SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
42–393 CC
1997
HEARING ON H.R. 588, TO AMEND THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT TO CREATE A NEW CATEGORY OF LONG-DISTANCE TRAILS TO BE KNOWN AS NATIONAL DISCOVERY TRAILS, TO AUTHORIZE THE AMERICAN DISCOVERY TRAIL AS THE FIRST TRAIL IN THAT CATEGORY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; AND H.R. 1513, A BILL TO AMEND THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT TO DESIGNATE THE LINCOLN NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL AS A COMPONENT OF THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS AND PUBLIC LANDS
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
on
H.R. 588 AND H.R. 1513—TO AMEND THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT
JUNE 10, 1997—WASHINGTON, DC
Serial No. 105–22
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
DON YOUNG, Alaska, Chairman
W.J. (BILLY) TAUZIN, Louisiana
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado
JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland
KEN CALVERT, California
RICHARD W. POMBO, California
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
HELEN CHENOWETH, Idaho
LINDA SMITH, Washington
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North Carolina
WILLIAM M. (MAC) THORNBERRY, Texas
JOHN SHADEGG, Arizona
JOHN E. ENSIGN, Nevada
ROBERT F. SMITH, Oregon
CHRIS CANNON, Utah
KEVIN BRADY, Texas
JOHN PETERSON, Pennsylvania
RICK HILL, Montana
BOB SCHAFFER, Colorado
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
MICHAEL D. CRAPO, Idaho
GEORGE MILLER, California
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
BRUCE F. VENTO, Minnesota
DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
OWEN B. PICKETT, Virginia
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
CALVIN M. DOOLEY, California
CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELÓ, Puerto Rico
MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York
ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
SAM FARR, California
PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
ADAM SMITH, Washington
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
CHRIS JOHN, Louisiana
DONNA CHRISTIAN-GREEN, Virgin Islands
RON KIND, Wisconsin
LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
LLOYD A. JONES, Chief of Staff
ELIZABETH MEGGINSON, Chief Counsel
CHRISTINE KENNEDY, Chief Clerk/Administrator
JOHN LAWRENCE, Democratic Staff Director
Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
ELTON, GALLEGLY, California
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland
RICHARD W. POMBO, California
HELEN CHENOWETH, Idaho
LINDA SMITH, Washington
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North Carolina
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
JOHN E. ENSIGN, Nevada
ROBERT F. SMITH, Oregon
RICK HILL, Montana
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
BRUCE F. VENTO, Minnesota
DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELÓ, Puerto Rico
MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York
ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
DONNA CHRISTIAN-GREEN, Virgin Islands
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
RON KIND, Wisconsin
LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
ALLEN FREEMYER, Counsel
STEVE HODAPP, Professional Staff
LIZ BIRNBAUM, Democratic Counsel
C O N T E N T S
Hearing held June 10, 1997—Washington, DC
Statements of Members:
Bereuter, Hon. Doug, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nebraska
Prepared statement
Hansen, Hon. James V., a Representative in Congress from the State of Utah, prepared statement
Pickett, Hon. Owen B., a Representative in Congress from the State of Virginia
Prepared statement
Weller, Hon. Jerry, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois
Prepared statement
Statements of witnesses:
Joslin, Robert C., Deputy Chief, U.S. Forest Service
Prepared statement
Lillard, David, President, American Hiking Society
Prepared statement
Lock, Leonard E.
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Prepared statement
Lukei, Mr. Reese, Jr., National Coordinator, American Discovery Trail Society
Prepared statement
Stevenson, Katherine H., Associate Director, Cultural Resources, Stewardship and Partnership, National Park Service
Prepared statement
Theis, Bill, Member, S.T.O.P. (Stop Taking Our Properties) Steering Committee
Prepared statement
Additional material supplied:
Bratton, Richard V., Mayor, Green Mountain Falls, CO
Dudley, Ellen and Eric Seaborg, Members of the original team that scouted the American Discovery Trail route
News-Dispatch, Sept. 5, 1997
Settler's Advocate, May 1, 1997
H.R. 588
H.R. 1513
S. Res. 57
HEARING ON H.R. 588, TO AMEND THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT TO CREATE A NEW CATEGORY OF LONG-DISTANCE TRAILS TO BE KNOWN AS NATIONAL DISCOVERY TRAILS, TO AUTHORIZE THE AMERICAN DISCOVERY TRAIL AS THE FIRST TRAIL IN THAT CATEGORY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES; AND H.R. 1513, A BILL TO AMEND THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT TO DESIGNATE THE LINCOLN NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL AS A COMPONENT OF THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1997
House of Representatives, Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands, Committee on Resources, Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:04 a.m. in room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. James V. Hansen presiding.
Mr. HANSEN. The Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands convenes this hearing to receive testimony on H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act of 1997, and H.R. 1513, the Lincoln National Historic Trail Act.
The first bill is H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act of 1997, introduced by Mr. Bereuter and cosponsored by many of our colleagues, which would amend the National Trails Systems Act of 1968 by creating a new category of long-distance national trails and authorizing the American Discovery Trail as the first trail in this new category.
[The information appears at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. The second bill is H.R. 1513, introduced by Mr. Weller, to amend the National Trails Act of 1968 by designating the Lincoln National Historic Trail in the State of Illinois.
[The information appears at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. As we approach the 30th anniversary of the National Trails System Act of 1968, we should reflect briefly on the impact this legislation has had. From the initial recognition of the Appalachian Trail in the eastern United States and the Pacific Crest Trail of the western United States, the National Trails System today encompasses over 37,000 miles of trails in 45 States, consisting of 20 congressionally designated, nationally scenic and historic trails, administered by the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. In addition, there are over 800 recognized national recreation trails that do not require congressional authorization, which are administered by local, State and private organizations after designations by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H.R. 588 will amend the National Trails System Act of 1968 to establish a new congressionally authorized trail category. National discovery trails, which will be extended contiguous to interstate trails, providing outstanding outdoor recreation and travel opportunities. The national discovery trails would intertwine national, cultural and historic resources and include metropolitan, urban, rural and back country regions of the Nation. The most unique provision of this new trail category is that there would be no Federal acquisition of land and administration would be bottom up, with local public involvement and local and State governments supporting the trails with only technical assistance to be provided by Federal agencies.
Finally, H.R. 588 would designate the first national discovery trail, the 6,300-mile American Discovery Trail, which would extend through 15 States, from Cape Henlopen State Park in Delaware to Point Reyes National Seashore in California.
H.R. 1513 would establish the Lincoln National Historic Trail in the State of Illinois as a component of the National Trails System to extend 350 miles from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River, generally following the Illinois River and the Illinois-Michigan Canal Heritage corridor. This channel would promote Abraham Lincoln's legacy to Illinois and would emphasize the important, existing historic and cultural sites along the route. H.R. 1513 would also require an additional study to extend the Lincoln National Historic Trail down the Sangamon River from Beardstown to Springfield, Illinois.
We look forward to the testimony that will be received this morning on these bills, and I will recognize Mr. Bereuter, the sponsor of H.R. 588, and Mr. Weller, the sponsor of H.R. 1513. Also, Mr. Pickett from Virginia is here to introduce the American Discovery Trail Society. But before I do that, I recognize my friend from Minnesota.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The statement of Mr. Hansen follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES V. HANSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF UTAH
The Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands convenes this hearing to receive testimony on H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act of 1997, and H.R. 1513, the Lincoln National Historic Trail Act.
The first bill is H.R. 588, ''The National Discovery Trails Act of 1997,'' introduced by Mr. Bereuter and co-sponsored by many of our colleagues, would amend the National Trails System Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-543), by creating a new category of long-distance national trail, and authorizing the American Discovery Trail (ADT) as the first trail in this new category.
The second bill is H.R. 1513, introduced by Mr. Weller to amend the National Trails System Act of 1968, by designating ''The Lincoln National Historic Trail in the State of Illinois.''
As we approach the 30th Anniversary of the National Trails System Act of 1968 we should reflect briefly on the impact this legislation has had. From the initial recognition of The Appalachian Trail in the Eastern United States and The Pacific Crest Trail in the Western United States, the National Trails System today encompasses over 37,000 miles of trails in 45 states, consisting of 20 Congressionally designated national scenic and historic trails, administered by the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. In addition, there are over 800 recognized national recreation trails, that do not require Congressional authorization, which are administered by local, state and, private organizations, after designation by the Secretary of the Interior, or Secretary of Agriculture.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H.R. 538 will amend the National Trails System Act of 1968 to establish a new Congressionally authorized trail category, National Discovery Trails, which will be extended, continuous, interstate trails, providing outstanding outdoor recreation and travel opportunities. The National Discovery Trails would intertwine natural, cultural, and historic resources and include metropolitan, urban, rural and backcountry regions of the Nation. The most unique provision of this new trail category is that there is to be no Federal acquisition of land, and the administration would be ''bottom up'' with local public involvement and local and state governments supporting these trails, with only technical assistance to be provided by Federal agencies. Finally, H.R. 588 would designate the first National Discovery Trail, the 6,300 mile American Discovery Trail, which would extend through 15 states from Cape Henlopen State Park in Delaware to Point Reyes National Seashore in California.
H.R. 1513 would establish the Lincoln National Historic Trail in the State of Illinois as a component of the National Trails System. The trail would extend 350 miles from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River, generally following the Illinois River and the Illinois and Michigan Canal Heritage Corridor. The trail would promote Abraham Lincoln's legacy to Illinois and the Nation, and would emphasize important existing historic and cultural sites along the route.
H.R. 1513 would also require an additional study to extend the Lincoln National Historic Trail down the Sangamon River from Beardstown to Springfield, Illinois.
We look forward to the testimony that we will receive this morning on these bills, and I recognize Mr. Bereuter, the sponsor of H.R. 588, and Mr. Weller, the sponsor of H.R. 1513. Also, Mr. Pickett from Virginia is here to introduce Mr. Lukei of the American Discovery Trail Society.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. VENTO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to welcome the witnesses and especially our colleagues, Mr. Bereuter, Mr. Weller and others that are here to offer their support.
I understand—earlier this session, Congressman Schaefer and I got together, and we have an informal group known as the Congressional Trails Caucus. This is a week in which there is a lot of focus of attention on these trails. Also, I understand there is a group in town this week concerned about other matters that have some impact on this.
In any case, I would just like to point out to the Chairman, I think it is prudent to have hearings and to move forward the issue that the American Discovery Trail has been subjected to, an overall study, so we have the benefit of the Park Service views on this, and analysis; and that will be very helpful, if and when, and I hope we do move forward with it.
I would just suggest that these trails are an increasingly important part of our recreational and cultural experience, Mr. Chairman, as you are well aware.
I note that, in my community, I have been invited to speak before a religious group that is celebrating its 150th anniversary with regards to the beginning of a trip. I am referring, of course, to the Mormon experience, and their role in terms of our culture and our community and building our community. In any case, those trails have been designated; I think we see them as important.
We have all sorts of opportunities for recreational trails. I myself use those types of trails extensively in and around our area. This weekend I was out biking for 40 miles on one of those. Yes, I made it back and forth, Mr. Chairman. In any case, I think they are going to play these green fingers and the opportunity to in fact use those resources as a very important aspect, as is the impact that these designations have on the adjacent lands and the impact, for instance, in terms of individuals' concerns about that, so we have to be cognizant of both.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I think this offers the opportunity for true partnerships with State governments, local governments, in terms of providing recreational and the identification of cultural and historic resources; and I especially want to commend my colleague, Mr. Bereuter, who has been working on this for about 5 or 6 years, for his continuity of interest and effort and want to support him and Mr. Schaefer, who is my cochairman, or cochair of this informal group known as the Trails Caucus. We want to work with folks, and I appreciate—and I think most do—the fact you focused on this hearing today.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from Minnesota, and in my many years of serving on this committee with the gentleman from Minnesota, we have looked at a lot of trails. We did the Great Western Trail, extending from Mexico to Canada, up to the Rocky Mountains, and this is a very interesting thing we are doing in America at this particular time.
The gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Bereuter, we are privileged to have you here. We will hear from you first; then the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. here to have you here. We will hear from you first; then the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Weller.
The time is yours, sir.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. DOUG BEREUTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BEREUTER. Chairman Hansen, Congressman Vento, Congressman Jones, and members of the subcommittee, it is homecoming week for me. I spent my first two terms on this subcommittee. Although this is my first appearance as a witness in the Walter Jones Hearing Room, it must give you special satisfaction, Congressman.
I would like to begin by thanking you very much for scheduling this hearing and giving me an opportunity to express the case for the passage of H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act, which I reintroduced on February 5, 1997. I first introduced this legislation during the 104th Congress as H.R. 3250.
I would like to begin by stating that in an exceptional display of support, H.R. 588 has already attracted a bipartisan mix of more than 50 cosponsors—and I might say, this is without any effort or one-to-one, person-to-person lobbying on my part. These cosponsors represent both rural and urban districts and cover very diverse geographic areas. The list of cosponsors includes members from 19 States, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia.
Mr. Chairman and colleagues, I believe it is easy to see why this legislation has attracted such widespread support. It represents the product of a true grass-roots effort and it is designed to provide a unique trail experience for millions of Americans. I believe that this legislation is a tremendously positive and exciting step forward in both the development and in the connection of trails in America.
The bill contains two important components. First, it creates a new category of trails, designated as the National Discovery Trails. This new category will complete a missing gap in the current National Trails System by establishing a link between urban and rural trails. Second, the legislation will designate the American Discovery Trail—I will call it ADT—as the first trail in the new category.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This trail, the ADT, was first proposed by the American Hiking Society and Backpacker magazine in 1989. In 1991, a scouting team hiked and biked its way across America, working with local citizen groups and local State and Federal land managers to map the route of ADT. Legislation enacted in 1992, Public Law 102–461, authorized a feasibility study for the trail, which the National Park Service completed in January of 1996.
The ADT is truly unique. It is the first trail to extend from coast to coast. It is also the first national trail designed to connect urban areas to wilderness areas. The designation of ADT, a multiuse trail, itself creates a national system of connected trails and links large cities and communities of all sizes across the Nation with majestic forest and remote desert landscapes. ADT also links such nationally known trails as the Appalachian and Pacific Crest Trails with numerous local trails across the United States. Along the way, it provides access to countless historic cultural and scenic landmarks.
I introduced the House version of this bill because I believe that the ADT will provide outstanding family-oriented recreational opportunities for all Americans. It will serve as the transcontinental backbone for a growing National Trails System by linking together a variety of local, regional and national trails and making them more accessible. In addition, ADT will offer important economic development benefits to the communities along the route.
States and communities are also justifiably excited about the increased tourism opportunities which the ADT will present and are asking to be included or want to know how they can hook on. In that regard, I have had several experiences in my own State of communities wanting to know how they can assure that they are a part of the trail. I received, for example, a letter from the mayor of York, Nebraska, my birthplace. Last year the city of York recognized the benefit of the ADT and took the initiative to request that the city be included on the route. I am pleased to say that their request was accommodated.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I also clearly want to stress and stress again that the ADT takes into account private property concerns by routing almost all of the trail on public lands—mostly public road, highway rights of way. I understand that a private property rights advocate, Bill Theis, also will testify later this morning, and I would like to reassure him and everyone else that one of the basic principles on which the ADT has been developed has been to avoid routing on private property.
The ADT is 6,356 miles long and almost entirely on public lands. As it is proposed, only approximately 58 miles of the route are located on private property and then only locations where there are existing rights-of-way or agreement with existing trails or by invitation. Private property rights would be fully protected through language in the bill which mandates that, quote, ''No lands or interests outside the exterior boundaries of federally administered areas may be acquired by the United States solely for the American Discovery Trail,'' so it doesn't provide eminent domain or opportunities, it simply does not raise this issue. And if that is raised because of the very straightforward reassurances to the contrary, I think you would understand that opposition in this respect would be a red herring.
I would also like to take a moment to mention the importance of the ADT in my home State as one example of the impact across the country. In Nebraska, the trail passes through Omaha, Lincoln, Grand Island, Kearney, North Platte, Ogallala, and numerous small communities. Trails groups throughout the State have been energized by the ADT, since they have realized the important role they will play in this unique national trails initiative.
Nebraska, of course, like many States, has a rich trails history, and I am pleased that the ADT gives trails enthusiasts the opportunity to explore the most popular and significant of the pioneer trails to the West Coast and the mountain region.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Mormon trail, I might say, I participated with some people re-creating the trip from eastern Nebraska, two locations, one in my district and one near it, across the State, all the way to the Salt Lake City region. They will be arriving there, Mr. Chairman; you can tell me exactly when, but I think it is in late July. I noticed the impact it had on schoolchildren along the way as they made a special effort to explain what was happening, what life had been like in this vast, uncharted prairie country 150 years ago; and people came back from Utah, for example, to commemorate people who lost their lives along the way. But this route in Nebraska takes the same course as the Mormon Trail, the Oregon Trail and the California Trail, as well as a Pony Express Trail and the route of the first transcontinental railroad.
Additionally, I would highlight the trails effort by the city of Lincoln, Nebraska, in relation to ADT, they showed a high level of enthusiasm for the ADT, which has become the focal point for the city's trails programs. They received recently a great deal of fame and success in their trails effort, but I won't go into great detail, you have got that in the record.
The city of Lincoln's example demonstrates, I think, the positive impact the ADT has had on communities through counterpart activities already. The community has worked hard to create an outstanding trail system, and it is clear these efforts were energized by the ADT.
I think this is an appropriate opportunity to acknowledge and commend Mr. Reese Lukei, Jr., the ADT national coordinator. I understand he will also testify in front of this subcommittee for this legislation. From the beginning, Reese has been an energetic and tireless advocate for the ADT. His impressive efforts along with the American Hiking Society certainly raised awareness of the trail and support for it.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The ADT is supported not only by the American Hiking Society, but also the National Parks and Conservation Association, American Trails, American Volkssport Association and numerous local trails organizations. I would also like to briefly mention two books about the ADT which have been published. I have them here. One is an explorer's guide, edited by Reese Lukei; and the other is a firsthand account of a journey along the trail written by Ellen Dudley and Eric Seaborg, members of the 1990–91 trail-scouting team who have submitted testimony for this hearing. These books describe the unique and fascinating qualities of the ADT.
[The information can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. Finally, I would conclude by mentioning that although the ADT is national in scope, this important trails project is made possible by grass-roots efforts on the State and local levels. Enactment of this legislation is critically needed in order for the ADT to achieve its outstanding potential. With the passage of this bill, we will help ensure the ADT will offer benefits for generations to come.
I have not been on the entire 6,300 miles of the trail, Mr. Vento; I have been at both ends. But I think you have seen parts of it, and I have seen other parts of it and walked on them or biked on them, and this is an outstanding effort, I hope this committee will be able to advance.
Thank you.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Bereuter. We appreciate your testimony.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The statement of Mr. Bereuter follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. DOUG BEREUTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FOR THE STATE OF NEBRASKA
Chairman Hansen, Delegate Faleomavaega, and Members of the Subcommittee: I would like to begin by thanking you very much for scheduling this hearing and giving me the opportunity to express the case for the passage of H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act, which I re-introduced on February 5, 1997. I first introduced this legislation during the 104th Congress as H.R. 3250.
I would like to begin by stating that in an exceptional display of support, H.R. 588 has already attracted a bipartisan mix of more than 50 cosponsors. These cosponsors represent both rural and urban districts and cover very diverse geographic areas. The list of cosponsors includes Members from 19 states, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia.
Mr. Chairman, colleagues, I believe it's easy to see why this legislation has attracted such widespread support. It represents the product of a true grassroots effort, and it is designed to provide a unique trail experience for millions of Americans. I believe that this legislation is a tremendously positive and exciting step forward in both the development and in the connection of trails in America.
The bill contains two important components: First, it creates a new category of trails, designated as the National Discovery Trails. This new category will complete a missing gap in the current National Trails System by establishing a link between urban and rural trails. Second, the legislation will designate the American Discovery Trail (ADT) as the first trail in the new category.
This trail was first proposed by the American Hiking Society and Backpacker magazine in 1989. In 1990-91, a scouting team hiked and biked its way across America, working with local citizen groups and local, state, and Federal land managers to map the route of the ADT. Legislation enacted in 1992 (Public Law 102-461) authorized a feasibility study for the trail, which the National Park Service completed in January 1996.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The ADT is truly unique. It is the first trail to extend from coast-to coast. It's also the first national trail designed to connect urban areas to wilderness areas. This multi-use trail itself creates a national system of connected trails and links large cities with majestic forests and remote desert landscapes. The ADT also links such nationally noted trails as the Appalachian and the Pacific Crest trails with numerous local trails across the U.S. Along the way, it provides access to countless historic, cultural and scenic landmarks.
I introduced the House version of this bill because I believe that the ADT will provide outstanding, family-oriented recreational opportunities for all Americans. It will serve as the transcontinental backbone for a growing national trails system by linking together a variety of local, regional and national trails and making them more accessible.
In addition, the ADT will offer important economic development benefits to the communities along its route. States and communities are also justifiably excited about the increased tourism opportunities which the ADT will present and are asking to be included or want to know how they can ''hook on.'' In that regard, I would like to submit for the record the letter I received from the mayor of York, Nebraska. Last year the City of York recognized the benefits of the ADT and took the initiative to request that the city be included on the route. I am pleased to say that their request was accommodated.
I also clearly want to stress and re-stress that the ADT takes into account private property concerns by routing almost all of the trail on public lands. I understand that a private property rights advocate, Bill Theis, will also testify later this morning and I would like to reassure him and everyone else that one of the basic principles on which the ADT has been developed has been to avoid routing it on private property. The ADT is 6,356 miles long and almost entirely on public lands.
As it is proposed, only approximately 58 miles of the route are located on private property and then only in locations where there are existing rights-of-way or agreements with existing trails or by invitation. Private property rights would be fully protected through language in the bill which mandates that ''no lands or interests outside the exterior boundaries of federally administered areas may be acquired by the United States solely for the American Discovery Trail.''
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I would also like to take a moment to mention the importance of the ADT in my home state. In Nebraska, the trail passes through Omaha, Lincoln, Grand Island, Kearney, North Platte, Ogallala and numerous small communities. Trails groups throughout the state have been energized by the ADT since they have realized the important role they will play in this unique national trail initiative.
Nebraska has a rich trails history and I am pleased that the ADT gives trails enthusiasts the opportunity to explore the most popular and significant of the pioneer trails to the West Coast—the Mormon Trail, the Oregon Trail and the California Trail—as well as the Pony Express Trail and the route of the first transcontinental railroad.
Additionally, I would highlight the trails efforts by the City of Lincoln, Nebraska in relation to the ADT. Lincoln has shown a high level of enthusiasm for the ADT, which has become a focal point for the city's trails program. I am pleased that Lincoln's extensive trails efforts were recently rewarded. Last month, the American Hiking Society announced that Lincoln was chosen as a charter member of the Trail Town USA Hall of Fame. A panel of judges including representatives from USA Today, the American Society of Travel Agents, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, rated the City of Lincoln as the number seven community in the nation for trails. The judges based the awards on more than a dozen criteria including miles of trails, future plans, and volunteer and government support. Two other urban areas in this top ten list are also located on the ADT route.
The City of Lincoln's example demonstrates the kind of positive impact the ADT has had on communities throughout the nation. The community has worked hard to create an outstanding trails system and it is clear that these efforts were energized by the ADT. Lincoln's strong commitment to the development of trails will continue to pay dividends in the form of increased tourism, economic development and recreational opportunities for its citizens.
This is an appropriate opportunity to acknowledge and commend Mr. Reese Lukei, Jr., the ADT's national coordinator. I understand that he will also testify before the Subcommittee in support of the legislation. From the beginning, Reese has been an energetic and tireless advocate for the ADT. His impressive efforts, along with the work of the American Hiking Society, have certainly helped raise awareness about the trail and support for it.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The American Discovery Trail is supported by not only the American Hiking Society, but also the National Parks and Conservation Association, American Trails, American Volkesport Association and numerous local trails organizations. I would also like to briefly mention two books about the ADT which have been published. One is an explorer's guide edited by Reese Lukei and the other is a firsthand account of a journey along the trail written by Ellen Dudley and Eric Seaborg, members of the 1990-91 trail-scouting team, who have submitted testimony for this hearing. These books describe the unique and fascinating qualities of the ADT.
Finally, I would conclude by mentioning that although the ADT is national in scope, this important trails project is made possible by the grassroots efforts on the state and local level. Enactment of this legislation is critically needed in order for the ADT to achieve its outstanding potential. With passage of this bill, we will help ensure that the ADT will offer benefits for generations to come.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 588.
LETTER TO HON. DOUG BEREUTER FROM GREG ADAMS, THE MAYOR OF YORK, NEBRASKA
June 4, l997
Representative Doug Bereuter
2348 Rayburn, House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Doug:
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Your continued support of the National Discovery Trail System and the American Discover Trail Route is to be commended.
Completion of the American Discovery Trail Route in the York area would afford billing enthusiasts additional recreational opportunities and provide a direct link with larger population centers providing access to additional recreational facilities. Outdoor recreation interest, biking in particular, has grown tremendously in the York area in recent years and we believe this trend will continue into the 21st century
The economic benefit resulting from users of the proposed trail system is difficult to project. However, it is with certainty that York and other communities along the American Discovery Trail Route will realize a positive economic impact. Users, and in some cases their support groups, will need food, lodging, and supplies as they enjoy this recreational experience.
Again, we urge your continued support for the American Discovery Trail System.
Very truly yours,
CITY OF YORK
Greg Adams,
Mayor
Mr. HANSEN. The Honorable Jerry Weller, we are grateful to have you with us.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JERRY WELLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am also grateful for the hearing you are providing for H.R. 1513. I also want to thank Mr. Vento and Mr. Jones for the opportunity to be with you today and to testify on behalf of this legislation, which I feel is both an important and exciting initiative, a bill to designate the Lincoln Historic Trail, legislation that has earned bipartisan support in Illinois delegation.
Before I go on, I would like to take an opportunity to recognize Leonard Lock, Chairman of the city of Ottawa Historic Preservation Commission, and one of those who, almost 20 years ago, was a pioneer, leading an effort to establish the Illinois-Michigan Canal Heritage Corridor through Illinois. Mr. Lock has taken his time to join us today to testify—and will be testifying later this morning—to be with us and share his knowledge and insight on Lincoln's history throughout Illinois and, of course, his reason for naming this particular trail after Abraham Lincoln.
I would like to briefly talk about this bill, which would designate the Lincoln National Historic Trail as a component of the National Trails System. This trail would consist of a 350-mile stretch generally following the Illinois River and the Illinois-Michigan Canal Heritage Corridor. The trail would begin at the Chicago Portage National Historic site and conclude at the Lewis and Clark Trail at Wood River.
My legislation resulted from a feasibility study conducted by the National Park Service. The Park Service was directed by Congress to determine the feasibility and desirability of establishing the ''Illinois Trail'' as a National Scenic or National Historic Trail. I should mention here that my legislation changes the name from ''Illinois Trail'' to ''Lincoln Trail,'' but it is the exact same trail that was studied. The Park Service concluded the proposed trail met the criteria for both national historic trails and national scenic trails, but that a historic trail would be most feasible.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As I mentioned, the trail would generally follow the Illinois River and the I&M Canal. The Illinois River was used for commerce and transportation during Lincoln's day, although French settlers were using it for trade long before Lincoln's time. As a matter of fact, Abraham Lincoln, while serving as a State legislator, was a proponent of building the canal between the Chicago River and the Illinois River at LaSalle, which was a major navigational improvement that helped position Chicago as a major economic center, which it has since become and achieved that goal.
There would be interpretive sites along the trail of historical significance. For instance, the trail would go through Ottawa, Illinois, the site of the first of the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates. Others include the old Beardstown courthouse, which is the only remaining courtroom where Abraham Lincoln practiced law.
I also might note that the studies show that this route comes at a very low cost with little land acquisition and is the route preferred by the State of Illinois according to the Park Service study.
The Park Service would develop and manage access areas and facilities to allow recreational boating on the historic waterway. The Park Service would be responsible for administration of the trail and would work with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to coordinate trail facility development, as well as areas for picnicking and camping. Designation of the ''Lincoln National Historic Trail'' would increase tourism, conservation and recreation while reinforcing Abraham Lincoln's contributions to our Nation's history.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Creation of the Lincoln National Historic Trail will bring history and nature enthusiasts to the region for biking, camping, boating and other recreational activities. This increased tourism will improve local economies along the route. The folks that come to visit the Lincoln Trail will eat in local establishments, stay in local hotels, and patronize local establishments to rent and purchase skates, cycling equipment and other items. A U.S. Department of Interior study on the Impact of Rails-to-Trails found the average trail user spent between $4 and $11 a day, generating an annual impact of $1.2 million or more. Due to the length of the length of the trail, we would expect this number to be much higher. This plan is great for economic development throughout the State of Illinois.
There is some evidence that having a trail such as this adjacent to property will increase its value. The survey of real estate agents completed on a similar trail in Washington State revealed that property near the trail sells for an average of 6 percent more.
To summarize, my legislation, H.R. 1513, would designate the proposed ''Illinois Trail'' as a national historic trail, while changing the name to the Lincoln National Historic Trail. I have also included a provision that requests a study of an extension of the trail along the Sangamon River from Beardstown to Springfield. This would be a water-based route and would emphasize important historic and cultural sites along the river, ending at Springfield, Abraham Lincoln's hometown.
Finally, I would like to express my support for the other piece of legislation the committee is looking at today, the American Discovery Trail, a bill by Congressman Bereuter. I am pleased to endorse his initiative.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I ask for your support, and I also want to thank you for this hearing today and the opportunity to present this legislation.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you for your testimony.
[The statement of Mr. Weller follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY WELLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for having me here today to talk about a very exciting piece of legislation—a bill to designate the Lincoln National Historic Trail. Before I go on, I would like to recognize Leonard Lock, Chairman of the City of Ottawa Historic Preservation Commission, who has taken his time to come out to Washington to be with us today and share his knowledge and insight on Lincoln history throughout Illinois. Mr. Lock will present his testimony shortly.
I would like to briefly talk about this bill, which would designate the Lincoln National Historic Trail as a component of the National Trails System. This trail would consist of a 350 mile stretch generally following the Illinois River and the Illinois and Michigan Canal Heritage Corridor. The trail would begin at the Chicago Portage National Historic site, and conclude at the Lewis and Clark Trail at Wood River.
My legislation resulted from a feasibility study that was conducted by the National Park Service. The Park Service was directed by Congress to determine the feasibility and desirability of establishing the ''Illinois Trail'' as a National Scenic or National Historic Trail. I should mention here that my legislation changes the name from ''Illinois Trail'' to ''Lincoln Trail,'' but is the exact same trail that was studied. The Park Service concluded that the proposed trail met the criteria for both national historic trails and national scenic trails, but that an historic trail would be most feasible.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As I mentioned, the trail would generally follow the Illinois River and I&M Canal. The Illinois River was used for commerce and transportation during Lincoln's day, although French settlers were using it for trade long before Lincoln's time. As a matter of fact, Abraham Lincoln, while serving as a state legislator, was a proponent of building the canal between the Chicago River and the Illinois River at LaSalle, which was a major navigational improvement that helped to position Chicago as a major economic center. There would be interpretive sites along the trail that have historical significance. For instance, the trail would go through Ottawa, Illinois—the site of the first of the infamous Lincoln-Douglas debates. Other historical sites include the old Beardstown Courthouse, which is the only remaining courtroom where Abraham Lincoln practiced law.
The Park Service would develop and manage river access areas and facilities to allow recreational boating on the historic waterway. The Park Service would be responsible for administration of the trail, and would work with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to coordinate trail and facility development, as well as areas for picnicking and camping. Designation of the ''Lincoln National Historic Trail'' would increase tourism, conservation, and recreation while reinforcing Lincoln's contributions to our nation's history.
Creation of the Lincoln National Historic Trail will bring history and nature enthusiasts to the region for biking, camping, boating and other recreational activities. This increased tourism will improve local economies along the route. The folks that come to visit the Lincoln Trail will eat in local establishments, stay in local hotels, and patronize local establishments to rent or purchase skates, bicycling equipment and other such items. A U.S. Department of Interior study on the Impacts of Rails-to-Trails found that the average trail user spent between $4 and $11 per day, generating an annual impact of $1.2 million or more. Due to the length of the Lincoln Trail, we could expect this number to be much higher. This plan is great for economic development throughout the state of Illinois. There is some evidence that having a trail such as this adjacent to property will increase its value. A survey of real estate agents completed on a similar trail in Washington State revealed that property near the trail sells for an average of 6 percent more.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
To summarize, my bill, H.R. 1513, would designate the proposed ''Illinois Trail'' as a national historic trail, while changing the name to the ''Lincoln National Historic Trail.'' I have also included a provision that requests a study of an extension of the trail along the Sangamon River from Beardstown to Springfield. This would be a water-based route, and would emphasize important historic and cultural sites along the river, ending at Springfield, Abraham Lincoln's birthplace.
Finally, I would like to express my support for the other piece of legislation we are looking at today, the American Discovery Trail bill by Congressman Bereuter. I am a co-sponsor of this legislation, and am pleased to lend my support. I urge the Committee to move favorably and approve H.R. 1513, to designate the ''Lincoln National Historic Trail.''
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Minnesota, do you have questions for our colleagues?
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, with regards to Mr. Weller's legislation, I haven't examined the study, but there is this nomenclature issue with regards to what best description occurs; and the gentleman sitting next to you represents Lincoln, Nebraska, so the name gets used often, so I think you ought to think long and hard about that.
I asked the staff, Rick Healy on the Minority side—and I think the issue is, if you want to attach Lincoln's name, you might want to talk about the canal as being the Lincoln Canal and try to keep nomenclature accurate with regards to the Illinois Trail, because it does follow the river. So I would suggest that as an alternative; it isn't enough, but I think you want to be accurate with regards to how you designate that.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
My colleague from Nebraska has put forth and been working—I said 5 years, and I guess it has been 8 years you have been working on this particular proposal; and it is a very ambitious proposal in terms of its length and breadth in covering the Nation. Later we are going to hear some corrections from the Park Service about this, and they are going to discuss some of the conflicts that are inherent.
I sponsored this bill with you, I think it is important enough, although it is a generic change to the basic trails legislation with regards to motorized use, in order to avoid or at least keep this tied together. I haven't looked at this in as much detail as I should have, Congressman Bereuter, but what segments, or how many miles? Have you separated any of the mileage out in terms of how much would be motorized and how much would not be motorized?
Mr. BEREUTER. No, I don't know the answer to that. Perhaps one of the witnesses involved in the initial pioneer scouting trail will. I would say that the predominant amount of the 6,000-plus miles are on rights-of-way, existing rights-of-way, but of course there are a number of areas it does cross State parks or national forests, and those oftentimes do not follow.
Mr. VENTO. I think it is a good concept to tie together national lands and State parks and other units along the way that give people the experience.
At the end of this, you said you hadn't covered it all, but I suppose when you run for President, this will be one of your commitments, to in fact entirely tread this trail, or at least bike it part way.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BEREUTER. I am more realistic, I hope, about the opportunity to pass this legislation than I am about any intention to run for President, I think.
Mr. WELLER. May I respond to Mr. Vento's question regarding the nomenclature?
Mr. HANSEN. Surely.
Mr. WELLER. Illinois, we are very proud to call, ''The Land of Lincoln'' and of course, other than—we recognize he was born in Kentucky, but he spent his entire professional life, other than while he served briefly in the Congress and while he served as one of our Nation's greatest Presidents, in Illinois.
This trail would start in Chicago where Abraham Lincoln was nominated for President, and I just think, when you think of Illinois, you think of Abraham Lincoln; and that is why we feel it is an appropriate name for a national trail.
Mr. VENTO. This is a pristine logic, Mr. Chairman. I would just suggest, I think there are two separate sites; there is the homestead site for Lincoln in Illinois, in Springfield, but there is another site as well.
In any case, I think in terms of the public's looking at these, they expect it may bring those together or actually have a connection with, for instance, Kentucky; which I think makes the point that I am trying to, you know, in terms of communicating this to those that understand the history better than I, and as well as you, Mr. Weller.
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In any case, I would offer it as a way of, you know, recognizing where his role was significant in terms of the establishment of the Michigan-Illinois Canal, the Heritage site, and obviously you would accomplish both goals, and you do it in such a way as to be consistent and so operating isn't obviously a big point.
Mr. WELLER. And I am most anxious to work with you in a bipartisan manner, and I appreciate that.
Mr. VENTO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you.
The colleague from Nebraska, I often wonder, at the National Governors Conference—the counties, the mayors—any support or comment or objection to your bill? Do any of these groups come forth?
Mr. BEREUTER. I have not received comments from them on it one way or the other. There have been news articles lately in some of the national publications, which indicate support from individual governors and, of course, wide numbers of mayors. I have had no one contact me in my own State in a negative sense, either public official or nonpublic, but I don't believe that any of the national associations of public officials of various varieties have taken a position on it one way or the other. Perhaps I am more delinquent in not asking them to do that.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. You have kept them aware and apprised of what is going on, and so far you have had no comments?
Mr. BEREUTER. That is correct.
Mr. HANSEN. In your testimony, you make a point of the idea, it would not acquire private land or any private property. Do you intend that that would occur anywhere? I mean, this is the most ambitious trail I have ever looked at, and I wonder if you envisioned any of that occurring along the line.
Mr. BEREUTER. As you know, there are only 58 miles that are not now on public rights-of-way or public lands, and those have existing agreements that have been acquired at this point. My view is that the only real source of opposition to this legislation could come from people that are concerned about the taking of private property, and so I simply wanted to set aside that issue, because the people who have worked with me over a period of time have indicated it is not necessary to have an opportunity for eminent domain, and in fact, they go beyond that and say we do not anticipate nor want the right, under the legislation, to acquire private property, even from willing sellers. Fifty-eight miles in 6,300 is such an insignificant amount, and there is no reason, of course, why one needs to have it all on public land as long as you have arrangements with the owners of the 58 miles.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I would say this. You may have noticed that the legislation, which prohibits the acquisition of private land, does not apply to the category of trails being created, only to the American Discovery Trail itself; and I would leave to your judgment, as a trail-by-trail consideration of future legislation, whether or not you wanted to prohibit the acquisition of private land on new trails that might be added under this category.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But I simply did not want to face that difficulty, because I don't think it is essential to the success of this trail, and I didn't want to have that raised as an argument against this particular trail, the American Discovery Trail. But you will have the judgment in the future, unless you would prefer to change the legislation and make the prohibition a categoric one that would apply to future trails.
Mr. HANSEN. I have noticed, in the little bit I have seen of your legislation, a lot of it is contiguous to interstates, State roads, areas such as that. They are constantly changing interstates or adding lanes and they are changing direction. Does that give you any concern at all? Do we have a conflict anywhere with that?
Mr. BEREUTER. We think that there needs to be an ongoing effort on the part of the nonprofit organization in working with the National Park Service, and of course, the Department of Transportation and its State equivalents, to modify the trail in the future as the specific route changes, because there is a right-of-way change. Generally those changes would be modest, it would seem, especially in the part of the country—you have a heavy roads system with lots of county roads in my part of the country, of course, on a square-mile basis. But in some parts of the country, like your own, there aren't that many alternatives in the more sparcely settled parts of the Nation west of you.
So I do think you need to have an ongoing effort as roads change, as rights-of-way are selected—for the route might change modestly, I would think—to redesignate that particular 2- to 5-mile, 10-mile stretch, whatever it might be.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. On the Great Western Trail, we hooked up existing trails; we put signs up saying, ''This is the Great Western Trail.'' To this day, it isn't completed, but it starts in Mexico, and parts are motorized, there are parts of only walking trails. I guess we can take animals on most of them. Most of this is done by volunteers who have volunteered their time——
Mr. BEREUTER. That is correct.
Mr. HANSEN. [continuing] and have spent an awful lot of time improving the trails and have worked with local governments. It really hasn't cost the Federal Government much money at all. What do you anticipate, cost-wise, on this?
Mr. BEREUTER. The Park Service at this point would indicate that the comprehensive plan developed by the nonprofit organization, which would be presented to you and your equivalent in the other body, would cost $360,000; then the annual cost is estimated to be $200,000 for signing and the relatively small amount of maintenance that relates to the trail.
So we are obviously talking about a trails enthusiasts' volunteer effort. If they are talking about—only about that amount of signing, you know that doesn't go very far. I do think, as you probably were noting yourself, that the refinement of a trail, through the markings and through the development of it, is an ongoing process.
I am very proud of the fact that the Lewis and Clark Trail, basically a water trail, passes on the boundary of my State; and some time ago, with the help of this committee, I gave some incentives for local groups to designate all of the Lewis and Clark campgrounds. But again, the markers or the kiosks or the outlooks that were developed on public land, that had a lot of volunteer effort as well; and that effort is not complete in the surrounding States.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I think our State is ahead in marking all the campgrounds, but it has provided, incidentally, an opportunity for people in my State and from elsewhere around the country to actually retrace the Lewis and Clark expedition with excerpts from the journal for that day on the signs that are erected; and it is done in a fashion that is consistent with the logo that was established by the National Park Service, so that ultimately, it will tie the whole effort to at least some degree of similarity in marking.
Mr. HANSEN. I have noticed our colleague from Virginia, Mr. Pickett, hasn't arrived.
Mr. VENTO. Just a brief question for Mr. Bereuter. One of the concerns expressed by the Park Service is the exemption from the American Discovery Trail from two sections, and while one authorizes the acceptance of donations in collaboration, through cooperative agreements, the other authorizes land exchanges to protect national trails. These provisions, both of which would be voluntary in this—you know, someone conveying land or an easement or voluntarily entering into a cooperative agreement, or a land exchange, where you have a conflict with the Park Service or the Department of Interior, could accomplish that.
I take it your—you did this consciously, you left these out because you are concerned about not having any authority in here for gaining additional land within the context of it. But it seems to me—I understand the good faith you are trying to show, and even in spite of this, you are—concerns are being raised; but do you understand, my concern is that it seems to me that these tools are important administrative tools, especially for the length and breadth of the trail, so I hope we can work out something, notwithstanding that.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
You are being criticized today in spite of the fact you have done this, but I just think those are reasonable tools that I think the Park Service needs in this instance, especially considering the length, because you can avoid problems by using those tools.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Vento, I knew of the concerns of the Park Service, but in an abundance of caution, we took this step to try to avert any kind of legitimate criticism about expansion of public lands and a concern that local governmental units might lose tax base. You will, of course, have the judgment on that issue. I certainly don't see anything wrong with donating funds, but when you donate land, you are back in a controversy. And I would just point out, once again, page 5, line 8, those three subsections that are exempted in this legislation do not apply to the category, you may have noticed, but it applies only to this trail, this ADT; it does not apply to the category being established.
Mr. VENTO. Of course, the issue here is some can be purchased by nonprofits; we don't have any control over that, so I think continuity would make some sense. If this were, I suppose, threshold questions with regards to what the impact would be, I would say in a rural county, you could have a donation of easement that might diminish the land value or do other things, I don't know, but it seems to me in terms of trying to avoid conflict and provide the type of experience and the meaningful designation that you have been advancing—but I understand your concern. I just wanted to make the observation with regards—because I think some of us would try to administer things, where we have such limited options makes it difficult to accomplish the goals we are trying to achieve, and I think you can understand what I am saying.
Mr. BEREUTER. I do.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. You know, there is nothing easy in the world, especially in Congress, but we will work things out as we go along. I am sure there will be additional questions. In my mind, I am wondering about rights-of-way, gas lines, power lines, all of those things. I don't think we have ever done anything easy around here, have we?
Mr. VENTO. Not when it is 6,000 miles.
Mr. HANSEN. But I do appreciate our two colleagues giving their excellent testimony and the very tantalizing and intriguing proposals you have put before this committee. Thank you for being here. I wish Mr. Pickett could have been with us. We will take his testimony, however. We will excuse you and turn to our first panel.
Our first panel is Katherine Stevenson, Associate Director, Cultural Resources, Stewardship and Partnership, for the National Park Service. We are always grateful to have Katherine Stevenson with us. And Robert C. Joslin, Deputy Chief of the U.S. Forest Service. If those two would come up.
I hope you are all right. Can you suffer through this?
Ms. STEVENSON. Yes, sir. I had thought of telling you that this was the result of a climbing accident or something of the like, but I thought it wouldn't be best to lie to Congress.
Mr. HANSEN. I can understand that. I always like to make it a skiing accident and tell somebody; I really say, I fell down some stairs or something.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Anyway, can both of you handle 5 minutes or what time do you need? Is 5 minutes adequate? OK. You know the rules; just like a traffic light.
We invite both Mr. Weller and Mr. Bereuter to come up if they feel so inclined.
Ms. STEVENSON. Would you like me to testify on both H.R. 588 and H.R. 1513 at the same time.
Mr. HANSEN. If you wouldn't mind. Do you need a few more minutes, maybe 10 minutes?
Ms. STEVENSON. No, I don't need that much time.
Mr. HANSEN. Why don't we give you 7, because I think you are probably going to need the time. I know how good you are at this; you are an old hand at it. We will go ahead and recognize you at this time
STATEMENT OF KATHERINE H. STEVENSON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, STEWARDSHIP AND PARTNERSHIP, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Ms. STEVENSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will submit the full testimony for the record if you would be so kind.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
On H.R. 588, the National Park Service strongly supports enactment, if amended, as proposed in our testimony. As several witnesses before me have pointed out, the bill establishes a new category of long-distance trails, the national discovery trails, and also authorizes the American Discovery Trail as the first national discovery trail.
The National Park Service has been involved in this for a number of years, since 1990 when the ADT was proposed. In 1992, Congress directed a feasibility study, which we completed in December of 1995 and submitted to Congress in 1996. The trail proposed, as you have pointed out, extends over 6,000 miles and the criteria described in the bill will further the goals of the National Trails System by incorporating a variety of cities and towns and will increase public access to the trails system. The primary management responsibility will be with a strong partner and then with us, and we believe very strongly that the partner should be there from the beginning and have a major role in the development, as well as the designation, as has been the case.
The trail largely uses existing trails and trail systems, and you have heard a fair amount of testimony already, that only a handful of private parcels will be authorized, or will be involved, and that an underlying trail exists already, as do voluntary agreements with those private property owners.
On the ever-present issue of cost, the details will be in the comprehensive management plan. The feasibility study said the comprehensive management plan itself would cost $360,000 over the course of several years and that our estimated operating costs would be about $400,000 per year. I refer you to the proposed amendments in our testimony, pages 6 through 9, and I won't address those individually unless you wish.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In H.R. 1513, Interior supports the designation, but not the name or the focus on Lincoln. This bill would again amend the National Trails System Act by adding another national historic trail called the Lincoln National Historic Trail and designating a study trail that would extend the Lincoln Trail. In large measure, this proposal is the trail proposed in the feasibility study called the Illinois Trail that was transmitted to Congress by the National Park Service in 1991. The study itself was conducted from 1984 to 1987, so the study is some 10 years old.
We found the trail to be nationally significant for its historic and prehistoric use as a commerce and transportation corridor. While Abraham Lincoln has a connection, as has been pointed out earlier, to the Illinois and Michigan Canal portion of the trail and perhaps some other portions, we would argue the national significance lies in its role in the development of trade, commerce and transportation, as well as exploration, migration and settlement, so a much broader significance than that of Lincoln alone.
It may well be that a trail directly associated with the life of Lincoln is appropriate, but we have not yet studied this issue and could not support this named designation. Consequently, we recommend that the trail on the Illinois River and waterway route be designated as the Illinois Trail, and the additional study route be deleted until it could be part of an entire Lincoln proposal to be made at a later date.
Thank you very much for considering our comments. We look forward to answering any questions you may have.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. We appreciate your comments.
[The statement of Ms. Stevenson can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Joslin, we will turn the time to you.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT C. JOSLIN, DEPUTY CHIEF, U.S. FOREST SERVICE
Mr. JOSLIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. Thanks for inviting us to come and share our views on H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act of 1997. I brought with me Lyle Laverty, Director of Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness Resources in the Forest Service. As stated, my complete statement has been submitted for the record, so I will summarize that statement and then will be glad to answer questions from you and members of the subcommittee.
The Department of Agriculture does not object to the creation of a new category of trails as proposed by H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act of 1997. You have already heard the background on the American Discovery Trail from Mrs. Stevenson, so I will not repeat it. The National Trails Systems Act consists of eight national scenic trails, 12 national historic trails and over 800 national recreation trails. The Forest Service is responsible for the overall management of more than 125,000 miles of trails in the national forest system.
Trails are a key ingredient to wonderful outdoor, recreational and scenic experience, which is why over 30 million recreation visitor-days are spent each year in trails in the national forests. The success of long distance trails, such as the American Discovery Trail, is dependent on strong State and local support in conjunction with public and private partners. Working cooperatively through partnerships and volunteer groups, as stated in the National Trails Systems Act, would be essential elements of the success of the American Discovery Trail.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We wish to raise two concerns with regard to planning and administering the American Discovery Trail, as stated in H.R. 588. The first point deals with the comprehensive management plan. Section 2(c) of the bill would require that the administering Federal agencies shall enter into arrangements with a competent, trail-wide, nonprofit organization to submit a comprehensive plan.
It is unclear who has the ultimate responsibility for preparing and transmitting the comprehensive plan to Congress. Nonprofit organizations are not responsible to the public or the Congress for consistency with other trail management policies. Allowing non-Federal organizations to be held responsible for land management decisions made in the comprehensive plan also raises concerns under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. We recommend that the bill be amended to provide that the comprehensive management plan would be prepared by the administering Secretary in consultation with the management entity and that the secretary would submit the plan to Congress.
Our second concern deals with how the trail would be administered. H.R. 588 requires the administering Secretary to cooperate with a—quote, a, unquote, competent trail-wide nonprofit organization. This presumably implies that only one nonprofit organization will be involved in the administration of the 6,000-plus mile trail. We believe this is unduly restrictive.
We recommend changing the bill to include one or more private non-Federal entities, which would then provide the opportunity to optimize the benefits to the public and build collaborative stewardship among the public, the nonprofit organizations and the Federal Government.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman, and I will be glad to take any questions you might have.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you very much.
[The statement of Mr. Joslin can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. VENTO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I note with interest the testimony from Mr. Joslin, the Deputy Chief, and I appreciate the testimony. I refer specifically to page 4, Mr. Chairman, where he comments about the relationship between the nonprofit and the Park Service and Forest Service.
Mr. Joslin, Deputy Joslin, would you suggest there ought to be more clarification here, that the Park Service and Forest Service ought to be in a coordinating role of more than one nonprofit, so they—is that your suggestion here?
Mr. JOSLIN. No, sir. The suggestion there—the Park Service would have the administration over this, but the suggestion there is that we include language which would not specifically say, one, which is somewhat limiting, although the language may encompass that now. We believe it should be clarified.
Mr. VENTO. Director Stevenson, how many nonprofits work on, for instance, the Appalachian Trail? Isn't there a multiple number?
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. STEVENSON. Yes, sir, there are many, many nonprofits that work on it. Our experience has been if you have a single group, who is the lead group, that it makes it significantly easier for us to work with them, and it is their responsibility to work cooperatively with the smaller groups and get them together to have a single opinion.
Mr. VENTO. You differ with the Forest Service testimony here?
Ms. STEVENSON. It is a difference of opinion, yes, sir.
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Joslin, does the Forest Service have any nonprofit groups that they work with?
Mr. JOSLIN. Yes, we do, and in connection with the ATC, we agree with the way that works, but there are—the language in there, all we are saying is, if you have the language as it is now, perhaps you might not be able to incorporate——
Mr. VENTO. You are saying you can do one if you want to do one, but you ought to have the flexibility, is what you are saying, so there would be no objection to that?
Mr. JOSLIN. That is correct.
Mr. VENTO. Director Stevenson.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. STEVENSON. Actually, we would have an objection. We feel very strongly there needs to be a lead group.
Mr. VENTO. But you can select or not select the lead group.
Ms. STEVENSON. That leaves you with the position of choosing among them, and if there is a lead group that has to be formed from a larger group, they among themselves decide who the lead group is and agree upon a method of dealing with us. Otherwise, you have enormous difficulty in relating to a large number of people.
Mr. VENTO. I think the concern is, at the end of the day, it is a coordinating role, and if in fact the designated nonprofit were not to be performing, there ought to at least be the recognition that the Forest Service or the Park Service can in fact work with the individuals. I realize it is more difficult to do in that vein, but I don't know that there have been—I guess there have been some problems with regards to the Appalachian Trail; is that correct?
Ms. STEVENSON. No, the Appalachian Trail has worked out very well with a single coordinating group.
Mr. VENTO. Has that—is it designated in the law, per se?
Ms. STEVENSON. I don't believe so.
Mr. VENTO. If it is worked out, I don't understand what the concern is about the added flexibility being added here. If you can do it without the designation in law, why would you want to limit your flexibility?
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. STEVENSON. Our experience was that that was come to after a long and arduous journey. There were many times there were significant differences of opinion. All we are trying to suggest is that we could circumvent some of those problems by saying up front that the groups would choose a single representative to represent all of them and then we would have one relationship, rather than many.
Mr. VENTO. In any case, I think an important point was made here when it was indicated that a significant number of volunteers helped maintain and do a significant number of tasks that relate to enhancing the quality of the trails, that the Forest Service and the Park Service both have had significant volunteer efforts to maintain the trails, is that correct.
Ms. STEVENSON. That is correct.
Mr. VENTO. And I see Mr. Joslin is nodding his head too. Unfortunately, we are on an audio system.
Mr. JOSLIN. Yes.
Mr. VENTO. With regards to the language I referred to, with donations of easements, you obviously favor not having that language in the bill that is in the bill now, the limitations on donations and cooperative agreement.
Ms. STEVENSON. We feel it would be very advantageous for us to have the ability to use every tool at our disposal to make this trail work and therefore they should be included as options for us.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. VENTO. To what extent—in terms of this cooperative agreement and conveying to the nonprofits the responsibility here, to what extent would the Park Service or Forest Service be involved in dealing with, for instance, State parks or State trails or other national units that might be—for instance, BLM, wouldn't the Park Service or Forest Service need to be involved at that particular point and work very closely in order to gain the confidence of those groups in providing easements and working with you and signing?
Ms. STEVENSON. I think I understand your question. We would cooperate with other Federal agencies and with State parks to the fullest extent along the trail.
Mr. VENTO. You both spoke of the fact of the comprehensive plan, but who in the end would be responsible for preparing and submitting the comprehensive plan?
Ms. STEVENSON. The National Park Service in this case.
Mr. VENTO. Even though the work would be done by the nonprofit group, I assume most of this is in here in this way to avoid the cost concerns; and if it were, I suppose, under a different period of time, we might look at it differently. The private group, would they have to comply with, for instance, all the environmental laws, like NEPA.
Ms. STEVENSON. We would prepare such a plan in cooperation with them and assure that all the appropriate laws were met. Then we would be the one who actually had to submit it, that is the process we choose now.
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. VENTO. You would have to go through NEPA yourself.
Ms. STEVENSON. We would meet all Federal laws.
Mr. VENTO. You used NEPA for the study, didn't you.
Ms. STEVENSON. I believe so.
Mr. VENTO. The question I would ask Mr. Bereuter, do you know what the breakdown is in terms of the motorized miles on the 6,000-mile trail.
Ms. STEVENSON. Actually, it is in the report itself.
Mr. VENTO. I will look in there then, if you don't know it off the top of your head, because my light has been on for a minute.
Mr. JOSLIN. Sixty-five percent of it is either paved or graveled.
Mr. VENTO. What does that mean? I mean, for instance, the trail I bike on is paved, this long trail that I do in the gateway, isn't necessarily motorized though.
Ms. STEVENSON. And we may not have that detail. Page 20 of the report has the trail statistics for paved, gravel, and trails and sidewalk.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. VENTO. Even though it is paved or gravel doesn't mean—we have a lot of limestone paths and bike paths, for instance, in Wisconsin. I am from Minnesota, but I do go over there. So I am pointing out that in itself doesn't necessarily indicate it is motorized. In fact, we can't have motorized. In fact, I would get the roller-bladers off there. If you ever tried to pass one of them, they are all over the place.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. No questions.
Mr. HANSEN. Does the gentleman from Illinois have any questions?
Mr. VENTO. The question he should be asking is on the nomenclature there.
Mr. HANSEN. I don't think he wants to. If I may ask, a major provision of H.R. 588 exempts the American Discovery Trail from land acquisition. The testimony states that the National Park Service believes the national discovery trail should not be exempt from Section 7(e) and (f) of the National Trails System Act. This creates the fear that private landowners have concerning this bill or further land acquisition in general.
All you have done is leave Section 7(g) in the bill, which would not allow condemnation. If you are not going to condemn things, is it the intent of the National Park Service to eventually acquire the trail right away for the American Discovery Trails and any subsequent national discovery trails?
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. STEVENSON. May I ask Tom Ross, who is one of our trail specialists and very familiar with the Act to answer that?
Mr. HANSEN. Bring him up. Identify yourself and grab that mike on the other side. Tell us who you are for the record.
Mr. ROSS. Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Tom Ross. I am the Acting Assistant Director for Recreation and Conservation Programs with the National Park Service. I believe the question you raised was in regard to our request to have authority to use those two subsections, under Section 7. They would allow the opportunity for us to participate with the trail organizations in cooperative agreements and also for the Federal Government to carry out land transfers under that authority. Specifically in our testimony, we are in agreement with the bill, which precludes any kind of Federal acquisition authority for this particular trail.
Mr. HANSEN. Do you envision possibly at a later date the National Park Service will ask Congress to authorize and appropriate funds for acquisition.
Mr. ROSS. No, sir. The intent of the entire Discovery Trail category is to build upon the efforts of State, local and the nonprofit groups that are involved in establishing trails and not to create any new federally owned areas.
Mr. HANSEN. Well, do you have any further questions, Mr. Vento.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. VENTO. I just wanted to comment to my colleague in Illinois, there is an Illinois boyhood site for Lincoln in Springfield and one in Kentucky, so there are three different sites. I was trying to recall what the circumstance was.
With regards to your last question, Mr. Chairman, I think the issue that is going to arise is that, of course, if you build this framework, this 6,000-mile framework, it is possible States or local governments or nonprofits will, in fact, fill in the areas and help you. Of course, that does arise.
What comes back to us at that particular time, then, as we were to work with that, would be the question of operating expenses, which have greatly been diminished by all the volunteer efforts. This is the logical extension in terms of what we are doing. There are some questions about the conflicts that occur.
When I joked about the roller-bladers, they also have—they are doing ways of inventing. I mean, once you put the trails in place, you end up with a tremendous number of people. So the caring capacity issue with regard to the trails, especially around some urban areas, is a real important question, you know. So I just would point that out in terms of trying to deal with these.
I mean, there are a lot of questions that arise with regard to motorized use. For instance, if you are actually using freeways or highways, we have fences around them so that people aren't walking around on them. So in these cases, you would not have a contiguous area you could walk in. Is that the point, Ms. Stevenson, or the other member of the Park Service? Can you answer that question? How do you anticipate use of the trail differing in terms of the motorized use, other types of uses? In some areas, you would not be able to take your roller blades; is that right.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. ROSS. That is correct, sir. I think, as the study indicates, a good portion of the American Discovery Trail, initially, will be along roadways and sides of roadways, and that by its nature would not be able to preclude any sort of motorized use.
Mr. VENTO. You can bike though, can't you?
Mr. ROSS. Yes, sir.
Mr. VENTO. That is the important thing.
Mr. HANSEN. We have always been kind of concerned about the trails and I think the general consensus is we feel good about them and they are a part of our culture and history and that type of thing. On the other side of the coin, they seem to be like many government programs. They start out very innocuous and before we long we are pouring money into them and I think that is what Mr. Bereuter is trying to work out.
On the great western trail we worked on, we have scrupulously tried to make sure we are not pouring any Federal money into this thing. I cannot believe the amount of people that go up and clear that trail and they have started societies and organizations and memberships and fraternities and the whole 9 yards about it, and part of the thing in life is to have on your badge that you have both hiked the Appalachian trail, what do they call it, the Pacific Crest Trail and also the Great Western Trail, and I admire the folks who can do it.
I guess we get a little nervous if we anticipate, one, private property being desecrated without a willing seller or willing right of way and, two, the money that has to come out of Congress. On the other side of the coin, there are things that are worth appropriating money for because of the historical nature of it.
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Weller, if I may point out, there seems to be some concern on names in your particular area. Some of us, we have heard, there might be an amendment to change it to Land of Lincoln National Historic Trail. Have you heard that, and if you haven't, would you agree to it?
Mr. WELLER. I was not aware of a Land of Lincoln National Historic Trail and the sponsor of that particular amendment has not discussed it with me.
Mr. VENTO. It is getting better all the time, isn't it?
Mr. WELLER. I am proud Congressman Lipinski represents the area to the north and the city of Chicago is working closely with me, and I am anxious to work with members of the committee in a bipartisan way to move this legislation forward. Clearly, Abraham Lincoln played a very important role for this Nation and Illinois is the land of Lincoln. I am anxious to work with this committee as we move through this process, but I do believe the Lincoln name as part of this national historic trail would be important. I think it is important he have his name as part of that name.
Mr. HANSEN. We appreciate Katherine Stevenson and Robert Joslin for being with us, and the gentleman, is it Watt?
Mr. ROSS. It is Ross, sir.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you for your testimony. Excuse me for not picking that up.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Our second panel is Bill Theis, David Lillard and Reese Lukei. If they would come forward. I understand Mr. Pickett wanted to be here to introduce one of our witnesses. I haven't seen him yet.
We have room for our third panel, Mr. Leonard Lock. Mr. Lock, if you would like to come up, we might as well have you all at the same time. We are grateful for our friend from Virginia, Mr. Pickett. You can join us up here, if you would like to or wherever you are comfortable. We will turn to our friend from Virginia, colleague, Owen Pickett, to any opening statement he may have and any introduction of witnesses he may want to cover
STATEMENT OF THE HON. OWEN B. PICKETT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA
Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you very much for this opportunity. I know you are having a very busy hearing this morning, but I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to come here and introduce to the committee Mr. Reese Lukei of Virginia Beach. He is a gentleman who not only talks about matters involving the National Trail System, but I think perhaps his record of actually using the system either equals or exceeds that of just about anyone else I have ever had occasion to be associated with. So he comes here today with a clear and fully justified bias in favor of the National Trail System, and yet he brings an objective and realistic view that has been built upon, his own experience in using the system, and in helping others and encouraging others to use it also. So I look forward to the testimony of Mr. Lukei here today.
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I commend him for coming and lending his support, and I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to present him and tell you a little bit about his background in the National Park System and what it means to him and to our Nation.
[The statement of Mr. Pickett follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. OWEN B. PICKETT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA
The American Discovery Trail, administered by the American Trails Society, is our nation's first coast to coast multi-use hiking trail. The trail is a 6,356 mile long route that links a patchwork of trails—35 percent existing, the others newly created—that will serve as a connector between the east and west coasts of the United States and inspire interest in outdoors by providing new and better places to explore nature. Although the trail has already been mapped across America, it still needs to be authorized by this Committee in order to be included as a part of the American Trails System.
I was introduced to the American Discovery Trail project by a constituent of mine, Mr. Reese Lukei. Through his efforts, I became a cosponsor of H.R. 3250, the ''American Discovery Trails Act 1996,'' in the 104th Congress, and I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this legislation in the 105th Congress. I am very pleased to have one of my constituents in Washington, today to testify on behalf of this most worthwhile legislation.
Mr. Lukei, an avid trail enthusiast, has been involved in community, state, and national trail projects for several years. He is currently the National Coordinator for the American Discovery Trail, the Vice President of Virginia Trails, an active volunteer with the Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge, located in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and is licensed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to trap and band raptors. Mr. Lukei has received numerous awards from the American Hiking Society, the Daughters of the American Revolution, and the Fish and Wildlife Service for outstanding service and contribution to the trails community. And perhaps the most important of all, he has hiked in all 50 states, every province and territory in Canada, except Newfoundland, seven countries in Europe, and all 2,100 miles of the Appalachian Trail. If this does not make Mr. Lukei an expert on the subject of trails . . . I don't know what would!
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Reese, if I missed anything I apologize, but with limited time and such exceptional background and credentials, it would take me the rest of the morning to present your achievements to the Committee. I would like to reaffirm my strong support for this legislation and thank the Chairman for allowing to speak today.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you very much. I appreciate you being with us. Mr. Weller, did you want to have any introductory remarks of this panel?
Mr. WELLER. Well, thank you, I made reference to Mr. Lock who is part of your panel, I want to thank you for the opportunity for him to testify. Leonard Lock is chairman of the city of Ottawa Historic Preservation Commission and is a Lincoln scholar and has been a real leader in conservation efforts and open space initiatives. I also want to point out that the Illinois-Michigan Canal Heritage Corridor, which has come up today, resulted from the efforts of people like Leonard Lock.
Leonard was one of the leaders, almost a generation ago, in helping to establish the national heritage corridor and with the sponsorship of Tom Corcoran, who served in the Congress and was my mentor in the political process. I want to welcome Mr. Lock and also thank the Chairman for his opportunity to testify.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. You folks heard the rules. Can you handle it in 5 minutes? If you can't, let me know, we will give you a couple minutes longer, but really that is our rules, 5 minutes. You see the light in front of you, it's just like a traffic light. Green, go; yellow start winding up; and red cut it off. We don't give you a ticket if you go over, especially in a loose hearing like this one, but we appreciate if you stay somewhat close. We will start with Mr. Lillard and just go across.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STATEMENT OF DAVID LILLARD, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN HIKING SOCIETY
Mr. LILLARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is David Lillard. I am the President of the American Hiking Society. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to address the subcommittee today. First, I will address the issue of establishing the national discovery trail category within the National Trail System Act and then speak briefly on the authorization of the American Discovery Trail.
The National Trail System Act has made possible 20 long-distance, primarily multi-State trails, but the current construction of the Act does not fully address the changing demand for outdoor recreation in America, which is at an all time high. As called for by President Ronald Regan's Commission on Outdoors, today's families need outdoor recreation opportunities that are closer to home.
Also outlined by President Reagan's Commission, trails and greenways provide cost-effective recreation and bring focus to local and regional park planning by linking existing parks and forests with places where people live and work. The idea of linking people with parks and linking existing parks and trails with one another truly makes a system of the National Trail System, rather than a collection of trails, yet no long distance trail designation within the current Act encourages or accommodates trails which are developed for such purposes.
So the national discovery trail category fulfills the Reagan Commission's recommendations for such linkages. In addition to linking existing parks and trails with one another and with communities, discovery trails by their intent also link outdoor recreation with local commerce. By bringing discovery trails into cities, small town and suburbs, local businesses have provided a regional focus for commercial activity.
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Discovery trails also promise a vehicle for promoting regional tourism, an opportunity already seized upon by the tourism offices of the States of Nebraska, Colorado and West Virginia. So although the benefits and primary use of discovery trails would be local and regional, the new category of trail does indeed recognize corridors that are nationally significant. Discovery trails are nationally significant because they provide the possibility of linkages we have talked about. They invite States and local governments to think cooperatively about a national trail while making their own decisions that meet their own needs and they allow Americans to discover for themselves the regional diversity which is America, a discovery that will foster an appreciation of shared American values and an understanding of regional differences, whether East and West or urban and rural.
Although they are nationally significant, discovery trails do not require Federal management on trail lanes outside of Federal acreage. In fact, as we discussed, Discovery Trail categories require in place a citizen-led, nonprofit organization to support the trail before it is even designated by Congress. Still, there is a very important Federal role in Discovery Trails, that of the convenient and the technical assistance.
The Federal Government has a vast range of expertise and experience that would help State, local and other Federal decisionmakers, as well as nonprofit organizations to coordinate their activities and their planning. This is a bold idea for Federal involvement in trails. It says to Americans, if your community wants our assistance, we will participate in your efforts. It also challenges States which develop discovery trails to utilize innovative means for conserving trail corridors, including conservation easements, voluntary transfer of development rights, privately funded land trust and conservancy, so I stress local and voluntary and private and local involvement.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This emphasis on linkages makes the most of the American investment in parks and trails, the reliance on local decisionmaking, and the private sector involved in the administration of Discovery Trails have been enthusiastically embraced by the trail community and the Members of this chamber, an enthusiasm illustrated by the more than 50 cosponsors of the measure.
On the authorization of the American Discovery Trail within the new category, the ADT fully meets the criteria for the National Discovery Trail designation in H.R. 588. First, it meets the linkage criteria by linking together cities of Washington, Cincinnati, Kansas City and Denver and also links nationally significant trails as has been outlined.
Second, it does meet the qualification criteria of a nonprofit organization. The ADT Society is incorporated as a 501(c)(3) and was formed specifically to promote and care for this trail. Clearly, at the local level people want this trail. Third, it meets interstate criterias as has been clearly outlined.
In closing, the American Discovery Trail is a nationally significant grand idea. It presents new ways of getting big things done by putting them into the hands of people who care about them the most. It has generated a lot of excitement within the States long underserved by Federal recreation programs, such as Nebraska and Kansas and others and these States deserve our gratitude and encouragement, along with Federal recognition and assistance on the project. ADT was ahead of its time when it was conceived, but this Congress gives us hope that its time has come. Thank you.
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The statement of Mr. Lillard can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you.
Mr. Lukei.
STATEMENT OF MR. LUKEI, JR., NATIONAL COORDINATOR, AMERICAN DISCOVERY TRIAL SOCIETY
Mr. LUKEI. Chairman Hansen and members of the subcommittee, I am Reese Lukei, Jr.. I am and have been for the past 7 years, the national coordinator of the American Discovery Trail, a project begun in 1989 by the American Hiking Society and Backpacker Magazine to, one, establish our Nation's first coast-to-coast multiuse recreational trail through a nationwide grass-roots effort.
Two, connect as many existing local and regional national trails together as possible. Three, route the trail through large metropolitan cities, bringing it closer to where people live. And, four, provide encouragement to local citizen groups and municipalities to develop and maintain trails in their area. Under the National Trail System Act, eight national scenic trails have been created under the model established by the trail and are mostly located in remote areas, avoiding urban areas.
In the past 30 years, a number of studies by Federal agencies, the outdoor recreation industry and the housing industry, all indicate that recreational trail use has increased tremendously and is expected to continue to do so, and that people want to recreate closer to where they live. The proposed long distance trail category, national discovery trails, and the American Discovery Trail, will recognize these trends.
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The ADT is a first long-distance trail that has been intentionally designed to link trails together and to pass through or near large metropolitan areas. Thirty-two million Americans live within 20 miles of the 6,000, 356-mile route of the ADT. The American Discovery Trail connects five of the eight national scenic trails, 10 of the 12 national historic trails and over 200 local and regional trails.
Two of those trails are the proposed Lincoln National Historic Trails, which—maybe it is going to be Lincoln National Historic Trail, which Congressman Weller is here to speak to today and the great western trail, which had legislation successfully sponsored last year by Chairman Hansen. This has been accomplished through the involvement of several thousand citizen volunteers under the outstanding leadership of our 15 State coordinators who paid all their own expenses.
Much credit is also due to the local, State and Federal land managers, town councils, planning commissions and economic development and tourism divisions, for their cooperation, assistance and encouragement. We have been sensitive to private landowners with whom we have held many meetings.
Of the 6,356 miles of the American Discovery Trail, only 58 miles are on private property and all of that is on existing trails and with the landowners' permission. The ADT has provided incentive to many local projects, such as the Ute Pass Corridor Trail in the Pikes Peak area of Colorado.
I request that the written statement of Richard V. Bratton, Mayor of Green Mountain Falls and Chair of the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments be made a part of the public record and I quote from his written statement. ''The ADT will provide a unique and important connection between urban and back-country trail systems. ADT will help us to realize a nonmotorized link between the second largest city in Colorado, Colorado Springs, and the mountain communities that surround Pikes Peak. The concept of the ADT has already been instrumental in assisting us in our local fund-raising efforts, supporting grant requests and capturing the interest of State, county and local elected officials. The ADT is key to our success.'' That is the end of his quote.
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The information can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. LUKEI. The ADT is already producing economic benefits for the communities along its route. Ellen Dudley and Eric Seaborg, who were referred to earlier as having written the American Discoveries book of their experience, who laid the foundation of the ADT's route in 1990 and 1991 scouting expedition, comment in their written statement to the subcommittee that trails attract tourists and businesses that cater to trail travelers which are already springing up on many sections of the American Discovery Trail.
On behalf of the ADT State coordinators, the thousands of citizen volunteers and the land managers who have worked hard for 8 years to create the American Discovery Trail, a trail that millions of Americans will use, I request that you recommend to your colleagues in the House of Representatives the passage of House bill H.R. 588, the National Discovery Trails Act of 1997.
Thank you for allowing me to present my comments and I believe I can answer some of the questions that were previously presented to some of the prior committee members.
[The statement of Mr. Lukei can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you very much.
Mr. Theis.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STATEMENT OF BILL THEIS, MEMBER, S.T.O.P. (STOP TAKING OUR PROPERTIES) STEERING COMMITTEE
Mr. THEIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I am a former teacher, turned businessman. The property rights movement first attracted my attention in 1989 as a result of proposed legislation that would have expanded the Indiana Dunes National Lake Shore in northwest Indiana. In 1994, I was elected to serve a 4-year term as the trustee/assessor of Pine Township in Porter County, Indiana, and currently I serve the property rights movement as a member of the Stop Taking Our Property Steering Committee and the Great Lakes Regional Chair for the Alliance for America.
I come before you today in total support of recreational trails. My own youth has very fond memories of summers I spent hiking the Appalachian trail when it was privately owned. This was back in the very early sixties, late fifties. However, I find myself philosophically opposed to the idea the Federal Government should be in the recreation business. I can't find any authority for this type of action in the Constitution.
Further, I find myself opposed to the concept of federally subsidized recreation. My own personal passion is fishing. One of the best kept secrets in Northwest Indiana is the Lake Michigan fishing. We have wonderful lake trout and steelhead and king salmon and cohoe salmon. I fish on two teams that fish the tournaments, and I would not come before this body and ask you to subsidize my hobby, and I don't think that the Federal Government should be getting involved in subsidizing other people's hobbies.
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
It is very difficult for me to understand why this bill is even being considered when congressional concern seems so focused on balancing the budget without making cuts in social security and Medicare. Therefore, I must stand firmly in opposition to House bill 588. However, I realize there are people who are philosophically opposed to my particular stand on this issue and if you do choose to move forward with the legislation, I urge you to give serious consideration to the following suggestions.
The bill states no lands or interests outside the exterior boundaries can be taken. There is a problem here. In 1966, we could exchange the words we have heard here today so far on the trail system with the words, ''Indiana Dunes National Lake Shore,'' where there was not an intent to take anybody's home. It was going to be strictly willing seller. It was going to be strictly voluntary and strictly cooperative.
The end result was Thursday, September 5th, the U.S. Park Service evicts woman and son. Despite all the promises, things tend to change in Congress over the years, and I don't know if anybody on this committee was here when that happened, but this is one of over 700—and this is national parks figures, people who have lost their homes and business in the Indiana Dunes National Lake Shore. And I would like to present the Chairman, I will leave it with the committee, a video tape of the Federal marshals pulling the moving van up in front of the house, escorting her out of the house and moving her lifetime possessions out.
Other examples—this type of legislation is always subject to future editions and changes and other examples include view scapes, sound scapes, easements, covenants, buffer zones, and, yes, the exemption from condemnation gets lifted. The Appalachian trail serves as a good example of how original trail acts tend to get expanded by these types of legislative devices.
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I have with me today Mr. David Guernsey, who can answer questions in detail because he was here when this happened and he also made this a part of the record of this committee, and we talk here that the provisions in National Trail System Act of 1968, the Park Service was to put up a 1,000-foot corridor to protect the Appalachian trail.
They offered to donate the land and the Park Service said, no, and I see my yellow light went on here and I want to get some other things so maybe we can address that in questions. Two, the second suggestion I have is we put a sunset clause of some sort on there so that this proposed plan doesn't drag on and on and on and on for years. Thirdly, the provision to enter into arrangements with the trail-wide nonprofit organization is just unacceptable. If the trail system is to have any chance of success, I would suggest we look at the Indiana Rails to Trails Act that was passed last summer. It was very, very successful and it was agreed to by all and there are several things in there that I bring to your attention, the first of which is that any proposed trail had to have the official approval and participation of every unit of local government through which the trail passed.
I have heard lots of testimony here today that everybody is in favor of this. Nobody asked me. I did an instant poll with 300 property rights and resource organizations on Sunday when I was telling them about this bill and not a single one of the organizations was contacted or asked about this. Despite the immense amount of planning, these groups are being ignored. If it is to have any chance of success, that needs to be included. There is also a little thing called a fence requirement that takes care of the liability.
Any property owner, who is adjacent, and that is an issue we haven't addressed here today, is the adjacent property owners, have issues of privacy and liability. In Indiana, any property owner who requests a fence, that is a trail organization, is responsible for putting that privacy fence up, which then, of course, limits the liability. So it brings us down to the three basic questions: Do we want it, and who is we? Does this include all affected parties? Do we need it? And I think we need to differentiate, especially in today's budgetary times, between the wants and the needs. We face that every day with our own township.
Page 67 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And thirdly, can we afford it? There is no mention in the bill about moneys, but I am already hearing a figure of 360,000 here, 200,000 there, so this committee has a really tough decision to make. Is the trail more important than our parents' social security? Is the trail more important than the medicare? Is the trail more important than maybe giving some of the taxpayer money back to the American public? Thank you for allowing me to testify today. I will be glad to answer any questions.
[The statement of Mr. Theis can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Theis.
Mr. Lock, we will recognize you, sir.
STATEMENT OF LEONARD E. LOCK
Mr. LOCK. Mr. Chairman and Members of Congress, my name is Leonard Lock. I am from Ottawa, Illinois, which is the site of the first Lincoln-Douglas debate, and since there is a question on the floor concerning the name of the trail, I will try to address that issue, if I may.
Tom Gilbert, who I talk to on the telephone all the time, wrote: ''As you know, Lincoln heritage is one of the several important themes of the proposed Illinois National Historic Trail, along with Mississippian Indian culture, French exploration and transportation.'' I am going to submit a proposal that will include all of those, and, also, eventually, include the Congressman from Kentucky, that the Lincoln National Historical Trail, this would be Phase 1. Phase 2 would go from Springfield to Vincennes, Indiana, to of course, his birth place in Kentucky. All of these could be incorporated. This could be phase one.
Page 68 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Lincoln was a Member of Congress, as you know, and he made a very important statement June 20, 1848, when he said that sugar had been, for the first time, shipped from New Orleans to Buffalo, New York. There was a navigational gap in the Nation, and the canal, which is the ditch that put Chicago on the map, made that become a reality.
Most of this information is included in my written statement, and I am going to include that so that this should be read to get the full impact. And as Congressmen, I am not trying to tell you what to do, but Abraham Lincoln was a master at satire, and some of these were hilarious. What he did to the former Attorney General that was a member of the legislature in the old capital in Vandalia, Illinois, is hilarious. I urge you to read it. He also did the same thing to David Dudley Field at the Chicago Rivers and Harbors Convention in 1847, where 10,000 people came.
Lincoln wanted to be Illinois DeWitt Clinton. When he first ran for public office, and incidentally he was defeated, he said he supported internal improvements. He never changed that, to his Presidency and his two annual messages to Congress. He told his friend Joshua Speed in Springfield that ran a store, he wanted to be Illinois DeWitt Clinton. And he also made a speech in Vandalia, he made it in Congress and he made it for the Chicago Rivers and Harbors Convention. So he was associated with the canal.
For example, he came to hearings in my hometown of Ottawa for legal claims against the canal. He also took a trip down the canal with his family. He was in Washington, DC as a Congressman. He went to Buffalo, and then he came down to the Great Lakes and went down the entire canal on October 8, 1848, and he went as far as Peoria, of course from LaSalle, Peru, he went by steamboat, then went to Peoria, Illinois, and then by stagecoach to his own home.
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And here, to include everyone, for example, if I just may take, the State of Illinois obtains its name from the great Village of the Illinois, from which there was an SOS out a few years ago, that is Save Our Site, and it was purchased by the State, and that is where the Mission of the Immaculate Conception occurred, and that is Pere Marquette. The other trails would be the Chicago Portage, Pere Marquette, W.D. Boyce, and Chief Shabbonah and Lincoln-Douglas Debate Trail.
And here are all the various things regarding the entire trail, the Illinois-Michigan Canal, the Illinois River, and the branch to Springfield. Presidential messages to the Congress are rarely noted for their literary significance, but the annual message to Congress of December 1, 1862, is Lincoln's literary masterpiece.
In that, President Lincoln said (Dec. 1, 1862): ''The military and commercial importance of enlarging the Illinois-Michigan Canal and improving the Illinois River is presented in the report of Colonel Webster to the Secretary of War, and now transmitted to Congress. I respectfully ask attention to it.''
The story of the canal and the Illinois River is a story of Illinois and the Nation. This historic travel began the transformation of a backwards wilderness into the world's richest reservoir of civilization's blessing. The work of the pioneers should be preserved and woven into the cultural life of present and future citizens of the Nation, for school children in Illinois and across the Nation and throughout the world sing:
''We have an old mule named Sal. We want to ride on Mr. Lincoln's national historic trail.'' And in conclusion, this may be one of the logos for the Lincoln National Historic Trail, which would eventually include Illinois, Indiana and Kentucky. In conclusion, I might add, I have been told many times that a foreign visitor coming in to the United States is first interested in seeing Disney Land, second, the Lincoln site.
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The statement of Mr. Lock can be found at the end of the hearing.]
Mr. HANSEN. Well, thank you very much. Mr. Bereuter.
Mr. BEREUTER. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Vento.
Mr. VENTO. Well, Mr. Chairman, I commented earlier about the motorized versus nonmotorized aspect. How do you envision, Mr. Lukei, the relationship in terms of motorized versus other uses of the trail? Important uses like straight line roller blades.
Mr. LUKEI. Actual recreational and motorized uses only two or three small sections of the trail, one in southwest Utah, on the Piute Trail, which is actually an ATV trail, and the other are two trails in which snowmobiles are allowed. One is a Hoover Valley Nature Trail and one of the other trails in Iowa.
There is a distinction between motorized recreational use. We are on a number of roads. They are mostly back country, farm-to-market roads, on which recreational vehicles, such as ATVs and snowmobiles are illegal, that is why they are called off-road vehicles. Therefore, the roads we are on are roads which hiking, bicycling and horseback riding are legal activities.
I would also point out that while currently the route is about one one-third on existing trails, one-third on some type of dirt or gravel road and many are roads that have limited access like Forest Service roads, and in Nebraska, the irrigation system out there has maintenance roads which allow recreational use on them and we follow some of those irrigation roadways, and the others are back-country roads that, again, recreational motor use are not permitted on.
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So this is intended to be a nonmotorized recreational trail. There is very little conflict in those areas with respect to motorized use. Actually, in Mr. Hansen's State of Utah, we were intentionally routed on the Piute Trail near Circleville, by the Forest Service and by the local citizens who built that trail.
Mr. VENTO. I understand that. I know even in the State of Minnesota, we have 15,000 miles of snowmobile trail and sometimes there is a common use with the snowmobile and cross-country skiers and other types of uses. And we found out, because snowmobiles have sort of a cleat in the track that they actually cause a lot of damage to the trail, you know, so they wear it down and the maintenance costs have gone up, but they do pay a certain fee and so forth so it can be maintained. But it is increasingly an issue even there, much less within the voyagers.
Mr. Theis, we were pleased to find our way up here together today and I read your testimony and I noticed that you feel the Federal Government shouldn't be involved in any type of recreation activities because you think we have more important tasks. I suppose you made an exception for fishing, didn't you.
Mr. THEIS. As a matter of fact, I didn't.
Mr. VENTO. We were talking about fishing in Lake Michigan and we talked about doing it in Lake Superior or some other puddle in Minnesota, but you realize there is a lot of effort and investment in terms of recreation in sport fishing by the Federal Government, Fish and Wildlife Service, and, you know, dealing with invasive species and a lot of other aspects.
Page 72 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Obviously fishing in Lake Michigan would look a lot different if we didn't do something about things that occur there, ruffies and the invasive species. I am trying to think of the other muscles, zebra muscles. Actually, you think we ought to get out of it and let someone else do it. You were talking about sport fishing. You are not a commercial fisherman, are you?
Mr. THEIS. I am sport fisher. It is my understanding in Indiana the stalking and taking care of the lake is done by the DNR and we are required to pay a fishing license and the better part of that money goes toward that activity, so in a sense, all the sports fishermen are paying their own way.
Mr. VENTO. We would all like to think that, but if you look a little closer, you will find that general taxpayers pay a lot. We would like to think they could pay their own way, and I suppose some trail users feel they pay their way when they pay the income tax, too.
Mr. THEIS. The State DNR, at least in Indiana, is constantly making the legislature to raise the fishing license so they can cover the cost, so I think a significant part is taken care of that way.
Mr. VENTO. We hear a lot about it. We went through a process of raising fees for entrance users and any other way we can extract it to the point we are now getting backlash from some corridors, Mr. Chairman, about that, as they are implemented. It is interesting to me, the Forest Service, they always look better in Washington than they look on the ground in Minnesota and I would say in Utah it is different, but in any case, I think they pay 10 or 15 percent at the most of what the cost is of running some of the agencies. And I think the same would be true of some of the forests or the Fish and Wildlife Service, which we as sports persons depend upon. I don't object to it, I just wanted to make the observation. I understand your concerns and I just think that that one ought to receive a little more consideration.
Page 73 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. Did you want to respond, Mr. Theis?
Mr. THEIS. Yes, I will respond and another comment comes to mind, Mr. Chairman, if I can take a minute to do that. I think maybe in the interest of fairness, if we are going to have fishing and hunting licenses for fishing and hunting people, maybe we should consider having hiking licenses for the hiking people so it is at least partially subsidized. But on another thought, as I listen here today, and I have done my research, a thought has come to mind. There is an alternative here to all of this.
If nobody is objecting to the idea of a trail of a national significance and historic and good idea, the objection is what it might become above and beyond that. Well, that if that is really the only purpose for it, maybe we don't need legislation, and the idea came to mind, as Mr. Bereuter talked about the Lewis and Clark Trail. Senate Resolution 57 said God bless the Lewis and Clark Trail. It is nationally significant. It is wonderful and we want to recognize it, and that was the end of it. And perhaps with the trail, all we need is a resolution, rather than a legislation that might be expanded and eventually lead to condemnation of property and whatever.
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, we can reduce ourselves to passing commemoratives and probably everybody would be happy because we wouldn't do anything for or to someone. I want to comment on the Illinois River Trail and I appreciate the work that has been done by the witness, Mr. Lock, on this issue, but much of what you talk about, of course, is the Illinois-Michigan Canal, and so I guess, again, I will reiterate, you did explain a logic where you were going to connect the birth place and the boyhood home and the Springfield site so maybe you want to comment about that further for me.
Page 74 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. LOCK. Yes, I would. I have a photostatic copy of—the Lincoln National Life Foundation has done a study including all the trails, and so has Lloyd Ostenkoff in the back of his book, regarding Lincoln and his entire life and that includes, Illinois, Indiana and Kentucky, the major States. That should be a goal of Congress, very long-term, and this could certainly be phase one, and I think it is equally as important. I think the debate site in Ottawa is equally as important as his birth place in Kentucky and I would support both.
If I may enter into the record, I did bring this along for the Library of Congress and all of Congress. It is called Lincoln's Connection with the Illinois Michigan Canal and (also includes) the Illinois River, his return to Congress and his Invention and there was an Abe Lincoln boat that went out of Morris, Illinois, and this is available and I will give it to the Chairman for everyone in Congress.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. Mr. Weller.
Mr. WELLER. Just a brief comment. I think Mr. Lock, who is a scholar and a noted historian in the area with his knowledge of Lincoln, has done a fine job of reinforcing Abraham Lincoln's connection with Illinois and an area that would be included in the national trail, and I want to thank you for including Mr. Lock and giving him the opportunity to testify today.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you.
Page 75 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Pickett.
Mr. PICKETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I notice that this legislation places the administration of this trail system under the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with a competent trail-wide, nonprofit organization, and other affected land managing agencies. Mr. Lukei, I noticed that you were the national coordinator for the American Discovery Trail Society.
How do you feel about this arrangement and do you think adequate provision is being made to involve the various voluntary organizations that are concerned with trails and hiking?
Mr. LUKEI. Yes, sir, I certainly do, and in fact the model that is used worldwide for the management of trails is a model established by the Appalachian Trail and while we are not building a trail that is identified as a remotely located trail, the management of that trail is a model for it and the reason for that is, as Katherine Stevenson, from the Park Service pointed out, the agencies need one lead agency or one nonprofit organization, with which they can communicate and enter into agreements.
There are actually 63 organizations that have responsibility for maintaining and managing parts of the Appalachian Trail, but they all operate under the umbrella organization of the Appalachian Trail Conference. We foresee a very similar management situation with respect to the American Discovery Trail. There would be one nationwide organization, the American Discovery Trail Society, which would have the overall responsibility and the umbrella responsibility, working with the 150 or so organizations that we have already identified along the route. I think that is not only a very efficient way, but it is the most effective way and the Appalachian Trail has shown that is the way to manage these long distance trails.
Page 76 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. PICKETT. Thank you very much. I know the Appalachian Trail has a great record of being a very successful undertaking and if that is going to be used as a model, I feel better about the way this legislation is going to be administered. I want to thank the witnesses for being here today and for offering their testimony concerning this legislation.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. Appreciate the gentleman's comments. You have all raised some very interesting questions. This committee has wrestled with many of the problems concerning how we do trails. We are talking designated trails here, but there are trails through public lands and private land, all over the 50 States, basically.
The question, Mr. Lukie, you brought up motorized vehicles. It is tough to determine. Go to the 1964 Wilderness Act. It doesn't say motorized, contrary to popular belief. It says mechanized, so when some of these go through a wilderness area, frankly, we really don't even have a decision yet what is mechanized. It is to the eye of the beholder. And to some people—is a backpack still mechanized? The question came up in this committee and we argued it for 40 minutes one day.
I guess technically it is. Is an oarlock mechanized when a river goes through a wilderness area? Technically, I guess it is. There are very few things you can take, maybe like our Native Americans, you wouldn't take too much. The question comes up, when you are going parallel to an existing road, why not used a mechanized vehicle or a motorized vehicle, even, these little motor scooter-type things or motorized mountain bikes, I think they call them Hondas or Yamahas or whatever they are, and the question comes up by many of the bikers, and biking is a big thing.
Page 77 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As you know, in the State of Utah, Mohab has turned into what is a biking capital. There are thousands of mountain bikes. Everyone has to have a $1,000 mountain bike now that is made out of things that only went to the moon a few years ago and that is light and can do the whole bit. We used to by Schwinn bicycles for $50. Now, all my kids, they all have to have these mountain bikes that are made out of things that I don't even understand.
So the problem comes down to, because it is really kind of a tacky problem, and I appreciate all of you folks addressing some of these problems. We have to sit here and either turn our heads or put our heads in the sand or make legislation that has a lot to do with thousands and millions of folks. So you have to be kind of careful on these things.
You folks are talking designated trails, that is one thing. Look at the trails that are sandwiched all over America and Alaska. It is amazing to me, and any suggestions you may have concerning that would be more than welcome. The question on both of these bills, I always admire my two colleagues who have come up with these. These are bold, innovative, stimulating, intriguing ideas, but they are always fraught with a few problems in them, and the ones that are going to leap out on these bills, especially Mr. Bereuter's bill, will be acquiring private property.
There is a lot to be said for what the government should be in and what it shouldn't be in, I don't argue that. The 10th amendment is clear on that, even though I think from the days of FDR, the 10th amendment is a dinosaur, but it shouldn't be. What do we exempt and what don't we exempt? I just want to thank my two colleagues for very intriguing and interesting pieces of legislation that they brought up and we will look forward to see how these progress.
Page 78 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, may I conclude by thanking you for a hearing on the bill, 588. I would remind the subcommittee what Daniel Burnham said when he laid out the plans for Chicago after it burned down: Make no small plans. I like Mr. Lukie's response to the question raised just a few minutes ago about the cosponsorship with the reference to the, what we call out in the West, Mr. Pickett, the Appalachian, but I know you said Appalachian, regional trail, and you ought to be right, I suppose, since you live closer to it. But I do think the experience there has demonstrated why, in the dispute between the Forest Service and Park Service, the sponsor of the legislation comes down on the sides of the Park Service, believing there should be a single nonprofit organization, which would work with a whole variety of other local organizations which provide the volunteer, the labor and the skill and the care for the trail. Again, thank you very much.
Mr. HANSEN. I thank you, gentlemen. Let me just point out that what is done around here is predicated on who wants to get something accomplished. I noticed some of our witnesses talked about NEPA, the Wilderness Act, FLPMA, all of those are very important Acts. However, maybe it doesn't prohibit the President of United States from completely violating those things on September 18, 1996, and putting 1.7 million acres of monument to the State of Utah, which doesn't fit any of the criteria, which is my plug to change the antiquities law, which I will be bringing to the floor in a short time.
Mr. BEREUTER. Will the Chairman yield just one more time?
Page 79 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. I will yield.
Mr. BEREUTER. I notice I am seated in Mr. Pombo's seat and that is one more reason to exercise caution on the private land issue.
Mr. HANSEN. Let me just add my thanks to my colleagues and witnesses and all the folks who have made a point to be here today. We appreciate you coming and it has been very informative, and I am looking forward to reading the information that Mr. Lock has brought up. I hope I have the opportunity to read that, kind of being a history buff on the gentleman we are talking about.
Thank you very much. This hearing will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
INSERT OFFSET FOLIOS 1 TO 74 HERE