[Senate Report 115-118]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 155
115th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 115-118
======================================================================
NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2017
_______
June 26, 2017.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Ms. Murkowski, from the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 713]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the bill (S. 713) to establish the Mountains to Sound
Greenway National Heritage Area in the State of Washington,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the
title, and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
1. Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Heritage Area Authorization
Act of 2017''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.
In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the
Interior.
SEC. 3. NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA DESIGNATIONS.
The following areas are designated as national heritage areas, to
be administered in accordance with this Act:
(1) Appalachian forest national heritage area, west virginia
and maryland.--
(A) In general.--There is established the Appalachian
Forest National Heritage Area in the States of West
Virginia and Maryland, as depicted on the map entitled
``Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area'', numbered
T07/80,000, and dated October 2007, including--
(i) Barbour, Braxton, Grant, Greenbrier,
Hampshire, Hardy, Mineral, Morgan, Nicholas,
Pendleton, Pocahontas, Preston, Randolph,
Tucker, Upshur, and Webster Counties in West
Virginia; and
(ii) Allegany and Garrett Counties in
Maryland.
(B) Local coordinating entity.--The Appalachian
Forest Heritage Area, Inc., shall be--
(i) the local coordinating entity for the
national heritage area designated by
subparagraph (A) (referred to in this
subparagraph as the ``local coordinating
entity''); and
(ii) governed by a board of directors that
shall--
(I) include members to represent a
geographic balance across the counties
described in subparagraph (A) and the
States of West Virginia and Maryland;
(II) be composed of not fewer than 7,
and not more than 15, members elected
by the membership of the local
coordinating entity;
(III) be selected to represent a
balanced group of diverse interests,
including--
(aa) the forest industry;
(bb) environmental interests;
(cc) cultural heritage
interests;
(dd) tourism interests; and
(ee) regional agency
partners;
(IV) exercise all corporate powers of
the local coordinating entity;
(V) manage the activities and affairs
of the local coordinating entity; and
(VI) subject to any limitations in
the articles and bylaws of the local
coordinating entity, this section, and
other applicable Federal or State law,
establish the policies of the local
coordinating entity.
(2) Maritime washington national heritage area, washington.--
(A) In general.--There is established the Maritime
Washington National Heritage Area in the State of
Washington, to include land in Whatcom, Skagit,
Snohomish, San Juan, Island, King, Pierce, Thurston,
Mason, Kitsap, Jefferson, Clallam, Grays Harbor
Counties in the State that is at least partially
located within the area that is \1/4\-mile landward of
the shoreline, as generally depicted on the map
entitled ``Maritime Washington National Heritage Area
Proposed Boundary'', numbered 584/125,484, and dated
August, 2014.
(B) Local coordinating entity.--The Washington Trust
for Historic Preservation shall be the local
coordinating entity for the national heritage area
designated by subparagraph (A).
(3) Mountains to sound greenway national heritage area,
washington.--
(A) In general.--There is established the Mountains
to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area in the State
of Washington, to consist of land in King and Kittitas
Counties in the State, as generally depicted on the map
entitled ``Mountains to Sound Greenway National
Heritage Area Proposed Boundary'', numbered 584/
125,483, and dated August, 2014.
(B) Local coordinating entity.--The Mountains to
Sound Greenway Trust shall be the local coordinating
entity for the national heritage area designated by
subparagraph (A).
(C) References to indian tribe; tribal.--Any
reference in this Act to the terms ``Indian tribe'' or
``tribal'' shall be considered, for purposes of the
heritage area established by subparagraph (A), to refer
to each of the tribal governments of the Snoqualmie,
Yakama, Tulalip, Muckleshoot, and Colville Indian
tribes.
(4) Sacramento san joaquin delta national heritage area,
california.--
(A) In general.--There is established the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area in the State
of California, to consist of land in Contra Costa,
Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo Counties in
the State, as generally depicted on the map entitled
``Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area
Proposed Boundary'', numbered T27/105,030, and dated
October 2012.
(B) Local coordinating entity.--The Delta Protection
Commission established by section 29735 of the
California Public Resources Code shall be the local
coordinating entity for the national heritage area
designated by subparagraph (A).
SEC. 4. ADMINISTRATION.
(a) Authorities.--For purposes of carrying out the management plan
for each of the national heritage areas designated by section 3, the
Secretary, acting through the local coordinating entity, may use
amounts made available under section 9--
(1) to make grants to the State or a political subdivision of
the State, Indian tribes, nonprofit organizations, and other
persons;
(2) to enter into cooperative agreements with, or provide
technical assistance to, the State or a political subdivision
of the State, Indian tribes, nonprofit organizations, and other
interested parties;
(3) to hire and compensate staff, which shall include
individuals with expertise in natural, cultural, and historical
resources protection, and heritage programming;
(4) to obtain money or services from any source including any
money or services that are provided under any other Federal law
or program;
(5) to contract for goods or services; and
(6) to undertake to be a catalyst for any other activity that
furthers the national heritage area and is consistent with the
approved management plan.
(b) Duties.--The local coordinating entity for each of the national
heritage areas designated by section 3 shall--
(1) in accordance with section 5, prepare and submit a
management plan for the national heritage area to the
Secretary;
(2) assist Federal agencies, the State or a political
subdivision of the State, Indian tribes, regional planning
organizations, nonprofit organizations and other interested
parties in carrying out the approved management plan by--
(A) carrying out programs and projects that
recognize, protect, and enhance important resource
values in the national heritage area;
(B) establishing and maintaining interpretive
exhibits and programs in the national heritage area;
(C) developing recreational and educational
opportunities in the national heritage area;
(D) increasing public awareness of, and appreciation
for, natural, historical, scenic, and cultural
resources of the national heritage area;
(E) protecting and restoring historic sites and
buildings in the national heritage area that are
consistent with national heritage area themes;
(F) ensuring that clear, consistent, and appropriate
signs identifying points of public access and sites of
interest are posted throughout the national heritage
area; and
(G) promoting a wide range of partnerships among the
Federal Government, State, tribal, and local
governments, organizations, and individuals to further
the national heritage area;
(3) consider the interests of diverse units of government,
businesses, organizations, and individuals in the national
heritage area in the preparation and implementation of the
management plan;
(4) conduct meetings open to the public at least semiannually
regarding the development and implementation of the management
plan;
(5) for any year that Federal funds have been received under
this section--
(A) submit to the Secretary an annual report that
describes the activities, expenses, and income of the
local coordinating entity (including grants to any
other entities during the year that the report is
made);
(B) make available to the Secretary for audit all
records relating to the expenditure of the funds and
any matching funds; and
(C) require, with respect to all agreements
authorizing expenditure of Federal funds by other
organizations, that the organizations receiving the
funds make available to the Secretary for audit all
records concerning the expenditure of the funds; and
(6) encourage by appropriate means economic viability that is
consistent with the national heritage area.
(c) Prohibition on the Acquisition of Real Property.--The local
coordinating entity shall not use Federal funds made available under
section 9 to acquire real property or any interest in real property.
SEC. 5. MANAGEMENT PLAN.
(a) In General.--Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment
of this Act, the local coordinating entity for each of the national
heritage areas designated by section 3 shall submit to the Secretary
for approval a proposed management plan for the national heritage area.
(b) Requirements.--The management plan shall--
(1) incorporate an integrated and cooperative approach for
the protection, enhancement, and interpretation of the natural,
cultural, historic, scenic, and recreational resources of the
national heritage area;
(2) take into consideration State, local, and tribal plans;
(3) include--
(A) an inventory of--
(i) the resources located in the national
heritage area; and
(ii) any other property in the national
heritage area that--
(I) is related to the themes of the
national heritage area; and
(II) should be preserved, restored,
managed, or maintained because of the
significance of the property;
(B) comprehensive policies, strategies and
recommendations for conservation, funding, management,
and development of the national heritage area;
(C) a description of actions that the Federal
Government, State, tribal, and local governments,
private organizations, and individuals have agreed to
take to protect the natural, historical and cultural
resources of the national heritage area;
(D) a program of implementation for the management
plan by the local coordinating entity that includes a
description of--
(i) actions to facilitate ongoing
collaboration among partners to promote plans
for resource protection, restoration, and
construction; and
(ii) specific commitments for implementation
that have been made by the local coordinating
entity or any government, organization, or
individual for the first 5 years of operation;
(E) the identification of sources of funding for
carrying out the management plan;
(F) analysis and recommendations for means by which
Federal, State, local, and tribal programs, including
the role of the National Park Service in the national
heritage area, may best be coordinated to carry out
this section; and
(G) an interpretive plan for the national heritage
area; and
(4) recommend policies and strategies for resource management
that consider and detail the application of appropriate land
and water management techniques, including the development of
intergovernmental and interagency cooperative agreements to
protect the natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic,
and recreational resources of the national heritage area.
(c) Deadline.--If a proposed management plan is not submitted to
the Secretary by the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment
of this Act, the local coordinating entity shall be ineligible to
receive additional funding under this Act until the date on which the
Secretary receives and approves the management plan.
(d) Approval or Disapproval of Management Plan.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
receipt of the management plan under subsection (a), the
Secretary, in consultation with the State, shall approve or
disapprove the management plan.
(2) Criteria for approval.--In determining whether to approve
the management plan, the Secretary shall consider whether--
(A) the local coordinating entity is representative
of the diverse interests of the national heritage area,
including governments, natural and historic resource
protection organizations, educational institutions,
businesses, and recreational organizations;
(B) the local coordinating entity has afforded
adequate opportunity, including public hearings, for
public and governmental involvement in the preparation
of the management plan; and
(C) the resource protection and interpretation
strategies contained in the management plan, if
implemented, would adequately protect the natural,
historical, and cultural resources of the national
heritage area.
(3) Action following disapproval.--If the Secretary
disapproves the management plan under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall--
(A) advise the local coordinating entity in writing
of the reasons for the disapproval;
(B) make recommendations for revisions to the
management plan; and
(C) not later than 180 days after the receipt of any
proposed revision of the management plan from the local
coordinating entity, approve or disapprove the proposed
revision.
(4) Amendments.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall approve or
disapprove each amendment to the management plan that
the Secretary determines make a substantial change to
the management plan.
(B) Use of funds.--The local coordinating entity
shall not use Federal funds authorized by this section
to carry out any amendments to the management plan
until the Secretary has approved the amendments.
SEC. 6. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES.
(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act affects the authority of a
Federal agency to provide technical or financial assistance under any
other law.
(b) Consultation and Coordination.--The head of any Federal agency
planning to conduct activities that may have an impact on a national
heritage area designated by section 3 is encouraged to consult and
coordinate the activities with the Secretary and the local coordinating
entity to the maximum extent practicable.
(c) Other Federal Agencies.--Nothing in this Act--
(1) modifies, alters, or amends any law or regulation
authorizing a Federal agency to manage Federal land under the
jurisdiction of the Federal agency;
(2) limits the discretion of a Federal land manager to
implement an approved land use plan within the boundaries of a
national heritage area designated by section 3; or
(3) modifies, alters, or amends any authorized use of Federal
land under the jurisdiction of a Federal agency.
SEC. 7. PRIVATE PROPERTY AND REGULATORY PROTECTIONS.
Nothing in this Act--
(1) abridges the rights of any property owner (whether public
or private), including the right to refrain from participating
in any plan, project, program, or activity conducted within a
national heritage area designated by section 3;
(2) requires any property owner--
(A) to permit public access (including access by
Federal, State, or local agencies) to the property of
the property owner; or
(B) to modify public access or use of property of the
property owner under any other Federal, State, or local
law;
(3) alters any duly adopted land use regulation, approved
land use plan, or other regulatory authority of any Federal,
State, tribal, or local agency,
(4) conveys any land use or other regulatory authority to the
local coordinating entity;
(5) authorizes or implies the reservation or appropriation of
water or water rights;
(6) affects the treaty rights of any Indian tribe within the
national heritage area;
(7) diminishes--
(A) the authority of the State to manage fish and
wildlife, including the regulation of fishing and
hunting within a national heritage area designated by
section 3; or
(B) the authority of Indian tribes to regulate
members of Indian tribes with respect to fishing and
hunting in the exercise of treaty rights; or
(8) creates any liability, or affects any liability under any
other law, of any private property owner with respect to any
person injured on the private property.
SEC. 8. EVALUATION AND REPORT.
(a) In General.--For each of the national heritage areas designated
by section 3, not later than 3 years before the date on which authority
for Federal funding terminates for each national heritage area, the
Secretary shall--
(1) conduct an evaluation of the accomplishments of the
national heritage area; and
(2) prepare a report in accordance with subsection (c).
(b) Evaluation.--An evaluation conducted under subsection (a)(1)
shall--
(1) assess the progress of the local management entity with
respect to--
(A) accomplishing the purposes of the authorizing
legislation for the national heritage area; and
(B) achieving the goals and objectives of the
approved management plan for the national heritage
area;
(2) analyze the investments of the Federal Government, State,
tribal, and local governments, and private entities in each
national heritage area to determine the impact of the
investments; and
(3) review the management structure, partnership
relationships, and funding of the national heritage area for
purposes of identifying the critical components for
sustainability of the national heritage area.
(c) Report.--Based on the evaluation conducted under subsection
(a)(1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources
of the House of Representatives a report that includes recommendations
for the future role of the National Park Service, if any, with respect
to the national heritage area.
SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated for each
national heritage area designated by section 3 to carry out the
purposes of this Act $10,000,000, of which not more than $1,000,000 may
be made available in any fiscal year.
(b) Availability.--Amounts made available under subsection (a)
shall remain available until expended.
(c) Cost-sharing Requirement.--
(1) In general.--The Federal share of the total cost of any
activity under this Act shall be not more than 50 percent.
(2) Form.--The non-Federal contribution of the total cost of
any activity under this Act may be in the form of in-kind
contributions of goods or services fairly valued.
(d) Termination of Authority.--The authority of the Secretary to
provide assistance under this Act terminates on the date that is 15
years after the date of enactment of this Act.
2. Amend the title so as to read: ``A bill to establish
certain national heritage areas, and for other purposes.''
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 713, as ordered reported, is to establish
the following four National Heritage Areas (NHAs): the
Appalachian Forest NHA in the States of Maryland and West
Virginia; the Maritime Washington NHA and the Mountains to
Sound Greenway NHA in the State of Washington; and the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta NHA in the State of California.
BACKGROUND AND NEED
S. 713 would establish four new NHAs: the Appalachian
Forest National Heritage Area (Maryland and West Virginia), the
Maritime Washington National Heritage Area (Washington), the
Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area
(Washington), and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National
Heritage Area (California).
Since 1984, Congress has designated 49 NHAs as places where
natural, cultural, and historic resources combine to form a
cohesive, nationally important landscape. Unlike national
parks, NHAs are large, lived-in landscapes and are not managed
by a federal agency. Consequently, NHA local coordinating
entities collaborate with communities to determine how to make
heritage relevant to local interests and needs. NHAs are a
grassroots, community-driven approach to heritage conservation
and economic development. Through public-private partnerships,
NHA local coordinating entities support historic preservation,
natural resource conservation, recreation, heritage tourism,
and educational projects. Leveraging funds and long-term
support for projects, NHA partnerships seek to foster pride of
place and an enduring stewardship ethic.
S. 713 provides for a total authorization of $10 million
for each NHA with a sunset date for the funding authorization
of 15 years after the date of enactment. The legislation also
designates a local coordinating entity for each NHA responsible
for preparing and submitting a management plan to the Secretary
of the Interior for review and approval, and for coordinating
with partners to carry out the programs and projects that
recognize, protect, and enhance important resource values in
each of the NHAs.
Appalachian Forest NHA: The Appalachian Forest NHA is
comprised of 18 counties--16 in West Virginia and two in
Maryland--that make up a landscape rich in cultural, natural,
and historical resources shaped by the geography of the
forested central Appalachian Mountains and the people who have
lived there over the centuries. During the late 19th century
and early 20th century, timber harvesting activities in the
region helped to foster industrial growth throughout the
nation. This timber ``boom'' was led by a number of notable
industrialists in the region and fueled by timber workers who
were immigrants of European and African-American descent.
Both historic and modern uses of the forest by residents
and people from around the nation demonstrate the significant
impact the landscape has on people and people on the landscape.
Traditions such as folklife, music, dance, and crafts are
celebrated and tied directly into the forest land of the
region. Majestic physical resources provide spectacular scenic
vistas, recreational resources, and reflect America's core
central hardwood forest. In addition, a number of significant
historic sites and resources are in the Heritage Area, as well
as five national historic landmarks, segments of four National
Scenic Byways, and one All-American Road.
The existing Appalachian Forest Heritage Area has
successfully operated for more than 13 years, demonstrating the
commitment of a vast number of stakeholders, partners, public
agencies, local government and communities, and members of the
forest industry to help maintain this nationally significant
forest region. S. 713 would establish the Appalachian Forest
NHA and designate the Appalachian Forest Heritage Area, Inc.,
as the local coordinating entity for the NHA responsible for
overseeing the development of a management plan.
Maritime Washington NHA: Western Washington State's
heritage is shaped by its relationship to the waters of Puget
Sound, the Straits of Juan de Fuca, and the Pacific Ocean.
Native communities found a bounty of resources in the waters
and shorelines of this area. While salmon and sea life provided
an abundance of sustenance, western red cedar provided the
material to establish permanent settlements and a maritime
culture. Canoe culture allowed an extensive trade and social
network to develop throughout the region, which was reliant on
these open waterways. The very resources that provided for
native peoples to thrive also attracted European and American
explorers and settlers.
In 1846, following the settlement of the international
boundary between British North America and the United States
west of the Rocky Mountains, European American settlements
began to gain strength. The timber industry spurred these
settlements and the transformation of the region from a
backwater to a center of maritime commerce. Pacific Northwest
ships helped supply the Klondike Gold Rush. Lumber shipped from
the region helped rebuild San Francisco after the earthquake of
1906 and was exported throughout the world.
Shipyards followed soon after a spike in lumber exports. In
fact, the history of ship building, both civilian and military,
highlights a major economic activity of the region today. Naval
activity at Bremerton, Bangor, and Everett provide a vital
connection to the region's maritime past.
Today, the region continues to be tied to its saltwater
heritage both in commerce and recreation. In 2010, the
Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic
Preservation undertook a feasibility study of the designation
of a NHA to preserve and promote this heritage. Designation of
a NHA and a coordinating organization would allow for the
significant number of maritime resources (e.g., museums and
interpretive centers, historic vessels, maritime education
centers, lighthouses and locks, waterfronts, and public spaces)
to develop opportunities for visitors.
Mountains to Sound Greenway NHA: Stretching from the shores
of Puget Sound to the heart of Washington State, the Mountains
to Sound Greenway is a mosaic of thriving communities, living
history, and vast natural lands. With 1.5 million acres of
rugged mountains, vast forests, high desert, suburban parks and
gardens, and metropolitan streets, the Greenway encompasses a
shared heritage of historic towns, healthy ecosystems,
spectacular alpine wilderness, working farms and forests, and
extensive outdoor recreation in a region that includes one of
the major metropolitan areas in the United States.
Twenty years ago, a coalition of civic leaders and
community activists came together around the need to preserve
the Greenway and its natural and historical assets. During 2009
and 2010, the Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust (Trust) engaged
stakeholders in discussions about the Greenway and potential
opportunities for conserving and enhancing a sustainable
balance into the future. In March 2012, the Trust completed a
feasibility study on establishing the Mountains to Sound
Greenway NHA.
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta NHA: The Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta is formed by the confluence of the Sacramento and
San Joaquin Rivers, as well as the Mokelumne, Cosumnes, and
Calaveras Rivers. The resulting inland Delta is the largest
estuary on America's West Coast. Today, the Delta's diverse
habitats support a wide variety of plants and animals including
migrating birds and anadromous fish.
Native American groups used the Delta prior to the influx
of fur traders in the 18th and 19th centuries. During the mid-
1800's Gold Rush prospectors recognized the agricultural value
of the Delta's fertile soils and abundant water. Marshlands
were converted into agricultural lands, which are still in
production today. The process of reclamation and the ensuing
agriculture brought with it a diversity of cultural heritage
including Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, East Indians,
Portuguese, and Italian immigrants who helped develop the
former marshlands into highly productive agricultural lands. By
1930, the Delta marshlands had been reclaimed into a network of
waterways and islands. Approximately 1,000 square miles of
levees are still in use today to support the agricultural
industry.
Recreational opportunities within the Delta include
boating, wakeboarding, windsurfing, fishing, and bird watching.
These opportunities attract visitors and provide outdoor
experiences for people living nearby in the large urban centers
that surround the area. The Delta area also serves as an
important infrastructure corridor between northern and central
California for power, gas, water, roads, and shipping canals.
In 2009, the California State Legislature charged the Delta
Protection Commission to develop a proposal to establish State
and Federal designation of the Delta as a place of special
significance, including the ability to apply for designation as
a NHA. As a result, the Delta Protection Commission, along with
public and private stakeholders, worked together to develop a
draft feasibility study of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
NHA. The Feasibility Study for a Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
National Heritage Area was completed on July 10, 2012. The
study supports the inclusion of the Delta Protection Commission
as the management entity with Technical and Stakeholder
Advisory Committees to bring diverse perspectives and expertise
to NHA planning and management.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 713 (the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage
Area Act), S. 401 (the Appalachian Forest National Heritage
Area Act), S. 627 (the Maritime Washington National Heritage
Area Act), and S. 731 (the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
National Heritage Area Establishment Act) were introduced
individually.
S. 713 was introduced by Senators Cantwell and Murray on
March 23, 2017. A related bill, H.R. 1791 was introduced by
Representatives Reichert and Adam Smith on March 29, 2017.
S. 401 was introduced by Senators Manchin, Capito, Cardin,
and Van Hollen on February 15, 2017.
S. 627 was introduced by Senator Cantwell on March 14,
2017. A related bill, H.R. 1513 was introduced by
Representatives Kilmer and Denny on March 13, 2017.
S. 731 was introduced by Senators Feinstein and Harris on
March 27, 2017. An identical bill, H.R. 1738 was introduced by
Representatives Garamendi, DeSaulnier, and McNerney on March
27, 2017.
In the 114th Congress, similar legislation was introduced.
S. 630, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area
Establishment Act, was introduced by Senators Feinstein and
Boxer on March 3, 2015. The Subcommittee on National Parks held
a hearing on the measure on June 15, 2016. An identical bill,
H.R. 1208, was introduced by Representative Garamendi,
DeSaulnier, Matsui, McNerney, and Thompson on March 3, 2015.
S. 1623, the Maritime Washington National Heritage Area Act
of 2016, was introduced by Senators Cantwell and Murray on June
18, 2015. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on
the measure on June 15, 2016. The Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources met in open business session on July 13,
2016, and ordered S. 1623 favorably reported as amended (S.
Rept. 114-310). An identical bill, H.R. 2833, was introduced by
Representatives Kilmer and Denny on June 18, 2015.
S. 1690, the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage
Area Act, was introduced by Senators Cantwell and Murray on
June 25, 2015. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a
hearing on the measure on June 15, 2016. The Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources met in open business session on
July 13, 2016, and ordered S. 1690 favorably reported as
amended (S. Rept. 114-317). A related bill, H.R. 2900, was
introduced by Representatives Reichert, DelBene, McDermott, and
Smith on June 25, 2015.
S. 3167, the Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area Act
of 2016, was introduced by Senators Manchin, Capito, Cardin,
and Mikulski on July 12, 2016. The Energy and Natural Resources
Committee held a hearing on S. 3167 on September 22, 2016. A
related bill, H.R. 693, was introduced by Representatives
McKinley, Delaney, Jenkins, and Mooney on February 3, 2015.
In the 113th Congress, Senators Cantwell and Murray
introduced related legislation, S. 2602, on July 15, 2014. The
Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on the bill on
July 23, 2014 (S. Hrg. 113-493). The Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources met in open business session on November 13,
2014, and ordered S. 2602 favorably reported as amended (S.
Rept. 113-300).
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in open
business session on March 30, 2017, and ordered S. 713
favorably reported as amended.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in
open business session on March 30, 2017, by a majority voice
vote of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S.
713, if amended as described herein.
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
During its consideration of S. 713, the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute to establish four new NHAs, and a title amendment.
These amendments are further described in the section-by-
section analysis.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 contains the short title.
Section 2. Definition of Secretary
Section 2 defines the term ``Secretary'' to mean the
Secretary of the Interior.
Section 3. National heritage area designations
Section 3 designates four national heritage areas:
Paragraph (1) establishes the Appalachian Forest NHAs in
the States of West Virginia and Maryland, as depicted on the
map entitled ``Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area,''
numbered T07/80,000, and dated October 2007; identifies the
local coordinating entity; and establishes its structure and
responsibilities.
Paragraph (2) establishes the Maritime Washington NHA in
the State of Washington, as depicted on the map entitled
``Maritime Washington National Heritage Area Proposed
Boundary,'' numbered 584/125,484, and dated August, 2014, and
identifies the local coordinating entity.
Paragraph (3) establishes the Mountains to Sound Greenway
NHA in the State of Washington, as depicted on the map entitled
``Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area Proposed
Boundary,'' numbered 584/125,483, and dated August, 2014;
identifies the local coordinating entity; and defines
references to ``Indian tribe'' and ``tribal'' within the
legislation as pertaining to the Mountains to Sound Greenway
NHA.
Paragraph (4) establishes the Sacramento-San Joaquin NHA in
the State of California; references the map entitled
``Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area Proposed
Boundary,'' numbered T27/105,030, and dated October 2012; and
identifies the local coordinating entity.
Section 4. Administration
Section 4(a) permits the Secretary, through the local
coordinating entity, to enter into cooperative agreements and
make grants to the State or political subdivision of the State,
nonprofit organizations, and other persons; hire and compensate
staff considered as subject matter experts on historical
protection and heritage programming; accept money or services
provided under any other Federal law or program; enter into
contracts for goods or services; and serve as a catalyst for
any other activity that furthers the purposes of the NHA and is
consistent with the management plan.
Subsection (b) requires the local coordinating entity to,
in accordance with section 5, prepare and submit a management
plan for the national heritage area to the Secretary and assist
Federal, State, tribal, and other stakeholders in carrying out
the approved management plan. As such, the local coordinating
entity must carry out programs and projects that recognize,
protect, and enhance important resources values in the national
heritage area; establish and maintain interpretive exhibits and
programs; develop recreational and educational opportunities;
increase public awareness and appreciation for the site;
protect and restore historic sites and buildings in the
heritage area that are consistent with area themes; ensure
clear, consistent, and appropriate signage is posted throughout
the area; and promote a wide range of partnerships in support
of the heritage area. In addition, the local coordinating
entity must conduct meetings open to the public at least
semiannually regarding the development and implementation of
the management plan, and submit an annual report to the
Secretary describing the activities, expenses, and income of
the entity (including grants) for any year that Federal funds
have been received under this section. The local coordinating
entity must make an audit available to the Secretary relating
to the expenditure of funds and any matching funds received.
The local coordinating entity shall not use Federal funds made
available under section 9 to acquire real property or any
interest in real property.
Section 5. Management plan
Section 5(a) instructs the local coordinating entity to
submit to the Secretary for approval a proposed management plan
for the NHA no later than three years after the date of
enactment of this Act.
Subsection (b) identifies requirements of the management
plan to be implemented by the local coordinating entity to
include: an integrated and cooperative approach for protection
and interpretation of the natural, cultural, historic, scenic,
and recreational resources of the NHA; take into consideration
State and local plans, such as inventories of property
resources, related themes, and significance of the property;
and produce comprehensive policies, strategies, and
recommendations for funding and management of the NHA. In
addition, the local coordinating entity develops actions that
government, private organizations, and individuals agree to
take to protect and manage the NHA. The entity is directed to
develop, as a component of the management plan: a description
of actions to facilitate collaboration to promote resource
protection, specific commitments for implementation by the
coordinating entity for the first five years of operation, the
identification of funding sources, analysis and recommendations
for the role of all partners and stakeholders in carrying out
the management plan, and an interpretive plan for the heritage
area.
Subsection (c) establishes a deadline of three years after
date of enactment of this Act for the local coordinating entity
to provide proposed management plan to Secretary in order to be
eligible for additional funding under the Act.
Subsection (d) directs the Secretary to approve or
disapprove the management plan no later than 180 days after
receipt from the local coordinating entity. In consultation
with the State, the Secretary shall apply criteria for approval
based on whether or not local coordinating entity engaged
diverse interests of the NHA through adequate opportunity for
public involvement, and that suitable protection of the NHA can
be fulfilled. If the Secretary disapproves the plan, the local
coordinating entity will be advised in writing, with
recommendations for revision of the management plan, and the
Secretary will review revised management plan no later than 180
days after receipt of proposed revisions. The Secretary has the
discretion to approve or disapprove amendments to the
management plan that make a substantial change to the plan, and
will also only allow the local coordinating entity to use
Federal funds to carry out any amendments to the plan after
approval of the amendments are granted.
Section 6. Relationship to other Federal agencies
Section 6(a) states that the authority of a Federal agency
to provide technical or financial assistance under any other
law has no impact on this Act.
Subsection (b) requires the head of any Federal agency to
consult and coordinate with the Secretary and local
coordinating entity in planning activities that may have an
impact on the NHA.
Subsection (c) affirms that any law or regulation
authorizing a Federal agency to manage or use Federal land
under the jurisdiction of the Federal agency is not modified,
altered, or amended by this Act; additionally, nothing in the
act limits the discretion of a Federal land manager to
implement an approved land use plan within the boundaries of a
NHA.
Section 7. Private property and regulatory protections
Section 7 specifies that property owners are not required
to permit public access to their property; modify use or public
access of property under any Federal, State, or local law;
alter any duly adopted land use regulation, use plan, or
regulatory authority; transfer any land use or regulatory
authority to the local coordinating entity; authorize the
reservation of water or water rights; modify, diminish, or
extinguish the reserved treaty rights of any Indian tribe
within the NHA; affect the jurisdiction of the State to manage
fishing and hunting within the NHA; or held to be liable to any
person injured on private property.
Section 8. Evaluation and report
Section 8(a) requires the Secretary to conduct an
evaluation and prepare a report of the accomplishments of the
NHA not later than three years before the termination date of
Federal funding.
Subsection (b) makes clear that the evaluation should
include a review of the management and partnership structure
for sustaining the NHA; a progress assessment of the local
coordinating entity measuring goals and objectives of the
management plan; an analysis of investments including funding
made by Federal, State, tribal, and local government and
private entities; and the impact of these investments on the
NHA.
Subsection (c) requires the Secretary to submit a report to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of
Representatives that describes the findings and conclusions of
the evaluation along with recommendations for the future role
of the National Park Service (NPS) with respect to the NHA.
Section 9. Authorization of appropriations
Section 9(a) authorizes $10 million to be appropriated for
each NHA designated in section 3, of which not more than $1
million may be authorized to be appropriated for any fiscal
year to carry out the bill.
Subsection (b) denotes that amounts made available shall
remain available until expended.
Subsection (c) requires not more than a 50 percent share of
non-Federal funding or in-kind contributions of goods or
services for any activity under the Act.
Subsection (d) specifies the authority of the Secretary to
provide assistance for this Act terminates 15 years after the
bill is enacted.
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following estimate of the costs of this measure has
been provided by the Congressional Budget Office.
S. 713 would designate the following geographic regions as
national heritage areas (NHAs) in their respective states:
The Appalachian Forest area in West Virginia
and Maryland,
The Maritime Washington area in Washington,
The Mountains to Sound Greenway area in
Washington, and
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta area in
California.
The proposed NHAs would not become units of the National
Park System. The bill would direct the National Park Service
(NPS) to select a local entity to develop a plan to manage
lands within each of the proposed heritage areas, subject to
the agency's approval. Finally, the legislation would authorize
the appropriation of $40 million, in total, over a 15-year
period for the agency's oversight costs and for assistance to
the local entities that will manage the areas.
Based on information from the NPS on the costs of
overseeing existing heritage areas, CBO expects that the agency
would spend the authorized amounts over the next 10 years
(about $1 million annually for each NHA) to review each area's
proposed management plan, provide technical and financial
assistance to the local management entity, and to carry out
other routine activities related to overseeing the proposed
areas. Thus, CBO estimates that implementing S. 713 would cost
about $20 million over the 2018 2022 period and an additional
$20 million after 2022, assuming appropriation of the
authorized amounts.
Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending
or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
CBO estimates that enacting S. 713 would not increase net
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.
S. 713 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jon Sperl. The
estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION
In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in
carrying out S. 713. The bill is not a regulatory measure in
the sense of imposing Government-established standards or
significant economic responsibilities on private individuals
and businesses.
No personal information would be collected in administering
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal
privacy.
Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the
enactment of S. 713, as ordered reported.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
S. 713, as ordered reported, does not contain any
congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits,
or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
Because S. 713 is similar to legislation considered by the
Committee in the 114th Congress, the Committee did not request
Executive Agency views. The testimony provided by the NPS at
the hearing before the Subcommittee on National Parks on June
15, 2016, and September 22, 2016, follows:
Statement of Dr. Stephanie Toothman, Associate Director, Cultural
Resources, Partnerships, and Science, National Park Service, Department
of the Interior.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on S. 630, a bill to
establish the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage
Area.
The Department supports enactment of S. 630 as the proposed
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area has been
found to meet the National Park Service's interim criteria for
designation as a national heritage area.
However, along with designating any new national heritage
areas, the Department recommends that Congress pass national
heritage area program legislation. There are currently 49
designated national heritage areas, yet there is no authority
in law that guides the designation and administration of these
areas. Program legislation that establishes criteria to
evaluate potentially qualified national heritage areas and a
process for the designation, funding, and administration of
these areas would provide a much-needed framework for
evaluating proposed national heritage areas. It would offer
guidelines for successful planning and management, clarify the
roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardize
timeframes and funding for designated areas. The Department
also notes that newly-authorized national heritage areas will
compete for limited resources in the Heritage Partnership
Program. The President's FY17 Budget proposes $9.4 million for
the current 49 areas. The authorization of additional national
heritage areas will leave less funding for each individual
national heritage area.
The Feasibility Study for a Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
National Heritage Area was completed and published by the Delta
Protection Commission in July 2012. The Delta Protection
Commission is identified as the Heritage Area's local
coordinating entity. The proposed national heritage area will
cover the counties of Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin,
Solano, and Yolo, in the State of California.
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is the largest estuary on
the West Coast of the Americas, a rare inland/inverse Delta at
the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. The
delta was formed after the last ice age 10,000 years ago, when
a rapid rise in sea level inundated the alluvial valley of the
Sacramento River.
Native Americans lived among the extensive freshwater and
brackish marshes, oak woodland, savannah, chaparral, and
riparian habitat rich with wildlife. Early fur traders such as
Jedediah Smith trekked into the region in search of otter, mink
and beaver. Then, gold seekers on their way from San Francisco
to the gold fields in the Sierra Nevada recognized the
fertility of the delta's soils. Beginning in the 1880s, using
Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, East Indian, Portuguese and
Italian laborers, one of the largest reclamation projects in
the United States converted the vast swamps into the leveed
landscape that characterizes the delta today.
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is the lynchpin of a huge
watershed that links San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean to
waterways flowing from the Cascade, Coastal and Sierra Nevada
mountain ranges. After more than a century and a half of
reclamation and development, the delta still supports over one
hundred crop types, and hundreds of species of flora and fauna.
It is a key stopover on the Pacific Flyway. While its quiet
waterways and historic towns are untapped recreational and
tourism attractions for large adjacent populations in the San
Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley, the delta supplies
irrigation and drinking water to far away California farmers
and households, and is at the heart of statewide water
conflicts.
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is a hidden gem of a
region located at a key geographic and historic crossroads in
our country. It is a land of ethnic diversity, innovation,
industry, enduring history, and both fragile and robust
physical features. Artists such as Jack London and Joan Didion
have written about the delta as both a place and an idea.
The mission of the proposed Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
National Heritage Area is to recognize, enhance and promote the
theme `Delta as Place' to help cultivate appreciation and
understanding of the Delta's heritage, and to build support and
economic activity around its preservation and enhancement. The
Delta Protection Commission has conducted a Delta Narratives
project in collaboration with regional academic and cultural
institutions to communicate the region's historic and cultural
importance. A cultural resources inventory and planning for the
Great Delta Trail are underway. Agri-tourism businesses--
markets, farm stays, wineries--increasingly showcase and share
the region's agricultural traditions.
Through the work of such partnerships in a Sacramento-San
Joaquin National Heritage Area, the Delta Protection Commission
has significant potential to engage the broader community in
protecting, enhancing, and enjoying the heritage values of the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region well into the future.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would
be happy to answer any questions you or any other members of
the subcommittees may have.
Statement of Dr. Stephanie Toothman, Associate Director Cultural
Resources, Partnerships, and Science, National Park Service, Department
of the Interior.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on S. 1623, a bill to
establish the Maritime Washington National Heritage Area in the
State of Washington.
The Department supports the enactment of S. 1623, as the
proposed Maritime Washington National Heritage Area has been
found to meet the National Park Service's interim criteria for
designation as a national heritage area.
However, along with designating any new national heritage
areas, the Department recommends that Congress pass national
heritage area program legislation. There are currently 49
designated national heritage areas, yet there is no authority
in law that guides the designation and administration of these
areas. Program legislation that establishes criteria to
evaluate potentially qualified National heritage areas and a
process for the designation, funding, and administration of
these areas would provide a much-needed framework for
evaluating proposed national heritage areas. It would offer
guidelines for successful planning and management, clarify the
roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardize
timeframes and funding for designated areas. The Department
also notes that newly-authorized national heritage areas will
compete for limited resources in the Heritage Partnership
Program. The President's FY17 Budget proposes $9.4 million for
the current 49 areas. The authorization of additional national
heritage areas will leave less funding for each individual
national heritage area.
The proposed area includes land that is as located within
one-quarter mile landward of the shoreline in the counties of
Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, San Juan, Island, King, Pierce,
Thurston, Mason, Kitsap, Jefferson, Clallam, and Grays Harbor,
approximately 3,000 linear miles of a ``Salt Water Coast.'' The
proposed local coordinating entity for the Maritime Washington
National Heritage Area would be the Washington Trust for
Historic Preservation. A Feasibility Study for a Washington
State National Maritime Heritage Area was completed by the
Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
in April 2010. The National Park Service conducted a review of
the study for consistency with the interim National Heritage
Area Feasibility Study Guidelines, and with a subsequent
revised Statement of Importance and boundary justification
submitted March 5, 2012, and found that the area meets these
criteria for national heritage area designation. The Washington
Trust for Historic Preservation was informed of this decision
in a letter on June 5, 2012.
The proposed Maritime Washington National Heritage Area
stretches from northern ports in Bellingham and Blaine to the
protected harbors of Aberdeen and Hoquiam. The landscape tells
the stories of a rich Native American civilization, development
of the farthest territorial corner of the United States, of
gold rushers and shipbuilders, and of a gateway to Alaska, Asia
and the seaports of the world.
Living between steep glacier-clad mountain ranges and a
temperate saltwater shoreline, native people built a complex
culture around canoe routes and salmon cycles. By the late 18th
century, the region was being mapped and named by Spanish,
English, and Russian explorers in the interest of science and
the pursuit of colonial empire. After the 49th parallel was
established as the nation's northern border in 1846, this new
corner of the country entered a dramatic period of social,
political and military development. The vast conifer forests
were easily accessible for timber production, and the coastal
geography made possible its transportation to the developing
American west. The timber trade and abundant marine resources,
especially salmon, of the San Juan de Fuca straight, the Puget
Sound and the Pacific Ocean attracted American, European and
Pan-Asian settlers who provided the labor for thriving port
economies in Port Angeles, Port Townsend, and Port Gamble.
At the heart of the heritage area is the greater Puget
Sound, a system of interconnected marine waterways, harbors,
bays and inlets that wet the shores of the San Juan Archipelago
and the many waterfront towns, cities, and ports that have
grown up here over time. The naval facilities on Puget Sound
have built and repaired vessels in our fleet for over a
century. Even today the region relies on the country's largest
marine highway system--its famous ferries--for day-to-day
transportation.
These stories are represented in the traditional Native
American sites, lumber towns, logging mills, salmon processing
plants, historic ships, lighthouses, museums and the host of
other maritime-related sites, scenes, and traditions that
comprise the proposed Maritime Washington National Heritage
Area. Under the leadership of the Washington Trust for Historic
Preservation, the heritage area would encourage and support the
work of the many organizations committed to the recognition,
preservation and continued economic, recreational and
educational use of this unique and vital region and its
resources.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be happy
to answer any questions you or any other members of the
subcommittee may have.
Statement of Dr. Stephanie Toothman, Associate Director, Cultural
Resources, Partnerships, and Science, National Park Service, Department
of the Interior
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of the Interior's views on S. 1690, a bill to
establish the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage
Area in the State of Washington.
The Department supports enactment of S. 1690 as the
proposed Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area has
been found to meet the National Park Service's interim criteria
for designation as a national heritage area.
However, along with designating any new national heritage
areas, the Department recommends that Congress pass national
heritage area program legislation. There are currently 49
designated national heritage areas, yet there is no authority
in law that guides the designation and administration of these
areas. Program legislation that establishes criteria to
evaluate potentially qualified national heritage areas and a
process for the designation, funding, and administration of
these areas would provide a much-needed framework for
evaluating proposed national heritage areas. It would offer
guidelines for successful planning and management, clarifying
the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardize
timeframes and funding for designated areas. The Department
also notes that newly-authorized national heritage areas will
compete for limited resources in the Heritage Partnership
Program. The President's FY17 Budget proposes $9.4 million for
the current 49 areas. The authorization of additional national
heritage areas will leave less funding for each individual
national heritage area.
The Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area
would include lands within King and Kittitas Counties
stretching from Snoqualmie Pass to Seattle. The proposed local
coordinating entity would be the nonprofit corporation
Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust.
Initially, NPS review of the Mountains to Sound Greenway
National Heritage Area Feasibility Study completed by the
Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust (Trust) in March 2012, found
that the study did not meet the NPS Interim National Heritage
Area Feasibility Study Guidelines. In a subsequent May 27,
2014, Addendum the Trust provided a revised statement of
national importance; themes and a list of associated resources;
a summary of traditions, customs, beliefs and folk life; and a
boundary justification.
The proposed Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage
Area is important for its association with the expansion of our
national transportation system and creation of our modern
timber industry. It tells the story of how the Northern Pacific
and Milwaukee railroads, and later the Sunset Highway and
Interstate 90, created the final section of an historic
transportation corridor that wove the Northwest into the
nation's fabric, opened up trade between the United States and
Asia, and led to development of the industrial timber practices
in use today.
Although by 1850 the Puget Sound area was part of the
United States, the Cascade Range isolated this region with its
abundant natural resources and sheltered deep-water ports from
the rest of the nation. In 1864, the Northern Pacific Railroad
was chartered by President Lincoln. Constructed along a Native
American pathway through the nearly impassible Snoqualmie Pass,
it reached Seattle 20 years later. This railroad connection
from the Eastern seaboard and the Great Lakes to the western
most reaches of the continental United States reinforced the
newly drawn American-Canadian border. The city of Seattle grew
into a booming hub for shipbuilding and trade of foreign goods
and the region's own wealth of natural resources, opening the
country's first trade routes on the Pacific Rim. Rail towns
sprung up along the main lines, mill and coal towns on the
spurs, while piers stretched into Puget Sound, attracting
immigrant workers whose descendants live in the region today.
The Milwaukee Road crossed the Cascades in the early 1900s,
pioneering tunneling and electrification techniques that
allowed the high speed electric trains to carry Japanese silk,
the nation's most precious rail commodity after gold and silver
bullion, to New York. But the Milwaukee Road made its money
carrying passengers to ski, hike and climb at Snoqualmie Pass.
The conservation ethic that developed in the region from
enjoyment of the region's natural beauty is strongly held
today.
Washington's modern economy has developed directly from the
Northern Pacific Land Grant used to build the railroad. In
place of public financing, the railroad received the largest
federal land grant in American history--40 million acres--every
other square mile of land in a checkerboard pattern up to forty
miles on either side of the right-of-way. This consolidated
ownership, along with the steam technology brought by the
railroad, created the booming timber industry that helped
rebuild San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake and fueled
shipbuilding in World War I. Airplanes entering large-scale
military production for the first time were built from the
region's prized spruce. Demand for this aircraft led William
Boeing in 1916 to found a company that supplies the nation's
air transportation industry today.
Plantation forestry, involving sustained-yield harvest and
reforestation, now the industry standard across much of the
country, was invented in this region in the 1930's. William
Weyerhauser, having amassed one-and-a-half million acres of
Washington timberland, established the first seedling industry
at Snoqualmie Falls, rolled out his ``Timber is a Crop!''
public relations campaign, and began to manage timber across
multiple harvests, a radical idea at the time.
The cultural heritage of the Mountains to Sound Greenway
National Heritage Area is alive in the ethnic diversity of the
region's population and its traditions, customs and
celebrations, and in the museums, festivals, historic sites and
interpretive trails that both residents and visitors enjoy
today. The proposed heritage area boundaries pragmatically
follow modern-day political and land-management structures, a
formula for long-term success as communities and their partners
seek to manage, enhance, and interpret resources across this
landscape.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be happy
to answer any questions you or any other members of the
subcommittee may have.
Statement for the Record, National Park Service, Department of the
Interior
Thank you for the opportunity to present the Department of
the Interior's views on S. 3167, a bill to establish the
Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area, and for other
purposes.
The Department supports enactment of S. 3167, as the
proposed Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area has been
found to meet the National Park Service's interim criteria for
designation as a national heritage area.
However, along with designating any new national heritage
areas, the Department recommends that Congress pass national
heritage area program legislation. There are currently 49
designated national heritage areas, yet there is no authority
in law that guides the designation and administration of these
areas. Program legislation that establishes criteria to
evaluate potentially qualified national heritage areas and a
process for the designation, funding, and administration of
these areas would provide a much-needed framework for
evaluating proposed national heritage areas. It would offer
guidelines for successful planning and management, clarifying
the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardize
timeframes and funding for designated areas. The Department
also notes that newly-authorized national heritage areas will
compete for limited resources in the Heritage Partnership
Program. The President's FY17 Budget proposes $9.4 million for
the current 49 areas. The authorization of additional national
heritage areas will leave less funding for each individual
national heritage area.
S. 3167 would establish the Appalachian Forest National
Heritage Area encompassing 16 counties in northeastern West
Virginia and two counties in western Maryland, a region that
has a rich history of human activity shaped by the geography of
the forested central Appalachian Mountains. The proposed local
coordinating entity would be the Appalachian Forest Heritage
Area, Inc., a non-profit organization that currently
coordinates forest-related heritage tourism activities in this
region. The provisions in this bill are similar to provisions
in most of the other national heritage area designation bills
that have been enacted in recent years, including a total
authorization of $10 million and a sunset date for the
authorization of funding 15 years after the date of enactment.
The Appalachian Forest Heritage Area, Inc. prepared a
feasibility study for designation of the area as a national
heritage area several years ago. The National Park Service
(NPS) reviewed the study and found that it met the NPS interim
criteria contained in National Heritage Area Feasibility Study
Guidelines. The Appalachian Forest Heritage Area, Inc. was
informed of this finding in a letter dated August 16, 2007.
The area encompassed by the proposed national heritage area
is a significant part of the central Appalachian highlands that
has a long history of timber harvesting, forest management, and
the production of forest products. The forests provided
resources for industrial expansion in the late 19th and early
20th Centuries, but large portions of the forests have regrown.
Areas within the proposed national heritage area include the
Monongahela National Forest, portions of the George Washington
National Forest, the Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge,
and the Seneca Rocks-Spruce Knob National Recreation Area,
along with a large number of state forests and parks and areas
protected by nonprofit conservation organizations. The
extensive hardwood forests and undeveloped rural character of
the area provide scenic vistas and opportunities for nature
observation and outdoor recreation.
There are also numerous historic and cultural resources
within the area, such as sites from the logging era and
Civilian Conservation Corps structures. It is a place well-
suited to demonstrate the connection between forest and forest
products, and the folklife, music, dance, crafts, and
traditions of central Appalachia. Designation as a national
heritage area would help the region realize the full potential
of the cultural, natural, historic, and recreational resources
of the region.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no
changes in existing law are made by the bill as ordered
reported.
[all]