[House Hearing, 108 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 1616 and H.R. 1964
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
June 17, 2003
__________
Serial No. 108-26
__________
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
______
87-737 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
RICHARD W. POMBO, California, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
Jim Saxton, New Jersey Samoa
Elton Gallegly, California Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Ken Calvert, California Calvin M. Dooley, California
Scott McInnis, Colorado Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Islands
George Radanovich, California Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Jay Inslee, Washington
Carolina Grace F. Napolitano, California
Chris Cannon, Utah Tom Udall, New Mexico
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Mark Udall, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada, Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Vice Chairman Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
Greg Walden, Oregon Dennis A. Cardoza, California
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona George Miller, California
Tom Osborne, Nebraska Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
Jeff Flake, Arizona Ruben Hinojosa, Texas
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana Ciro D. Rodriguez, Texas
Rick Renzi, Arizona Joe Baca, California
Tom Cole, Oklahoma Betty McCollum, Minnesota
Stevan Pearce, New Mexico
Rob Bishop, Utah
Devin Nunes, California
VACANCY
Steven J. Ding, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California, Chairman
DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands, Ranking Democrat Member
Elton Gallegly, California Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Tom Udall, New Mexico
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Mark Udall, Colorado
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Carolina Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
Chris Cannon, Utah Dennis A. Cardoza, California
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Nick J. Rahall II, West Virginia,
Mark E. Souder, Indiana ex officio
Rob Bishop, Utah
Richard W. Pombo, California, ex
officio
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 17, 2003.................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Christensen, Hon. Donna M., a Delegate in Congress from the
Virgin Islands............................................. 2
Frelinghuysen, Hon. Rodney, a Representative in Congress from
the State of New Jersey.................................... 5
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 6
Garrett, Hon. Scott, a Representative in Congress from the
State of New Jersey........................................ 7
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 9
Kelly, Hon. Sue W., a Representative in Congress from the
State of New York.......................................... 10
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 11
Lewis, Hon. John, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Georgia................................................. 3
Prepared statement on H.R. 1616.......................... 4
Radanovich, Hon. George P., a Representative in Congress from
the State of California.................................... 1
Prepared statement on H.R. 1616 and H.R. 1964............ 2
Saxton, Hon. Jim, a Representative in Congress from the State
of New Jersey.............................................. 12
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 12
Statement of Witnesses:
Jones, A. Durand, Deputy Director, National Park Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C........... 25
Prepared statement on H.R. 1616.......................... 26
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 27
Nordstrom, Hon. Margaret, Freeholder, Morris County Board of
Freeholders, Long Valley, New Jersey....................... 29
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 31
Shaw, Stephen H., Immediate Past President, New Jersey
Builders Association, Mountain Lake, New Jersey............ 32
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 33
Tenny, David, Deputy Under Secretary, Natural Resources and
Environment, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington,
D.C........................................................ 13
Prepared statement on H.R. 1964.......................... 14
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 1616, TO AUTHORIZE THE EXCHANGE OF CERTAIN
LANDS WITHIN THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JUNIOR, NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE FOR
LANDS OWNED BY THE CITY OF ATLANTA, GEORGIA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES;
AND H.R. 1964, TO ESTABLISH THE HIGHLANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA IN THE
STATES OF CONNECTICUT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND PENNSYLVANIA, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.
----------
Tuesday, June 17, 2003
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:02 p.m., in
room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. George
Radanovich [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Radanovich and Christensen.
Also Present on Dais: Representatives Frelinghuysen and
Saxton.
STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE RADANOVICH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Mr. Radanovich. Good afternoon. The Subcommittee on
National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands, Committee on
Resources, will come to order for a hearing on H.R. 1616 and
H.R. 1964. I want to welcome everybody to this Subcommittee
hearing and let you know that our first bill, H.R. 1616, which
is introduced by Congressman Lewis of Georgia, will authorize
the exchange of certain lands within the Martin Luther King,
Junior, National Historic Site for lands owned by the City of
Atlanta, Georgia.
Our other bill, H.R. 1964, introduced by Congressman
Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, would establish the Highlands
Stewardship Area in the State of Connecticut, New Jersey, New
Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Before running, before turning the time over to Mrs.
Christensen, I would ask unanimous consent that Mr. Lewis, Mr.
Frelinghuysen, Mr. Garrett and Ms. Kelly would be permitted to
sit on the dais following the statements.
Without any objection, so ordered.
And I now turn to my Ranking Member, Mrs. Donna
Christensen, from the Virgin Islands, for your opening
statement.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Radanovich follows:]
Statement of The Honorable George Radanovich, Chairman, Subcommittee on
National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands,, on H.R. 1616 and H.R.
1964
Good afternoon. The hearing will come to order.
This afternoon, the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and
Public Lands will receive testimony on two bills--H.R. 1616 and H.R.
1964.
Our first bill, H.R. 1616, introduced by Congressman Lewis of
Georgia, authorize the exchange of certain lands within the Martin
Luther King, Junior, National Historic Site for lands owned by the City
of Atlanta, Georgia.
Our other bill, H.R. 1964, introduced by Congressman Frelinghuysen
of New Jersey, would establish the Highlands Stewardship Area in the
States of Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.
Before turning the time over to Mrs. Christensen, I would ask
unanimous consent that Mr. Lewis, Mr. Frelinghuysen, Mr. Garrett and
Ms. Kelly be permitted to sit on the dais following their statements.
Without objection, so ordered.
I now turn to the Ranking Member, Mrs. Christensen for any opening
statement she may have.
______
STATEMENT OF HON. DONNA CHRISTENSEN, A DELEGATE TO CONGRESS
FROM THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
Mrs. Christensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to welcome our colleagues and the other
panelists here today, particularly to welcome Congressman
Lewis, who I understand served on this Subcommittee when he
first came to Congress. So it is nice to welcome you back,
John.
Today, we are meeting to receive testimony on two unrelated
bills. The first bill, H.R. 1616, introduced by my good friend
and colleague, Representative John Lewis, authorizes an
exchange of land between the National Park Service and the City
of Atlanta at the Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic
site.
It is my understanding that both the National Park Service
and the City of Atlanta support this exchange and that the
exchange would benefit both the National Historic Site and the
city. This looks to be a win-win situation, and I am especially
interested in learning the details, since I, too, am working on
a proposal to address the needs of a local community and
national park unit in my district that involves the Virgin
Islands National Park and the local Government on the Island of
St. John.
Our second bill, H.R. 1964, is an ambitious proposal to
provide for a new designation of more than two million acres,
covering parts of four States as the Highlands Stewardship
area. Over the years, a number of studies, plans and projects
have been developed to further stewardship goals and
conservation strategies for the Highlands region.
In the highly populated Northeastern United States, there
seems to be a lot of interest in finding ways to conserve the
natural agricultural and cultural resources of the region for
both the residents of and visitors to the Highland area.
Mr. Chairman, I would, again, like to welcome our
colleagues and look forward to hearing more about the two
measures before us today.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Donna.
We will go ahead and ask the first of three panels to come
forward. We are privileged and honored to have so many of our
colleagues here with us today to speak on these two bills; the
Honorable John Lewis from the 5th District of Georgia. John,
welcome to the Subcommittee; the Honorable Rodney
Frelinghuysen, representing the 11th District of New Jersey.
Rod, welcome; and the Honorable Scott Garrett, representing the
5th District of New Jersey. Scott, welcome to the Subcommittee;
and also Sue Kelly if she is--from New York--if she does come.
We are going to go ahead and start with each testimony 5
minutes with each, and after that, if there are any questions
we may ask, and then the gentleman are welcome to join us on
the dais for the rest of the hearing and the consideration of
the following two panels.
Mr. Lewis, welcome, if you would like to begin your
testimony. Welcome back, and please begin.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN LEWIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF GEORGIA
Mr. Lewis of Georgia. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and
Madam Ranking Member. Thank you very, very much for having me
here to talk about 1616, H.R. 1616.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to come before
you today to discuss H.R. 1616, the Martin Luther King, Junior,
National Historic Site Land Exchange Act. H.R. 1616 would amend
Public Law 96-428, the Act that established a Martin Luther
King, Junior, National Historic Site. This bill authorizes the
exchange of land owned by the National Park Service, a land of
equal or greater value, from the City of Atlanta.
H.R. 1616 is necessary in order to facilitate an agreement
to exchange land between the National Park Service and the City
of Atlanta. This exchange will allow the Martin Luther King,
Junior, National Historic Site to create an emergency access to
and from the site.
The City of Atlanta has expressed interest in acquiring
property from the National Park Service in order to encourage
commercial development in the community. Likewise, the National
Park Service has expressed interest in acquiring land owned by
the City of Atlanta that surrounds the Martin Luther King,
Junior, National Historic visitor center.
This legislation is so important because the Martin Luther
King, Junior, National Historic Site visitor center and museum
is landlocked and has no emergency access, making it virtually
impossible for firefighting equipment to reach the facility. In
fact, if there was a fire at the visitor center, the Atlanta
Fire Department would have to walk at least 150 to 200 yards in
order to reach the Center. Luckily, we have not been faced with
such an outcome. However, we must be prepared for the
heightened security concerns at our Nation's monuments and
parks. Emergency access is very critical.
This bill is a win-win for all parties. The acquisition of
city-owned property would enable the National Park Service to
establish easy street access to the Martin Luther King, Junior,
National Historic Site visitor center and museum and would
benefit the City of Atlanta by changing a piece of property
that the city could develop into a commercial center.
Mr. Chairman, Atlanta is the heart of the South. It is the
gateway to the new South and home to a progressive residential
and viable business community.
The Martin Luther King, Junior, National Historic Site is
adjacent to one of Atlanta's most preserved communities. It is
a gathering place where people from all over the world travel
to learn and study our Nation's history, study the history of
the civil rights movement, the history of Martin Luther King,
Junior.
Furthermore, the Martin Luther King, Junior, National
Historic Site is central to the growth and prosperity of the
surrounding community. Currently, both the National Park
Service and the City of Atlanta support H.R. 1616. Community
residents strongly support this legislation as well. We must do
all that we can to preserve this important part of our history.
H.R. 1616 plays a small, but important, role in achieving
this responsibility. Again, thank you for your consideration,
and I ask for your support of this piece of legislation, Mr.
Chairman.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Congressman Lewis.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lewis follows:]
Statement of The Honorable John Lewis, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Georgia, on H.R. 1616
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. Thank
you for allowing me the opportunity to come before you today to discuss
H.R. 1616, the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site Land
Exchange Act.
H.R. 1616 would amend Public-Law 96-428, the act that established
the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site. This bill
authorizes the exchange of land owned by the National Park Service for
land of equal or greater value from the City of Atlanta.
H.R. 1616 is necessary in order to facilitate an agreement to
exchange land between the National Park Service and the City of
Atlanta. This exchange will allow the Martin Luther King, Jr. National
Historic Site to create an emergency access to and from the site.
The City of Atlanta has expressed interest in acquiring property
from the National Park Service in order to encourage commercial
development in the community. Likewise, the National Park Service has
expressed interest in acquiring land owned by the City of Atlanta that
surrounds the Martin Luther King National Historic Visitor Center.
This legislation is so important because The Martin Luther King,
Jr. National Historic Site Visitor Center and Museum is land locked and
has no emergency access, making it virtually impossible for
firefighting equipment to reach the facility.
In fact, if there were a fire at the Visitor Center, The Atlanta
Fire Department would have to walk at least 150 to 200 yards in order
to reach the Center.
Luckily, we have not been faced with such an outcome. However, we
must be prepared. Furthermore, with heightened security concerns at our
Nation's monuments and parks, emergency access is critical.
This bill is a win-win for all parties. The acquisition of city-
owned property would enable the National Park Service to establish easy
street access to the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site
Visitor Center and Museum, and would benefit the City of Atlanta by
exchanging a piece of property that the City could develop into a
thriving commercial center.
Mr. Chairman, Atlanta is the heart of the South and home to a
progressive residential and business community. The Martin Luther King,
Jr. National Historic Site is adjacent to one of Atlanta's most
preserved districts. It is a gathering place where people from all over
the world travel to and learn from our Nation's history. Furthermore,
The Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site is central to the
growth and prosperity of the surrounding community.
Currently, both the National Park Service and the City of Atlanta
support H.R. 1616. Community residents strongly support this
legislation as well.
We must do all that we can to preserve this important tale of
history. H.R. 1616 plays a small but an important role in achieving
this responsibility.
Again, thank you for your consideration, and I ask for your support
of this legislation.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Next, is Mr. Rodney Frelinghuysen, here to
discuss H.R. 1964. Rod, welcome to the Subcommittee.
STATEMENT OF HON. RODNEY FRELINGHUYSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon,
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and also Mr. Saxton from New
Jersey, who is on the dais. Thank you for allowing me the
opportunity to speak on H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship
Act.
President Bush's Fiscal Year 2004 Forest Legacy Budget
designates the Highlands as one of nine national priority areas
threatened by development. There is good reason for this
designation.
The time to act is now. The Forest Service study found that
each year more than 5,000 acres of the New York/New Jersey
Highlands is being developed. From 1990 to 2000, the population
within the Highlands increased by 11 percent. When you consider
that the New Jersey and New York are among the most densely
populated States in the union, this is a significant increase.
While it is not my intention to drop a laundry list of
numbers highlighting the Highlands' importance to the
Northeast, several examples are definitely noteworthy.
According to a U.S. Forest Service study on the area, the
Highlands watershed lands contain reservoirs and aquifers that
provide and protect high-quality drinking water for over 15
million Americans. In addition, over 25 million Americans live
in an hour's drive of these watersheds, wildlife habitat, and
recreational opportunities that lie in the roughly 2 million
acres that encompass the Highlands.
More important than these numbers, however, is the fact
that this bill fits into the current administration's vision
for land conservation. In a Nation where the Government owns
one of every five acres of land and is responsible for
maintaining one out of every four acres, we all need to be
aware that operations and maintenance costs for the Federal
Government have increased dramatically, endangering the very
assets we all seek to preserve and protect.
Please be assured that this proposal stresses local
responsibility in public-private partnership. In fact, this
bill does not call for any Federal ownership, nor does it call
for any future Federal maintenance and upkeep. Instead, this
bill would require the State and local governments to work with
willing sellers. Similar to the Federal Forest Legacy Program,
the Highlands Stewardship Act only provides Federal financial
assistance for willing sellers. In short, this bill is seeking
a helping hand from the Federal Government, rather than
overregulating, strong-armed mandate.
Because local communities welcome this Federal partnership,
and without Federal oversight, 24 towns and four New Jersey
counties have passed resolutions in support of conserving the
Highlands resources. Notably, not one community has expressed
opposition.
At the Federal level, along with a large number of our
colleagues from New York, and I am here with Congressman
Garrett and Congresswoman Kelly, the entire New Jersey
delegation has co-sponsored this bill. This truly is a
bipartisan effort. This spirit exists because the bill provides
deference to local authority, while recognizing the need for
Federal assistance to preserve nationally significant natural
resources in our local forest areas, just as Congress did with
a similar collaborative State-Federal partnership 7 years ago
with Sterling Forest.
In short, this bill is important to New Jersey, New York,
Connecticut and Pennsylvania. By not providing Federal
ownership or future Federal maintenance responsibilities, and
by acquiring land from only willing sellers, H.R. 1964 conforms
to the Bush administration's best practices and vision for land
acquisition. As such, I see this bill as a victory for the
people of the Northeast, the Congress and the President, and I
ask your support of the bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Frelinghuysen follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Rodney P. Frelinghuysen, a Representative in
Congress from the State of New Jersey, on H.R. 1964
Good Morning. Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, thank you
for allowing me this opportunity to testify in support of my
legislation, H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship Act.
President Bush's Fiscal Year 2004 Forest Legacy Budget designates
the Highlands as one of nine national priority areas threatened by
development. There is good reason for this designation.
The time to act is now! The Forest Service Study found that each
year more than 5000 acres of the New York/New Jersey Highlands are
being developed. From 1990 to 2000, the population within the Highlands
increased by 11 percent. When you consider that New Jersey is already
the most densely populated state in the union, this is a significant
increase.
While it is not my intention to drop a laundry list of numbers
highlighting the Highlands importance to the northeast, several
examples are definitely noteworthy. According to a U.S. Forest Service
Study on the area, the Highlands watershed lands contain reservoirs and
aquifers that provide and protect high quality drinking water for over
15 million Americans. In addition, over 25 million Americans live with
in an hour's drive of these invaluable watersheds, wildlife habitat,
and recreation opportunities that lie in the roughly 2 million acres
that encompass the Highlands.
More important than these numbers, however, is the fact that this
bill fits into the current administration's vision for land
conservation. In a nation where the government owns 1 in every five
acres of land and is responsible for maintaining 1 out of every 4
acres, we all need to be aware that operations and maintenance costs to
the Federal Government have increased dramatically endangering the very
assets we all seek to preserve and protect.
Please be assured this proposal stresses local responsibility and
public/private partnerships. In fact, this bill does not call for any
Federal ownership, nor does it call for any future Federal maintenance
and upkeep.
Instead, this bill would require state and local governments to
work with willing sellers. Similar to the Federal Forest Legacy
Program, the Highlands Stewardship Act only provides Federal financial
assistance for willing sellers. In short, this bill is seeking a
helping hand from the Federal Government rather than an over-
regulating, strong armed mandate.
Because local communities welcome this Federal partnership and
without Federal oversight, 24 towns and 4 New Jersey Counties have
passed resolutions in support of the conserving the Highlands'
resources. Notably, not one community has expressed opposition.
At the Federal level, along with a large number of our colleagues
from New York, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania, the entire New Jersey
delegation has co-sponsored this bill. Thus, this truly is a bipartisan
effort. The bipartisan spirit exists because the bill provides
deference to local authority, while recognizing the need for Federal
assistance to preserve nationally significant natural resources in our
local forest areas, just as Congress did with a similar collaborative
state/Federal partnership seven years ago with Sterling Forest.
In short, this bill is important to New Jersey, New York,
Connecticut, and Pennsylvania. By not providing Federal ownership or
future Federal maintenance responsibilities, and by acquiring land from
only willing sellers, H.R. 1964 conforms to the Bush Administration's
best practices and vision for land acquisition. As such, I see this
bill as a victory for the people of the Northeast, the Congress, and
the President.
That concludes my testimony. Once again, I thank you all for the
opportunity to be heard and I would be happy to answer any questions.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Frelinghuysen.
The Honorable Scott Garrett, welcome to the Subcommittee.
If you would like to begin your testimony, that would be great.
I understand it is on the same bill, H.R. 1964.
STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT GARRETT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mr. Garrett. That is correct, and thank you, Mr. Chairman,
and Ranking Member, as well, for the opportunity to present my
testimony to you today and also thanks to my colleague to the
right, who I have served with in the State legislature over the
years and as a friend, for his efforts to this matter and his
devotion to these significant environmental issues.
Mr. Chairman, I have lived in the Highlands region my
entire life, and now my congressional district lies in the
heart of this very vast and diverse national heritage. More
than 12 years ago, I ran for public office for the State
legislature because I believe in a cleaner environment and a
healthier America. I believe that we really weren't doing
enough on the State and Federal level, and I wanted to become
involved.
Upon being sworn in as a member of the New Jersey Assembly,
I continued my efforts for preserving open space, expanding our
recreational land and protecting our natural resources. In my
time as a State legislator, I sponsored several pieces of
legislation that were eventually signed into law that allocated
millions of dollars for acquisition and protection of
recreational land, open space, farmland preservation and also
park developments as well.
Now, we have made several important strides to protect and
restore our State's resources. Of course, there is still much
more we can do.
If you look at these pictures and if you looked at the
area, and if you have ever been there, you know there is an
opportunity to preserve an open space of greenways with endless
trees and waterways. Imagine a landscape of recreational lands
and fields for our children to play and enjoy.
Our commitment to conserve this open space and a cleaner
America really runs deep, and it runs deep in New Jersey, and
that is because New Jersey is the most congested State in the
country. More of this prized open space is being used up every
single day. A recent report from the U.S. Forest Service found
that certain portions of this area in the Highlands are losing
over 5,000 acres of open space every year. H.R. 1964 will go a
long way to addressing this serious concern.
It would help to preserve some of that open space that
remains there and help protect cherished natural resources as
well. It would help to provide the Highlands region with a
national designation and perhaps financial support to protect
these lands.
Now, the Highlands lie in the middle of one of the most
populated areas in the country. And as my colleagues just
stated, over one-twelfth of the U.S. population lives within a
driving range, an hour; 14 million visitors come there every
year to provide significant economic help to the area, and we
rely on it for water as well.
In a recent update of the original Forest Service study, it
states that the Highland is a ``landscape of national
significance.'' The update also draws attention to some recent
trends that I think we should pay attention to. Over 25,000
acres of land were developed in the Highlands from 1995 to
2002. Continued development trends would reduce the quality of
the water. Nearly 300,000 acres of critical watershed areas are
still unprotected. All of these, and more, are of concern to
us.
Over the last several years, there has been an increase in
funding and support on both a Federal level, the State level
and local governments to preserve this area. Now, from the
Federal Government alone, between 2001 and 2003, more than $10
million has been distributed to help preserve some of these
critical tracts. It is vital that this support continue.
Now, with that said, there is an ever-increasing demand
from all regions for these limited dollars. So it is essential
that all Federal dollars allocated to the region be used to
help protect those areas that have the highest conservation
value and are at the greatest risk of being developed.
Preservation of the Highlands is not a partisan issue, and so
we must work hand-in-hand to meet these goals. But let us make
this one point clear. By working to protect open space, we must
also ensure that an adequate opportunity for economic
development continues as well. And there are signs that the
economy is beginning to grow again. It is important that we
find that right balance between protecting the cherished
resources and promoting strong economy as well.
Now, during my tenure in the legislature, I found that
people at the local level, in this case, those people who live
in and around the land that we are working to protect, they
really are the ones that are best-qualified to determine what
works in their communities. So local involvement is essential
to the success of protecting these critical areas.
Now, when discussing local control, it is also important to
remember the potential problems associated with increasing the
already overburdensome Federal bureaucracy. It would be
extremely disappointing to see money get wasted on paperwork
and red tape that could have been used better for more critical
habitat and environmentally sensitive tracts of land
acquisition.
And so in closing, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I would
like to thank you again for the chance to be with you and
present this testimony, and to work together to protect open
space. Throughout my entire life, I have had the opportunity,
along with my family, to enjoy the natural resources of the
Highlands and what they have to offer. My hope is that we can
work together so that future families can, also.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Garrett follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Scott Garrett, a Representative in Congress
from the State of New Jersey, on H.R. 1964
Thank you Chairman Radanovich. I would like to thank you, Ranking
Member Christian-Christensen, and Chairman Pombo for holding this
hearing today to discuss the Highlands and for providing me an
opportunity to come before this Subcommittee to offer my testimony. I
would also like to thank my good friend, Congressman Frelinghuysen, for
all of his hard work on this legislation and for having such a devotion
to protecting this significant environmental treasure.
Mr. Chairman, I have lived in the Highlands region my entire life
and my Congressional District lies in the heart of this vast and
diverse natural heritage. More than 12 years ago, I ran for public
office because I believed in a cleaner and healthier America. I
believed we weren't doing enough to preserve our precious farmland and
vital open space.
Upon being sworn in as a member of the New Jersey General Assembly,
I continued my cause for preserving our open space, expanding our
recreational land and protecting our natural resources. In my time as
an Assemblyman, I sponsored and had several pieces of legislation
signed into law that allocated millions of dollars for acquisition and
protection of recreation land, open space, farmland preservation and
park development projects.
We've made several important strides to protect and restore our
state's resources and there is still much more work to do. Imagine a
vast, open space of greenways with endless trees and waterways. And
imagine a landscape of recreational lands and fields for our children
to play and enjoy.
Our commitment to conservation of open spaces, and a cleaner and
healthier America, runs deep. But, Mr. Chairman, I believe it doesn't
run deep enough. New Jersey is the most congested state in the country
and more of this prized open space is being used up everyday. The
recent report from the U.S. Forest Service found that certain portions
of the Highlands in New Jersey are losing over 5,000 acres of open
space per year.
H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship Act, would go a long way
towards addressing this serious concern. It would help preserve the
remaining open space in New Jersey and help protect cherished natural
resources that provide extraordinary environmental, recreational, and
historical assets. This bill would provide the Highlands region with a
national designation and an increase in Federal financial support to
protect these lands.
The Highlands lie in the middle of one of the most populated areas
in the country. Over one-twelfth of the U.S. population lives within an
hour driving distance. The 14 million visitors to the Highlands every
year provide a significant economic impact to the area while 15 million
people rely on the Highlands for clean drinking water.
In the recent update of the original Forest Service study, it
states that the Highlands is a ``landscape of national significance.''
The update also draws attention to some recent trends and makes several
predictions about what could happen to the land if it goes unprotected.
The report states:
Over 25,000 acres of land were developed in the Highlands
between 1995 and 2000;
Continuing development trends will reduce the exceptional
value water quality watersheds by 75 percent;
Nearly 300,000 acres of critical watershed areas are
unprotected, and
The loss of wetland and forestland quadrupled between
1984 and 1995 at the rate of 3,400 acres per year.
Mr. Chairman, these trends are very worrisome and something must be
done to address these concerns.
Over the last several years, there has been an increase in
financial support from Federal, state, and local governments to
preserve the Highlands. From the Federal Government alone, between
Fiscal Year 2001'' to Fiscal Year 2003'', more than $10 million has
been distributed to help preserve critical tracks of land. It is vital
that this financial support from the Federal Government continue to
grow.
With that said, there is an ever-increasing demand from all regions
of the country for the limited Federal resources available to protect
undeveloped lands like the Highlands. So it is essential that all
Federal dollars allocated to the region be used to help protect those
areas that have the highest conservation value and are at the greatest
risk of being developed.
The preservation of the Highlands is neither a Republican nor
Democratic issue. Rather, it is a national prerogative and a local
responsibility. We must work hand-in-hand with the local communities to
determine which tracks of land have the highest priority and use the
limited resources available to ensure they are protected.
But, while working to protect open space, we must also ensure there
is adequate opportunity for further economic development. As there are
signs that the economy is beginning to improve, it is important that we
find a balance between protecting our cherished natural resources and
promoting a strong economy.
During my 12-year tenure in the New Jersey State Assembly, I found
the people at the local level, in this case those who live in and
around this land we are working to protect, are best qualified to
determine what works in their communities. Local involvement is
essential to the success of protecting these critical, at risk areas
and we must ensure that this local participation is a top priority as
we move forward.
When discussing local control, it is also important to remember the
potential problems associated with increasing the already over-
burdensome Federal bureaucracy. It would be extremely disappointing to
see money get wasted on paperwork and red tape that could have been
used to purchase more critical habitat and environmentally sensitive
tracks of land.
In closing Mr. Chairman, I would like to again thank you and
Chairman Pombo for holding this hearing today and I would reiterate the
importance of protecting open space in the Highlands.
Throughout my entire my life, I have had the opportunity to take
advantage of all of the natural resources the Highlands has to offer.
My family and I have enjoyed the resources the Highlands provides, and
I want to ensure that many other families have the same opportunities
for years to come.
The critical lands in the Highlands must be protected and it is our
job to work with the state and local governments to see that they are.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Garrett.
Sue Kelly, welcome to the Subcommittee. As you know, we
have got I think two votes coming up here shortly--is it three
votes? And if we could hear your testimony, then I think what
we will do is break, and then everybody here is welcome to join
us on the dais when the panels gather, the second and third
panel, to discuss your bill. So you might want to be here to
help ask questions and such.
So, Sue, welcome to the Committee, and if you would like to
begin, go ahead.
STATEMENT OF HON. SUE KELLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Mrs. Kelly. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I will be very brief.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify here in support of
H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship Act. As a co-sponsor of
the bill, I join my colleagues here today from New Jersey in
urging the passage of this really important piece of
legislation. I represent much of the New York portion of the
Highlands on both sides of the Hudson River, and I can attest
to vital importance of the Highlands Forests, to the millions
of residents of New York Metropolitan Area, and to the
tremendous pressure this resource is facing from suburban
sprawl.
The Highlands supply and protect water supply for over 15
million people, and the region hosts more than 14 million
recreation visitors annually. That is more than Yellowstone
National Park.
The U.S. Forest Service documented the national
significance of the Highlands in their recent study of the
region and the threats to those critical water and recreational
resources from the loss of over 5,000 acres of open space
annually in these highlands. This New York-New Jersey
Highlands.
Only 20 percent of this region is publicly or privately
preserved, and the U.S. Forest Service has identified 300,000
acres of high-value water resource lands that further need
preservation and protection. Despite the significant investment
that is being made by State, local and private individuals to
protect these lands, the future of the region and this vital
water supply will be in jeopardy unless the Federal Government
becomes a partner in this effort.
The Highlands Stewardship Act would do just that by
authorizing the Federal Government to assist the Highlands
States in purchasing priority lands, and I want to again stress
from willing sellers only, that would be then owned and managed
by the States and not by the Federal Government. Technical and
financial assistance would also be provided to private
landowners and local communities to help them remain good
stewards of these lands and resources.
The bill will grant no new authority to any level of
Government to interfere with local control over land use. This
legislation simply enables us to preserve this land. The
legislation is broad and bipartisan in its outlook, and from
our regions, congressional delegation, from local governments
and throughout the region, it is fully bipartisan.
Thank you so much for the opportunity to testify in support
of H.R. 1964, and I really urge your support for this very
important legislation. I also want to issue an invitation to
anyone on this Committee who would like to come and see the
Highlands for themselves. You are welcome. Just call my office,
and we will take you there.
Thank you.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Ms. Kelly.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kelly follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Sue W. Kelly, a Representative in Congress
from the State of New York, on H.R. 1964
I want to thank you Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify in
support of H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship Act. As a cosponsor of
this bill, I join my colleagues here today from New Jersey in urging
passage of this important legislation.
I represent much of the New York portion of the Highlands, on both
sides of the Hudson River, and can attest to the vital importance of
Highlands' forests to the millions of residents of the New York
metropolitan area, and to the tremendous pressure this resource is
facing from suburban sprawl.
The Highlands supply and protect the water supply for over 15
million people and the region hosts more than 14 million recreational
visitors annually, more than Yellowstone National Park. The U.S. Forest
Service documented the ``national significance'' of the Highlands in
their recent study of the region and the threats to these critical
water and recreational resources from the loss of over 5,000 acres of
open space annually in the NY-NJ Highlands alone.
Only 20% of this region is publicly or privately conserved, and the
U.S. Forest Service has identified 300,000 acres of high-value water
resource lands that need further protection. Despite the significant
investment that is being made by state and local governments to protect
these lands, the future of the region and this vital water supply will
be in jeopardy unless the Federal Government becomes a partner in this
effort.
The Highlands Stewardship Act would do just that by authorizing the
Federal Government to assist the Highlands states in purchasing
priority lands--from willing-sellers only--that would be owned and
managed by the states, not the Federal Government. Technical and
financial assistance would also be provided to private landowners and
local communities to help them remain good stewards of these lands and
resources.
The bill would grant no new authority to any level of government to
interfere with local control over land use decisions.
This legislation has broad and bipartisan support from our region's
Congressional Delegation, from local governments throughout the region.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify in support of H.R.
1964. Again I urge your support for this important legislation.
______
Mr. Radanovich. The Chair recognizes Mr. Saxton from New
Jersey.
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM SAXTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mr. Saxton. Mr. Chairman, as a cosponsor of H.R. 1964, and
a strong supporter, I thank you for inviting me to sit on the
panel this afternoon, and I have a statement which I ask
unanimous consent be placed in the record at this point.
Mr. Radanovich. There being no objection, so ordered.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Saxton follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Jim Saxton, a Representative in Congress
from the State of New Jersey, on H.R. 1964
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to join you today to discuss an important
piece of legislation, The Highlands Stewardship Act. My colleague, Mr.
Frelinghuysen, also of New Jersey, has introduced this important piece
of conservation legislation. Thank you to the witnesses who have taken
time out of their schedules to be here with us today, and I look
forward to hearing your testimony.
I have long been an advocate for, and worked hard to preserve open
space and prevent the encroachment on and development of significant
tracts of land in both my district and throughout the state of New
Jersey.
I am proud of the fact that New Jersey has been a leader on the
issue of open space, recognizing the importance of not developing every
acre of land possible. We need areas of undeveloped land, for a wide
range of reasons, from habitat protection to simply providing areas for
people to recreate and enjoy the outdoors.
In Burlington County, which is in my Congressional district for
example, there are over 162,000 acres of protected land. There is 4,000
acres of Federally protected land, which is primarily in the New Jersey
Pine Barrens; 130,000 acres of State-held acres, of which 120,000 is
also located in the Pinelands; the Municipality has 8,000 acres and the
County 1,500 acres; 4,000 acres are held by Non-Profit organizations
and there are over 15,000 acres acquired as Farmland Preservation
areas. This is an impressive number of acres and demonstrates New
Jersey's ongoing commitment to these important and often fragile lands
and ecosystems.
Mr. Frelinghuysen has also recognized this important need, which is
why he introduced this piece of conservation legislation. The New York/
New Jersey Highlands, consisting of nearly 2 million acres, has been
identified by the U.S. Forest Service and virtually all other Federal,
state, local and private authorities as critical lands in need of
preservation.
This region provides and protects the drinking water supplies for
over 15 million residents of the New York and Philadelphia metropolitan
areas. The Highlands region hosts more than 14 million recreational
visits annually, which is more than Yellowstone and many of our
national treasures in the West.
The USDA Forest Service found that over 5,000 acres of land are
being developed a year in the NY-NJ Highlands alone, threatening the
quantity and quality of water supplies, and other critical resources in
the Highlands. Currently, 294,000 acres, which is 77% of high-value
lands in the Highlands are unprotected and 100,000 acres of this high-
value land are immediately threatened.
I have joined with Mr. Frelinghuysen in this important effort and
it is my hope to move this bill out of the Resources Committee and to
the House of Representatives. Thank you and I look forward to hearing
your testimony.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your
testimony. Again, we will break. We will take a quick break, we
will go vote, come back and hear these other two panels.
We are in recess.
[Recess from 2:22 p.m. to 2:54 p.m.]
Mr. Radanovich. We are back from recess and back in
session. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Panel No. 2 of the
Subcommittee hearing on H.R. 1616 and H.R. 1964. That is Mr.
Randy Jones, deputy director of the National Park Service here
in Washington; Mr. David Tenny, who is the deputy
undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment, with
USDA, who is accompanied by Kathryn Maloney, with USDA.
Welcome.
Dave, I understand that you have got to leave soon. So if
you want to give your testimony, and then we will ask you
questions. I assume that you are speaking on both bills or just
the one?
Mr. Tenny. Just the one.
Mr. Radanovich. On H.R. 1964. So please begin, and then we
will ask questions of you, and then, Randy, we will save you
for later.
STATEMENT OF DAVID TENNY, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR NATURAL
RESOURCES AND THE ENVIRONMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
WASHINGTON, D.C., ACCOMPANIED BY KATHRYN MALONEY, DIRECTOR,
NORTHEAST AREA, STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY, FOREST SERVICE
Mr. Tenny. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have to admit that I find it more comfortable sitting up
there in my former capacity than sitting down here, but,
nonetheless, it is a privilege to be here.
Mr. Radanovich. Welcome back.
Mr. Tenny. Thank you. In the interest of conservation; that
is, conserving the time of the Committee and hearing what you
would like to know, I will condense my remarks.
As noted, I am accompanied by Kathy Maloney. She directs
our Northeastern Area for State and Privacy Forestry in the
Forest Service, very involved in this project, has a great
responsibility and is responsible for much of the good work
that is being done in this region.
Mr. Chairman, over the last decade, the Department of
Agriculture has been an active participant and player with
States, local governments, local communities and others, in
documenting and inventorying the resources' values that exist
in this part of the country. They have done a number of
studies. They have done some very good work and have been able
to document what is truly there, and what is important, and
those resources that are most significant from a conservation
standpoint.
Based on our experience in the region, the Department
believes that this legislation generally tracks the findings
and the actions that have been taken by the Forest Service over
the last decade. We are not opposed to this bill. We would like
to be able to work with the Committee to maybe make a few
improvements to the bill that we think are useful and will be
helpful in making it work, even better on the ground, and we
recognize the importance of this area, not only to the people
who live in and around the Highlands, but also to the Nation as
a whole, and we would like very much to be able to work not
only with the Committee, but with the delegation as we move
forward.
The most recent work that the Forest Service has done on
the Highlands has been an update in 2002 of a study that was
done some time ago. A couple of highlights from that study are
probably worth noting.
As has been stated, this is an area that is home to upwards
of 20 million people. As many as 11 million people rely upon
this area for their drinking water. As was noted earlier, 14
million people visit this area for recreational purposes on an
annual basis. Those are pretty significant numbers. They, I
think, demonstrate the importance of the resource.
The bill that has been introduced from the Department of
Agriculture's standpoint does three essential things:
First of all, it establishes what is called the Highlands
Stewardship Area in the Highlands region. This would be an
exercise of actually mapping the region that we would be
looking at for purposes of identifying opportunities to engage
in conservation types of practices, in partnership with the
State and local communities;
It establishes the Office of Highlands Stewardship within
the Department of Agriculture. This would be an entity that
would be responsible for administering the activities within
the region, and it establishes a Highlands Stewardship Area
Work Group, which would be a group of advisers that would come
together, representing various interests, who would make their
recommendations, working through their Governors and working
with the Department and with the Forest Service on
recommendations for activities that should move forward;
And then, finally, the bill has a funding mechanism that
makes use of the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
We have noted in our testimony some of the recommendations
that we would have. Rather than going into those in detail,
what I would like to do is just reiterate the position that we
have that we would like to work with the Committee on this bill
and do our very best to try and move forward in a reasonable,
balanced way.
I would be happy to answer any questions that the Committee
might have that, hopefully, will be helpful to you as we move
forward.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Tenny follows:]
Statement of David Tenny, Deputy Under Secretary, Natural Resources and
Environment, U.S. Department of Agriculture, on H.R. 1964
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to present the
Administration's views on H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship Act. I
am David Tenny, Deputy Under Secretary for Natural Resources and
Environment, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). I am accompanied
today by Kathryn Maloney, Director of the Forest Service Northeastern
Area.
Mr. Chairman, over the last decade, the Department of Agriculture
has been an active partner with States, local governments, academics,
landowners, community-based organizations, and others in documenting
the resource values and supporting land conservation efforts in New
York and New Jersey, two of the four states included in this
legislation.
Based upon our experience in this region, the Department believes
this legislation generally reflects actions and findings that we have
already taken to date. We are not opposed to the measure, but we would
like to work with the committee to make improvements to the bill. I can
assure the Subcommittee that the Department of Agriculture recognizes
the importance of the Highlands area and supports the desired land
management objectives of H.R. 1964, which builds on the body of work we
have completed.
At the direction of Congress, in 1992, the USDA Forest Service
completed the New York-New Jersey Highlands Regional Study that
characterized the water resources, wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation
opportunities, and agricultural resources in the region. This study
identified lands with important resource values such as the Sterling
Forest located near Tuxedo, NY.
Over the past 10 years, the Forest Legacy program with $4,000,000
in Federal funds has leveraged over $14,000,000 in non-Federal funds to
secure conservation easements and other interests in 3,400 acres in New
Jersey and New York. Over the last five years, private landowners,
nonprofits and State and local governments, through a range of Forest
Service non-regulatory, technical and financial assistance programs
have leveraged nearly $750,000 toward land conservation activities.
These include technical and financial assistance to states and
communities and landowner assistance for management planning and
implementation of conservation practices.
The Forest Service updated the New York-New Jersey Highlands
Regional Study in 2002. The original study area was expanded from the
Hudson River eastward to the New York-Connecticut border. The Update
identifies a number of many important natural resources in the
Highlands, and the effect of existing patterns of land use change on
these resources. Some key findings from the 2002 Update include:
The Highlands adjoin a metropolitan area of more than 20
million people.
More than 11 million people rely on the Highlands water
resources.
More than 14 million people visit the Highlands each year
for recreational opportunities.
5,200 acres per year of land was developed between 1995
and 2000.
Almost 40 percent, 540,000 acres, are considered to have
high conservation value. Nearly half of these lands are currently in
some type of permanent conservation arrangement, such as an easement or
under a nonprofit land trust holding.
Approximately 100,000 acres considered to have high
conservation value have a high likelihood of change.
Forty two of the 51 existing Hydrologic Unit Code 11
watersheds (which have an average area of about 50 square miles)
presently have 10 percent or less impervious surface cover (a
significant indicator of water quality). Depending on the rate of land
use change, this number could fall to between 18 to 9 in the next
thirty years.
The future population in the New Jersey-New York
Highlands could increase by 26 to 48 percent in the next 30 years,
based on our analysis.
H.R. 1964 directs the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior,
in consultation with appropriate Federal officials, the Governors of
the four states, and local units of government, to establish the
Highlands Stewardship Area in the Highlands region. It provides that
not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretaries shall prepare a map depicting the Stewardship Area.
The bill also directs the Secretary of Agriculture to establish the
Office of Highlands Stewardship to implement the strategies of the 1992
Study and 2002 Update. The Office would be authorized to provide
financial and technical assistance to an eligible entity to carry out a
project to protect, restore, preserve, promote or interpret Area
resources.
H.R. 1964 also directs the Secretary of Agriculture to establish
the Highlands Stewardship Area Work Group to assist with implementation
of those strategies and to advise the Secretaries on priorities for
projects carried out with assistance provided pursuant to the Act.
Finally, the bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to
designate annually land conservation partnership projects that are
eligible, under certain conditions and with specified limitations, to
receive financial assistance under the Act. H.R. 1964 would authorize
appropriations of $25,000,000 to the Secretary of the Interior from the
general funds of the Treasury or the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for each of Fiscal Years 2004 through 2013 to be used for this purpose.
As part of a Congressional request in Fiscal Year 2002, the
Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior will be putting forth a
joint set of recommendations identifying ways that Federal Government
can work with State, local and non-profit partners to address important
resource issues, based on the findings of the 1992 Study and 2002
Update. These recommendations are currently in executive branch
clearance. I believe when they are provided to Congress that they will
be consistent with several of the key components of H.R. 1964.
However, this afternoon, I want to bring to the Subcommittee some
issues that the Department has identified with H.R. 1964 that may
require further consideration by the Subcommittee.
First, the legislation covers a 2 million-acre, four-state region.
The Department's efforts to date have concentrated on the 1.5 million
acre New York-New Jersey portion of the region, and have only generally
characterized the resource values in the Pennsylvania and Connecticut
portions of the proposed Highlands Stewardship Area. More thorough
consideration and inventory of the resource values in Pennsylvania and
Connecticut is needed. It is important to have current and accurate
inventory information for Pennsylvania and Connecticut so that natural
resources in all four states can be considered equally for the
technical and financial assistance authorized by this legislation. This
type of comprehensive resource assessment would require additional time
and money, and is not now addressed in H.R. 1964.
Second, the specific organizational requirements mandated in H.R.
1964 could duplicate existing activities and organizations that support
land conservation in the Highlands region. For example, the functions
articulated for the Office of Highlands Stewardship are currently
performed by the staff of the Forest Service's Northeastern Area of
State and Private Forestry. The measure is unclear about which USDA
agencies other than the Forest Service or Natural Resources
Conservation Service, if any, are to participate in the Office of
Highlands Stewardship, the organizational location of that office
within USDA, or its relation to the Department of the Interior. The
Subcommittee should consider using the existing Forest Service
organizational structure.
To our knowledge, the bill does not authorize any activity not
already authorized under current law. USDA could designate the
Highlands area as a high priority within existing authorities to permit
its agencies to address resource issues in the Highlands region. The
bill's targeting of technical assistance, financial assistance, and
land conservation projects could require USDA to determine the priority
of these activities relative to other high-priority programs or
projects that may relay on the same funding source.
The bill is also unclear about how land conservation projects would
be funded, authorizing funds either from Treasury or the Land and Water
Conservation Fund (LWCF) but not indicating whether the projects
authorized under the measure are the same as land acquisition
authorized by LWCF.
The measure includes a concept for focusing intra- and cross-
departmental Federal conservation assistance on non-Federal lands but
has few details on the idea, particularly with regard to how this
designation would change with respect to on-the-ground management of
lands within the stewardship area, most of which are privately owned.
In addition, the Department believes H.R. 1964 would be improved by
clarifying several provisions.
H.R. 1964 lists the Palisades Interstate Park Commission as both a
``Highlands State'' and as a ``non-Federal entity''. The Commission
should not be considered a State. It should be listed as a non-Federal
entity only.
Section 5(c) directs the Secretaries to prepare a map of the
Highlands Stewardship Area within one year. As discussed previously,
the Department believes it prudent to undertake an analysis of the
500,000 acres in Pennsylvania and Connecticut that are proposed to be
included in the Area. If the Subcommittee concurs, the deadline for
preparing the map should be extended so that the two-state assessment
could be conducted.
Also, if a primary purpose of the map is to delineate the
properties and communities that are envisioned to be eligible for the
technical and financial assistance to be provided under H.R. 1964, the
Subcommittee should consider clearly stating that is the purpose for
which the map is to be used by the Secretaries.
The Highlands Work Group set forth in Section 6(c) would alter the
informal collaborative process that successfully operated for a decade.
During the study process, an informal work group met periodically
and was effective in providing valuable input. More than 100
organizations and individuals, representing a broad spectrum of
interests, were invited to participate, building good working
relationships and a sense of inclusiveness.
The proposed Highlands Work Group would fall under the provisions
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). Congress has had occasion
to exempt advisory groups from FACA for various reasons. The Department
is concerned whether a 100-member FACA committee would be effective and
timely. The Department suggests that more specific guidance on the
selection of members and the appointment of a Chair be provided, if
FACA is to apply. However, our experience has shown that an inclusive,
informal model could serve as the mechanism for inter-governmental
consultation and public participation.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. The Department would be
pleased to work with the Subcommittee on amendments to the provisions
discussed in my statement.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have for me at
this time.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Tenny. A couple of
questions.
As the concept of this project comes up, in my mind, I am
having trouble figuring out where it fits in either the
National Park Service or USDA. What is a stewardship area? is
this something that exists already or are we creating something
that has never existed before? Are there similar examples of
this type of a partnership?
Mr. Tenny. This type of partnership occurs frequently
within our State and private forestry area. The term
``stewardship area,'' I don't believe is necessary a term of
art. Kathy can correct me on that if I am wrong.
Ms. Maloney. That is correct.
Mr. Tenny. But this is more a term that is descriptive of
the way we have been working with the communities and with the
States in this region of the country.
Mr. Radanovich. Can you give me an example of one in
California?
Mr. Tenny. I don't think that there is one that would be an
exact match to what we are doing here in California.
Mr. Radanovich. Good enough.
I recognize Mrs. Christensen.
Mrs. Christensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I don't believe you had an opportunity to get into the
improvements of the bill, and I wasn't really listening to your
question. I hope I am not asking you a question that was
already asked, but you said you would work with the Committee
to make improvements to the bill. Would you like to just
outline some?
Mr. Tenny. Yes. Let me just outline, really briefly, a
couple of the improvements that we would suggest.
There are what I would call some technical improvements.
Rather than taking your time on those, let me give you some of
the bigger picture improvements.
We have been looking at this area for over a decade, and
the area that we have been most focused on has been the area
that has been in New York and New Jersey. The bill covers a
little bit larger area than what is reflected in our studies,
and there is a requirement to do some mapping so that we are
clear on the area within which we are going to be doing the
technical assistance and other conservation practices.
Because we are a little bit light on some of the inventory
of the resources that we need in the expanded area, we would
like some further time to be able to look at that, so that as
we are making our decisions, we are doing it on an informed
basis.
Secondly, because we have a structure in place in our
Northeast Area for State and Private Forestry, we would like to
work with the Committee and with the delegation on what the
Office of Highlands--or the office that is established in the
bill--how we can make sure that that doesn't duplicate any of
the existing infrastructure that we have in place because we
are confident that the organization is in place now that could
really do a good job, and we would like to see that continue
without a hiccup if we are going to be moving forward.
And then, finally, as I mentioned, there are a few
technical corrections that we want to make in the bill, but I
think that probably covers the high points.
Mrs. Christensen. Just looking through your testimony, it
just seems like it is more a matter of coordination of
activities that are either already being done or underway or
planned more than needing to create an additional structure.
Mr. Tenny. That would be correct.
Mrs. Christensen. Twenty-five million dollars a year from
the Land and Water Conservation Fund seems like an
extraordinarily large amount of funding that we would be
authorizing out of that fund. I should have asked the staff how
much is usually available, but do we fund projects out of that
fund at that level over 10 years?
Mr. Tenny. I can tell you a little bit about what the
Forest Service does. It probably would be a good idea for me to
refer to my colleague, Mr. Jones, to talk about how the Land
and Water Conservation Fund, in general, is administered out of
the Department of Interior.
But in the past, the Forest Service has been using the
Forest Legacy Program, which is an ongoing program. Last year
it was funded at probably about, if I am not mistaken, around
$70 million/$75 million to do some of the conservation work.
This is acquiring helping States and other entities acquire
conservation easements another types of work of that nature.
That is the purpose of the Forest Legacy Program.
In addition to that, the other agencies within the
Department of Agriculture also administer technical assistance
programs. For example, the Farmland Trust helps also do some
conservation work for farmland. So there are a number of
different programs that are used to do this kind of work.
Mrs. Christensen. My understanding is that we appropriate
approximately $100 million a year for that fund for use by all
of the States.
Mr. Jones. That is correct. The current fiscal year for the
stateside Land and Water Conservation Fund is $97 million, and
then within the National Park Service, $74 million is
appropriated for land acquisition within the units of the
National Park Service.
We have funded a couple of projects in this area in recent
years, including under our Rails to Trails Program. We have
supported a planning and orientation to help establish a couple
hundred miles of hiking and biking trails, and we also
provided, under the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a grant
of $1 million, which was matched by the State, for a $2-million
purchase.
Mrs. Christensen. There is a joint Agriculture-Interior
update of the 1992 Highlands Study. When would that be
completed? Do I understand it should be ready soon?
Mr. Tenny. Yes. There is an update that has been completed,
and then in 2002, Congress, in the appropriations bill,
requested some recommendations based upon the update. Those are
moving through the agencies as we speak. We expect for those to
be coming to the Department in very short order, and we will be
transmitting those to Congress soon thereafter.
Mrs. Christensen. Ballpark time?
Mr. Tenny. Ballpark time will be----
Ms. Maloney. It is in clearance.
Mr. Tenny. It is in clearance right now? If it is in
clearance right now, that means it is going to be on our desk
in just a very short time, and then it is a matter of just
moving it through the interagency clearance process, which
shouldn't be too long. I believe we are talking a matter of
weeks.
Mrs. Christensen. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mrs. Christensen.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Saxton from New Jersey for 5
minutes.
Mr. Saxton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, again, appreciate
your willingness to permit me to sit on this panel of which I
am not a member.
Let me just begin by----
Mr. Radanovich. Oh, you are not?
Mr. Saxton. Pardon me?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Saxton. Mr. Chairman, the intent of this bill is well
shown by looking at the two photographs over here or
demonstrated by looking at the two photographs. The photograph
on the right is New York City, the photograph on the left is
the Highlands, and the photograph on the right is a picture
taken from the Highlands.
And I point this out because in States like New Jersey, and
Connecticut and New York that have a center of commerce, a
growing center of commerce, which is an attraction, obviously,
for people to find good jobs, and it creates, inevitably, a
situation where the beautiful greenlands, like the lands of the
Highlands, become subject to very rapid development.
And in New Jersey, which is already the most densely
populated State in the country, there is no issue that unifies
liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats,
suburbanites and people who live in the country more than the
preservation of open space. This is a really big deal for our
State.
I remember years ago, probably 30 years ago, my family and
I enjoy sailing, and we would sail out of the little creek
where we kept our boat, it is called Cedar Creek, and sail
south on Barnegat Bay. On the left is a barrier island called
Island Beach State Park, and it was natural, and still today is
natural, and to the right was the mainland. It was beautiful
trees, just like the picture that you see here on the left.
Today, if you superimposed what has happened to the
mainland, as I looked over my shoulder sailing to the south,
that picture would be nothing but rooftops, and that is what
has happened in so many areas of New Jersey. We have got a
great highway system, we have great work opportunities. If I am
not mistaken, and Mr. Frelinghuysen can correct me if I am not,
I think our per capita income is one of the highest, if not the
highest, among all of the States. And so it is a great place to
live. It is an attractive place for people to come and build
homes, so much so that people who live in New Jersey today want
nothing more than to preserve the open space that is left.
So I commend, Mr. Frelinghuysen, on his foresight of
drafting H.R. 1964, and I commend the Administration for their
careful examination. As a matter of fact, I want to commend the
Forest Service for producing an excellent 2002 update on the
Highlands Regional Study. Thank you for doing that, and thank
you for understanding the needs of New Jersey.
Mr. Tenny, can you elaborate for us, with regard to the
study, why the study so forthrightly declares this region to be
one of national significance.
Mr. Tenny. I think it is, probably the most direct answer
to that question is because of the unique nature of the region.
As you pointed out, there are some very populated areas, but a
very unpopulated area, for the most part, and because of that
there are some resource values that have a very direct effect
on the livelihoods, quality of life and the experiences in
these areas that those very populated areas have.
I think in the total region there were, of the $1.5 million
acres, there was somewhere in the neighborhood of a half-a-
million acres that had some very, very unique ecological values
attached to them that were identified by the Forest Service.
Because of their character, and their nature, these were of
high value either for their water quality or because they were
home to a listed species or because of high-value recreation
opportunities, that sort of thing.
And so there is a prioritization that has occurred, as the
Forest Service has looked at this area, but that prioritization
has demonstrated that there are some areas here that are truly
significant and truly unique.
Mr. Saxton. Thank you. One final quick question. I think
one of the highlights of Mr. Frelinghuysen's bill is the
incorporation of the willing sellers and public-private
partnerships. Can you speak to those issues and tell us how you
think they fit within the Administration's concept of land
conservation.
Mr. Tenny. Yes. Obviously, when you are talking about land
conservation at the local level, as has been noted in this
hearing already very well, it is critical that those who are
involved at the local level, not only in identifying the
issues, the right issues that need to be addressed, but in
making decisions about those issues, working together, are the
ones who ought to be directly involved.
When you are talking about those who own property, it is
absolutely essential that those who own property are able to
exercise the rights of property ownership, and in that regard,
I note that the bill has language in it that makes clear that
there is a willingness that has to be demonstrated on the part
of the property owner in order to participate in the conveyance
of any of their interests in property, and that is an important
principle.
The Secretary has talked about working lands as a concept
moving forward, in terms of addressing some of the challenges
that we face for our rural communities and rural landowners,
and certainly it is a principle that we adhere to, making sure
that as we work with local communities, that we are taking into
full account the interests of those local landowners and the
importance of their ability to maintain their property
interests in a way that is not only comfortable to them, but is
not coercive in any way, in terms of what they do with those
interests.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Saxton.
Mr. Frelinghuysen?
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for
the opportunity to testify earlier, and I want to thank
Congressman Saxton for so well articulating a lot of the
excitement and the importance of this legislation, and to Mr.
Tunny and your colleagues who put together this updated report,
done with a huge collaboration of so many interested parties.
It was then-Governor Christie Todd Whitman, what, seven or
8 years ago, who set a goal just for New Jersey of saving a
million acres from development and set her heart and soul into
that. Her vision has been endorsed by a Democratic successor,
Jim McGreevey, and every step is being made, obviously, to
recognize the need for home ownership and the desire of people
who live in this wonderful area, but to recognize that what
makes it special is its open space and farmland, which is
rapidly disappearing. But the work that you did to highlight
why it is so important is essential to the success of this
legislation, and I really appreciate your being here today.
And this is part of a process, and you have made some
excellent suggestions, which I am sure the Committee will
consider. And if the bill needs some improvement, we will be
happy to do it, but our heart and soul is in this bill and has
wide bipartisan support on both sides of the aisle and
throughout a four-State region. So I want to thank you for all
of your efforts, and thank you, again, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Radanovich. You are welcome, Mr. Frelinghuysen.
Dave, is there a presence in this area by the Forest
Service right now?
Mr. Tenny. The Forest Service doesn't have a physical
presence in that there is not a ranger district or a forest,
obviously, but the Forest Service has a presence in the area.
The Northeast Area for State and Private Forestry of the Forest
Service covers about 20 States, and they provide, on an ongoing
basis, technical assistance. They help with forest health
monitoring and other types of work, working with the State
foresters to address forest health issues and other resource
management issues. So there is a presence in the region.
Kathy, do you want to elaborate on that? Kathy directs the
area. She can tell you, with precision, exactly what we do.
Ms. Maloney. In addition to what Dave has said, we have
had, through the course of the study that was updated in the
last 2 years, we have had a coordinator onsite in the Highlands
area, working with the public and doing the coordination and
help with setting up meetings and bringing people to this
discussion. That is a person who is in a term appointment
position, and we have trained her so well she has accepted a
new job and will leave at the end of this month.
But there has been that sort of presence there, and as an
organization, while our headquarters are near Philadelphia, we
have the flexibility to position people where they are needed,
and we do that throughout the 20-State area that I manage. So I
would expect a continued presence of some sort there, depending
upon the role that is agreed to by the Secretary and
recommended up here.
Mr. Radanovich. Can you tell me, with regard to the private
property owners that would fall under this designated area, if
such a thing were to occur, what happens to their property
values once it is under that designation? I mean, I know that
there is going to be a willing seller involved, but there has
been a history of, when there is Federal land, when the land is
being projected for a particular use, usually that land value
goes down before it is bought. Is that typical?
Mr. Tenny. In this area or generally? I think I will talk
about this area and what I do know, and that is that as we have
worked in this area in the past, I don't know that we have
identified any direct impacts on property values that have been
caused by the reports that have been done. Whether an
additional or new designation of the area would have that kind
of an impact, to be honest with you, I don't know that we have
studied that directly, and so it would be a little bit
speculative to say that.
However, I do believe that there probably would be some
effect on property values, depending upon where they are within
this area. Obviously, the further away you get from highly
developed areas, probably the more likely that impact might be.
Mr. Radanovich. I yield to Rod, if you want to further
comment.
Mr. Frelinghuysen. If anything, land values continue to
escalate, which is germane to the earlier question as to why
this figure has a $25-million annual goal. Whether that is
achievable or not would depend largely on the work of those of
us who serve on the Appropriations Committee, from whatever
State you are, in terms of the Land and Water Conservation Fund
or whatever Federal source, but that land values continue to
escalate, this is a very expensive piece of real estate here.
There won't be any diminution of value. If anything, that
is why land is so expensive here, just to be any tract of land.
And there are certain tracts of land that have been identified
either by the U.S. Forest Service or other local agencies that
are particularly important to watershed protection. And if we
don't act quickly, a lot of that watershed would be violated
forever, and I think that is sort of what is the root cause of
why we are moving and trying to move with some rapidity.
Mr. Radanovich. If I can, too, comment, and I still need to
know what a stewardship area is, when it is all said and done,
because it is very cloudy, in my mind. But an area of private
property that falls under this type of designation, though, and
I would assume the private property that is in that designation
has certain development rights that are, by the very nature of
falling into an area such as this, as soon as I find out what
it is, you would, in a sense, lose your development rights, and
that is where your property value would decline.
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Local control, Mr. Chairman, is still
maintained. New Jersey has, for instance, 21 county
governments. It has over 500 municipalities. They still retain
the power to decide where development goes. Nobody is losing
their property rights as a result of this difficult-to-describe
stewardship designation. The stewardship actually already
exists through a State, Federal, municipal and county
collaboration. It is to continue the collaboration and to make
it more successful in preserving pieces of land that are
literally under the gun to be developed, inappropriately to be
developed.
Mr. Radanovich. So what is a stewardship area, and where
are the examples of this?
Mr. Tenny. I think probably the best way to answer that----
Mr. Radanovich. I have been on this Committee for 8 years,
and I have never heard of anything like this. So this is new to
me.
Mr. Tenny. Yes. A stewardship area would be whatever this
piece of legislation would define it to be. There is no
designation, within the Agency right now, of a stewardship
area, per se. So that is one of the questions that would be
answered by a piece of legislation like this. It would
certainly be a defined area on a map. It would certainly have
certain types of values associated with it, and some of those
have been identified. Probably most of those have been
identified by the studies that have been taking place and some
of them have been listed in the bill.
But I think the bottom line is that a stewardship area of
this nature would be whatever this bill would define it to be.
Mr. Radanovich. I yield to Mr. Saxton.
Mr. Saxton. Mr. Chairman, let me take a crack at the two
issues that you have brought up.
First, with regard to the stewardship issue, I am not sure
that there is a legal or Federal definition of stewardship
area, but the term ``stewardship'' would tend to imply that the
Federal Government is somehow overseeing this tract of land,
the Highlands.
There is another example of this in New Jersey, but it is
different, and very different. And so I don't want to confuse
the two, but in I believe the late 1970's, the Federal
Government passed a law creating the Pinelands National Reserve
in New Jersey, and it was different than this because there
were specific mandates that the Pinelands National Preserve
delineated.
And they said the State will become the caretaker of the
Pinelands National Preserve, and the State then enacted a law
to implement their responsibilities. They created a commission,
and it, in effect, usurped a certain amount of local zoning.
Well, everybody wanted that to happen in New Jersey for many of
the same reasons that I stated before.
In this case, there is no prescribed method of governance
by the Federal Government or by the State. It simply sets this
land aside and says that $25 million a year could be used to
purchase the property or the property rights, the development
rights, I suppose, of anybody who wants to sell them.
And so the stewardship in this case is defined differently
than the stewardship that is in my district, through the
Pinelands National Reserve. Would you tend to agree that that
is a fair analysis of what is happening?
Mr. Tenny. I think that is probably pretty fair. One point
that was raised here that made some sense is that what is being
proposed here is, in many ways, analogous to what occurs with
the Forest Legacy Program right now because the State will
enroll in the Forest Legacy Program, the State will identify
lands that are eligible for Forest Legacy assistance, and then
those lands, those areas will be prioritized on a national
basis, and then they are put into a queue based upon their
priority. Sometimes Congress will identify priorities for us.
And then the assistance, whatever it may be, in this case,
with Forest Legacy, is it often an easement, a conservation
easement of some kind or some other interest in the land for
conservation purposes, monies will be appropriated for that
purpose, and then we move forward.
That might be the most analogous, from a programmatic
standpoint.
In this case, it appears that the designation of this area
would be for the purposes of identifying those lands that would
be available or be eligible for certain types of assistance;
for example, some technical assistance or other types of
research assistance or, in some cases, the acquisition of
easements on a priority basis.
So, really, the designation of the area is, more than
anything else, the establishment of a priority for the delivery
of certain kinds of assistance and other types of funding for
easements.
I think that is probably maybe the best description of it,
for purposes of the----
Mr. Saxton. Thank you. If I could take a crack at the other
question that you raised, which I think is an important one,
what happens to property values? Mr. Frelinghuysen just told me
that there is about two million acres in this parcel, and if we
could just assume, for one moment, that, and let us say over a
10-year period, that owners of one million acres decided they
wanted to take part in the program, and somehow we found the
money to purchase a million acres, and assume also that the
demand remains relatively stable. Because the supply of land
has been significantly reduced, would it then cause the price
of the remaining buildable land to increase?
Mr. Tenny. I think that is probably true. I think you see
it in different places, and certainly the intensity of that
effect varies from place-to-place. Obviously, population
pressures and folks looking for opportunities to build and to
expand will have its influence on that, but I think that,
generally, your premise is correct.
Mr. Radanovich. Mr. Tenny, thank you very much for being
here. We appreciate the testimony.
And, Mr. Randy Jones, of the National Park Service, sir, if
you want to go ahead.
Are you speaking to both, Randy, or what?
Mr. Jones. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Radanovich. You are welcome to be brief, if you would
like to.
STATEMENT OF A. DURAND JONES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Jones. In fact, I would be very happy to be brief, and
I would ask that my statements be submitted for the record in
their entirety.
I will start very briefly with thanking you for the
opportunity to present the views on H.R. 1616. The bill would
authorize the exchange of lands within Martin Luther King,
Junior, National Historic Site for lands owned by the City of
Atlanta.
The Department of Interior supports H.R. 1616. I think, as
several members have pointed out, this is one of the best
examples of a win-win proposal we think we have ever seen.
It would allow us to provide, in exchange with the City of
Atlanta, provide for the city lands that are currently
undeveloped, with only a temporary structure on them, that
would be used by the city to help the urban renewal and
revitalization of this important historic district and provide
lands coming from the City of Atlanta to the National Park
Service, which would provide really critically needed access,
especially for emergency services to the park's visitor center.
The visitor center actually is on lands that have already
previously been donated by the City of Atlanta to the park
itself.
So we think this is an excellent proposal, and we think it
will help all of the parties involved, and we do strongly
support it, Mr. Chairman.
Moving on to H.R. 1964, a bill to establish the Highlands
Stewardship Area in the State of Connecticut, New Jersey, New
York and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
As you know from the testimony just presented, the U.S.
Forest Service is the lead agency on this, which we continue to
support them being the lead. The background has already been
provided by several members, as far as the significance. There
is no doubt there is a great significance to this area.
One of the things that we think this bill does provide is
it provides a focus of what are several different Federal
programs and their importance to the area.
From the National Park Service point of view, several units
of the National Park Service are within the boundaries of this
area, including Morristown National Historic Park, part of the
Appalachian Trail, the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation
Area, the Upper Delaware and Farmington Wild and Scenic Rivers,
and two Heritage Areas--the Hudson Valley Heritage Area and the
Delaware Lehigh Valley National Heritage corridor.
As I mentioned earlier in questions, the National Park
Service has had a role in this area, through the stateside Land
and Water Conservation Fund. We think that is a role that can
continue.
As our reading of the bill is not really, other than the
authorization of funding, is not really providing any new
specific authority, but as I said earlier, providing a focus of
several different authorities to recognize the importance of
this area. Otherwise, we would actually defer to the U.S.
Forest Service for their positions on the area.
So, with that, I would be happy to answer any questions the
members might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones on H.R. 1616 follows:]
Statement of A. Durand Jones, Deputy Director, National Park Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 1616
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to present the Department's views on H.R. 1616. This bill
would authorize the exchange of lands within the Martin Luther King,
Junior, National Historic Site for lands owned by the City of Atlanta,
Georgia.
The Department supports H.R. 1616. The bill would allow the
National Park Service (NPS) to exchange land currently owned on
Edgewood Avenue for land of equal or greater value from the City of
Atlanta (City). The exchange would provide the Martin Luther King,
Junior, National Historic Site (park) with emergency access to the park
visitor center, and would help in the continuing revitalization of
Edgewood Avenue. Although appraisals have not been completed, there
would be no acquisition costs associated with this equal value
exchange. Development of the newly acquired land, in order to provide
paved access for emergency vehicles, is estimated to cost $160,000.
There would be no increase in operational costs or the need to fund
additional facilities.
H.R. 1616 would amend Section 2(b) of P. L. 96-428, the act that
established Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site, to allow
the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land within the boundary of
the park that is owned by the State of Georgia, or any political
subdivision of the State, by exchange. Currently, P. L. 96-428 only
allows the Secretary to acquire such lands by donation.
The park and nearby Preservation District, which includes Sweet
Auburn, the economic and cultural center of Atlanta's African American
community during most of the 20th century, were established in 1980 to
preserve, protect and interpret the places where Dr. King was born,
worked, worshiped, and is buried. Located near downtown Atlanta, the
park consists of 34.47 acres, of which 13.04 acres is currently in
Federal ownership.
Most of the park is self-guided, including the visitor center,
Historic Ebenezer Baptist Church, Dr. King's gravesite, Freedom Hall
and Historic Fire Station No. 6. Guided tours are provided for Dr.
King's Birth Home. In addition, the park preserves and maintains 22
historic properties. Most of these properties are located on the same
block as the Birth Home and are restored to the 1930s period when Dr.
King lived on Auburn Avenue. These historic properties are leased, as
residential units, to the general public.
In 1992 when the NPS began planning for a visitor center, the
preferred location was determined to be the site of the City owned
Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center. In accordance with P.L. 96-
428, land could only be acquired from the City of Atlanta by donation.
The City, realizing the importance of having an NPS visitor center
within the park, agreed to donate the community center to the NPS.
Due in large part to the City's generosity, the visitor center has
been completed. However, emergency vehicles are unable to access the
visitor center from nearby streets and additional land is needed to
provide this emergency vehicle access. The City owns 1.71 acres that
are adjacent to the visitor center, have easy access from Jackson
Street, and could be developed to provide the needed emergency access
for the visitor center. The City is interested in conveying all, or a
portion, of this property to the NPS through an exchange.
When the park was established, the boundary was created to ensure
the preservation of Dr. King's neighborhood. Included within the
boundary is Edgewood Avenue. In order to assure preservation of the
area NPS has gradually acquired several properties along Edgewood
Avenue, which was a deteriorating commercial area.
At the time the park was established, there were no local efforts
to preserve properties along Edgewood Avenue. However, during the past
10 years several individuals and organizations, with the support of the
City, have initiated restoration of the preservation district,
including Edgewood Avenue. NPS ownership on Edgewood Avenue is no
longer needed solely to ensure preservation and NPS has identified land
along Edgewood Avenue that would be suitable for an exchange with the
City, in order to acquire the parcel adjacent to the visitor center.
That completes my testimony. I would be happy to answer any
questions that you or any members of the Subcommittee may have.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
______
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jones on H.R. 1964 follows:]
Statement of A. Durand Jones, Deputy Director, National Park Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 1964
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of
the Department of the Interior on H.R. 1964, a bill to establish the
Highlands Stewardship Area in the states of Connecticut, New Jersey,
New York, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. As you know, the
U.S.D.A. Forest Service has the lead on this initiative. We will defer
to them on provisions of the bill affecting the Forest Service and only
comment on provisions relating to the Department of the Interior and
the collaborative role our two Departments have played in this
important natural area.
The Highlands Area, comprising more than 2 million acres in one of
the most urbanized sections of the country, contains numerous natural
and cultural resources worthy of protection. It is a water supply
source for over 11,000,000 persons, provides critical habitat to a wide
variety of plant and animal species, and is the site of many historic
events that have shaped our nation including significant actions
related to the American Revolution. It is also an area rapidly
experiencing the impacts of urbanization.
The Highlands Area has been the subject of many past studies
described in the bill that document its important natural and cultural
resources. It also contains units of the National Park System including
Morristown National Historical Park and the Delaware Water Gap National
Recreation Area; designated wild and scenic rivers including the Upper
Delaware and Farmington Rivers; and two designated national heritage
areas--The Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area and the Delaware
and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor. The National Park Service has
enjoyed long-standing partnerships with many of the governments and
organizations in this region.
In 1992, the Forest Service completed its initial study of the
Highlands Region, which was authorized by the 1990 Farm Bill. The study
supported land stewardship and watershed based planning activities,
identified voluntary and non-regulatory means to protect important
areas, fostered public awareness of the region's resources, and
identified priority areas for protection. In 2000, under Representative
Frelinghuysen's leadership, Congress recognized the need to revisit the
study's findings and authorized an update in Public Law 106-291. The
Forest Service completed the update this year with the National Park
Service providing comments on the draft report. The draft report is the
product of extensive public participation across the Highlands Region,
including involvement by members of the working group from over 120
municipalities, non-profit groups, private groups, and citizens in 12
counties as well as other Federal agencies and members of Congress.
Congress has requested that at the conclusion of the update, the
Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior report on how they will work
together to implement the recommendations of the study. In the draft
report, the Secretaries provide three recommendations for a continued
Federal role in the Highlands Region including: supporting the
stewardship of the Highlands region, ensuring the availability of
science-based information, and partnering in local land stewardship
activities. The Secretaries are in the final stage of completing this
document and hope to transmit it to Congress in the very near future.
We currently see many opportunities for participation in the
Highlands Region through existing programs of the Department of the
Interior. Projects within the region may qualify for Rivers, Trails and
Conservation Assistance, Wild and Scenic Rivers Program assistance, and
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) assistance, among others. For
example, through the LWCF program, the Rockaway Township in the
Highlands Region of the State of New Jersey recently acquired 294 acres
of land adjacent to the Wildcat Ridge Wildlife Management Area to
protect open space inhabited by endangered species including the
threatened bald eagle. Through our Rivers, Trails and Conservation
Assistance Program, we are working with local groups along the Delaware
and Hudson Canal to create a 220-mile network of trails (including
water trails), scenic railroads, and scenic byways. We look forward to
continuing this productive relationship with the Department of
Agriculture, the four states, local governments, and many present and
new partners in the Highlands Region as we strive to protect natural,
historic, and cultural resources.
Our concern with the bill is its cost. H.R. 1964 would authorize
the appropriations of $250 million from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund over 10 years. The targeting of these funds could require
redirecting funds from other high-priority programs or projects, which
could reduce the efficacy of those programs. Many of the purposes of
this bill can be accomplished through grants to states under the Land
and Water Conservation Fund Act. We would like to work with
Representative Frelinghuysen and other sponsors of the bill to examine
more appropriate and cost-effective sources of funding.
This concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to answer any
questions the Committee may have on this bill.
______
Mr. Radanovich. I now recognize Mrs. Christensen.
Mrs. Christensen. Just for clarification, following along
the lines of the question that was partially answered by
Congressman Saxton, what is the difference between the
Highlands Stewardship Area and a National Heritage Area?
Mr. Jones. A National Heritage Area has a direct
relationship with the National Park system and the National
Park Service. A Stewardship Area is not a unit of the National
Park system, and we would hope would not be the National Park
Service.
Mrs. Christensen. And would this sort of a Highlands
Stewardship Area fit under the President's Heritage America
Program?
Mr. Jones. I really would have to defer those questions
specifically to the Forest Service to answer because I do not
have any background or experience in the concept of what is
proposed in this bill.
Mr. Radanovich. Just to clarify that last remark, though,
the Heritage Area is usually administered out of the Park
Service. Did you mean to say, then, that a Stewardship Area is
generally administered out of the USDA, the Department of
Forestry?
Mr. Jones. Well, the Heritage Areas are not administered by
the National Park Service, but we are the lead Federal agency
that work with private partners.
Mr. Radanovich. Right.
Mr. Jones. Be they State, local governments or private
organizations.
Mr. Radanovich. Does that mean that, typically, then--what
is this called?--a Stewardship Area, then, is the Department of
Forestry then the lead agency on that?
Mr. Jones. That would be how we see it, yes, sir.
Mr. Radanovich. Good.
Mr. Frelinghuysen, any questions?
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Actually, your boss is Gale Norton,
Secretary Norton?
Mr. Jones. That is correct, yes, sir.
Mr. Frelinghuysen. And Secretary Norton and Secretary
Veneman are both involved in coming up with the recommendations
that the appropriations language requested.
Mr. Jones. That is correct.
Mr. Frelinghuysen. We are hoping, obviously, for a very
positive, some positive recommendations, in terms of how the
Federal Government can collaborate with other stewards of
properties in this regard, including the good stewardship,
obviously, that the National Park Service has shown in this
region and around the Nation.
Mr. Jones. Absolutely. I would agree with you, and there is
definitely a continued role for the stateside Land and Water
Conservation Fund in this area as well. We have had good
projects in the area, and we fully expect we will have them in
the future, in partnership with all of the local organizations
and States.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Jones, for your
valuable testimony. I appreciate it.
With that, you are excused, and we call up Panel 3, the
Honorable Margaret Nordstrom, a freeholder from Morris County
Board of Freeholders in Long Valley, New Jersey, and Mr.
Stephen Shaw, the immediate past president of the New Jersey
Builders Association from Mountain Lake, New Jersey. Both are
here to speak on H.R. 1964.
Good afternoon and welcome to the Subcommittee.
Ms. Nordstrom, would you like to begin your presentation?
We will give you both 5 minutes, and then we will open it up
for questions from the members up here.
Thank you and welcome.
STATEMENT OF MARGARET NORDSTROM, FREEHOLDER, MORRIS COUNTY
BOARD OF FREEHOLDERS, LONG VALLEY, NEW JERSEY
Ms. Nordstrom. Mr. Chairman, Madam Ranking Member, my name
is Margaret Nordstrom, and I am pleased to appear for you today
on behalf of the Morris County Board of Chosen Freeholders and
the diverse local interests we represent, including small
businesses, community groups, private property owners and
nearly 750,000 residents of the New Jersey Highlands, to share
with you the overwhelming support in our local communities for
the legislation you are considering today.
We are grateful, Mr. Chairman, for your Committee's
expeditious attention to this bill and to the urgent needs it
will address in New Jersey and throughout the four-State
Highlands Region.
We also deeply appreciate the dedication of our
congressional delegation, including Representatives
Frelinghuysen and Garrett, and the efforts of the many
committed House members from other States who recognize the
intense pressures the Highlands face, and the appropriate
Federal role and appropriate local control the Highlands
Stewardship Act provides.
The Highlands is truly a glorious part of the United
States. It has scenic vistas, unmatched recreational
opportunities, critical wildlife habitat and prime farmland.
However, its major importance lies in the fact that the
Highlands is the prime source of drinking water for 15 million
people.
Today, these water resources are profoundly threatened,
mainly as a result of unprecedented growth. The population in
the Highlands from 1990 to 2000 increased 11 percent. The USDA
Forest Service found that over 5,000 acres of land are being
developed a year in the New York-New Jersey Highlands alone.
Aquifer recharge areas that contribute to groundwater
renewal have been paved over and other important aquifers have
been damaged irreparably by inappropriate development. During
times of heavy rains, water that in the past would have been
allowed to percolate back into the ground now becomes runoff,
making the rivers swell and flooding downstream communities
with storm water.
In the 18 years I have lived in my town, Washington
Township, I have seen intermittent streams and wells dry up and
the level of groundwater drop markedly. As the number of people
who are dependent on the Highlands as their source of drinking
water is expected to continue to increase, it is vital that we
take steps now to ensure that we have water in sufficient
quality and quantity for the future.
The USDA Forest Service Report identified about 77 percent
of the highest-value water resources in the Highlands,
approximately 294,000 acres, as being unprotected. About
100,000 of these acres are immediately threatened by potential
development. We, in the Highlands, have a longstanding
commitment to protecting our watersheds to prevent the need for
water treatment options that ultimately cost far more and
deliver less community benefit.
Preservation of water resources is an issue of primary
importance and cuts across municipal, political, and economic
lines. As a result, many partnerships are being forged between
State, county and municipal governments to this end, but this,
in itself, will not be sufficient to do what needs to be done.
We need the Federal Government to partner with us.
Each of the towns and counties in the Highlands has its own
goals for providing for its citizenry. Some want to continue to
grow more than others, to provide services for their people,
but all want to grow intelligently by protecting vital
resources as they move forward.
This is the common understanding that has to drive public
policy. Yes, we need housing and commercial development, but it
has to be built within a framework that accommodates
environmental realities.
I understand full well that this Committee hears from many
communities who face similar, if less pronounced, land-use
issues and which urge you to respond by asserting Federal
control in the form of new national park areas or other
Federally managed units.
Please be assured, Mr. Chairman, that the very last thing
we are interested in is a Federally controlled and mandated
solution to local planning and land management decisions. In
fact, our support for the Highlands Stewardship Act stems
precisely from the bill's respect for local decisionmaking and
from its targeted Federal assistance to our efforts to protect
the nationally significant resources in our own backyard.
The Highlands Stewardship Act offers a helping hand, rather
than a strong-arm intrusion, regarding these issues. The bill
brings Federal agencies, in a defined and welcome role, into
the full partnership that now exists among our State and local
agencies and the broad array of involved private interests.
This balanced approach will help us to maintain our
community vitality and our open spaces. It will facilitate
cost-effective alternatives to domestic water purification
options that otherwise would place even greater strains on
public budgets, and it will enhance our ability to shape the
best-possible future for our area and our constituents.
I have here with me resolutions in support of this bill
from five counties, many municipalities, a local guy who is a
real estate agent, a very active real estate agent, and an
organization of which fully one-third of their members
represent the business community.
Mr. Radanovich. And I would ask unanimous consent that that
be submitted for the record as well, there being no objection.
[NOTE: The supporting resolutions have been retained in the
Committee's official files.]
Ms. Nordstrom. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Nordstrom follows:]
Statement of Margaret Nordstrom, Freeholder,
Morris County, New Jersey, on H.R. 1964
Mr. Chairman, my name is Margaret Nordstrom, and I am pleased to
appear before you today on behalf of the Morris County Board of Chosen
Freeholders and the diverse local interests we represent including--
small businesses, community groups, private property owners, and nearly
750,000 residents of the New Jersey Highlands--to share with you the
overwhelming support in our local communities for the legislation you
are considering today.
We are grateful, Mr. Chairman, for your Committee's expeditious
attention to this bill and to the urgent needs it will address in New
Jersey and throughout the four-state Highlands region. We also deeply
appreciate the dedication of our Congressional delegation (including
Representatives Frelinghuysen and Garrett) and the efforts of the many
committed House members from other states who recognize the intense
pressures the Highlands face and the appropriate Federal role--and the
appropriate local control--the Highlands Stewardship Act provides.
The Highlands is truly a glorious part of the United States. It has
scenic vistas, unmatched recreational opportunities, critical wildlife
habitat, and prime farmland. However, its major importance lies in the
fact that the Highlands is the prime source of drinking water for 15
million people. Today, these water resources are profoundly threatened,
mainly as a result of unprecedented growth. Population in the Highlands
from 1990 to 2000 increased 11%. The USDA Forest Service found that
over 5,000 acres of land are being developed a year in the NY-NJ
Highlands alone.
Aquifer recharge areas that contribute to groundwater renewal have
been paved over and other important aquifers have been damaged
irreparably by inappropriate development. During times of heavy rains,
water that in the past would have been allowed to percolate back into
the ground now becomes run-off, making the rivers swell, and flooding
downstream communities with storm water. In the 18 years I have lived
in my town, Washington Township, I have seen intermittent streams and
wells dry up, and the level of ground water drop markedly. As the
number of people who are dependent on the Highlands as the source of
their drinking water is expected to continue to increase, it is vital
that we take steps now to insure that we have water in sufficient
quality and quantity for the future.
The USDA Forest Service report identified about 77 per cent of the
highest value water resource lands in the Highlands, approximately
294,000 acres, as being unprotected. About 100,000 of these acres are
immediately threatened by potential development. We in the Highlands
have a long standing commitment to protecting our watersheds to prevent
the need for water treatment options that ultimately cost far more and
deliver less community benefit. Preservation of water resources is an
issue of primary importance, and cuts across municipal, political, and
economic lines. As a result, many partnerships are being forged between
state, county and municipal governments to this end, but this in itself
will not be sufficient to do what needs to be done. We need the Federal
Government to partner with us.
Each of the towns and counties in the Highlands has its own goals
in providing for its citizenry. Some want to continue to grow more than
others, to provide services for their people, but all want to grow
intelligently by protecting vital resources as they move forward. This
is the common understanding that has to drive public policy. Yes, we
need housing and commercial development--but it has to be built within
a framework that accommodates environmental realities.
I understand full well that this Committee hears from many
communities who face similar, if less pronounced land-use issues and
which urge you to respond by asserting Federal control in the form of
new national park areas or other Federally managed units.
Please be assured, Mr. Chairman, that the very last thing we are
interested in is a Federally controlled and mandated solution to local
planning and land management decisions. In fact, our support for the
Highlands Stewardship Act stems precisely from the bill's respect for
local decision-making, and from its targeted Federal assistance to our
efforts to protect the nationally significant resources in our own back
yard.
The Highlands Stewardship Act offers a helping hand, rather than a
strong-arm intrusion, regarding these issues. The bill brings Federal
agencies, in a defined and welcome role, into the full partnership that
now exists among our state and local agencies and the broad array of
involved private interests.
This balanced approach will help us to maintain our community
vitality and our open spaces. It will facilitate cost-effective
alternatives to domestic water purification options that otherwise
would place even greater strains on public budgets. And it will enhance
our ability to shape the best possible future for our area and our
constituents.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Ms. Nordstrom for your
testimony. Right on 5 minutes. Good job.
Mr. Shaw, welcome to the Subcommittee. If you would like to
begin your testimony, that would be great.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN H. SHAW, IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT, NEW
JERSEY BUILDERS ASSOCIATION, MOUNTAIN LAKE, NEW JERSEY
Mr. Shaw. Yes, thank you, Chairman Radanovich, Ranking
Member Christensen, and members of the National Parks,
Recreation and Public Lands Subcommittee.
My name is Stephen Shaw. I am a lifelong New Jersey
resident, and I am a second-generation builder and developer
who has been in the home building business in New Jersey for
over 30 years. I am the immediate past president of the New
Jersey Builders Association, and I serve as councilman in
Mountain Lakes, New Jersey, where my wife and I raise our two
children.
I am pleased and honored to have the opportunity to appear
before you today to share the views of the New Jersey Builders
Association and the National Association of Home Builders
concerning H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship Act.
While we appreciate the efforts of this Subcommittee and
Representative Frelinghuysen to address growth issues in New
Jersey, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut, the members
of the New Jersey Builders Association and the National
Association of Home Builders are opposed to the Highlands
Stewardship Act.
In my home State of New Jersey, we are facing a severe
housing shortage. In the 1990's, New Jersey's population grew,
while housing starts declined during that same time period.
Because of this imbalance between supply and demand for
housing, one million low- and moderate-income families will not
have the opportunity to own a safe, decent and affordable home
in the State of New Jersey.
Mr. Chairman, using H.R. 1964 to influence population
growth and migration trends in the Highlands is unrealistic.
The Highlands Stewardship Act will only exacerbate the housing
shortage in New Jersey.
The Highlands Region is home to over 1.4 million people
and, as the study states, virtually in the backyard of the
Nation's largest metropolitan area. The region looks like any
other suburban setting in the U.S. It is beautiful. It has
lakes, rivers, highways, corporate parks, housing and shopping.
Yet, this seemingly average suburban setting has been the
subject of two congressionally authorized, and funded, U.S.
Forest Service studies; first, in 1992, and most recently in
2002.
Representatives of the New Jersey Builders Association were
asked to participate on the Highlands Work Group for the 2002
update. Unfortunately, our participation was limited to little
more than reviewing and commenting on the update. As a result
of our limited input, the 2002 update fails to recognize the
critical importance of housing and the economic impacts in the
region.
The attempt by the 2002 update to quantify the influence of
future development is flawed in a number of ways. The lack of
specificity in the modeling and scientific data presented in
the reports opens the reports to contradiction and debate.
These omissions, coupled with other flaws within the study, do
nothing to realistically portray future development patterns or
the likelihood of environmental damage in the Highlands.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1964, which draws its basis from the
conclusions and recommendations of the 2002 update, will have
an adverse affect on housing affordability and housing choice
in the Highlands Region. Land preservation and the development
restrictions in the Highlands can only serve to increase the
cost of land--I think Mr. Tenny testified to that--and
therefore increase the cost of a home.
There is no need for the creation of a Federal Office of
Highlands or a special annual appropriation for the region, as
H.R. 1964 would do. There currently exists several Federal
programs that can aid local Highlands communities in their
efforts on land preservation.
For example, the U.S. Forest Service's Forest Legacy
Program, which offers States an opportunity to identify and
protect environmentally important forests, includes the
programmatic infrastructure and funding to serve the goals of
protecting sensitive lands in the Highlands.
Additionally, as you, Mr. Chairman, pointed out, H.R. 1964
offers no definition of Stewardship Area and what Federal
protection, management or obligation the designation may
provide to the Highlands Region. Although the legislation
attempts to preserve local zoning control and private property
rights, the creation of a Highlands Stewardship Area will
encourage preservationists and no-growth advocates to further
limit land use in the name of ``national significance.''
The study poses a question: What will the area look like
for our children and grandchildren? And that is a question I
want to know, too. And I submit they will be forced to live and
look at the Highlands from afar, unless we balance preservation
with planning for people.
Thank you for this opportunity to share our views on this
very important issue. I look forward to answering any questions
you or your Subcommittee members may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Shaw follows:]
Statement of Stephen H. Shaw, on behalf of the New Jersey Builders
Association and the National Association of Home Builders, on H.R. 1964
Chairman Radanovich, Ranking Member Christensen and members of the
National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands Subcommittee, I am pleased
to appear before you today to share the views of the New Jersey
Builders Association (NJBA) and the National Association of Home
Builders (NAHB) concerning H.R. 1964, the Highlands Stewardship Act.
My name is Stephen Shaw and I am a life long New Jersey resident
and second-generation builder and developer who has been in the home
building business for over thirty years. For the past thirteen years, I
have been the President of Shaw Built, Inc., an award winning medium-
sized building company specializing in the construction of custom
single-family homes in Morris, Hunterdon and Sussex Counties in New
Jersey. I am the Immediate Past President of the NJBA and serve as a
Councilman in Mountain Lakes, New Jersey.
On behalf of the 2,000 members of the NJBA and the 211,000 members
of the NAHB, I would like to express our opposition to H.R. 1964, the
Highlands Stewardship Act, introduced by Representative Rodney
Frelinghuysen (R-NJ). While we appreciate the efforts of this
Subcommittee and Representative Frelinghuysen to address growth issues
in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Connecticut, the NJBA and
NAHB are opposed to the Highlands Stewardship Act.
This country is faced with the inevitability of population growth
and migration trends. For years, NJBA and NAHB have been working on how
to grow ``smart.'' However, in order to provide solutions, we must
confront an emerging issue that goes hand in hand with smart growth:
population pressure. Projections based on U.S. Census data show that
the U.S. population segment between 25 to 64, the population segment
that accounts for the most household formation, will increase by about
1.4 million per year over the next ten years. With the addition of
approximately 800,000 immigrants per year, the number of U.S.
households will increase about 1.3 million per year for the next ten
years. To satisfy this nationwide demand, and demand for the
replacement of lost housing stock, home builders will have to provide
approximately 1.6 million new homes a year.
In my home state of New Jersey, we are facing a severe housing
shortage. According to New Jersey's State Plan, approximately one
million households, which represent about 2.5 million people, live in
sub-standard, over-crowded housing for which they pay too much. The
average new home in New Jersey costs $308,000; and the average existing
home costs $224,000. To put it in context: the state's median household
income is about $52,000 per year. A family at the median income level,
assuming a generous down-payment and reasonable property taxes, can
afford a house that costs perhaps $150,000--well below the average
resale and average new home price in New Jersey. Over the decade of the
1990's, New Jersey's population grew 87% more than in the 1980s; but
our housing starts declined by 36%. The imbalance between the demand
for and supply of housing is denying one million middle and modest
income families to one of life's basic necessities: a safe, decent and
affordable home.
Mr. Chairman, the option to halt future growth, as a means of
controlling present frustrations, is unrealistic. Future growth in the
Highlands region is not an exception to this reality. The Highlands
Stewardship Act will only exacerbate the housing shortage in New Jersey
by slowing or even halting the opportunity to provide affordable
housing in the Highlands region of the state and throughout the entire
Highlands region.
The Highlands is a geographic region that encompasses over two
million acres stretching from western Connecticut across the Lower
Hudson River Valley and northern New Jersey into east-central
Pennsylvania. This area is home to over 1.4 million people and abuts
one of the most populous metropolitan regions of the nation. The region
is home to interstate highways, airports, a variety of single family
and multi family housing, industrial complexes and corporate parks. The
region also includes brownfield sites, gas stations, and shopping
complexes, as well as, mountains, farmland, lakes and streams. The
communities within the Highlands are vibrant and dynamic and, like most
communities, will continue to grow to accommodate the needs and desires
of people who choose to live, work and raise their families in the
Highlands region.
The Highlands has been the subject of two congressionally
authorized and funded U.S. Forest Service studies: first, in 1992 and,
most recently, the New York-New Jersey Highlands Regional Study 2002
Update (the 2002 Update). In both instances, the reports accompanying
these studies attempt to both qualify and quantify the natural
resources of the Highlands and the threats posed to the region's
natural resources by ``a growing population, urban decline, and
suburban sprawl.''
Representatives of NJBA were asked to participate by the U.S.
Forest Service on the Highlands Work Group and ensure a regional
perspective for the study. Unfortunately, our representatives were just
a few of the over one hundred members of the Work Group. While our
members had hoped to provide the U.S. Forest Service study team with
specific input on the scope and subjects of the study, our
participation was limited to little more than reviewing and commenting
on the 2002 Update. As a result, we believe that the 2002 Update fails
to recognize the critical importance of housing needs and economic
impacts in the region. Further, the 2002 Update makes extremely general
statements and negative predictions describing the condition of the
natural resources within the area. The lack of specificity in the
modeling and scientific data presented in the reports opens the reports
to contradiction and debate. Because these studies comprise the basis
for the legislative action we are contemplating today, it is important
to comment on the shortcomings of these reports, specifically the 2002
Update.
The 2002 Update presents a broad scale assessment of the water
quantity and quality, forest, habitat, recreation, and farmland
resources of the New York and New Jersey portions of the Highlands
region. The 2002 Update concludes that the Highlands' resources are
being placed in jeopardy by development pressures. In order to draw the
conclusion that the area's natural resources are threatened by
residential expansion, the 2002 Update uses general modeling methods to
make predictions about what will occur in the future. These modeling
methods are replete with assumptions and generalities.
For example, in an effort to quantify the effect future development
will have on the region, the 2002 Update establishes a low-constraint
and high-constraint build out analysis. The low-constraint build out
analysis, which assumes that existing policies and conditions will be
continued indefinitely, showed that build out would be reached in 2021
with a 47.6 % population increase. The high-constraint build out
analysis, which increases development constraints by removing areas
that can be developed and changes some policies, showed that build out
would be reached in 2035 with a 26.3% population increase.
This attempt to quantify the influence of future development is
flawed in a number of ways. First, build out may never occur. Both
models assume that all available developable land will be utilized.
Further, the two scenarios alter the pace of build out by using
different and widely general assumptions, leading to the conclusion
that increased development will occur. Second, the scenarios completely
generalized local zoning regulations and ignored any opportunity for
zoning changes. Third, both scenarios removed areas that were already
built to maximum zoning density and areas that were zoned for
commercial and industrial use. To omit these areas from consideration
completely disregards the possibility, and reality, of community
revitalization and infill development, such as brownfields
redevelopment.
The report employs additional modeling methodology with similar
levels of assumptions and generalities to describe the future
conditions of the area's water resources, forest resources, and
watersheds. As above, it is through application of a generalized
principle and coarse scale that the report provides the inevitable
conclusion that these resources are imperiled.
Additionally, the 2002 Update fails to assess the strain that
development constraints will have on the local economies of the
Highlands communities. If actualized, the restrictive modeling of the
high-constraint scenario would deny the opportunity for 300,000
residents (as compared to the predicted population of the Highlands
using the low-constraint scenario) to live in the Highlands region.
Further, the model fails to consider the economic benefit those new
residents would provide to the region. The 2002 Update is noticeably
silent on this issue, failing to adequately address any consideration
of economic impacts, either in the modeling employed or in the
potential impacts of the conservation measures sought in the report,
might have on the region.
Coupled with the conclusions and recommendations of the 2002
Update, H.R. 1964 will have an adverse affect on housing affordability
and housing choice in the Highlands region. As stated earlier, the
Highlands is adjacent to one of the most populous metropolitan regions
of the country and presents a desirable location in which to live,
work, raise a family and recreate. Land preservation and development
restrictions in the Highlands can only serve to increase the cost of
land and, therefore, the cost of a home, and prohibit people from
living in a home of their choice, in a setting of their choice and at a
price they can afford.
In an effort to address the short-term pressures of growth within
the Highlands, the Highlands Stewardship Act provides Federal grants to
the four Highlands states of New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and
Connecticut for land acquisition. However, H.R. 1964 creates an
unneeded and unwarranted level of bureaucracy. The legislation creates
a Federal Office of Highlands Stewardship within the U.S. Department of
Agriculture with the authority to approve and dispense land
preservation grants for the Highlands region. Further, the Office of
Highlands Stewardship is tasked with implementing the findings and
strategies of the 1992 study and the 2002 Update, which, as stated
earlier, has many flaws. The legislation authorizes an annual
authorization of $25 million for land acquisition within the Highlands.
There currently exist several Federal programs that can aid local
Highlands communities in their efforts on land preservation without the
creation of a new Federal office. For example, the U.S. Forest
Service's Forest Legacy Program offers states an opportunity to partner
with the U.S. Forest Service to identify and help protect
environmentally important forests. The U.S. Forest Services' Land and
Water Conservation Fund, which this legislation uses to fund Highlands
preservation, provides money to Federal, state and local governments to
purchase land, water and wetlands. The Natural Resources Conservation
Service's Farmland Protection Program provides funds to help purchase
development rights to keep productive farmland in agricultural uses.
These Federal programs, and others, include the programmatic
infrastructure and funding to serve the goals of protecting land in the
Highlands without the creation of a new office to administer the
program.
Although H.R. 1964 attempts to preserve local zoning control and
private property rights, the designation of the Highlands as a national
Stewardship Area will serve to grant the Federal imprimatur to the
Highlands region. With this designation, preservationists and no-growth
advocates in the region will be emboldened to seek further limits on
land use in the name of ``national significance.'' Further, the
legislation offers no definition of ``Stewardship Area'' and what
Federal protection, management or obligation the designation may
provide to the area and the citizens who live within the region.
One solution to easing development pressures and threats to natural
resources in the Highlands is to examine the Federal statutory and
regulatory impediments to sensible development and resource protection.
Our industry has struggled over the years with myriad overlapping
regulations that inhibit responsible development. Rather than create
another layer of Federal oversight for this region, the Congress should
explore ways that the Federal Government can coordinate its own various
land use authorities and its own often contradicting policies that
affect the Highlands region. The local communities within the Highlands
that desire land preservation would be better served by the
streamlining or improved cross-department coordination of the Federal
requirements and processes that influence local land use plans. With
better Federal regulatory coordination, state and local governments
could better accommodate both development and preservation.
The redevelopment of petroleum-contaminated brownfield sites is one
area that the Federal Government can aid local communities.
Unfortunately, current Federal law does not provide liability
protection for innocent developers who want to develop petroleum
brownfield sites. Without liability protection, builders are unwilling
to assume the risk to their businesses and, therefore, are deterred
from redeveloping petroleum sites. Petroleum brownfield sites, which
present excellent redevelopment opportunities, represent approximately
half of the 500,000 brownfield sites in the country. By providing
statutory or regulatory incentives for redevelopment, brownfields
revitalization can ease the development of ``green fields'' and aid
land preservation efforts.
Mr. Chairman, the Highlands Stewardship Act seeks to preserve land
in the Highlands by using solutions drawn from debatable conclusions in
flawed reports. Without exploring the economic impact that land
preservation will have on local Highlands' economies and housing
affordability, the solutions and strategies H.R. 1964 seeks to
implement are incomplete and could damage the economic future of the
region. While the cause of land preservation is a noble one, the goal
of land preservation within the Highlands can be accomplished by
existing Federal conservation programs without any special ``national''
designations.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to share the views of
the New Jersey Builders Association and the National Association of
Home Builders on this important issue. I look forward to any questions
you or the members of the committee may have.
______
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Shaw.
Mr. Shaw, do you think that the Highlands should be
developed, then; is that what you are----
Mr. Shaw. I think we have--I don't think--I know we have,
and according to our State plan today, as we sit here, one-
third of New Jersey residents live in substandard, overcrowding
housing for which they put too much. It is a balancing act.
The recommendation calls for more recreation space for the
citizens of New Jersey. I submit that we need to be equally
concerned or more so that these residents have a safe,
affordable roof over their head before we worry about where
they are going to go during the day for recreation.
The Highlands needs to be developed responsibly. I live
there. Obviously, I have children and a family I am raising
there, but the notion that housing, and the people that inhabit
housing, are going to be detrimental to the environment is
simply not true. Development can be done responsibly and
protect the environment. But we need to provide housing, and we
need to have a plan for people, instead of planning against
people.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Christensen?
Mrs. Christensen. I have no questions.
Mr. Radanovich. No questions, no?
Mr. Frelinghuysen?
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Just one brief comment.
Thank you, again, Mr. Chairman, for the courtesies you have
extended to me, Mr. Saxton, and the witnesses here today, and I
particularly want to welcome Freeholder Margaret Nordstrom and
Steve Shaw, who is an old friend, both of whom are
constituents, particularly Margaret Nordstrom, who is a county-
elected official. Mr. Shaw is a municipal-elected official.
Both of them are dedicated to the betterment of their
communities and to Morris County, the county in which I live.
And I know that I will continue to work with both of them,
particularly Margaret Nordstrom, in terms of preserving open
space, and toward the goals of this Highlands Stewardship Act.
And I look forward to working with the New Jersey Home
Builders, and Mr. Shaw and his group to make any improvements
that are within reason, but help us achieve this very important
goal.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Frelinghuysen.
I have one question, too, and, Rod, it may be more
appropriate for you to answer, but were there issues, and I
mean this land is primarily in New Jersey and New York, but in
Pennsylvania and Connecticut, were there ever any ballot or
statewide ballot initiatives or bills at the State level to try
to accomplish open space preservation within these same areas?
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Well, I can speak for New Jersey. We
have had a number, we have something called the Green Acres
Program. I am not sure whether you have the equivalent in
California. But the voters of New Jersey stand up on a fairly
regular basis, and with their feet and with their pocketbooks,
have voted, in many cases, to tax themselves so that they can
raise money that can be matched by municipal, county, State and
sometimes Federal resources; the ones that have been mentioned
previously.
So the State of New Jersey has had a long history of
supporting public ballot initiatives to preserve open space,
both in Republican and Democratic legislatures, as well as
Republican and Democratic Governors.
Mr. Radanovich. Any initiatives to make this more of a
State park system or anything like that?
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Well, what we don't want to do with this
bill, as I have discussed with you on the way to floor votes,
is give the Federal Government any more responsibilities to
match----
Mr. Radanovich. No, I am just thinking State parks, though,
in a State park scenario.
Mr. Frelinghuysen. Well, the State has lots of initiatives
to buy more open space itself. The State is not relaxing, nor
are the counties and municipalities, in terms of trying to
preserve open space. They are willing to tax themselves, add on
to their own tax rates, a certain percentage to buy open space.
So I think there is a wide support for what we are doing
because many municipalities and counties already have the State
mechanism.
We hope that that self-taxing mechanism can be used in
conjunction with Federal dollars to expand the ability to buy
more property from willing sellers.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Radanovich. Ladies and gentlemen, thanks for your fine
testimony. I appreciate your being here and, with that, the
hearing is closed.
[Whereupon, at 3:48 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]