STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK CHURCH, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE

STATE OF IDAHO

Senator CHURCH. I am particularly pleased that the committee has seen fit to consider this measure sponsored by the distinguished chairman and ranking minority member of the committee. This legislation is, in my judgment, an emergency measure vitally necessary to combating the ever-increasing land price escalation problem.

True, we have made significant progress through the land and water conservation fund and other programs designed to enhance this Nation's recreation opportunities, but much more needs to be done.

Senator CHURCH. I would like to stress in my own State of Idaho this is an example of how the land and water conservation funds are used. In my State of Idaho, there are 39 projects totaling over $2.9 million which have been implemented through this land and water conservation fund. Yet, through fiscal 1967, all of the funds allocated to the State under this act have been obligated and funds apportioned under fiscal 1968 will be obligated by June 30, 1968. It has gotten a good start.

Our State has money available, in fact, more money available, I understand, now, than there is Federal money to match, which is the very thing we hoped to stimulate with this land and water conservation fund. We hope to get the State engaged in outdoor recreation programs. I think this is indicative of the success of the fund that we should now have in my State more State money available than there is matching money when a few years ago there was no appreciable State money available at all for outdoor recreation.

So, I think this certainly bears out the success of this program and represents, in my judgment, an effective partnership of Federal and State Government in this field. During these days of crises abroad and troubles at home, man's need to revive his spirit and refresh his body is of paramount importance. I am pleased to join in support of this legislation.

I should like to enter for the record an excellent article which has been written by Mr. Frank Hewlett, having to do with the use of money from this fund in connection with land acquisition for the Nez Perce National Historical Park with which you are familiar, located in Idaho.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The document referred to follows:)

PARK SERVICE REPORTS NEZ PERCE SITE STEPS
(By Frank Hewlett)

WASHINGTON. -The land acquisition work is just about completed for northern Idaho's promising new tourist attraction, the novel Nez Perce National Historical Park.

The National Park Service, in a report to Sen. Frank Church, D-Idaho, author of the Nez Perce park legislation, said the land acquisition has been mainly at Spalding site where it plans to build its administration headquarters. This area was seen first by white men in 1805 by the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Thirtythree years later the Rev. Henry Spalding established a mission among the Nez Perce there, calling the place Lapwai. A century ago it was the site of the Nez Perce Indian Agency and today it includes the village of Spalding and a state park.

"At the Spalding site," said the NPS report, "we have reached agreement with the owners of 39 tracts involving 20 separate landowners which virtually completes our acquisition there except for three tracts, all three of which must be condemned to clear title."

BOUGHT FROM NEZ PERCE

Land also has been acquired at the White Bird site, a principal battleground of the 1877 Nez Perce war and the East Kamiah site, also in Idaho County, where 10 acres have been acquired from the Nez Perce Indians for $10,000. Total land acquisition cost to date has been $428,650 and accordiing to the Park Service, it appears the $630,000 limitation ordered by Congress "will be adequate to purchase the three units comprising the federally owned portion of the historic site."

"It is hoped," said the report, "that the Lolo Trail and Lolo Pass can be included in the park. Both of these features, which will require at least several interpretive facilities, are on land administered by the Forest Service. In fact, we hope that the eastern contact point for park visitors will be at Lolo Pass in a visitor center and information office already planned by the Forest Service for its own purposes."

The report notes that during the feasibility study and legislative phases of the park project, Mr. and Mrs. John Pfeifer, owners of the St. Joseph's Mission at Slickpoo, expressed a willingness to have the old First Presbyterian mission church included in the park.

STRUCTURE CLOSED

"Since the establishment of the area, however, the increased visitation has placed too much of a burden upon them and they have recently closed the structure to the public," said the park service. "This service has been attempting to draw up an agreement which might provide the Pfeifers a reasonable amount of financial assistance in the maintenance and interpretation of the building but terms have not yet been found which will be likely to be agreeable to the Pfeifers and still comply with the provisions of the authorizing legislation."

"We feel." the report concludes, "that steady and purposeful progress is being made toward the completion and operation of the park as envisioned by the authorizing legislation and in the approved master plan. Facilities on park lands already acquired are being improved and agreements for interpreting sites in nonfederal ownership are being drawn. We hope to have most of the nonfederal portions of the park at least marked by the next visitor season and to have an adequate wayside exhbit functioning at Canoe Camp by the same time. Visitors to the Spalding site will find the grounds and picnic facilities more attractive than ever before and an active interpretive program with demonstrations of Nez Perce art will be in operation."

Senator CHURCH. Finally, I would like to enter into the record a letter received from Ernest Day, chairman of the State park board, in which he expressed the board's general endorsement and support of the pending bill.

(The document to be furnished follows:)

Hon. FRANK CHURCH,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF PARKS,

Boise, Idaho, January 26, 1968.

DEAR SENATOR CHURCH: We have received a copy of S. 1401, 90th Congress, Second Session, relative to amendment of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (P.L. 88-578).

The Idaho Parks Board and the Department of Parks have reviewed this proposed amendment, and we believe that the State of Idaho will benefit from its enactment.

The State of Idaho has been moving forward quite rapidly in implementing the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act. We now have 39 active outdoor recreation projects, totaling $2,951,400.38. All of the funds appropriated to the State under this Act, through fiscal year 1967, have been obligated. Money apportioned to the State for fiscal year 1968 will be obligated prior to June 30, 1968. The State is now short Federal funds to match some of its park developments. We feel that the purpose of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act has been well served by stimulating outdoor recreation projects, not only by the state agencies, but by the political subdivisions of the State as well.

The State's outdoor recreation needs cannot be met at our current level of funding. We believe that the additional revenue which this proposed amendment would deposit in the Land and Water Conservation Fund would further our program in fulfilling high-priority needs.

The Idaho Parks Board, therefore, urges you to support this legislation. We have noted, in a press release dated January 11, 1968, the Secretary of the Interior recommended enactment of S. 1401, and that the States and Federal agencies share the funds equally. This is contrary to Section 4 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, which establishes an appropriation ratio of 60 percent for State purposes and 40 percent for Federal purposes. We further urge that the fund allocation ratio remain 60 percent for State purposes. We will sincerely appreciate your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

ERNEST E. DAY, Chairman, State Park Board.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Moss also has a statement.

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK E. MOSS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE

STATE OF UTAH

Mr. Moss. Mr. Chairman, having previously cosponsored S. 531, which would add to present land and water conservation fund revenues those realized under the Outer Continental Shelf Act of 1953, the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, and the Potash Leasing Act of 1927 and 1948, I am glad to support S. 1401, which seeks to achieve the same objectives. Since the issuance in 1962 of "Outdoor Recreation for America," the report of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, the Congress has moved to expand and protect the Nation's outdoor recreation resources. A few of the treasures we have already added to the national inventory are Point Reyes National Seashore, Padre Island National Seashore, Canyonlands National Park, Delaware Watergap National Recreation Area, Assateague Island, and Cape Cod National Seashore. A Senate-passed bill to create a Redwoods National Park is now before the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. To raise money for the purchase of these park and recreation lands, and for the support of Federal and State outdoor recreation programs, the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act was passed.

Experience has now made it clear that the revenues we provided for the fund are inadequate. This is because the fees established for the use of Federal areas have failed to raise the estimated amounts. Almost $25 million a year less is coming into the fund than was expected. We cannot simply wait for the fund to build up because land prices have a tendency to escalate in areas suitable for public parks and recreation areas. Early in 1967 President Johnson pointed out that average land prices are increasing at a rate of almost 10 percent a year and that the cost of land for recreation is increasing at a considerably higher rate. He stated that the most effective means of controlling these increases is to acquire the lands as quickly as possible after areas are authorized by Congress. We in the Interior Committee have been made fully aware of this problem and of the great difficulty the National Park Service and other agencies have had in trying to overcome it.

Today's fund is not adequate to keep up with purchases of areas already authorized by Congress, let alone to finance additions.

If the Federal Government and the States are forced to wait until the moneys now going into the land and water conservation fund are sufficient, the ultimate cost to the taxpayers will be greatly increased. It will save millions of dollars in the years ahead if we invest as soon as possible. This problem has received careful study, and the most practical solution is to raise the moneys from the sources proposed in this bill.

Besides adding revenues to the fund, S. 1401 would give the land management agencies administrative weapons to fight rising land prices. One of these would permit department heads, under certain conditions, to contract for the land authorized for parks or recreation areas prior to actual appropriation of moneys from the land and water conservation fund. Another would set up a lease- and sell-back land management program for property bought for the National Park System. Amounts obtained from lease- and sell-back transactions would be credited to the fund, thus lessening the burden imposed by the initial purchase of property.

Mr. Chairman, the Federal portion of the land and water conservation fund is the primary financing source for all new acquisitions by the National Park Service and the Forest Service as well as for expansion of existing facilities. It is the financial base for expanding recreation programs of the States and their political subdivisions. Only added revenues will make it possible for these agencies to meet the park and recreation requirements of our citizens in the next decade. I support prompt approval of this bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Ribicoff of Connecticut has submitted a statement for inclusion in the hearing record. That statement in support of this legislation will be printed at this point.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. ABRAHAM RIBICOFF. A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

Mr. Chairman, almost three out of four Americans live in urban surroundings, and each year more land is swallowed up by our burgeoning metropolitan areas. New highways acquire landscape at the rate of 60 acres a mile and a single cloverleaf junction requires 50 acres. Vast shopping centers and industrial parks now dot the outskirts of our cities where once there were pastures and forests.

In my own State of Connecticut, today's population of nearly three million people will double in size by the year 2000. It took us more than 300 years to reach three million-the next three million will be added in little more than three decades.

With this trend toward urbanization has come a greater demand to protect lands in their natural state. As our people increasingly populate urban areas, so do they increasingly demand escape to more natural surroundings for respite, relaxation and recreation. Higher incomes, more leisure time and greater mobility all steer our people toward the outdoors.

By enacting the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, the Federal government took the lead in providing urgently needed land for open space and recreational opportunities for the American public. During the 89th Congress, we authorized 23 new federal recreation areas encompassing a quarter of a million acres. The present Congress is continuing the trend.

But, as presently constituted, the Land and Water Conservation Fund is unable to meet our obligations to the American people. It has neither adequate funding for the future, nor the ability to act quickly to hold down acquisition costs.

Land is expensive, and getting more expensive every day. Land prices are spiraling at the rate of almost 10 percent a year at an even faster rate in land with recreation potential.

The Department of the Interior estimates that under present funding, the Land and Water Conservation Fund will fall $2.7 billion short of our requirements for the next ten years. This lack of money will mean delay in acquisition of this badly needed land. In this case, time is money, for delay means the land will be more expensive in the future. To meet our needs as economically as possible, we must have enough funds immediately.

S. 1401 provides these urgently needed funds for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Section 1 of the bill would add to the fund the unearmarked receipts under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the receipts from the Outer Continental Shelflands Act of 1953 including those funds now held in escrow which may accrue to the United States, and certain revenues from the national forests. It is estimated that these additional sources of revenue would add from two to three hundred million dollars annually to the Fund. These funds would, of course, be subject to the normal appropriations process.

An equally significant aspect of S. 1401 is the provision in section 1 (b) allowing certain federal agencies to contract for the purchase of land in advance of appropriations for the purchase. This power is restricted to $30,000,000 annually of those funds authorized by Congress. This is an important and badly needed power. Generally, land price escalation is intensified immediately after the federal government has authorized the purchase of lands for a recreation area. The public follows the course of legislation through Congress, and speculation increases concomitantly with the likelihood that the federal government will acquire the land. It is not unusual for prices to increase to the point that the Congress is forced to subsequently raise the authorization ceiling for certain federal projects. The time lapse between authorization and appropriations can be as much as nine months to two years a lapse that can mean an increase in prices of recreation land of as much as 50 percent.

In my own state of Connecticut, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation is studying the feasibility of establishing a national recreation area in the Connecticut River Valley. As sponsor of this legislation, I am vitally interested in means to accomplish any required land acquisition for this project at the lowest possible price. In a time when we must carefully scrutinize every dollar of federal expenditures, devices such as the proposed advance contracting authority can be most helpful in minimizing the burden on the taxpayer. The advance authority in S. 1401 is, however, wisely limited to $30 million-requiring the Department of the Interior to devise its priorities and utilize the authority selectively for the land most likely to increase in cost.

The second section of the proposed bill would allow the Secretary of the Interior to sell or lease back parcels of land previously purchased for recreation areas. Such sales or leases would have restrictions on the use of the land in keeping with the nature of the proposed plans. The authority under this provision would also help to hold down acquisition costs by reimbursing the government through the sale price or rental. For this reason, I believe the thrust of the section is beneficial.

I would like to point out, however, a potential difficulty under this authority. As presently drafted, the Federal government has the power to buy land under condemnation proceedings and then sell it back to the original owner at an inflated price. The government would, of course, retain the profit. The sale or lease back authority is designed to hold down acquisition cost, but it does not necessarily follow that the government should make a profit. I would hope a means could be found by which the government might restrict the use of the land without taking an unnecessary gain by purchase and resale.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to submit a statement on this important piece of legislation. With my previously stated minor reservation, I strongly support S. 1401 and ask that it be favorably considered by this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cannon of Nevada and Senator Long of Missouri have submitted statements in support of this legislation. Also Senator Mansfield of Montana and Senator Bennett of Utah have written letters indicating support of the measure.