[Senate Hearing 109-663]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-663
DESIGNATION/REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
S. 574 S. 2037
S. 1387 S. 2645
S. 1721
__________
JUNE 22, 2006
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
_____
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
30-701 PDF WASHINGTON : 2006
_________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free
(866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail:
Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico, Chairman
LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RON WYDEN, Oregon
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
CONRAD BURNS, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
GORDON SMITH, Oregon ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
Bruce M. Evans, Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Chief Counsel
Robert M. Simon, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on National Parks
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming, Chairman
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Vice Chairman
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina RON WYDEN, Oregon
MEL MARTINEZ, Florida MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
GORDON SMITH, Oregon KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
Pete V. Domenici and Jeff Bingaman are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
Thomas Lillie, Professional Staff Member
David Brooks, Democratic Senior Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Allen, Hon. George, U.S. U.S. Senator from Virginia.............. 6
Cutler, Charlene Perkins, Executive Director & CEO, Quinebaug-
Shetucket Heritage Corridor, Inc............................... 46
Dodd, Hon. Christopher J., U.S. Senator from Connecticut......... 2
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., U.S. Senator from Massachusetts......... 3
Lieberman, Hon. Joseph I., U.S. Senator from Connecticut......... 5
Murphy, Donald W., Deputy Director, National Park Service,
Department of the Interior..................................... 10
Rice, Daniel M., President and CEO, Ohio & Erie Canalway
Coalition, Akron, OH........................................... 41
Salazar, Hon. Ken, U.S. Senator from Colorado.................... 8
Sullivan, Dr. W. Michael, Director, Rhode Island Department of
Environmental Management....................................... 25
Thomas, Hon. Craig, U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................... 1
Velasquez, Ann Marie, Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area.... 29
Voinovich, Hon. George V., U.S. Senator from Ohio................ 6
Wyatt, Cate Magennis, President, The Journey Through Hallowed
Ground Partnership............................................. 34
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 51
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 59
DESIGNATION/REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 22, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Energy & Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Craig Thomas
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT BY HON. CRAIG THOMAS, U.S.
SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Thomas. I call the committee to order.
Thank you very much. We're going to vote in about an hour.
So we can just begin as soon as we possibly can.
Good afternoon, I want to welcome Deputy Director Don
Murphy from the National Park Service and our other witnesses
to today's subcommittee hearing.
Our purpose for this hearing is to receive testimony on
five Senate bills.
S. 574, a bill to amend the Quinebaug [kwen-uh-bog] and
Shetucket [shuh-tuck-it] Rivers Valley National Heritage
Corridor Act of 1994 to increase the authorization of
appropriations and modify the date on which the authority of
the Secretary of the Interior terminates under the Act.
S. 1387, a bill to provide for an update of the Cultural
Heritage and Land Management Plan for the John H. Chafee
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor, to extend
the authority of the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley
National Heritage Corridor Commission, to authorize the
undertaking of a special resource study of sites and landscape
features within the Corridor, and to authorize additional
appropriations for the Corridor.
S. 1721, a bill to amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands
Management Act of 1996 to extend the authorization for certain
national heritage areas, and for other purposes.
S. 2037, a bill to establish the Sangre [San-gray] de [Day]
Cristo [Chris-tow] National Heritage Area in the State of
Colorado, and for other purposes.
And S. 2645, a bill to establish the Journey Through
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area, and for other purposes.
All of these bills concern the designation of new national
heritage areas or the reauthorization of existing heritage
areas. I think national heritage area designation has
accomplished many good things, but with 27 in existence and
over 20 more proposed for designation, the program needs
definition and criteria to remain viable. Heritage areas are
not units of the National Park System yet they expect annual
funding through the national park budget. They are created with
a limited funding authorization of $10 million for a limited
time of 15 years yet they return for an extension of both money
and time. They seem to be looking more and more like park units
from a fiscal perspective, and that was never the intent. I
want to encourage the House to pass my bill, S. 243, to give
better definition to national heritage areas.
I understand that our witness for S. 574 is prepared to
testify that her heritage area has found a way to be self
sufficient by the year 2015 and that the bill should be amended
to reflect that. I would like to thank Ms. Cutler for
developing such a strategy and I challenge every other heritage
area to improve on that approach by becoming self sufficient
within the initial authorization period of 15 years.
I thank the witnesses for being here and look forward to
receiving their testimony.
Senator Allen, if you'd like to go right ahead, sir.
[The prepared statements of Senators Dodd, Kennedy,
Lieberman, and Voinovich follow:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Christopher J. Dodd, U.S. Senator
From Connecticut
Chairman Thomas, Vice Chairman Alexander, Senator Akaka, and
members of the Subcommittee, I thank you for holding this hearing
today. I appreciate the opportunity to offer testimony in support of
the Quinebaug-Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor
(Corridor) reauthorization.
The Corridor is one of the last unspoiled river valleys along the
coastal, eastern United States and is often referred to as the Last
Green Valley. Established twelve years ago, and expanded to include a
few more towns in 1999, the region is known for its scenery, vibrant
wildlife, recreational opportunities, and more than 100 historic and
architecturally significant mills. The Corridor is highly regarded as
an advocate for resource protection and is looked to by its 35 small
communities and residents as the glue that holds together the regional
success stories. Hundreds of volunteers and thousands of hours of
service have contributed to the projects and programs of the Corridor
each year.
The excellence of their work has been recognized by state and
national awards including the 2005 Public Education Award from the
American Planning Association of the Green Valley Institute.
What I find very impressive is their record of leveraging non-
federal matches to the federal investment. In fact, the cumulative
ratio is $19 non-federal dollars to each federal dollar. In a time of
scarce federal resources, I think it is clear that the Corridor is a
great federal investment.
Since Senator Lieberman, Senator Kennedy and Senator Kerry joined
with me last year in introducing S. 574, a bill to extend the
authorization of the Corridor, the Corridor itself completed an
innovative Sustainability Plan, The Trail to 2015, and intends to be
self-sufficient of federal funding by 2015. They are the first heritage
corridor to embark on such a plan.
However in the intervening years, it is imperative that the
Corridor continue to receive federal appropriations to support critical
programs while it is developing an alternative resource base.
Therefore, I respectfully request that we amend our bill to extend
the Quinebaug-Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor
Authorization Act of 1994 to extend the period of authorization beyond
2009 to 2015, and to extend the appropriation to reflect an additional
$6 million to coincide with the six-year extension. This would reflect
the Corridor's timetable to be self-sustaining by 2015.
I would be remiss if I didn't recognize and thank Charlene Cutler
for the wonderful job she is doing. She is the Executive Director and
CEO of Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage Corridor, Inc., the grassroots
nonprofit designated as the management entity for the Corridor and she
will offer testimony at this hearing in support of this proposal.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Edward M. Kennedy, U.S. Senator
From Massachusetts
I commend Chairman Thomas and Senator Akaka for holding this
hearing. Earlier this year, Senators Voinovich, Chafee, Byrd, Grassley,
Specter, Kerry, Graham, DeWine, Reed, Schumer, Clinton, Rockefeller and
I requested the Committee to consider S. 1721, and I appreciate the
opportunity to offer my strong support for that bill, as well as two
others on which the Committee will receive testimony today.
Senate bills 1721, 1387, and 574 would reauthorize Heritage Areas
covering thousands of square miles across 12 states. Among them are the
Essex National Heritage Area, the John H. Chafee Blackstone River
Valley National Heritage Corridor, and the Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage
Corridor, which span 56 cities and towns in the northeast and south-
central regions of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. They include some
of the nation's most historic, scenic and culturally significant sites,
and it's vital that they be preserved.
Essex County is uniquely historic. It includes Salem, where the
Heritage Area Commission is based, which was among the nation's first
colonial settlements dating back to the early 17th century. It was home
to the great American author Nathaniel Hawthorne, and was also the site
of the infamous Salem witch trials of 1692.
The city of Lawrence gave us the 1912 ``Bread & Roses Strike,''
which was an early battlefront in the effort to protect the rights of
the nation's factory workers.
In Amesbury, the Merrimack River powered some of the nation's
earliest textile mills, and John Greenleaf Whittier, the poet and
abolitionist, did most of his writing here.
Gloucester is one of the nation's oldest and greatest fishing
ports.
Essex County has all of this history and much more. Congress
recognized its significance when it established the Essex National
Heritage Area 10 years ago as part of the Omnibus Parks and Public
Lands Act of 1996.
Earlier this month, the Heritage Area celebrated its tenth
anniversary, and the event was called ``10 years and 100 Milestones.''
I ask the Committee to include a copy of my remarks on that occasion,
and I urge the Committee to act on S. 1721, so that these unique
treasures may be preserved and protected for future generations.
Both S. 1721 and Sen. Chafee's bill, S. 1387, would reauthorize the
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor,
which includes 24 cities and towns in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
The Blackstone Corridor is a window into the nation's early
industrial period. It was here that the nation's first factory--the
Slater Mill--was built in 1790. It was a cotton-spinning mill powered
by the Blackstone River in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Its success
inspired other water-powered mills and led to America's Industrial
Revolution, in which raw materials from the south were shipped to New
England to be woven into textiles. The process greatly strengthened the
nation's commercial power and reduced its dependence on imported goods.
Today, there are few remnants of our early Industrial period. Many
of the old mill buildings have been demolished and replaced with modern
structures, or put to entirely different uses. That's why the
Blackstone Corridor, which preserves and promotes understanding about
mill community-living, is so precious. It offers a glimpse at America
as a young nation on the way to becoming a world power, and it honors
the ingenuity and hard work that led us forward.
In fact, Blackstone was the nation's second nationally-designated
Heritage Area--established in 1986, two years after the Illinois &
Michigan National Heritage Corridor, and it's been a remarkable
success. Last year, the Corridor Commission's Sustainability Study
reported that ``the Commission has directly sponsored or participated
in more than 400 projects within the Corridor.'' The Study also found
that, ``A conservative estimate of [National Park Service] funds
indicates a 22-to-1 match--a public-private investment in excess of
$500 million.''
The reauthorization legislation needs to be enacted before November
when the Blackstone Corridor Commission expires.
I also urge the Committee's support for Senator Dodd's bill, S.
574, to reauthorize the Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage Corridor, which
includes 35 communities in Massachusetts and Connecticut.
This Corridor, commonly known as ``The Last Green Valley,'' is
among the few remaining areas in the Northeast with thousands of
contiguous acres of open space, and much of it looks just as it did
when the nation was founded. At night, its 1,000 square-mile area of
darkness can be seen from the sky or in satellite photos of the
northeast, surrounded by lights from the metropolitan areas of New York
City, Worcester, and Boston.
The Last Green Valley has had remarkable success in moving toward
self-sufficiency. The Corridor Commission has leveraged $4.8 million
from the Heritage Area program into more than $89 million from other
sources--nearly 19 times the Park Service investment. Indeed, I
understand that the Commission wishes to amend S. 574 to reduce this
authorization from 2027 to 2015, and I support such a change. Again,
though, I ask the Committee to do all it can to expedite the enactment
of the bill.
I know that some Senators have reservations about the Heritage
Areas program and the need for reauthorization. I understand those
concerns, particularly at a time of large annual budget deficits and
too few resources for Park Service programs. But these are important
investments that shouldn't be cut off.
The nation's Heritage Areas promote and preserve national
treasures. States and localities shouldn't have to bear the full
burden. The Heritage Areas are effective in using Park Service funds to
leverage private, state and local aid, and the program is fundamentally
sound. Congress should continue to support them rather than allow them
to expire prematurely.
I urge the Committee to approve Senate Bills 1721, 1387, and 574
soon, so that these Heritage Areas won't lose their leveraging power,
and can continue to strengthen existing partnerships and build new ones
to care for these important parts of the nation's history.
I thank the Committee for scheduling this hearing and for the
opportunity to testify in support of these bills, and I look forward to
working with the Committee to enact these important bills.
[Attachment.]
Tenth Anniversary of Essex National Heritage Area
June 1, 2006
Ten years ago we began a new experiment to see if the federal
government could partner with local organizations to bring a broad
range of communities together--34 in all--from Lawrence to Peabody and
from Saugus to Salisbury--to plan a stronger future by promoting our
common heritage, preserving our history, and investing in education and
cultural awareness. We set out to create new economic opportunities by
promoting cultural tourism, which is now one of the principal economic
engines of our state.
It was a novel and relatively untried approach, and many felt it
would be difficult to bring so many interests together. But its been a
remarkable success here in Essex County, and you've become a model for
other communities across the country.
Few things are more challenging than creating a broad consensus,
but the rewards are impressive when all that hard work pays off. And
it's easy to see it's paying off for the North Shore.
The ``10 years and 100 milestones `` presentation you've made
tonight just begins to tell this story. From the transformation of the
United Shoe Machinery site into the Cummings Center in Beverly to the
lighthouse restoration work of the Thatcher Island Association, these
milestones demonstrate an enduring commitment on the part of so many.
Essex County has been blessed with a remarkable and proud legacy.
Its history dates from the years of Nathaniel Hawthorne and the
earliest days of our democracy, and its beautiful landscape and
seascapes rival any in the world.
For nearly 400 years, the story of Essex County has been the story
of America--from the first European settlement--to the rise of the sea
trade--to the industrial revolution--and now to the dawning of this new
age of global communication.
The heritage of the area is preserved in its many outstanding
cultural and historic organizations that work in partnership with the
Heritage Commission. I think of the Trustees of Reservations, who've
protected some of the most historic properties in our state for future
generations, such as Appleton Farms in Ipswich, which was established
in 1638 and remains one of the oldest continually operating farms in
the United States.
I think of the Peabody-Essex Museum, which has just undergone a
brilliant renovation that will help us tell the story of the China
trade and the region's early economic vitality.
In Gloucester, there's the Maritime Heritage Center, the
Fishermen's Wives Memorial, and the historic Schooner Adventure, which
has been restored to its early glory. Each of them help us understand
the magnitude of the past challenges confronting our fishing families,
and the extraordinary courage it took to master the sea.
In Amesbury, the restored historic Lowell Boat Shop, the oldest
continuously operating such shop in the nation, is a wonderful place to
learn more about the skills and artistry of boat craft.
The Saugus Ironworks National Historic Site offers visitors an
opportunity to learn about the nation's first integrated ironworks, and
provides fascinating information on all of the Heritage Area's
programs.
One of the most impressive community efforts has been the
construction of the Friendship. I was privileged to join you all five
years ago in Gloucester and in Salem for her commissioning ceremony.
Building the Friendship was truly a labor of love, citizens young and
old, business leaders and community leaders--each of whom understood
what the Friendship would mean to the area.
It was not a single voice but a strong chorus that came to Congress
for federal support, and we were happy to help. I still remember
showing Senator Bob Byrd the postcards that school children sent in and
the beautiful painting they presented us. In the end, it was the
heartfelt sincerity of the children that helped carry the day in
Congress, and today the Friendship moored in the picturesque harbor
near here is a noble flagship that all visitors to Essex County salute.
I was proud to be a part of that effort, and proud to support the
continuing work of the Essex National Heritage Area.
The federal government has provided essential seed money. But it's
the communities and towns across the county who made it happen,
leveraging the federal aid with at least two or three and sometimes
five dollars of private sector investment for each dollar of federal
funds.
Our challenge now is to take this public private partnership
approach into the next ten years with the same sense of purpose, high
expectations, and determination.
The new Leonard Partnership Grants will encourage that kind of
leadership, and I commend this year's winners--the Ford School and the
Salem Boys and Girls Club--for their outreach programs that serve young
people and sustain community awareness and involvement so well.
Together, we can achieve even more in the next decade, so that a
new generation of our citizens from Newburyport to Lynn and Haverhill
to Salem will understand their precious heritage as residents of one of
the nation's founding colonies and know about the successive
generations--the ironworkers, the fishermen, the writers, authors, the
businessmen and public officials, who've worked to leave the region
better off than the way they've found it.
I congratulate you on all you've accomplished--and I pledge my full
support as you meet the new challenges of the coming decade.
@_____
Prepared Statement of Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman, U.S. Senator
From Connecticut
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley
in northeastern Connecticut and south-central Massachusetts is ``The
Last Green Valley'' in the midst of the urban sprawl that covers much
of the Boston-to-Washington corridor. This National Heritage Area is
half the size of Grand Canyon National Park and more than ten times the
size of Acadia National Park, the largest national park in the
northeast. This regionally and nationally important landscape provides
wildlife habitat, recreation opportunities, and important ecosystem
services, such as carbon sequestration, erosion control, and clean
water.
I have supported the efforts of my esteemed colleague from
Connecticut, Senator Dodd, who has worked tirelessly to ensure funding
for this important National Heritage Area, as have my friends from
Massachusetts, Senators Kennedy and Kerry.
Thanks to the excellent management of the nationally-recognized
grassroots nonprofit organization, Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage
Corridor (QSHC), Inc., federal appropriations have been leveraged and
matched by funds from state, local, and private sources with a
cumulative ratio of nineteen dollars to each federal dollar. QSHC Inc.
has developed ``The Trail to 2015, a Sustainability Plan,'' which puts
The Last Green Valley on track to being self sufficient and sustainably
managed by 2015.
Today I testify in support of amending the Quinebaug and Shetucket
Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Reauthorization Act of 1994 to
extend the period of authorization through 2015--six years beyond the
2009 current level--and to maintain the level of authorized funding at
one million dollars per year throughout that period. That would
represent a total authorization increase of six million dollars. This
amendment comports with QSHC Inc.'s management plan and reflects the
fact that QSHC will not need federal money after 2015.
With this amendment, we can ensure that The Last Green Valley
remains green and protected for future generations and for America's
wildlife. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. George V. Voinovich, U.S. Senator From Ohio
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today to discuss
legislation designating and reauthorizing National Heritage Areas. As
you know, I introduced S. 1721, the National Heritage Area Extension
Act, on September 19, 2005. I believe this bill is vital to the ongoing
protection and promotion of the nation's cultural, historic and
environmental resources. Therefore, I urge the Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources to consider and pass this important
legislation.
Heritage areas preserve thousands of unique national resources
without restricting land uses or interfering with private property
rights. They do so by using federal investments to leverage local
public and private capital. Last year, more than $100 million was
leveraged in community investments, with nearly half coming from
private funding, and the funds were used to improve recreational
trails, provide educational programs, and award local heritage project
grants.
S. 1721 would enable this worthwhile federal support for our
national treasures to continue. The bill authorizes $10 million per
year through fiscal year 2027 for the National Coal Heritage Area, the
Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area, the Augusta Canal National Heritage
Area, the Steel Industry American Heritage Area, the Essex National
Heritage Area, the South Carolina National Heritage Corridor, America's
Agricultural Partnership, the Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage
Corridor, and the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area. These
nine Heritage Areas were originally authorized in the Omnibus Parks and
Public Lands Act of 1996, but they are now near their spending caps and
will be unable to continue leveraging federal funding without a new
authorization.
In addition, the bill authorizes $10 million through fiscal year
2016 for the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage
Corridor, which was established in 1986, expands the Corridor
Commission's membership, and orders a new Corridor Plan. The New Jersey
Coastal Heritage Trail Route, which was established in 1988, would be
ordered to prepare a new strategic plan focused on improving local
public and private participation. The Mississippi River National
Heritage Area would be established, including counties bordering the
river, and $20 million would be authorized to implement its management
plan of inventorying, improving, and promoting the region's resources.
Heritage Areas are proven methods of community preservation and
revitalization. Their success results from their public-private
partnerships, which have evolved in two decades of working well with
local businesses, community activists, regional officials, county-wide
organizations, and state and federal agencies.
Again, thank you for holding this hearing. It is my hope that we
can act on this important legislation in the near future.
STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE ALLEN, U.S. SENATOR
FROM VIRGINIA
Senator Allen. Sure, thank you, Chairman Thomas, and I'm
pleased to have the opportunity here and I know our committee
is to hear this subject and this topic at this hearing that is
very close to my heart. As a history buff, and in fact, as a
student in history, I feel very, very strongly that it is
important to preserve and celebrate and learn from the rich
history of our country; many great things in our past, some
things that aren't so great. And regardless, people can learn
from them. In our Commonwealth of Virginia, we're particularly
proud of the many historical events and people who are
essential for the foundation and shaping of our country, and,
in fact, in some areas it's been so essential and crucial that
it's wonderful to see how it expanded beyond just our continent
but also these concepts that grow around the world; the ideals
of democracy and liberty.
In recognition of this contribution, I've introduced this
measure S. 2645, The Journey Through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area Act of 2006. My partner and colleague from
Virginia, Senator Warren is also a co-sponsor, an original co-
sponsor, of this and Congressman Frank Wolff who is a
passionate, strong, good friend and colleague and leader, also
has introduced this with many other Virginians on the House
side.
This effort is a means of enhancing, not just the ideas,
but the educational awareness of this very historic ground,
which I think, when you look at it and see the assets of what
has happened there, is a very unique region. It is remarkable
in this country and it was such an important formation of our
more perfect union. This legislation is designed to maintain
the heritage of what is Route 15 and Route 20. It's a corridor
that starts in Albemarle County outside of Charlottesville on
Route 20, goes north through the Piedmont of Virginia on up
through Maryland and finally ending at Gettysburg and
Pennsylvania. This area, Mr. Chairman, includes six
presidential homes, 13 locations on the National Historic
Landmark Register, two world heritage sites, 47 historic
districts and the largest number of Civil War battle fields.
The region contains intrinsic resources including the greatest
concentration of rural historic districts in the United States;
sites from colonial times, sites from the Civil War and, of
course, there are four national parks there.
This effort is not something that has just arisen this
year. It's a 10 year joint public-private sector initiative.
And I know Cate Magennis Wyatt will be testifying here this
afternoon, for her work with the National Park Service to
conserve and promote the historic resources within this region.
The designation of this heritage area will consist of an
outstanding grassroots effort which is comprised of over 150
organizations, nearly every single governing board of
supervisors, town council, borough council throughout the
approximate 175 mile corridor. There are some examples of this
in Virginia in the Shenandoah Valley where there were a lot of
battles during the war between the States; different counties,
cities and communities worked together to have a way of
presenting the various battles that raged in the 1860's in the
Shenandoah Valley.
Now this legislation, though, is more than just the Civil
War, this is, in fact, was even before the Revolutionary War.
This legislation will ensure that future generations will be
able to trace the old Iroquois and Sasequahatic Indian Trading
routes. Also to recognize the battles and tragic bloodshed that
transpired on many Civil War battle fields. They'll be able to
reflect on the formation of our American Republic through the
homes of Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, and James Madison.
Our young citizens will learn from journeys and when you
have a journey it is also a great way to have families take a
trip, and you can follow where you're going and tell stories
and try to imagine what things were like in the 1700's or the
1800's in these areas. And I think what young people are going
to learn is that leadership emanates from personal choices, and
our choices are within the control of each and every one of us,
and so is the leadership; the people and the decisions and
choices that people made to the challenges they faced in those
times. So this Journey Through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area, I think, is going to enhance preservation. It's
truly going to enhance education, and moreover, heritage
tourism, a big part of these communities, and it's going to
help, I think, with jobs and historic preservation.
Finally, this has come up, and it has to do with one of the
most important rights we have in our free and just society, and
that's private ownership of property. The preservations of our
country's heritage is important, as are our Constitutionally
protected rights, including private ownership of property.
This bill does more than any other heritage bill passed by
Congress that I've seen to date to include language clearly
recognizing those property rights. The introduced language
provides that nothing in this legislation, in any way, alters
State or local land use policies or provides no new eminent
domain powers whatsoever. So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to
working with my colleagues to pass this legislation during this
Congress, it would be great to get this done before the 400
anniversary of the founding of Jamestown. We've heard this
before, that Captain John Smith water trail--we want to have
all America come home to Virginia which is the cradle of
American Liberty, and the first permanent English settlement
and to do this I think will enhance not just Virginia, this
will be beneficial for Maryland, for Pennsylvania, but most
importantly, I think, for the Nation, not just for 2007, but
for generations to come, and I thank you, again, Mr. Chairman,
for holding this hearing and your consideration of this
important legislation.
Senator Thomas. Okay. Thank you very much, Senator. I
welcome Deputy Director Don Murphy from the National Park
Service, and our other witnesses on today's hearing. Our
purpose is to receive testimony on five Senate bills having to
do with national heritage: S. 574, S. 1387, S. 1721, S. 2037,
and S. 2645.
So now let me turn to the Senator from Colorado, and then
we'll go to Mr. Murphy.
STATEMENT OF HON. KEN SALAZAR, U.S. SENATOR
FROM COLORADO
Senator Salazar. Thank you very much, Senator Thomas, for
holding this hearing on these important bills that are before
the committee. I appreciate your leadership not only on these
bills but also your leadership concerning our National Park
System. The bill S. 2037, which is the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area Act, will help protect the extraordinary
cultural and natural resources of the San Luis Valley in
Colorado, my native valley.
I want to welcome today to our hearing, Ann Marie
Velasquez, who has been the lead organizer of this project in
Colorado, and I'd also like to welcome a number of people who
have traveled a long ways from Colorado to be here from
Alamosa, Costilla and other counties. Your attendance is a
testament as to the strength of this national heritage area
proposal.
As a native son of the San Luis Valley, I know how hard the
peoples of the region have fought to protect their traditions,
their language, their art and architecture, and the stories of
their ancestors. They have fought to protect treasured
grasslands, the Great Sand Dunes, the waterways and the
mountain peaks of the valley. They have fought to protect a
rural way of life that cherishes family, faith and hard work.
Sadly, they also paid a price for guarding their rural way of
life. Costilla and Conjeos Counties are two of the four poorest
counties in the United States of America. Young people often
must leave the valley to find the jobs and opportunities that
they seek elsewhere. What the valley lacks in financial riches,
it more than makes up for in its natural and cultural
treasures.
Mr. Chairman, the land, traditions, and history of the
valley are of the San Luis Valley are of such importance to the
story and identity of America that they deserve national
designation and protection.
Since people first settled in the San Luis Valley over
11,000 years ago, the cultures, lifestyles and the cosmologies
of the valley settlers have converged, conflicted and coalesced
through the centuries. The region was dubbed ``The Land of the
Blue Sky People,'' in honor of the Utes, the oldest continuous
residents of which is now Colorado. It is the home of Mount
Blanca, the sacred mountain that, according to folklore, marks
the eastern boundary of the Navajo world. Seventeenth century
Spanish which is still spoken by about 35 percent of the
population of the region testifies to the strong influence of
this--of the original New Mexican settlers into the southern
part of Colorado. And the Narrow Gauge railroads the Rio Grande
Railroad recall America's era of westward expansion.
The valley's natural wonders are many and the designation
of the national heritage area would, in fact, be a significant
statement about the importance of the heritage of this peaceful
area.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for holding this hearing and for
allowing the presentation to be made on this proposed heritage
area. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Senator Salazar follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ken Salazar, U.S. Senator From Colorado
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Akaka. I appreciate you
holding this hearing on S. 2037, the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area Act, which would help protect the extraordinary cultural and
natural resources of the San Luis Valley in Colorado.
I want to welcome Ann Marie Velasquez, who has been the lead
organizer of this project in Colorado. And I would like to welcome the
large group of county commissioners and community leaders from Conejos,
Alamosa, and Costilla counties who have traveled so far to join us here
today. Your attendance is a testament to the strength of this National
Heritage Area proposal.
As a native son of the San Luis Valley, I know how hard the peoples
of the region have fought to protect their traditions, their language,
their art and architecture, and the stories of their ancestors. They
have fought to protect treasured ranchlands, sand dunes, waterways, and
mountain peaks. And they have fought to protect a rural way of life
that cherishes family, faith, and hard work.
Sadly, they have also paid a price for guarding their rural way of
life. Costilla and Conejos Counties are two of the four poorest
counties in America. Young people often must leave the Valley to find
the jobs and opportunities they seek.
What the Valley lacks in financial riches it more than makes up for
in its natural and cultural treasures. Mr. Chairman, the land,
traditions, and history of the San Luis Valley are of such importance
to the story and identity of America that they deserve national
designation and protection.
Since people first settled in the San Luis Valley over 11,000 years
ago, the cultures, lifestyles, and cosmologies of the Valley's settlers
have converged, conflicted, and coalesced through the centuries. The
region was dubbed ``The Land of the Blue Sky People'' in honor of the
Utes, the oldest continuous residents of what is now Colorado. It is
the home of Mount Blanca, the sacred mountain that, according to
folklore, marks the eastern boundary of the Navajo world. Seventeenth
century Spanish, still spoken by about 35% of the population of the
Sangre de Cristo region, testifies to the strong influence of Hispano
settlers, while the narrow gauge rails of the Rio Grande Railroad
recall America's era of westward expansion.
The San Luis Valley's natural wonders attract visitors from around
the world. The Valley is home to three National Wildlife Refuges,
fifteen State Wildlife Refuges, a National Forest, two National Forest
Wilderness Areas, and the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve.
Anyone who hikes the area's peaks, watches its wildlife, or rides on
its ranches will tell you that this region is a crown jewel of the
American landscape.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that the concept of a National Heritage
Area can be, in places like the San Luis Valley, an excellent way for
the federal government to support local, consensus-based approaches to
land management. I also agree with you that we need a coherent system
for designating and managing these heritage areas.
For this reason, I wrote this bill as if your bill, S. 243, which
creates standards for National Heritage Area designations, were law.
The Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area Act includes strong
protections for private property, is based on a sound study of the
national significance of the area, gives firm guidance to the
management entity, and provides clear direction for how the federal
government may support the project.
The Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area Act also fulfills the
criteria that the Park Service has established for determining whether
a project is worthy of designation, and I look forward to hearing more
about this in Mr. Murphy's testimony.
I particularly want to note the leadership that the local community
has shown over the past four years in building support for the project,
studying the region's resources, and assembling a plan for protecting
these resources demonstrates that this will be a permanent, successful,
and self-sufficient project. The list of local governments,
organizations, state agencies, and individuals supporting this project
is remarkable, as Ms. Velasquez will attest.
Mr. Chairman, for generations the peoples of the San Luis Valley
have worked hard to be good stewards of their land and water and to
preserve their culture and rural way of life. They are looking for our
help now to protect a place that is central to Colorado's peoples,
emblematic of the Western landscape, and at the core of the American
experience.
I hope we can honor the contributions of the San Luis Valley to our
Nation's heritage by designating the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Thomas. Thank you.
Mr. Murphy, would you care to comment, please?
STATEMENT OF DONALD W. MURPHY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Allen, Senator
Salazar. I'm Donald Murphy, Deputy Director of the National
Park Service, and I would like to open my statement by saying
my official testimony is in the record, and I hope you'll
except my official testimony that has been placed in the
record.
Senator Thomas. It will be in the record.
Mr. Murphy. A recent National Park System Advisory Board
report, entitled ``Charting a Future for National Heritage
Areas,'' recognized the important role of national heritage
areas and expanding conservation, stewardship and identifying
and preserving significant historic resources. The report also
recognized that national heritage areas need a legislative
foundation that frames and supports this approach. So the
national heritage area program legislation sponsored here in
the Senate, by Chairman Thomas, S. 243 that passed the Senate
last year and is supported by the Department would provide that
framework, and that's very important to the National Park
Service for the future management of these heritage areas.
I'll take each bill in turn and present the Department's
positions on those bills.
First, S. 574 that would extend the termination date for
Federal funding to the Quinebaug and Shetucket River Valley
National Heritage Corridor from September 2009 to September
2027, and increase the ceiling on appropriations from $10
million to $20 million. The Department does not support
enactment of this bill, since extending the Federal financial
commitment to this heritage area is not in keeping with the
program legislation framework that I just referred to. Under
its existing organization the area will continue to receive
annual Federal funding for 3 more years. And we would recommend
that the area begin to evaluate on how it will sustain its
efforts to protect resources when Federal funding ends in 2009.
Now, turning to the S. 1387 that would reauthorize the John
H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor
Commission for a period of 10 years. It would provide an update
of the management plan, authorize a special resource study,
authorize additional appropriations for the corridor for
operations and development, and increase the membership of the
commission. The Department is not able to support the enactment
of S. 1387 as presently drafted, but would support a 5-year
reauthorization of the commission with an authorization of one
million dollars per year. The Department opposes the
authorization of $10 million in additional development funds.
However, we do support, enthusiastically, this special resource
study. The Department also recommends that the bill be amended
to include an update of the management plan that would require
identifying a successor, non-Federal management entity for the
corridor comprised of a board with broad, regional
representation. The updated plan should also provide the
schedule and manner in which the transition of the management
of the corridor will occur by the end of the five-year
reauthorization period.
And finally, the plan should provide information on how the
heritage corridor will be financially self-sufficient as its
work continues during the 5-year reauthorization period.
Now turning to S. 1721, the National Heritage Area
Extension Act, which has four titles. And, based on the
complexity and the varied nature of these titles, the
Department would like to present our position on each of the
titles separately.
Title I would extend the authority for nine national
heritage areas to receive Federal funds for an additional 15
years. It would increase the authorization ceiling from $10
million to $20 million per area, and would make several
amendments to the authorizing legislation for three of these
areas.
Although the Department supports the proposed minor
amendments to the three heritage areas, we do not support
reauthorizing Federal assistance to all nine heritage areas for
an additional 15 years or increasing their authorization
ceilings.
In title II, it would reauthorize the New Jersey Coastal
Heritage Trail Route, which is an affiliated area of the
National Park System, and is not a national heritage area. It
will eliminate the $4 million appropriation ceiling and will
require the completion of a strategic plan by the Secretary.
The Department supports this title, if amended to increase the
authorization ceiling to $8 million instead of eliminating it
altogether, to extend the reauthorization date of the trail
route until May 2009. And to require that this strategic plan
be done in partnership with the State.
Title III would reauthorize the John H. Chafee Blackstone
River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission for a period
of 20 years, provide an update of the management plan,
authorize additional appropriations for operations and
development, and increase the membership of the commission. The
Department does not support this title as currently drafted,
but would support reauthorizing the commission for a 5-year
period, and updating the management plan to identify a
successor, non-Federal management entity for the corridor,
comprised of a board with a broad, regional representation. We
also recommend that a new subsection be added that requires a
special resources study to be completed. And the Department
would oppose authorizing $10 million in development funds.
Finally, title IV, would designate the Mississippi River
National Heritage Area across ten States and authorize
appropriations of $2 million a year, not to exceed $20 million
overall. The Department isn't able to support enactment of this
title and would recommend that the title be amended to
authorize an updated study instead.
Turning to S. 2037, to establish the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area of Colorado. The bill would establish
that the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area to recognize
the outstanding and nationally significant, natural, cultural
and scenic recreational resources found within the San Luis
Valley of Colorado.
While a feasibility study has determined that the area is
appropriate for designation, the Department recommends that the
committee defer action on S. 2037 until program legislation is
enacted, that establishes guidelines for process of designation
with national heritage areas.
I want to hasten to add that we thought the feasibility
study was an excellent feasibility study, that it met all of
the criteria and this area's clearly recognized by the National
Park Service as being superior in nature. We simply feel that
it's important to have the program management legislation
implemented before establishing any new heritage areas.
With S. 2037 we recommend that the bill be amended to
remove paragraph 5(d)(2), which would require 100% Federal
funding prior to completion of the management plan and to
change the termination authority in section 10 to expire 15
years after enactment.
These amendments would make S. 2037 consistent with other
similar national heritage area establishment bills.
Now turning to S. 2645, Designation of A Journey Through
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area. S. 2645 would establish
``A Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area''
across 175 miles along Route 15 and part of Route 20. We
recognize that this is an extremely significant route. I live
not far from that route in Spotlvania County right in the
middle of wilderness battlefield. I often travel to Almerow
County because I teach at the Federal Executive Institute.
My family owns property not far from there that's been in
our family for nearly 100 years, and I'll be going there this
weekend with my great-cousin, as a matter of fact, and have
great affection for that area. However, in its current form the
Department does not support enactment of this bill at this
time. Before a national heritage area is designated by
Congress, a comprehensive feasibility study is required that
evaluates an area using a criteria developed by the Department
and Congress. And although a study undertaken by ``A Journey
Through Hallowed Ground Partnership'' is a very good beginning
step in looking at the resources in the region, it doesn't
fully address the required criteria for the designation of
national heritage areas.
I am happy to report, however, that we have been meeting on
a regular basis with the sponsors of this legislation. Our
National Park Service staff just recently met with Cate, again,
this week, and we have a follow-up meeting after this hearing
to make sure the group understands the criteria that we believe
have not been met yet. And so they can continue to work with
us, to make sure that the study meets the National Park Service
criteria.
Additionally, if the bill moves forward, the Department
would recommend that two provisions be removed from the bill;
one requiring the compact, and one that authorizes Federal
funds for land acquisition. So we're fully prepared to provide
advice to the partnership to assist in completing the
feasibility study that meets our professional standards, and
provides Congress with the necessary information and assessment
upon which to base its decisions regarding the designation in
the future.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I'll be happy to
take questions.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Murphy follow:]
Prepared Statement of Donald W. Murphy, Deputy Director, National
Park Service, Department of the Interior
S. 574
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
574, a bill to amend the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National
Heritage Corridor Act of 1994. The Department does not support
enactment of this bill.
The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage
Corridor, also known as The Last Green Valley, was authorized in 1994
and comprised 25 communities in northeastern Connecticut. It began
receiving federal funding in 1996 and in its first four years of
operation, it received $200,000 per year. It became the first national
heritage area to be managed by a non-profit organization, the
Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage Corridor, Inc. Its first plan, Vision to
Reality: A Management Plan, was completed in 1997.
In 1999, the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National
Heritage Corridor (QSHC) was expanded to include 10 additional
communities in its watershed in Connecticut and Massachusetts, making
it the second bi-state national heritage area in the country. At the
same time, its original seven-year authorization was extended through
2009 and a new ceiling of $10,000,000 was authorized with an annual
amount not-to-exceed $1,000,000, in keeping with other similar national
heritage areas. At that time, Vision 2010: A Plan for the Next Ten
Years was completed, along with the Interpretive Initiative for the
Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor. With
the additional federal investment and larger regional focus, many
successful programs were initiated. Appropriations from FY 1996 through
FY 2006 have totaled $5,581,000.
S. 574 would increase the ceiling on appropriations to the QSHC
from $10,000,000 to $20,000,000 and extend the termination date of the
Secretary of the Interior's financial commitment from September 30,
2009 to September 30, 2027 which is inconsistent with the national
heritage area program legislation passed by the Senate last year and
supported by the Administration.
With regard to that legislation, a recent National Park System
Advisory Board report Charting a Future for National Heritage Areas
recognized that national heritage areas need a legislative foundation
that frames and supports the important role of national heritage areas
in expanding conservation stewardship and in identifying and preserving
significant historic resources. The national heritage area program
legislation (S. 243) that passed the Senate last year and is supported
by the Department would provide such a framework. The program
legislation authorizes the Secretary to provide financial assistance to
national heritage areas for a period not to exceed 15 years after an
area is designated by Congress. Local coordinating entities that
prepare and implement the management plan for the national heritage
area could receive up to $1 million per year, not to exceed $10 million
over the 15-year period. Prior to the end of the 15-year period, an
evaluation and report would be required on the accomplishments,
sustainability, and recommendations for the future of each national
heritage area. Extending the federal financial commitment to this
heritage area is not in keeping with this framework.
During the 12 years since designated by Congress, the QSHC has
accomplished many partnership-oriented projects related to resource
protection and interpretation within the watershed as outlined in the
management plan. Under its existing authorization, the area will
continue to receive annual federal funding for three more years. As is
stated in the program legislation, we would recommend that the area
begin to evaluate how it will sustain its efforts to protect resources
when federal funding ends in 2009.
The Green Valley Institute (GVI) is a partnership among the QSHC,
the University of Connecticut's College of Agriculture and Natural
Resources, and the cooperative extension system of the University of
Massachusetts. Its programs are made possible through active
partnerships with many additional organizations and communities, and
the active involvement of QSHC's Natural Resources and Agriculture
Committee. GVI programs specifically target three local audiences:
private landowners; municipal leaders and land use commissioners; and
contractors, realtors and others who convert open space to other uses.
Now in its fifth year, the work of GVI has been positively recognized
with eight state and national awards.
GVI was created to help document, plan for and protect the
priceless land-based resources of the region. Its goals are to improve
the knowledge base from which land use and natural resources decisions
are made, and to build local capacity to protect and manage natural
resources as the region grows.
The nearly 1,100-square miles of The Last Green Valley provide a
challenge to cohesive and engaging regional interpretation of natural
and historical resources. Over the past several years, QSHC has
developed a number of interpretive strategies to educate residents and
visitors alike, while providing an entertaining base from which to
generate tourism. For example, Last Green Valley Ventures is a program
that (1) circulates people and information throughout the region; (2)
provides adequate visitor services, orientation to The Last Green
Valley and interpretation of the many regional themes; (3) assures
quality, consistency and hospitality; and (4) collects important
statistical data to inform future marketing and programming. The
program combines current assets of The Last Green Valley, the
compendium of existing research and support brochures, the
complimenting businesses offering unique experiences, and partners from
public and private sectors into one cohesive product.
Last Green Valley Ventures also dovetails with an on-line
educational resources guide, Valley Quest, used by regional educators,
parents and youth group leaders to educate and inspire the future
stewards of the QSHC.
Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage Corridor, Inc, who manages the
heritage corridor and implements the management plan, has distributed
$1.6 million in historic preservation and partnership program grants to
municipal governments and non-profits for nearly 200 projects,
resulting in the leveraging of $7 million overall. The grants have
built local capacity, revitalized downtown areas, supported trail
design and enhancements, improved water quality, supported economic
development and tourism, just to name a few.
Local support for the QSHC is evident by the lengthy list of
partners in their annual reports that includes entities from all
geographic areas and mission areas. QSHC's large grassroots
organization consistently has more than 100 people involved in active
working committees each month. Each of the 35 towns in the region has
signed a voluntary and nonbinding community compact in which the local
governments accepted the goals and objectives of the Quinebaug-
Shetucket management plan and formalized the towns' commitment to
balance conservation and growth in their collective vision for the
watershed.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This
concludes my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any
questions you or other committee members might have.
S. 1387
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
1387, a bill that would reauthorize the John H. Chafee Blackstone River
Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission for a period of 10 years,
provide for an update of corridor planning documents, authorize a
Special Resource Study, authorize additional appropriations for the
corridor for operations and development, and increase the membership of
the commission. The Department is unable to support enactment of S.
1387 as presently drafted, but would support a limited reauthorization
of the commission. The Department opposes the authorization of $10
million in additional development funds.
The John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage
Corridor, which has been in existence for 20 years, is considered among
the leading national heritage efforts in the nation. The commission
that has managed the corridor's programs and projects has made
exceptional strides in the preservation and protection of a myriad of
resources and in interpreting the rich stories of the ``Birthplace of
the American Industrial Revolution''--the Blackstone River Valley of
Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
It was in the Blackstone River Valley at Pawtucket that Samuel
Slater, a British immigrant, in concert with Moses Brown developed the
first successful textile manufacturing mill that triggered our own
industrial revolution, one that continues today. Indeed, the Blackstone
River Valley itself became a major center of manufacturing in the
United States during the 19th and 20th centuries. Today, largely due to
the recognition of the corridor by Congress, and the important work of
the commission, the region has seen a rebirth through intelligent and
adaptive reuse of previous mills and manufacturing facilities. As
residents came to fully understand the nation-changing history of their
region, the stories of its people, and its untapped community and
economic potential through historic preservation, pride of place and
appreciation of shared heritage soon followed.
National heritage areas and historic preservation efforts
throughout the country have benefited from the leadership and best
practices for which Blackstone is well-known. The commission has and
continues to enjoy exceptional support among state and local
governments, businesses, private organizations, and the general public
of the region.
The National Park Service (NPS) has had a unique relationship with
the commission and its innovative and productive work since the
corridor was established in November 1986. Consistent with section 4 of
the authorizing legislation, the NPS has provided staff to the
commission and conducts ranger-led interpretive programs in the
corridor. Congress, recognizing this special relationship, has
consistently authorized funding for projects in the corridor in the
Line Item Construction portion of the NPS budget. The executive
director of the commission, a NPS employee, also serves as
Superintendent of the Roger Williams National Memorial, a small unit of
the National Park System in Providence, Rhode Island.
S. 1387, besides providing for reauthorization of the commission,
authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a Special Resource
Study to determine whether areas in the corridor meet the criteria for
congressional designation as a unit of the National Park System. We
believe the conduct of such a study is timely and appropriate. It would
permit the Secretary to make recommendations to Congress including the
future role that NPS may play in the preservation and protection of
additional corridor resources.
The National Park System Advisory Board in its recent report
entitled Charting a Future for National Heritage Areas recognized the
important role of national heritage areas in expanding conservation
stewardship and in identifying and preserving significant historic
resources. The report also recognized that national heritage areas need
a legislative foundation that establishes a clear process for
designation, administration, and evaluation. The national heritage area
program legislation (S. 243) that passed the Senate last year and is
supported by the Department also outlined the steps to be followed for
success as a national heritage area. Both the Advisory Board report and
the proposed legislative framework recommended that prior to
consideration for reauthorization, an individual national heritage area
should be the subject of a study to determine any future and
appropriate level of NPS involvement including, but not limited to,
future federal funding. Blackstone is the first heritage area to have
followed this process. A study prepared in 2005 by the NPS Conservation
Study Institute entitled, Reflecting on the Past, Looking to the Future
concluded that there is a clear need to sustain an effective
coordinating framework for the corridor and an on-going relationship
with the NPS.
The Department believes that S. 1387, if amended, can provide the
basis whereby the important work of the commission may continue while
providing an opportunity for the NPS and the commission to explore
viable alternatives for the future management of heritage resources in
the region. This can be accomplished while maintaining the cooperative
working relationship that has been the hallmark of our joint efforts to
preserve, protect, and enhance the nationally significant and important
resources of the Blackstone River Valley.
The Department recommends that the bill be amended in section 2(d)
to only reauthorize the commission for a five-year period, and that the
update of the management plan in section 2(c) include a requirement
that the plan identify a successor non-Federal management entity for
the corridor, comprised of a board with broad regional representation.
The updated plan should also provide the schedule and manner in which
the transition of the management of the corridor will occur from the
present federal commission to a new management entity by the end of the
five-year reauthorization period. Finally, the plan should provide
information on how the heritage corridor will be financially self-
sufficient as its work continues beyond the five-year reauthorization
period.
The Department would further recommend that the Special Resource
Study authorized in section 2(e) be submitted to the Committee on
Resources in the House of Representatives and Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources in the Senate no later than 90 days after it is
completed instead of the proposed 30-day requirement in order to permit
full consideration by the Secretary to make an informed recommendation
to Congress. Finally, the Department would recommend that section 2(f)
be amended to strike the authorization for $10 million in development
funds in order to be consistent with the appropriation levels of other
national heritage areas.
The Department believes that these amendments will permit the John
H. Chafee Blackstone National Heritage Corridor Commission to continue
its significant contributions to the region while providing the
necessary time for transition to a non-federal, locally supported
management entity to carry on the commission's valuable work into the
future.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony and I am prepared to
answer any questions that you or other members of the committee might
have at this time.
S. 1721
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
1721, the National Heritage Area Extension Act of 2005.
The bill has four titles. Title I would extend the authority for
nine national heritage areas to receive federal funds for an additional
15 years. It would increase the authorization ceiling from $10 million
to $20 million per area, and would make several amendments to the
authorizing legislation for three of these areas. Title II would
reauthorize the New Jersey Coastal Heritage Trail, eliminate the
$4,000,000 appropriations ceiling, and require that the Secretary
undertake a strategic plan to increase opportunities for participation
by the public in the trail route. Title III would reauthorize the John
H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission
for an additional 20 years, update the management plan, provide for
additional commission members to be appointed, authorize an additional
$10 million for the commission, and authorize $10 million in
development funds to the heritage corridor. Title IV would designate
the Mississippi River National Heritage Area across 10 states.
Based on the complexity and varied nature of each of these titles,
the Department would like to present our position on each title
separately.
title i--extensions and technical corrections to omnibus parks and
public lands management act of 1996
Title I would extend the authorization for nine national heritage
areas, authorized in the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act
of 1996, from September 30, 2012 to September 30, 2027, and would
increase their current appropriations ceiling of $10 million to $20
million. It also would make several minor amendments to the authorizing
legislation for the National Coal Heritage Area, the South Carolina
Heritage Area, and the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Corridor. Although
the Department supports the proposed minor amendments to the three
heritage areas, we do not support reauthorizing federal assistance to
all nine heritage areas for an additional 15 years or increasing their
authorization ceilings.
A recent National Park System Advisory Board report Charting a
Future for National Heritage Areas recognized the important role of
national heritage areas in expanding conservation stewardship and in
identifying and preserving significant historic resources. The report
also recognized that national heritage areas need a legislative
foundation that frames and supports this approach. The national
heritage area program legislation (S. 243) that passed the Senate last
year and is supported by the Department would provide such a framework.
The program legislation authorizes the Secretary to provide
financial assistance to national heritage areas for a period not to
exceed 15 years after an area is designated by Congress. Local
coordinating entities that prepare and implement the management plan
for the national heritage area could receive up to $1 million per year,
not to exceed $10 million over the 15-year period. Prior to the end of
the 15-year period, an evaluation and report would be required on the
accomplishments, sustainability, and recommendations for the future of
each national heritage area. Extending the federal financial commitment
to the heritage areas in S. 1721 is not in keeping with this framework.
Therefore, the Department does not support section 101(a) of S. 1721.
title ii--reauthorization of appropriations for new jersey coastal
heritage trail route
Title II would reauthorize the New Jersey Coastal Heritage Trail
Route, eliminate the $4,000,000 appropriations ceiling, and require the
completion of a strategic plan by the Secretary. The Department
supports Title II of S. 1721 with three amendments.
In 1988, the Secretary was authorized to designate a vehicular tour
route in coastal New Jersey and to prepare an inventory of sites along
the route. An interpretive program was also mandated to provide for
public appreciation, education, understanding and enjoyment of
important fish and wildlife habitats, geologic and geographical
landforms, cultural resources, and migration routes in coastal New
Jersey. The Secretary was authorized to provide technical assistance,
prepare and distribute information, and erect signs along the route.
The trail links national wildlife refuges, national parklands, National
Historic Landmarks, and National Register sites with important historic
communities, state parks, natural areas, and other resources to tell
the story of New Jersey's role in shaping U.S. history and in providing
internationally important habitats for bird and other migrations.
The trail, an affiliated area of the National Park System, is a
partnership among the National Park Service; the State of New Jersey
through its Department of Environmental Protection, Commerce and
Economic Growth Commission, and Pinelands Commission; and many local
government and private non-profit partners. Through interpretation of
five themes (Maritime History, Coastal Habitats, Wildlife Migration,
Relaxation & Inspiration, and Historic Settlements), the trail brings
attention to important natural and cultural resources along coastal New
Jersey. The trail demonstrates the potential of public/private
partnerships that allow the National Park Service to meet its core
mission of natural and cultural resource preservation along with
interpretation and public education in a cost-efficient manner through
technical assistance while reducing operational responsibilities.
Reauthorization of the trail would enable the National Park Service
to complete implementation of the trail plan, as supported by the
public and our partners. Without additional time and funding, the New
Jersey Coastal Heritage Trail Route will be left incomplete.
Implementation of the plan is also critical in building a base of
sustainable partners and developing a strategy for the long-term
management of the trail. Additionally, commitments to trail partners
would go unfulfilled, and many additional natural and cultural
resources would not receive the partnership assistance leveraged by the
trail.
The strategic plan authorized in S. 1721 would be an important tool
to help the trail develop a long-term management strategy that includes
creating a self-sustaining funding mechanism that does not depend
indefinitely on operational funding from the National Park Service. To
this end, we would recommend that the title be amended to increase the
authorization ceiling by an additional $4 million only instead of
eliminating the ceiling altogether. We also would recommend an
amendment to require this strategic plan to be done in partnership with
the State. Also, because the reauthorization extension proposed in
section 201 of S. 1721 has already passed (May 2006), we would
recommend that section 6(c) of Public Law 100-515 be amended to change
``12'' to ``15'' thus extending the reauthorization date until May
2009.
title iii--john h. chafee blackstone river valley national heritage
corridor
Title III would reauthorize the John H. Chafee Blackstone River
Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission for an additional 20
years, authorize an additional $10 million over 20 years to support the
commission, expand the commission from 19 to 25 members, require an
update of the Cultural Heritage and Land Management Plan, and authorize
$10 million over 10 years in development funds for the heritage
corridor. The Department does not support Title III of S. 1721 as
currently drafted, which is not in keeping with the framework of the
heritage area program legislation supported by the Department.
Designated 20 years ago as only the second national heritage area
in the country, the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National
Heritage Corridor celebrates the ``Birthplace of the American
Industrial Revolution''--the Blackstone River Valley of Massachusetts
and Rhode Island. The commission that has managed the corridor's
programs and projects has made exceptional strides in the preservation
and protection of a myriad of resources and in interpreting the rich
stories of the Industrial Revolution in our nation.
It was in the Blackstone River Valley at Pawtucket that Samuel
Slater, a British immigrant, in concert with Moses Brown developed the
first successful textile manufacturing mill that triggered our own
industrial revolution, one that continues today. Indeed, the Blackstone
River Valley itself became a major center of manufacturing in the
United States during the 19th and 20th centuries. Today, largely due to
the recognition of the corridor by Congress, and the important work of
the commission, the region has seen a rebirth through intelligent and
adaptive reuse of previous mills and manufacturing facilities. As
residents came to fully understand the nation-changing history of their
region, the stories of its people, and its untapped community and
economic potential through historic preservation, pride of place and
appreciation of shared heritage soon followed.
The Department would recommend that Title III, section 303 be
amended to only reauthorize the commission for a five-year period, and
that the update of the management plan in section 302 include a
requirement that the plan identify a successor non-Federal management
entity for the corridor, comprised of a board with broad regional
representation. The updated plan should also provide the schedule and
manner in which the transition of the management of the corridor will
occur from the present federal commission to a new management entity by
the end of the five-year reauthorization period. Finally, the plan
should provide information on how the heritage corridor will be
financially self-sufficient as its work continues beyond the five-year
reauthorization period.
The Department would also recommend that a new subsection be added
that requires a Special Resources Study to be completed to determine
whether any areas within the corridor meet the criteria for
congressional designation as a unit of the National Park System. We
believe the conduct of such a study is timely and appropriate. It would
permit the Secretary to make recommendations to Congress including the
future role that National Park Service may play in the preservation and
protection of corridor resources. And finally, the Department would
recommend that section 304 be amended to strike the authorization for
$10 million in development funds in order to be consistent with the
appropriations levels of other national heritage areas.
title iv--mississippi river national heritage area
Title IV would designate the Mississippi River National Heritage
Area consisting of all counties and parishes that border the
Mississippi River, it would designate a non-profit organization, the
National Mississippi River Museum and Aquarium, as the management
entity, it would require the development of a management plan for the
heritage area, and authorize appropriations of $2 million a year not to
exceed $20 million overall. The Department does not support enactment
of this title, and would recommend that the title be amended to
authorize an updated study instead.
The Mississippi River Corridor Study Commission was established by
Congress in 1990 to study and determine the feasibility of designating
the river corridor as a national heritage area. The study was completed
in 1995 and recommended a national heritage area designation although a
number of private residents were vocally against this effort based on
concerns of federal control in local issues. Because this study was
completed over 10 years ago before the criteria contained in our
heritage area program legislation was developed, there are several key
criteria that have not been evaluated including the extent of
grassroots civic engagement, a boundary map for the heritage area,
environmental compliance, a business plan, and financial commitments
from partners. In addition, the management entity designated in this
title was not one of the three groups evaluated in the 1995 study.
Also, this title would authorize the heritage area to receive double
the normal amount of appropriations for other current national heritage
areas and there is no sunset provision for this funding.
The Mississippi River story is one that spans many centuries,
cultures, lifeways and economies. It continues to draw people to its
banks, waterways and communities. A National Park Service unit now
exists in the Minnesota region of the Mississippi River, offering a
knowledgeable perspective based on their experience within a small
section of the river as an active partner. We recommend the Mississippi
River feasibility study now in existence be updated to address current
public, compliance, and management needs based on the current heritage
area criteria and guidelines.
conclusion
Over the past 20 years, the process for designating national
heritage areas has evolved from its early stages where Congress was
establishing these on an area-by-area basis with no standardized
criteria, study requirements or guidelines, to a much more uniform
process that still ensures each area retains its unique
characteristics, resources, themes, and partnership structure. The
National Park System Advisory Board's report and the national heritage
area program legislation (S. 243) that passed the Senate last year and
is supported by the Department, would provide a framework that
establishes a national heritage area system, and sets criteria and
guidelines for studies and designations to enable all parties to do a
better job of evaluating and designating the national heritage areas of
the future. Reauthorizing existing heritage areas for 15 or more years
without the benefit of an assessment of the accomplishments and needs
for sustainability, or supporting new designations that are not based
upon the completion of comprehensive feasibility studies that
adequately address our criteria, does not help the national heritage
area program to succeed and thrive.
According to the Advisory Board report, national heritage areas are
an important direction in conservation and historic preservation and
are founded on consensus-based planning, local commitments, and a
network of long-term partnerships. As the individual areas approach the
termination of their funding authorization, they need to plan for
future options to sustain the partnerships and program beyond
reauthorizing the area for an additional fifteen years of funding.
Through advance planning, new partnerships can be forged that sustain
the heritage area approach and honor the legislative commitment of
financial support.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This
concludes my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any
questions you or other committee members might have.
S. 2037
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the Department of the
Interior's views on S. 2037, a bill to establish the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado.
While a feasibility study has determined that the area is
appropriate for designation, we recommend that the Committee defer
action on S. 2037 until program legislation is enacted that establishes
guidelines and a process for designation of national heritage areas.
The National Park System Advisory Board in its recent report entitled,
Charting a Future for Heritage Areas recognized the important role of
National Heritage Areas in expanding conservation stewardship and in
identifying and preserving significant historic resources. The report
also recognized that National Heritage Areas need a legislative
foundation that establishes a clear process for designation,
administration, and evaluation. Last year, the Senate passed national
heritage area program legislation that is supported by the Department.
The Administration is working on a similar legislative proposal this
year, and we look forward to continuing to work with Congress on this
very important issue.
S. 2037 would establish the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area
(NHA) to recognize the outstanding and nationally significant natural,
cultural, scenic and recreational resources found within the San Luis
Valley of Colorado.
S. 2037 contains safeguards to protect private property, including
a prohibition on the use of federal funds to acquire real property. The
bill proposes no new restrictions with regard to public use and access
to private property.
S. 2037 designates the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area
Board of Directors as the management entity and outlines their duties.
The Board represents a broad spectrum of the valley's residents,
organizations, and agencies that were involved in the planning for the
NHA. The bill also authorizes the development of a management plan
within three years of enactment and authorizes the use of federal funds
to develop and implement that plan. If the plan is not submitted within
three years of enactment of this Act, the Heritage Area becomes
ineligible for federal funding until a plan is submitted to the
Secretary. Additionally, the Secretary may, at the request of the
management entity, provide technical assistance and enter into
cooperative agreements with other public and private entities.
Exceeding 7,700 feet in elevation, the San Luis Valley is flanked
by the Sangre de Cristo and San Juan Mountains and the geology and
climatology within the valley have contributed to the formation of
America's tallest Sand Dunes, part of Great Sand Dunes National Park
and Preserve.
The Rio Grande, the second largest river in North America, has its
headwaters within the proposed NHA and twists its way through the San
Luis Valley on a 1,900-mile journey, offering outstanding scenic and
recreational opportunities, including trout fishing, rafting, and
tubing. The availability of water in this largely arid and alpine
environment tends to concentrate the abundant wildlife in highly
visible and public preserves creating exceptional wildlife and bird
watching opportunities.
The area's rich natural resources include one National Park, three
National Wildlife Refuges, one National Forest, two National Forest
Wilderness Areas, six Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
administered by the Bureau of Land Management, and 15 State Wildlife
Areas. The cultural resources associated with the proposed national
heritage are equally impressive. The abundant natural resources of the
San Luis Valley may have been inhabited by native peoples including the
Ute, Navajo, Apache, Tiwa, Tewa, Comanche, Kiowa, and Arapaho for more
than 12,000 years.
More recently, the San Luis Valley served as a crossroads for
European exploration and settlement. Spanish explorers and Franciscan
priests first entered the valley in 1776 in an attempt to strengthen
Spain's weak hold on her remote empire. Captain Zebulon Montgomery Pike
camped in the shadows of the Sangre de Cristo Range along the banks of
the Conejos River and was captured by Spanish soldiers, arrested for
trespassing on Spanish soil, and escorted to Mexico for questioning.
His campsite is commemorated as a National Historic Landmark along with
22 other properties that are listed on the National Register of
Historic Places.
Extensive Mexican land grants triggered the initial settlement of
the area as families from northern New Mexico found enough water to
support their sheep and water their crops. The proposed NHA contains
the oldest continuously occupied town in Colorado, (San Luis), the
oldest parish (Our Lady of Guadalupe), the oldest church (San Acacio),
and the first water right (San Luis People's Ditch).
The Hispanic cultural traditions associated with this first wave of
European settlement can still be found in this isolated and
predominately agricultural region of Colorado where a version of 17th
century Spanish is still spoken by about 35% of the population.
The feasibility of recognizing the area's impressive cultural and
natural resources as a national heritage area was the subject of a
study produced in 2005 by two grassroots organizations, the Los Amigos
Caminos Antiguos Scenic and Historic Byway, in conjunction with the
Sangre de Cristo NHA Steering Committee.
The feasibility study was largely based upon the results of a
symposium held in the fall of 2002 where scientists, historians, and
anthropologists from interested colleges as well as local ranchers,
community leaders, and tribal elders presented papers on the history,
natural resources and local culture of the San Luis Valley. The
feasibility study identified four interpretive themes for the NHA and
addressed the ten interim criteria that the National Park Service has
developed for designation of national heritage areas. The study
concluded that the area's cultural and natural resources met those
criteria.
All local governments within the proposed area have passed
resolutions in support of the establishment of the proposed NHA.
Moreover, State and federal land managers within the proposed NHA have
expressed a willingness to work with the management entity in
accomplishing their congressionally authorized conservation and
education responsibilities.
At such time as S. 2037 moves forward, we recommend that the bill
be amended to remove paragraph 5(d)(2) which would require 100 percent
federal funding prior to completion of the management plan and to
change the termination authority in Section 10 to expire 15 years after
enactment. In addition, we would like to work with the Subcommittee to
ensure that the management planning process is coordinated with the
affected federal land management entities. These amendments would make
S. 2037 consistent with other, similar, national heritage area
establishment bills.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
S. 2645
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
2645, a bill to establish the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National
Heritage Area. The Department does not support enactment of this bill
at this time.
Before a national heritage area is designated by Congress, a
comprehensive feasibility study should be completed that evaluates an
area using criteria developed by the Department and Congress. Although
the study undertaken by the Journey Though Hallowed Ground Partnership
is a good beginning step in looking at the resources in the region, it
does not fully address the required criteria for designation of
national heritage areas. We believe the bill should not be enacted
until an adequate feasibility study is completed that yields the
necessary information to demonstrate that the proposed national
heritage area meets the criteria for designation. We also believe that
individual bills proposing to designate new national heritage areas
should be deferred until program legislation is enacted by Congress.
The proposed Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area
would span a region of approximately 175 miles along Route 15 and part
of Route 20, from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania through Maryland and West
Virginia to Charlottesville, Virginia. The region is rich in historic
and natural resources including the homes of Presidents Thomas
Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, and Dwight David Eisenhower,
and includes significant Revolutionary and Civil War sites.
Revolutionary War sites include Willow Grove, the temporary
headquarters of Generals Wayne and Muhlenberg, Point of Fork Arsenal,
Castle Hill, home of colonial leader Dr. Thomas Walker, and the Hessian
Barracks, used as a prison for British soldiers. Civil War sites
include the battlefields of Gettysburg, Monocacy, Antietam, Brandy
Station, and Manassas, among others. The region is also crossed by
numerous historic trails and byways relating to the Civil War and other
scenic resources. All told, there are an estimated 7,000 buildings in
the area listed on the National Register of Historic Places, 13
National Historic Landmarks, and 2 World Heritage Sites.
S. 2645 would establish the Journey Through Hallowed Ground
National Heritage Area and designate the Journey Through Hallowed
Ground Partnership (Partnership) as the local management entity. The
Partnership is a nonprofit corporation that has conducted a significant
number of public meetings, an important requirement for evaluating
local support for the designation of a national heritage area. The bill
prescribes the duties of the management entity, provides for the
Secretary and the Partnership to enter into a compact, requires the
development of a management plan by the Partnership to be approved by
the Secretary, and includes a 15-year authorization for up to $1
million dollars per year not to exceed a total of $10 million.
Both Congress and the Department have long agreed that a national
heritage area designation should be predicated on the completion of a
feasibility study that adequately addresses criteria to determine that
a proposed national heritage area will enjoy not only public support,
but other equally important factors that are necessary for the future
success of the area, such as the financial capability to carry out the
management plan.
The Department has had the opportunity to review a feasibility
study undertaken by the Partnership. We find that the study, while a
good first step, fails to address many of the criteria and does not
permit an informed decision regarding the feasibility of designating
this proposed national heritage area. The report does not adequately
address proposed heritage area themes, does not contain any information
regarding integrity of resources, nor does it provide an in-depth
analysis of management alternatives for the region's resources. The
study does not provide any information regarding financial planning and
capability, potential sources of matching funds, or specific local
commitments to ensure the viability of the programs and activities
normally associated with heritage areas. Of concern, too, is the
absence of any defined boundary within which federal funding would be
targeted.
In addition, the Department has several concerns with some of the
language contained in S. 2645. First, section 4 of the bill calls for
the Secretary and the Partnership to enter into a compact to delineate
the boundaries of the heritage area, discuss heritage area goals and
objectives, and explain the proposed approach to conservation and
interpretation. Although compacts were found in many of the older
national heritage areas designated, over the past 10 years they have
been replaced by a requirement to complete a feasibility study that
includes this information. We strongly believe that these tasks are key
components of a feasibility study and must precede designation.
Second, we note that section 5(a)(2)(D) provides that funds
authorized under the legislation to the management entity may be used
to acquire lands and interests in land, while section 5(e) prohibits
the use of such funds for acquisition of real property or any interest
therein. We recommend that section 5(a)(2)(D) be removed from the bill,
since it is inconsistent with past heritage area statutes, which
prohibit the use of federal funds authorized for heritage areas to be
used for land acquisition.
The Department has consistently taken the position that proposed
national heritage areas follow the proven path of those achieving
designation in recent years. A recent National Park System Advisory
Board report Charting a Future for National Heritage Areas recognized
the important role of national heritage areas in expanding conservation
stewardship and in identifying and preserving significant historic
resources. The report also recognized that national heritage areas need
a legislative foundation that sets specific criteria for designation
demonstrated by the completion of an adequate feasibility study. The
national heritage area program legislation (S. 243) that passed the
Senate last year and is supported by the Department outlined the steps
followed for success as a national heritage area. That path is always
charted by the completion of a comprehensive feasibility study that
provides the Department and Congress with an evaluation of the
financial, programmatic, and tangible community support and commitment
capabilities of the local management entity. Without information
regarding those key ingredients, we are unable to support this bill. We
are, however, fully prepared to provide advice to the Partnership to
assist it in completing a national heritage area feasibility study that
meets our professional standards and provides Congress with the
necessary information and assessment upon which to base its decision
regarding designation in the future.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony and I am prepared to
answer any questions that you or other members of the committee might
have at this time.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much. Since you gentlemen
have bills here of particular interests, if you have questions,
you can go first, and if we could make it rather short, I'd
appreciate it.
Senator Allen : Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Murphy, you
have an enviable job, I admire the fact that you have to come
here and testify against every single bill on the docket.
That's okay. It's getting closer than, of course, the last one.
I think the one in Colorado will pass the most muster, but ours
seem to do alright.
I actually appreciate the work you're doing. It's not an
easy job that you have, you have to stick to standards and
principles, and I think that some of the recommendations that
you have made in the scrutiny of our legislation are very good.
There may be some inconsistencies, and I appreciate that.
Everything can be improved, that's been the nature of our
country and certainly with legislation here.
I'm also pleased to hear that you recognize the important
work that's been done by the private sector, this partnership,
because not every one of these studies needs to be a
congressional study, we ought to encourage, I think, as a
government, the private sector to take initiative on their own,
rather than waiting around for the Government or Congress to
command agencies to do the work. I'm also encouraged to hear
that you are working with Cate Magennus Wyatt and others
involved in this effort.
Do you, in your opinion, and I do want to make this quite
clear, I don't want to have a bill bypassing something that
would not meet the criteria. But, in your opinion, your
professional opinion, if amendments are made, which are
reasonable, others and certain things better defined, do you
believe that this area would qualify for a national heritage
area?
Mr. Murphy. Yes. I did take the time to read all of the
material and the documentation in as much of the report as I
could for this meeting, and in my, you know, professional
judgment, and based upon other heritage areas that I've seen,
it certainly would qualify once it's gone through the proper
processes and we've seen a feasibility study that meets the
criteria. But on the face of it, on the surface, with, of
course, not having the benefit of having it completed, a
completed feasibility study, it certainly appears that it does.
Senator Allen. Now, would you contemplate that this could
be resolved say, in a matter of months, or would you think some
of the criteria that need to be met are going to take a longer
period of time to satisfy the criteria of your service?
Mr. Murphy. A lot of the timing, you know, depends upon not
only the kind of criteria that still has to be met, it's also
getting a consultant on board, and when they can start work and
that sort of thing. Some of those variables we don't have
control over, of course. But we will be meeting subsequent to
this hearing with the sponsors, and with Cate, to determine
exactly what the timing will be. I don't expect that it'll be
more within months. I certainly don't expect it to take longer
than that.
Senator Allen. Thank you, Mr. Murphy, and I thank you for
your service, your diligence, adherence to the law and also
willingness to work with all of us to achieve this goal, and I
thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Thomas. Mr. Salazar.
Senator Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This doesn't happen to me very often, here in the U.S.
Senate, Mr. Chairman, but there is a wonderful Republican in
the audience who's a county commissioner in my native county of
the San Luis Valley, who's family and my family have shared the
same water and the same water rights out of a ditch that has an
appropriation date of May 15, 1857. His name is Commissioner
Bagwell and his family and my family go back for several
generations, and I would just like to point out that he is in
Washington today testifying on behalf of this bill.
Senator Thomas. Welcome. He's a Republican you say?
Senator Salazar. We have some wonderful Republicans in the
valley.
Senator Thomas. You're welcome. Glad to have you here.
Mr. Bagwell. Same water; we've known each other after all
these years enough to give each other diseases.
Senator Thomas. We ought to have more of that here in
Washington.
Senator Salazar. And just a comment, Mr. Murphy, and that
is I very much appreciate the Park Service and your description
of the proposal of the Sangre de Cristo Heritage Area. And I
appreciate the fact that you have found the proposal to be
superior and that it does, in fact, meet the criteria that you
have for the designation for these areas. Sir, it is my hope
that we will work to make sure that the proposal does in fact,
match-up the requirements of S. 243 sponsored by Senator Thomas
so that we can move forward with that designation national
heritage area. I appreciate your testimony.
Senator Thomas. Thank you, I have some questions. I almost
left myself out here. Very briefly, because we want to get on
with our other folks, but since designating these, I think it
was in 1985, how many have evolved to the point where they no
longer need Federal funds to operate?
Mr. Murphy. Well, only one national heritage area, the
Illinois and Michigan Canal Corridor, has passed its
authorization for Federal funding. It is now managed by a local
non-profit organization. However, a bill has been submitted to
authorize additional funding for this area, It's H.R. 938 and
it has passed the House and a similar bill which is S. 203 has
passed the Senate during the 109th Congress. In addition, the
caush la puldra River Corridor's Authority to receive Federal
funding has expired even though they have not reached their
authorization ceiling. So that's the current status but none
has really gotten to the----
Senator Thomas. How many are there? How many heritage
areas, do you remember offhand?
Mr. Murphy. There are 27.
Senator Thomas. Twenty-seven?
Mr. Murphy. Twenty-seven.
Senator Thomas. Okay. And I don't want anyone to
misunderstand, all of us are for heritage areas, but they were
not designed to be a part of the Park Service, to be sustained
and managed and funded by it. The Park Service helps them get
initiated until they became self-sustaining and that's what
we're kind of talking about. Was it originally the notion that
they would be perpetually funded do you believe?
Mr. Murphy. Well, in the mid 1980's, when they were forced
to establish, the National Parks really had no model to look at
for their management so to kind of give a comprehensive answer
to Illinois, Michigan, the Blackstone River Valley and the
Delaware, Lehigh, canal corridor were all authorized for only a
5-year period with legislative provisions for 5-year
extensions. As a 10 year exploration neared, the National Park
Service then recognized that more time was needed to complete
the management plans of the corridors and supported an
additional 10-year reauthorization. But more recently, the
national heritage areas were authorized using a standard
funding framework, as you know, from the $10 million for 15
years. So the answer is, you know, is really no, we really
didn't anticipate that these would go on forever, and the
National Park Service would support that in perpetuity.
Senator Thomas. You mentioned the Blackstone River areas, I
understand there's 14 or 15 Federal employees there now. How
many positions are funded by the Park Service?
Mr. Murphy. All 14 are funded by the National Park Service.
That was what the original authorization was for that area was
for. So when that particular heritage area was authorized, it
authorized the National Park Service to manage that in the 14
positions authorized.
Senator Thomas. Appears to be funded and managed pretty
much by the Park Service. Do you think it can become a unit of
the Park Service?
Mr. Murphy. Well, as I said in my testimony I think there
may be areas that are within the heritage area that could
qualify for designation as national parks, but that would come
out as a result of the feasibility study.
Senator Thomas. I understand. Well, I thank you very much
and I appreciate your work, and as I said I don't want anyone
to think for a moment that we don't all think national heritage
areas are not very important and they are. But they are
basically to be developed and operated more locally so one
would hope that might be the case.
Well, thank you, sir.
Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Thomas. We'll ask the other folks to come forward,
please, for our second panel.
On the second panel we have Dr. Michael Sullivan, director
of the Rhode Island Department of Environment Management, Ms.
Ann Marie Velasquez, chairman of the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area in Colorado: and Cate Wyatt, president of Journey
Through Hallowed Grounds, in Virginia; Mr. Dan Rice, president
and chief executive officer of the Ohio & Erie Area Canalway
Coalition, and Charlene Cutler executive director, and chief
executive officer of the Quinebaug-Shetucket area in
Connecticut.
Why don't we take them in the order that they were called
on. So Dr. Sullivan, if would you begin, sir? By the way, if
you could hold your statements down to the 5 minutes, and, if
you have further things, they will be put in the record with
your statement.
STATEMENT OF DR. W. MICHAEL SULLIVAN, DIRECTOR, RHODE ISLAND
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Dr. Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. It's a
pleasure and honor to be here and offer not only my support but
the support of Donald Carcieri, Governor of the State of Rhode
Island. The bill would reauthorize the John H. Chafee
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission
for an additional 10 years, but also authorizes, as you know,
the appropriations of operationally development funding for the
corridor and for a special resource for the study to examine
the potential long term responsibilities of the service, and
the preservation, interpretation and immigration so that the
commission can ultimately, I think, achieve what the chair has
referred to.
While, we would respectively disagree with the Service's
recommendations to change the legislation, the Blackstone is
the only heritage area to have been evaluated against and fully
meet the same criteria for national significance that the Park
Service now applies to units of the Park System.
The Blackstone is widely recognized as the birthplace of
the American Industrial Revolution. This is where Samuel Slater
in 1793 harnessed the river and caused it to become known as
the hardest working river in America. It changed the human
ecology and the natural ecology of the region bringing
thousands of people from farms; brought two segments of my
family to the region, and has created a living legacy for all
of us. This 46-mile river, which starts in western
Massachusetts and comes all the way to Providence, fed the
world and had impact on the world. The valley became a model
for the industrialization of New England, and beyond. It shaped
the history of the American free enterprise, labor,
immigration, and environment. It has worked hard, and it
deserves the recognition.
There is no better place, Mr. Chairman, to learn about this
critical part of American history, than the Blackstone River
Valley in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
The commission and the Park Service has been doing an
exemplary job in forming and working through dozens of
partnerships that tell thousands of visitors and valley
residents the history. They have helped the people of a once-
vibrant region, achieve once again a sense of place and a sense
of pride in the past, and have taught thousands of other
Americans and visitors about this region. Historic mills and
mill worker's houses have been rehabilitated and preserved. The
natural landscape has been preserved. My department has had
significant and extensive involvement in farms, fields, and
once polluted areas are becoming recreational assets again.
Migratory fish are returning to the basins and dams that
retarded flow to drive this engine.
Against this background, the environmental education, the
heritage, and tourism programs are flourishing. All 24 cities
and towns of two States have endorsed this program and have
been designated by the White House as Preserve America
communities.
We are grateful for the significant Federal contribution to
this success story. And let me suggest, the partners have been
working hard since 1986 and the Federal investment has been
matched 22 times over, to the extent of well over $500 million
to date.
The corridor has partnered with 75 different organizations
and an array of individuals to accomplish 365 different
projects, and the great work of the commission along with the
Park Service has been more than matched by the growing legions
of volunteers. In this past year alone, there were in excess of
30,000 hours donated to the commission. We think the Blackstone
has been a leader and a model for national heritage areas. It
is important, I think, to underscore that a unique aggregation
of mostly significant historical and natural resources being
preserved in this region.
Mr. Chairman, so successful have been these efforts, and
the commission's activities have been endorsed, again, by both
Governor Carcieri and by 24 different municipalities and
thousands of individuals.
I have with us today, and we will leave them with you for
the record, you know, voluminous documents from citizens, from
communities and others showing the high regard for the
commission and its work.
An obvious question is, why would this record of progress
in 20 years of commitment, should we have another 10 year
authorization of the commission? Well, first, is the
commission. And the first reason I would offer for this is the
work is not yet done. If the commission were to cease to exist
and disappear, there's no existing management entity across
these two States in 24 regions that would serve so well in
motivating all the communities. The sustainability of this
noble experiment, I feel, would come at an end at a critical
time where the natural resources are truly beginning to move
and continue to eco-develop.
And the second reason goes to the heart of the mission,
that John H. Chafee defined here. His vision set ambitious
goals for the corridor. I had the good fortune of being on the
river on several occasions with him. Few appreciated the
magnitude of the challenges, but I think he did. In retrospect,
it should not be surprising that it's taken just 20 years to
undo much of what took 200 years to achieve.
The agenda for the next decade is detailed in the
management plan called for in this bill defines, what I would
call, legacy tasks. The first of these would be to develop
the----
Senator Thomas. Can you wind up, please sir, we're going to
have to move along.
Dr. Sullivan. Yes, yes. The fourth of the major tourism
areas, the second would be the completion of the Blackstone
Valley Bikeway. In the fourth, really, is the major clean-up,
the river. Governor Carcieri will talk about this being
fishable, swimmable and playable in 2015.
This special resource study is also going to provide and
meet all of the actions of S. 243, and I would submit that. It
would meet all the goals, and it would empower you with
information you need. That concludes my testimony and when
appropriate, Mr. Chairman, I'd be happy to entertain any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Sullivan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. W. Michael Sullivan, Director, Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before this
committee to offer my strong support for S. 1387. This bill would
reauthorize the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National
Heritage Corridor Commission for an additional ten years.
It would also authorize appropriations of operational and
development funding for the Corridor, and enable us to carry out a
Special Resource Study to examine the potential of long-term
responsibilities by NPS in the preservation, interpretation and
integration of some of the Blackstone Valley's nationally significant
resources, such as the Slater Mill Historic Site.
Blackstone is the only heritage area to have been evaluated against
and fully meet the same criteria for national significance that the NPS
applies to units of the National Park System.
Blackstone is widely recognized as the Birthplace of the American
Industrial Revolution. It was in the Blackstone Valley for the first
time in America that the power of water was successfully harnessed for
the industrial production of cotton yarn by Samuel Slater in 1793. Soon
the Blackstone became known as the ``hardest working river'' on the
continent. Dozens of mill villages sprouted along its banks, drawing
thousands of workers from the surrounding New England countryside,
Canada, and soon from distant lands as well. This 46-mile river, and
the Blackstone Canal which paralleled it, connected Worcester, MA to
Providence, RI, carrying agricultural produce, raw materials, and
finished goods to the world. The Blackstone Valley became the model for
the industrialization of New England and beyond. Its influence shaped
the history of American free enterprise, labor, immigration and
ethnicity, and management of the environment. It has worked hard and
created a connectedness and linkage for the region.
Mr. Chairman, there is no better place to learn about this critical
part of America's history than the Blackstone River Valley of
Massachusetts and Rhode Island. And for nearly twenty years the
Blackstone Corridor Commission and the National Park Service have been
doing an exemplary job, working through dozens of partnerships to tell
thousands of visitors and valley residents about that history. They
have helped the people of a once-vibrant region that sunk into
depression regain their self-confidence and a sense of pride in their
past. The rapid decline allowed things to be somewhat frozen in time.
Historic mills and mill workers' houses have been preserved and
rehabilitated for new residences and businesses. Farmscapes, wetlands,
forest habitat and open spaces have been protected or restored.
Brownfields and once-polluted waterways are becoming recreational
assets. Migratory fish are again finding their way upstream to their
ancient spawning areas. Against this background, environmental
education and heritage tourism programs are flourishing. Uniquely among
heritage areas, all 24 cities and towns in the Blackstone Corridor have
been designated by the White House as Preserve America communities.
While we are grateful for the significant federal contribution to
this success story, Mr. Chairman, let me suggest that Blackstone's
partners have more than done their job as well. Since 1986, the federal
investment has been matched some 22 times over by state, local, and
private dollars--well over $500 million to date. The Corridor has
partnered with more than 75 governmental agencies, not-for-profits,
chambers of commerce, volunteer organizations, and individuals to
accomplish some 365 projects within the Corridor. And the great work of
the Corridor Commission's staff of NPS professionals has been more than
matched by growing legions of volunteers. In 2005 alone, these
volunteers contributed over 30,000 hours to Corridor projects and
programs! No wonder the NPS has long considered Blackstone to be the
leader and model for national heritage areas nationwide.
It is important to underscore, too, that a unique aggregation of
nationally significant historical and natural resources are being
preserved and interpreted for the benefit of the American people
without the costs of federal ownership and direct management, and
without threats to private property rights or state and local
regulatory powers.
Mr. Chairman, so successful have the corridor commission's
activities been that its reauthorization is enthusiastically endorsed
by the governors of its two states, the governing bodies of all 24 of
its cities and towns, and by hundreds of its citizens. I offer for the
committee's review this volumeous documents containing resolutions and
letters of support testifying to the high regard in which the
commission and NPS are held by Valley residents.
I want now to address the obvious question: Why, with this record
of progress and achievement for nearly twenty years--why should
Congress reauthorize the commission for another ten years? Mr.
Chairman, there are two reasons why this should happen. First, the
commission has served as an extremely effective management entity for a
region composed of twenty-four cities and towns in two states. Though
there may be other management models, I do not believe any could have
served so well to create an effective forum for bringing so many
disparate entities together around a shared agenda.
Were the commission cease to exist and disappear in November, there
is no existing management entity in the Valley, across the States, and
municipalities with the stature, breadth, and depth to take its place.
The sustainability of this noble experiment would thus be seriously
threatened without the continuation of the federal role in this
partnership.
The second reason for extending the commission goes to the heart of
the Corridor's mission, and our commitment to realize the vision of its
namesake and founding father, the late Senator John H. Chafee.
That vision set ambitious goals for the Corridor. As we come to the
end of our second ten-year management plan, we must conclude that,
despite enormous successes, we have not finished the job.
Few appreciated the magnitude of the challenges faced when the
commission started its work in 1988. Yet in retrospect it should not be
surprising that it has taken only two decades to significantly reverse
two hundred years of attitudes and activities that lead to the
ecological degradation and a half century of economic decline.
An action agenda for the next decade will be defined in detail in
the management plan called for in this bill. But we can clearly see at
least three major ``legacy'' tasks ahead of us:
The first of these tasks is in the area of heritage education and
tourism development. With federal seed money and technical assistance,
the commission's partners have built and now operate three of four
planned ``gateway'' visitor centers to the Blackstone Valley, but we
must see the last and most ambitious of these completed: the Northern
Gateway Visitor Center in Worcester. In this project the commission has
played and must continue to play the critical role of conceptual
planner, convenor, and negotiator to assure coordination among multiple
federal, state, local, and non-profit partners.
The second major task is the completion of the 46-mile Blackstone
Bikeway, perhaps the most significant joint recreational amenity in the
states of Massachusetts and Rhode Island. The Rhode Island segment in
nearing completion. Much has been done, but the magnitude of this
project will require a continued federal-state partnership effort for
the better part of the next decade.
The third major task is to complete the cleanup of the Blackstone
River and protect its watershed. The commission and its partners have
launched the ``Fishable-Swimmable Blackstone by 2015'' campaign.
Governor Carcareri and I will continue to speak about FISHABLE,
SWIMABLE, PLAYABLE and SUSTAINABLE. . . . Narragansett Bay but as the
names suggests, no one is underestimating the scope and scale of the
challenge we face.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to add a special word in support of this
bill's provision for a Special Resource Study. No other heritage area
has enjoyed the benefits of such an extensive relationship with NPS as
has the Blackstone. From the start, NPS has provided critical staff to
the commission. The commission's Executive Director also serves as
Superintendent of Roger Williams National Memorial, an NPS unit in
Providence. NPS rangers have led interpretive programs and trained
volunteers and docents throughout the Corridor. They have been the
seeding agent of interest by local communities. The Special Resource
Study would examine this unique relationship and permit the Secretary
of the Interior to make recommendation to Congress about the future
role NPS might play in preserving and interpreting Corridor resources.
I do not come before this committee without having done our
homework. Prior to seeking reauthorization, the commission asked the
NPS's Conservation Study Institute to conduct an independent evaluation
of the commission's record and look at options for sustaining the
Corridor's future. Such a study would be required by the national
heritage area program legislation, S. 243, that passed the Senate last
year. It is also called for by the National Park System Advisory Board
in its recently adopted report entitled Charting a Future for National
Heritage Areas. I are proud to say that Blackstone is the first
heritage area to follow this process. I would like to submit for the
committee's review copies of the Blackstone study, entitled Reflecting
on the Past, Looking to the Future. I believe that S. 1387, if enacted,
would secure that future for the Blackstone Valley and its people.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony, and I am prepared to
answer any questions that you or other members of the committee may
have at this time.
Senator Thomas. All right. Thank you very much.
Ms. Velasquez.
STATEMENT OF ANN MARIE VELASQUEZ, SANGRE DE CRISTO NATIONAL
HERITAGE AREA
Ms. Velasquez. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
I'm Ann Marie Velasquez, and I'm here to testify in support of
the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area. I am the chairman
for the emerging board of directors and management entity named
in S. 2037. I'd like to thank you for asking me to testify at
this hearing. The bill to designate the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area is of high importance to this three-
county region that lies within the great San Luis Valley of
Colorado.
This is evidenced by the number of people who have traveled
with me to Washington just to be present at this hearing. The
emphasis that I'd like to place on my testimony today, is that
of local and regional support for designation of the area as a
national heritage area.
Since the beginning, we have sought the support of the
residents, organizations, and governments, starting with a
public meeting in each county in 2002 for the process of
building a steering committee. Today's several of the original
steering committee members are still actively involved and have
traveled to Washington to be present at this hearing. The
steering committee has been responsible for most of the work
that has been done so far on the national heritage area
designation effort, and in the creation of the feasibility
study.
For the past 5\1/2\ years, we and others, have had numerous
public meetings and have encouraged individuals to become
involved on the committee or in other ways.
Individuals from our committee have presented at various
meetings and of other non-profits, special interest groups,
civic groups, local governments and tourism boards. Resolutions
have been received supporting the national heritage area from
the counties and communities lying within the proposed region.
Numerous letters of support have been obtained from businesses,
nonprofit organizations, regional economic development entities
and individuals.
Our State Senator and State Representative have also shown
their support for the project throughout our efforts. The
greatest contributions that have impacted our goal of
designation have been the overwhelming personal work effort of
professional volunteers.
As I mentioned, countless hours of research have been
contributed. That research had its roots in a collaborative
scholarly symposium that our steering committee presented in
November 2002.
Partnerships with Adam's State College and others were
formed to present the full day of multi-venue symposium on
history, heritage, culture and natural resources that make up
the proposed region. Over 30 percent is donated to research to
the national heritage area effort. The final feasibility study
was researched and authored almost entirely by local
historians, authors, scholars, business people and residents of
the proposed region.
This once again shows the overwhelming support for this
designation from multitude of people within the valley and
around the State of Colorado.
Within the planning process, friendships with our local
public land agencies and organizations have been our main
focus. And a close working relationship has been established
with the Nation's newest national park, the Great Sands
National Park and Preserve.
The recognition of the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area's three-county region as an important component in
America's history is long overdue.
From the cultural treasure chest of living history to the
abundance of unique natural resources and recreational
experiences, this region sits is a diamond among gems.
In conclusion, the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area
is worthy of national designation. This may be one of the few
remaining places in our great country with the integrity worthy
of national acclaim. But the forces of change which diminish
these qualities in other parts of Colorado and the Nation are
quickly--are rapidly approaching here as well.
I urge you to act quickly to stem the flow of irreparable
change and enact legislation establishing the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area. Thank you, and I would entertain any
questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Velasquez follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ann Marie Velasquez, Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am Ann Marie Velasquez
and I am testifying in support of the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area (SDCNHA). I am interim Chairman for the emerging Board of
Directors of the proposed National Heritage Area, the management entity
named in bill S. 2037. I am also the Executive Director for Los Caminos
Antiguos Scenic and Historic Byway, Secretary/Treasurer for the Conejos
County Tourism Board and former Secretary/Treasurer of the Sangre de
Cristo National Heritage Area Steering Committee. I hold advisory
committee positions at the State level for several heritage tourism
projects including the Colorado Tourism Office's Heritage Tourism
Strategic Plan.
I'd like to thank you for asking me to testify at this hearing. The
bill to designate the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area is one of
high importance to the three county region which lies within the great
San Luis Valley of Colorado. This is evidenced by the number of people
who have traveled with me to Washington just to be present for this
hearing.
The San Luis Valley is located in the south-central region of the
State of Colorado surrounded by the Sangre de Cristo Range and northern
Culebra Range of the Rocky Mountains to the East and the San Juan
Range, which forms the Continental Divide, to the West. At 122 miles
long and 74 miles wide, the San Luis Valley is Colorado's largest
mountain park and has been labeled ``the highest, largest, mountain
desert in North America''. The proposed designation area is comprised
of Costilla, Conejos and Alamosa counties in addition to the Great Sand
Dunes National Park and Preserve, Baca National Wildlife Refuge and
Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge; all lying within the southeastern
part of the San Luis Valley.
With 11,000 years of documented human habitation, the Sangre de
Cristo National Heritage Area is a crossroads of the centuries. Here a
unique blend of Native American, Hispano and Anglo settlement is
reflected in the diversity of the people, art and traditions. The
geographic isolation of the alpine valley and the people's enduring tie
to the land have given rise to a rich cultural heritage and ensured its
preservation. The area's fertile cultural landscape is complemented by
remarkable natural resources, including the mighty Rio Grande, majestic
Rocky Mountain peaks, Great Sand Dunes National Park, National Wildlife
Refuges, and the high mountain desert, all of which lend the Sangre de
Cristo National Area an unparalleled beauty that offers a sense of
retreat and a powerful source of inspiration for visitors.
For a century and a half the region has cultivated a rich heritage
that is a living testament to the generations gone before us. Everyday
life is endowed with traditions, both conscious and subconscious, that
have been passed from father to son, mother to daughter and neighbor to
neighbor. New neighbors learn traditional ways and over time, find
themselves embracing these traditions either out of need or out of
respect. This is a land that is essentially true to its roots.
The history of the proposed area is marked by the dynamic encounter
of three major cultures during a time when the nation's boundaries and
flags were in a state of constant change. First Nations, or Native
Americans, Indo-Hispanos and Anglo-European vied for the land. They
held divergent views of the land and its resources. The Utes, who claim
11,000 years of ancestry and occupation, like other First Nations had a
unique and spiritual relationship with the land. They could never think
in terms of owning it. That would have gone against all that they
believed. The land was a friend, a provider, and a partner to all of
nature. It fed and sheltered. It cared for the people and gave them
everything they ever needed.
Hispanos claimed territory for the motherland and God. Theirs was a
communal self-sustaining system, which required the cooperation of
everyone. Villages were born with extended families, building adobe:
structures which were connected and surrounding a town square called a
plaza. Farming and ranching depended on the acequia system of
irrigation which functions well only when everyone is a participant.
Land ownership was for the good of the family, the community and the
Church.
When Anglo/Europeans began to populate the land, they brought with
them a system of deeds, surveys, titles, taxation and barbed wire to
delineate and define. Mining, building railroads and big ranching were
the goals. For the Anglo/Europeans, the land was not so much perceived
as a place of sustenance, but seen more as a source of resources to be
used and extracted.
The U.S. military presence came in 1852 just one year after the
first Hispano settlement in the region. Fort Massachusetts, built then,
proved to be inadequate so the army replaced it with Fort Garland in
1858. Fort Garland remained as a fort for 25 years. Its mission was to
protect settlers against hostile Indians. Hostilities were present
among the three groups, but major battles never occurred.
The distinguishing elements that set this region apart from others
are the multitude of natural resources and incredible recreational
choices that integrate with the distinctive cultural landscape. Early
settlers found precious water in abundance and fertile soil in which to
raise crops and graze livestock. Vast forests provided wildlife for
food, wood for lumber, plants for medicines and forage for livestock.
The designation area contains habitats and wildlife that are
characteristic of the San Luis Valley, yet unique to Colorado and the
West. A natural marvel, the Great Sand Dunes National Park and
Preserve, lies to the north end of the designation area. The dunes, the
tallest in North America, developed as a result of winds blowing across
the valley.
Despite the title of ``desert'', the San Luis Valley boasts one of
the West's most prized natural resources--WATER. Two separate aquifers
underlie the valley and both contain large quantities of water. Water
from mountain drainages and ground water moving toward the valley
filtrates down and recharges the aquifer. The range of wetland types in
the designation area, each with varying degrees of water permanence,
supports a diversity of plant and animal species, some of which are
very rare such as the slender spiderflower. The SDCNHA provides a
comprehensive sampling of the valley's intricate system of wetlands
that is fed by watershed runoff, creeks, ditches, ground water and
artesian wells.
The amount of federally protected land within the proposed National
Heritage Area attests to the natural resources within the southern
portion of the San Luis Valley. The State of Colorado and the Nature
Conservancy also protect substantial land holdings in the proposed
area. These protected lands include a National Park and Preserve, three
National Wildlife Refuges, a National Forest, two National Wilderness
Areas, a proposed National Natural Landmark (Rio Grande), Bureau of
Land Management lands, 15 State Wildlife Areas, a State Park and the
97,000 acre Nature Conservancy Medano-Zapata Ranch.
Plant species, wildlife and birds are abundant throughout the
SDCNHA. A number of plant communities and bird and animal species found
in this area have been recognized by the Colorado Natural Heritage
Program as globally significant. Rankings of these particular plants,
birds and animals put them in the category of vulnerable to extinction.
For this reason, protected lands serve as last bastions in preserving
species.
Other wildlife in the area boasts large populations such as deer,
elk, Rocky Mountain sheep, and pronghorn. More common forbearers such
as beaver are found throughout the region.
Exceptional recreational opportunities abound in the Sangre de
Cristo area. There are hundreds of square miles of public lands,
thousands of acres of wildlife rich wetlands, marshes, and water bodies
and two designated wildernesses that provide for highly diverse
recreation experiences. While experiencing this unparalleled scenic
beauty one can find solitude, absorb clean crisp air, gaze upon some of
the clearest of night skies and bask in a climate that is dominated by
sunlight.
Nature based tourism includes recreational pursuits such as dune
skiing, snowshoeing, snowmobiling, camping, biking, bird watching/
wildlife viewing, cross-country skiing, hiking, mountaineering, star
gazing, fishing and hunting. Both the Sangre de Cristo Wilderness and
the San Juan, Wilderness areas provide excellent recreation
opportunities for visitors seeking more remote backcountry hiking,
camping, and mountain and ice climbing experiences.
The Rio Grande and the diversity of ecosystems and life zones and
the intricate system of wetlands that span the area, make wildlife
viewing phenomenal. The valley is situated on a major flyway and sees a
large number of species as great waves of birds pass through on annual
migration. With further enhanced partnerships and interpretive tourist
information, several of these areas could be organized into wildlife
driving tours. Bird watching guides and tours have the potential to
increase visitor traffic tremendously throughout the area.
Cultural based tourism can be experienced through the architecture,
development patterns, art, food, lodging and cultural events. Los
Caminos Antiguos, the Ancient Roads, is a 129 mile stretch of Colorado
highway that links many of the key resources in the proposed SDCNHA.
The Byway provides visitors with panoramic views, a strong sense of the
past and opportunities to experience the rich culture and traditions of
the local people. Along this route one can see and feel the
authenticity of the cultural landscape. Visitors can experience
numerous historic Hispano communities such as San Luis, the oldest town
in Colorado, listed as a National Historic District, with its plaza,
vega, adobe structures, mission churches, local artifacts, authentic
restaurants, cultural museum and B&Bs. On the same trip, visitors can
see historic Mormon villages that illustrate the tightly gridded
streets and clustered homes of the early settlers and pass through the
numerous railroad towns that sprung up during the late 1800s. One of
the larger railroad towns is Antonito where the Cumbres and Toltec
Scenic Railroad, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is
located. This historic railroad has vintage steam-powered locomotives
and wooden passenger cars that wind through spectacular scenery as it
travels through the San Juan Mountains on route to Chama, New Mexico.
Fort Garland, the once stronghold of protection for the settlers of the
region, is now a fine museum offering interpretation of everyday life.
Its one time commander, Kit Carson, and the regiment of buffalo
soldiers who served at the fort are highlighted with interpretation,
artifacts and special displays. Reenactment camps and living history
events bring bygone times back to life. Many more recreation
opportunities exist but are far too many for this testimony to list.
Isolation within these valley walls has been the impetus that has
kept the culture intact and the natural resources from being completely
exploited. An archaic dialect of 17th Century Spanish is still spoken
by about 35% of the population, showing remnants of centuries past.
In this high mountain valley, isolation has worked to our advantage
and to our disadvantage. Although our heritage and culture have been
well preserved, the population has remained relatively low. The exodus
of our youth to more prosperous areas has left its mark on the ability
of families to keep generations-held land. Our financial resources and
tax base has not kept pace with urban areas or even with other rural
communities. The counties of Conejos and Costilla are two of the
poorest in the country. The struggling economies of these counties, as
well as their sister county, Alamosa, are in desperate need of economic
enhancement. Unemployment averages within these counties is high and
per capita income, when compared to the Colorado State average, is low
at 45-65%. As we search for ways to sustain our agrarian lifestyle, a
National Heritage Area designation would compliment existing efforts of
attracting heritage travelers through tourism. Heritage tourism and
historic preservation are proven economic stimulators and a perfect fit
for rural communities. Along with tourism, heritage education to
include the traditional arts, language and local history would benefit
tremendously from the national designation.
I would like to include in this testimony the process of bringing
this dream of National Heritage Area designation from beginning to
present day and of the overwhelming support that exists for the
designation.
Los Caminos Antiguos Scenic and Historic Byway is one of the 24
Colorado scenic byways and traverses three of the southernmost counties
of the San Luis Valley and is a 501(c)(3) not for profit organization.
During the research the Byway conducted while preparing interpretive
material for publication, the board of directors realized that there
was a significant, important, and integrated story within the region
that had not been told, nor had it been celebrated. The Byway holds a
stake in the cultural and historical preservation of the area. It's not
unusual for a byway, either a State Scenic Byway or National Scenic
Byway, to lie within a National Heritage Area.
A consensus of the Board of Directors instructed byway planners to
include the formation of a National Heritage Area in the Strategic Plan
for the Byway. Beginning with three public meetings, one in each of
Alamosa, Conejos and Costilla counties, the Byway assessed interest,
attendance and the willingness of individuals to help move the project
forward.
Attendance and interest from these meetings encouraged us to
organize interested parties to work on the designation. A volunteer
steering committee was nominated and formed. Today, several of the
original steering committee members from 2002 are still actively
involved and have traveled to Washington to be present at this hearing.
The steering committee has been responsible for the majority of the
work that has been done thus far on the Heritage Area designation
effort and in the creation of the feasibility study.
From those first meetings, we've met regularly over the past five
and a half years to plan, organize and take forward the concept. We've
held several other public meetings and have encouraged individuals to
become involved either on the committee or in other ways. Individuals
from our committee have presented at various monthly and quarterly
meetings of other non-profits, special interest groups, civic groups,
local governments and tourism boards. We have met with the County
Commissioners of all three counties periodically to update them on the
progress of the designation process. Countless hours have been spent in
research and building public support for the project.
Resolutions supporting the National Heritage Area designation from
all three Boards of County Commissioners have been received, as well as
supportive resolutions from communities lying within the proposed
region. Numerous letters of support have been obtained from local and
regional governments, businesses, non-profit organizations, regional
economic development entities and individuals. Our State Senator, Lewis
Entz, and our State Representative, Rafael Gallegos have also shown
their support for the project throughout our efforts and have given
letters committing their support.
Financially, Los Caminos Antiguos has supported the efforts, and
through their non-profit status, individuals have been able to make
cash contributions. The greatest contributions that have impacted our
goal of designation have been the overwhelming personal work of our
professional volunteers. As I mentioned, countless hours of research
have been contributed. That research had its roots in a collaborative
scholarly symposium that our steering committee presented in November
of 2002. Partnerships with Adams State College, Trinidad State Junior
College, Adams State College Title V Office, Jalisco Inc. (a private
business) and Los Caminos Antiguos were formed to present the full day,
multi-venue symposium on the history, heritage, culture and natural
resources that make up the proposed region. Over 31 presenters donated
their time, travel costs and research to the National Heritage Area
effort. Scholarly papers were presented at the symposium and then given
to the steering committee to be used in the authoring of the
feasibility study. Cultural groups donated performances during the
lunch that was provided with funding from our partners. People from the
San Luis Valley and other regions of Colorado and the state of New
Mexico came to hear the presentations that were made in lectures and on
panels.
The feasibility study was researched and authored almost entirely
by local historians, authors, scholars, business people and residents
of the proposed region. This once again shows the overwhelming support
for this designation from a multitude of people within the valley and
around the state of Colorado. A well known landscape architecture firm
Shapins Associates, specializing in heritage planning and research,
contributed significantly to the completion and production of the final
study.
Within the planning process, partnerships with our local public
land agencies and organizations have been a main focus. Our partners
include the Rio Grande National Forest, the Bureau of Land Management
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the three National
Wildlife Refuges within the NHA boundaries. All of these agencies have
been contributors to the research and writing of the feasibility study.
A close working relationship has been established with the nation's
newest National Park, the Great Sand Dunes. State agencies such as the
Division of Wildlife and Colorado State Parks have all offered
technical assistance along the way.
Since the completion of the feasibility study, the group has sought
to further Heritage Tourism by participating with other organizations
to advance visitor readiness and increase the profile of the region.
Preservation projects to protect some historic treasures include
placing the original circa 1880s Antonito Train Depot on both the State
and National Registers of Historic Places. Restoration work on the
depot is being planned with a new coalition of partners and an
interpretive center is under consideration.
The recognition of the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area's
three county region as an important component in America's history is
long overdue. From the cultural treasure chest of living history to the
abundance of unique natural resources and recreational experiences,
this region sits as a diamond among gems.
In conclusion, the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area is
worthy of national designation and has met the criteria of the National
Park Service. This may be one of the few remaining places in our great
country with the integrity worthy of national acclaim, but the forces
of change which diminished these qualities in other parts of Colorado
and the nation are rapidly approaching here as well. I urge you to act
quickly to stem the flow of irreparable change and enact legislation
establishing the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area. Thank you for
the opportunity to address the committee and I would be happy to answer
any questions you may have.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Ms. Wyatt.
STATEMENT OF CATE MAGENNIS WYATT, PRESIDENT, THE JOURNEY
THROUGH HALLOWED GROUND PARTNERSHIP
Ms. Wyatt. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Senator and
with great appreciation to Senator Allen for his support of
this very important legislation and his wonderful opening
remarks. My name is Cate Megennis Wyatt, and I am president of
The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership, which is an
initiative that began in 1996 and has worked over the last 10
years closely with the National Park Service, building a very
strong coalition of now over 150 partners.
This region from Gettysburg, as so eloquently described by
Senator Allen, following the old Carolina Road, down to
Monticello, hold more American history than any other swath of
land in the country. It has been described by renowned Yale
University historian, Stephen Woodward, as--and I quote, ``This
part of the country has soaked up more blood, sweat and tears
of American history than any other part of the country. It has
bred more founding fathers, it has inspired more hopes and
ideals, and witnessed more triumphs, failures, victories, and
lost causes than any other place in the country.''
The history of the heritage sites is long, it is included
in the written testimony, and it includes over a million acres
of land already on the National Register of Historical Places.
Fourteen National Historical Landmarks, eight presidential
homes, but much, much more important than the bricks and the
mortar, are the men and the women, who contributed through
individual acts of leadership and combined acts of courage to
create these United States.
In June 1755, on the onset of the French and Indian War,
Major General Edward Braddock led troops across this region of
Virginia to attack a French Fort in what is now Cumberland,
Maryland. Had those battles gone differently and had not those
young soldiers gave their lives, we might very well be speaking
French at the moment.
Twenty years later a collection of British citizens by the
names of Jefferson, Madison and Monroe, risked their lives and
their livelihoods to wage war against their own sovereign
nation, and now in retrospect, we recognize audaciously sought
to create a grand dream called democracy.
In 1859, it was John Brown who led his men across the very
same region as he planned and executed his attack on Harper's
Ferry in the name of Freedom for All.
And a mere 80 years after the revolution, this very land
absorbed more loss of blood, dreams and lives, with more Civil
War battles were fought on it than any other region in the
country. More lives were lost on this land than in the history
of the country as young men laid everything they had on the
line. And brave women like Clara Barton, administered as best
they could. Among others who risked everything were the slaves
who ran in hopes of finding freedom and the Quaker towns and
abolitionists who honored and harbored them while they were on
their way.
I could go on and on, and if this sounds like a history
lesson, it is, and it's a lesson we want to bring to every
American and every visitor. We ask that you support this
legislation as we intend to bring alive the history of our
Nation, so that we may honor those who made it their home;
others their grave, and by each deliberate contribution
contributed towards creating these United States.
We would offer that on the merits of history alone the
national heritage area designation is appropriate, but on the
merits of the strength of the partnership, it is equally on
solid footing. This is an amazingly strong grassroots
operation, as Senator Allen indicated, with over 150 partners.
These partners have allowed us to raise over $1.7 million in
private funds, which are already sustaining and supporting this
initiative as well as the cost of the feasibility study, which
we understand is of a different model perhaps than the National
Park Service would prefer. We are thrilled with the partnership
we have with the National Park Service the efforts that have
already been undertaken in this cooperative effort to ensure
that our feasibility study, indeed, is as good as it possibly
can be.
We have already hired our consultant to begin this work and
have had two meetings and will be moving immediately following
this testimony to our third meeting with the Park Service so we
will ensure that we will make every effort to meet the criteria
set by the Park Service to ensure that this legislation meets
their standards.
We also recognize as important as our heritage is so, too,
is the constitutionally-protected private property rights, and
S. 2645 is among the most stringent when it comes to protecting
citizens' private property. We believe the Virginia hallowed
ground is most qualified and worthy of national heritage area
designation.
Once again, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity
to testify, and we certainly welcome any questions you may
have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Wyatt follows:]
Prepared Statement of Cate Magennis Wyatt, President, The Journey
Through Hallowed Ground Partnership
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Akaka, and Members of the
Subcommittee, my name is Cate Magennis Wyatt. I am the President of The
Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership and I appreciate the
invitation to present testimony on behalf of Senate Bill 2645, the
``Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act of 2006.''
I have served in government, as the Secretary of Commerce and Trade for
the Commonwealth of Virginia, in the private sector as a developer and
in the non-profit sector as a trustee on numerous Boards.
The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership is a 10 year old
grassroots organization with over 150 Partners, which has worked with
the National Park Service over this period to raise national awareness
of, interpretive educational programs for, and civic engagement in, the
unparalleled history within the region that generally follows the Old
Carolina Road (Rt. 15/231) from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania through
Frederick, Maryland, ending at Monticello in Albemarle County in
Virginia. This area includes land in ten counties and four states.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Attachment A (retained in subcommittee files) is a map of the
Heritage Area. This area includes: Adams County (PA); Frederick County
(MD); Jefferson County (WV); Loudoun County (VA); Prince William County
(VA); Fauquier County (VA); Culpeper County (VA); Orange County (VA);
Madison County (VA); Louisa County (VA); Charlottesville/Albemarle
County (VA) and Fluvanna County (VA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. senate bill 2645
Senate Bill 2645 would establish the area within the proposed
boundary as the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area
(hereinafter, ``Heritage Area''). This region has been described by
renowned Yale University historian C. Vann Woodard as follows:
``This part of the country has soaked up more of the blood,
sweat, and tears of American history than any other part of the
country. It has bred more founding fathers, inspired more
soaring hopes and ideals and witnessed more triumphs, failures,
victories, and lost causes than any other place in the
country.''
And, by author and noted Revolutionary War authority Richard
Ketchum, as:
``If any land in America deserves to be called Hallowed
Ground, it is this red clay soil on which so much of this
nation's past is preserved.''
Inhabited hundreds of years ago by the Iroquois and Susquehanna
Native Americans, this region was traveled by European trappers and
frontiersmen who ventured to the wilderness to find a means to create a
living. Young surveyor George Washington laid the plans for the town of
Culpeper, never envisioning that it would later be engulfed by the
largest Calvary battle of the Civil War, the battle of Brandy Station.
In June 1755, the onset of the French and Indian War, Major General
Edward Braddock led troops from Virginia across this region to attack
the French fort in what is now Cumberland, Maryland. Had those battles
gone differently, had not the young soldiers gave of their lives, we
very well might be speaking French.
Twenty years later, a collection of British citizens, by the names
of Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, risked their lives and their
livelihoods to wage a war against their own sovereign nation and, in
retrospect, audaciously sought to create a grand dream called
democracy. As we read through their journals and have the benefit of
their thoughts, they did not always agree on how to create this
country, nor on what this notion, ``Democracy'', should look like in
law. As they traveled between their homes and to Philadelphia, the
natural resources along the Journey served to inspire them. Jefferson
wrote in his journal, as he observed the confluence of the Potomac,
that it invites you ``as it were, from the riot and tumult roaring
around, to pass through the breach and participate in the calm below''
(Thomas Jefferson, Notes of the State of Virginia).
During the Revolutionary War, this corridor served as headquarters
to Generals Wayne, Lafayette, and Muhlenberg, each of whom exhibited
bravery and leadership in the face of daunting odds. In 1859, John
Brown led his men through the region as he planned and executed his
attack on Harper's Ferry in the name of freedom for all.
A mere 80 years after the Revolution, this very land absorbed the
loss of blood, dreams and lives with more Civil War battles waged on it
than any other region in the country. There were more lives lost on
this land than in the history of this country as young men laid
everything they had on the line and brave women like Clara Barton
administered as best they could. Among others who risked everything,
were the slaves who ran in the hopes of finding freedom and the Quaker
towns and abolitionist who harbored them along their way.
During the War of 1812, as Washington was burning, Dolly Madison
sent a fearless team to secretly steal away the documents of democracy
to private homes in this region for safe keeping.
This is the land that gave respite to Presidents Theodore and
Franklin Roosevelt, Kennedy and Eisenhower and where General George
Marshall found solace in the only home he ever owned, as he said,
``after 41 years of wandering''--a home where he could pen The Marshall
Plan, which exported the ideals of Democracy to Europe. A listing of
the great variety of historic resources within the proposed Journey
Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area is attached to this
testimony.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Attachment B (retained in subcommittee files) is an inventory
of historic resources within the proposed Journey Through Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was through these hills and along this corridor that they all
led by example and left their indelible mark on the creation of
America. Some made it their home, others their grave, and by each
deliberate contribution, they created these United States.
In his Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863, Lincoln spoke to
the nation when he said:
``We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a
final resting place for those who here gave their lives that
(this) nation might live.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate--we can not
consecrate--we can not hallow--this ground The brave men,
living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far
above our poor power to add or detract.''
Senators, the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership is here
today to ensure that not only do we not detract, but that we work
diligently to extract the lessons in leadership and celebrate the
landscape that has inspired generations to fight for the evocative
ideals of democracy.
National designation for the Heritage Area, as further explained
below, will bring numerous benefits to the region and help ensure that
our children and grandchildren are able to walk in the footprints of
those who gave their lives to give us this nation.
B. The Role of the Partnership as Management Entity within the Heritage
Area
S. 2645 designates the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership,
an organization based in Waterford, Virginia, as the management entity
for the Heritage Area and outlines the Partnership's duties and
authorities in Section 5 of the bill. The Partnership is bi-partisan,
public-private initiative that works collaboratively with heritage
sites, elected officials, business leaders, educators, landowners,
preservationists, and destination marketing organizations to celebrate
the cultural heritage in this region.
Considerable thought was given to the creation of this Partnership.
First, an Advisory Council was created which includes: the Presidents
of Monticello, the Civil War Preservation Trust, the Eisenhower
Institute, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and Protect
Historic America, among others. Early counsel was sought from the
National Heritage Area Program Director and the President of the
Alliance of National Heritage Areas.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Attachment C (retained in subcommittee files) lists the
Advisory Council members for the Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Partnership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, a Board of Trustees was convened and includes professionals
in the fields of heritage conservation, interpretation, tourism, and
representatives from the business sector. This Board takes seriously
its responsibilities. It has raised significant private funds to
execute its 2005-2007 management plan with time-specific performance
schedules and cost benefit analysis for funds expended.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Attachment C lists the Board of Trustees for the Journey
Through Hallowed Ground Partnership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 5(b) of the bill authorizes the development of a Heritage
Area management plan by the Partnership and authorizes the use of
federal funds to develop and implement that plan within the Heritage
Area. It is with assurance that I commend to you the current management
entity which has demonstrated fiscal responsibility and best management
practices. The Partnership is well-equipped to serve as the managing
entity for the Heritage Area and to oversee the implementation of the
management plan. The Partnership has been working with the National
Park Service for nearly ten years to advance the Heritage Area concept
for this region, as demonstrated by the National Register of Historic
Places Travel Itinerary which was placed online by the National Park
Service in 2000.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/journey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past ten years, the Partnership has worked diligently to
build a strong network of local, regional and national partners to
develop a common vision for the conservation and enhancement of the
scenic, historic, recreational, cultural, and natural characteristics
of the region. Over 100 community briefings have been given, in
addition to twenty full-day or two-day workshops held within the four
(4) states each of which convened stakeholders from the community. A
list of numerous Community Workshops and Partners meetings held to date
is attached to this testimony.\6\ In addition, a list of the Partners
and affiliated supporters of the Heritage Area effort is attached to
this testimony.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Attachment D (retained in subcommittee files) is a list of
Community Workshops and Partners meetings held to date.
\7\ See Attachment E (retained in subcommittee files).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Partnership has developed a committee structure with the
establishment of the several standing committees, including Economic
Development and Education Subcommittees. As a result, the Partnership
has created a highly successful education outreach program to reach
students and teachers within the region as well as across the nation,
and is creating a heritage tourism program that will provide economic
development opportunities, through regional branding and cooperative
marketing, in communities throughout the Heritage Area. Finally, the
Partnership has been working with local, state and national officials
to create a National Scenic Byway to supplement the Heritage Area
designation that will help sustain and strengthen the economy, heritage
and quality of life in the region. Heritage area designation will
ensure that the Partnership and its collective members can continue
their active work as the official management entity for the Heritage
Area.
C. Specific Benefits of Heritage Area Designation for the Region
The Partnership and its members are seeking designation of the
Journey Through Hallowed Ground as a national heritage area because it
will provide operational funding and National Park Service support for
the Partnership and its members to work collaboratively with business
leaders, heritage sites, elected officials, preservationists,
destination marketing organizations, citizens, and a variety of
community-based organizations to create interpretation programs and to
promote the history and tourism opportunities within the Heritage Area.
To date, all operational funds for The Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Partnership have been provided through private philanthropic donations,
which will continue as the initiative moves forward.
Importantly, the region will also benefit from national recognition
due to the association it confers with the National Park Service
through the use of the NPS arrowhead symbol as a branding strategy, a
symbol so familiar to most travelers. Local economies benefit by the
increased heritage tourism, and the Heritage Area has the support of 15
Main Street Communities and historic downtowns in four states.
Although tourism is the first, second or third largest industry in
each region within The Journey Through Hallowed Ground, the
Partnership's research found that visitation to heritage sites has been
dramatically declining over the past five years. Further research
identified perhaps the root cause of this decline--the heritage tourist
demographic profile is that of a highly educated, two-income earning
family with little time to plan itineraries. Accordingly, the
Partnership has designed and launched the Where America
HappenedTM marketing campaign.
Each element of this campaign makes it easy for citizens and
visitors alike to plan multi-faceted trips along heritage themes or
geographic destination. These efforts have included: publishing a
Journey Through Hallowed Ground guidebook, designing a website which
educates and facilitates heritage visitation, the creation of visitor
maps and brochures, working to create a National Trust for Historic
Preservation Study Tour and the development of audio touring CDs. In
addition, the Partnership has implemented a targeted, concentrated
media outreach plan which has resulted in over 100 local and national
articles including features in Smithsonian, National Geographic and
Preservation magazines as well as PBS television and National Public
Radio stories. A sample of these articles is attached to this
testimony.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Attachment F (retained in subcommittee files) includes copies
of major print press coverage of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allow me to emphasize, however, one very important distinction
between marketing the region and the intended results. Clearly, by
design, our marketing efforts provide economic benefits to, and support
for, our heritage sites, national parks, Main Street Communities and
working landscape industry. However, our directive and intended result,
as we launched and pursue our Where America HappenedTM
campaign, is to bring civic education alive for children and adults
alike. This Partnership feels that The Journey Through Hallowed Ground
is a trip every American must take in their lifetime.
Accordingly, we also seek to work with the National Park Service to
create interpretive programs on leadership. Such programs will allow
visitors to walk in the footsteps of those who created this nation and
fought to ensure democracy prevailed. Only by visiting can one begin to
comprehend the enormity of the contributions made by normal citizens
and statesmen alike. Only by experiencing this Journey can we hope to
instill the invaluable lessons of individual acts of leadership under
peril which combined to create the values of America--values and
lessons which must be shared with generations to come. By combining
historic preservation and civic education with sound environmental
stewardship, the Partnership aims to help inspire every citizen and
visitor alike.
Finally, Heritage Area designation also has more intangible
benefits, such as functioning as a federal ``seal of approval'' that
acknowledges the depth of historic assets and importance of a region to
our American cultural heritage on a national scale. It is an honor for
a region to achieve this congressionally-designated status and propels
citizens and communities to greater appreciation and understanding, and
spurs voluntary conservation practices. Increased pride of a community
and region in its history and traditions increases residents' interest
and involvement in retaining and interpreting the landscape for future
generations. Preserving the integrity of the cultural landscape and
local stories means that future generations will be able to understand
their relationship to the land and have a sense of ``place'' although
they may not be from the area originally. In sum, designation would
provide increased opportunity for collaboration, marketing, resource
protection, education, interpretation, recreation, heritage
celebration, civic involvement and quality of life.
D. Community Support
Community support for the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Heritage
Area reaches back to 1992 to the origins of the Partnership, when
national and local organizations joined together with local citizens to
raise awareness of the importance of the history of the region in
response to a proposal to build a theme park in the area. Support for
the Partnership has come from ordinary citizens and landowners, local
businesses, heritage sites, educators, government agencies, and elected
bodies such as town councils, counties, historians and other academics,
regional planning districts state general assembly, and nonprofit
conservation and preservation organizations.
For example, over the past several years, in preparation of seeking
the National Heritage Area designation, the Partnership has sought to
formalize this support through obtaining official resolutions in favor
of the National Heritage Area designation and the efforts of the
Journey Through Hallowed Ground from fifty-eight (58) elected
bodies.\9\ In each case, these resolutions were considered after public
presentations and thoughtful debate. S. 2645 would further this
community involvement by allowing all federal, state and local groups
to participate actively in the development and implementation of the
management plan and allow sites within the area to benefit from grants
to be administered by the National Park Service and offered through the
Partnership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Attachment G (retained in subcommittee files) to this Testimony
includes copies of the resolutions of support passed by local
governmental bodies within the proposed Heritage Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, many residents, business interests and nonprofit
organizations within the proposed area have been involved in the
planning for the Heritage Area and have demonstrated their support
through letters of support. For example, thirty preservation,
conservation and recreation organizations, fourteen heritage sites,
nine government agencies, thirty-four businesses, twenty educators and
education institutions, and over two hundred and fifty private citizens
have written in support of the Heritage Area. The Heritage Area effort
has also generated a high level of public interest, having been written
about it over ninety newspaper articles, fifteen of which were on the
front page, and including editorials of support from Vermont to
Fredericksburg, Virginia.\10\ The Heritage Area also has a high level
of voter support, as indicated in a voter survey taken in 2005
regarding the Journey Through Hallowed Ground initiative.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Attachment F (retained in subcommittee files).
\11\ See Attachment G (retained in subcommittee files).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated, the Partnership already has a very strong foundation of
community support and commitment through the involvement and support of
more than 150 public and private, foundation, community, and citizen
partners already actively involved in heritage activities in the
region. Designation would ensure that this level of collaboration and
support is increased and sustained.
ii. private property protections
Celebrating American heritage is important, and so are
constitutionally-protected private property rights. Sections 9 and 10
of S. 2645 are devoted to private property protection assurances.
Section 9 requires that owners of private property be notified in
writing if the property will be included in the management plan and
provide written consent. Section 9 also allows a property owner to
withdraw from being included within the boundary of the Heritage Area
by submitting a written request.
Section 10 provides that nothing in the bill would require any
property owner to provide governmental or public access to their
property, or modifies any federal, state or local law dealing with
public access or use of private property or any land use regulation. In
addition, Section 10 provides that nothing in the bill creates any
liability of any property owners with respect to persons injured on
such property. Section 10 provides, further, that nothing in the bill
requires a private property owner located within the boundaries of the
Heritage Area to participate or be associated with the Heritage Area.
In Section 5(a), the bill authorizes the Partnership to acquire
land through gift, devise or by purchase from a willing seller, and
also provides assurance that ``no lands or interests in lands may be
acquired by condemnation.'' In Section 5(e), the legislation states
that the Partnership ``may not use Federal funds received under this
Act to acquire real property or interest in real property.'' In sum, S.
2645 contains some of the most stringent private property rights
protections of any heritage bill yet passed by Congress. Even private
property advocates have acknowledged that the bill's language is not
objectionable from a private property protection standpoint.
Furthermore, a General Accounting Office (GAO) report from 2004
determined that there is no evidence that heritage areas impact private
property rights, after extensive interviews with private property
rights groups.\12\ Zoning and land use policies remain local decisions
made by locally elected officials who are directly accountable to
citizens they represent. There are no federal mandates in this bill.
Heritage areas are ``non-federally owned, managed by local people with
many partners and NPS advice, funded from many sources, and intended to
promote local economic development as well as protect natural and
cultural heritage resources and values.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See GAO Report 04-593T, ``National Park Service: A More
Systematic Process for Establishing National Heritage Areas and Actions
to Improve Their Accountability Are Needed'' (March 30, 2004)
(Methodology section) (``To determine the extent to which, if at all,
private property rights have been affected by these areas, we discussed
this issue with the national coordinator, regional officials, the
Executive Director of the Alliance of National Heritage Areas . . . the
executive directors of the 23 heritage areas that were established at
the time of our work, and representatives of several private property
rights advocacy groups and individuals, including the American Land
Rights Association, the American Policy Center, the Center for Private
Conservation, the Heritage Foundation, the National Wilderness
Institute, and the Private Property Foundation of America. In each of
these discussions, we asked the individuals if they were aware of any
cases in which a heritage area had positively or negatively affected an
individual's property rights or restricted its use. None of these
individuals were able to provide such an example.'')
\13\ Carol Hardy Vincent and David Whiteman, Congressional Research
Service, Resources, Sciences and Industry Division, ``Heritage Areas:
Background, Proposals, and Current Issues'' (updated March 9, 2006), at
pg. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. conclusion
Heritage areas are founded on the concept that the best way to
preserve important historic and cultural landscapes is through
voluntary partnerships and community participation, allowing property
to remain in state, local or private ownership but unifying the area
through shared efforts at promotion, preservation, and interpretation.
It is essential for Congress to continue to recognize the desire of
citizens and communities to obtain national recognition for areas with
national importance, allowing citizens to promote and further a sense
of pride of place on a national and international scale.
We understand that National Park Service seeks enactment of program
legislation as contained in S. 243 passed by the Senate last year that
would establish statutory guidelines and a more uniform process for
designation of national heritage areas. We also understand that the
increasing demand on National Park Service resources should dictate
that only those sites that are most qualified should be designated by
Congress as a heritage area. We strongly believe that the Journey
Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area meets the criterion for
designation set forth in S. 243, and is an example of a site most
worthy of national heritage area designation. We look forward to
continuing our close collaboration with National Park Service to
provide all the necessary assurances that the Journey Through Hallowed
Ground National Heritage Area Act of 2006 is consistent with their
desire for supporting only the most highly qualified heritage area
programs.
Once again, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
address the Subcommittee on this important legislation. I look forward
to answering any questions you or your colleagues may have.
* * *
``This is the ground of our Founding Fathers. These are landscapes that
speak volumes--small towns, churches, fields, mountains, creeks and
rivers with names such as Bull Run and Rappahannock. They are the real
thing, and what shame we will bring on ourselves if we destroy them.''
\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ As stated in a Press Conference regarding the Journey Through
Hallowed Ground at the National Press Club on May 11, 1994.
--David McCullough, a Pulitzer Prize winner and one of
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the narrators for the PBS ``Civil War'' series
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Mr. Rice.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL M. RICE, PRESIDENT AND CEO,
OHIO & ERIE CANALWAY COALITION, AKRON, OH
Mr. Rice. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the
committee; my name is Dan Rice. I'm president and chief
executive officer of the Ohio & Erie Canalway Coalition, a
regional non-profit organization working on the Ohio River
canalway in northeastern Ohio.
I greatly appreciate the opportunity to appear before the
committee today to offer testimony in support of S. 1721. I am
here also today to testify as a general witness on behalf of
the eight other national heritage areas included within S.
1721.
While I will be providing some limited information about
the work of some of the national heritage areas, I respectfully
request the subcommittee keep the record open so that those
national heritage areas can submit testimony themselves. The
Ohio & Erie Canalway is a national treasure, that sovereign can
meet national, historical and recreation resources along the
Ohio-Erie canal of northeast Ohio.
Working in partnership with our private, local, State, and
national partners, we are developing a 101 mile multi-use
recreational trail conserving hundreds of acres of natural
areas, cultivating new stewards with over 160,000 hours on area
projects, preserving historic structures and stimulating over
$270 million of community and economic development.
For every one dollar federally-received funding, Mr.
Chairman, we are leveraging over $12.00 of private, local and
State investment. All of these accomplishments would not even
be possible if it were not for the legislation and designation
as a national heritage area.
With the development of our management plan, we have
obtained the investment, commitment and support of all our
partners, including the National Park Service, for this 20-year
plan.
For the first 3 years of our designation, we completed our
resource inventories and developed a management plan. From 2000
and 2006, we established the identity for the canalway and
worked on the three main linkages of the Topia Trail, scenic
highway and scenic river.
Through the hard word and dedication of our over 90 plus
partners, I am proud to tell you, Mr. Chairman, that we are
ahead of schedule and poised to move into the second phase of
the development of the Ohio River canalway.
As you can see, Mr. Chairman, we are at very critical
crossroads in the development of our project as well as the
eight other national heritage areas. If our Federal partners
withdraw from the partnership and their commitment to the
management plans, the private, State and local partners may
take the same approach and withdraw their commitment and
support. Once this occurs, the public/private partnership is
dissolved, the foundation for the regional resource
conservation strategy is destroyed, and the previous investment
of private, local and state and other partners may be at risk.
Reauthorization of the Ohio & Erie River Canalway and the
eight other national heritage areas allows us to complete our
management plans, fulfill our commitments to the local
communities and develop the necessary funding diversification
and self-sustaining strategies.
In essence, Mr. Chairman, reauthorization enables the
national heritage areas identified in S. 1721 to move towards
sustainability, and a decreased dependence on the National Park
Service for long term funding.
Although the Ohio & Erie Canalway is not scheduled to
address the issue of funding diversification and sustainability
until 2012, this year, the net of 2006 we have already begun
the view of our processes and our partners and all our funding
at the local level.
It is our intention, over the next 3 years to develop a
funding diversification sustainability strategy so that we can
be prepared in 2012 to implement that policy.
As you see, these are results of effective planning. As you
know, Mr. Chairman, we support very strongly your general area
heritage program administration bill, S. 243.
However, with a grandfather clause to include the existing
national heritage areas, we support the account of doing a
study 3 years to the sustaining of funding. But unfortunately
we do not have the luxury of that time right now.
And so we would ask, respectfully, that we be able to make
an adjustment in the pending legislation.
To be quite honest with you, I'm disappointed in the
National Park Service testimony that was just received here. It
truly sends a mixed message. The reference to the National Park
Service Advisory Committee report regarding having a framework
and structure for national heritage areas, at the same time,
that very report, Mr. Chairman, says that there was a need to
include national heritage areas within the system of the
National Park Service, as well as a long term commitment to
national heritage areas, and we feel that does send a mixed
message.
As I move to my conclusion, Mr. Chairman, now more than
ever, we need to maintain our partnership with the National
Park Service and renew our shared commitment to the nine
national heritage areas listed in S. 1721.
I believe that national heritage areas are an innovative
approach to resource conservation and truly represent the
future of the National Park Service of the 21st century. Most
importantly, national heritage areas expand the reach of the
National Park Service and allows the service to effect the
lives of ordinary citizens in extraordinary ways, without the
burden and responsibility of long term maintenance and
ownership. Working together, Mr. Chairman, we have the
opportunity to create legacies for future generations. I want
to thank you very much for this opportunity. I look forward to
answering any questions you may have, sir.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rice follows:]
Prepared Statement of Daniel M. Rice, President and Chief Executive
Officer, Ohio & Erie Canalway Coalition, Akron, OH
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, my name is
Daniel M. Rice. I am the President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Ohio & Erie Canalway Coalition, a regional private non-profit
organization working on the development of the Ohio & Erie National
Heritage Canalway from Cleveland to New Philadelphia, Ohio in northeast
Ohio. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the Committee today
to offer testimony in support of S. 1721, a bill to amend the Omnibus
Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to extend the
reauthorization for certain National Heritage Areas.
I am here today also to testify as a general witness on behalf of
the eight other National Heritage Areas included within S. 1721. These
National Heritage Areas, the class of 1996, were all authorized
together in the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996.
These National Heritage Areas have charted new territory in the way the
federal government works to conserve America's great heritage. These
nine National Heritage Areas have proven that the National Park Service
conservation strategy can be a partnership that involves state, local
and private partners with each party's investment hinged to support the
others. These nine National Heritage Areas have been reviewed by the
Government Accountability Office and have successfully demonstrated
that National Heritage Areas promote the National Park Service ethic of
resource conservation, and cultivate stewardship for our national
resources without impacting private property rights. While I will be
providing some limited information about the work of some of the
National Heritage Areas, I respectfully request that the Subcommittee
keep the record open so that those National Heritage Areas can submit
testimony themselves.
Within S. 1721 are eight other National Heritage Areas, including
Augusta Canal National Heritage Area (Georgia), Coal National Heritage
Area (West Virginia), Essex National Heritage Area (Massachusetts),
Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area New York), Rivers of Steel
National Heritage Area (Pennsylvania), Silos and Smokestacks National
Heritage Area (Iowa), South Carolina National Heritage Corridor (South
Carolina), and Tennessee Civil War National Heritage Area (Tennessee).
Over the past ten years, I have had the privilege and benefit of
working with each of these Heritage Areas and experienced the unique
heritage and resources of the eight other National Heritage Areas.
Collectively, these nine National Heritage Areas are successfully
promoting resource conservation, celebrating cultural traditions and
stimulating community and economic development.
The Ohio & Erie Canalway is a regional and national treasure that
celebrates the unique natural, historical and recreational resources
along the Ohio & Erie Canal from Cleveland to New Philadelphia in
northeast Ohio. Working in partnership with our private, local, state
and national partners, we are developing a 101-mile multi-use
recreational trail, conserving hundreds of acres of natural areas,
preserving historic structures and stimulating over $270,000,000 of
community and economic development activity. For every $1 of federal
seed funding, we are leveraging over $12 of private, local, and state
investment.
As one of the 27 Congressionally-designated National Heritage
Areas, the Ohio & Erie Canalway is a successful example of the national
heritage area concept of the conservation and interpretation of
nationally significant resources through local management and
investment. Some examples of our resource conservation accomplishments
include:
Development of 73 miles of the multi-use recreational
Towpath Trail from Cleveland to New Philadelphia, Ohio. To
date, over $53,000,000 of private, local, state and federal
resources have been invested in this regional greenway. Over 3
million users utilized the Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail in
2005.
Implementation of four county trail and green space plans
with over 400 miles of connecting trails and 1,000 acres of
green space.
The relocation of the world headquarters of Advanced
Elastomers Systems from St. Louis, Missouri to Akron, Ohio,
along the banks of the Ohio & Erie Canal. Local developer Paul
Tell invested $25 million dollars in the former BFGoodrich
building and generated over 300 new jobs in downtown Akron.
Over 160,000 volunteer hours on National Heritage Area
related programs and projects, and over 250,000 participants in
educational programs.
Preservation and restoration of historic canal resources
including, the Mustill House and Store, Henniger House, Zoar
Hotel, Zoar Town Hall, Jackson Township School and the Richard
Howe House.
Local developer Frank Sinito invested over $13 million
dollars in the mixed-use development, Thornburg Station, along
the banks of the Ohio & Erie Canal and Towpath Trail in
Independence, Ohio in Cuyahoga County. Through a combination of
upscale restaurants, offices and shops, Thornburg Station has
generated over 50 jobs and is a destination Trailhead along the
Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath Trail.
Designation of the Canalway Ohio Scenic Byway as a State and
National Scenic Byway.
Extending the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad from the
Cuyahoga Valley National Park to the City of Akron and the City
of Canton.
Creation of a Communications Plan, including a comprehensive
Interpretation Plan, Signage Plan and Marketing Plan. In April
2006, we introduced the first Visitors Guide for the Ohio &
Erie Canalway, in partnership with our Convention & Visitors
Bureaus.
Provided technical assistance and planning support for the
four main Canalway Center Visitors facilities. The first of our
facilities, the Stark County Canalway Learning Center is
scheduled to open in 2007.
Through the development of public/private partnerships, we are
exporting the National Park Service ethic of resource conservation to
thousands of citizens, cultivating stewardship and investment of the
unique resources and most importantly, creating a legacy for future
generations.
All of these accomplishments would not have been possible without
the designation, as a National Heritage Area, by Congress in 1996.
The National Heritage Area designation provides an organized
regional structure and forum for the promotion of resource
conservation, interpretation and development of the natural, historical
and recreational resources along the Ohio & Erie Canalway. With the
development of the Corridor Management Plan, we obtained the
investment, commitment and support of all of our private, local, state
and federal partners for the Ohio & Erie Canalway. All of our private,
local, state and federal partners, including the National Park Service,
endorsed the Corridor Management Plan and committed their resources to
the completion of the 20-year plan.
For the first three years of our designation, we completed our
resource inventories and developed the Corridor Management Plan. From
2000 to 2006, we established the identity for the Ohio & Erie Canalway
and worked on the three main regional linkages of the Towpath Trail,
Scenic Byway and the Scenic Railroad. Through the hard work and
dedication of our over 90-plus partners, I am proud to tell you that we
are ahead of schedule and are poised to move into the second phase of
the development of the Ohio & Erie Canalway.
According the Corridor Management Plan, approved by the Secretary
of the Interior, over the next six years, we will work on the following
items:
Complete the key regional linkages, including the Towpath
Trail, Scenic Byway and Scenic Railroad.
Expand the connecting trail network.
Market the entire Ohio & Erie Canalway and its journeys.
Assist the Canalway Center project partners to complete
construction.
Continue coordination with the National Park Service for
program involvement.
Develop Corridor-wide programs and mechanisms for their
continued operations.
As you can see, Mr. Chairman, we are at a very critical crossroads
in the development of the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway, as
well as the other eight National Heritage Areas and that is why we are
requesting reauthorization of these nationally significant projects.
Just as much of the past accomplishments of the nine National Heritage
Areas have been due to the participation and involvement of the
National Park Service, much of our future success depends on the
continued partnership and participation of the National Park Service.
As the Corridor Management Plan for the Ohio & Erie Canalway states,
``Alliances and regional coalitions are critical to the long-term
success of the National Heritage Corridor as well as to the
accomplishment of short-term projects.''
Over the past ten years, the other eight Heritage Areas have
experienced similar success in the promotion of resource conservation
and development.
From FY 1997 through FY 2006, the Rivers of Steel National Heritage
Area in western Pennsylvania has received $8,645,000 in National Park
Service funding through this authorization. This funding, which Rivers
of Steel is required to match, has raised more than $45,000,000 through
the National Heritage Area to match the National Park Service funding,
with an additional $35,000,000 being leveraged with the partner
organizations or local governments in the seven county National
Heritage Area. This investment has resulted in more than 200 heritage
development projects that are either ongoing or have been completed in
the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area.
Since 1996, the South Carolina National Heritage Corridor has
successfully completed over 100 large-scale projects, and is currently
working on over 40 more, while also providing programming and major
marketing efforts. The South Carolina National Heritage Corridor serves
as a catalyst and an incubator for heritage tourism development across
the state of South Carolina. The efforts within the Heritage Area led
to the development of numerous statewide initiatives, including the
South Carolina Farmer's Association and the South Carolina Artisans
Consortium; and placed an emphasis on protecting and celebrating the
diversity of cultures in South Carolina such as the influence of Native
Americans, African and Caribbean heritage.
The Augusta Canal National Heritage Area in Georgia preserves
promotes and celebrates the region's rich history, heritage, culture
and natural resources relating to the Augusta Canal for the benefit of
current and future generations. Since designation in 1996, some of the
major projects completed include, construction of a nine-mile multi-use
trail along the Augusta Canal, construction of an award-winning
Interpretive Center in an abandoned textile mill, and renovation of the
1875 gatehouse, locks, four historic buildings and the canal head
gates.
I know without reauthorization of the Ohio & Erie Canalway, we will
be unable to fulfill the commitments and obligations outlined in the
Corridor Management Plan, and it could undermine the successful public/
private partnership strategy at the local level. I trust that without
reauthorization, the other eight Heritage Areas contained within S.
1721, will not be able to fulfill their Management Plans and
responsibilities.
If our federal partners abandon the partnership and their
commitment to the Management Plans, the private, local and state
partners may take the same approach and withdraw their commitment and
support. Once this occurs, the public/private partnership is dissolved,
the foundation for the regional resource conservation strategy is
destroyed and the previous investment of private, local, state and
other partners will be at risk. Continued federal investment is
necessary to maintain the momentum and provide critical seed funding to
important components of the Management Plans.
All of the National Heritage Areas included in S. 1721 were
established with 10-year Management Plans to guide the work of the
National Heritage Areas for the next 10 years. This was not meant to be
a limitation on the life of the National Heritage Area, only a
limitation on the timeframe of the plan. At the end, or near the
conclusion of the Management Plan, the National Heritage Areas were
charged with the responsibility to chart out its next 10-year strategy.
National Heritage Areas were established as long-term conservation
tools to protect America's heritage in places where sole federal
government ownership, i.e., units of the National Park Service were not
feasible or practicable. National Heritage Areas need to be
reauthorized in order to fulfill their Management Plans. Selecting a
pre-determined termination, as it has been suggested after 10 years,
will cause more harm than good.
Reauthorization of the Ohio & Erie Canalway, and the other eight
National Heritage Areas, allows us to complete our Management Plans,
fulfill our commitments to the communities and develop the necessary
funding diversification and self-sustaining strategies. In essence,
reauthorization enables the National Heritage Areas identified in S.
1721 to move towards sustainability and a decreased dependence on the
National Park Service for long-term funding.
From 2012 to 2020, the Corridor Management Plan for the Ohio & Erie
Canalway recommends the development of funding diversification and
self-sustaining strategies to maintain the quality of the experience of
the Ohio & Erie Canalway. Although we are not scheduled to address this
issue until 2012, in 2006, we began an internal review of our
operations and initiated conversations with our local foundations,
corporations, governments and state agencies regarding funding
diversification and self-sustaining strategies and models. Building
upon the recently completed studies of the John H. Chafee Blackstone
River Valley National Heritage Corridor and the Delaware and Lehigh
Canal National Heritage Area, it is our goal to begin the
implementation of our funding diversification strategy within the next
six years. With the continued participation of the National Park
Service, we will develop a comprehensive funding diversification and
self-sustaining strategy that protects the investment of private,
local, state and federal resources, continues the promotion of resource
conservation, while stimulating community and economic development in
the region.
Mr. Chairman, now, more than ever, we need to maintain our
partnership with the National Park Service and renew our shared
commitment to the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway, and the eight
National Heritage Areas listed in S. 1721. National Heritage Areas
successfully promote and export the National Park Service ethic of
resource conservation without significant permanent investment. Through
the National Heritage Area designation, we are building permanent
community partnerships and developing funding diversification and
sustainability strategies for the conservation of nationally
significant resources. Most importantly, National Heritage Areas expand
the reach of the National Park Service and allows the Service to affect
the lives of ordinary citizens, in urban areas and townships, across
this country in extraordinary ways, without the burden and
responsibility of ownership and long-term maintenance by the National
Park Service.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I believe that National Heritage Areas
are an innovative approach to resource conservation and they represent
the future direction of the National Park Service in the 21st century.
That is why I strongly urge your support for the passage of S. 1721 so
we can continue our successful partnership for resource conservation
and the celebration of our nationally significant resources. Working
together, we are creating legacies for future generations.
I would like to express my thanks to you, Senator Thomas, for your
outstanding leadership and vision regarding National Heritage Areas.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony regarding S. 1721
before your Committee, and I am happy to answer any questions that you,
or other members of the Committee might have.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much.
Ms. Cutler.
STATEMENT OF CHARLENE PERKINS CUTLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO,
QUINEBAUG-SHETUCKET HERITAGE CORRIDOR, INC.
Ms. Cutler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
offer testimony on the amendment of the Quinebaug-Shetucket
River Valley National Heritage Corridor Act of 1994.
I am the executive director and CEO of Quinebaug-Shetucket
Heritage Area, Incorporated, which is a nonprofit, designated
management entity for the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley
National Heritage Corridor.
I ask that our document ``The Trail to 2015, a
Sustainability Plan'' can be entered in it's entirety into the
record of the subcommittee.* To summarize that document, I am
pleased to say that the Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage Corridor,
Incorporated has been very successful in its work to date in
fulfilling the intent of Public Law 103-449, the responsibility
given to us by the Congress, and the visions and goals of our
management plan. It is our intent to be self-sustaining and not
need Federal funding by the year 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The document has been retained subcommittee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our heritage corridor has been diligent, has completed a
management plan, an implementation and action plan, an
interpretative plan, a 10 year plan that extended the vision of
the management goals, and now a sustainability plan. And those
documents have been truly useful.
We have shown a consistent ability to maximize scarce
resources by developing and fostering partnerships with State
and Federal municipal governments and regional corporate and
private entities as well as our residents.
We've acted as an educator and facilitator to motivate
other organizations to take independent actions in line with
our mission.
The Quinebaug-Shetucket Corridor is one of the most
appropriate entities, we have taken action through specific
projects and programs to do critical work.
Our heritage corridor has received numerous State and
national awards recognizing the excellence of our work
including the 2005 Public Education Award from the American
Association for our Green Valley Institute.
We have consistently met and exceeded the requirements from
the Federal appropriation. The communicative ratio is $19 to
every Federal dollar, and I have a pie charts attached to the
back of my written testimonies so you can see that where it
divides up by type.
Direct grants to 191 local projects have funded work in
trail development, historic preservation, economic development,
heritage tourism infrastructure, natural resource conservation
and community planning. The sustainability plan offers many
examples of those projects.
Hundreds of volunteers have given more than 10,000 hours of
service last year alone to our projects and programs. And 7,045
participants have benefitted from our fiscal year 2005
education programs.
According to our fiscal year 2005 audit, 89% of the
heritage corridors expenditures regardless of source go
directly into programming.
Our communities and residents increasingly look to our
heritage corridor as a source for educational assistance and an
advocate for resource conservation. We have developed
credibility at local, regional, state and Federal levels and we
need to continue the work to fulfill the mission to be present
for several decades. That is why we adopted the sustainability
plan this January and why we are committed to achieving its
goals.
There are two key elements to realize those goals. We must
maintain credible programming and we must have the faith in our
work that the Federal investment demonstrates to attract
significant, long-term non-Federal resources. Therefore, we
respectively request that the Quinebaug-Shetucket Area National
Heritage Corridor Act of 1994 be amended to extend the period
of authorization from 2009 to 2015 and to extend the total
appropriation from $10 million to $16 million to coincide with
our time table for being self-sustaining.
We would also request that we retain designation as a
national heritage corridor after authorization has ceased since
our region will be known as significant national resources. I
thank Senators Dodd, Kerry, Kennedy and Lieberman for their
support of our work in this amendment, and I am pleased to
answer any questions the subcommittee may have. This concludes
my prepared testimony.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Cutler follows:]
Prepared Statement of Charlene Perkins Cutler, Executive Director and
CEO, Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage Corridor, Inc.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to offer testimony on S. 574, to amend the Quinebaug and
Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Act of 1994. I am
the executive director and CEO of Quinebaug-Shetucket Heritage
Corridor, Inc., the grassroots nonprofit designated as management
entity for the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage
Corridor.
I ask that our document, The Trail to 2015, a Sustainability Plan,
be entered in its entirety into the record of this subcommittee.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The document has been retained in subcommittee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To summarize that document, I am pleased to say that Quinebaug-
Shetucket Heritage Corridor Inc. has been very successful in its work
to date in fulfilling the intent of Public Law 103-449, the
responsibility given to us by the Congress, and the visions and goals
of our Management Plan. It is our intent to be self-sustaining and not
need federal funding by the year 2015.
Our Heritage Corridor has been diligent and has completed a
Management Plan, an Implementation and Action Plan, an
Interpretive Plan, a Ten-Year Plan that extended the vision of
the original management goals, and now a Sustainability Plan.
Those guiding documents were completed in a timely and
efficient manner, and have been truly useful documents.
We have shown a consistent ability to maximize scarce
resources by developing and fostering partnerships with
federal, state and municipal governments, and regional
corporate and private entities. We have acted as an educator
and facilitator to motivate other organizations to take
independent actions in line with our mission. When the Heritage
Corridor was the only or most appropriate entity, we have taken
action through specific projects or programs to do critical
work.
Our Heritage Corridor has received numerous state and
national awards recognizing the excellence of our work,
including the 2005 Public Education Award from the American
Planning Association for our Green Valley Institute.
We have consistently met and exceeded the required match on
our federal appropriation. The third page of my written
testimony includes an analysis of our funding and non-federal
leverage since 1994. The cumulative ratio is $19 to each
federal dollar.
Direct grants to 191 local projects have funded work in
trail development, historic preservation, economic development,
heritage tourism infrastructure, natural resource conservation
and community planning. The Sustainability Plan offers many
examples of these projects.
Hundreds of volunteers have given more than ten thousand
hours of service last year to our mission-related projects and
programs, and 7,045 participants have benefited from our FY05
education programs.
According to our FY05 audit, 89% of the Heritage Corridor's
expenditures, regardless of source, go directly into
programming.
Our communities and residents increasingly look to our Heritage
Corridor as a source for guidance and assistance, and as an advocate
for resource conservation. We have developed credibility at the local,
regional, state and federal levels. The need to continue the work to
fulfill the mission will be present for several decades. That is why we
adopted the Sustainability Plan this January and why we are committed
to achieving its goals.
There are two key elements to meeting those goals:
In order to maintain credible programming that will attract
significant, long-term, non-federal resources, it is critical
to retain the federal investment over the next ten years.
Reauthorization to 2015 would leverage significant,
multiyear, non-federal commitments that are essential to our
self-sustainability.
Therefore, we respectfully request that the Quinebaug and Shetucket
Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Reauthorization Act of 1994 be
amended to extend the period of authorization from 2009 to 2015, and to
extend the total appropriation from $10 million to $16 million, to
coincide with our timetable to be self-sustaining by the year 2015. I
thank Senators Dodd, Kennedy, Kerry and Lieberman for their support of
our work and this amendment.
I am pleased to answer any questions the Subcommittee may have.
This concludes my prepared testimony.
Senator Thomas. Thank you very much. Thanks to all of you
for being here. It's a great job and I know that it takes a
great deal of work on the local level to do these things, and
it's very much that way. I have just one or two quick
questions, and if you can give us a quick answer, then we'll be
able to wind up here pretty soon.
Mr. Sullivan, when do you expect the Blackstone River
Heritage Area to be self-sustaining?
Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that we would
be able to maintain the 22-1 ratio, and I would say by June 6
we could have come close to meeting that challenge.
Senator Thomas. I see. Okay. Good. Mr. Rice, your heritage
area does not lose its authorization until 2012. Why are you
seeking to go to 2027 with 6 years remaining?
Mr. Rice. Mr. Chairman, there's actually two caps in our
legislation there's a funding cap of up to only a million
dollars for a total cap of $10 million, and then there's the
amount of years, I believe 15 years. We are coming up against
our refunding cap. That's why we're seeking reauthorization at
this time so we can continue to fulfill the obligations and
responsibilities outlined in our management plan.
Senator Thomas. I see. Okay.
Ms. Cutler, yours will be self-sustaining then by 2015, is
that your plan?
Ms. Cutler. Correct.
Senator Thomas. Did you intend to be self-sustaining as you
organized your plan in the first place?
Ms. Cutler. The first 5 years of our appropriation was
about $300,000 a year in an area of 1,100 square miles. That
didn't make a lot of impact so it was only within the past 5
years that we've been able to make some significant headway and
realized what our capabilities would be. And so it's been our
intention over the past couple of years to develop this plan
because we feel that if we can't sustain that work over the
long term. This is off-and-on, though.
Senator Thomas. Okay, well, I appreciate it. I want you to
understand, I'm not trying to make a huge issue out of this
funding thing, but I do think that heritage areas are pretty
much oriented to regions and to local areas and they're very
helpful to the local people, although they do retain side
things as well.
You know, we have 390 park systems now and we have a
funding problem on that, as you well know, you've read a lot
about it, and so we have to try to figure out the best way
overall to handle this financial situation and so on. We
certainly want to continue to see these things happen and find
the best way to do that.
Ms. Wyatt, section 5 of the bill as I understand it,
authorizes the use of Federal funds for land acquisition and
section 5(e), states that Federal funds may not be used for
acquisition of real estate. I don't understand that.
Ms. Wyatt. Typo.
Senator Thomas. Typo? Gotcha.
Ms. Wyatt. That was just a typo, we have no intentions of
using the funds under this Federal Act for the purchase of real
property.
Senator Thomas. I see.
Ms. Wyatt. Other funds from other donations could be used
by the non-profit.
Senator Thomas. Sure. I understand.
Ms. Wyatt. But we will certainly make that change.
Senator Thomas. Yeah, okay. Well, again, let me say how
important I think it is to continue to do these things.
Because, you know, the park generally, why the whole park is a
ball park and it's all public land, and it's maintained and so
on, where here you have private lands within your operations,
and Federal and local lands, and all this other, they are
different, but they're very important. And it's very important
of you to be able to work at the local level to create these
kinds of things. They are great. I was just in Virginia a
couple of weeks ago, and all the things that happened in
Jamestown and Yorktown and also all the park facilities that
are already there. But it's great, you know, it's historic and
we're very proud of Yellowstone and Cavetown and so on in
Wyoming, so I'm glad we're working together to do these things
and we just got a buzz to go vote, I noticed and thank you very
much for being here. We'll certainly work with the committee in
trying to get maybe some of the changes that the Department
would like to have and then see if we can get you in and do
other things. So thank you very much. If there are any
questions from other members, why, I will ask you to answer
them by mail.
Thank you.
Senator Thomas. The committee's is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:42 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Responses of Cate Magennis Wyatt to Questions From Senator Thomas
Question 1. (S. 2645, Journey Through Hallowed Ground NHA
Designation): Have any private property owners objected to this
designation as a National Heritage Area?
Answer. No individual property owners have approached the
Partnership with concerns or objections about how they feel the
proposed bill might affect their land specifically. However,
representatives of a few organizations representing private property
rights viewpoints and opposed to the national heritage area concept,
generally, have contacted the Partnership to voice opposition.
Where the Partnership has been able to engage in dialogue with
these groups, and language has been proposed by them to improve the
bill and strengthen private property rights protections, we have
readily agreed and immediately incorporated suggested language--for
example the language in Section 5(a)(2)(D) clearly stating that ``no
lands or interests in lands may be acquired by condemnation.'' Other
entities have been unwilling to engage in dialogue, and have limited
themselves resort to public protest tactics, making it hard to discern
from them improvements to the bill that would address concerns.
We can tell you, however, that hundreds of private property owners
resident in the area have voiced resounding support for the National
Heritage Area and strongly desire a more coordinated regional approach
to honoring the national importance of the history of the region for
residents and visitors.
Question 2. (S. 2645, Journey Through Hallowed Ground NHA
Designation): Section 5(a) of the bill authorizes the use of Federal
funds for land acquisition and Section 5(e) states that Federal funds
may not be used for acquisition of real property or interest in real
property.
a. Do you intend to use Federal funds to acquire any land for the
Journey Through Hallowed Ground Heritage Area?
b. Should we amend the bill to correct the conflicting statements
about use of Federal funds for real property/land acquisition?
Answer. One of the intended purposes of Section 5(a) was to
recognize that the management entity, as a Virginia corporation like
any other corporation, has the authority generally to accept funds from
a variety of sources to assist with operational and other costs.
However, it was also the intent of the legislation, as stated in
Section 5(e), to clearly prohibit the Partnership from using federal
funds provided under the Act to acquire real property or any interest
in real property. We agree that the language in Section 5(a)(2)(D)
conflicts with that in Section 5(e) and thus the Partnership would
support an amendment to strike Section 5(a)(2)(D) and retain Section
5(e) in its entirety.
Question 3. (S. 2645, Journey Through Hallowed Ground NHA
Designation): What do you see as the best use of Federal funds that are
made available to National Heritage Areas?
Answer. The Partnership believes that the federal funds made
available to National Heritage Areas are best utilized to develop and
implement heritage area management plans that represent the very finest
that can be achieved by public-private collaboration and coordination
toward the united goal of moving ahead as a society while respecting
our past.
The Partnership understands the economics of prospering through
preservation and is working currently on creating strategic alliances
with the private sector and with educational foundations to sustain the
critical work of educational programming, to create profit centers in
publishing, study tours, and audio touring tapes, among other
initiatives that will enhance such collaboration.
The federal funding that the Partnership is provided as the
management entity will further these types of efforts, and allow the
Partnership to fulfill its goal of setting an example of the kind of
exciting and inspiring things that can happen when government,
business, and citizenry work together at celebrating, commemorating,
conserving and promoting the history and resources in an area in a
cost-effective manner that leverages funding from a variety of sources.
Question 4. (S. 2645, Journey Through Hallowed Ground NHA
Designation): What do you see as the Federal government's role in
National Heritage Areas?
Answer. Only the federal government, and specifically only an Act
of Congress, can provide the national ``seal of approval'' for an area
as a designated National Heritage Area. This national designation is
honorific. It honors regions which not only hold significant heritage,
but confers this designation because the citizens, businesses, elected
bodies and non-profit organizations within the region have taken
decided steps to ensure this heritage will be available to generations
to come. In this respect, for over 10 years, the Journey Through
Hallowed Ground Partnership has worked not only to increase awareness,
but has worked collaboratively with stakeholders to significantly
celebrate, commemorate, conserve and promote our heritage.
As the Partnership has seen many times ``if you Honor people--they
become Honorably.'' Specifically, we have witnessed, and have research
to support, the tangible and intangible benefits which result from
federal honorific designations. The recognition serves to bolster a
sense of pride and place. It provides a catalyst to voluntary community
and individual efforts to celebrate, commemorate, conserve, promote and
protect resources integral to our American heritage.
In short, the federal role is recognition of the importance of an
area to the Nation's story. Also, importantly, the designation permits
the increased partnership of the management entity with the
professionals within National Park Service who lend their decades of
expertise to these regions as they work closely and collaboratively to
promote historic, cultural, recreational and other resources for
visitors and residents. National Park Service involvement helps ensure
the ultimate success of the heritage area effort.
Question 5. (S. 2645, Journey Through Hallowed Ground NHA
Designation): Is your heritage area prepared to become self-sustaining
and not require Federal funds like Ms. Cutler has outlined for her
heritage area in Connecticut? If so, by what date do you expect to be
self-sustaining?
Answer. The JTHG Partnership has been self-sustaining for over ten
(10) years, with the significant support of the private sector, and has
created a business plan to ensure it has been self sustaining each of
those ten years. This private sector support will only increase with
the passage of this legislation, with the federal support authorized
under the legislation being utilized to broaden the activities of the
Partnership to serve as a management entity in the manner outlined in
the legislation. We have every expectation of being fully self-
sustaining as a management entity for the heritage area within the 15
year authorization period for funding set forth in the legislation.
______
Responses of Ann Marie Velasquez to Questions From Senator Thomas
Question 1. (S. 2037, Sangre de Cristo NHA Designation):
Approximately how many people reside within the boundaries of the
Sangre de Cristo Heritage Area?
Answer. According to the 2003 Population Estimate from the San Luis
Valley statistical profile, 27,731 people reside within the boundaries
of the proposed National Heritage Area. U.S. Census Bureau actual
figures for the year 2000 were stated as 27,029. This area encompasses
all of the counties of Conejos, Costilla and Alamosa.
Question 2. (S. 2037, Sangre de Cristo NHA Designation): Have any
residents objected to the designation as a National Heritage Area?
Answer. We have not encountered anyone objecting to this
designation. We have held public meetings to inform residents of the
efforts and what the designation could mean for the area. After
speaking with several people in other currently designated National
Heritage Areas, and with the National Park Service personnel at the
beginning of this process, we learned that most objections in the west
were concerned with private property rights. We have addressed this
issue whenever possible and specifically asked to have a clause
concerning private property rights included in the bill. We understand
that this clause has become a standard clause that is now incorporated
into a bill to designate a National Heritage Area.
Question 3. (S. 2037, Sangre de Cristo NHA Designation): If your
area is approved as a National Heritage Area, how long do you think it
will take for you to be self-sustaining without a need for Federal
funding?
Answer. During the planning process for the feasibility study we
reviewed other currently designated National Heritage Areas. Many areas
are able to leverage the federal funding received through the U.S.
Congress by up to 22 to 1. This figure is even surpassed in some areas.
With this type of leveraging, self-sustainability should be attainable
within the authorized period. We intend to create a business plan along
with the Management Plan that is required within the first 3 years of
authorization. This should help to focus on projects that will lay a
solid foundation for sustainability and study how the SDCNHA can
operate without federal assistance. Business enterprises that directly
relate to our Not for Profit status could be one avenue of longevity,
as an example. One of our partners is Adams State College, a local
higher education facility. We intend to work with the School of
Business to pursue a plan for sustainability. The ingenuity that it
took to produce the feasibility study with $5,000.00, called
``superior'' by NPS Deputy Director Donald Murphy, exists in this
region of the country. We view these federal funds as a stimulus, not a
crutch. We are confident that self sustainability is within reach
during the original authorization period of 10 to 15 years.
______
Responses of Charlene Cutler to Questions From Senator Thomas
Question 1. (S. 574, Quinebaug and Shetucket NHA Reauthorization):
Ms. Cutler, you stated that your heritage area will be self-sustaining
without any need for Federal funds in 2015. Have you always intended to
become self-sustaining or is this a new approach to doing business?
Answer. Senator Thomas, early on our Heritage Corridor anticipated
becoming self-sufficient, and our planning documents bear that out. We
were one of the earlier NHAs designated and received a smaller
appropriation for the first five years ($200,000/year). In a region of
nearly 1,100 square miles, it is understandable that under that level
of funding our impacts were small. In the past five years we have
accomplished significant work with the increased federal investment and
been able to coalesce many partners and, most importantly, residents
around our joint mission.
In 2000, we wrote Vision 2010: A Ten-Year Plan, that expanded on
the vision of our original management plan. The overall goal of that
plan was ``to accomplish the mission of our National Heritage Corridor
by perceiving and reflecting the priorities of residents and
translating these into programs and services for the next ten years and
beyond.'' That plan also foresaw the need to think past federal funding
and stated that if the overall goal was to carry the work forward, an
endowment or some other type of permanent fund would need to be
established to generate income for the work.
In preparation for that eventuality, our organization conducted a
Fundraising Feasibility Study in 2002. That study recognized that there
was no example of a National Heritage Corridor developing a permanent
fund, and therefore, we were in uncharted waters. The document also
recognized the rural nature of our region. It laid out a conservative
and realistic plan to developing sustaining resources. Extrapolating
out to our $10 million goal, we plan to have the fund capitalized in
2015.
Our experience has also shown us that there is a required critical
mass of successful programming that must be attained in order to
attract significant, non-federal resources. We feel that we have
reached that threshold and will be able to begin a capital campaign to
develop a permanent fund. However, in our National Heritage Corridor,
that is very rural and has a relatively low population, we also know
that we need the time to 2015 to be successful in accumulating the
funds.
In 2004, we began working on Trail to 2015, A Sustainability Plan.
The permanent fund is one leg of our three-legged stool plan; the other
two are for-profit activities and foundation support.
With private funds, we have just hired a well-respected and very
successful development professional to shepherd the organization
through the next ten years to the point of self-sustainability. The
only element left to be in place is continued authorization through
2015 to maintain credible programming until other resources take over.
We are committed to becoming self-sustaining and this is not a new idea
for us.
Question 2. (S. 574, Quinebaug and Shetucket NHA Reauthorization):
Do you think all National Heritage Areas should become self-sustaining
and free of Federal funding at some point?
Answer. Every NHA is distinctive, although they all have
commonality in resource protection, resource interpretation and
economic development. If each NHA is truly grassroots in origin, that
is, its focus is driven internally as opposed to externally, then there
must be some point at which the stewards take complete ownership for
the fulfillment of the mission. I think self-sustainability is
inevitable if the work is to carried forward to the next group of
stewards--our children and grandchildren.
Question 3. (S. 574, Quinebaug and Shetucket NHA Reauthorization):
What do you see as the Federal government's role in National Heritage
Areas?
Answer. I think the Federal government best serves National
Heritage Areas by first recognizing regions of significant national
resources, designating them as such, and providing seed money for the
work the residents of that area determines is important. National
Heritage Areas are impressive in their ability to put responsive
programming in place very quickly. That ability is what attracts non-
federal match to the process.
Many layers of federal requirements would seriously impede that
process and put a damper on the ability of a NHA to become self-
sustaining. For example, if instead of appropriations funding was
allocated as grants for particular projects, the accomplishments of
heritage areas would be significantly less, and the time to put
essential programs on the ground would become so slow that the programs
would lose credibility with residents.
Question 4. (S. 574, Quinebaug and Shetucket NHA Reauthorization):
What do you see as the best use of Federal funds that are made
available to National Heritage Areas?
Answer. The best use of Federal funds is to support necessary
planning documents and invest in programming until a critical mass is
reached that measures impacts, identifies work no other entity can do,
and points the way to self-sustainability.
______
Responses of Dan Rice to Questions From Senator Thomas
Question 1. (S. 1721, Omnibus Heritage Area Extensions): Has the
National Heritage Area that you manage had any adverse impact on
private property with the boundaries of the heritage area?
Answer. No. The Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway has not had
any adverse impact on private property within the boundaries of the
Heritage Area.
Question 2. (S. 1721, Omnibus Heritage Area Extensions): Mr. Rice,
the House has added private property rights language to every National
Heritage Area bill they have passed. Do you have any objection to the
language the House is using? If so, what are your specific objections
and how would you amend the language if given an opportunity to do so?
Answer. Yes, I object to the private property rights language being
inserted into the National Heritage Area legislation by the House
Resources Committee. It is particularly confusing since the General
Accounting Office investigated the relationship between private
property rights and National Heritage Areas, and they were not able to
document any examples or evidence of National Heritage Areas having an
adverse impact on private property within the boundaries of Heritage
Areas. The General Accounting Office report conclusively stated that
National Heritage Areas do not have an adverse impact on private
property rights.
For over 45 years, the citizens of northeast Ohio have worked in a
collaborative manner to conserve, interpret and develop the natural,
historical and recreational resources along the Ohio & Erie Canal,
without a single issue of adverse impact on private property rights.
The proposed language is unnecessary since we do not, and cannot
preserve, conserve or promote private property without the consent of
the private property owner. The success of our project is dependent on
the cooperation and participation of our partners. Any other approach
is unacceptable and inconsistent with our mission.
Based on our 45-year history and experience, I would suggest that
the proposed private property rights language is not necessary and does
not need to be included in our Reauthorization Bill, S. 1721.
Question 3. (S. 1721, Omnibus Heritage Area Extensions): S. 1721
reauthorizes 9 National Heritage Areas including the one that you
manage.
a. Your heritage area, the Ohio and Erie Canalway, does not lose
its authorization for Federal funding until 2012. Why are you seeking
reauthorization to 2027 if you have another 6 years remaining?
Answer. In our original authorizing legislation, the Omnibus Parks
and Public Lands Management Act of 1996, there were two clauses
established for planning purposes:
``The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any
assistance under this title after September 30, 2012.''
``There is authorized to be appropriated under this title not
more than $1,000,000 for any fiscal year. Not more than a total
of $10,000,000 may be appropriated for the corridor under this
title.''
Since our authorization in 1996, we have received approximately
$8,500,000 of federal funds towards our $10,000,000 authorization. At
our present rate of federal appropriations, we will reach our funding
authorization before 2012 and before we fulfill the responsibilities
outlined in our Management Plan.
By seeking reauthorization now, we will maintain the momentum of
leveraging over $12 of private, local and state resources for every $1
of federal investment, complete the responsibilities and projects
outlined in the Management Plan and fulfill our commitment to the local
communities.
Question 3b. Is your heritage area prepared to become self-
sustaining and not require Federal funds like Ms. Cutler has outlined
for her heritage area in Connecticut? If so, by what date do you expect
to be self-sustaining?
Answer. According to our Management Plan, approved by the Secretary
of the Interior, there are three phases to our plan, 2000-2006:
Establishing the Identity, 2006-2011: Develop key Linkages and
Resources and 2012-2020: Funding Diversification and Self-sustaining
strategies. As I mentioned in my testimony, we are ahead of our
schedule and we are already examining what we need to accomplish by
2020 and what partnerships, collaborations and resources we need to
meet our objectives outlined in the Management Plan. Currently, we are
developing a 3-year funding diversification and cultivation strategy
for implementation in 2008, with the expectation that by 2012, we will
be on target according to our Management Plan.
During the development of the funding diversification and
cultivation strategy, we will examine the role of all of our public/
private partners, including our federal, state, local and private
partners, to determine if there is a continued need for continued
participation, as outlined in Senator Thomas's National Heritage Area
program legislation (S. 243). As part of the family of the National
Park Service, there is a level of expectation and service that visitors
to Heritage Areas have, due to the association with the National Park
Service. When folks see the National Park Service logo attached to
National Heritage Area materials, programs and projects, there is an
immediate recognition that this is one of America's special places and
that visitors will have a quality experience. One of the ways to ensure
quality and service of the programs and projects of National Heritage
Areas is to maintain the partnership with the National Park Service.
Question 4. (S. 1721, Omnibus Heritage Area Extensions): Should
National Heritage Areas be made units of the national park system?
Yes. Despite being in direct conflict with Senator Thomas's
National Heritage Area program legislation, S. 243, as well as the
National Park Service Advisory Committee Report on Heritage Areas, I
believe it is time to re-examine this issue. Even though the National
Park Service Advisory Committee Report on Heritage Areas states, ``the
National Park Service must commit to Heritage Areas for the long term
and welcome Heritage Areas into the system of the National Park
Service,'' the recent testimony by the National Park Service on our
Reauthorization bill, S. 1721 contradicts that statement. It is
apparent from their testimony that the National Park Service is not
committed to National Heritage Areas, nor have they welcomed National
Heritage Areas into the system of the National Park Service.
I have reached the conclusion that the only way for the National
Park Service to fully accept, embrace and understand National Heritage
Areas, may be to make them units of the National Park System. Our
situation is similar to the National Long Distance Trails, National
Seashores and National Recreation Areas, who received similar treatment
before becoming part of the National Park System. Rather than being
treated as the ``red-headed step child,'' National Heritage Areas can
be recognized for their contributions to resource conservation,
stewardship cultivation and recreational opportunities. Additionally,
some of the successes of National Heritage Areas, including public-
private partnerships and leveraging significant amounts of private,
local and state funding, can be applied to units of the National Park
Service. Congress has thoroughly examined the benefits and successes of
National Heritage Areas and their entrepreneurial ways of conserving
nationally significant resources. As the National Park Service looks to
fulfill its mission in the 21st century, they can utilize the National
Heritage Areas principles of leveraging private, local and state
resources, cultivating public-private partnerships and developing
entrepreneurial business practices to make the current system of
National Park Service units more efficient and cost-effective. Finally,
as units of the National Park Service, National Heritage Areas will
demonstrate the significant costs savings of National Heritage Areas,
compared to traditional National Park Service units. Rather than the
traditional funding of between $5,000,000 and 8,000,000 annually to
each unit of the National Park Service, National Heritage Areas fulfill
the mission of the Service at a fraction of the cost.
Based on these reasons, I believe it may be time to re-examine the
issue of including National Heritage Areas as units of the National
Park Service.
______
Responses of Governor Donald Carcieri to Questions From Senator Thomas
Question 1. (S. 1387, Blackstone River NHA Reauthorization): How
many acres of state, Federal, and private land are there within the
boundaries of the Blackstone River National Heritage Area?
Answer. There are 400,000 acres of land within the boundaries of
the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor. Of this total,
approximately 26,000 acres are state-owned and 1,365 acres are
Federally-owned. The rest is primarily in private ownership.
Question 2. (S. 1387, Blackstone River NHA Reauthorization): Have
any private land owners within the boundaries of the Blackstone River
National Heritage Area objected to being included in the area?
Answer. The Corridor Commission is not aware of any private land
owners who have objected to being included in the area. On the
contrary, several towns have expressed an interest in being included
within the Corridor's boundaries, based upon local citizen initiatives.
The Corridor has no authority to own or control land. Rather, it works
in partnership. The Corridor Commission developed a policy early on to
avoid taking positions on land use disputes at the local level, acting
instead as a mediator or ``convenor'' on issues related to the
Corridor's mission of resource protection. The Corridor has hosted
public meetings on many occasions, inviting all factions and all levels
of involvement, including Federal, state, and local governments,
business entities, organizations, and local citizens. The purpose of
these meetings has been to provide a neutral space for all parties to
state their case, rather than to decide the outcome of a particular
issue. This policy helped cement the Commission's reputation for
promoting ``the big picture'' and a true spirit of cooperation and
collaboration.
Question 3. (S. 1387, Blackstone River NHA Reauthorization):
National Heritage Areas are established to form collaborative
partnerships for identifying and managing areas with unique natural,
cultural, and recreational resources. How much of the budget for the
Blackstone River National Heritage Area is derived from Federal, state,
and non-government sources?
Answer. The BLAC operating budget ($800,000 in FY 2006 before
recissions) is matched by the States of Massachusetts and Rhode Island
at least one-to-one. This requirement helps assure that each state is
engaged in activities consistent with the ten-year work plan for the
Corridor submitted to Congress. BLAC also has also received development
funds in varying amounts throughout its 18 year term. BLAC has
documented leveraging of 22 to 1 on those funds. A detailed breakdown
of Federal appropriations and the leverage these funds have created in
the Corridor was included in the Blackstone Sustainability Study,
``Reflecting on the Past, Looking to the Future'', which was published
early this year, and is excerpted below:
the cost-effectiveness of the corridor's management structure
It is also important to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the
management structure. At the Commission's request, the NPS serves as
staff and coordinates and implements the management plan, working
primarily through partnerships to protect the valley's nationally
important resources. The original assumption of the designation was
that the heritage corridor management framework would be a less costly
alternative to a traditional national park designation. While it may be
difficult to compare the operations of a national heritage corridor and
national park, it nonetheless demonstrates different funding scenarios
and provides insights to the added value the NPS achieves through
partnership management strategies.
Below, we compare two national parks with the Blackstone National
Heritage Corridor in terms of annual operating budget and staffing. The
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park is a linear canalway
traversing several states, and Lowell National Historical Park is an
urban partnership park focused on industrial heritage.
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park follows the
route of the Potomac River for 184 miles from Washington, D.C., to
Cumberland, Maryland, and encompasses 20,000 acres. The park manages a
complex historic and natural resources program with an annual operating
budget of $8.4 million and 122 full-time employees.
Lowell National Historical Park encompasses 141 acres within the
City of Lowell, Massachusetts, and is responsible for preserving and
interpreting numerous historic and cultural resources and celebrating
the beginnings of America's industrial heritage. Lowell has an annual
operating budget of $8.5 million and 112 full-time employees.
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor encompasses an
entire watershed of 400,000 acres and includes 24 cities and towns. It
has a very broad mandate for the preservation, redevelopment, and
interpretation of the cultural landscape. Blackstone has a current
annual operating budget of approximately $1 million and 14 full-time
employees.
Historic Preservation: The Commission has invested approximately
$3,560,000 with an estimated return on this investment that exceeds
$132,705,000. These projects include such activities as historic
preservation of national register eligible properties, cultural
landscape assessments, collection management and curation of historic
objects, archaeological studies, and community preservation plans.
Interpretation, Education and Tourism Development: The Commission
has invested approximately $9,966,000 in historical research,
interpretive and cultural programs, and educational programs, with an
estimated return on this investment that exceeds $17,700,000. These
projects include such activities as NPS-ranger guided tours and
lectures, visitor center and museum development, exhibit design and
fabrication, interpretive master plans for heritage sites and
communities, curriculum development, support for cultural arts
education and programming, development of interpretive brochures and
websites, tourism marketing and promotion, a unified identity system,
and public information program.
Community Planning and Economic Development: The Commission has
invested approximately $4,667,000 to assist communities in developing
strategies and plans that help to support Corridor heritage
preservation and development goals. It is difficult to put a definitive
dollar value on much of the leverage to this investment. An estimated
$292,371,000 in leverage contributed toward community revitalization
projects, regional visions, transportation improvements, master
planning for historic mill villages, land preservation, regional
economic development plans, revitalization of historic industrial
properties, and the redevelopment of historic mills.
River Recovery and Recreation: The Commission has invested
approximately $4,684,000, which has leveraged $79,121,000. These
activities include developing parks, constructing the Blackstone River
Bikeway, developing river landings and public access sites for boating
and fishing, constructing trails, developing plans for the restoration
of migratory fish, wetland and streambank restoration projects,
upgrades to wastewater treatment plants, watershed-wide education
programs, and water quality monitoring and protection programs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Partnership
Commission leverage investment leverage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historic Preservation............... $3,559,810 $132,704,834
Interpretation, Education and $9,965,629 $17,713,372
Tourism............................
Community Planning and Economic $4,666,497 $292,370,886
Development........................
River Recovery and Recreation....... $44,684,340 $79,120,938
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development funds are the most effective way we engage with our
partners. More recently, BLAC has been able to require greater levels
of collaboration and matching funds from our partners. For example; the
Northern Gateway Visitor Center in Worcester, MA--a project which will
anchor the northern end of the Corridor--was developed as a result of a
feasibility and engineering study partially funded by the Corridor
Commission. That contribution, along with funding set aside for exhibit
development, consists of about $700,000 in funding from the Corridor.
This contribution leveraged a commitment of $6.4 million in federal
transportation funds, $1.6 million in state matching funds, and $2
million from the City of Worcester. In addition, the Visitor Center's
prime tenant and operating entity, the Worcester Historical Museum,
expects to raise between $5 million and $7 million to develop a world-
class museum facility in the Visitor Center. It is unlikely that this
complex project would have succeeded without the upfront ``seed'' money
provided by the Corridor Commission.
Question 4. (S. 1387, Blackstone River NHA Reauthorization): Dr.
Sullivan, we have just heard the director of a heritage area in
Connecticut state that she plans to be self-sustaining and free of
Federal funding by the year 2015. When do you expect the Blackstone
River National Heritage Area to be a self-sustaining entity with no
requirement for Federal funds?
Answer. The question of becoming self-sustaining is one that post-
dates the designation of the Corridor in 1986. BLAC was only the second
National Heritage Corridor designated. No heritage area program or set
of guidelines existed at that time. Certainly the Commissioners had no
expectation of becoming self-sustaining after five years when Congress
first reauthorized the Commission, or even after ten years, when
Congress extended the Commission's authorization in 1996. Early on,
Commission reviews suggested that it would take at least 20 years to
make the Corridor's legislative mission and vision sustainable without
Federal funding through the National Park Service. Even that estimate
failed to fully reflect the scale of the task faced by the Commission.
While the newer heritage areas can take advantage of a well-
established template, BLAC spent much of its early years creating that
template. The first Management Plan, begun from scratch, took 18 months
to be completed and approved. Newer areas can complete these tasks in
much less time because of policies and procedures that were pioneered
and shared by BLAC. The Sustainability Study undertaken by the BLAC was
precedent setting. BLAC was the first area to conceive of such an open
``audit'' of their practices and procedures and to invite the public to
help critique the effectiveness of the Heritage Corridor and say how
they would like to see the Commission operate in the future. The
Conservation Study Institute was engaged because of its talent and
ability to act as a third party reviewer.
Each Heritage Area must have a management entity appropriate to the
landscape and people within its borders. For BLAC, that has been a
Federal commission because of the bi-state nature of its operations.
BLAC has had a close alliance with the National Park Service, and its
citizens sent a resounding note of confidence in this management entity
and NPS partnership. BLAC has requested a Special Resource Study be
conducted to help determine the Corridor's future relationship with the
NPS, and NPS has endorsed this position to your Committee. BLAC intends
to use its next reauthorization period to study and recommend future
management options for the Corridor. Because 5 communities, and most
importantly the City of Worcester, the second largest city in New
England, have only participated in the Heritage Corridor for 10 years,
and the northern leg of the Corridor is, therefore, not completed, the
Commission believes that 10 years, rather than 5 years, would be more
appropriate to the job left to complete. River restoration and the
completion of the northern section of the Blackstone Bikeway that will
link the entire Heritage Corridor and join with the East Coast Greenway
require the leadership and convening abilities of the Blackstone
Corridor Commission.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Adams State College,
Alamosa, CO, June 16, 2006.
To Whom It May Concern:
On behall of Adams State College, I am pleased to lend our support
to the efforts of the Sangre de Cristo National Historical Area
Committee. We wholeheartedly endorse congressional designation of the
tri-county area of Conejo Costilla, and Alamosa counties as a national
historic area. This designation will greatly enhance the historical,
recreation, and economic situations of this area.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 719-
587-7341.
Sincerely,
David P. Svaldi,
President.
______
City of Alamosa,
Alamosa, CO, June 16, 2006.
To Whom It May Concern:
On behalf of the City of Alamosa, please accept this as support for
the efforts toward Sangre de Cristo National Historic Designation Area
of Alamosa, Conejos and Costilla Counties.
The designation of this area will enhance tourism, heritage,
recreation, and economic development of the entire San Luis Valley.
Please give this request your favorable consideration.
Sincerely,
Farris J. Bervig,
Mayor of the City of Alamosa.
______
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
Boston, MA, June 21, 2006.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Parks, Historic Preservation and Recreation,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Thomas: I am writing to express my support for Senate
Bill 1387, relative to the reauthorization of the John H. Chafee
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor and Commission.
As you know, the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor
serves the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of Rhode Island.
The work of the Commission has had substantial, positive economic and
environmental impacts on our states, and has helped to further
interstate cooperation on a number of fronts.
The Commission's efforts have demonstrably improved water quality,
opening up new opportunities for business, tourism and outdoor
recreation. Notably, the numbers of fish and wild animals have
increased, and Great Blue Herons and Bald Eagles have returned to the
river valley. Much of this progress has been the direct result of the
Commission's involvement and dedicated work. Passage of SB 1387 would
affirm the federal government's commitment to this tremendously
successful partnership.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I would urge your
favorable consideration of this important piece of legislation.
Sincerely,
Mitt Romney,
Governor.
______
Congress of the United States,
Washington, DC, June 22, 2006.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
Ranking Member, Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National
Parks, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thomas and Ranking Member Akaka: We are writing to
commend the Subcommittee for scheduling a hearing on S. 1387, the John
H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor
Reauthorization Act of 2005, and we respectfully urge you to report
this legislation favorably.
The Blackstone River Valley Heritage Corridor was established in
1986 in recognition of the national importance of the region as the
birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution. Redesignated in 1999
as the John. H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage
Corridor, the Corridor has become a national model of how the National
Park Service, without federal ownership and regulations, can work
cooperatively with local communities and a multi-agency partnership to
create a seamless system of parks, preserved historic sites, and open
spaces that enhance the protection and understanding of America's
heritage. The Corridor is managed by a bi-state, 19 member federal
Commission, which represents federal, state, and local authorities and
citizens from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of Rhode
Island. The Commission's federal stature has made it an extremely
effective management entity for coordinating two states and 24 local
governments around a common action agenda.
As you may know, the authorization and funding for the John H.
Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Commission are
scheduled to expire November 2006 unless reauthorized by Congress. S.
1387 would provide for the update of the Cultural Heritage and Land
Management Plan for the Corridor, extend the authority of the John H.
Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission
for an additional ten years, and authorize operating and development
funding appropriations to enable the Commission to continue its work.
The John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage
Corridor is important to Rhode Island and Massachusetts, as well as to
our entire nation. Please let us extend to you our appreciation in
advance for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
James P. McGovern,
Patrick J. Kennedy,
Richard E. Neal,
James R. Langevin,
Members of Congress.
______
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, June 22, 2006.
Hon. Craig Thomas,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Senate Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thomas: As cosponsors to Senate Bill 1721, the
National Heritage Area Extension Act of 2005, we would like to take
this opportunity to convey our strong support for reauthorization of
the National Heritage Areas Program.
The National Heritage Areas Program has been very beneficial to
communities throughout the country. Heritage Areas are proven methods
of community preservation and revitalization.
Currently, Iowa is fortunate to have the America's Agricultural
Heritage Partnership. This Heritage Area encompasses a 37-county region
and covers more than 20,000 square miles. The Partnership is helping to
preserve significant agricultural and industrial events from our
history. America's Agricultural Heritage Partnership was part of the
originally authorized Heritage Areas in the Omnibus Parks and Public
Lands Act of 1996.
In addition, the Mississippi River National Heritage Area would be
established to serve the counties bordering this mighty river in ten
states, one of which is Iowa. This Heritage Area would help inventory,
improve, promote, and preserve the resources and rich culture along our
nation's river.
We appreciate your consideration of this program before your
committee this week, and hope that you are able to support the National
Heritage Area Extension Act of 2005. Please call on us if you need
additional information, or if we can be of service as you work to
reauthorize program.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley,
Tom Harkin,
U.S. Senators.
______
Statement of Annie C. Harris, Executive Director, Essex National
Heritage Commission
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, I am
pleased to submit the following written testimony in support of S.
1721, a bill to amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act
of 1996. I am writing in favor of the provisions included in S. 1721 to
extend reauthorization for the nine National Heritage Areas, including
the Essex National Heritage Area, authorized under this Act to receive
up to $10 million in appropriations over a fifteen year period.
I serve as the Executive Director of the Essex National Heritage
Commission. The Commission is the designated management entity for the
Essex National Heritage Area. Operating under the oversight of a 25
member board of trustees, 150 commissioners and 62 ex officio
commissioners, the Commission coordinates preservation, conservation
and education programs in throughout this 500 square mile area north of
Boston, Massachusetts. Essex National Heritage Area, along with the
other eight National Heritage Areas established in the Act of 1996, has
an impressive ten-year track record in preserving America's heritage
through innovative and successful public-private partnerships at every
level of government. S. 1721 would allow this worthwhile work to
continue by extending the federal funding and permitting the National
Park Service to continue to participate this important work.
There are four questions that are frequently asked about the
National Heritage Areas. These questions go to the core of the National
Heritage Areas. I have answered them below and illustrated my answers
with examples from the Essex National Heritage Area.
1. What are the public benefits of the National Heritage
Areas?
2. Does the National Park Service derive significant benefits
from the National Heritage Areas?
3. Why should Congress consider reauthorizing the National
Heritage Areas?
4. Do National Heritage Areas restrict private property
rights?
1. What are the public benefits of the National Heritage Areas? The
National Heritage Areas provide significant national, regional and
local benefits to the American public in these ways:
a. NHAs preserve nationally important historic sites, develop
regional recreational facilities (such as bikeways and trails),
and foster community revitalization through the rehabilitation
of historic and cultural resources.
b. NHAs leverage their annual federal appropriations,
regularly attracting between $3 to $12 in private, local and
state investment for every $1 of federal investment `seeded' in
the Area.
c. NHAs build dynamic civic partnerships by bringing together
hundreds of volunteers, businesspeople, educators and elected
officials to work together to revitalize their communities.
Examples: The Essex National Heritage Area contains more than
9,200 National Register of Historic Places properties, 607
National Register districts and 24 National Historic Landmarks.
The Area interprets three nationally significant themes: Early
European settlement, American maritime history in the Great Age
of Sail and the early Industrial Revolution, and conserves four
major heritage landscapes. The Essex National Heritage Area
plays a critical role in facilitating collaborative programs
across the region including an extensive Heritage Landscape
Inventory that identified more than 1,300 resources, two scenic
byways designations, and thirty miles of proposed rail-trail
development. The ENHA `Trails & Sails' event annually attracts
more than 3,500 people, introducing them to the rich heritage
resources of the region and engaging them in the long-term
preservation and promotion of these significant assets.
Bikeways, trails, regional tourism, downtown revitalization,
education and recreation are all important aspects of ENHA. In
2005 alone, the Essex National Heritage Area hosted 1,182,000
cultural visitors, oversaw 10,500 hours of volunteer time,
managed 369 formal and informal partnerships, made 33 direct
grants, worked on projects that improved 37 National Register
properties, and offered education programs that engaged 340
people. During the past 10 years, the Essex National Heritage
Area has gained extraordinary momentum but the work is on-going
and should not be stopped in mid stride.
2. Does the National Park Service derive significant benefits from
the National Heritage Areas? The National Park Service derives
important benefits from their affiliation with the National Heritage
Areas, and many of these have been identified in the ``Report by the
National Park System Advisory Board's Partnership Committee'' which
notes that ``National Heritage Areas contribute to the mission of the
National Park Service'' and ``the National Heritage Area approach . . .
can serve as a model for achieving NPS collaborative conservation
goals.'' It is our experience that the following benefits result from
the collaboration between the National Heritage Areas and the Park
Service:
a. NHAs build goodwill for the National Park Service
especially in areas where the Heritage Area is adjacent to or
surrounds the NPS site.
b. NHAs promote partnerships between residents and the Park
Service on a broad range of projects from small, one time
events to large volunteer maintenance and construction
projects.
c. NHAs often provide significant additional resources,
monetary and otherwise, to the Park Service.
d. NHAs support the mission of the Park Service and allow
many of parks to focus on their core resources more
effectively.
Examples: The Essex National Heritage Area partners with the
National Park Service's Salem Maritime National Historic Site
and Saugus Ironworks National Historic Site on a wide variety
of projects. There is the tall ship ``Friendship'' volunteer
program where 200+ volunteers maintain and sail the NPS tall
ship thus saving the Salem Maritime NH Site thousands of
dollars each year in maintenance and operations costs.
Recently, the Essex National Heritage Area has provided
assistance to Salem Maritime for the acquisition of a dock for
their Visiting Vessels program, an important NPS initiative
developed to generate new educational activities and revenue
for the park. Another example is the interpretive thematic
trails that ENHA has developed cooperatively with NPS that are
designed to educate residents and visitors about the history of
the park and the surrounding region and that also encourage the
economic benefits of increased visitation. The Essex National
Heritage Area works cooperatively with local area colleges, the
National Archives regional office and the National Park Service
on exhibits and primary source research projects, and this in
turn enables the NPS to have new exhibits and educational
programs at no cost to the park.
3. Why should Congress consider reauthorizing the National Heritage
Areas? The work of the National Heritage Areas is not complete. While
there are many successful initiatives and projects, ten years is too
short a time to build and maintain hundreds of lasting collaborative
partnerships. The National Heritage Areas should not be stopped in mid-
stream when so much more can be accomplished by continuing the
relationship with the National Park Service and the small investment of
federal funds.
a. NHAs have proven to be very effective historic
preservation and resource conservation tools. Hundreds of
National Register properties have benefited from the support of
the National Heritage Areas. Miles of trails have been cleared
and improved by the Areas. A multitude of cultural
organizations and civic groups have revitalized their
communities with the guidance of the National Heritage Areas.
These improvements benefit not only the residents but also the
thousands of tourists who visit the National Heritage Areas
every year (68 million visitors at last count).
b. NHAs have built hundreds of regional and local
partnerships to carry out their work. These relationships are
usually carefully nurtured over many years, and often include
small investments of `seed' funding to assist the partners in
the cooperative projects. These `seed' funds allow the National
Heritage Areas to build trust among formerly competing
organizations, and in turn, this stability has enabled these
organizations to attract additional matching funds from a wide
range of new sources. All of the National Heritage Areas are
working diligently to develop sustainable sources of revenue,
but it is too early in the process to zero out the federal
funding. These funds provide a stable platform upon which many
new cooperative ventures are being built. All of the partners
need to remain `at the table' for a while longer so that this
model can continue to mature.
c. NHAs and their special affiliation with the National Park
Service are designated in perpetuity. The quality of the
National Heritage Area has a direct bearing on the public's
perception of the National Park Service. Up to this point, the
National Heritage Areas have reflected well on the Park
Service, however without any public assistance for their base
operations and programming, this may not be the case in the
future.
d. NHAs have oversight from the National Park Service through
Cooperative Agreements that specific the federal funding and
the annual work program for each National Heritage Area. With
no federal appropriations, there will not be Cooperative
Agreements and the Park Service will not be in a position to
provide oversight to the work of the National Heritage Areas
despite their continuing affiliation with the Service.
Example: To date the Essex National Heritage Area has made
228 direct grants to historic preservation projects, heritage
education programs, trail development, interpretative projects
and historical records preservation. These grants total
$1,351,000 and have leveraged $4,123,000 in additional direct
investment in these resources. The National Heritage also makes
other types of grants such as twenty-one survey and planning
grants to archival organizations where hundreds of thousands of
nationally significant historical records are housed and grants
to the regional visitor centers who collaborate with the
National Park Service to welcome tourists to the Area. In
addition, the Essex National Heritage Area maintains over 300
formal and informal partnerships that promote the heritage
resources in the region in broad array of projects ranging from
bikeway planning to seed funding. The National Heritage Area
works closely with the National Park Service's Salem Maritime
and Saugus Ironworks National Historic Sites on education,
interpretation, and preservation projects that are outlined in
the annual cooperative agreement. These projects feature the
historic themes of the two National Park units and integrate
the park themes into projects with other regional partners. For
example, ``Using Essex History'' highlights Salem and Saugus
along with other significant historic sites in a multi-year
project that links teaching history to the statewide standards
testing. The ``100 Milestones'' celebrates many significant
accomplishments in regional preservation and community
engagement including the National Park Service's resources.
4. Do National Heritage Areas restrict private property rights? The
simple answer is no; there is nothing in the National Heritage Area
legislation or in their practice that restricts the rights of property
owners to own, develop or change their property. Some people confuse
the limitations imposed by local authorities such as zoning and
planning boards as somehow being the purview of the National Heritage
Area. This is incorrect.
a. NHAs do not have any regulatory authority explicit or
implied in the legislative acts that established them.
b. NHAs do not have legal authority to tell private property
owners what they can and cannot do, nor is there any evidence
that they try to do this.
c. NHAs are not mandated to affiliate with other regulatory
federal and state agencies. In fact, the cooperative nature of
the work of the National Heritage Areas dictates the opposite.
Example: The Essex National Heritage Area works to inspire
residents and their communities to cooperative in preserving
and promoting their heritage resources. The Area's
collaborative partnerships seek to demonstrate the benefits
derived from heritage while they reframe from interfering with
local decisions. With the hundreds of formal and informal
partners working on matters that affect a substantial portion
of the 9,000 national register properties in this region as
well as acres of open space and trails, the Essex National
Heritage Area has a proven track record of excellent
relationships with all levels of government and civic
organizations, and at no time is there evidence that this work
has limited the rights of private property owners to do what
they wish with their property.
In conclusion: The work of the National Heritage Areas requires
that all of the partners in this exciting experiment continue to
cooperate and work together. The successes to date are clearly
documented, but the challenges for heritage preservation and community
revitalization are still many. This is a work-in-progress that should
be continued. Perhaps no group has said it better than the National
Park System Advisory Board's Partnerships Committee. In their recent
study of the National Heritage Areas, they concluded that ``the
National Park Service can benefit from the National Heritage Areas
approach to conserving nationally important living landscapes and
cultures'' and they recommended that the Director of the National Park
Service and by extension the Park Service and Congress:
1. Create a home for Heritage Areas in the Park System
2. Commit to Heritage Areas for the long-term
3. Provide for unique legislative authorities
4. Extend our reach to gateway communities
5. Support research and understand partnership networks.
Their study recognizes that ``National Heritage Areas are founded
on consensus-based planning, local commitments and a network of long-
term partnerships. For this reason a long-term commitment is needed to
achieve meaningful progress.'' The National Heritage Areas endorse this
conclusion and urge this committee to reauthorize the nine National
Heritage Areas established in the Act of 1996.
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this committee, thank you
for your consideration of this matter and for the opportunity to make a
written presentation to the committee.
______
Statement of the Conejos County Board of Commissioners
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: We the Conejos County
Board of Commissioners would like to submit the following testimony in
support of Senate bill 2037 for the purpose of establishing the Sangre
de Cristo National Heritage Area in the San Luis Valley located in
Southern Colorado.
The passage of this bill would enhance the opportunity this
designation would bring to the Counties of Alamosa, Conejos and
Costilla. The designation would bring economic opportunities to the two
poorest counties in the state of Colorado. Although, we have been
called the poorest counties in the state, we are rich in culture and
heritage. The opportunity to share our area's history and culture would
entice tourism into our communities and bring economic value to our
local businesses and agricultural community.
The idea of a National Heritage Area concept was introduced by a
501(c)(3) non-profit organization called the Los Caminos Antiguos
Scenic and Historic Byway (LCA). Through the efforts of the LCA a
steering committee was formed, this was the beginning of much hard work
and perseverance to make the heritage area a reality. Hundred of hours
in planning, research, committee and community meetings took place over
a 5 year period of time. Over time much support was gained from
citizens, organizations, local and regional governments. All groups
recognized the need to capture and preserve the unique blend of the
native American, Hispano and Anglo settlement and to preserve the
history, art and traditions or future generations.
``The mission of the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area is to
promote, preserve, protect, document and interpret its profound
historical, religious, environmental, geographic, geologic, cultural,
and linguistic resources''. The efforts will contribute to the overall
national story engender a spirit or pride and self-reliance, and create
a legacy in the Colorado counties of Alamosa, Conejos and Costilla.
A feasibility study that was required by both the U.S. Congress and
the National Park Service was produced by using local and regional
professional writers, historians, academics and local citizens, working
on a volunteer basis.
The heritage and history of the area has been well preserved
through the isolation of the San Luis Valley and through local
preservation and conservation efforts.
The abundance of historical and cultural sites is described in
detail in the feasibility study. Although there are many historical and
cultural sites in Conejos County, the following are a few sites that
have played an important part of early history in the State of
Colorado:
Pike's Stockade--the contact between the Anglo and Hispanic
cultures in the San Luis Valley. Dating back to 1806 the
encounter between Lt. Zebulon Pike and Spanish scouts, the
stockade was constructed on the Conejos River.
Our Lady of Guadalupe Church--considered the oldest Church
in Colorado, established in 1856.
The Lobato Bridge--one of three iron bridges remaining in
the United States constructed in 1892. This bridge was the
first bridge constructed in Colorado over the Rio Grande. Iron
and lumber at a cost of $8,400 was brought in by wagon.
Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad--going into new New
Mexico on February 1, 1881. The railroad not only conquered the
Sangre de Cristos and the San Juan Mountains, but brought the
blend and diverse ethnic and racial groups that still live in
harmony today. This nineteenth-century steam railroad provides
an adventure for tourists to enjoy yet another historical
experience.
We the Conejos County Board of Commissioners and on behalf of our
citizens ask and urge you to consider and approve S. 2037 bill
designating the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area.
______
Statement of Darius Allen, Chairman of the Board, Alamosa
County Commissioners
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, am Darius Allen,
Chairman of the Board of Alamosa County Commissioners and in support of
S. 2037, the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area Act, appreciate
the opportunity to present my thoughts on behalf of the Board of
Alamosa County Commissioners on the proposed legislation.
S. 2307 proposes to designate the counties of Alamosa, Conejos and
Costilla, Monte Vista National Wildlife Relive, the Baca National
Wildlife Refuge, the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve as a
National Heritage Area and to establish guidelines, standards and
requirements for the Area. A local 501(c)(3) nonprofit board of
directors will be put in place and would be designated as the
management entity for the Heritage Area to work with the National Park
Service and the many local heritage organizations.
The mission of the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area is to
promote, preserve, protect, document and interpret its profound
historical, religious, environmental, geographic, geologic, cultural
and linguistic resources. These efforts will contribute to the overall
national story, engender a spirit of pride and self reliance and create
a legacy in the Colorado Counties of Alamosa, Conejos and Costilla.
the sangre de cristo national heritage area is rich in culture and
history and worthy of preservation
The Sangre de Cristo National Heritage located in the South Central
part of Colorado is rich in culture and natural resources. The people
of the San Luis Valley have found ways to preserve their cultural and
natural heritage. There are historical structures and land that still
exist today such as Mexican land grants, the narrow gauge railroad also
known as the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroads Pikes Stockade, Great
Sand Dunes National Park and Fort Garland. The language, art,
architecture, religious tradition of the Native American early Spanish
colonists and Mexican settlers is still alive and thriving in the area.
The towns of San Luis and Antonito, Colorado are the two oldest
settlements in the State. The area still contain moradas (place of
worship, the oldest church in Colorado, murals, the first mercantile of
the region, the first water right and La Vega (the last remaining
commons area in the United States that is still used for its original
purposes) which is located in Costilla County, Colorado. Festivals and
religious celebrations including century old procession of Los Hermanos
Penitentes are still hosted today.
The Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area inhabited over 11,000
years by native people, including Ute, Navajo, Apache, Tiwa, Tewa,
Comanche, Kiowa and Arapaho remains central to native cultures and is
home to Mount Blanca (one of Colorado's 14,000 foot peaks) also known
as Sisnaajini, a sacred mountain for Navajo and other people that marks
the eastern boundary of their world. There are also petroglyphs and
pictographs along the Rio Grande telling stories and cosmologies of
early inhabitants. The San Luis Valley is beautiful in nature
surrounded by the San Juan and Sangre de Cristo Mountains. The San Luis
Valley is one of the largest alpine valleys in North America and has an
abundance of natural resources.
I believe the San Luis Valley is very unique because of the
preservation of culture and the strong historical significance. The San
Luis Valley history has been well preserved through isolation and
conservation efforts.
A volunteer steering committee worked hundreds of hours in
committee meetings, research, and public meetings to organize and gain
support or this effort. There are resolutions from local governments
that show support with the feasibility study that has been submitted to
Congress. I strongly urge you to pass Senate Bill 2037. This will
enable the people to preserve the rich culture and natural resources of
the San Luis Valley. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to submit
a written testimony.
______
Statement of Donald P. Short, Executive Director, Silos & Smokestacks
National Heritage Area
America's Agricultural Heritage Partnership, also known as Silos &
Smokestacks National Heritage Area, is a thirty seven county area
located in Northeast Iowa. We are the second largest of the twenty
seven National Heritage Areas and the only one telling the story of
American agriculture through a network of over ninety partner sites
covering more than 20,000 square miles.
Silos & Smokestacks is proud to have distributed over $1.3 million
to assist partner sites in telling the story of American agriculture
through grant programs. Our cash matching requirements for this program
has created a five to one multiplier effect.
Launched in 2001, CampSilos (campsilos.org) educational website
targets students in grades 4-8 with online educational material related
to all aspects of agriculture. Student activities, teacher lesson plans
and virtual field trips are featured on the website with over forty
thousand (40,000) hits per month. The National Education Association
recognized CampSilos with a national 2nd place award in 2003 for
quality education.
SSNHA is also nationally recognized for its L.I.F.E. (Living an
Iowa Farm Experience) Tours group travel program creating relationships
with several foreign countries including Denmark, Norway, France,
England, Japan, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Ireland and now (October, 06)
Argentina. Life Tours has definitely impacted Iowa's six billion dollar
tourism industry yet state funding ranks third from the bottom
nationally.
Silos & Smokestacks acts as a facilitator for small communities. We
provide technical assistance, hospitality training workshops and grant
opportunities to help them become self supporting. Our support helps
them ``jump-start'' projects that may never become a reality for small
town Iowa to again prosper.
summary
Silos & Smokestacks provides the tools for its people and
communities to preserve and tell the story of American agriculture.
Fewer people are living in rural areas. As farming becomes more
automated, the people are separated farther from how their food is
grown and processed. Silos is the critical link to preserve the stories
and the culture.
The most difficult dollars to raise are for administrative
expenses. Nobody wants to fund an organization's daily operating. When
federal funding stops the wheels could slowly come to a halt. Federal
funding brings other partners to the table and has enabled us to create
a match of the fed funds. The small rural communities do not have the
audiences to fund many of the initiatives needed for sustainability.
Heritage Areas provide the critical supporting link.
On behalf of the Board of Trustees, Leadership Advisors and
Partnership Panel of Silos & Smokestacks National Heritage Area, we're
asking you to pass S. 1721.
Senators Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley are strong supporters of
this bill. A letter of support was delivered to your committee at the
hearing on June 22, 2006.
______
Statement of Michelle McCollum, Executive Director, South Carolina
National Heritage Corridor
The South Carolina National Heritage Corridor (SCNHC) is one of 27
congressionally designated heritage areas in the country. A `National
Heritage Area' is a place where natural, cultural, historic and scenic
resources combine to form a cohesive, nationally distinctive landscape
arising from patterns of human activity shaped by geography.
A recent National Park Service survey shows that almost 45 million
people across 17 states live within a national heritage area. The very
nature of the `heritage area' structure engages communities to work in
partnership across jurisdictional boundaries to improve their future by
building on a shared past. This is a very unique and effective way for
the federal government to impact local communities with minimal
investment. It is important to note that a recently conducted GAO
report stated that national heritage areas do not infringe upon private
property rights. National Heritage Areas allow the federal government
to preserve, protect and promote the resources of these areas without
acquiring or managing additional land or programs.
Many projects such as downtown revitalization, adaptive reuse of
historic structures, preservation of diverse cultures, and conservation
of unique and endangered landscapes are initiated within and by
National Heritage Areas. Heritage Area programs also provide training
to individuals, businesses, and non-profit organizations in grant
writing, strategic planning, product development and marketing. Large
scale technical assistance programs as well as local grant programs are
part of the leveraging process used to build on the federal seed money.
On average, National Heritage Areas leverage $10 to every federal $1
that is invested, proving that this program is an investment, not an
expense, for the federal government. National Heritage Areas are also
required to match federal funds dollar-for-dollar, thus spurring local
investment and building a foundation for local partnerships.
The importance of the National Heritage Program cannot be
overstated. Tourism is growing worldwide and Heritage Tourism is the
fastest growing segment and the segment with the greatest per capita
expenditures by tourists. Unless our nation focuses on this segment of
worldwide tourism we will be losing ground to other countries which are
putting major emphasis on this growing trend.
The SCNHC was designated in the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands
Management Act of 1996. The program began under the leadership of the
SC Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism and has now moved under
the direct management of a public/private partnership Board of
Directors. This has been a very important move for our organization and
is part of the overall strategy to become self sustaining.
The development of the SCNHC has been an important program for our
state. Not only does the SCNHC preserve and promote ``pride of place''
in South Carolina, it also tells a national story as our state is one
of the original thirteen colonies and one which has had a
disproportionately large impact on national events. Unlike many other
National Heritage Areas, the SCNHC is not a single destination, but a
wide variety of sites and attractions. These locations are extremely
diverse, and they are in many cases ``authentic'' and ``raw'' as
opposed to ``manmade'' and ``polished''. Many facets of historic and
rural ``Americana'' can be experienced within the boundaries of our
heritage area. Our themes include Native American History; Frontier and
Colonial Life; Military History; Transportation; and African American
History. Few programs interpret this level and depth of history and
provide such a unique and educational experience.
By weaving the threads of South Carolina's history, culture and
natural resources together in a defined area, the state has added to
its available tourism product and increased visitation and spending.
According to a study prepared by Lane, Frenchman and Associates of
Boston, completion of the SCNHC 10 year management plan will mean as
many as 700,000 additional visitor days and will generate $83.5 million
in new tourism revenue each year; rising, of course, as the work
continues.
The SCNHC currently works with over 70 local communities and over
120 designated sites to build a foundation that protects area resources
and creates quality community infrastructure. Since our inception we
have successfully completed over 100 large-scale projects, and are
currently working on over 40 more, while also providing programming and
major marketing efforts. Product development in the Corridor has
centered chiefly on the creation of tourism infrastructure in areas of
the state that have not always seen the benefits of tourism. As tourism
`product' is developed, it is phased into our Discovery System, the
mechanism that provides regional interpretation, way-finding and
visitors services to tourism locations in our 14-county area.
This system is continuously gaining momentum and will ultimately
have a major economic impact on the heritage area and the state. At
this time, half of our system has been installed and we need more time
and additional federal investment in order to complete the foundational
structure of the program. This will include the design, fabrication and
installation of visitor centers, interpretive signage and directional
signage in the final two of our four regions. This will also include
the completion of over 100 large-scale projects in the rural areas of
our state and the development and execution of a major marketing
program.
The entrepreneurial spirit of this program has successfully engaged
local citizens and they are working together through public-private
partnerships to preserve and promote the structures, places and
traditions that provide a sense of place and a unique quality of life
for South Carolinians. The SCNHC has served as an incubator and a
catalyst for heritage tourism development across the state. The efforts
within our heritage area have led to the development of numerous
statewide initiatives such as the South Carolina Farmer's Association
and the South Carolina Artisans Consortium. It has also placed an
emphasis on protecting and celebrating the diversity of cultures in
South Carolina such as the influence of Native American, African and
Caribbean culture in today's society. Most importantly, our efforts
have stimulated the economy by diversifying economic development
initiatives in areas that are struggling with the loss of manufacturing
jobs and a changing economy.
Some examples of our accomplishments include:
The development of two Regional Discovery Centers that serve
as visitor's centers as well as rural tourism development
centers. Programming, special events and training workshops are
held regularly at these locations.
The development of a large-scale interpretation system that
links together over 100 sites and attractions throughout 10
counties of our heritage area. This system is complimented by a
comprehensive way-finding signage program. Development is still
needed in four of our counties.
The restoration and adaptive reuse of major historic
structures within our heritage area to include the Walhalla
Civic Auditorium, the Anderson Arts Warehouse, the Springfield
High School and the Lourie Theatre. These four structures alone
have diversified economic opportunities, created jobs and
increased the quality of life for their communities.
Awarded over $2.5 million in grants to local projects. Once
complete, these projects are phased into our program and
marketed for visitation and development.
Created a partnership with Barbados to highlight the influx
of Caribbean influence into our heritage area and ultimately
the nation. A joint development and marketing plan is currently
being created to spur European visitation to both countries
based on our shared past.
Provided much needed technical assistance and training to
our communities in areas such as product development,
marketing, visitor's services and grant writing. This type of
assistance is on-going and has a major impact on rural
communities.
As a compliment to our economic development initiatives,
educational programs have been implemented in local schools and
our children's program currently has over 450 members.
It is extremely important to point out that the SCNHC comprises 14
counties across the state of South Carolina. The impacts of the
Corridor have been so great for our communities that three additional
counties have expressed an interest in being added to our program. This
will enlarge our Heritage Area to 17 counties and a length of over 450
miles. Again, unlike many other heritage areas, the federal investment
into our program is spread out not only geographically, but also
programmatically. The size of our Heritage Area also increases the time
needed to become fully established and self-sustaining. Although we
have made significant progress, 10 years is certainly not enough time
to complete a project of this proportion.
Just as all of the Heritage Areas included in S. 1721, the SCNHC
was established with a 10-year Management Plan to guide the work of the
program for the next 10 years. This was not meant to be a limitation on
the life of the National Heritage Area, only a limitation on the
timeframe of the plan. At the end, or near the conclusion of the
Management Plan, the National Heritage Areas were charged with the
responsibility to chart out their next 10-year strategy. Since the
designation of the ``Class of 1996'' the individual heritage areas,
partner organizations and the National Park Service have all discovered
better, more effective ways to operate the heritage area program and
many of these points are addressed in the Heritage Area program bill,
S. 243. At this critical point, we need to ensure that the ``Class of
1996'' is not penalized for being the test case for the movement before
these issues were resolved.
I cannot emphasize enough that the SCNHC understands the need to
become self sustaining and we are currently in the process of
conducting a new 10 year management plan that will include a
sustainability plan. This sustainability plan will map out a strategy
for diversifying funding sources for the program and will solidify the
on-going development of our heritage area. Because of the fact that the
management of our program has only recently transferred from a
government agency to a public/private Board of Directors, precious
years were lost in which sustainability was not a major focus. I assure
you that if granted reauthorization our Board of Directors will
maximize the federal investment and will become self sustaining by the
end of the authorization period.
Our new management plan has not been completed at this point;
however, several goals have already been established:
Create and implement a strategy for diversification of
funding sources for the sustainability of the SCNHC.
Complete the development of the SCNHC Discovery System
throughout the entire heritage area to include two (2)
additional visitor centers and interpretive signage at over 150
additional locations.
Implement a tourism plan with the country of Barbados to
spur European visitation to both countries based on the
``Carolina--Caribbean Connection''.
Develop Corridor-wide educational programs to be implemented
at partner locations and in school-districts within our
heritage area.
Work with the SC Departments of Commerce, Transportation,
Arts, and Parks, Recreation and Tourism to further solidify
cultural tourism as an economic development tool in the state
through major product development and marketing efforts.
Heritage tourism development, like all other economic development
initiatives, is an on-going process. It is also a lengthy process. It
takes time to build the type of grassroots support and participation
that makes the heritage area program successful. This is particularly
true of heritage areas encompassing numerous counties and numerous
themes. The large-scale projects that are initiated by heritage areas
also take many years to complete as preservation and conservation
involves the input and assistance of many citizens, organizations and
government entities.
The federal funding appropriated to national heritage areas serves
as the foundation for securing state, local and private investment. If
this foundation is removed, it will surely impede, and could possibly
halt, the unprecedented work that has been accomplished thus far. The
South Carolina National Heritage Corridor has a proven record of
successfully leveraging the federal investment AND improving the
communities that we serve. For these reasons, reauthorization is a
necessary and logical request.
The Board of Directors of the SCNHC, the fourteen counties and
numerous municipalities within the boundaries of our heritage area, and
the many citizens of our state appreciate the support and assistance of
Congress over the past ten years and respectfully request that Congress
review our successes, access the impact of the federal investment and
grant reauthorization through the passage of S. 1721 so that our
important work can continue.