Service tank had broken and
remained broken for nearly a year. Now the tank cannot be
filled from the nearby wells, which are now mostly dry owing to
the severe drought this year, in time for firefighting
preparedness. The public has lost a huge amount of benefits
from this.
The Mount Wilson Institute has been taking on the public
obligations to open these recreational facilities. We have paid
a quarter of a million dollars just in the last 6 years to meet
these Forest Service obligations.
The costs have been borne by donors, scientific grants from
Federal and State agencies and the Board of Trustees and the
scientists who work to preserve and enhance this irreplaceable
site unanimously support the proposed land transfer.
We are hoping to ensure that the unique capabilities of the
Observatory are developed and used for the highest scientific
and educational purposes and for the intellectual and practical
benefit of humankind.
Thank you for your time.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Baliunas (H.R. 4952)
follows:]
Statement of Sallie Baliunas, Ph.D., Deputy Director and Director of
Science Programs, Mount Wilson Institute
Chairman McInnis and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee:
I am grateful for the opportunity to provide information on H.R.
4952. I have been conducting astronomical research at Mount Wilson
Observatory since 1976. Since 1989 I have been Deputy Director of Mount
Wilson Institute, the non-profit organization authorized to operate the
Observatory into the 22nd century. My research there has been part of
my official duties as scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for
Astrophysics for 22 years.
As Mr. Peterson noted, Harvard College Observatory first installed
a telescope on Mount Wilson in 1889, on then-private land. By 1904,
George Ellery Hale had begun planning to place there the next two
largest telescopes in the world. With some of the world 's greatest
scientists using the most magnificent telescopes at the site with
extraordinarily calm air, the Observatory became the origin of profound
leaps of knowledge about humankind's place in the Cosmos.
21st century on Mount Wilson--Today top scientists from Berkeley,
Georgia State University, Penn State Univ., Univ. Illinois, Harvard-
Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, UCLA, USC, JPL, Cal Tech, Univ.
Hawaii, Univ. Chicago and National Optical Astronomy Observatories
(NOAO) conduct cutting-edge research with new-technology telescopes and
instruments set in the priceless calm skies above Los Angeles. As a
result of this precious calm air, Mount Wilson Institute in the last
ten years has overseen the approximately $62 million invested from
public and private sources in new assets, plus improvements in and
maintenance of existing assets that support astronomy and education. (A
letter from the Director of the CHARA, Prof. Hal McAlister, the most
powerful optical interferometer in the world, is attached as Appendix
A).
Public land and assets In 1976 an 1100-acre parcel of land
containing the Observatory's 40 or so acres left private ownership and
came to the USFS. The donated parcel also holds approximately 60 acres
with visitor facilities built and donated to the public by the former
private owner. This area forms the gateway to the Observatory, and
includes roads, two large parking lots, restrooms, drinking fountains,
stairs, picnic facilities, retaining walls, fences, and several
buildings that have been abandoned for several years.
Through my 26 years of research at the Observatory the public
facilities have deteriorated. In the last ten years, Mount Wilson
Institute has been requesting that the Forest Service meet its
obligations both on the public ``gateway parcel'' and on the
Observatory grounds. There are two main concerns about USFS fulfillment
of its obligations. First is for managing forest and public risk; and
second is for the public benefit. A list of concerns that have been
given to the USFS in ongoing communications is attached (Appendix B). I
wish to discuss one important example in detail.
Immediate hazards: Fire risk This year may be the worst for fire
risk in the 112-year history of the mountaintop observatory. On the
Observatory parcel the 1905 Lease requires that Mount Wilson Institute
and USFS share the burden of reducing fire hazards. This includes
removing trees and shrubs too close to buildings. My current and a
prior site supervisor report that USFS has rarely met its share of fire
risk abatement. The Institute has borne essentially all the cost in
order to protect not only its employees, their families, visitors and
the public but also the forest and facility.
As for trees, the Institute has for several years been requesting
permission to remove trees that are fire and falling hazards, or
interfere with the operation of the telescopes. (The 1905 Lease allows
the Institute to remove trees that unduly affect telescope viewing).
Only recently have inspection and permission been granted; the backlog
of serious tree problems is so great that approximately 100 trees need
to be removed as quickly as possible.
On the USFS parcel that is the gateway to the Observatory, we have
urged for some time that fire hazards be addressed. A related issue is
the nearly-empty USFS 300,000-gallon cistern that is the only fire-
fighting water for one-half mile. The pump for the tank had broken and
remained so for nearly a year, and now the tank cannot be filled from
the nearby wells in time for fire fighting preparedness.
Lost public benefits Per the 1905 Lease, the Observatory must be
open free to the public. Moreover, the Institute believes that public
access to the Observatory is an important mandate. Because USFS
controls the access parcel, its dilapidated condition has decreased
visitorship by more than a factor of ten in the last ten years. There
are unsafe staircases, failed retaining walls, dead trees, broken
fences, and attractive nuisances. The public restrooms have been closed
for broken fixtures and a failed septic system. The Institute now pays
over $10,000 per year for portable facilities on USFS land.
Mount Wilson Institute has paid about $250,000 just in the last six
years (the period for which I summed the costs) to meet USFS
obligations. The costs have been borne by donors, plus scientific
grants from Federal and state agencies. Mount Wilson's Board of
Trustees and the scientists who work to preserve and enhance this
irreplaceable site unanimously support the proposed land transfer in
order to ensure that the unique capabilities of the Observatory are
developed and used for the best and highest scientific and educational
purposes, for the intellectual and practical benefit of humankind.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Appendix A: Statement from Prof. Hal McAlister, Director of CHARA
(Center for High Angular Resolution Astronomy) on Mount Wilson
From: Harold A. McAlister
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: Mt. Wilson Institute Agreement
Dear Cong. Peterson:
I am pleased to comment on aspects of CHARA's presence on Mt.
Wilson in connection with the proposed transfer of the land occupied by
observatory facilities from the USFS to MWI. The CHARA Array consists
of six telescopes, distributed over the observatory grounds, whose
beams of light are relayed to a central beam combination laboratory and
are combined interferometrically to synthesize a single telescope some
350 meters in diameter. The scientific mission for the Array is the
study of details on the surfaces of other stars and the determination
of basic physical parameters for stars (such as their mass, distance,
temperature, diameter and luminosity).
Our facility, which consists of 17 separate structures, was
constructed between 1996 and 2001 at a capital cost of approximately
$14M with approximately 45% of these funds provided by a grant from the
National Science Foundation. My University provides an annual operating
budget of approximately $350K for our activities on Mt. Wilson. Our
access to this wonderful site was formalized on 30 Oct 1995 when our
President signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Mount Wilson
Institute. This agreement provides us access to the site and speaks to
mutual obligations regarding infrastructure availability and upkeep.
Our relationships with MWI have consistently been positive at all
levels, and our staff has worked well with MWI mountain staff on
numerous occasions to mutual benefit.
I strongly support this land transfer for several reasons. First,
it recognizes that MWI has been acting de facto as the entity with sole
responsibility and liability (although with no privileges or authority)
for maintaining grounds and facilities (including public facilities) at
the Observatory. Second, MWI is now embarking on an ambitious program
to enhance its viability through the introduction of new scientific
opportunities and programs of public outreach, and land ownership will
be a critical enhancement of the Institute's prospects towards
achieving these goals through private fundraising efforts. Finally, I
know that USFS resources are thinly stretched, and it simply makes good
sense to turn over this limited and highly specialized site to the
management of a group whose sole purpose is the preservation and
furtherance of the Mount Wilson Observatory.
In response to your question of the accuracy of stating that CIW
``owns'' the Observatory, which I view as being defined by the land
reservation set aside for astronomical research and all the buildings
and facilities therein, it is clear that CIW does not own the land nor
does it own the modern generation of facilities and buildings
constructed there by Georgia State, UC Berkeley, the Naval Research
Laboratory and others. CIW does indeed own the structures and
telescopes it constructed prior to its closing those facilities in the
late 1980's.
Sincerely,
Harold A. McAlister Regents' Professor of Physics and Astronomy
Director, Center for High Angular Resolution Astronomy
Georgia State University
Atlanta, GA 30303
CHARA Website:=``http://www.chara.gsu.edu/CHARA/index.html''
MACROBUTTONHtmlResAnchorhttp://www.chara.gsu.edu/CHARA/index.html
Appendix B: List of immediate concerns and risks transmitted to USFS
USFS must provide opening and closing of USFS electric
access gate to public areas. This activity includes a security sweep of
the public area at gate-closing, and search for and attention to
unattended or inadequately-doused cooking fires.
The USFS 300,000 gallon reservoir has only 7 feet of
water (the maximum depth is 30 feet). Water should be added to ensure
adequate reserve for fire fighting capability.
Two long-dead tall dead ponderosa pines on the public
roads are falling hazards.
Dead tree limbs on the public buildings are fire hazards.
Brush clearance is inadequate near public buildings.
The abandoned A-frame building is so dilapidated that it
must be removed. (On June 9, 2002, USFS kindly boarded the building
from accidental access.)
USFS bathrooms remain closed and unrepaired. If USFS opts
to keep them closed in order to conserve water this year, the USFS
should install portables nearby along with a hand-washing station.
(Mount Wilson currently pays for portables on USFS site.)
USFS needs to commit to plow snow form its portion of the
access road.
USFS needs to remove some trees to close to the roadways
to ensure plowing safety.
USFS needs to widen its electric Front Gate for passage
by emergency vehicles.
USFS needs to repair potholes on its access road.
USFS needs to repair its asphalt at the Front Gate
entrance.
USFS safety fences need repair.
USFS retaining walls need repair.
Some public stairs and walkways are unsafe.
USFS needs to designate an area of the lower parking lot
for emergency/rescue helicopter landing (LA County is re-issuing its
long-standing request).
USFS needs to commit to its partial responsibility for
fire prevention (brush and tree clearance) on the Observatory parcel.
USFS needs to inventory and keep repaired its water
facilities.
USFS needs to ensure that public trash is consistently
removed and kept from bears.
______
Mr. Peterson. We thank both of you, Dr. Huntress and Dr.
Baliunas and Mr. Thompson.
Mr. Inslee, do you have any questions for the panel?
Mr. Inslee. I do. Thank you very much. My questions might
reveal not total familiarity with this issue, so you will
forgive me.
Could you tell us what guarantees are to the public?
Essentially, as I understand it, this is a grant without
consideration to a nonprofit organization. What is the
situation regarding the nonprofit? Could it at some time sell
the property? Are there any restrictions in that regard or
could the nonprofit go out of existence and sell the property?
What guarantees are there of further public use, if you
will tell us.
Ms. Baliunas. This bill conveys to Mount Wilson Institute,
which is a nonprofit. If we become a nonprofit, I presume the
Secretary of Agriculture will come in and remove the land
because of the reversion clause in there. But the language
isn't quite right to do that. Then it should be made right.
But we have no intention of selling the land. We can't.
Mr. Inslee. Maybe you could explain to me why you could
not. If there is a grant to the nonprofit, what restrictions
are there?
Ms. Baliunas. The language in the bill says that Mount
Wilson Institute, as a nonprofit, will operate this. So, Mount
Wilson Institute is not a nonprofit. I presume we are in
violation of the language of the bill and the reversion clause
comes into effect. The determination would be made by the
Secretary of Agriculture.
Furthermore, if we are not conducting research there, if we
are not using this as an observatory, the reversion clause also
comes into effect.
Mr. Inslee. Mr. Peterson could help me on this. As I
understand it, there would be a requirement to be operated as
an observatory?
Ms. Baliunas. Yes.
Mr. Inslee. I appreciate that.
Ms. Baliunas. Either nonprofit. So, both conditions have to
be met.
Mr. Inslee. To what extent is this whole proposal a
response to your perceptions that there has just been a lack of
fulfillment of obligations by the lessor in this situation?
Ms. Baliunas. I have been working with the Congressmen, Mr.
Moorhead, Mr. Rogan, currently Mr. Schiff and in the future, in
January, Mr. Dreier, to address these issues, for 10 years.
There has been very little response. We are pleased that there
has been response over the last few weeks.
But this is now catch-up of more than 10 years of severe
deterioration and open hazards on this land.
Mr. Inslee. Maybe this is kind of an esoteric question, but
I will ask it to you anyway. We have a lot of circumstances
where national forest lands are not adequately repaired. We
have, for instance, an $8 billion backlog in maintenance of our
forest groves.
How do we separate those situations from what you are
proposing? I mean the logical extension of this is when
Congress fails to appropriate enough to maintain these public
lands, is the extension of this that we just sort of privatize
them, we give them away to nonprofits?
Where do we draw boundaries in that regard? That is an open
question to anyone.
Mr. Peterson. If I could respond to that, my thought
processes are, because you just hit the nail on the head, the
$8 billion backlog. This is used for the public good. It is an
observatory used by institutions all over this country. It is
the finest place for observing the stars and sun that there is
in this country. So, it is for the public good.
It would seem to me that it is foolish to require the
Forest Service, when they have a $1 lease, to continue to use
those scarce resources to maintain this facility when the
lessor could raise private funds to keep it up.
The reversion clause is strong. If anybody wants to make it
stronger, I am glad to work with them. But if it is not used as
a research facility, as it has been, then it goes back to the
Forest Service; it is theirs.
So, it is not a matter of putting it into private or for
profit hands. It is strictly for the public good. Shouldn't we
relieve the Forest Service of this cost? In my view that makes
public policy sense when the institute has in the past shown it
can raise funds and has often done the Forest Service
maintenance work and plowed the snow and dealt with the water
problems and dealt with the restaurant facilities and things
which are not uncommon across the country because of the lack
of resources appropriated by Congress for the Forest Service
and other agencies.
So, to me it just seems like nothing is going to change
except there will be private resources brought to bear to
maintain this facility. To me, that just makes public policy
sense. It is sort of like taking the problem away from the
Forest Service.
But if this is not used as a research facility, it goes
back to the forest service.
Mr. Inslee. Could I have one more question? What is the
coolest thing ever discovered at the observatory?
Ms. Baliunas. Oh, I would say in the days of Hubble, the
expansion of the universe, the origin of space time 15 billion
years ago.
Mr. Inslee. I was at a Flagstaff observatory and I thought
they said that one had something to do with the Hubble
research. Are they making that up?
Ms. Baliunas. No. What happened is they had a smaller
telescope and had done initiative measurements and had seen an
expansion of the galaxies. But because Hubble looked at that
and said, that needs to be done with the biggest telescope in
the world, he came to Mount Wilson and turned his genius for
telescopes and the fantastic night sky there to charting
expansion of the universe. So, it was the work at Lowell that
was the seed for it.
Mr. Inslee. Is there any relationship between the expansion
of the universe and the expansion of the Federal deficit?
Perhaps you can work on that.
Ms. Baliunas. One is expanding and one is accelerating.
Mr. Peterson. Well, we have a journal vote. I am told we
should go. Does anybody have a quick question before we go?
Mr. Holt. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to use my time
now. I think we have another probably 14 minutes.
Mr. Peterson. Go ahead. Mr. Holt from New Jersey.
Mr. Holt. Thank you, Mr. Peterson.
Actually, Ms. McCollum was here first. Perhaps she would
like to go first. I apologize.
Ms. McCollum. You have the gavel, but I would like to be
able to hear the testimony, feel that I can record my vote and
come back and ask intelligent questions. I am at a loss for
what to do.
Mr. Peterson. Do you want to proceed, Mr. Holt, and then we
will go vote and then we will come back and Ms. McCollum can
proceed. We will keep the panel here.
Mr. Holt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, there are a number
of questions that come to mind here, partly because of my long
standing personal interest in Mount Wilson and the science that
has come from there. In my former career as a physicist, and
specifically a solar physicist, I have been very interested in
your work, Dr. Baliunas, and the work of others from Mount
Wilson, and in fact, have used work that has come out of there.
So, I want to do anything I can to see that Mount Wilson
continues this great tradition.
First of all, just to get a sense of what we are talking
about in this conveyance of land, I understand the Forest
Service has not done a formal value assessment of this. But can
you give us some idea? Are we talking about a few million
dollars or many tens of millions of dollars in value of the
land here?
Mr. Thompson. Yes. There hasn't been a formal appraisal
done of the property, but the estimates that I have been given
are around $1 million per acre value. That would be, obviously,
for 100 acres would be $100 million, but that is without the
basis of a sound appraisal.
Mr. Holt. So we are talking about significant value here,
so I have some idea of the scale.
Mr. Thompson, one more question: When were you first aware
of Mount Wilson Institute's complaints about the level of
maintenance?
Mr. Thompson. I am not sure. I am sure at the district
level, as the previous witness has testified, there have
probably been ongoing discussions for a number of years. I do
know that the regional forester in the region has kept this as
one of the top priorities, aside from fire, to put her energy
on, on the forest.
There have been meetings and commitments made to turn the
maintenance situation around, specifically with regard to trees
and toilets and some of the other issues with regard to the
tank and other things. There are obviously some pressing
problems that need to be dealt with. The region and the forest
and the district ranger are all committed to put the energy
into it at the appropriate opportunity to make some significant
improvements.
Mr. Holt. Dr. Huntress, in the period reports that come to
Carnegie Institution, I presume, from the management
organization at Mount Wilson Institute, have these problems
that are being described today been reported?
Mr. Huntress. No, Mr. Congressman, we had no reports in
these periodic updates as to any particular difficulties with
the Forest Service.
Mr. Holt. Well, I ask these questions because it sounds as
if there are some legitimate concerns about maintenance. If
visitors have fallen off from more than 1,000 to fewer than
100, that is, I think, a measure that something is wrong. If
the institute is in fact taking on work that the Forest Service
used to do or could do, we should address that.
But it is not clear to me that the conveyance of the land
is the best way or the only way to address it.
Dr. Baliunas, what I am trying to understand, is your goal
here to see that the land is conveyed or that the services are
provided?
Ms. Baliunas. I want what is best for the land. I want the
best public access to the observatory. Our mandate is to
provide information, knowledge, be free and open to the public.
It is in our 1905 lease agreement that we would be free and
open to the public. It is difficult to do when the front gate
is locked, unless we provide that service.
Mr. Holt. OK, so your goal is to see that the front gate is
open--
Ms. Baliunas. Our goal is to see that the public visitors
are best served and that the health of the land is preserved.
Mr. Holt. If you are currently shouldering the cost of
plowing the road and hiring somebody to open the gate and
renting the Porta-Potty and so forth, how would your expenses
be less if the land were transferred to you? You will be doing
those jobs, whether the land belonged to the Forest Service or
it belonged to Mount Wilson Institute.
Ms. Baliunas. Yes, but they would be done with more
assurance, more regularity and more assurance.
Mr. Holt. I guess I don't understand why. I mean you can
hire somebody with all the authority you want to open the gates
or you can hire somebody with as good a plow truck as you want,
regardless of who owns the plant.
Ms. Baliunas. But not for the Forest Service facilities. It
is very difficult for us to take on that liability without
having the authority to do that. So, for example, fixing the
restrooms that are up there, we do not have the authority to do
that unless we are given the facility.
Mr. Holt. The reason I am raising these questions is
because it seems rather suddenly and without any expectation
that the Carnegie Institute is aware of, suddenly the land
needs to be conveyed in order that this maintenance takes
place.
I can understand the risk of fire. That is something that
clearly must be addressed soon. I hear this from all of you.
But it is not clear to me that the conveyance of these hundred
acres necessarily means that.
I mean if the Forest Service is not doing a good job of
fire prevention just outside the hundred acres, that could be
as devastating to you as whether they are doing it within the
hundred acres.
The point is we want to see the Forest Service protecting
that area, not just for the sake of the tradition that resides
there at Mount Wilson, but for the current work. I am not sure
that the conveyance of this hundred acres would make that any
easier.
With regard to the expenses and difficult of the Mount
Wilson Institute, maintaining it, providing for tourists and so
forth, it seems to me that is the same regardless of who owns
the land. If there specific roadblocks literally or
figuratively that the Forest Service is putting in the way of
the Mount Wilson Institute's maintenance, I would like to see a
list of those things and then we can see whether each one of
those things can be addressed by further arrangements with the
Forest Service or whether it can be addressed by a conveyance
of the land.
If it turns out that a conveyance of the land makes sense,
then we can talk about whether it should be done in some fee
simply arrangement or with the taxpayers gift to an institute
that is in some sense serving the public.
Ms. Baliunas. I have a preliminary list attached to my
testimony. July 1, with the forester, we will go through a much
longer list.
Mr. Holt. I think we need to take time to get a full list
here. This is not a small matter.
Mr. Peterson. This meeting is in recess. Please hurry back.
We have three more bills and we have to be out of this room at
11 o'clock. This meeting is in recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. Peterson. The Committee is called back to order. The
Committee hearing was suspended for a vote
We will go now to Ms. McCollum from Minnesota for her
questions.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As this is my first
term on the Committee, I have a couple of really brief
background questions for the Forest Service.
Sir, do you ever have instances where the Forest Service
works with community organizations, community volunteers and
nonprofits to go in and fix up, work on portions of open space
to make them more accessible for the public.
Mr. Thompson. Yes, we do. There are numerous examples
around the country where we work in partnership with
communities, friends of a place, those kinds of things, to
enhance and bring together volunteers. An example that I would
use --
Ms. McCollum. That is fine. I just wanted to know if you
did that, sir.
The other question that I have is more for the spokesperson
for the institute. We keep hearing about this 1905, because it
was a 99-year lease. Maybe the Forest Service can help with
this, too. Was there a gate? Were there public facilities? Were
those all in place in 1909 or have they been added since then?
Ms. Baliunas. I think I can answer that. The 1905 lease was
with a private company. No, the gateway facilities were not in
place. Through a series of bankruptcies and buyouts, a later
private company ended up with a large parcel surrounding the
observatory, including the observatory.
They put in place the public facilities that then were
deeded in 1976 to the Forest Service. So, the Forest Service
was left these facilities.
Ms. McCollum. To the Forest Service, and please forgive me
if I am asking a question that would seem obvious to you, but
as I said, this is the first time I have worked on this issue
here.
In Minnesota, when I served on the Resources Committee,
when the State Forest Service System leased land out, when the
DNR leased land out, the person we leased it to was responsible
for the maintenance.
It appears that the Forest System doesn't handle leases in
that way. Could you tell me, are leases written specific for
what the agreed-upon areas are and if so, I would very much
like to see a copy of the lease that we are describing here
today in the future.
Mr. Thompson. Well, there obviously are some differences
between a lot of the kinds of uses that we with the special use
permits where we have a permit. This is a lease and it is
different.
I don't have the specifics, but I would be more than happy
to provide details of that lease to you.
Ms. McCollum. I thank you. Well then, I am just going to
lay a few things out because I know this bill is still in
progress. I have a concern that we have a lot of, you know,
``You are responsible for this.'' No, you are not responsible
for this. You have a leave for this. You are using the land. It
is available to you yet you expect me to do all the maintenance
kind of stuff.
Being a mom, it kind of reminds me sometimes of the sibling
kind of squabbling about things. That is what it felt like
reading this. That is what it sounds like today hearing it
again. So, I think that sometimes you just need to get back
down to basics. You have to look at what the original agreement
was, not what people promised each other or thought it has
evolved to over the past 99 years because the same people still
aren't here any more. As we proceed forward, whether it be a
lease agreement or whatever, things need to be spelled out
clearly who is responsible for what.
To the Forest Service, I would personally at this time
think I would lean toward figuring out who is responsible for
what. This is a value that is given to the institute to be able
to have the land and maybe work out one of the agreements
between the institute, Carnegie, and the Forest Service. The
Forest Service still has the land in a form. But we figure out
a way to work with the nonprofits to get volunteer groups in
there to do what needs to be done with the Forest Service
adding some supplies and some materials.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Peterson. Ms. Baliunas, would you spell out what is in
the lease currently?
Ms. Baliunas. The lease is now renewed until the year 2203.
Specifically on the issue of forest fire abatement, the 1905
lease says that the lessor and the lessee will share the cost
of abating forest fire risk on the land. Our 40 acres leased
from the -- we do take care of the roads going through there.
The problem is the gateway area, the 60 acres through which one
has to travel, that is totally Forest Service land and for
example, they must plow the roads, they must keep those roads
safe and secure. That has not been done and we have had to do
that. So, that is not a question of the lease; that is a
question of the Forest Service responsibility.
Mr. Peterson. OK. We are going to conclude on this bill. I
just would like to make one statement. It is my view that this
property is used for the public good. I mean Mount Wilson
Institute is a service to all our research universities. It is
not for the private good. It is for the public good. It is a
publicly used facility.
The landowner happens to be the Forest Service. With a $1
lease for one hundred years, they certainly don't get anything
back if they are responsible for all the maintenance. I saw it
as an offer from the institute. Correct me if I am wrong, but
if you own the land, you can go out to the public and get
donations that will allow you to keep this in tiptop shape.
There will be no more arguments.
The use will not change. It will be exactly like it is. If
you ever stop using it for what you are using it for, it is
back to the Forest Service. So nothing changes. I am kind of
practical. It just seems to make sense to me that if Mount
Wilson Institute thinks they can raise the money privately and
keep it in tip top shape and increase visitorship and make it
more available to the public, that is a win-win.
Then the Forest Service would no longer have to use its
very scarce dollars to maintain this property when they don't
get any cash back from it.
To me that just seems like a practical thing. If either of
you would like to comment on that, Mr. Thompson or Ms.
Baliunas.
Mr. Thompson. Well, as I said in my testimony, we look
forward to working with you to resolve some of these issues. We
have concerns maintaining the existing public use of the
property. We also are dedicated and committed to working to
resolve the maintenance issues through partnership, through
bringing together all the interests and improving the situation
and the maintenance there no matter what happens.
So, we are committed to do that. The regional forester is
committed to do that and we certainly look forward to doing a
much better job in the years ahead.
Mr. Peterson. Do you have a concluding comment?
Ms. Baliunas. We look forward to working with the Forest
Service to make a sterling relationship here, to really keep
this property right.
Mr. Peterson. Mr. Huntress, do you have any closing
comments?
Mr. Huntress. I think that in fact if the Forest Service
and the Mount Wilson Institute can find a way to protect this
property and make sure that the historic buildings and
instruments on the top of that mountain are preserved,
protected and maintained in the public interest, that would be
in the best interest of everybody.
Mr. Peterson. I didn't see the gentleman from Arizona come
back. Mr. Hayworth, you are recognized.
Mr. Hayworth. Well, Mr. Chairman, wow, maybe the diet is
working; probably not.
To the witnesses, good morning. To my colleagues, thank you
for being here. Thanks to all our panelists.
Dr. Baliunas, if you could just amplify for the record and
describe the relationship between Mount Wilson and the Carnegie
Institute, please, exactly how it works?
Ms. Baliunas. We have an agreement that says we will
operate the observatory and there will be no money exchanged
between Mount Wilson and Carnegie, that is Carnegie will not
put money into the observatory and we will not have to pay any
rent or any consideration to Carnegie for that.
That permanent agreement went into place in 1992, but it
has been a temporary operating agreement since 1989. We have
put $62 million into the site.
Mr. Hayworth. Now, this is something that needs to be
amplified for people. I understand there may be some
undercurrents. I don't understand what the implications and
suggestions or aspersions have been today in terms of this. But
it seems to me to be a very straightforward process.
Would you repeat the figure again, the amount of money?
Ms. Baliunas. Since 1992, when the permanent agreement went
into place, $62 million of improvements, maintenance and upkeep
that we have raised from public and private resources have gone
onto not only the 45-acre parcel of the observatory, but the
maintenance we have had to do and upkeep on the Forest Service.
Mr. Hayworth. $62 million. Is there a way to estimate how
much of that has gone into upkeep that you have talked about
and that is apparently sorely lacking?
Ms. Baliunas. We have only done the bare minimum on the
Forest Service land because we don't have the authority, but
for the past 6 years, which is all I have tallied so far, it
has been a quarter of a million dollars.
Mr. Hayworth. And this legislation, again to reiterate,
would simply give you the authority to do some of the work that
has not yet been done. I would hope that we can, in the works
of my friends from the Forest Service, work this out because I
think about the time you started this relationship, about 1982,
a former Democratic member of the New York City Council wrote a
book entitled, ``The Death of Common Sense.''
It seems to me imminently reasonable and straightforward
that when an entity wants to step in with full transparency and
the authority of Congress statute and the certainty that if the
nature of the project should change, boom, the relationship is
severed, it seems to me imminently practical, despite some of
the suggestions here, that that be allowed, in the full
transparency of enterprise and good public policy.
It is interesting that some would try to characterize this
in other ways. I thank the witnesses. I thank the Chairman.
Mr. Peterson. We thank the witnesses. We thank the members.
Mr. Peterson. We will now move on to our next bill and
recognize Mr. Hayworth for his comments.
STATEMENT OF J.D. HAYWORTH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Mr. Hayworth. Well, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the
chance to offer testimony today. Mr. Chairman, the Education
Land Grant Act, nicknamed HELGA, sets up a national mechanism
to convey small parcels of U.S. Forest Service land to local
educational agencies for purpose of renovation, expansion or
construction of school facilities.
Mr. Chairman, my colleagues and those who join us today,
you need to understand this. This bill was signed into law on
December 28, 2000, nearly 18 months ago. Now, after nearly a
year and a half, implementation procedures are finally being
completed so that forest supervisors will know how to process
applications received from school districts.
It is sad to say, but implementation of this Education Land
Grant Act by the U.S. Forest Service would be laughable if it
weren't such a tragedy for so many of our nation's schools.
Forest Service personnel circumvented the will of Congress in
so many instances that they may well have been conducting a
clinic entitled, ``How to administratively kill legislation we
don't like.''
Mr. Chairman, perhaps those of us in Congress should call
it, ``What is wrong with bureaucracy.'' Mr. Chairman, in a
Resources Committee held last week to investigate the analysis/
paralysis problem at the Forest Service, I outlined some of the
frustrations I have encountered in simply trying to get the
Forest Service to implement the law of the land.
I will not repeat the long run around given to me by Forest
Service staffers that very nearly sabotaged an Education Land
Grant Act conference I hosted in Phoenix last year. However, I
will simply say that the experience demonstrated to me exactly
what constitutional officers trying to follow the letter of the
law are up against in terms of bureaucratic inertia.
Ultimately, in the recent past, though there have been some
phone calls and signs of promise, it is sadly accurate to
report the Forest Service have demonstrated extreme reluctance
to complete the implementation of this law.
Additionally, Forest Service staff has administratively
determined that schools that apply for conveyance under this
Act would need to pay for various administrative costs,
analysis, and environmental compliance assessments. In fact,
the interim directive that has now finally been distributed
states various costs to be borne by school districts, ``nominal
costs includes the nominal fee of $10 per acre conveyed plus
all costs directly associated with the project that the Forest
Service may incur to evaluate and process the school district's
request to acquire National Forest Service lands under ELGA
such as costs associated with National Environmental Policy Act
Compliance, document preparation, surveys, posting of property
monuments, markers or posts and recordation.''
Another memo distributed by former Forest Service Deputy
Chief James Furnish, mentions that even staff time used to
process requests will need to be paid by the school districts.
The costs associated with the conveyance under ELGA are truly
minimal to the Forest Service, a comparative drop in the bucket
for this agency. Such costs, however, can be absolutely
prohibitive to school districts seeking to expand their
facilities, forcing school districts to pay for such costs
violates both the spirit and the intent of the law.
Instead of jealously guarding their bureaucratic power,
perhaps more accurately bureaucratic license -- still in our
constitutional republic power belongs to the people -- instead
of jealously guarding their bureaucratic license, the Forest
Service needs to consider the contribution that ELGA
conveyances would make to our society, to our school children.
These school children deserve the best possible education
and the best possible setting. Unfortunately, it is the reality
that many school districts cannot afford the cost of acreage
and a new school facilities.
I authored the Act. Let me again state this for the record:
The purpose of HELGA, the purpose of the Education Land Grant
Act was to he cash-strapped school districts by eliminating the
expensive costs associated with purchasing lands. Under current
conditions, this will not become a reality for many school
districts unless the law is now amended to ensure that scarce
education funds are not tied up in paying for Forest Service
bureaucracy and administrative costs.
We must take action.
I thank the Chairman for his time and my colleagues for
their indulgence.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hayworth (H.R. 3802)
follows:]
Statement of The Honorable J.D. Hayworth, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Arizona
Mr. Chairman, the Education Land Grant Act (HELGA) sets up a
national mechanism to convey small parcels of U.S. Forest Service land
to local educational agencies for the purpose of renovation, expansion,
or construction of school facilities. This bill was signed into law on
December 28, 2000 (P.L. 106-577), nearly 18 months ago. Now, after 18
months, implementation procedures are finally being completed, so that
Forest Supervisors will know how to process applications received from
school districts.
In fact, implementation of the Education Land Grant Act by the U.S.
Forest Service would be laughable if it weren't such a tragedyour
nation's schools. Forest Service personnel circumvented the will of the
U.S. Congress in so many instances that they may as well have been
conducting a clinic entitled ``How to Administratively Kill Legislation
We Don't Like.'' Perhaps we should call it, ``What is Wrong with
Bureaucracy.''
Mr. Chairman, in a Resources Committee hearing held last week to
investigate the ``Analysis Paralysis'' problem at the U.S. Forest
Service, I outlined some of the frustrations I have encountered in
simply trying to get the Forest Service to implement the law of the
land. I will not repeat the long run-around given me by Forest Service
staffers that very nearly sabotaged an Education Land Grant Act
conference I hosted in Phoenix last year. However, I will simply say
that the experience showed me just what I am up against. Ultimately,
the Forest Service has shown extreme reluctance to complete the
implementation of this law. Additionally, Forest Service staff has
administratively determined that schools that apply for a conveyance
under this Act would need to pay for various administrative costs,
analyses, and environmental compliance assessments. In fact, the
Interim Directive that has now finally been distributed states various
costs to be borne by school districts:
``Nominal costs includes the nominal fee of $10 per acre
conveyed, plus all costs directly associated with the project
that the Forest Service may incur to evaluate and process a
school district's request to acquire National Forest Service
lands under ELGA, such as, costs associated with National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, document
preparation, surveys, posting of property monuments, markers,
or posts, and recordation.''
Another memo, distributed by former Forest Service Deputy Chief
James Furnish, mentions that even staff time used to process requests
will need to be paid by school districts.
The costs associated with a conveyance under ELGA are truly minimal
to the Forest Service a drop in the bucket for the agency. Such costs,
however, can be absolutely prohibitive to school districts seeking to
expand their facilities. Forcing school districts to pay for such costs
violates the spirit and the intent of the law. Instead of jealously
guarding their bureaucratic ``power'', the Forest Service needs to
consider the contribution ELGA conveyances would make to society and to
our school children.
These school children deserve the best possible education in the
best possible setting. Unfortunately, the reality is that many school
districts cannot afford the costs of acreage and new school facilities.
The purpose of the Education Land Grant Act was to help cash-strapped
school districts by eliminating the expensive costs associated with
purchasing lands. Sadly, this will not become a reality for many school
districts unless the law is now amended to ensure that scarce education
funds are not tied up in paying for Forest Service bureaucracy and
administrative costs.
______
Mr. Peterson. We thank the gentlemen. We recognize Mr.
Thompson from the Forest Service.
STATEMENT OF TOM L. THOMPSON, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
SERVICE
Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Subcommittee. I will provide the Administration's comments on
this bill, H.R. 3802.
H.R. 3802 amends Section 202 of the Education Land Grant
Act by requiring the Secretary of Agriculture to pay the costs
of environmental review for conveyances under ELGA. The
Department does not object to this bill. However, two points:
The measure would prohibit a school district from paying the
cost of environmental reviews if they choose.
In some situations the exchange process might be delayed
because the forest may have other funding priorities or funding
limitations. In those instances, the school district might be
able to expedite the exchange process by paying the costs of
the environmental reviews. But I believe the way the
legislation is drafted, that would not be allowed.
Also, to meet that requirement the Department would likely
need to reprogram funding to effectively implement the bill.
That concludes my statement on the bill. I would be happy
to answer questions.
Mr. Peterson. The gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. Haywood. Again, Mr. Thompson, we thank you for being
here this morning and thank you for your comments.
Let's explore the reasoning and the concerns you have. Is
it possible that in the interaction between local Forest
Service officials and school districts, that you cite that
school districts, if we don't delineate the fact that school
districts could ``fast track'' this by paying these bills,
doesn't that just put into law, if we were to articulate that,
yet another excuse for bureaucratic inertia?
Doesn't that say, well, gee, if you want to move this
faster, you pony up the jack, you come across with the dough.
By that purpose we can go ahead and defeat the intent of the
legislation.
Mr. Thompson. Let me just say, that is not the intent of
the comment there. The intent was to at least provide the
possibility for school districts to do that if they felt like
that would help expedite it and there was not funding available
at that point in time.
Mr. Hayworth. OK. I am sure that is not the intent, but as
I have seen, an interaction with a sabotage of conferences
called by constitutional officers, by certain Forest Service
officials, and again for the record, Mr. Chairman, let me say
that I think many people work in good faith. I have had
conversations with the Under Secretary on these matters and I
understand that people are trying to put good things in place.
My purpose is, in our hearing today, to shake off the
tendency that some folks have in some regions to act like
royalty concerning the forest. In fact, you mentioned something
else that just again offers what is a challenge and I am not
going to dispute, especially with the horrific fire, the Rodeo
fire burning now in what is my Congressional district and the
possibility of Show Low and Pine Top, Arizona being evacuated
today, not to mention the other fires we have seen across the
west and the laudatory the Forest Service does.
Mr. Thompson, in your testimony you also offered remarks
that said, and I think this came up last week as well, to the
effect that with so many duties this falls administratively
down the list. That can be the rationale for slow action.
If you have to fund it, well, that drops it on down the
list, too. Perhaps we should take it under advisement that next
to fire fighting we should articulate the ability for rural
school districts to purchase these conveyances of public land
are the highest and best use of government land. Would that be
helpful to move this up the priority list in the purview of the
Forest Service in implementing the law of the land? Should I
add that language to reflect the intent of Congress?
Mr. Thompson. Mr. Hayworth, I think the challenge that we
have in setting priorities for these land issues is simply one
of making sure that our folks at the ground level are
responsive and are working very closely with the school
districts.
At this point in time we are proceeding with vigor in
responding to the applications we have. We recognize that there
will always be a choice of priorities. That is why I did state
in the testimony that we are going to have to reprogramming
some of our priorities in looking for ways to fund this. It is
going to be a consequence, but we look forward to doing that.
Mr. Hayworth. But again, and I thank you, Mr. Thompson, and
obviously to the extent that you are there to administer and
implement what is the law of the land, perhaps food for thought
today, Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, is to take a look at
language that would specific that next to fire danger and
obvious recreation, the highest and best use.
Perhaps that articulates further and moves this up on the
hit parade of priorities nationwide. And again, let me clear up
any misnomer, while this is most dramatic in the rural west,
our studies indicate 44 of the 50 States can be helped by this
legislation that should be fully implemented.
I thank the gentleman for his comments and the Chairman for
the generous use of the gavel and the time.
Mr. Peterson. The gentlelady from Minnesota, Ms. McCollum.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just so I understand
little bit of legislative history and how it impacts the Forest
Service, sir, this Act was implemented. Was there any funding
that came with the Education Land Grant Act? In other words,
you had new responsibilities, was there any appropriation that
came with the new responsibilities?
Mr. Thompson. Not that I am aware of.
Ms. McCollum. Not that you are aware of. So, in other
words, to implement the Act, you take it out of hide. You take
it out of current programming that you are already doing. If
you have to do environmental compliance studies or anything
else, there is no funding.
Mr. Thompson. Well, it certainly is a responsibility of
ours to administer the law and issue the regulations and
implement it at the ground level. We assume that as our
responsibility as an agency.
Ms. McCollum. I understand that, sir, but I am also trying
to understand. Your responsibility to implement it, I would
think, would come with our responsibility to fund it in order
to allow you to do your job.
The other question I have for you, sir, you have a separate
line appropriation for forest fires. It appears that there was
no funding and following this Act enabling you to implement it
as effectively as it should have been. I don't disagree with
what the gentleman is saying.
The people who work for the Forest Service who would be
responsible for working on the land exchanges, are they the
same employees that are responsible also for managing and
watching what is going on, that we have effective fire fighting
going on right now? Are those the same individuals?
Mr. Thompson. Well, right now we have about 13,000 people
that are on fire duty in the United States. That is closely
approaching what we had in the 2000 fire season. It affects all
of our people in many different ways, even people who are not
directly on the fire line are called up for work in different
ways.
So, yes, there certainly is an effect of the fire
situation. For the next 3 months, we are obviously going to be
putting a tremendous amount of priority on fire. We do have
lands people, people who would work on this kind of thing, who
are called out and on fire teams. I hope that answers your
question.
Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chairman, I can certainly see the
gentleman's frustration with not having it done, but I become
concerned when we ask more and more, whether it be the Forest
Service or any other group, the Department of Education. We
talk about unfunded mandates, how we shouldn't have unfunded
mandates. But I think sometimes we need to sit down and maybe
reprioritize, as you suggested, or realize and listen seriously
that there are some needs, especially with the Forest Service
with what is going on right now with employees being torn both
ways.
I would like to learn more about it and find out how we can
be more effective so that we can accomplish your goal.
Mr. Hayworth. Would my friend from Minnesota yield?
Ms. McCollum. I am out of time.
Mr. Hayworth. Mr. Chairman, could I be recognized?
Mr. Peterson. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Arizona.
Mr. Hayworth. Very briefly. I thank my friend from
Minnesota for her comments.
Just a couple of notes that I think we need to amplify for
the record. When the legislation was proposed, before it was
signed into law, it was deemed to be revenue neutral with
minimal costs. The costs, sadly for many rural school
districts, what the Federal Government deems ``minimal'' are
substantial costs for poor, rural schools.
Indeed, I would hope that even dealing with the horrific
fires that we deal with now, that we can evaluate and get the
help of the Forest Service to serve these rural school children
in the districts.
I thank you all.
Mr. Peterson. I want to thank the members and the
witnesses. The members of the Subcommittee may have some
additional questions for the witnesses. We ask you to respond
to those in writing. The hearing record will be held open for
10 days for those responses. That includes the previous bill we
just passed. I failed to read that paragraph for the record.
Mr. Peterson. Now we introduce our fourth bill, H.R. 4919.
We are very short on time. We need to be very quick. We have
two more bills and only a few minutes.
Mr. Peterson. I recognize the gentleman, Mr. Hayworth.
Mr. Hayworth. Mr. Chairman, I thank you. I will move
expeditiously.
H.R. 4919, the Tonto and Coconino National Forests Land
Exchange Act authorizes, directs and expedites two land
exchanges in the Tonto and Coconino National Forests in
Arizona. The Montezuma Castle, Payson Airport land exchange and
the Diamond Point Land exchange.
This legislation authorizes the Forest Service to enter
into equal value land swaps to acquire a 157-acre parcel of
private land to enhance and protect the Montezuma Castle
National Monument as well as a 143-acre open meadow wildlife
habitat known and Double Cabin Park. Both parcels are in the
Coconino National Forest.
In exchange, approximately 221 acres of National Forest
property adjoining the Town of Payson Municipal Airport would
be acquired. The property is held by the Montezuma Land
Exchange Joint Venture, an Arizona partnership of local
residents formed to promote economic development.
The Town of Payson has entered into an agreement with the
Joint Venture folks to purchase a portion of the property to
create private sector business development and job
opportunities.
Members of the Committee and my colleagues, you need to
know that Payson, Arizona is totally surrounded by National
Forest lands and that virtually landlocks the entire community.
Local officials feel the lack of land for industry and low-cost
housing is the major obstacle to economic development in their
region.
The legislation also authorizes the Forest Service to
acquire a 495-acre parcel known as the Q Ranch which is
currently owned by the Conservation Fund. In exchange, the
Diamond Point Summer Homes Association will acquire 108 acres
of Federal land that has been occupied by the group's 45
residential cabins since the 1950's.
The Tonto National Forest plan specifically recommendation
conveyance of the Federal land. The exchange will transfer land
of limited public use to the association in exchange for
private lands that will increase management efficiency and
enhance public access, use and enjoyment of the surround
National Forest lands.
I again reference last week's Resources hearings on
analysis/paralysis in explaining the need for the exchanges to
be accomplished by means of legislation. These two exchanges
have been pending for more than 6 years with no conclusion
anywhere in sight.
In fact, Mr. Chairman, you will be interested to know that
since the Diamond Point Land Exchange began, the administrative
process on the Tonto National Forest to complete this, four of
the 45 home owners have died. This is common sense legislation
that accomplishes goals that even the Forest Service has stated
are a priority.
The land exchanges are endorsed by the Gila County Board of
Supervisors, the Rim County Regional Chamber of Commerce, the
Town of Payson, the Payson Regional Economic Development
Corporation and the National Park Service among others.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, that completes my statement.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hayworth (H.R. 4919)
follows:]
Statement of The Honorable J.D. Hayworth, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Arizona
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 4919, the Tonto and Coconino National Forests
Land Exchange Act authorizes, directs and expedites two land exchanges
in the Tonto and Coconino National Forests in Arizona: the Montezuma
Castle/Payson Airport Land Exchange and the Diamond Point Land
Exchange.
The legislation authorizes the Forest Service to enter into equal-
value land swaps to acquire a 157-acre parcel of private land to
enhance and protect the Montezuma Castle National Monument, as well as
a 143-acre open meadow wildlife habitat known as Double Cabin Park.
Both parcels are in the Coconino National Forest.
In exchange, approximately 221 acres of national forest property
adjoining the Town of Payson municipal airport would be acquired. The
property is held by the Montezuma Castle Land Exchange Joint Venture
(MCLEJV), an Arizona partnership of local residents formed to promote
economic development. The Town of Payson has entered into an agreement
with MCLEJV to purchase a portion of the property to create private
sector business development and job opportunities.
Payson is totally surrounded by national forest lands, virtually
land-locking the community. Local officials feel that the lack of land
for industry and low-cost housing is the major obstacle to economic
development in the region.
The legislation also authorizes the Forest Service to acquire a
495-acre parcel known as the Q Ranch, which is currently owned by The
Conservation Fund. In exchange, the Diamond Point Summer Homes
Association will acquire 108 acres of Federal land that has been
occupied by the group's 45 residential cabins since the 1950's.
The Tonto National Forest Plan specifically recommends conveyance
of the Federal land. The exchange will transfer land of limited public
use to the association in exchange for private lands that will increase
management efficiency and enhance public access, use and enjoyment of
the surrounding national forest lands.
I again reference last week's Resources hearing on ``Analysis
Paralysis'' in explaining the need for these exchanges to be
accomplished by means of a legislative fix. These two exchanges have
been pending for more than 6 years, with no conclusion anywhere in
sight. In fact, Mr. Chairman, you will be interested to know that since
the Diamond Point land exchange began the administrative process on the
Tonto National Forest, 4 of the 45 homeowners have died.
This is common-sense legislation that accomplishes goals that even
the Forest Service has stated are a priority. These land exchanges are
endorsed by the Gila County Board of Supervisors, the Rim County
Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Town of Payson, the Payson Regional
Economic Development Corporation, and the National Park Service, among
others.
______
STATEMENT OF TOM L. THOMPSON, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
SYSTEM
Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Comments on H.R.
4919. It directs the Secretary to exchange approximately 108
acres of land within the Tonto National Forest near Payson,
currently occupied by 45 resident cabins under a special use
permit for 495 acres of non-Federal land called the Q Ranch
within the Tonto.
This exchange is identified in the bill as the Diamond
Point-Q Ranch land exchange. The bill also directs the
Secretary to exchange approximately 222 acres of National
Forest System land adjacent to the town of Payson near the
airport for approximately 157 acres of private land owned by
Montezuma Castle Land Exchange adjacent to the Montezuma Castle
National Monument, and also nearly 143 acres of private land at
the Double Cabin parklands.
Both the private parcels are within the Coconino National
Forest. The bill requires that the values of the non-Federal
and Federal land be exchanged or equalized as determined by the
Secretary through an appraisal by a qualified appraiser and
performed in conformance with the uniform appraisal standards
for the Federal land acquisitions and Federal land policy and
management act.
The bill requires the Secretary to execute the Montezuma
Castle and Diamond Point land exchanges within 6 months after
receipt of an offer from the private landowners unless the
Secretary and private landowners mutually agree to extend the
deadline.
The Department supports the concept of exchanging the
National Forest System lands, which were identified in H.R.
4919. However, we can meet this objective by utilizing existing
statutory authorities. In fact, the Diamond Point land exchange
is currently being evaluated through our administrative
exchange process and we anticipate completing the environmental
analysis and making a decision on this proposal in March of
2003.
However, passage of legislation certainly could conclude
this process more quickly.
We have completed an initial review relative to the
conveyance of National Forest System lands to Payson, Arizona
Airport. We believe a competitive exchange process utilizing
competing market forces would best meet the public interest in
identifying priority private lands for acquisition.
Due to the rapidly market variables in this major growth
area and multiple interest anticipated for this Federal parcel,
this competitive approach would serve as a more reliable means
of estimating value of the Federal lands.
The Forest Service intends to initiate this competitive
proposal this calendar year and all interested parties will be
encouraged to participate in the process.
That concludes my testimony. I would be happy to answer
questions.
Mr. Peterson. The gentleman, Mr. Ferguson, you are
recognized.
STATEMENT OF JERRELL FERGUSON, DIAMOND POINT SUMMER HOMES
ASSOCIATION
Mr. Ferguson. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Jerrell
Ferguson. I am a member of the Diamond Point Summer Homes
Association.
In the interest of time, I would like to summarize my
remarks. I submitted a written statement to the Subcommittee.
Most of the details you have heard already. What I would
like to point out is that we have had numerous meetings with
the Forest Service representatives at all levels. While they
offer significant vocal support, there really has been almost
no progress whatsoever. I mean, we started back in 1999 with
this.
This exchange is so clearly in the public interest that it
is really difficult to explain why the Forest Service has been
really incapable of moving it forward under their
administrative process.I, as a person, am pretty significantly
unhappy with it.
Although I don't represent the private proponents of the
Montezuma Castle land exchange, I would like to speak on their
behalf. Like my association, they have been excessively delayed
in their efforts to complete a straightforward exchange.
The Payson land exchange was proposed to the Forest Service
in May 1994. the Forest Service encouraged the Payson four
investors to buy private lands, but the agency never authorized
the documents required to initiative an administrative
exchange.
After years of frustration, a number of investors sold
those lands on the private market. Now, with the January 2000
encouragement of the former Tonto National Forest supervisor,
the remaining investors spent more money on restructuring the
proposal.
The exchange is supported by the Town of Payson, the Gila
County Board of Supervisors, the Payson Regional Economic
Development group, the Rim Country Chamber of Commerce and the
National Park Service. We have evidence of all of that.
Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ferguson (H.R. 4919)
follows:]
Statement of Jerrell Ferguson, Diamond Point Summer Homes Association
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Jerrell
(``Jim'') Ferguson, and I am a member of the Diamond Point Summer Homes
Association. Our association has 45 residential cabins currently
permitted on Federal land within the Tonto National Forest east of
Payson, Arizona.
Diamond Point Land Exchange
Over forty years ago, under a program to encourage public use of
the nation's forests, the U.S. Forest Service permitted our members to
build cabins on a parcel of National Forest land located near Diamond
Point. Like other similar ``recreation residences'', the 108-acre
parcel has no public access and is managed as if in private ownership,
with a number of roads, driveways, water systems, and other
improvements associated with the residences.
The Federal land was identified for disposal in the 1985 Tonto
National Forest Plan. We began discussing a land exchange with the
Forest Service in 1999. In November 2000, we proposed an exchange of
the 495-acre Q Ranch parcel for the Federal land underlying our members
' cabins. Because the Q Ranch acquisition was of such significant
public interest, and because the owner of the Ranch had listed it for
sale on the private market, The Conservation Fund, a national leader in
land protection, agreed to purchase the property and option it to the
Association for use in the land exchange. The Forest Service confirmed
that the Q Ranch was a very high priority for Federal acquisition and
encouraged us to proceed with the exchange proposal.
Since that time, we have paid for a land survey and a cultural
resources inventory of the Federal property. The Conservation Fund
spent over $2 million dollars of their limited resources on the Q
Ranch, anticipating the exchange would have been completed by now, and
thereby releasing their funds for further land protection work. We have
had numerous meetings with Forest Service representatives at all levels
and while their vocal support for the transaction remains strong,
almost no progress has been made in advancing the process. In fact, as
alluded to by Congressman Hayworth, in the seventeen months since our
first formal proposal to the Forest Service, four of our members have
died. Yet the agency has still not executed the non-binding Agreement
to Initiate the exchange process.
The Federal land proposed for conveyance to the private sector is
already treated like private land and was specifically identified in
the Forest Plan for disposal. The Q Ranch acquisition represents the
third and final transaction necessary for the United States to acquire
a major inholding in the Tonto National Forest. The exchange proposal
has enjoyed broad support and literally no opposition. This exchange is
so clearly in the public interest, it is difficult to explain why the
Forest Service has been incapable of moving it forward under the
administrative process.
Montezuma Castle Land Exchange
Although I do not represent the private proponents of the Montezuma
Castle Land Exchange, I am prepared to speak on their behalf. Since the
mid 1990's, they have been frustrated in their efforts to complete a
straight-forward exchange with the Forest Service.
This land exchange was originally proposed to the Forest Service in
May 1994 and included a number of parcels of non-Federal land in
exchange Federal land within and around the Town of Payson. The Forest
Service had encouraged the acquisition of the private lands for the
exchange, including the Montezuma Castle and Double Cabin Park parcels.
However, the agency never authorized the documents required to initiate
an administrative exchange. The local landowners endured years of
frustration, and significant investment in cultural resources surveys,
valuation work and NEPA studies.
With the January 2000 encouragement of the former Tonto National
Forest Supervisor and the Town of Payson, the participants spent
additional funds to restructure and reduce the size of the exchange
proposal. However, with a change in Forest Supervisors, the agency then
abandoned the exchange, and the local investors were left holding
millions of dollars worth of land that the Forest Service had
encouraged them to purchase. The current Montezuma Castle Land Exchange
proposal involves approximately 222 acres of Federal land needed for
commercial and residential development within the Town of Payson.
The land at Montezuma Castle is critical to the Monument's views
shed, and includes important riparian habitat along Beaver Creek. The
land at Double Cabin Park includes a vast high meadow and wetlands that
provide important wildlife habitat. Congressman Hayworth's legislation
authorizes the Forest Service to transfer all or a portion of the
Montezuma Castle parcel to the National Park Service if deemed
appropriate by the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture. The
exchange is supported by the Town of Payson, the Gila County Board of
Supervisors, the Payson Regional Economic Development Group, the Rim
Country Regional Chamber of Commerce, and the National Park Service.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony, with one exception. I
want to once again personally thank Congressman Hayworth and you for
holding this hearing and hopefully passing legislation that will ensure
that highly desirable lands are secured for the public, while the
interests of private individuals and the Town of Payson are served.
______
Mr. Peterson. Does the gentleman from Arizona have any
further comments?
Mr. Hayworth. I have just a quick question. As I pointed
out, I think it needs to be amplified, this process on the land
exchange has been going on for 6 years?
Mr. Ferguson. Well, the Payson Four exchange has been since
1994. The Forest Service had some problems with it. They said,
``Well, reduce it and bring it back.'' So, that is what the
folks did. They reduced it and brought it back. And it is
hanging out there.
Mr. Hayworth. Is there a situation when it seems like
things are working out suddenly personnel are shifted and it is
kind of like starting all over again?
Mr. Ferguson. Yeah, well, we have had some changes in the
supervisors. One of the problems that we have had is that we
get promises, but we don't get any action. Again, like I said,
we get good vocal support, but we don't get any action. We get
told things will get done in 2 weeks and it is 6 months later.
Mr. Hayworth. What we have found in the political realm is
that talk is cheap, but action is sometimes rare. I thank the
gentleman for his testimony. I think it compels us to move
legislatively.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Peterson. The gentlelady from Minnesota? No comments?
I want to thank all the members and the witnesses. The
members of the Subcommittee may have additional questions for
the witnesses. We ask you to respond to those in writing. The
hearing record will be open for 10 days for those responses.
Mr. Peterson. Now, for our last bill, H.R. 4917, a bill
introduced by Congressman Elton Gallegly.
Mr. Peterson. Due to a scheduling conflict, Mr. Gallegly
won't be able to attend today's hearing, but has asked that his
opening statement be submitted to the record.
Without objection, it is so ordered
[The prepared statement of Mr. Elton Gallegly follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Elton Gallegly, a Representative in Congress
from the State of California, on H.R. 4917
Thank you Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this opportunity to testify
today on H.R. 4917, the Los Padres National Forest Land Exchange Act, a
bill I introduced to facilitate a land exchange between the U.S. Forest
Service and the United Water Conservation District, a local government
agency. Under this legislation, the U.S. Forest Service will convey 420
acres to United Water. Of that total, 290 acres are mud-flats
surrounding Lake Piru, 80 acres are campground, and 50 acres are
primarily two separate sections of Blue Point Road. United Water will
convey 340 acres to the Forest Service, which includes the western
parts of Lisk Ranch. The land is open space within the Los Padres
National Forest previously used for grazing leases. The 340 acres also
includes the beginning of the Potholes Trail, which runs from the Lisk
Ranch to the Sespe Wilderness Area.
This exchange benefits both the Forest Service and United Water. If
enacted, the Forest Service will own the entire western part of Lisk
Ranch, which is open space. The Forest Service will also own the entire
Potholes trail, which begins in Lisk Ranch. United Water has also
promised, as stated in this bill, to pay for and build a gravel parking
lot at the Potholes trailhead to facilitate more visitor access to that
trail. In addition, the Forest Service will no longer have to maintain
the Blue Point Campground, which has been closed since 1995. The
campground is two hours away from the nearest ranger station, and the
Forest Service does not have the resources necessary to keep it open
and patrol the arroyo toad habitat on that campground. In addition, the
Forest Service will no longer have to maintain the entire Blue Point
Road, which runs the length of the lake up through the Blue Point
Campground. Although the Forest Service testified that they were
concerned that United Water will be able to regulate vehicular access
to this road, vehicular access to this road is already strictly
regulated. As the letter from United Water I am submitting for the
record states, United Water has already agreed that the public will
have unrestricted access via foot, horse or bicycle throughout all
United Water lands. However, vehicular access will not change from the
current pattern.
United Water will benefit from this legislation as well. The water
agency will own all the land that surrounding Lake Piru. This will
allow for better management of United Water's operations with less
bureaucracy. In addition, United Water will be able to open the Blue
Point Campground on a limited basis for a small user fee. United Water
already runs recreational programs around its property. United Water
will also be able to patrol and better maintain the Arroyo Toad habitat
on that campground. The water agency will also own the entire Blue
Point Road.
In addition, if these tracts of Federal land around Lake Piru
become the property of United Water it would own all the land around
the operation of the Santa Felicia Dam, which they already own and
operate. It is my understanding that this would remove the Forest
Service as a principal in the management of the dam, as currently
allowed under Section 4(e) of the Federal Power Act, and therefore
remove a bureaucratic layer in the management of the dam.
The cost of the exchange should be minimal. Since the date of the
hearing in the Subcommittee on Forests and Forests Health, both United
Water and the Forest Service have agreed to share the costs of any
appraisals or land surveys to be done after enactment. Should the land
to be exchanged by the Forest Service exceed twenty-five percent of the
value of the land to be given up by United Water, the bill allows
United Water to pay a cash-equalization payment in excess of the
twenty-five percent. Any cash equalization payment can be used by the
Los Padres National Forest for the improvement of recreational or
administrative facilities. Although the Forest Service testified
against this language, I hold firm that the maintenance backlog of our
national forests is paramount to additional land acquisition. However,
if the Forest Service read my legislation, they would have seen that
this language provides for an option for funds to go towards
maintenance. For the record, I am submitting an article highlighting
the maintenance backlog in the Los Padres, which should make clear the
need for this language.
This legislation will have a positive impact on recreational access
for the public. The majority of the land that the Forest Service is
exchanging to United Water are mud-flats which are partially covered by
water from Lake Piru during part of the year. No recreational activity
occurs on the mud-flats. Blue Point Campground is the only parcel that
has any recreational value. However, the campground has been closed
since 1995. After enactment of this bill, United Water will open this
campground to the public on a limited basis for a small user fee. This
will have the effect of providing families access to a campground for
this first time in years.
All recreational fishing activity and kayaking on Lake Piru will
still be maintained through United Water's existing recreational
programs. The land to be exchanged by United Water is currently used
for cattle leasing activity. However, the last lease has expired and
all grazing activity has recently ceased. The Potholes Trail runs
through this property as well. The public already has access to this
trail.
This bill will also enhance the protection of the endangered arroyo
toad. Currently there is arroyo toad habitat in the Blue Point
Campground. The campground is in a remote location and the nearest
ranger station is two hours away. For this reason, the Forest Service
does not have the resources necessary to adequately patrol and protect
this habitat. United Water is willing to manage this habitat and patrol
it with much more frequently than the Forest Service. In addition,
United Water already has experience managing arroyo toad habitat on the
easterly part of Lisk Ranch, which it already owns. In addition, United
Water has pledged to work with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to
draft a biological opinion to manage the arroyo toad habitat on the
Blue Point Campground. The campground would only be opened during
periods that will not harm the arroyo toad.
I believe this exchange is a win-win for the public, the Los Padres
National Forest and the United Water Conservation District. I
appreciate this Committee's help in holding this hearing and urge this
Committee to schedule this measure for a markup soon.
______
Mr. Peterson. Now we will move on to Mr. Thompson's
comments. You may proceed.
STATEMENT BY TOM L. THOMPSON, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST
SYSTEM
Mr. Thompson. Mr. Chairman, again, thank you and members of
the Subcommittee for this opportunity to testify on H.R. 4917.
H.R. 4917 authorizes the Secretary to exchange 420 acres of
National Forest System land for approximately 340 acres of
inholdings in the Los Padres National Forest.
The United Water Conservation District of California owns
the inholdings. This exchange would consolidate interior land
boundaries of the Ojai Ranger District of the Los Padres
National Forest and would provide UWCD with continuous
ownership around Lake Piru.
The bill requires the UWCD to construct a gravel parking
area upon UWCD lands for the Potholes trailhead of the Los
Padres National Forest. It also would protect the existing
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license for less than a 5-
megawatt generator at the outfall.
The Department supports H.R. 4917, but we are concerned
about the control the bill would give to UWCD regarding
restricting public vehicle access. Any decisions on regulating
vehicle access should be made in consultation with the Los
Padres Forest Supervisor.
Additionally, the bill does not specify whether the Forest
Service or United Water Conservation District of California
will pay for the associated cost of the land exchange. We
believe it is in both parties interest to have the UWCD
significantly share in the costs of processing this
transaction.
Finally, we believe that any receipts from cash
equalization that are deposited into the Sisk Act Fund should
be used to acquire replacement lands within the Los Padres
National Forest instead of being used toward facilities.
We would again like to thank the Committee for this
opportunity and we are willing to address any questions.
Mr. Peterson. Are there any questions?
No questions forthcoming, I want to thank the gentleman for
his patience today.
If there is no further business before the Subcommittee,
the Chairman again thanks the members of the Subcommittee and
our witnesses.
Members do have the right to submit questions for the
record.
Mr. Peterson. This meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:08 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]