SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
64–045 l
1999
HEARING ON: H.R. 2541, A BILL TO ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES OF THE GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE TO INCLUDE CAT ISLAND, MS; H.R. 1864, (HANSEN) A BILL TO STANDARDIZE THE PROCESS FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; AND H.R. 1866, A BILL TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR THE PUBLIC TO APPEAL CERTAIN DECISIONS MADE BY THE NPS AND BY THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS AND PUBLIC LANDS
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, WASHINGTON, DC
Serial No. 106–64
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house
or
Committee address: http://www.house.gov/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-HAGE, Idaho
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North Carolina
WILLIAM M. (MAC) THORNBERRY, Texas
CHRIS CANNON, Utah
KEVIN BRADY, Texas
JOHN PETERSON, Pennsylvania
RICK HILL, Montana
BOB SCHAFFER, Colorado
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
DON SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina
MIKE SIMPSON, Idaho
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
GEORGE MILLER, California
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
ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
ADAM SMITH, Washington
CHRIS JOHN, Louisiana
DONNA MC CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands
RON KIND, Wisconsin
JAY INSLEE, Washington
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARK UDALL, Colorado
JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
RUSH D. HOLT, New Jersey
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
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
ELTON, GALLEGLY, California
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado
RICHARD W. POMBO, California
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North Carolina
CHRIS CANNON, Utah
RICK HILL, Montana
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
DON SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania
CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELÓ, Puerto Rico
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
BRUCE F. VENTO, Minnesota
DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
DONNA CHRISTIAN-CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands
RON KIND, Wisconsin
JAY INSLEE, Washington
TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARK UDALL, Colorado
JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
RUSH D. HOLT, New Jersey
ALLEN FREEMYER, Counsel
TODD HULL, Professional Staff
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
LIZ BIRNBAUM, Democratic Counsel
GARY GRIFFITH, Professional Staff
C O N T E N T S
Hearing held Thursday, September 30, 1999
Statements of Members:
Hansen, Hon. James V., a Representative in Congress from the State of Utah
Prepared statement of
Romero-Barceló, Hon. Carlos A., a Resident Commissioner in Congress from The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
Gene, Hon., Taylor, a Representative in Congress from the State of Mississippi
Prepared statement of
Udall, Hon. Mark, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado
Underwood, Hon. Robert, a Delegate in Congress from the Territory of Guam
Prepared statement of
Statements of witnesses:
Bieti, Fred, Isle Royale Boaters Association
Prepared statement of
Boddie-Colbert, Cala, Cat Island, Mississippii
Prepared statement of
Falkner, Juliette, Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department of Interior
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Prepared statement of
Matson, Jim, President, Vermillion Services
Prepared statement of
Monahan, Bob, Chairman, Monahan Group
Prepared statement of
Shaddox, William, Acting Associate Director for Professional Services, National Park Service
Prepared statement of
Additional material supplied:
Text of H.R. 2541
Text of H.R. 1864
Text of H.R. 1866
HEARING ON: H.R. 2541, A BILL TO ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES OF THE GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE TO INCLUDE CAT ISLAND, MISSISSIPPI; H.R. 1864, (HANSEN) A BILL TO STANDARDIZE THE PROCESS FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; AND H.R. 1866, A BILL TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR THE PUBLIC TO APPEAL CERTAIN DECISIONS MADE BY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AND BY THE UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1999
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on National
Parks and Public Lands,
Committee on Resources,
Washington, DC.
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m. in Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. James V. Hansen [chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Mr. HANSEN. The meeting will come to order.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES V. HANSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF UTAH
Mr. HANSEN. Good morning and welcome to the hearing.
The Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands will hear testimony on three bills, H.R. 2541, H.R. 1864, and H.R. 1866.
H.R. 2541 was introduced by Congressman Gene Taylor of Mississippi. This bill would adjust the boundaries of the Gulf Islands National Seashore to include an area of land known as Cat Island, Mississippi. Gulf Islands National Seashore is administered by the National Park Service and consists of a number of coastal barrier islands stretching along the coast of Mississippi and the panhandle of Florida.
H.R. 2541 would modify the boundaries of the national seashore to include Cat Island. The island is approximately 2,145 acres in size and offers around 21 miles of shoreline. Most of Cat Island, approximately 90 percent, is currently owned by one family. The other 10 percent is owned by nearly 15
other individuals who retain smaller land holdings.
I understand there are a few problems with this bill that need to be ironed out before the bill moves forward. These include excluding some of the private land area from the boundaries, agreements as to what will become of the land when it becomes part of the seashore, and establishing clear language as to fishing rights around the island.
The second bill is H.R. 1864, a bill that I introduced to address the problem that citizens have conveyed to me over a number of years concerning the Department of the Interior. This bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to standardize a process for conducting public hearings for Federal agencies within the Department to help ensure that the public understands and can fully participate in public hearings.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Presently, public hearings held by Federal agencies do not have any standard way that they are conducted. As a result, these agencies hold hearings any way they see fit. This has led to numerous complaints and confusion by the general public when appearing at these public hearings.
For example, no established regulation requires Federal agencies to respond to legitimate questions asked by the public. People walk away from these hearings confused and many times irate that the government did not attempt to address their concerns.
H.R. 1864 would help alleviate this problem by standardizing the procedures used by Federal agencies for public hearings. This would give the public an understanding as to what is expected from Federal agencies, along with what is expected from them, when they conduct a public hearing. Standardizing these procedures would also provide a process for the public to ask relevant questions and receive informed and timely answers from the Federal agencies.
I want to note that nothing in this bill limits or interferes with other opportunities for the public to comment on or participate in agency decisions pursuant to NEPA or the Administrative Procedures Act. Nor does H.R. 1864 replace any existing law or policy which provides for public involvement in hearings held by Federal agencies.
The third bill is H.R. 1866, another bill that I introduced. This bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to establish a process for the public to administratively appeal certain decisions made pursuant to NEPA by the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. These regulations would establish what types of agency decisions are appealable, who may appeal such decisions, the responsibilities and procedures of the appellant or other party, and also establish a process the Federal agencies would follow for notifying the public for their appeal process.
Obviously, decisions made by Federal officials are an important function for Federal land management agencies. These decisions, of course, have direct effects on the methods used and the result of the land management activities. Frequently, however, members of the public disagree with the decisions made by these Federal agencies. Two Federal land management agencies, the Forest Service and the BLM, currently have an administrative process whereby the public can appeal certain decisions in regard to the land management. However, at present, the only recourse the public has if disagreeing with decisions made by the Park Service or the Fish and Wildlife Service is to take the issue to court. I believe a similar administrative appeal process for NEPA decisions made by the Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service should be made available to the public so that decisions made by these two agencies could be reviewed and modified, if appropriate.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Before we begin the testimony, I would like to mention a few things related to the two bills that I have introduced. I believe that both of these bills are good ideas, and it is time we took a look at what they are trying to accomplish. However, I realize that these bills, especially H.R. 1866, only represents a starting point. I am very open to ideas and discussion with interested parties and the minority so that the bill can be crafted to meet the needs of the public and the agencies while at the same time avoiding creating a bureaucratic mess which bogs the system down rather than improves it.
All of that said, I want to thank our witnesses for being here today and those that are going to testify on the bills.
[The prepard statement of Mr. Hansen follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES V. HANSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF UTAH
Good morning everyone and welcome to the hearing today. The Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands will hear testimony on three bills, H.R. 2541, 1864, and 1866.
H.R. 2541 was introduced Congressman Gene Taylor of Mississippi. This bill would adjust the boundaries of the Gulf Islands National Seashore to include an area of land known as Cat Island, Mississippi. Gulf Islands National Seashore is administered by the National Park Service and consists of a number of coastal barrier islands stretching along the coasts of Mississippi and the panhandle of Florida.
H.R. 2541 would modify the boundaries of the National Seashore to include Cat Island. The island is approximately 2145 acres in size and offers around 21 miles of shoreline. Most of Cat Island (approximately 90 percent) is currently owned by one family. The other 10 percent is owned by nearly 15 other individuals who retain smaller land holdings.
I understand there are a few problems with this bill that need to ironed out before this bill moves forward. These include excluding some of the private land area from the boundaries, agreements as to what will become of this land when it becomes part of the seashore, and establishing clear language as to fishing rights around the island.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The second bill is H.R. 1864, a bill that I introduced to address a problem that citizens have conveyed to me over a number of years concerning the Department of the Interior. This bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to standardize a process for conducting public hearings for Federal agencies within the Department to help ensure that the public understands and can fully participate in public hearings.
Presently, public hearings held by Federal agencies do not have any standard way they are conducted. As a result, these agencies hold hearings any way they see fit. This has led to numerous complaints from and confusion by the general public when appearing at these public hearings. For example, no established regulation requires Federal agencies to respond to legitimate questions asked by the public. People walk away from these hearings confused and many times irate that the government did not even attempt to address their concerns. H.R. 1864 would help alleviate this problem by standardizing the procedures used by Federal agencies for public hearings. This would give the public an understanding as to what is expected from Federal agencies, along with what is expected from them, when conducting public hearings. Standardizing these procedures would also provide a process for the public to ask relevant questions and receive informed and timely answers from the Federal agencies. I want to note that nothing in this bill limits or interferes with other opportunities for the public to comment on or participate in agency decisions pursuant to NEPA or the Administrative Procedures Act. Nor does H.R. 1864 replace any existing law or policy which provides for public involvement in hearings held by Federal agencies.
The third bill is H.R. 1866, another bill that I introduced. This bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to establish a process for the public to administratively appeal certain decisions made pursuant to NEPA by the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. These regulations would establish what types of agency decisions are appealable, who may appeal such decisions, the responsibilities and procedures of the appellant or other party, and also establish a process the Federal agencies would follow for notifying the public of their appeal procedures.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Obviously, decisions made by Federal officials are an important function for Federal land management agencies. These decisions, of course, have direct effects on the methods used and the results of the land management activities. Frequently, however, members of the public disagree with the decisions made these Federal agencies. Two Federal land management agencies, the Forest Service and the BLM, currently have an administrative process whereby the public can appeal certain decisions in regard to their land management. However, at present, the only recourse the public has if disagreeing with decisions made by the Park Service or the Fish and Wildlife Service is to take the issue to court. I believe a similar administrative appeal process for NEPA decisions made by the Park Service and Fish & Wildlife Service should be made available to the public so that decisions made by these two agencies can be reviewed and modified, if appropriate.
Before we begin the testimony I'd like to like to mention a few things related to the two bills I introduced. I believe that both these bills are good ideas and its time we took a look at what they are trying to accomplish. However, I realize that these bills, especially H.R. 1866 represent a starting point. I am very open to ideas and discussion with interested parties and the Minority so that a bill can be crafted to meet the needs of the public and the agencies, while at the same time, avoid creating a bureaucratic mess which bogs the system down rather than improve it.
With that said, I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today to testify on all the bills and now turn the time over to the Ranking Member Mr. Romeo-Barceló.
Mr. HANSEN. Now I turn the time over to the Ranking Member, the gentleman from Puerto Rico.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELÓ, A RESIDENT COMMISSIONER IN CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I would like to welcome the two fellow members, one of the fellow members from this Committee, from Guam, Mr. Underwood, and Mr. Taylor, one of the sponsors of one of these bills.
Today, the Subcommittee will hear testimony of the two bills relating to the hearing and the appeals process of the agencies within the Department of the Interior as well as an unrelated measure dealing with the Gulf Islands National Seashore.
H.R. 2541, which is the Gulf Islands National Seashore Bill, is about the islands which stretch for 150 miles along the Gulf Coast from Mississippi to Florida. The seashore is more than 135,000 acres in size and includes portions of both the mainland and a chain of barrier islands.
Apparently, when the seashore was first conceived, it was hoped that Cat Island, one of the islands in this chain, would be included. However, the family which owned most of the island did not wish to be included at that time. As a result, despite the fact that Cat Island was thought to be the crown jewel of the area, the seashore did not include this originally, and it is our understanding that the family is now willing to have their land included in the seashore.
H.R. 2541, sponsored by my colleague, Representative Taylor, would alter the boundary that encompasses this addition. We understand there are several issues which may need to be resolved regarding this legislation, including the exemption of a portion of the island from the legislation and a question regarding the ownership of the water surrounding the island. I look forward to hearing from the family and the Park Service on this issue as well as our colleague.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H.R. 1864 and H.R. 1866 would require the Secretary of the Interior to develop new regulations concerning the public hearing process of agencies within the Department of the Interior as well as the appeals process for National Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service decisions. Both bills contain specific requirements that would have to be part of any such regulations. We don't know the extent or exact nature of the problems these two bills seek to rectify nor do we know the consequences of the proposed solutions. Hopefully, the testimony we will receive today will shed some light on these issues. We would like to welcome each of our witnesses here today, and we look forward to their testimony.
Mr. HANSEN. I thank the gentleman.
We are honored to have two of our colleagues with us, Mr. Gene Taylor of Mississippi and Bob Underwood from Guam. We appreciate these gentlemen being with us.
Mr. Taylor, we will start with you, sir.
Hold just a minute, I apologize. The gentleman from Colorado. I am sorry, I didn't see you. Do you have an opening statement you would like to make?
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO
Mr. MARK UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to the echo the comments of both the Ranking Member and the chairman, and I look forward working with you, particularly on this issue of public input that is heard and that leads us to the kind of outcomes that we all want. I am open to working with the chairman and the Ranking Member and look forward to the testimony.
Mr. HANSEN. I appreciate your comments.
STATEMENT OF HON. GENE TAYLOR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Taylor, we will turn to you now; and the time is yours, sir.
Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you, Mr. Hansen, Mr. Romero-Barceló. It is pretty ironic that we are now in a position where an island in the other guy's backyard is subject to each of our jurisdictions.
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. You better hide it from the Navy. They like the pretty islands.
Mr. TAYLOR. I am looking forward to traveling to Puerto Rico once we adjourn to see if we can't do a better job for the sake of the people of Puerto Rico.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I am pleased to be before the Committee today, testifying on behalf of H.R. 2541. I introduced this bill to adjust the boundary of the Gulf Islands National Seashore to include Cat Island, which is the island you see in the photo taken from space by the NASA remote sensing lab. I have submitted a copy of this testimony to the Committee and ask this document be part of the record.
I have been a life-long resident of the Mississippi Gulf Coast. As many residents of the area, I have had the incredible good fortune of enjoying the natural beauty, physical resources and wildlife of this pristine island. I would add that the present owners of the island have been incredibly generous to allow people to go on their private property which is how so many of us have had the opportunity to enjoy it.
I come here today to urge adoption and the inclusion of a portion of Cat Island that the Boddie family offers, as willing sellers, to be included in the Gulf Island National Seashore.
The Gulf Island National Seashore was established by Public Law 91-660 on January 8, 1971, to preserve Petit Bois, Horn and East and West Ship Islands for public use and enjoyment because of their natural beauty and recreational values. At that time, Cat Island was also considered for inclusion within this boundary. In fact, in a hearing held in June of 1970 regarding establishment of the seashore, the Assistant Secretary of Fish and Wildlife, Parks, and Marine Resources testified before the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Subcommittee on National Parks and Recreation, that Cat Island offers an—now I am quoting—''ecological array of conditions which cannot be located anywhere else.''
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The total uniqueness Cat Island offers makes it a key addition to the Gulf Island National Seashore. Cat Island is the last of the Gulf Islands to be publicly protected. I would like to see a majority of this island preserved for future generations to enjoy.
Therefore, I come before the Committee today, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, to urge adoption of H.R. 2541 with two exceptions.
The first exception is to remove the Boddie family parcel and the existing privately owned subdivided lots on Cat Island from the proposed boundary of the Gulf Island National Seashore. In the early 1970s or late 1960s, the family sold off several lots on the island. The family would also like to keep a small portion of the island, and the total of this adds up to about 160 acres. I insist on leaving these parcels out of the seashore boundary simply because this designated acreage is not being willingly offered for inclusion. The rest of the island is. I value the importance of this and have promised the owners that I would never do anything to forcibly take their land from them with or without compensation.
Secondly, I would like to bring to the Committee's attention that in July of 1986, subsequent to the Gulf Island National Seashore being established, the Supreme Court of the State of Mississippi ruled on a case entitled Cinque Bambini Partnership versus the State of Mississippi. In this case, the claimants brought action against the State of Mississippi to clarify title resulting from oil leases granted by the State. The Supreme Court held that fee simple title to all lands naturally subject to tidal influence inland to the current mean high water mark is held by the State of Mississippi in trust; and lands bought within the ebb and flow of tide by avulsion or by artificial or non-natural means are owned by the record titleholders.
All of that being said, basically means that that land up to the high water mark belongs to the State, since our laws are based on English law and that was the English common law prior to the United States becoming a separate entity. Since this case has happened, since the inclusion of the other islands clarified that as far as we would recognize, the State of Mississippi owns everything up to the high water mark, everything above the high water mark would be included in the Gulf Island National Seashore.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
With this said, I ask that the bill include clarifying language that ensures that the State boundary of this island is determined by the current mean high tide line of the Mississippi Sound and the Gulf of Mexico and any tidally affected streams emptying into those bodies of water. Again, this is Mississippi State law. Everything below this line is to remain under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State. Furthermore, it is intended that the agency currently referred to as the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources retain responsibility for determining fishing regulations around Cat Island.
In conclusion, I wish to remind you of the opportunity before us today to preserve a major portion of this island in its natural state for public enjoyment and use. I respectfully request the Committee to do all it can do to expedite this legislation.
I will go on in my remaining time to say that the major impetus for this is just the phenomenal growth of not just coastal America but coastal Mississippi. About 10 years ago, I was one of three sponsors of a bill that legalized gaming in Mississippi. We were in the throes of a recession. We thought that we could create 8,000 jobs by doing it. To date, that has led to the creation of about 50,000 jobs. It is now a $2 billion business. People that we never dreamed would come to Mississippi and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars are now coming to Mississippi and spending $2 billion a year.
When I was a high school teenager, about half of my graduating class had to move away in order to find jobs. That has changed. Instead of people moving away, we have a job for anybody who wants one. We have an incredible influx of people, incredible demands on our resources and, quite frankly, I would like to see this resource preserved in its natural state so that future generations could have the great benefit that I have had and my kids have had.
To take it a step further, we are often asked—our constituents throw us a ringer in our town meetings, which you and I have been around for a while. We have had every tough question we could think of thrown at us. But one of the tougher questions I have had recently is what have you done to bring your folks closer to God. And I have got to admit that I was taken aback. I tried to come back with the lame excuse that I voted for the 10 Commandments being posted in public buildings, which tried to set a good example.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But the bottom line is, if you look at what happened in Colorado and in most of those places, this happened in fairly urban areas. I think that a lot of this has to do with the fact that, in the urbanized areas, folks have gotten so far away from nature that they have lost the ability to see the hand of God. When I look at Cat Island, I see the hand of God. Whether it is a porpoise and her child or an osprey or something as strange looking as a horseshoe crab or an alligator, they are all out there.
And I really think we could do the people of this Nation, in particular the people of Mississippi, a tremendous favor by taking one of the last remaining parcels in its true natural state and preserving it for perpetuity. This would include about 21,000 acres and leave the remaining 160 acres for the private property owners. I would certainly appreciate your assistance on this.
Mr. HANSEN. We thank our colleague from Mississippi for his testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Taylor follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. GENE TAYLOR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FRO THE STATE OF MISSIPPII
Good morning, Mr. Chaitrman and Members of the Committee. I am pleased to be before the Committee today, testifying on behalf of H.R. 254. I introduced this bill to adjust the boundary of the Gulf Islands National Seashore to include Cat Island. I have submitted a copy of this testimony to the Committee. I ask this document to be made part of the hearing record.
I have been a life-long resident of the Gulf Coast, and as many residents of this area, I have had the good fortune of enjoying the natural beauty, physical resources and wildlife of this pristine island. I come here today to urge adoption of the portion of Cat Island the Boddie family offers, as willing sellers, to be included in the Gulf Islands National Seashore.
The Gulf Island National Seashore was established by Public Law 91–660 on January 8, 1971 to preserve Petit Bois, Horn and East and West Ship Islands for public use and enjoyment because of their natural and recreational values. At that time, Cat Island was also considered for inclusion within this boundary. In fact, during a hearing held in June of 1970 regarding the establishment of this seashore, the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife, Parks, and Marine Resources testified before the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Subcommittee on National Parks and Recreation that Cat Island offers an ''ecological array of conditions which cannot be located anywhere else.'' The total uniqueness Cat Island offers makes it a key addition to the Gulf Island National Seashore. Cat Island is the last of the Gulf Islands to be publicly protected. I would like to see the majority of this island preserved for future generations to enjoy.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Therefore, I come before the Committee today, Mr. Chairman, to urge adoption of H.R. 2541, with two exceptions. The first exception is to remove the Boddie family parcel and the existing privately owned subdivided lots on Cat Island from the proposed boundary of the Gulf Islands National Seashore. I insist on leaving these parcels out of the seashore boundary simply because this designated acreage is not being willingly offered for inclusion. I value the importance of this land to these owners.
Secondly, I would like to bring to the Committee's attention that in July 1986, subsequent to the Gulf Islands National Seashore being established, the Supreme Court of Mississippi ruled on a case entitled Cinque Barmbini Partnership versus the State. In this case, the claimants brought action against the State of Mississippi to clarify title resulting from oil leases granted by the state. ''The supreme court held that (1) fee slimle title to all lands naturally subject to tidal influence inland to the current mean high water-mark is held by the State of Mississippi in trust, and (2) lands brought within the ebb and flow of tide by avulsion or by artificial or nonnatural means are owned by the record titleholders.'' With this said, I ask that this bill include clarifying language which ensures that the state boundary of this island is determined by the current mean high tide line of the Mississippi Sound and the Gulf of Mexico and any tidally affected streams emptying into those water bodies. Everything below this line is to remain under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State. Furthermore, it is intended that the agency currently referred to as the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources retain responsibility for determining fishing regulations around Cat Island.
In conclusion, I wish to remind you of the opportunity we have before us to preserve the major portion of this island in its natural state for public use and enjoyment. I respectfully request of this Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee to do all it can to expedite this legislation through the Committee. I wish to thank the chairman and the Committee for the opportunity of appearing before you. This concludes my statement. I am prepared to respond to any questions you may have.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. We will turn to our colleague from Guam, Mr. Robert Underwood, who is also a member of the full Resources Committee.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, if I may, one last request is we have a number of letters of support for this, including an editorial from the Mississippi Gulf Coast's largest newspaper just yesterday, in favor of the proposal that I would like to include for the record.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. Without objection, it will be entered into the record.
[The information follows:]
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Underwood.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT UNDERWOOD, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM THE TERRITORY OF GUAM
Mr. UNDERWOOD. I thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on H.R. 1866, which encourages and allows for public participation to appeal of land management decisions made by the National Park Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
As you are well aware, Mr. Chairman and other members of the Committee, the government of Guam, like other State and local governments and private citizens, are subject to land acquisition methods employed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In March, 1994, the Fish and Wildlife Service declared more than 20 percent of Guam a national wildlife refuge overlay or approximately 24,500 acres island-wide. Eighty-three percent of the refuge had been in the possession of the U.S. military, 14 percent owned by the government of Guam, and by the remaining 3 percent by private landowners. The majority of the acreage is located in the northern end of the island. The refuge was established under the guise of protecting Guam's endangered bird populations from extinction.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Since the establishment of that refuge, Guam has received a considerable amount of attention and publicity about the decline of the island's bird populations. Books, documentaries, magazine articles, academic papers and even websites have been published or produced to inform the American public about the decimation of Guam's bird population and its effects on the wildlife ecosystem. I believe that it has been accepted by not only the scientific community but by the American public in general that the extinction of many of Guam's indigenous bird species is a direct result of the introduction of the brown tree snake which is an invasive species introduced to Guam in the 1950s along with military cargo.
The designation of a wildlife refuge which ''roped off'' land for the Fish and Wildlife Service essentially preempted many opportunities for Guam to regain title to these properties which the military had been considering as declaring as excess property. The land was originally taken in the immediate post-World War II era to ensure national security.
The island of Guam would have been better served if the Fish and Wildlife Service did everything necessary to eradicate the brown tree snake rather than acquiring precious lands that are needed by the people of Guam. It doesn't take a scientific community and, in fact, many biologists working for the Department of the Interior acknowledge that it is the abundance of the brown tree snake and not land preservation efforts which were needed to reverse the decline of Guam's native birds. So, in short, this was a problem of an invasive species rather than a lack of critical habitat.
Mr. Chairman, I believe Fish and Wildlife Service has too much land acquisition authority and, in particular, there are very few opportunities to challenge the manner in which they establish the refuge in Guam. Indeed, I am working on legislation to find a way to balance the approach to this wildlife refuge.
I am not adverse to more extreme measures if they are necessary. However, I believe that your approach, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1866, is a reasonable and fair beginning to ensure that all interested parties are taken into account before private or public land is taken in the name of preservation. This legislation asks no more than what is required by the U.S. Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management. This legislation is a fair proposal, and I give it my full support. I promise that I will work with the chairman and other members of the Subcommittee to make the legislation workable.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Had this process been in place for Guam rather than a couple of perfunctory public hearings on it, we would have had—the local community would have had a fair chance at explaining its perspective on this manner.
So, with that, I appreciate the opportunity to share this particular story. I wish that this legislation would be retroactive, but it has fallen on my watch to attempt to deal with this very tragic situation regarding public lands in Guam. Thank you.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. I appreciate the gentleman's support and his comments.
[The prepard statement of Mr. Underwood follows:]
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM THE TERRITORY OF GUAM
Mr. Chairman:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on H.R. 1866, which encourages and allows for public participation to appeal land management decisions made by the National Park Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
As you are well aware Mr, Chairman, the Government of Guam like other state and local governments and private citizens are subject to land acquisition methods by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In March 1994, The Fish and Wildlife Service declared more than 20 percent of Guam a national wildlife refuge overlay or approximately 24,562 acres island wide, 83 percent of the refuge had been in the possession of the U.S. Military, 14 percent ovined by the Government of Guam and the remaining 3 percent by private landowners The majoriry of the acreage is located in, the northern end of the island. The refuge was established under the guise of protecting Guam's endangered bird populations from extinction.
Since the establishment of the refuge, Guam has received a considerable amount of attention from the decline of the island's bird populations. Books, documentaries, magazine articles, academic papers, and even websites have been published or produced to inform the American public of the decimation of Guam's wildlife eco-system. I believe it has been accepted by not only the scientific community but the American public that the extinction of many of Guam's indigenous bird species is a result of the introduction of the brown tree snake which is an invasive species introduced to Guam in the 1950's. The designation of a Wildlife Refuge which ''roped off'' land for the Fish and Wildlife Service, essentially preempting any opportunity for Guam to regain title to these properties wbich had been taken to ensure national security in the post war era, was unnecessary.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The island of Guam would be better served if the Fish and Wildlife Service did everything necessary to eradicate the brown tree snake rather than acquiring precious lands which are needed by the people of Guam. It doesn't
take a scientific community to figure out it's the abundance of the brown tree snakes and not only land preservation efforts which are needed to reverse the decline of Guam's native birds.
Mr. Chairman, I believe Fish and Wildlife Service has too much land acquisition authority and the manner in which they established the refuge in Guam was wrong. Indeed I am working on legislation to find an equitable solution to this problem but I am not averse to more extreme measures—if necessary. However, I believe that H.R. 1866 is a reasonable and fair approach to ensure that all interested parties are taken into account before private or public land is taken in the name of preservation. This legislation asks no more than what is required by the U.S. Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management. This legislation is a fair proposal and I give it my full support.
Mr. HANSEN. Questions for our colleagues?
The gentleman from Puerto Rico.
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. I have one for my colleague from Guam. Are there any objections that you know of from the Department of the Interior to this legislation, and, if so, what are their objections? Do you know?
Mr. UNDERWOOD. I can't speak for what their objections would be, but I would assume that anything that reduces their authority or extends the time line for appeals would certainly be objected to. In this particular instance, I think they were fully aware of the level of objection to this particular effort in Guam. As a consequence, they did it in a very rapid manner with as little public input as possible.
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. We have had the same experience at home. I think once in a while we look at this very, very carefully, and we appreciate your testimony and your support of this.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. UNDERWOOD. If I could just add to that, the frustrating part of it for us was the science behind it was clearly on the side of dealing with the invasive species which is the brown tree snake, which is almost legendary now in light of—I think when you do an article search on Guam, some 30 or 40 percent of the articles are on the brown tree snake. That was clearly the problem.
Fish and Wildlife took control of some 300 acres for a headquarters, declared this wildlife refuge, and then refuses to spend money on eliminating the brown tree snake, leaves it to special appropriations to fight the brown tree snake but continues to spend money on its own to work on perfecting this refuge. So the net result is we see many more Fish and Wildlife personnel than we see birds now, not as many as snakes.
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. Do local authorities have free access to these lands to deal with the problem of the brown tree snake or not?
Mr. UNDERWOOD. There are other Federal programs to deal with the brown tree snake, but they were done by special appropriations as add-ons. I have consistently argued that those funds that are used to fight the brown tree snake should come from Fish and Wildlife because their objective was to deal with the issue of the endangered species.
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. Thank you.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Nevada, Mr. Gibbons.
Mr. GIBBONS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your leadership in having this hearing today, and I appreciate our colleagues and their testimony this morning.
I would ask the gentleman from Guam and our friend, Mr. Underwood, whether he thinks the territory of Guam could better handle the decision-making with regard to the control of the brown tree snake versus the Federal Government's intervention in this issue.
Mr. UNDERWOOD. I think a collaborative effort is necessary because it involves Customs. It involves moving—the potential of the brown tree snake moving on to Hawaii and other places.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But in this particular instance it has been most frustrating that the agency designed to deal with the endangered species has not come to the table with the resources to confront it. What we are left with is we are now left to advocate on our own through other—including some Department of Defense money—to help fight the brown tree snake.
Mr. GIBBONS. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Udall.
Mr. MARK UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have no questions at this time.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Washington, Mr. Inslee.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Taylor, I am reading a comment from George Shloegel in our file. He is extolling the virtues of Cat Island. It says here, quote, Just last month our own Congressman, Gene Taylor, and his daughter Emily landed a monster red fish and played a hand-over-hand line much like the Old Man and the Sea and presented a delicious meal to their entire family, close quote.
Now, I realize that you are not under oath, but how big was that fish? Could you just show us?
Mr. TAYLOR. It was indeed the biggest fish I ever caught. It was my daughter Sarah.
Mr. INSLEE. I don't have a question. I just have a comment for Mr. Taylor.
Your comments about the importance of seeing the hand of God in nature—I have been in Congress for 3 years, off and on. That is was the most eloquent statement I have heard on environmental issues since I have been here. I appreciate your comments. I think that we should share it with other Members.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. TAYLOR. I am rarely accused of being eloquent.
Mr. INSLEE. That is why I noted it. I appreciate what you had to say.
Mr. Underwood, you are getting some help because last night on the Learning Channel they had a story on the brown tree snake on your island, so you are getting a little help. Thank you.
Mr. UNDERWOOD. I am not sure that I like that kind of help.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Taylor, what is it that you envision for Cat Island?
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned before, and I really don't know who was behind it back then, my hunch would be then Congressman Colmer, who was a very influential member of the Rules Committee, Senator Eastland and Senator Stennis, I don't know who was smart enough to do it. I guess all of them. But they took several approaches to the islands that were purchased in the Gulf Island Seashore.
One of them has a Civil War fort that was used as a prison during the Civil War. That island is Ship Island. It has a regular passenger service to it, and I would presume probably over 100,000 people a year go out there and swim on the beaches, tour the fort. They have some beautiful boardwalks out among the marshes so people can see the alligators, the egrets, get an idea of what nature was like.
Another island, Horn Island, was kept primarily in a primitive state. They allow for primitive camping out there. They allow folks to sail out there, anchor off and swim off the beaches, basically do everything short of hunting out there, if I am not mistaken. I would leave that up to the Park Service as to what they think the market is for the best use of this island. Either one would be wonderful, as far as I am concerned. It is not very far from Ship Island where the vast majority of tours go by way of the regular passenger service.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But I think with the incredible growth of the Mississippi Gulf Coast—and again, no one anticipated it. I was one of the sponsors of the bill, and it is 50 times bigger than anyone guessed it could have been. I think we should leave it to the Park Service, the flexibility to do one or the other depending on what they think the market is. If they find that Ship Island has gotten so crowded that people are tripping over each other, much like the Jersey Shore, I am sure they would want the option of doing with Cat Island what they did with Ship Island.
Mr. HANSEN. Do people go over there in their private boats on those islands that are close to the mainland for recreation purposes?
Mr. TAYLOR. I was out at Ship Island in July when they have an annual get-together as a fund raiser for the island. I would estimate that at least 50,000 people were out there. Most of them got out there in their private boats.
We have a really great thing about the Mississippi Gulf Coast, is that we have these barrier islands that range anywhere from about 7 to 10 miles off shore that protect us from the big waves of the Gulf of Mexico. So even people with fairly small boats, 14-, 15-, 16-foot boats, can access them knowing they are not going to encounter too great a sea.
We have a very good presence of the United States Coast Guard. We have an excellent National Weather Service. It is something that truly the average Joes of south Mississippi can use.
Again, to the compliment of the Boddie family—I have only recently gotten to meet them—I have been going out there since I was a kid. They have been very good about saying if you stay on the beach and don't come in where our things are, they kind of just let people do it.
Mr. HANSEN. You say 7 to 10 miles from the mainland?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, sir. But, again, it is in a place where the seas rarely get as high as this desk top.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. So small boats can go through there unless inclement weather? They can make it all right?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes. And the beauty of it is it is accessible so that almost anyone who can afford a boat or has a friend who has a boat can get to Ship Island. Again, in the case of Ship Island, which I am going to guess is 5 miles to the east, there is a regular passenger service available through a charter to the——
Mr. HANSEN. Your bill does not dictate to the Park Service or any other entity what they should do with it. You are leaving it up to them. So if they decided that the Marriott Corporation should put three hotels you would go along with that?
Mr. TAYLOR. That is prohibited, if I am not mistaken, from the 1970s law.
Mr. HANSEN. If they decided to put it in wilderness, would you feel okay with that?
Mr. TAYLOR. Again, that is they have done with Horn Island and allowed for primitive camping. I would think that, as far as the Park Service is concerned, that would be the low-cost option for them, the easiest for them to maintain. I would love to give them that option.
Again, since our tourism industry has just exploded, they may find that they need additional beaches made available to the public. They may want to establish a passenger service to that island they way they have at Ship Island. That is their call. I would like to see it included. I would like to make those opportunities available to them.
Mr. HANSEN. From the map it appears that it has quite a nice beach along that one side; is that correct?
Mr. TAYLOR. It is a phenomenal beach. I have seen everything from manta rays, dolphins. I really did catch the largest red drum of my life just a couple of weeks ago. It is where most of the crabs from the Mississippi Sound go there during the summer to lay their eggs. You literally will go out there on a day where you can hardly take a step for fear of stepping on crabs. The only horseshoe crabs that you see anymore in the Gulf Coast are out there. The white albino crabs that you see on the sand, you normally think of as down in the Bahamas, you see out there. Whitetail deer, osprey—the Boddies have been incredible stewards of this resource.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. What is your estimation of cost? Do you have one yet?
Mr. TAYLOR. Yes. The rough estimate—the Gulf Island National Seashore is in the process of having a survey done. If I am not mistaken, they are going to have two surveys done, just to comply with the law. The estimate is somewhere in the $28 million range. But if I may say, that is not out of line.
Mr. Gibbons is here. A lot of the folks that have casinos, some of those casinos are paying in rents from people $5 million a year for the equivalent of half a city block on the waterfront. So $28 billion dollar compared to that, those are the folks who really can afford to buy this island.
The Boddie family contacted me this summer and said, we have heard some of their proposals, and we have decided that the best long-term use for this island is to preserve it, and we would like to sell it. They could sell it either way. They can get a lot of money for it either way. It is their wishes that it be preserved as it is. I would—I think it is a great opportunity for the people of this country, and I would like to honor their wishes.
Mr. HANSEN. Where does it get the name Cat Island?
Mr. TAYLOR. I am told that when Bienville and D'Iberville, the French explorers that first explored the Mississippi Gulf Coast around 1699, were working their way from Florida to what they hoped would be the mouth of the Mississippi River—it is fairly shallow around here, so a lot of it had to be done kind of touchy-feely to keep from running aground. When they passed the island, from a distance they saw a large number of raccoons which are still on the island. From a distance, they mistook them for cats. Hence the name Cat Island.
Mr. HANSEN. Always a story on those names, isn't there?
Mr. Underwood, you are of the opinion that the Fish and Wildlife is spending the money that they should have been using to take care of the birds and for the brown tree snake, and the people of Hawaii are really kind of ticked off for you folks for transporting the tree snake in the undercarriage of the airplanes. Your comment regarding where the money is going.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. UNDERWOOD. Actually, let me clarify that. The Fish and Wildlife Service doesn't really put any funding into fighting the brown tree snake. It is done by special appropriations. The leader on that has been Senator Inouye who has appropriated some money from the Department of Defense to help in controlling the brown tree snake.
My—I think the people of Guam could be ticked off for a lot of things. One, they could be ticked for the military planes that brought in the brown tree snakes to begin with. That is the first issue. But secondly is the fact that, under the guise of trying to help protect the endangered species, the birds, there has been more effort given by Fish and Wildlife towards dealing with property issues and land issues than the actual invasive species which have led to the decline of the birds.
Obviously, one of the—I have always kidded both Senator Inouye and Senator Akaka, the fastest way for us to get attention is to take a dead snake and throw it on the tarmac over in Honolulu. That gets everyone excited.
In reality, it is a serious problem, a serious public relations problem; and people of Guam are very much in favor of bringing back the bird species.
I have recently gone to a little cleared-off area in the north of Guam trying to bring back what is known as the koko or the Guam rail. The Guam rail existed only in Guam. It is the only place in the word that it existed, and this flightless bird had been wiped out by the brown tree snake.
Mr. HANSEN. Always a problem.
The way the 1973 bill reads, if you are very successful in eliminating the brown tree snake down to a certain extent it will then become endangered and we will have to appropriate millions of dollars to save it. I don't know whether we ever get the balance worked out, but someone around this place ought to be smart enough to figure out how to change the Endangered Species Act. In some people's opinion, it came from Mount Sinai and the hand of God wrote it, but it really has lot of flaws in it.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
With that frustration out of my way, let me say this. We appreciate the testimony of our two colleagues. We would welcome you to the dais if you would like to. And we will turn to the gentleman from Puerto Rico.
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. Mr. Taylor, what if the Navy decided that one of the islands in the Gulf Coast of Mississippi was indispensable for national defense and they started using it for bombarding and maneuvers? How would the people around Mississippi feel about that?
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Romero-Barceló, I am of the understanding that during World War II portions of both this island and Horn Island were used to train dogs for the military. There is actually some chemical weapons testing out there, either on this island or Horn Island.
I certainly understand where you are coming from. I have a very large Army tank range that I help to make better in my district where they do drop bombs in my district.
As I have said before, we value our bases as great neighbors. I hope to go to Puerto Rico when we adjourn and see if I can't do a job of convincing the United States Navy to be better neighbors on Vieques.
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. The difference there—we are getting into another subject, but the difference there is the community is involved in the base, and they get jobs in the base different from the situation in Vieques where the Navy is completely estranged from the people in Vieques.
Mr. TAYLOR. I am going to do the very best I can, in my very best mumble, to——
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELÓ. I know that. You have been very helpful. Thank you very much on that. You can be sure that we will also be very helpful to you in this, whatever we can do.
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Nevada.
Mr. GIBBONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have just one question for Mr. Taylor.
I noticed that the owners of Cat Island have requested the retention of a retained right for an in-holding within the island itself. Are you in support of their request for retention of an in-holding that would be within the area of the island but not included within the park boundaries?
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Gibbons, let's remember, they have a number of people who have a lot of money who have offered to buy this island. Those people can do, since it is privately owned, anything they want with it all the way from razing it—they can do anything they want with it right now.
They have offered to make about 2,100 acres available to the public. They have asked that they can keep for their children, since this has been in their family for almost a century, about 150 acres. About another 8 or 10 acres are owned by other individuals in smaller lots.
You and I, I think, are very much alike in that we don't want to take anyone's land. They are willing sellers. They have told me that they would like to retain that 150 acres for their children and children's children, but also with the knowledge and working with the Gulf Island National Seashore to possibly one day construct a small lodge, 8 to 15 rooms, where folks could come out and have eco-tours. I see that as a great idea.
We both have districts where a lot of people come for the purposes of gambling. But they also come to do a lot of other things. In the case of your district, to play golf, see the mountains, see the desert. In the case of south Mississippi, we have the great resource of the Gulf of Mexico. I think that the more assets that already exist in south Mississippi that we can make available to the public the better.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So if they want to give the opportunity to folks that don't have a boat to go out to Cat Island and spend a few days and see the deer and the alligators, the ospreys and the horseshoe crabs, the dolphins, I think it is a wonderful idea.
Mr. GIBBONS. Thank you, Mr. Taylor.
Mr. Chairman, I know that we have had discussions in this Committee in the past about in-holdings in the park and other areas and some of the problems that has been raised by the park commission over such things. I would hope that we can make it clear that the wishes of the owners in this regard to their property making this a public island more or less would be recognized down the road. I am afraid what we will see is an erosion of that support for private ownership within that island after a number of years.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Gibbons, to the point, if I may, only yesterday I received a letter from someone who owns about 80 acres on one of the islands previously purchased back in the late 1960s, early 1970s. Obviously, it has not been a problem for them, that they have retained title to that for these many years.
We are—I would hope that you would ask the same question of the Boddie family. They have asked for very specific language that would allow them to do just what we talked about. I hope the bill would spell that out so they don't have to keep going to the expense of coming back and forth to Washington, that we could get this straight and have it as part of the proposal that your Committee votes on.
Mr. HANSEN. Further questions for our colleagues? If not, we will excuse you. Actually, if you would like to join us on the dais, we will turn to the first panel.
Our first panel is William Shaddox, Acting Associate Director for Professional Services, National Park Service; Cala Boddie-Colbert, Cat Island, Mississippi; and George Schloegel, Friends of the Gulf Island National Seashore.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
If these three folk would like to come up, we would appreciate it.
Thank you.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM SHADDOX, ACTING ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Shaddox, we appreciate you being with us, and we will turn to you first.
You folks notice this little machine in front of you. It is a new idea that they have come up with around here. It has on it: Talk, sum up, and stop. There is the time just ticking away. We appreciate it if you would try to stay within your time. We realize that maybe you have got to go over for a few minutes, and that is all right. We now fine you for $10 a minute for every minute you go over. Maybe we would waive that in this hearing.
The floor is yours, sir.
Mr. SHADDOX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, for allowing us to appear and testify on H.R. 2541 today to adjust boundaries of Gulf Island National Seashore to include Cat Island, Mississippi.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit my statement for the record, if you please. Then I could summarize.
Mr. HANSEN. Without objection, your entire testimony will be in the record, as it will for all of our witnesses today. If you would like to summarize, that is perfectly all right. We understand.
Mr. SHADDOX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Congressman Taylor for all of his hard work to bring this bill to the attention of the Congress. I would like to thank Trust Republic Lands for all of the hard work that they have done in this measure. I would certainly love to thank the Boddie family for their willingness to step forward to help preserve this wonderful resource, this beautiful island.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Department supports this legislation, Mr. Chairman, with the amendments described later in this testimony. The significant natural resources of the island and its great potential for visitor use make this island a highly desirable addition to the national seashore.
The landowners prefer to have the island added to the national seashore, and to that end we have been discussing terms of conveyance with the Trust for Public Lands and the National Park Service. Meanwhile, because development pressures along the coast of Mississippi are intensifying, the owner is likely to get very attractive competing offers from land developers. We hope that Congress would seize what could turn out to be a short-lived opportunity to obtain this magnificent resource for the benefit of the public by passing this legislation enabling the National Park Service to acquire the island. Land acquisitions, however, would be subject to National Park Service priorities and the availability of appropriations.
While we agree with the intent of H.R. 2541, we recommend two changes to the legislation as follows. If you will bear with me, Mr. Chairman, this is somewhat lengthy, but I will get through it as quickly as possible.
First, section 1, subsection 3, would add to Gulf Islands and the water area adjacent to the shoreline that is not owned by the State of Mississippi. Because the State actually has title to all submerged lands below the mean high tide line, the boundary would end at the high tide line. The beach area below the high tide line and the submerged lands, which are owned by the State, would be excluded.
This proposed boundary is different from the boundaries around the other islands within the seashore, which include the adjacent submerged lands for one mile from the shoreline or to the south edge of the Intercoastal Waterway, whichever is closer.
We recommend that section 1, subsection 3, be amended to establish a seaward boundary for Cat Island that is consistent with those of the other national seashore islands. We are concerned that if the boundary stops at the high tide line, it may pose management problems. For example, the Park Service would not be able to establish and enforce rules for recreational watercraft immediately offshore, as it does for other national seashore islands.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We understand that State officials oppose including State submerged lands in the boundary. However, including this area in the boundary would not change the ownership of the submerged lands. The State would retain ownership. Section 2(a)(6) of Public Law 91–660, the original Gulf islands legislation, makes clear that the National Park Service may acquire only with the consent of the State. The State did in fact convey to the Park Service ownership of the submerged land surrounding the other Gulf Islands nearly 30 years ago.
If Mississippi wishes to retain title to the submerged lands adjacent to the island, establishing a boundary one mile out to see would make it possible for the State to enter into an agreement for concurrent jurisdiction of the area with the National Park Service. That could be a real advantage to both the State and the Park Service. Under such an agreement, it would be possible for the State to be relieved of the burden it would otherwise continue to bear for management of the water surrounding the island, while the Park Service would have a greater ability to protect the island's resources and the visiting public. But unless the boundary is extended beyond the high tide line, the option of entering into such a management agreement would not be available.
Furthermore, should the State ever decide that it wanted to transfer ownership of the water within the one mile boundary to the Park Service, there would be no need for new legislation to adjust the boundary.
Two alternative maps depicting the island as part of Gulf Islands National Seashore are being prepared by the Park Service's Regional Office. One depicts the island with a boundary one mile seaward, as we are recommending, the other with a boundary at the high tide line, as described in H.R. 2541 as introduced, and we will submit both to the Subcommittee.
Secondly, H.R. 2541 anticipates the purchase of the island but does not include an increase in the authorization of appropriations for land acquisition. The last authorization for the acquisition at Gulf Islands, enacted in 1976, raised the ceiling to $22,162,000. Over the years, Congress has actually appropriated more than that amount for land purchases in the islands. Because we do not yet have a cost estimate for the approximately 2,200 acres that would be purchased if this legislation is approved, we recommend that the legislation authorize the appropriation of such sums as necessary for land acquisition. Furthermore, the language should be clear that the submerged land, as well as land and water, are eligible for acquisition, as that would help avoid confusion over the status of submerged lands.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In summary, we believe that Cat Island would be a very valuable addition to the Gulf Island National Seashore, and we urge the Subcommittee to act on this legislation as quickly as possible before we lose the opportunity to add this wonderful property to the National Park Service.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my remarks; and I would like to answer any questions that you or the Subcommittee may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Shaddox follows:]
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM SHADDOX, ACTING ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify on H.R. 2541, to adjust the boundaries of the Gulf Islands National Seashore to include Cat Island, Mississippi.
The Department supports this legislation, with the amendments described later in the testimony.
H.R. 2541 would revise the boundary of Gulf Islands National Seashore established in 1971, by Public Law 91–660, to add Cat Island to the series of barrier islands and onshore units in Mississippi and Florida that comprise the national seashore. Cat Island, which lies about eight miles south of Gulfport, is the western-most barrier island of the group of five islands off the eastern half of the Mississippi coast. This almost entirely undeveloped, 2,350-acre, T-shaped island has more than 21 miles of shoreline varying from sea-level beaches to 40-foot high sand ridges.
Cat Island contains a greater diversity of vegetation and wildlife than any of the islands currently within the national seashore. Habitats include saltwater marsh, ephemeral saltwater marsh, freshwater marsh, palmetto-slash pine forest, and live oak stands. The only development on the entire island consists of three frame dwellings, some man-made canals, and relics of military use during World War II. The significant natural resources of the island, and its great potential for visitor use, make this island a highly desirable addition to the national seashore.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
When plans were under way to establish Gulf Islands National Seashore three decades ago, the Administration proposed to include Cat Island in the boundary. However, due to opposition to its inclusion by the owner, Congress omitted the island from the final legislation. The island's principal owner now wishes to sell all but 150 acres of the island.
The owner prefers to have the land added to the national seashore and, to that end, has been discussing terms of conveyance with the Trust for Public Land and the National Park Service. Meanwhile, because development pressures along the coast of Mississippi are intensifying, the owner is likely to get very attractive competing offers from land developers. We hope that Congress will seize what could turn out to be a short-lived opportunity to obtain this magnificent resource for the benefit of the public by passing this legislation, enabling the National Park Service to acquire the island. Land acquisitions, however, would be subject to National Park Service priorities and the availability of appropriations.
While we agree with the intent of H.R. 2541, we recommend two changes to the legislation, as follows:
First, Section 1(3) would add to Gulf-Islands National Seashore Cat Island and the water area adjacent to the shoreline that is not owned by the State of Mississippi. Because the State actually has title to all submerged lands below the mean high-tide line, the boundary would end at the high-tide line. The beach area below the high-tide line and the submerged lands, which are owned by the state, would be excluded.
This proposed boundary is different from the boundaries around the other islands within Gulf Islands National Seashore, which include the adjacent submerged lands for one mile from the shoreline or to the south edge of the Intercoastal Waterway, whichever is closer.
We recommend that Section 1(3) be amended to establish a seaward boundary for Cat Island that is consistent with those of the other national seashore islands. We are concerned that if the boundary stops at the high-tide line, it may pose management problems. For example, the National Park Service would not be able to establish and enforce rules for recreational watercraft immediately off shore, as it does for the other national seashore islands.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We understand that State officials oppose including State submerged lands in the boundary. However, including this area in the boundary would not change the ownership of the submerged lands. Section 2(a) of Public Law 91–660, the original Gulf Islands legislation, makes clear that the National Park Service may acquire State property only with the consent of the State. The State did in fact convey to the Park Service ownership of the submerged lands surrounding the other gulf islands nearly 30 years ago.
If Mississippi wishes to retain title to the submerged lands adjacent to Cat Island, establishing a boundary one mile out to sea would make it possible for the State to enter into an agreement for concurrent jurisdiction of the area with the National Park Service. That could be a real advantage both to the State and the National Park Service. Under such an agreement, it is possible that the State could be relieved of the burden it would otherwise continue to bear for management of the water surrounding the island, while the Park Service would have a greater ability to protect the island's resources and the visiting public. But unless the boundary is extended beyond the high-tide line, the option of entering such a management agreement will not be available.
Furthermore, should the State ever decide it wanted to transfer ownership of the water within the one-mile boundary to the National Park Service, there would be no need for new legislation adjusting the boundary.
Two alternative maps depicting Cat Island as part of Gulf Islands National Seashore are being prepared by the Park Service's Southeast Regional Office. One depicts Cat Island with a boundary one-mile seaward, as we are recommending, the other with a boundary at the high-tide line, as described in H.R. 2541 as introduced. We shall submit both to the Subcommittee.
Second, H.R. 2541 anticipates the purchase of Cat Island, but does not include an increase in the authorization of appropriations for land acquisition. The last authorization for land acquisition at Gulf Islands, enacted in 1976, raised the ceiling to $22,162,000. Over the years, Congress has actually appropriated more than that amount for land purchases there. Because we do not yet have a cost estimate for the approximately 2,200 acres that could be purchased if this legislation is approved, we recommend that the legislation authorize the appropriation of ''such sums as necessary'' for land acquisition. Furthermore, the language should be clear that submerged lands, as well as land and water, are eligible for acquisition, as that will help avoid confusion over the status of submerged lands.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In summary, we believe that Cat Island would be a very valuable addition to Gulf Islands National Seashore, and we urge the Subcommittee to act on this legislation as quickly as possible before we lose the opportunity to add this wonderful property to the National Park System.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks. I would be pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.
Mr. HANSEN. We have, apparently, a couple of votes on right now. We will have to see what they are and determine whether we would want this kind of recess for just a moment.
There is just one on the rule and just a general vote. Possibly it would be better if we recessed for just a few minutes. We will run over and come right back. I would urge the members of the Committee to come right back, and we will get right back to the next testimony.
We will stand in recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. HANSEN. The meeting will come to order.
We have no control over things such as votes going on. We just have to go. That vote ended. I am sure the members will be coming back.
We will now turn to Cala Boddie-Colbert as our next witness.
STATEMENT OF CALA BODDIE-COLBERT, CAT ISLAND, MISSIPPII
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. I am Cala Boddie-Colbert. I am here together with my brother and sister. Together with our cousin and our nine children, we own all but six acres of Cat Island.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As you can see from the map over there, it is a T-shaped island approximately 7 miles south of Gulfport, Mississippi. The island has been in my family for almost 90 years. It has 21 miles of shoreline and it has pristine views and over three miles of totally undeveloped white gulf sand beach.
The incredible economic growth on the Gulf Coast in recent years has put us under intense pressure to decide between preserving the island and developing it. We have come to the conclusion that, if we are compensated fairly, we would greatly prefer to see the majority of the island preserved in its natural state. We think that the National Park Service has done an excellent job of managing the Mississippi barrier islands that are currently in the Gulf Islands National Seashore. For that reason, we believe that the seashore is the logical entity to preserve and manage the majority of Cat Island.
But our children are the fifth generation of our family to love Cat Island, and it is very important to us that this relationship should continue. Therefore, since we were first approached by the National Park Service in May, 1998, about the possibility of including Cat Island in the seashore, our discussions with the Park Service and with the Trust for Public Lands concerning an option which it could exercise on behalf of the Park Service, it has always been based on the premise that our family would retain approximately 6 percent of Cat Island in fee simple ownership. We have voluntarily agreed that we will place substantial government restrictions on this family land once the remainder of the island has been transferred to the Park Service. However, we did not contemplate and we have not agreed to the inclusion of this family land within the boundaries of the Gulf Island National Seashore.
We completely support the intent of H.R. 2541, but we ask that the Subcommittee modify the bill, as Congressman Taylor asked, to remove our family land and to remove the existing privately owned subdivided lots from the proposed boundary amendment to the Gulf Island National Seashore. If the bill is amended to that effect, my family will wholeheartedly support it.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The reserved rights that we have negotiated with the Park Service will allow us to build houses for ourselves and our children and construct a small ecologically-oriented lodge on the acreage we will retain. The Park Service has agreed that this type of responsible and limited development is consistent with its management plans for Cat Island. A copy of the proposed reserved rights and restrictions that we have negotiated with the Park Service, a map showing the location of our family parcel, and a plat of the existing subdivided lots on the island are included with our written statement. A legal description of the family parcel is being submitted for the record.
We think that the preservation of 94 percent of Cat Island in its natural state for public use by future generations is in everyone's best interests. But because we want to keep a small part of Cat Island for ourselves, our children, and we hope for their children, and we also want to ensure the rights of the existing lot owners, I do ask you to amend H.R. 2541 to exclude our family's retained land and the existing other privately owned property on the island from the proposed boundary of the Gulf Island National Seashore.
Thank you.
Mr. HANSEN. We thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Boddie-Colbert follows:]
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. George Schloegel, I hope.
STATEMENT OF GEORGE SCHLOEGEL, FRIENDS OF THE GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE
Mr. SCHLOEGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, my name is George Schloegel. I am 43 year employee of the Hancock Bank, headquartered in Gulfport. I represent the Friends of the Gulf Islands National Seashore, a broad-based volunteer nonprofit organization dedicated to the preservation and enhancement and operation of the barrier islands that are owned by the Federal Government located in the Mississippi Sound and the Gulf of Mexico and visited by approximately 4 1/2 million people annually.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
By way of background, my experience with the Gulf Islands goes back several generations. My father, Joseph A. Schloegel, Sr., personally led the effort to keep Fort Massachusetts from being destroyed by the encroaching sea in the early 1930s. I was a part of the effort from 1965 to 1971 to have the islands transferred from private to public ownership. I am cofounder and chairman emeritus of the Friends of the Gulf Island National Seashore. I serve as chairman of the reconstruction of Ship Island lighthouse which was originally built in 1853, destroyed in 1861 during the Civil War, and rebuilt in 1886 and accidentally burned in 1972. We rebuilt the lighthouse on October 9, 1998. A model that I have in front of me is of that lighthouse. It is nearing completion as we speak.
Now, to the island itself. The beauty and history of Cat Island is augmented by the inexpensive accessibility to sports fishing by fishermen who do not need costly boats to enjoy these waters. Families have access to gigging flounders at night or wade fishing along the sandy beaches with only a pole and a line. My grandsons fish off of Cat Island as did their great, great, great grandfather. Cat Island is a profound part of our lives, the lives of many people who live along the Gulf Coast of Mississippi. Just last month, as we read in the record a while ago, our own Congressmen Gene Taylor and his daughter Emily landed a monster redfish employing a hand-over-hand line, much like the Old Man and the Sea, and he presented to his family a delicious meal. That is common among the people who live on the Gulf Coast.
Today's appearance is ''deja vous'' for me. Under the able leadership of M. James Stevens, a New Jersey native who migrated to the Mississippi Gulf Coast and became our most beloved historian and civil leader, H.R. 10874 was introduced May 5, 1969. Sponsors of that bill included Congressman Sikes of Florida, Congressman Dickinson of Alabama, Congressman Hebert of Louisiana and Congressman William Colmer of Mississippi. Congressman Colmer at the time was chairman of the House Rules Committee.
H.R. 10874 created the Gulf Islands National Seashore to preserve one of America's most historic and scenic chain of barrier islands.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Included in the original bill was Mississippi's Petit Bois Island, Ship Island, Horn Island, and Cat Island. My good friend and the owner of Cat Island, the late Nathan Boddie, and his family did not want to sell Cat Island at that time. Mr. Bill Colmer in his infinite wisdom did not want to invoke eminent domain. I remember the stately chairman putting his hand on my shoulders here in Washington and saying, ''George, Nathan does not want to sell Cat Island and I feel we should accommodate him and take Cat Island out of the bill. At a later date perhaps we can purchase Cat Island, but condemnation simply is not an alternative I can live with.''
Naturally, I agreed with Mr. Colmer, and H.R. 10874 passed the 91st Congress on January 8, 1971. Mr. Calmer's prophesy that one day Cat Island could be purchased is the subject of today's hearing. The Friends of the Gulf Islands National Seashore are grateful to Mr. George Boddie, to his sisters, and to all members of the Boddie family for their concurrence of the preservation of this national landmark.
By way of a little additional history, in 1513 Spanish explorer claimed the area of Cat Island 94 years before Jamestown and 110 years before the Mayflower landed at Plymouth Rock.
Three hundred years ago this year, on February 10, 1699, the French established a beachhead on the island and sailed through the pass between Cat Island and Ship Island and built Fort Maurepas on the mainland in Ocean Springs.
President Thomas Jefferson declared the control of New Orleans the focal point to the western expansion of our young Nation in 1801. New Orleans controlled the Mississippi River which drains 41 percent of the continental United States, including all or part of 31 States from New York to North Carolina and Idaho to New Mexico. This territory located just west of Cat Island prompted the Louisiana Purchase, America's greatest real estate transaction at 4 cents an acre, tripling the size of the United States in 1803.
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The islands in question at today's hearing were pivotal in the Battle of New Orleans won by Andrew Jackson in 1815. The Treaty of Ghent on Christmas Eve, December 24, 1814, ended the war of 1812, but the terms of the armistice claimed the British did not recognize the Louisiana Purchase and therefore the coastal land and islands from Pensacola to Baton Rouge remained British. Andy Jackson's decisive defeat of the British at Mobile, Pensacola and finally at New Orleans on January 8, 1815, 2 weeks after the war was officially over, drove the British out of America once and for all.
Admiral David G. Farragut used the Gulf Islands as his launch spot for the siege of New Orleans, Baton Rouge and Natchez. The USS Constitution, among other transport vessels, deposited 18,000 troops on the islands in the midst of the Civil War. Those were the troops that General Benjamin Butler of Massachusetts used to occupy the City of New Orleans.
Admiral Farragut again used the islands to stage the Battle of Mobile against Admiral Franklin Buchanan, First Superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy and former Commander of the C.S.A. Merimac-Virginia. In that battle, Farragut climbed the mainsail to view the fight and coined the phrase, ''Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.''
Others before you in these hallowed halls have preserved pieces of American history dating back to Francis Scott Key, Betsy Ross, Patrick Henry, and Nathan Hale. Today you have the opportunity to do the same by preserving another vital piece of American history where Andrew Jackson, David Farragut, and Zachary Taylor made their marks.
Today's testimony is not only about buying an island, it is also about preserving a piece of American history.
Thank you.
Mr. HANSEN. I thank the gentleman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schloegel follows:]
STATEMENT OF GEORGE A. SCHLOEGEL, GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
My name is George Schloegel. I am a 43 year employee of Hancock Bank located at 2510 14th Street, Gulfport, Mississippi 39501. My telephone number is (228) 868-4706. My degree is from Louisiana State University in New Orleans in Business Administration with a minor in History. I represent the Friends of the Guf Islands National Seashore, a broad based, volunteer non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation, enhancement and operation of the barrier islands owned by the Federal Government located in the Mississippi Sound and Gulf of Mexico and visited by 4 1/2 million people annually.
My experience with the Islands goes back several generations. My father, Joseph A. Schloegel, Sr., personally led the effort to keep Fort Massachusetts from being destroyed by the encroaching sea in the early 1930's. I was a part of the effort, from 1965 to 1971, to have the Islands transferred from private to public ownership. I am a co-founder and Chairman Emeritus of the Friends of the Gulf Island National Seashore. I serve as Chairman of the reconstruction of the Ship Island Lighthouse originally built in 1853, destroyed in 1861 during the Civil War, rebuilt in 1886, accidently burned in 1972 and rebuilt beginning on October 9, 1998.
The beauty of Cat Island is also augmented by inexpensive accessibility to sports fishing. Fishermen do not need costly boats to enjoy these waters. Families have access to gigging flounders at night or wade fishing along the sandy beaches with only a pole and line. My grandsons fish off of Cat Island as did their great, great, great grandfather. Cat Island is a profound part of our lives. Just last month our own Congressman, Gene Taylor, and his daughter, Emily, landed a monster redfish employing a hand-over-hand line, much like The Old Man and the Sea, AND PRESENTED A DELICIOUS MEAL TO THEIR ENTIRE FAMILY.
Today's appearance is ''deja vous'' for me. Under the able leadership of M. James Stevens, a New Jersey native who migrated to the Mississippi Gulf Coast and became our most beloved historian and civic leader, H.R. 10874 was introduced May 5, 1969. Sponsors of that bill included Congressman Sikes of Florida, Congressman Dickinson of Alabama, Congressman Hebert of Louisiana and Congressman William Colmer of Mississippi, Chairman of the House Rules Committee.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H.R. 10874 created the Gulf Islands National Seashore to preserve one of America's most historic and scenic chains of barrier islands.
Included in the original bill was Mississippi's Petit Bois Island, Ship Island, Horn Island, and Cat Island. My good friend and owner of Cat Island, the late Nathan Boddie and his family, did not want to sell Cat Island at the time and Mr. Bill Colmer in his infinite wisdom did not want to invoke eminent domain. I remember the stately chairman putting his hand on my shoulder and saying, ''George, Nathan does not want to sell Cat Island and I feel we should accommodate him and take Cat Island out of the bill. At a later date perhaps we can purchase Cat Island but condemnation is simply not an alternative I can live with.''
Naturally, I agreed with Mr. Colmer and H.R. 10874 passed the 91st Congress on January 8, 1971. Mr. Colmer's prophecy that one day Cat Island could be purchased is the subject of today's hearing, and the Friends of the Gulf Islands National Seashore are grateful to Mr. George Boddie and the members of the Boddie family for their concurrence in the preservation of this national landmark.
In 1513, Spanish Explorers claimed the area 94 years before Jamestown and 107 years before the Mayflower landed at Plymouth Rock.
Three hundred years ago this year, on February 10, 1699, the French established a beachhead on the islands when they sailed through the pass between Cat Island and Ship Island and built Fort Maurepas on the mainland in Ocean Springs.
President Thomas Jefferson declared the control of New Orleans as the focal point to the western expansion of our young nation in 1801. New Orleans controlled the Mississippi River which drains 41 percent of the continental United States, including all or part of 31 states from New York to North Carolina and from Idaho to New Mexico. This territory located just west of Cat Island prompted the Louisiana Purchase, America's greatest real estate transaction at 4 cents per acre, tripling the size of the United States in 1803.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The islands in question at today's meeting were pivotal in the Battle of New Orleans won by General Andrew Jackson in 1815. The treaty of Ghent on Christmas Eve, December 24, 1814, ended the War of 1812 but the terms of the armistice claimed the British did not recognize the Louisiana Purchase; therefore, the coastal land and islands from Pensacola to Baton Rouge remained British. Andy Jackson's decisive defeat of the British at Mobile, Pensacola and finally at New Orleans on January 8, 1815, two weeks after the war was over, drove the British out of America once and for all.
Admiral David G. Farragut used the Gulf Islands as his launch spot for the Seige of New Orleans, Baton Rouge and Natchez. The U.S.S. Constitution, among other transport vessels, deposited 18,000 troops on the Islands in the midst of the Civil War. These were the troops General Benjamin Butler of Massachusetts used to occupy the city of New Orleans.
Admiral Farragut again used Ship Island to stage the Battle of Mobile against Admiral Franklin Buchanan, First Superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy and former Commander of the C.S.A. Merrimac-Virginia. In that battle, Farragut climbed the mainsail to view the fight and coined the phrase, ''Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.''
Others before you in these hallowed halls have preserved pieces of American history dating back to Frances Scott Key, Betsy Ross, Patrick Henry and Nathan Hale. Today you have the chance to do the same by preserving another vital piece of American history where Andrew Jackson, David Farragut and Zachary Taylor made their marks.
Today's testimony is not only about buying an island, it is also about preserving a piece of American history.
Thank you for allowing me to make this presentation.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Nevada, a question for our witnesses?
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. GIBBONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me address my first question to Ms. Colbert, if I may.
Welcome and thank you for your testimony. I know your family is in support of this acquisition. What is the will, if you might say that, of the other landholders on the island? What do they see with all of this?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. I don't speak formally for them, but there are approximately 27 quarter acre lots that my father sold in the 1960s and early 1970s. Those are probably owned by, I would think, 10 to 12 different persons, because several people owned more than one lot. We have not talked to each of them.
I think that the overwhelming sentiment is that they would like to be outside the seashore, if for no other reason so they could drink a Coors longneck on the porch of their house. The seashore, for very good reasons, prevents any glass on the island's seashore, and that is obviously necessary. But I think these people would like to have a little less regulation and be able to go into their camps and continue life as usual.
Mr. GIBBONS. So they want to continue their private property ownership on the island while still permitting the public ownership of the majority of the island that you plan——
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. We own all but six acres of the island. I don't know that other landowners really have a say as to whether—into our decision to sell to the Park Service. But it is my understanding and it has been my understanding that the land that we kept and also the existing privately owned lots would not be included within the boundaries of the seashore. They would simply be outside the seashore, not in hold.
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Shaddox, what is the projected cost of the island?
Mr. SHADDOX. We have no estimates at this time. We are conducting an appraisal, but we don't know what the costs are going to be at this time.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. GIBBONS. Would you be willing to submit for the record your determination of the appraisal value prior to the acquisition?
Mr. SHADDOX. We would be willing to do that after we share it with the landowner, yes.
Mr. GIBBONS. With an included boundary of your suggestion for the barrier, the boundary around this island to be included as part of the title, would there be any restrictions on the access to this island generated by your service for these private property inholders?
Mr. SHADDOX. If I may, Representative Gibbons, ask the chairman if I could please call Jerry Eubanks, the Superintendent of Gulf Islands, to the table and Dan Brown, Deputy Regional Director of Atlanta, to help answer some of these questions. They are infinitely more familiar with the island and its regulations than I am.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Udall.
Mr. GIBBONS. I noticed that it was still green, Mr. Chairman. When it turns red, I would stop. I have acceded to your wishes.
Mr. HANSEN. The floor is still yours.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Gibbons, I believe that I can help answer that question.
Mr. HANSEN. You can answer from there.
Mr. TAYLOR. I want to show you. I think it is easier. It is my understanding that the track of lands the family and the other property owners would like to retain is right up around here.
Mr. GIBBONS. Yes, I have seen the map in the back. I have heard testimony.
Mr. TAYLOR. So, as you can clearly see, that land would continue to be accessible by water.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. GIBBONS. But the land behind it, which is the other 10 or 12 property owners, would have also some restrictions, and that is the reason why I went to the question.
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. Sir, do you want me to respond?
Mr. GIBBONS. Sure.
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. Those privately owned lots are on the northern channels that are shown on the map. So they would have—they should have waterfront access right to their lot.
Mr. GIBBONS. That would be my question back to the Park Service, Ms. Colbert. That is why I wanted to ask the Park Service that question. Because if they include a greater boundary around the island as their territory, then they would end up controlling and making the decisions about access over the property for you.
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. That is a subject of great concern to my family.
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, if one of the gentlemen that have come to the table could provide an answer, I notice my questioning time has lapsed.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Nevada, I apologize for not paying attention. Do you want additional time to pursue this line of questioning?
Mr. GIBBONS. I would ask one of the gentlemen, if they understood my question, if they could respond to it.
Mr. EUBANKS. The private property is on the canal that comes on there, so there would be access.
Mr. GIBBONS. I guess my question is, if you include the boundary around there extending out into the submerged lands as included as part of the acquisition description, then do you have the ability to control access? Would that exclude access for these individuals or the public?
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. EUBANKS. No, sir, not in my opinion, it would not.
Mr. GIBBONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HANSEN. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Udall.
Mr. MARK UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to yield to my colleague from Nevada if he had additional questions——
Mr. GIBBONS. I do, but you are certainly welcome to take up your own time.
Mr. MARK UDALL. Let me ask one or two questions. I don't think they will take very long.
I am interested in clarifying the record as well. I am looking at this plat here. It looks like there are 18 lots along a certain access and the there is some more on this point here. Your family still owns some of those lots. Some of them are owned privately. You used the word ''camp.'' It also sounds like in large part, that these are fairly primitive places where people come to spend the weekend to fish.
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. There are three buildings currently on these lots. The latest one, my brother's, for use of a better word, is certainly not primitive. It is modelled on the replica of the Horn Island lighthouse, which was built in the early part of this century. It is cypress. It is beautifully constructed. I would love for you to come out and see it.
The other two buildings out there are probably more correctly described as fishing camps, but I can tell you that one of them was built prior to Camille and went through the eye of Camille without any major damage. So there has been a—it is possible to build out there to withstand the forces of nature. It is a beautiful place.
Mr. MARK UDALL. If I could get permission, if your Congressman would invite me out there, I would love to have a chance to visit. You have to understand a lot of us on this Committee are from the mountain West. We sometimes have to take a little adjustment to the seashore. But it sounds like a phenomenal resource. He has invited me for the weekend.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So you feel confident that—I think my colleague from Nevada is concerned about access regulation. I think I am concerned about the private property owners who are there getting crosswise with the management policies of the Park Service and the general public perhaps having their experience impacted by private landowners who have a different point of view. But I hear you saying you think the two are compatible and you have examples of this and the other islands in this seashore area.
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. Well, now, I can't speak for the other lot owners. There are only currently two houses on the island that are not under my family's control. The development that we have negotiated with the Park Service would allow the members of our family to build houses on the land that we retain and to put in the small ecologically oriented lodge. We certainly expect to be good neighbors with the Park Service. We don't have any desire to, I think, undertake any activities that would disturb the beauty of the place. We want to enjoy it and keep it like it is, if possible.
Mr. MARK UDALL. That is clear from the way that you have managed it for 100 years, it sounds like. Do you expect other private landowners would expand and develop their parcels over time or do you think that it would probably only be a few more dwellings and your ecolodge that you are talking about?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. I think there could be only a few more dwellings. The possibility of additional dwellings would be limited to maybe four on those existing lots. I don't think there could ever be any significant development out there.
Mr. MARK UDALL. I would be happy to yield whatever time I have left to my colleague from Nevada.
Mr. GIBBONS. Thank you, Mr. Udall. I appreciate that.
I would presume your purpose would be to have a commercial ecotourism base on that island?
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. We think that it would be something that we would enjoy doing.
Mr. GIBBONS. The purpose, is that commercial or it would be a private, not-for-profit operation?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. I don't think that we could do it if it were not for profit. It would be a commercial operation, but I think it would be a very small-scale, limited operation.
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Shaddox, is that within the park's purview to acquire public land for the use of commercial operations within it?
Mr. SHADDOX. Normally when we buy lands inside the parks or if the park is established and has private lands inside the park, we respect those private individuals' rights to do with their land what they will. In this case, it doesn't appear that there is going to be any inflection against the park. At this time, the Boddie's plans are very straightforward, and we wouldn't have that much difficulty with it. Our concern is more what happens in the future with lands that are not in that ownership.
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, may I just take an additional moment here to follow up that question? Because what I am hearing from the owner of the property today is they want to establish a permanent commercial ecotourism operation on the island. But then again, if you are a private individual wanting to visit the island, I am not sure whether the park is going to provide public access to the island outside of this commercial operation that is proposed. I would wonder if that was the intent of the Park Service and if they could answer that to provide access to the island that would be private without having to go through the public commercial operation that Ms. Colbert is offering.
Mr. SHADDOX. If I could defer to the superintendent on that to find out what his plans are.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. EUBANKS. Mr. Chairman, if I understand the question correctly, the private owned property would be accessible without having to come through the park because of those canals. It would through the other rough boundary——
Mr. GIBBONS. That would be true for those accessing private property unless they made a private access easement across their private property. So if there is that intent for the Park Service to create a landing facility, public visitors center access to the land, that would be my question to you. Because it seems to me it would be very restrictive to have a commercial operation which said you can only come to my island and tour it if you go to our commercial, paid for for-profit tourism.
Mr. EUBANKS. No, sir. I would visualize this being just like the others. People are free to go their in their private boats, and this one is much closer to the other islands and is much more accessible by privately owned boats. The only island that we have public access to by concession boat is West Ship Island that was referred to earlier. At this point, I don't know that we would have any plans for that. That hasn't been determined yet, but I would visualize it.
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Gibbons, the cove that would be on the bottom left-hand side is on the Spit Cove, as it is commonly referred to locally Smuggler's Cove, because the rum runners used it during Prohibition as a stopping-off station as they were bringing liquor up from Cuba and other places.
I have been there. This is a privately owned island, almost all of which is owned by the Boddie family. I have been there when over 100 boats were in that cove right now. If the question is somehow slanted that would this prohibit the public from using the island if the family retained a small portion, absolutely not. The family has been incredibly generous to allow on a regular basis folks to just show up and dock off their island.
Mr. GIBBONS. That was not my intent, to say that the family has not been generous with their current access. But the problem comes is when the Park Service takes over control of the majority of the island, they begin to have the ability to restrict use and activities. We see it all in the west a lot of times where day use or day visitor use gets down to numbers. Where they say in a certain area there is too many people coming here so we are going to restrict it to ''X'' thousand days of use per year and each individual counts for one of those day use.
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Gibbons, to that point, as I mentioned before and it may have been before you entered the room, the Park Service presently has several islands over in the Gulf Coast. One of them is called Horn Island where they allow primitive camping right now. Anyone can go there for a day trip in unlimited numbers and anyone can camp on the island in unlimited numbers.
They have another island called Ship Island, which has a commercial operation that you can pay to go out to the island or you can take your own boat out to the island. In parts of Ship Island there is unlimited camping. On parts of the island where the fort that Mr. Schloegel described, in order to prevent vandalism to the fort they limited camping on that portion of the island mostly to prevent vandalism to the fort that has occurred in the past and the lighthouse that Mr. Schloegel and his group have worked so hard to restore.
Mr. GIBBONS. I am sure Mr. Taylor is quite aware of Stiltsville in Florida where it was privately constructed residences in this bay. When it was turned over to the Park Service for a protected status it then became the objective of the Park Service to remove the private ownership and the owners out there in that bay. What worries me is when we do this, we are going to end up at some point down the road developing restrictions on these private owners at that point.
Mr. TAYLOR. Again, Mr. Gibbons, on that point, I appreciate you asking this question, and I can assure that the property owners appreciate you asking this question. One of the things that we hope to make abundantly clear today, so they don't have to keep coming back to Washington and explaining their position, is that they would like to retain fee simple title to what they retain, which means they can do what they want and the Park Service cannot interfere.
Mr. HANSEN. Let's move along. If you need another round, we would be happy to.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Sherwood.
The gentleman from Mississippi, do you have anything that you would like to——
Mr. TAYLOR. Again, I would like to thank our panelists for coming. I know it is a fairly expensive trip up from Mississippi and other parts of the country.
Mr. Schloegel very modestly did not mention that he is not only the employee of Hancock Bank but he is the president of the Hancock Bank, which is the largest banking institution in the State of Mississippi. Again, I am really pleased to see all of you here, but in particular I think Mr. Schloegel not only brings, as he mentioned, the concern of his family over decades for the Gulf Islands, but I think he also speaks for the business community of south Mississippi when he says this would be a good thing for South Mississippi and for our Nation. That is all. I thank you all for being here.
Mr. HANSEN. Thank you.
Ms. Colbert, let me get this in perspective, could I? Apparently your family has owned it for many years; is that right?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. Since 1911.
Mr. HANSEN. Your father was the titleholder with the family?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. My father and his sister inherited it from their grandmother, I think, in 1935. They each owned a half interest in it.
Mr. HANSEN. Now, they are the heirs to your father who I assume has passed away?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. My father died in 1985. My aunt, who is still alive, has given all of her interest in the island to my siblings and our children and her daughter.
Mr. HANSEN. So you are all co-owners.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. Yes.
Mr. HANSEN. Has it been divided up?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. No.
Mr. HANSEN. Like you have a piece and your children have a piece?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. No, we own it indivisible.
Mr. HANSEN. You are the ones that would be negotiating with the Park Service to determine if you want to sell this property to the Park Service or some other entity; is that right?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. The Park Service approached my brother in May of 1998. I think he agreed to take Mr. Eubanks out to the island, and they discussed the possibility that we would begin negotiations to consider the possibility of putting Cat Island into—a portion of Cat Island into the Gulf Island National Seashore.
Mr. HANSEN. And your father divided up—I don't know if we got this straight, but there looks like a number of lots in here. I think that you previously said quarter acre lots?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. Yes, sir.
Mr. HANSEN. These are owned by private individuals that were sold to these individuals from your family or your father or whoever?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. Yes, sir. Basically my father did that in an attempt to establish property values to keep Cat Island out of the Gulf Island National Seashore.
Mr. HANSEN. Is there a family dwelling that your family has owned somewhere in this area?
Ms. BODDIE-COLBERT. My brother has a house that is on that—well, on one of the can