[Senate Hearing 112-225]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-225
A CALL TO ACTION REPORT OF THE
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
TO
CONSIDER A RECENTLY RELEASED REPORT BY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE: A
CALL TO ACTION: PREPARING FOR A SECOND CENTURY OF STEWARDSHIP AND
ENGAGEMENT
__________
SEPTEMBER 21, 2011
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
72-433 WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman
RON WYDEN, Oregon LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington MIKE LEE, Utah
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont RAND PAUL, Kentucky
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan DANIEL COATS, Indiana
MARK UDALL, Colorado ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota DEAN HELLER, Nevada
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia BOB CORKER, Tennessee
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
Robert M. Simon, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
McKie Campbell, Republican Staff Director
Karen K. Billups, Republican Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on National Parks
MARK UDALL, Colorado, Chairman
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RAND PAUL, Kentucky
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan DANIEL COATS, Indiana
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia DEAN HELLER, Nevada
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware BOB CORKER, Tennessee
Jeff Bingaman and Lisa Murkowski are Ex Officio Members of the
Subcommittee
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Jarvis, Jonathan B., Director, National Park Service, Department
of the Interior................................................ 4
Morris, Jason, Executive Vice President, NatureBridge, San
Francisco, CA.................................................. 12
Mulholland, Neil J., President and CEO, National Park Foundation. 7
Udall, Hon. Mark, U.S. Senator from Colorado..................... 1
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 33
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 41
A CALL TO ACTION REPORT OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m. in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark Udall
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL, U.S. SENATOR FROM
COLORADO
Senator Udall. Good afternoon. The Subcommittee on National
Parks will come to order. Welcome gentlemen, I'm very much
looking forward to the discussion that we're going to have on
this important hearing to discuss the build up to the 100-year
anniversary.
That's truly 100 years, anniversary of the founding of the
National Park Service and our National Park system.
Specifically we're here to review a report that the Park
Service issued last month entitled, A Call to Action: Preparing
for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement. It
identifies 36 separate actions the Park Service plans to
undertake in preparation for the agency's centennial in 2016.
Over the past 2 decades there have been a number of reports
that have attempted to provide guidance to the Park Service.
These range from the Park Service's so-called Vail Agenda
issued 20 years ago to the Bush Administration's Centennial
Challenge Initiative 5 years ago which focused on raising
billions to promote specific programs in the parks. Last year
the National Park's Conservation Association convened the
National Park's Second Century Commission which was co-chaired
by former Senators Howard Baker and Bennett Johnston, provide
recommendations to the Park Service as it moves forward in its
second century of operation.
I don't have to tell the Director of the Park Service that
a tremendous amount of time and professional expertise has been
invested in all of these reports. Our challenge is to see
Congress work with the Park Service to use these
recommendations to make sure that the services in our Park
System are fully prepared for the next 100 years. But while
we're here let's not forget what the National Park System has
become over the first and the last 100 years.
From the creation of the first park, Yellowstone in 1872 to
today our National Parks have helped us better understand our
history and protect special landscapes. The National Parks
unite us. They are a place for people all across the globe to
come together to recreate, to find adventure or calm for
peaceful contemplation.
For me, personally, National Parks have helped shape who I
am today. Many people are familiar with my father, Congressman
Mo Udall and my Uncle, Interior Secretary Stewart Udall and
their work to promote conservation across the country
especially through the Park Service. But in this subcommittee
and in my passion for conservation generally, I often think
frankly more about my mother and how she was the real
conservationist in our family.
She was a Coloradan. She raised 6 kids. She was a member I
found out later in life of the NRA. She was a sharp shooter, a
marksman, an angler and an equestrian. She encouraged my 5
brothers and sisters and me to get outside, to get dirt under
our fingernails, to look at and also tackle the steepest
climbs, to strap on our skis on the coldest days and on the
coldest mountains. Her influence prevailed in many ways.
That passion for the outdoors is why I campaigned to be
able to chair this important subcommittee. That's why one of my
top priorities for this Congress and the coming years will be
to build upon what has been an incredibly successful Federal
agency. Make it even better.
I'd be remiss if I didn't mention as a parent myself some
of my favorite times with my own children, Jed and Tess, have
been in our National Parks. They're young adults now and old
enough to pursue their own outdoor adventures although they do
invite me along every once in a while. But it has me thinking
about who will the next generation of enthusiasts be? What
better antidote to the childhood obesity crisis is there than
to get another generation of kids away from video games and
outside in our parks. I strongly believe that without
developing a solid relationship with America's youth, our
National Park system will suffer.
That's why I've started an initiative this year to
encourage kids and their parents to get involved in outdoor
activities in Colorado. But our enthusiasm for the parks is not
without challenges. We all know the challenges the Park Service
and the Federal Government, as a whole, face.
A common topic in this subcommittee is the maintenance
backlog that the Park Service and many other public land
agencies face. That backlog is going to continue to grow and
the Federal Government is going to have to make difficult
decisions about where to invest limited Federal dollars. So I'm
interested in exploring the endowment idea that is in this
important report.
Today I'm looking forward to hearing about this report in
detail from Jon Jarvis, the Director of the National Park
Service, specifically how he sees its recommendations being
implemented and to what extent this newest report will build on
or differs from the earlier efforts. In announcing this report
Director Jarvis highlighted how the future successes of the
National Park Service rely on efforts from partners.
We've also invited 2 organizations with a long and
established history of cooperative work to benefit our National
Parks to hear their views as well.
The first organization is the National Park Foundation, the
congressionally chartered, philanthropic partner of the
National Park Service.
The second is NatureBridge, which for 40 years has worked
with the Park Service to educate and bring school aged children
to our National Parks.
I look forward to hearing from each of our 3 witnesses
today. If Senator Paul was able to join us, he's the
subcommittee's ranking member, we'll recognize him for any
statement that he'd like to make. His timing is impeccable.
Senator Paul, I can filibuster for a minute or 2 if you'd like
or I can recognize you.
Senator Paul. I'm ready if you are ready.
Thank you for holding these hearings. I don't have an
opening statement. But I look forward to hearing the testimony.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Paul.
Director Jarvis, let's turn to you and we'll in turn hear
from Mr. Mulholland, who has deep Colorado roots and Mr. Morris
as well.
So welcome, gentlemen.
Director Jarvis.
[The prepared statement of Senator Mark Udall follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mark Udall, U.S. Senator From Colorado
Good afternoon. Today, the Subcommittee on National Parks is
holding a hearing to discuss the buildup to the 100 year anniversary of
the founding of the National Park Service and our National Park system.
Specifically, we are here to review a report that the Park Service
issued last month, entitled ``A Call to Action: Preparing for the
Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement.'' It identifies 36
separate actions the Park Service plans to undertake in preparation for
the agency's centennial in 2016.
Over the past two decades, there have been a number of reports that
have attempted to provide guidance to the Park Service. These range
from the Park Service's so-called ``Vail Agenda'', issued 20 years ago,
to the Bush Administration's ``Centennial Challenge'' initiative five
years ago, which focused on raising billions to promote specific
programs in the Parks.
And last year the National Parks Conservation Association convened
the National Parks Second Century Commission, which was co-chaired by
former Senators Howard Baker and Bennett Johnston, to provide
recommendations to the Park Service as it moves toward its second
century of operation.
A tremendous amount of time and professional expertise has been
invested in these reports. Our challenge is to see Congress work with
the Park Service to use these recommendations to make sure that the
Service and our Park system are fully prepared for the next 100 years.
Let's not forget what the National Park System has become over the
last 100 years.
From the creation of the first park--Yellowstone--in 1872 to today,
our national parks have helped us better understand our history and
protect special landscapes. The national parks unite us. They are a
place for people from all across the globe to come together to
recreate, to find adventure--or calm for peaceful contemplation.
For me personally, National Parks have helped shaped who I am
today. Many people are familiar with my father, Congressman Mo Udall,
and my uncle, Interior Secretary Stewart Udall, and their work to
promote conservation across the country--especially through the Park
Service.
But in this Subcommittee, and my passion for conservation
generally, I often think about my mother and how she was the real
conservationist in our family. She was a Coloradan, she raised six
kids. She was a member of the NRA, a sharpshooter, a marksman, an
angler, and an equestrian. And she encouraged my five brothers and
sisters and me to get outside. . .to feel the dust in our hands, tackle
the steepest climbs, and ski the coldest mountains. Her influence
prevailed in many ways. That passion for the outdoors is why I sought
to become chairman of this Subcommittee. And that is why one of my top
priorities for this Congress and the coming years will be to build upon
what has been an incredibly successful federal agency and make it even
better.
As a parent myself, some of my favorite times with my own children,
Jed and Tess, have been in our national parks. They're grown now, and
old enough to pursue their own outdoor adventures, but it has me
thinking about who the next generation of enthusiasts will be. . . What
better antidote to the childhood obesity crisis is there than to get
another generation of kids away from video games and outside in our
parks? I strongly believe that without developing a solid relationship
with America's youth, our Park system will suffer. That's why I've
started with an initiative this year to encourage parents to get their
kids involved in outdoor activities in Colorado.
But enthusiasm for the parks is not without challenges. We all know
the challenges the Park Service--and the federal government as a
whole--face.
A common topic in this subcommittee is the maintenance backlog that
the Park Service--and many other public lands agencies--faces. That
backlog is going to continue to grow and the federal government is
going to have to make difficult decisions about where to invest limited
federal dollars. So I'm interested in exploring the endowment idea that
is in this report.
Today, I am looking forward to hearing about this report in detail
from Jon Jarvis, the Director of the National Park Service,
specifically how he sees its recommendations being implemented and to
what extent this newest report will build on or differs from the
earlier efforts. In announcing this report, Director Jarvis highlighted
how the future success of the National Park Service will rely on
efforts from park partners. We have also invited two organizations with
a long and established history of cooperative work to benefit our
national parks, to hear their views.
The first organization is the National Park Foundation, the
congressionally-chartered philanthropic partner of the National Park
Service, and the second is NatureBridge, which for 40 years has worked
with the Park Service to educate and bring school-aged children to our
national parks.
I look forward to hearing from our three witnesses in a few
minutes. First, I'd like to recognize Senator Paul, the subcommittee's
ranking member, for any statement he'd like to make.
STATEMENT OF JONATHAN B. JARVIS, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Paul. I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to
discuss A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of
Stewardship and Engagement.
We launched A Call to Action in a town hall meeting in
Ford's Theatre and broadcast it to the National Park Service
employees and partners on August 25th, which was our 95th
anniversary. This document and its actions were developed by
National Park Service career employees as a road map to help us
and our partners prepare for our second 100 years of service to
the American people. A Call to Action is both a rededication of
our mission and a recognition that we need to strategically
integrate what we do in parks with our programs that offer
historic preservation, recreation and conservation assistance
to communities.
The document is built around 4 themes.
The first is connecting people to parks. That involves a
continuum of engaging recreational, educational, volunteer and
work experiences as well as outdoor activities to really engage
diverse audiences.
The second is advancing the National Park Service's
education mission through collaborative means that will help
develop American values, civic engagement and citizen
stewardship. We will do this in part through using social
media, leading edge technologies to capture public interest and
working directly with many of our partners, such as
NatureBridge, who is with us here today.
Nine actions are identified to achieve thematic goals for
preserving America's special places. These include
modernization of historic preservation technologies and
engaging the power of philanthropy as well as addressing
critical infrastructure needs.
Finally the theme of enhancing professional and
organizational excellence will be accomplished by meeting
recruitment and retention goals of a diverse work force and the
development of an innovative, collaborative and creative work
force.
Across A Call to Action there are 36 action items. They
call upon our employees and our partners to choose. For
instance one action calls for expanding opportunities for
students to directly experience National Parks through
transportation support provided by our Park partners.
Another action will encourage our visitors to make healthy
lifestyle choices when they purchase healthy, sustainably,
locally produced and reasonably priced food options in our
concession operations.
Additional action items are called for that will connect
people to parks, including local ones in their own communities.
A Call to Action challenges us to create youth employment
pathways to connect new and diverse generations to parks.
To reach 25 percent of the Nation's K through 12 school
population through virtual field trips, teacher training,
online resources and actual visits to the parks.
Foster civic dialog about the stories of the civil rights
movement found within the National Parks through a series of
special events that commemorate significantly the 50th
anniversary of the civil rights movement.
Demonstrate how historic structures can be sustainable and
part of an economic vitality of rural and urban communities.
Develop a $1,000,000,000 billion, second century endowment
campaign with the National Park Foundation and our other
partners.
Each of the senior executives in the National Park Service
have stepped up to champion an action item. I've asked that
every park, every program and every office identify those
actions that they will work on and encouraged them to work with
their local and national partners like our friends groups, our
cooperating associations and concessioners in this effort.
A key component to this Call to Action is that it is built
upon the expectation that there will be little or no new money,
new Federal money anyway, in the National Park Service in the
near future. With so many things that divide us as a Nation we
see the National Parks as a rallying point that can unite every
American in a sense of wonder, patriotism and pride in our
country. One of the National Park Service's most important
responsibilities is to invite fellow citizens to get to know
these places that they own, discover how the National Park
Service can help revitalize their neighborhoods and join in the
stewardship of America's greatest places.
A Call to Action challenges our employees and partners to
commit to concrete actions that advance the mission of the
service.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I'd be pleased
to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jarvis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jonathan B. Jarvis, Director, National Park
Service, Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today to discuss ``A Call to Action--
Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement.''
A Call to Action was announced at a Town Hall meeting at historic
Ford's Theatre and broadcast to National Park Service employees
Servicewide on August 25, 2011--our 95th anniversary. It was developed
by National Park Service career employees as a roadmap to help us--and
our partners--prepare for our second hundred years of service to the
American people. It is online at www.nps.gov/CallToAction.
A Call to Action is both a rededication to our mission and a
recognition that we need to strategically integrate what we do in parks
with our programs that offer historic preservation, recreation, and
conservation assistance to communities. The plan builds on three
previous reports--America's Great Outdoors: A Promise to Future
Generations (2011); the National Parks Second Century Commission
Report, Advancing the National Park Idea (2009); and The Future of
America's National Parks (the Centennial Report, 2007).
A Call to Action is built around four themes. Connecting People to
Parks involves a continuum of engaging recreational, educational,
volunteer, and work experiences and outdoor activities to engage
diverse communities. Advancing the NPS Education Mission through
collaborative means will develop American values, civic engagement, and
citizen stewardship. We will do this, in part, through use of social
media and leading-edge technologies to capture public interest.
Environmental literacy programs offered by organizations such as
NatureBridge further this theme. Nine actions are identified to achieve
thematic goals for Preserving America's Special Places. These include
modernization of historic preservation technologies and engaging the
power of philanthropy to provide legacy support for the NPS both
nationwide and at the individual park level. Finally, the theme of
Enhancing Professional and Organizational Excellence will be
accomplished by meeting goals such as recruitment and retention of a
diverse workforce and development of an innovative, collaborative and
creative workforce.
Across the themes, A Call to Action lays out 36 specific action
items that NPS employees and partners will undertake. For instance, one
action calls for expanding opportunities for 100,000 students to
directly experience national parks through transportation support
provided by the National Park Foundation and other park partners.
Another action will encourage park visitors to make healthy lifestyle
choices through choices of healthy, sustainably produced, and
reasonably priced food options in parks.
Additional actions are called for that will connect people to
parks, including the local ones in their own communities. These actions
will advance the educational mission of the NPS and continue our
efforts to preserve and interpret America's special places. A Call to
Action challenges us to:
Create a pathway to youth employment in the NPS to connect
new, diverse generations to parks.
Reach 25 percent of the nation's K-12 school population
annually through virtual field trips, teacher training, online
resources, and visits to parks.
Reach new audiences with digital media and engage in
conversations with all Americans.
Create a new generation of citizen scientists and future
stewards with fun and educational biodiversity discovery
activities in at least 100 parks.
Foster civic dialogue about the stories of the civil rights
movement found within the parks through a series of special
events to commemorate significant 50th anniversaries of the
civil rights movement.
Demonstrate, using modern historic preservation techniques
and technologies, how historic structures can be sustainable
and part of the economic vitality of rural and urban
communities.
Develop a $1 billion second-century endowment campaign with
the National Park Foundation and other NPS partners.
Each of our Senior Executives have stepped up to champion an action
item and I have asked every park, program, and office to identify those
action items that they will work on, and encouraged them to engage
local and national partners like the National Park Foundation, friends
groups, cooperating associations, and concessioners in this effort.
We have also created an intranet site that allows employees across
the Service to learn from each other, share great ideas, and
collaborate on success using tools like discussion forums and a blog.
It is also important to note that A Call to Action assumes no new
funding. We are committed to focusing our efforts to accomplish our
objectives within our budget, or in some cases, with the help of our
amazing partners.
With so many things that divide us as a nation, we see the national
parks as a rallying point that can unite every American in a sense of
wonder and pride in our country. One of the National Park Service's
most important responsibilities is to invite our 307 million fellow
citizens to get to know these places that they own, discover how the
National Park Service can help them revitalize their neighborhoods, and
to join in the stewardship of America's greatest places. A Call to
Action challenges our employees and partners to commit to concrete
actions that advance the mission of the Service.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
respond to any questions you or the other members of the subcommittee
may have.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Director Jarvis.
Mr. Mulholland, welcome to Washington. It's good to see you
here.
STATEMENT OF NEIL J. MULHOLLAND, PRESIDENT AND CEO, NATIONAL
PARK FOUNDATION
Mr. Mulholland. Great to see you.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Paul, thank you for the privilege of
appearing before you today. The National Park Foundation
commends the subcommittee for its commitment to help preserve
the National Park Service, prepare the National Park Service
for the opportunities and challenges of the next century and
for highlighting the role that partnerships and philanthropy
will play in the future.
Established by Congress in 1967 the National Park
Foundation is the philanthropic and promotional partner of the
National Park Service. Through our grant making programs and
public outreach the Foundation works with Park Service leaders
to conserve natural resources, engage diverse audiences,
promote health and recreation in the great outdoors and educate
our children about our shared American history in the places
where it actually happened.
In the previous 5 years the Foundation has contributed over
$123 million to the Park Service in grants, program support and
contributive goods. In addition the Foundation is leading the
$30 million, private fundraising campaign to build the Flight
93 National Memorial which was dedicated earlier this month.
Unlike other congressionally chartered, non-profits established
to support land management agencies, the Foundation receives no
Federal appropriations.
This year the Foundation initiated a strategic planning
process to increase alignment between our organization and the
Park Service. The process has helped us refine our mission of
enriching America's National Parks and programs through private
support. Developed simultaneously the Foundation's strategic
planning and the development of the Park Service Call to Action
report had significant overlap.
The Foundation was pleased to provide thoughts and ideas to
the Park Service in the development of a Call to Action. I'm
energized by the opportunities it presents to expand public/
private partnerships to protect and preserve our National
Parks.
A Call to Action envisions a Park Service that works
closely with partners to improve visitor services, but also
strengthen local economies, create jobs and support
conservation in American communities. The Foundation embraces
this vision and believes that park philanthropy is a vital
element of securing the second century for parks. Annually the
National Park Foundation and National Park Friends groups grant
over $100 million in private support to National Parks.
The Foundation's new strategic vision aligns with many of
Call to Action goals. By example, the report calls for reaching
25 percent of the Nation's K to 12 school population annually
so that they may learn about our parks. Like our friends at
NatureBridge, the Foundation has a great passion for the
education of our youth. The Foundation's park stewards program
gives high school teachers and students the opportunity to
build a deeper connection to their National Parks through
service learning projects that will leverage our parks as
classrooms. Today over 4,000 students have directly benefited
from park stewards program and more than 100,000 National Park
visitors have been positively impacted by the work of the park
steward students.
Through a Call to Action, the Park Service highlighted an
important mechanism for inviting all Americans to continue
their support of our National Parks, an endowment. A second
century National Park endowment will require the Foundation,
the Park Service and local friends groups to work
collaboratively to assess the feasibility of a coordinated
friend fundraising campaign. It also provides a challenge to
think beyond the traditional definition of an endowment.
Instead consider the potential of an umbrella structure
encompassing a range of restricted and unrestricted funds,
capital campaigns and fund raising initiatives. The Park
Service and the Foundation are now beginning that conversation,
planning to due diligence necessary to successfully launch such
an effort. Our organizations will explore how to create a
portfolio of national and local park endowments that will
complement rather than compete against one another.
A second century endowment is a legacy for the current
generation and a benefit for future generations. Those who lead
the Foundation, friends groups and the Park Service realize
that the actions we take today in establishing an endowment
will be a long term strategy to position the parks for future
success.
A second century endowment has the potential to benefit
from the transfer of trillions of dollars of wealth from baby
boomers to their children and the causes they are passionate
about. Our National Parks have demonstrated for generations
that they are worthy of philanthropy. They have used this
private support to become centers of education, science,
history, recreation and conservation.
A second century endowment or a constellation of national,
local endowments ensures continuity in programming during
periods of financial uncertainty. Yet we recognize that an
endowment and all other forms of private park philanthropy will
only be successful when donors have faith that their government
is doing everything they can to ensure that these special
places remain preserved and protected for future generations.
Partnership in philanthropy must be central to the future
of our National Parks. We are confident this can be
accomplished in a manner that enables national and local
partners to be successful and fulfill our shared mission with
the Park Service. Through a Call to Action the Park Service is
committed to transform itself to meet the needs of the American
people in the next century. As its congressionally established
partner, the National Park Foundation is committed to securing
the private resources necessary to help the Park Service
achieve these goals.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Paul, for your ongoing
support of America's National Parks.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mulholland follows:]
Prepared Statement of Neil J. Mulholland, President and CEO, National
Park Foundation
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. The National Park Foundation
(``Foundation'') commends this Subcommittee for its commitment to help
prepare the National Park Service (``NPS'') for the challenges and
opportunities of the next century and for highlighting the role that
partnerships and philanthropy will play in this future.
Established by Congress in 1967 (PL 90-209), the Foundation serves
as the philanthropic and promotional arm of the NPS. Through its grant-
making programs and public outreach, the Foundation works with NPS
leaders in Washington, D.C. and in parks across the country to fund
conservation and sustainability efforts, engage diverse communities,
promote health and recreation in the great outdoors and educate our
citizens about our shared history in the places where it happened.
In the previous five years (FY2006-2010) the Foundation has
provided $95 million in grants and program support and more than $28
million in contributed goods and services to the NPS, a total
contribution of over $123 million. Unlike other Congressionally
chartered nonprofits established to support land management agencies,
the Foundation receives no federal appropriations. The Foundation is
governed by a citizen Board of Directors appointed by the Secretary of
the Interior. Additionally, the Secretary and the NPS Director serve ex
officio as Chairman and Secretary of the Board, respectively. The
Secretary of the Interior and the NPS Director have always been
invaluable resources to the Board as it charts a course for our
organization.
This year, the Foundation initiated a strategic planning process
with the goal to increase alignment between our organization and the
NPS. The process has helped the Foundation's Board and staff to refine
our mission of enriching America's national parks and programs through
private support, safeguarding our heritage and inspiring generations of
national park enthusiasts. The Foundation's strategic planning process
and the development of the NPS A Call To Action report had significant
overlap and both organizations benefited from the simultaneous and
parallel conversations about how best to adapt our long standing
organizations to this new moment in our nation's history.
The Foundation was pleased to provide thoughts and ideas to the NPS
in its development of A Call To Action, and I am energized by the
opportunities it presents to expand public-private partnerships to
protect and preserve our national parks. In my testimony, I will
highlight how the Foundation will assist the NPS in finding creative
and innovative ways to meet the goals outlined in A Call To Action,
including its call for an endowment for the national parks, and the
role of park philanthropy in the next century.
philanthropy and the national parks
Since Yellowstone National Park was established in 1872, private
philanthropy has been at the core of the preservation, protection, and
improvement of America's national parks, and will continue to be
essential in securing their future.
Private philanthropy helped create individual national parks, as
well as the National Park Service itself. The earliest philanthropic
acts spanned the country from California to Maine. In 1907, William and
Elizabeth Thatcher Kent donated land that later became Muir Woods
National Monument in California. In June 1916, a group of private
citizens donated to the federal government the land for Sieur de Monts
National Monument in Maine, the very same land that would one day grow
and develop into Acadia National Park. Stephen Mather himself, the
first director of the NPS, contributed from his personal fortune to
support parks and their administration both before and after he led the
agency. In addition to land purchases, Mather enlisted several western
railroads to join him in contributing $48,000 to publish the National
Parks Portfolio, which promoted national parks and helped persuade
Congress to create the NPS in 1916.
These examples from, what are today, the icons of our national park
system necessitate the recognition of park philanthropy as a vital
element of the second century for parks. Annually, the National Park
Foundation and Friends Groups leverage the federal government's
necessary investment in national parks to grant over $100 million in
private support to the parks. With the help of these nonprofit park
partners, the Foundation will build on this rich tradition and help
achieve the goals of A Call To Action with public and private interests
working in tandem.
IMPLEMENTING A CALL TO ACTION
A Call To Action envisions a National Park Service that works
closely with park partners to improve the services they provide within
our parks, but also to strengthen local economies, create jobs and
support conservation in American communities. Park partners like the
Foundation are asked to work hand in hand with NPS employees to advance
a shared vision toward the NPS centennial in 2016.
The Foundation looks forward to working with the NPS to help
convene national park Friends Groups, cooperating associations and
other nonprofit park partners in preserving, interpreting and restoring
natural, historic and cultural resources in the NPS and local
communities. It will work to enable park partners, educational
institutions and youth to use national parks as places of learning and
thereby deepen our knowledge and understanding of the natural world,
science, art, history and other academic disciplines. The Foundation
will seek to collaborate with non-NPS land managers and park partners
to conserve urban, rural and landscape-scale resources that connect
these neighboring lands to parks.
The work of the Foundation and its new strategic vision align with
many A Call To Action goals including:
Provide multiple ways for children to learn about the
national parks and what they reveal about nature, the nation's
history, and issues central to our civic life.
The Foundation and NPS are looking to leverage the NPS Teacher-
Ranger-Teacher program with the Foundation's Park Stewards, a
grant program that gives high school teachers and students the
opportunity to build a deeper connection and sense of
stewardship for their national parks through personal
engagement and service learning projects. To date, over 4,000
students have directly benefited from the Park Stewards
program; an estimated 7,000 have indirectly benefited; and more
than 100,000 national park visitors have also benefited from
materials and activities produced by the Park Stewards
students.
Expand opportunities for students to directly experience
national parks, where natural and historic settings inspire
powerful learning. To achieve this we will provide
transportation support for 100,000 students each year to visit
national parks.
Early next year, the Foundation will offer a grant program aimed at
helping parks provide transportation for youth in their local
area to engage with park programs, educational efforts and
service opportunities.
Foster civic dialogue about the stories of the civil rights
movement found within the parks.
The African American Experience Fund of the National Park
Foundation is working with NPS Interpretation and Education to
plan numerous special events between 2012 and 2015 to
commemorate the 50th anniversaries of major national civil
rights events including the 1963 March on Washington, enactment
of the Civil Rights Act, enactment of the Voting Rights and
other key events that are memorialized in our parks.
Lead the way in protecting natural darkness as a precious
resource and create a model for dark sky protection.
Since 2005, the Foundation's Best Lighting Practices grant program
has worked to reduce light pollution in several national parks
and we are working with corporate partners like Musco Lighting
to expand that commitment.
Create a new basis for NPS resource management to inform
policy, planning, and management decisions and establish the
NPS as a leader in addressing the impacts of climate change on
protected areas around the world.
The Foundation has committed to fund the re-examination of the
Leopold Report to help the NPS enhance its national resource
science and stewardship in the next century.
Each of these goals presents the private sector with an opportunity
to provide financial, technical, scientific and educational support and
expertise to help the NPS meet and exceed its expectations.
a second century endowment
America's national parks are owned by all its citizens. As the
history of park philanthropy suggests, these citizens have supported
their parks through their tax dollars and their charitable
contributions. In A Call To Action, NPS has highlighted one important
mechanism for inviting Americans to continue that support: an
endowment. The action item states:
Engage the power of philanthropy to provide legacy support
for the NPS both nationwide and at the individual park level.
To do so we will develop a $1 billion National Park Service
second century endowment campaign working in partnership with
the National Park Foundation and national park Friends Groups.
This goal presents an opportunity for the Foundation to work
collaboratively with the NPS and Friends Groups to assess the
feasibility of a substantial endowment campaign. It also provides a
challenge to think beyond the traditional definition of an endowment
and instead consider the potential for an umbrella for a range of
restricted and unrestricted funds, capital campaigns and fundraising
initiatives. The NPS and the Foundation are now beginning the
conversations, planning and due diligence necessary to launch such an
effort. Our organizations will explore how to create a movement in
support of national and local parks endowments that would complement,
rather than compete against, one another.
The Foundation supports the NPS goal of creating for future
generations a long lasting source of support to ensure that our parks
are protected. An endowment, or constellation of national and local
endowments, ensures continuity in programming during periods of
financial uncertainty and changing times. As a supplemental financial
support to normal appropriations, an endowment would provide the
national parks with a perpetual funding stream that would allow park
leadership to thoroughly plan and implement multi-year programs.
A second century endowment is a legacy for the current generation
and a benefit for future generations. Those who lead the Foundation,
Friends Groups and the NPS realize that the actions they take today in
establishing an endowment will be a long-term strategy to position the
parks for future success. An endowment will provide donors with a
maximum return on their investment. In a sense, their gifts to our
national parks live on in perpetuity, contributing to the purpose for
which they were intended.
A second century endowment, and the other forms of private
philanthropy that help support the NPS, will only be successful when
donors have faith that their government is doing everything it can to
ensure these special places will remain preserved and protected for
future generations.
A second century endowment has the opportunity to benefit from the
substantial transfer of trillions of dollars of wealth from baby
boomers to their children, causes and charities. Our national parks
have demonstrated for generations that they are worthy of philanthropy,
and they have used this private support collaboratively with their
partners to become centers of education, science, history, recreation
and conservation.
conclusion
The state of our parks at the Centennial Celebration in 2016 will
say a lot about our priorities as a nation. Through A Call To Action,
the NPS has pledged its own commitment to transform itself to meet the
needs of the American people in its next century. As its
Congressionally established partner, the Foundation is ready to help
the NPS achieve its goals.
Opportunities for partnership and philanthropy must be central to
the future of our national parks. The Foundation is confident this can
be accomplished in a manner that empowers local partners to be
successful and helps national programs extend the benefits of
philanthropy to all parks. Partnership and philanthropy are critical to
create new opportunities for more of the public to relate to their
parks and to generate the creativity and innovation the NPS recognizes
in A Call To Action that it will need.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your ongoing support of America's
national parks and for allowing me the opportunity to report on the
important role philanthropy plays in supporting the noble mission of
the NPS.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Mr. Mulholland.
Mr. Morris, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF JASON MORRIS, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT,
NATUREBRIDGE, SAN FRANCISCO, CA
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, thank you for
the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee to offer our
perspective on the National Park Service Call to Action report.
NatureBridge commends Director Jarvis and the National Park
Service for developing an action oriented report that brings
together the best thinking from a decade of reports and
commissions. As the report explains there are benefits to
schools, communities and to society at large. I will focus on
the greater good with reflections on these 3 key issues.
First, how can we provide meaningful National Park
experiences for 25 percent of America's schoolchildren?
Second, how can we create the next generation of stewards,
career professionals and engage citizens?
Third, how can we overcome the current barriers to
partnerships?
As a 40 year partner of the National Park service,
NatureBridge is uniquely suited to help the Park Service
succeed in its goals for the next century. Our mission is to
inspire personal connections to the natural world and
responsible actions to sustain it. We bring more than 40,000
young people and teachers to the parks annually through our
residential field science education programs. We are proud to
have introduced almost one million students to the wonder of
our National Parks, but there are 52 million school aged
children in this country.
So how do we reach more students? NatureBridge supports
changes that will connect our schools to our Nation's best
classrooms, National Parks. We have 3 suggestions.
First, continue working across the Administration. With the
Associate Director for Interpretation and Education, the
National Park Service can collaborate with counterparts at the
Department of Education. We commend this outreach and ask that
partners be engaged to deliver programs that are well aligned
with cross departmental goals.
Second, work across congressional committees. Our Federal
education laws, specifically the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act should recognize organizations like ours as
eligible partners so that schools can use the funding they
receive for National Park based school programs.
Third, ensure that private sector resources are leveraged.
We applaud the National Park Foundation on the initiative to
fund transportation and to create an endowment. While
educational opportunities will compel philanthropic support,
the private sector cannot do this alone.
All of these suggestions are focused on introducing more
students to National Parks. But how do we extend these
experiences to create the next generation of engaged citizens
and career professionals.
I have an example to share. Virginia Delgado made her first
connections to the natural world as a sixth grader at
NatureBridge's Golden Gate Program. Virginia later became a
team mentor and taught at our summer education programs. In her
own words, ``At NatureBridge, I got hooked.'' She is now
pursuing a career in environmental policy so more students from
underserved communities can have this opportunity.
So how do we all join Virginia's cause? We must work as a
community of program providers to set young people on the path
to become stewards in their communities and in their careers.
With the action item on the Class of 2016, we recommend the
Park Service do just that. We recognize that the National Park
Service cannot accomplish actions alone and that partnerships
are essential. However, the barriers to successful partnerships
are significant.
So how do we overcome these barriers? We fully support the
National Park Service goals in the enhancing the professional
and organizational excellence section of the report.
Unfortunately those goals are not evident in the proposed
actions.
We recommend the following.
First, the Career Academy. Partners should be engaged in
trainings that focus on how non-profits and government agencies
operate. We recommend that partnerships be one of the 12 fields
in the Career Academy.
Second, cooperative agreements. We are not vendors and
considerations around streamlining cooperative agreements for
program partners should not be lumped in with those of vendors.
We have some additional recommendations on partnerships
that we have included for the record.
We look forward to working with the National Park Service
and other non-profit partners to overcome these barriers. We
are confident that we can move forward together. NatureBridge
is inspired to do more everyday by the beaming faces of the
students we serve and by the teachers who organize bake sales
so that their students can experience our programs in National
Parks.
We know that our programs and our talented educators are
only part of the equation. The other part is the power of place
embodied in our National Parks. We hear the Call to Action
everyday and we are ready to answer it.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, this concludes my
prepared remarks. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you
have. Thank you for considering our views.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Morris follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jason Morris, Executive Vice President,
NatureBridge, San Francisco, CA
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the
subcommittee to provide our perspective on the National Park Service's
recently released report ``A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second
Century of Stewardship and Engagement.''
NatureBridge commends Director Jarvis and the National Park Service
for developing an action-oriented report that brings together the best
thinking from a decade of reports and Commissions. The report does not
start over but instead focuses on moving forward through concrete
actions. I recognize that many of these actions are appropriately
focused on preparing the agency for a second century. As the opening
section of the report explains, there are broader benefits that will
come from undertaking these benefits to schools, communities, and
society at large. I will focus on that greater good with reflections on
three questions:
1. how to provide meaningful national park experiences for
25% of America's K-12 schoolchildren
2. how to create the next generation of stewards and career
professionals
3. how to overcome the current barriers to partnerships
About Us
Founded in 1971 in Yosemite National Park, NatureBridge has been
working in partnership with the National Park Service for 40 years.
Ours is a history of mutually beneficial collaboration. Indeed, we are
excited about the impact we have on the lives of youth through our
partnership with the National Park Service.
NatureBridge employees 180 people in three states; primarily field
educators who deliver what we have dubbed the ``Wow! moments'' for the
students and teachers who participate in our programs. Our mission is
to inspire personal connections to the natural world and responsible
actions to sustain it. We currently operate residential campuses in
Yosemite National Park; Golden Gate National Recreation Area; Olympic
National Park; and Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. In
2012 we will be conducting a demonstration program at Prince William
Forest Park in Virginia and we are excited to be working with the
National Park Service on this new venture. And, since 2009,
NatureBridge in conjunction with the National Military Family
Association has hosted military families participating in the Operation
Purple Healing Adventures program, giving veterans and their families a
chance to reconnect.
We serve more than 40,000 participants annually through field
science, youth leadership and teacher training programs. We are a fee-
based program and we fundraise to provide scholarships to 35% of our
participants. In looking at the past three years alone, NatureBridge
has served schools from 19 states including 49 of the 53 California
congressional districts, all 9 of the Washington congressional
districts, and all 5 of the Oregon congressional districts. As we
prepare to celebrate our 40th anniversary, we are approaching one
million students served through our programs.
While we are proud of one million, there are 52 million school-aged
children in this country who would benefit from programs like ours. We
are one of about a dozen residential environmental education programs
operating in national parks and our combined best efforts are just
scratching the surface.
So, how do we scale to provide meaningful national park experiences
for 25% of America's school children as called for in the report?
We recognize that there are several strategies contemplated in this
action item but there are some efforts that will benefit all proven
program providers. Whether you are talking about field-science programs
like ours or history and civics in our national parks, NatureBridge
supports making systemic changes that will connect our schools to our
national parks, our ``nation's best classrooms.'' We have three
suggestions on this front.
1. Continue working across the Administration.--With the
first-ever Associate Director for Interpretation & Education,
the National Park Service is able to engage counterparts at the
Department of Education. We commend this outreach and ask that
partners be engaged where they can deliver, extend, or
implement programs that are well-aligned with cross-
departmental goals.
2. Work across Congressional committees.--As we work to
reauthorize our federal education laws, specifically the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we should provide
clarity so that organizations like ours are recognized as
``eligible partners'' under the law. This will ensure that
schools can use funding that they receive for national park-
based student programs and teacher training. Other legislative
efforts include Senator Reed's ``No Child Left Inside''
legislation. We would like to thank members of the Committee
who have co-sponsored that legislation.
3. Ensure that existing resources are preserved.--There is
modest funding, $10 million per year, for environmental
education programs in the EPA budget. We must ensure that this
funding is not cut as contemplated in the House Interior
Appropriations bill. We applaud the collaboration with the
National Park Foundation and other partners to provide
transportation support for 100,000 students each year. This is
desperately needed as transportation costs are a significant
barrier for many schools. We also support the $1 billion
endowment campaign and feel certain that educational
opportunities will compel philanthropic support. However, the
private sector cannot do its part only to see the modest amount
of federal funding for environmental education cut from the
budget.
All of these suggestions are focused on introducing more students
to national parks but how do we extend the experiences to create the
next generation of stewards and career professionals?
The report talks about creating deep connections between a younger
generation and parks through a series of diverse park experiences
offered in collaboration with education partners and youth
organizations. The described outcome is to create a pathway to
employment with the NPS, with a focus on diversifying the workforce.
Our programs provide these deep connections every day and we know that
we are achieving the intended outcome. A few years ago, we gave a
presentation at a National Park Service forum and after the
presentation four Superintendents in the room stood up and said that
they had been through our programs and that it impacted their career
choices.
A student from our Yosemite Summer Research Institute writes, ``It
was this program that showed me my love for science. I hiked over 50
miles total with 40 pound pack; everyday was incredibly challenging,
but I've never felt more accomplished. I didn't realize how tedious
science really is, and this showed me not only what it is really like,
but that I can do it and because of this trip I've decided that a
career in science is what I want to pursue.''
Another student, Virginia Delgado, made her first connections to
the natural world at our Golden Gate campus in the 6th grade. She came
with her biology club and in her own words, ``got hooked.'' She is now
pursuing a career in environmental policy and urban planning and is
committed to seeing that more students in low-income areas, like the
one she grew up in, have the same opportunity.
So, how do we all join Virginia's cause? One program provider will
never excel in providing all of the experiences from first exposure to
education to stewardship to career. We offer two thoughts:
1. Connect the experiences.--The report contains separate
actions that talk about first experiences, deep connections,
diverse experiences, new audiences, and new locations. The
action focused on adopting a class of 2016 graduates at all
national parks has the potential to connect these experiences.
Proven partners should be included in developing and delivering
the ``fun, educational, and engaging activities culminating in
the NPS Centennial in 2016'' but we should not stop in 2016.
The next five years are should be just the beginning of a
program for the second century that can have profound impacts
on young people from all parts of the country and all
demographics.
2. Cross promote.--As a community of partners that provide
experiences along this continuum, we must cross promote.
NatureBridge will do our part to bring the community together
through our privately-funded field building initiative.
Everything in my remarks thus far, and indeed the Call to Action
itself is based on recognition that the National Park Service cannot
accomplish all of these actions alone and that there is a shared vision
between the Service and its partners. While we are certain that we have
the shared vision, we are also certain that the barriers to effective
and sustainable partnerships have not evaporated with the release of
this report. I would like to turn my attention to the question of:
How to overcome the current barriers to partnerships?
NatureBridge is looking to strengthen an already rewarding
partnership with the NPS. We seek to advance our common mission and
develop a closer working relationship. Our testimony is offered in the
spirit of wanting to move forward with these actions and a need to
leverage increasingly scarce resources.
We fully support the National Park Service goals in the Enhancing
the Professional and Organizational Excellence section of the report
to:
develop and recruit NPS leaders at all levels with the
skills to work with partners
build a more flexible and adaptive organization that
encourages innovation, collaboration, and entrepreneurship
modernize and streamline NPS business systems
Unfortunately, those goals are not evident in the proposed actions.
We would like to highlight two actions where the full range of partners
and their perspectives will need to be considered, and possibly
directly engaged, to ensure success:
1. The NPS Career Academy.--We recommend that Partnerships be
one of the 12 career fields in the NPS Career Academy. The
cultural differences between government and nonprofits are
often a barrier to effective partnerships. Understanding this
is a key for both the NPS and their nonprofit partners.
Partners should be directly engaged in trainings that focus on
how nonprofits and government agencies operate, and how to
bridge the gap. NatureBridge would gladly participate in this
type of training.
2. Cooperative agreements.--Cooperative agreements impact
more than the buying power of national parks. From our
perspective they impact mission delivery. We are not vendors
and would not want considerations around streamlining
cooperative agreements for program providers to be lumped with
those of buying offices as implied by the report.
The following are additional recommendations on partnerships that
speak to modernizing and streamlining NPS business systems.
1. Difficulty of Completing Legal Agreements.--The increasing
complexity of public/private partnerships has resulted in
Agreements (Cooperative, Fundraising, etc.) that are
overreaching and unworkable. The staff time and financial
resources spent on reviewing and redoing agreements is
frustrating and wasteful, can take several years to complete
and in the end fosters a climate of legal adversaries rather
than partners.
The process of reviewing agreements is highly centralized;
drafts acceptable to the Park or the Region may be extensively
questioned by the Washington Support Office (WASO), which can
at times seem disconnected from the field. ``No risk''
partnerships do not exist and should not be the legal bar that
is set.
For example, our Yosemite Institute has operated under a
series of agreements with the NPS since 1971, but in 2010
questions from WASO about the NPS's legal authority to allow us
to enter into agreements has caused extensive delays. Our most
recent experience with the Fundraising Agreement for our
proposed new Environmental Education Center in Yosemite
National Park is a perfect example of what is not working. We
first received a 20 page draft modeled from former partner
agreements that has now mushroomed into over 40 pages after
review by NPS solicitors.
Meanwhile, at Golden Gate National Recreation Area,
NatureBridge's Headlands Institute campus is operating under
its fourth successive one-year extension of its general
agreement. After operating and providing programs for over 30
years in the Park, the partnership feels more like a landlord/
tenant arrangement as we are now being asked to pay
approximately $140,000 annually in ``service district charges''
to continue our programs in the Park.
NatureBridge recognizes and values the uniqueness of each
park but is frustrated by our inability either to use
agreements signed in one park as a template for a similar
agreement in another park, or to negotiate a master agreement
that would cover NatureBridge operations in multiple parks.
Suggestion: NatureBridge supports streamlined and
standardized partnership agreements. For example, the National
Park Service should consider ``proven partner status'' for
longtime partners that have a strong mission alignment and have
met their program and financial obligations for a number of
years. This would involve setting up a vetting system for new
partners and enabling them to use streamlined processes once
certain conditions are met and a proven track record is
established.
2. Cost of construction in National Parks.--Last year the
National Park Service signed a Record of Decision approving
construction of a new environmental education center in
Yosemite National Park. The Center will be owned by Yosemite
National Park and operated jointly by NatureBridge and Yosemite
National Park. NatureBridge will raise more than $45 million
from private donors to pay for the center. It doesn't need to
cost this much.
We have worked closely with the Park Service for 5 years
finalizing the EIS, the design and the construction drawings.
The process involves thousands of design decisions made by the
National Park Service that affect cost while as a partner we
are focused on ensuring that scarce resources have maximum
impact.
Suggestion: A greater focus on value per dollar spent will
increase the power of public-private partnerships and allow
partners to apply increasingly scarce resources to program
delivery.
3. Decision Making.--Decisions must be made more quickly.
This mainly has to do with the layering of agreements and
multiple written approvals that are time-consuming, cumbersome
and difficult to manage and enforce. Often it seems the delays
come from divisions within a particular park's management.
These kinds of delays are costly, frustrating and can inhibit
timely implementation and execution of partnership agreements
as well as program and fundraising activities.
Suggestion: Approval processes should be streamlined to fit
the pace of business in the 21st century. This will improve
mission-related results for both partners and will save both
donor and taxpayer money.
We look forward to working with the National Park Service and other
non-profit partners to overcome these barriers to partnership and we
feel confident that we can move forward together.
The NatureBridge staff is inspired to do more every day by the
beaming faces of the students we serve and by the teachers who organize
bake sales so that their students can experience our programs. We know
that our model and our talented educators are only part of the
equation--the other part is the power of place embodied in our national
parks. We hear the call to action every day and we are ready to answer
it.
Thank you for focusing on the future of our National Parks and what
it means for our communities and our children, and for including
NatureBridge in this hearing. I would be glad to answer any questions.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Mr. Morris. I look forward to
hearing more in the timeframe now where we ask some questions
and receive some answers.
Let me recognize myself for 5 minutes and then I'll
recognize Senator Paul for 5 minutes after my 5. Let me start.
Director Jarvis, your report has several themes. Again,
congratulations on compiling your conclusions based on your own
internal work, but also these other important seminal studies
that have been published. The report has several themes and I
think 40 different action items. What's the most important
thing we should take away from the report?
Mr. Jarvis. I think there, from my perspective, may be 2
things.
One, for the very first time, we are looking at all of the
responsibilities that have been bestowed upon the National Park
Service by the U.S. Congress and past Presidents to aggregate
all of those for a vision for the second century. Everything
from our Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance program to
our Historic Preservation Tax Act tax credit programs as well
as the 395 units of the National Park System, all focused on a
vision. It's a call for people to use a little bit of their
discretion, a little bit of their authority to align that
toward this common goal.
I think the second is the endowment itself. We are a
perpetuity institution on an annual appropriation. If you think
about any other major institution in this country whether it's
the Smithsonian or Harvard, they have an endowment that allows
them to carry forward on programs, as Mr. Mulholland said, in
times of austerity and it provides a point for giving from an
extraordinary philanthropic American people.
I think if we look back 100 years from now when we are
facing our third 100 years, I think if you look back what
action might have been one of the most important, the Second
Century Commission said it was an endowment.
Senator Udall. I want to just make an editorial comment,
I'll move forward with my second question. I have joined forces
with Senator Hatch to propose an unauthorizing Committee that
would look at Federal programs that are perhaps duplicative or
are not necessary anymore. I'm going to sit down with you,
Director, and look at all the missions or the directives that
you've received through the years from many Senators, many
Presidents, many members of the House. It might be a useful
exercise to look at harmonizing those.
Some cases we may want to set aside one or 2 of the things
we've asked you all to do. Because I know when you look at the
broad suite of directives they're almost all well intentioned,
but some of them may be beyond your means. But that's another
conversation.
I know this will upset Senator Paul, but you said you don't
need any Federal funding to implement the Call to Action. Would
you elaborate on this for the 2 of us?
Mr. Jarvis. Recognizing that we are in a tough economic
situation in this country, I know the Senate and the House are
working diligently to find economies. I deeply believe the
National Park Service is a great investment and we leverage
what appropriated dollars we have. But I did not want to build
an action plan from here to 2016 that was predicated on new
Federal appropriations because that's probably just not going
to happen.
So the direction that I gave to the team was to build a set
of actions that could be actually executed without new money,
without new Federal money anyway. So that's really what there's
no call here to appropriations in this document.
Senator Udall. Mr. Mulholland, let me build on the
Director's comments. A billion dollars is an ambitious
undertaking. I admire the Foundation's commitment to putting a
plan in place to pursue such a goal.
Are you concerned that the endowment plan would negatively
affect your other park fundraising programs?
Mr. Mulholland. It's a good question. But, you know, when
we look at the terms of endowment and we put a goal out there
of a billion dollars. First of all we wanted to have something
that would benefit the entirety of the Park System and 395
units of buildings, a billion is an adequate goal. We look at
this to be a long term campaign that would start now but, you
know, build for a period of 20 to 25 years.
So we do not see it impacting our current programs. Really
look at it more for legacy, estate planning, it would be a big
part of it when people transfer wealth to fund it.
Senator Udall. As a former non-profit CEO I'm very
intrigued with the way in which you laid out the creative ideas
for the Foundation and for the endowment. I look forward to
pursuing some additional questioning with you on that front.
Let me recognize Senator Paul for his time.
Senator Paul. Oh my goodness, you've come not asking for
more money. I love it.
I like the idea of the endowment. I have a suggestion.
There's this guy I've been hearing about in the news,
apparently he has a lot of money and he feels under taxed,
Warren Buffett. You all should talk to him.
With regard to how cost are attributed, what percentage of
the annual costs of running the parks is able to come in
through concessions and admission fees?
Mr. Jarvis.
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Senator. I'll give you it in hard
numbers. We can run the percentage.
We collect about $175 to $180 million in recreational fees.
That's campground, entrance, user fees. Then we collect about
another $100 million annually in franchise fees. So you're
looking at about $250 to $275 million, somewhere in that
neighborhood, in total fee collection in the National Park
system right now.
Senator Paul. Franchise fees is when someone puts their
name on the entranceway or something or what's that mean?
Mr. Jarvis. No, that's from our concessions.
Senator Paul. OK.
Mr. Jarvis. We have about 80 business operations.
Senator Paul. Alright.
Mr. Jarvis. Food, hotel.
We are currently in negotiations for about 25 of those
concessioners for new contracts and we expect those franchise
fees, in many cases, to go up substantially. But I can't tell
you right now what that would actually work out to be. So
you're looking at, you know, the Park Service's total budget is
about $2.8 billion. So you're looking at about 10 percent.
Senator Paul. My second is sort of a suggestion. This might
be a little off the wall but I've been trying to grow a giant
Sequoia in Kentucky for years. I had some pretty good luck. I
had one grow for about 7 or 8 years, about 12 feet tall, about
this big around. But I always seem to have some blight.
But the reason I bring it up is for an education. I think
I'm fascinated by trying to grow a big tree in my yard. I think
kids would be fascinated on Arbor Day. I don't know if people
are against the spread of the Sequoia or something. But I think
it would be a neat sort of a project around the country to get
kids interested in the big trees or whatever.
I've been out to Muir Woods which I think is a neat park as
well. But I don't know, I saw one one time that's been growing
in Northern Georgia for 150 years. It's like almost 200 feet
tall. So they will grow.
I believe that one time North America had giant Sequoias
across North America, maybe, I don't know thousands of years
ago. But I suspect there was some kind of blight that I don't
know of. But if anybody knows about this can send me some
information on the giant Sequoia and how I might get past the
adolescent years.
A lot of trees, I think the Chestnut and the Elm will grow
for a while, the native ones. They're trying to get resistant
ones to the blight. But I suspect that's what's happening to me
is a blight somewhere in the maturity. But I've tried a couple
times and I've not had success. But anyways, you're welcome to
respond if you want.
Mr. Jarvis. We would be glad to help you with that. As a
matter of fact I think there are a number of places that do
sell the giant Sequoias. But, you know, I'm sure they're a
challenge on the east coast and in particular certain
environments.
I would mention that we have just developed a partnership
with the American Chestnut Foundation to begin to replant the
American Chestnut in the east. They have successfully cross
bred back a 99 percent pure American Chestnut that is blight
resistant. So this has been a great opportunity for us to
restore this incredible tree in the east.
But we'll help you with that.
Senator Paul. Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Paul.
Director Jarvis, I'd urge you to get back to Senator Paul
as quickly as possible.
[Laughter.]
Senator Udall. Anything he's interested in, I'm interested
in.
Senator Paul. We don't want to have to subpoena that
information on the Sequoia.
[Laughter.]
Senator Udall. Mr. Morris, your story is a powerful one.
It's a great example of the American spirit of volunteerism
which has been identified, for almost a couple hundred years.
DeToqueville, the great French observer of American 1820s and
1930s, noted Americans even in that era had a spirit of
volunteering in their communities. But I'm really intrigued
with all of the ideas you put forth.
In the Call to Action the Park Service emphasizes the use
of technology in outreach research and management. How are you
using technology in the programs you provide the parks? In
particular when you look at that 25 percent number that
everybody on the panel thinks is realistic or at least a goal
that we ought to embrace. I would have to guess part of that is
going to be through technology that you're going to reach
students.
But please have at it.
Mr. Morris. Thank you, Senator. Real quick for Senator Paul
on the Sequoia piece.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Morris. You know, we use technology. We have this
program called Sequoia-ology. We have the kids track the baby
Sequoia trees in Yosemite National Park. Every week there's a
different group of schoolchildren in Yosemite National Park.
Every week there's a new sprout of a Sequoia tree and they map
them using technology, using GIS technology and put it on a
fixed place.
Then the kids when they get back to their classroom can log
in and watch the survival rate of those Sequoias and how they
grow. Now they grow in a very small area in California. It's
getting smaller all the time.
So, you know, we're interested in the long term health of
these trees over time. But that's just one example of how we
use technology and engage kids at the local level and then
extend it, you know, back into their classrooms. Then they can
extend it to students who didn't get to visit Yosemite through
one of our programs.
Senator Udall. Why are they so limited geographically? My
understanding the giant Sequoia has a much broader range along
the Sierra Nevadas but the Redwood is more limited. I can
understand that, some of that is coastal air and humidity and
stuff.
But what is it? Is there a blight that limits them or what
limits them geographically to their growth?
Mr. Morris. I'm actually going to defer that question to
the Director and his scientists.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Morris. Either he can answer it or we'll get back to
you with a specific answer.
Mr. Jarvis. Yes. I'll take a shot at it though. I'll
probably be dusting off my old biology background.
As you well know, the giant Sequoias and the Redwood trees
are very closely related. The Redwoods survive, as you astutely
picked up, on the fog that comes in from the coast. That's why
you get the tall coastal Redwoods.
In the Sierras, I think you're absolutely right, at one
time the giant Sequoias covered a much greater range. But now
they are pretty much confined to one range of sort of a mid
slope that provides the perfect amount of moisture, winter,
coolness and summer heat that allows them to re-grow. They're
also fire dependent. They have very thick bark. Fire goes
through, they do fine. Their cones need to be burned in order
to reopen and fire has been suppressed in much of the Sierras.
We've brought fire back into the system in Sequoia King's
Canyon and Yosemite. As a consequence we're getting
reproduction there. But I think they're a pretty tough tree.
They've been around a long time. Can probably persist in other
areas.
I think that that's one of the decisions we're going to be
making is about where else trees like giant Sequoias can exist.
Senator Paul. One final thing on my Sequoias. Mine always
grew and stayed green at the top but was always was brown. The
needles turned brown. I would trim them as long as I could
reach them. It seemed to keep growing.
But I think it always had some kind of blight in the very
beginning that didn't seem like it was a stress from water or a
climate. But I'm not positive. I, you know, don't know. But I
really need to know this because I'm going to try again.
Mr. Jarvis. OK. We're here to help.
Senator Udall. I'm sure there are some of Senator Paul's
political opponents that would be happy to light his yard on
fire if it would help the Sequoia tree.
[Laughter.]
Senator Udall. Alright. Mr. Morris, why don't you continue
in describing how you use technology? That was a wonderful
example. But share some others with us.
Mr. Morris. Yes. This is actually very timely. We're just
about to pilot a partnership with National Geographic around a
type of eco-monitoring technology called Field Scope.
We're actually going to pilot this on the Elwah River in
Olympic National Park where this past weekend Director Jarvis
and a number of dignitaries were up there for the removal of
the Elwah Dams. Now these dams have been there for almost 100
years and have blocked, you know, salmon from going up and
sediment from going down and a number of other things. Now that
these dams are starting to be taken down we want to engage kids
in real science projects.
So this is information that the National Park Service is
interested in, that NOAA is interested in and that scientists
from universities from all over the world are interested in. We
happen to have schoolchildren at the, you know, at the base of
these dams, about 200 days a year. So we're going to start to
use technology to monitor the environment as it is restored
over time and be able to chart the progress that the river
makes in terms of the ecology coming back, the salmon coming
back, etcetera. Use this Field Scope technology that was
developed through National Geographic to put that up online and
then study it over time.
That will allow not only the kids to engage in post trip
research which is incredibly important to their learning
ability. We know that kids retain much greater amount of
information if they can do something with it in the weeks
following their visits to a National Park. So after they leave
Olympic if they're able to engage in this, in the data, in the
science research that's happening over time and then next year
look at how little brother and little sister found that river,
etcetera, etcetera.
So we hope to create kind of a longitudinal science study
where a kid may only be there for a week. But they can be part
of that science study throughout their formative years and
ideally lead them into, you know, careers that are around the
sciences and engage that next generation in some critical work.
Senator Udall. I assume that this project and program would
be using scientific monitoring technologies that would cover
everything from the return of certain biota, to the fish
themselves, to sediment levels, to any number of metrics tied
to the water, to the activity on the site. Is that? Elaborate a
little bit more if you'd like.
Mr. Morris. That's absolutely correct.
Senator Udall. Yes.
Mr. Morris. We take our cue from the Park Service. The
National Park Service creates the actual protocols and the
science experiments that they would like to have data on and
because we have children out there every day we're able to
collect it in a rapid way and an ongoing way that doesn't cost
the National Park Service any money. Through the use of
technology we can actually collect legitimate data. Sometimes
we're putting probes into streams and testing dissolved oxygen,
nitrates, those types of things.
Senator Udall. I assume you maybe would have miniature
cameras onsite as well and you could have a series of
photographs, today, next week, a year from now.
Mr. Morris. Exactly. Photographic evidence and videos. On
the human side of the equation we talk a lot about restoration
of plants and rivers and salmon. On the human side of the
equation, as Director Jarvis put in his report, we want to
engage kids on an ongoing basis in National Parks.
So if we use, you know, little video cameras and take
testimonials of kids down next to a river, a 12 year old next
to a river having a scientific experiment and put that up on
the web and other kids from across the country can see, you
know, someone who looks like them have a great opportunity and
a transformational experience in a National Park. We're hoping
that that will attract really the next generation to engage in
these magical places.
Senator Udall. That's very exciting to hear. That's the
kind of reality TV that I would like young people to engage
with. I won't mention other reality TV shows that are popular,
but is it going to be the National Park Service TV channel or
the NatureBridge channel or a coalition?
Mr. Morris. I will defer to one of these guys. That's a
terrific idea.
Senator Udall. That's intriguing. I know you've got many
more examples. We may have a chance to come back to some more.
Action item 29 deals with the $1 billion endowment campaign
and to help me better understand the proposal I'd like each of
you to talk about your understanding of how the endowment would
be funded and managed and a sense of how long it would take to
raise the one billion. I know, Mr. Mulholland, you spoke to
that. But I'll have everybody speak to that again if there's
any additional information.
Let me start with that question with Director Jarvis. Is
that clear enough?
Mr. Jarvis. Yes.
Senator Udall. Just talk about your vision of the
endowment.
Mr. Jarvis. There's several aspects to the development of
the long term endowment.
First, in terms of Congressional action we believe that the
interest that could be derived from our non-appropriated fee
accounts should be taken to go to, at least a portion of the
endowment.
As I indicated to Senator Paul, we collect around $250
million a year in non-appropriated dollars, fee dollars that
sits in the Treasury account. The interest does not come to us.
We feel that that would be a great start for the endowment at
whatever the standard Federal T-bill rate is what would be spun
off into beginnings of the endowment. That then could be
leveraged by our partner here in the National Park Foundation
to seek philanthropic matches to that to really begin the
corpus of the endowment.
Every fundraising effort in the National Park Service that
is taken on by a friends group, whether it's the Golden Gate
Conservancy or some friends of any National Park has to have an
agreement signed by either the regional director or the
director. It will be our intent in all future fundraising
agreements require at least some money go into an endowment.
That endowment can be managed by that friends group. We're not
suggesting that all money be aggregated under the National Park
Foundation.
The goal is that in adding up all of the various endowments
derived from the philanthropy that could be focused on Yosemite
or on Golden Gate or the parks of New York or in the Foundation
aggregate. We're not aggregating them but when you add them all
up the goal is the $1 billion. So we're approaching this from a
multiple directions that we're encouraging each of our friends
organizations out there as they raise money for parks that they
create an endowment for that park or for that program in which
they are raising money through----
Senator Udall. Director Jarvis could I stop you there.
Mr. Jarvis. Yes.
Senator Udall. So for example and Mr. Mulholland I want to
call you by your first names because I know you both so well.
But Mr. Mulholland may have to clarify for me. But I think it's
the Friends of Rocky Mountain National Park, when they solicit
their donor base the idea would be that depending on what the
campaign was, if it was a general operating or support for the
park, that a percentage of that would go into the endowment
which would be a part of their endowment which would be a part
of the larger endowment.
You would reach agreement with them that that makes sense
going forward.
Mr. Jarvis. Yes.
Senator Udall. That any long term organizations have an
endowment for a profit company. Of course has a balance sheet
on which they hold cash and assets that are a form of an
endowment, a non-profit or a government entity, unique like the
Park Service has every reason to have a similar kind of fund
like that.
Mr. Jarvis. Exactly.
Senator Udall. Is that how it would work?
Mr. Jarvis. Exactly, sir. I think we've been remiss in the
past in major fundraising efforts than even some that I've been
directly involved in like the USS Arizona where we didn't
require at least a portion of it to go into an endowment.
Senator Udall. Yes.
Mr. Jarvis. Where we would have a very strong capital
campaign and then no endowment.
Senator Udall. Yes.
Mr. Jarvis. The goal here is through these agreements we
would require at least some percentage to go in its endowment.
Again, not that we're going to take the money from the Friends
of Rocky Mountain and give it to the Foundation. We want them
to develop it. But we get to count that toward the
$1,000,000,000 goal.
Senator Udall. I interrupted you. I know you were moving to
a couple of other points perhaps you wanted to make on how this
would be structured or had you worked through your list?
Mr. Jarvis. The goal--as our primary legislatively created
partner, the National Park Foundation, this larger endowment
that we expect to build over time through the reinvestment and
match of the interest off of our non-appropriated funds we
would expect the National Park Foundation to be the principle
manager of that.
We would also want to prescribe how that endowment, any
spin off from that endowment would be used. It would not just
be going to general operations. We would also hope that the
U.S. Congress would not to look to offset our current
appropriations with any revenues or the endowment itself.
Senator Udall. All very important points well made and ones
that I find very compelling.
Mr. Mulholland, did you want to speak to the question as
well?
Mr. Mulholland. Yes, Mr. Chairman. First of all, public/
private partnerships work.
Senator Udall. Yes.
Mr. Mulholland. Most recently we've seen that with the
fundraising with the Flight 93 National Memorial, $60 million
campaign.
Senator Udall. Congratulations, everybody.
Mr. Mulholland. Thank you. Where, you know, the government
provided half of that and the private sector provided the other
half. We find that dynamic works very well.
When we look, as the Director said here, I'm creating an
endowment campaign for the National Parks. As he said it will
be a series of endowments. There are places like Rocky Mountain
National Park that have very sophisticated and well run Friends
groups that are very good fund raising organizations.
Senator Udall. Does every park unit have a Friends group?
Mr. Mulholland. No, over the 395 units of the National Park
there's approximately 175 units that have Friends groups and
today of that 175 we find that there's approximately 50 that
really contribute a significant amount of money back to the
park.
One of the things the Foundation is very focused on is not
only raising money nationally, but working with the existing
Friends groups, the aspirational Friends groups and those parks
that could support a Friends group in helping build that local
fundraising organization. As we move forward as we feel these
Friends groups, this private fundraising at the local park
level is going to be very important.
You know, and then as we take that into an endowment we
think a coordinated campaign is going to be very important.
There are individuals out there that have a very good
relationship with the overall spectrum of the National Parks.
They've had many good experiences and they might be more apt to
donate to the overall system. There are people that have or
feel solely focused on Rocky Mountain National Park or Yosemite
and that's where they want their focus to be and we want to
encourage that.
Then there's other parks that just, by their scope, nature
or location may not be able to support a Friends group because
of their remote nature. That doesn't mean they shouldn't
benefit from private philanthropy. So we want to work that, you
know, manage that as well. That's the role the Foundation could
play.
We see this as being a coordinated effort. We see the
billion dollars as a starting point, not an ending point. If we
do this properly--here we are in 2011, perhaps 60 years from
now people will be sitting there in this very room or 100 years
from now and there will be several billion dollars or tens of
billions of dollars in an endowment because of the actions that
we're taking today.
Senator Udall. Success breeds more success.
Mr. Mulholland. It's building blocks.
Senator Udall. Yes.
Mr. Mulholland. As you know the anticipation of this starts
with dollar one. It starts with the first dollar raised, then
the second dollar. We felt it was very important, as we talk,
that, you know, to have an initial goal. We feel a billion is a
sizable number. It's a reasonable number. It's an appropriate
number when you look at the magnitude of the National Parks.
So again, we look at that as a starting point to where we'd
like this endowment to go. But many of the things--what we see
the opportunity going forward is, we look at NatureBridge.
They're running programs year over year.
We want to do things that begin to create lifelong
relationships with the National Parks. We want to, you know, do
things that have continuity, you know, from age one through the
entirety of a person's life. We also want to do things that--in
all aspects whether it's programmatic or fundraising that
become repetitive and that the National Parks become core to an
individual's philanthropic giving.
Senator Udall. Did you speak to the units that don't have a
Friends group and potential effort to set up groups in those
areas? Would that be something that as you further develop this
plan that----
Mr. Mulholland. Yes.
Senator Udall. Given that that would take some time and
focus but that there will be utility I think as well.
Mr. Mulholland. One of the things we're doing, you know,
independent but you add it to the endowment is we are very
proactive investing Foundation funds into working with the
Friends groups to help them do what they do better. That then
to take those groups, who are very good at what they do and
bring them to the table and help them with the smaller
aspirational groups. You know the overall park community, the
Friends group community, those who are involved in philanthropy
work together as a group.
We work to help at a local park level and then to, you
know, help those parks that are aspiring to, you know, create
their own individual organization. But now we've got to be
realistic, not all National Parks or units of the National Park
are going to justify a Friends group. It takes people. It takes
committed people. It takes people with passion.
But it doesn't mean they'll be overlooked. That's the role
that the, you know, National Park Foundation plays on a
national level.
Senator Udall. Yes, and you never know over time when that
unit triggers a connection on the part of somebody who may live
at a far distance, but nonetheless decides to take that on as a
cause.
Mr. Mulholland. That's exactly----
Senator Udall. I'm sure there are examples of that already.
I know there are in Mesa Verde, for example. There are a number
of people in the Phoenix area that are huge supporters of Mesa
Verde National Park and what it represents and so on around the
country.
Mr. Mulholland. Kirk Buckholtz, who you know.
Senator Udall. I know well.
Mr. Mulholland. Rocky Mountain National Park votes, you
know, is very generous with his time across the system in
working with aspirational groups. We see that with the leaders
of the larger groups.
Senator Udall. Sounds like you're going to have to quit
your day job and take this on.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Mulholland. We're totally committed.
Senator Udall. Mr. Morris, do you want to comment on the
endowment plan from your perspective? I know you did in your
commentary. You had some great ideas.
Mr. Morris. Yes, sure.
Senator, I feel that the notion of all boats rising is the
right approach. Mr. Mulholland talked about how there are
donors that may want to give to a local park or may want to
give to the system as a whole. What that does is that
strengthens the backbone of the entire system.
NatureBridge has taken that same approach. We're doing that
with our colleague organizations in the non-profit sector to
try to build the field of education in the outdoors as a
legitimate field. It's hard because there's a number of non-
profits who are generally disparate. Efforts like this,
initiatives like this really bring people together around a
common vision. All boats can rise.
It's not about competition for a limited amount of dollars.
As you mentioned success breeds success. That's the attack
we're taking, you know, as a budding national organization and
aspiring to work with our colleagues across the country to make
these things happen.
Senator Udall. I think it's a very helpful conversation if
you all could stay just a little bit longer. I've got a few
more questions.
I wanted to come back to Mr. Mulholland and talk about the
goal of reaching 25 percent of all school aged children through
actual and virtual field trips. I understand that the
Foundation provides a very vital service or funding stream, I
should say, with transportation grants to get students to
parks. Sometimes those of us in position of leadership don't
think about it, actually getting people there. You don't do
that for free.
What other efforts have you undertaken to encourage young
people to get outside and into the National Parks?
Mr. Mulholland. You know the biggest--we'll start with
that, how's that?
What we see with today's youth, the dynamic is different.
You know, today's youth spends a lot more time indoors. You
know, studies have shown they spend 7\1/2\ hours of each day
tethered to an electronic device. We look today there is a
health and obesity issue with our children. They are lacking in
education as far as their American history and science.
When we look at National Parks that we look at these as,
you know, wonderful places, wonderful classrooms for play space
learning, experience based learning. Part of it is we've got to
introduce them to the parks. When we were young someone took us
to a park. That's how we developed our relationship with it.
You know, that dynamic has changed today. You asked about
technology earlier. You know, what Mr. Morris is doing here and
really the first point of introduction has to be through the
electronic medium in many cases is for those that don't have an
advocate, a parent, a guardian, somebody that's going to
introduce them to the park, is taking it to them electronically
and introduce them that way.
By way of example, what we're doing in partnership with the
Park Service on Saturday is Worldwide Day of Play with
Nickelodeon. Nickelodeon is going to go dark for 3 hours,
nationwide. They're the No. 1 children's channel in the United
States. They've been putting a message on their channel all
summer long, you know, promoting Worldwide Day of Play with the
messages, get active, get outdoors, go visit a National Park.
So they'll be emanating live from the Ellipse in
President's Park here on Saturday. There's huge power in that.
So, you know, going to your question.
Some of the things we're doing is reaching out to
organizations that already have the audience. In this case,
Nickelodeon has a large viewership of children. Other things we
do is work with organizations like NatureBridge, that, you
know, are working with children year in and year out that are
very good on the educational aspects of it.
We've talked about transportation. You know, the other
thing is is we have the parks and once we make this
introduction we have school buses, sit in school lots that they
don't have the money for the gas or the driver to take the
field trip. These are simple things.
As we're moving forward we're creating campaigns that are
sustainable that people in the private sector, you know, they
can grasp onto that or a transportation program to get kids
into the parks, 100,000 kids, it's a measureable goal, you
know. It's appropriate. So we have transportation funds.
We're looking at other educational initiatives to introduce
kids to parks. What we want to do is to begin to develop
lifelong learning. That these programs work throughout the
entirety, while they're in school starting with elementary
school, junior high and high school and into adulthood.
Senator Udall. For the record I want to clarify that I
misspoke earlier. I don't want you to quit your day job. I just
think you're going to take on a night job and a weekend job to
get all of this done.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Mulholland. I accept the challenge.
Senator Udall. Good.
Director Jarvis, let me turn to a topic you and I have
discussed at great length and it ties to action item 23 which
discusses the increasing use of renewable energy in the parks.
I fully agree with that goal particularly because it will lower
energy costs in the long term.
Talk a little bit about your plans in that regard,
particularly given the budget constraints that we face, and fit
in there too some discussion about energy efficiency, not just
renewable energy production, but energy efficiency which I know
is a part of the overall approach.
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate that
question. It's near and dear to my heart as well.
We just completed within the National Park Service our
Green Parks Plan. We set the goal, I think, it's by 2012 we
will have completed our assessment of all the carbon footprints
in terms of every park. In terms of looking at its overall
operation, everything from fleet to fuel to what type of energy
they're using, to lighting and really assessing how we can
significantly reduce our overall carbon footprint.
As you well know in some parks we have the opportunity to
perhaps install large solar arrays. Then in others we don't.
It's because of either its cultural landscape or the natural
resources would really prohibit that. So we're working on
agreements with utility companies.
Senator Udall. It would be PPAs or power purchasing
agreements, long term?
Mr. Jarvis. Yes, absolutely, Southern California Edison is
one that we're currently negotiating so that perhaps we can
participate as a partner in the development of solar arrays on
other public lands or on military bases that then we can get an
offset for our overall use within the parks. We've set the
standard for all new construction at a minimum of LEED Silver.
We're actually achieving LEED Platinum in a number of cases.
Lassen Volcanic National Parks', new visitor's center, the
Eielson Visitor's Center in Denali are both platinum facilities
as well.
We're also working with the historic preservation community
in establishing sort of a lead analog to historic preservation
because there's a great deal of embedded energy in our many,
many historic structures. But we also have to meet the
Secretary's Standards for Historic Preservation as we go
through that as well.
We're experimenting with biofuels. We are reducing overall
fleet to the appropriate size vehicles. We are looking to all
types of renewable materials, sustainably harvested, green type
products. Probably most important is that we're interpreting
all of that information. We're providing that to the American
public as a part of our overall interpretation and education
programs as well.
Mr. Jarvis. If I may I'd like to throw my hat in on the
technology side as well.
Senator Udall. Please do.
Mr. Jarvis. There's a huge opportunity in the National
Parks to provide students virtual experiences over the net. We
have enormous content on our side. We have great interpreters.
We have great places. The technology already exists for
interpreters to literally stand in the resource and talk to
students and take questions.
We can do that right now. We could actually do it
underwater at Channel Islands. We have live, in the kelp
forest, interpreters that can actually answer questions through
their mask from students in the classroom.
Senator Udall. That's phenomenal. I want to have a chance
to experience that myself.
Mr. Jarvis. We can set that up. In fact when we launched A
Call to Action and took questions from employees, one of the
questions came from underwater at Channel Islands on video.
When that kind of connection can be made, students can actually
participate directly like that.
We'll be able to use the support of the National Park
Foundation to get kids from school. We'll be able to connect
through NatureBridge for residential programs. Through those
kinds of programs right now we're reaching about 5 percent of
the public school kids, K through 12 now.
So it's a reasonable goal to go to 25 percent. But a lot of
that is going to be through virtual connections. We are
partnering with the Department of Education on a lot of this
work as well.
So being green for the National Park Service saves us
money. It reduces our impact on the night sky. It's a great
example of how a Federal agency can lead and sustainability.
Senator Udall. What's not to like about that list? Thank
you for your leadership.
You mentioned the Channel Islands. I will take a moment to
share a story, which I may have to further clarify for the
record with my cousin, Tom Udall. But I know that my Uncle
Stewart when he was Interior Secretary, I think it would have
been at, is it Buck Island in the Virgin Islands? Is the
national monument there? Uncle Stewart was called to dedicate
that first underwater trail that's there. But he didn't mention
to anybody that he'd never had a mask and snorkel and fins
explained to him. He was a desert kid.
Evidently when he went down actually to cut the ribbon, he
claimed that the Park Service half drowned him before he got
the job done. But I'm sure you've got staffing today equal to
all the challenges you face and the Secretary face. Stewart
loved to tell that story. Talk about the diverse nature of our
National Parks and our Park units. But he'd be very intrigued
by that were he with us today.
Let me end with a question to Director Jarvis and then to
Mr. Morris and then Mr. Mulholland, if you want to weigh in as
well. Action 2, Action Item Two, I should say, talks about
creating a pathway to employment with the Park Service starting
with educational experiences with a special focus on minority
youth. Would you all speak to whether you have the necessary
Federal hiring authorities to make this a reality. Then Mr.
Morris, if you'd elaborate more on the educational experiences
provided by groups like yours relate to future employment. I
think this is very, very crucial.
Before I let you answer I want to give a shout out to 2
National Parks in Colorado I visited or Park units I should
say. I don't want to get ahead of the good people of Western
Colorado. Colorado National Monument is helmed by Michele
Wheatley in an acting role right now. She has done wonderful
work reaching out to the local community and bringing the young
people from Mesa County and the surrounding counties into
Colorado National Monument for very powerful experiences.
In addition I was in the Great Sand Dunes in August.
There's a similar effort underway to reach out to those
communities in the San Luis Valley. Now, Director, I know you
know this, but I couldn't have been more proud of the staff
there and the work they're doing. All the extra time they were
putting in. They certainly weren't being paid by the hour.
But it was marvelous. It was inspiring. One of the
experiences that I had was a young ranger, who had come up
through the program, is now working for the Park Service,
attempted to show me how to atlatl which is an advanced form of
a spear that Native people used. It was a lot of fun and it was
very educational. I very much saw how you could draw young
people into that kind of physical challenge but in the process
of facing that challenge you learn a lot more about yourself,
about the people that live there, about the wildlife. Those
were 2 very meaningful experiences I've just had in this year
through my own interaction with the Park Service.
So, you've probably forgotten the question I asked you
because I started reminiscing here. But yes, please speak to
your vision and then we'll turn to Mr. Morris and his
recommendations.
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Chairman. Thanks for that shout out
to those 2 great Colorado parks. They are doing great work.
I think they're examples of the kind of work that's going
on around the country today to reach out to communities to
connect young people and create a lifelong connection to the
outdoors. The fantastic experiences like practicing with an
atlatl is one of those. We really believe, and I deeply believe
and I know these 2 gentlemen that are with me deeply believe
that an investment in young people is going to reap benefits
well into the future.
Your specific question about whether we have the right
authorities in place is a great question. We can connect these
kids and we can show them what an extraordinary opportunity
lies before them perhaps with a career in conservation. That
doesn't necessarily mean a career in the National Park Service.
There are Federal land management agencies. There are State
agencies. There are NGO's out there. There can be all kinds of
ways that they can pursue a career in conservation.
It is difficult though, to get into the National Park
Service. I sometimes say, we don't hire the best, we hire the
most persistent. Persistence generally pays off, but it is
challenging.
We are working with our human resources folks and OPM to
try to find better pathways for individuals that show an
interest and a willingness to pursue a career with us. We would
love to increase the diversity of our organization. We frankly
are not a very diverse organization. We're a product of history
and in many ways and do not reflect the face of America. That's
a concern for me.
I think it should be a concern for all of us. That's true
not only of the National Park Service but also of my 3 sister
land management agencies: the Forest Service, the Fish and
Wildlife Service and the BLM. We're all concerned about that.
We do need to find creative ways to connect these kids and to
lead them to potential careers with our organizations because
they are fantastic careers and very, very rewarding.
But any help that you might be able to provide us. We'd be
glad to meet with you at some future date to talk about those
challenges and see if we can't create a little easier path into
Federal service.
Senator Udall. Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Really 2 strategies come to mind that I'd like to touch on.
In terms of creating a continuum of experiences for children as
they grow through their years I had the privilege of growing up
in Colorado outside of Fort Collins. I was able to go up to
Rocky Mountain National Park as a kid and experience the
wonder.
A lot of kids these days don't have that opportunity. In
many cases for many of our programs kids have never been to a
National Park. They've never seen the Pacific Ocean. They've
never seen the dew dripping off of a leaf from a tree in
Yosemite.
So these experiences, while incredibly transformational by
themselves, are much more powerful if they're strung together
with multiple experiences. So at NatureBridge we have our core
field science program which is a week long, 3 to 5 days long in
the National Parks. We follow that up with additional
opportunities for kids to engage through their years as I
referenced in my testimony with Virginia Delgado, whether it's
a team mentorship program when they get into high school.
This past summer we created an educator training program in
Yosemite to draw in candidates for our field science educator
positions that may not have the hard skills but have the soft
skills to interact in the educational skills to interact with
kids. We were able to train them some of the hard skills. Then
we ended up hiring all of those people to work on our staff for
full time jobs. So that's one of the things we do in our
organization.
But to the points that we've made earlier is we all have to
work together to string together these opportunities. Research
does show that it takes 4 to 5 to 7 opportunities as you're
growing up to actually create, you know, a lifelong infinity
with the natural world and specifically with natural parks. So
NatureBridge, while transformational can't do that by
ourselves.
We have to hook up with our colleague organizations and
send kids from our program into the SCA programs into the other
residential programs. Maybe it starts with a virtual field
trip. That's what gets them excited or maybe that's what gets
their teacher excited.
Then their teacher says I want to go to the NatureBridge
program in the Santa Monica Mountains or in the Channel
Islands. So there, you know, there are opportunities out there,
but as I mentioned it's a disparate field. We have to do a much
better job of collaboration and bringing people to the table to
map out these experiences for kids and make them a legitimate
ladder of learning as kids work their way through their years.
Senator Udall. There's a true use for high definition TV it
seems like. Through the power of technology I think we could
add to those experiences or complement the real experiences
with those virtual experiences. But you are right.
Having worked for many years for the Outward Bound system,
we had many similar non-profits. Sometimes our missions were
aligned. Sometimes the missions were complementary. Sometimes
the missions were slightly different.
There was a healthy competition. But it's a very disperse
and decentralized world. The more of what you all are doing can
tie all of that together the better.
I think, Mr. Mulholland, you see that as a vision of
creating a confederation in the best sense of a confederation
of friends of National Parks and the type of organization
NatureBridge is. Then combined with increased--I shouldn't say
increased, the high level of professionalism that's always
existed in the Park Service. The increased knowledge that the
Park Service has of technology and the importance of making
this next 100 years equal to the first 100 years which is going
to be hard to top, isn't it, Director Jarvis? But it can be
equaled for sure.
I mean this is truly America's best idea. It's been a
pleasure to hear from the 3 of you today and the teams that
back you up and the proposing of all these great ideas. So I
really enjoyed the hearing. It's been very informative. I think
we could carry on for quite a bit longer.
I want to thank you all for your testimony. Besides Senator
Paul's question on Sequoias and I'm looking forward to the
answer myself, other members of the subcommittee may submit
additional questions in writing. If so, we may ask you all to
submit answers for the record. But I know you'd do that
eagerly.
We'll keep the record open for 2 weeks to receive any
additional comments. With that, thanks again. The subcommittee
is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:50p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Responses of Jonathan B. Jarvis to Questions From Senator Paul
maintenance backlog
Question 1. Can you please explain to me how the Park Service plans
to address the $10 billion maintenance backlog?
Answer. We will continue to address maintenance needs on several
fronts. Funding proposed for line-item construction will be targeted
primarily to addressing critical health and safety projects, especially
if the project involves the repair of a facility for which corrective
maintenance has been deferred. The National Park Service (NPS) will
also continue to use other sources of funding for similar projects,
including repair and rehabilitation funds, housing funds, and
recreational fee revenue. The NPS will use operational maintenance
funding, including cyclic maintenance, to help slow the deterioration
of assets awaiting rehabilitation and to maintain the improved
condition of repaired assets so that these projects do not become
deferred. We will continue to target funding toward strengthening
assets' critical systems (e.g. roofs, utility systems, foundations),
which are the highest priorities because an overall asset will become
further damaged and potentially non-functional if the critical system
is impaired. We will also continue to work toward disposing of more
low-priority assets that are contributing to the maintenance backlog.
Question 1a. I do understand that there are sensitive lands and
certain special circumstances for which land must be acquired despite
the maintenance backlog. Could you tell me why the NPS couldn't use
land exchanges to acquire sensitive lands rather than paying to acquire
these additional lands?
Answer. The NPS considers all possible avenues to address the most
urgent needs for recreation; species and habitat conservation; and the
preservation of landscapes, and historic and cultural resources. The
NPS has used land exchanges to acquire needed land in certain
situations. However, in many situations, land exchanges are not a
viable option, and therefore the NPS uses other means to acquire lands
from willing sellers.
Question 1b. Does the National Park Service estimate the
maintenance costs of new land acquisitions before making the decision
to purchase additional land? If so, how does this factor into the
decision-making process? Shouldn't the Federal Government wait until
the maintenance backlogs for all federal land management agencies are
paid down before new public land units are established?
Answer. Yes, the NPS estimates the costs of maintenance for new
lands before proposing to acquire the lands. Estimated maintenance
costs are one of the factors that are considered in the priority-
setting process for the Administration's annual budget requests. Most
of the land the NPS acquires for existing parks is undeveloped, so
there is relatively little contribution to the maintenance backlog from
these new acquisitions. We do not believe that designations of new
units of national parks or other public lands should be postponed
because there is a maintenance backlog within existing units of public
lands.
Question 1c. Generally, when a business or individual cannot afford
to maintain their assets they are forced to sell the unmanageable
assets. Can you please explain to me why the National Park Service
decides to purchase more assets when the NPS cannot take care of what
they already own?
Answer. The Administration's proposal to increase funding for NPS
land acquisition reflects the strong support for land conservation and
additional outdoor recreational opportunities that was voiced at the 51
America's Great Outdoors listening sessions held during the summer of
2010. The lands identified in the FY 2012 budget request are strategic
acquisitions that would strengthen our existing national parks while
adding little to operational costs. In fact most of these acquisitions
or easements would simplify management and reduce expenses related to
signage, fencing, law enforcement patrols, legal permits, rights-of-way
conflicts, fire fighting, road maintenance, habitat management and
restoration, and fighting invasive species, and they would protect
national parks in perpetuity.
Question 1d. How does the National Park Service's maintenance
backlog compare to other Federal Land management agencies?
Answer. The NPS's maintenance backlog is an estimated $10.8
billion. The two other Department of the Interior land management
agencies, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land
Management, have estimated maintenance backlogs of $2.9 billion and
$438 million, respectively. We note that the NPS has far more buildings
at its sites, which are used by far greater numbers of people, than do
the other two agencies.
raising revenues
Question 2a. Would the National Park Service consider selling land
or property that is no longer financially viable for the NPS to
continue to manage? For example, many of the National Parks in Alaska
receive fewer than 5,000 visitors per year. Would the NPS be better
served to raise revenues by selling those lands and transferring assets
to other Park Units?
Answer. There are a number of sites under the stewardship of the
NPS that protect and interpret critically important aspects of our
nation's natural and cultural heritage, but that receive relatively few
visitors. In many cases, low visitation is attributable largely to the
fact that they are in remote locations. The value of these places to
the American public, now and for the future, cannot and should not only
be measured by the number of people who visit them.
Lands managed by the NPS are nationally significant areas that have
been determined by past Congresses and a number of Presidents (through
the Antiquities Act) to be worthy of permanent protection for the
benefit of future generations. If the NPS determined it should no
longer manage certain park lands, it would require enactment of
legislation to sell those park lands.
Question 2b. Can you please provide a list of properties that the
NPS leases to outside entities? Shouldn't the NPS expand leasing
opportunities?
Answer. The National Park Service is gathering information for a
national database on all current leases with terms in excess of one
year. This database will enable us to track the number of types of
leases, types of structures subject to the leases, revenue generated,
and other information. We are in the final stages of gathering the
lease information and would be happy to provide the listing once it is
compiled.
Concurrently, we are developing tools to help park managers decide
how to care for our inventory of structures, including whether to use
leases. By law, leasing of properties in parks is permitted only where
the proposed use is consistent with park purposes and compatible with
park programs. However, we anticipate leasing will increase to some
degree over time as more park mangers become aware of the benefits of
leasing.
buffer zones/park service jurisdiction
Recently, there have been a number of situations where the National
Park Service endorsed proposals to increase NPS land or effectively
create buffer zones around existing National Park Service Units. It is
important to note that the Park Service only manages land within the
boundaries of the National Park Units, and is not provided with the
jurisdiction to manage lands outside of those Units.
Question 3a. What role should the National Park Service play in
creating and mandating policy for lands surrounding National Park
Units?
Question 3b. If the Park Service plays a role in overseeing
surrounding lands or resources, the NPS would have extremely far
reaching jurisdiction, wouldn't you agree?
Answer. The NPS does not create or mandate policy for lands
surrounding national park units. The agency does not have jurisdiction
over lands outside of park boundaries, and it does not play a role in
overseeing surrounding lands or resources, except in cases where we
have entered into a cooperative management agreement with a neighboring
entity. However, in order to address negative impacts on park resources
from activities outside of park boundaries, NPS managers try to work
with surrounding communities to find solutions. Working cooperatively
with partners beyond park boundaries is necessary as the NPS strives to
fulfill its statutory mandate to preserve the natural and cultural
resources of parks unimpaired for future generations.
Responses of Jonathan B. Jarvis to Questions From Senator Barrasso
The State of Wyoming and the Department of the Interior have
reached an agreement on the sale and purchase of a state land in-
holding section within the Grand Teton National Park. The agreement for
purchasing the state lands requires timely action. The Grand Teton
state land acquisition has been identified as a top priority by the
National Park Service.
Question 1a. Does the NPS remain committed to the agreement between
the State of Wyoming and the DOI?
Question 1b. What steps are being taken to fulfill the agreed upon
timeline and accompanying terms?
Answer. The NPS and Department of the Interior (D01) remain fully
committed to acquisition of the Wyoming inholdings within Grand Teton
National Park. A 40-acre subsurface mineral rights-only tract was
acquired earlier this year for $2,000. Three tracts totaling 1,366
acres remain to be acquired at a combined appraised value of $107
million. The NPS has set aside $5 million from FY 2011 funds, and the
President's budget request for FY 2012 includes $10 million for
acquiring the Snake River parcel by the January 5, 2013 deadline
established in the agreement. The NPS intends to seek additional funds
to complete this acquisition.
The NPS and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are also
determining if alternative methods to fund acquisition of the
additional inholdings may be available, such as royalties or bonus bids
from the sale of coal in Wyoming. A 2006 report to Congress prepared by
the BLM pursuant to the Grand Teton National Park Land Exchange Act
(P.L. 108-32) identified several options related to coal as potential
methods of completing the acquisition. Recent and anticipated future
sales of coal (through 2013) could potentially provide a source of
funds for acquisition of the remaining lands, but would likely require
additional authority from Congress.
Question 2. In the National Park Service's Call to Action report,
there are a number of stated goals I would like to have clarified. The
seventh goal is to create a new generation of citizen scientists.
a. In the NPS's view, who is a citizen scientist?
b. Would citizen scientists need to have the same academic
credentials as real scientists?
c. How will the NPS guarantee the educational materials used
to create a new generation of citizen scientists is peer
reviewed and science-based?
Answer. Citizen scientists are volunteers who receive training from
the bureau to enable them to collect accurate field data and may range
from school children to professional scientists. These highly
productive volunteer efforts foster a sense of stewardship between
people and parks. Citizen scientists working on NPS Biodiscovery events
are generally supervised by an agency or professional scientist to
ensure safety and credible and useful data collection, and to he
educated about the resources of the park. Citizen scientist activities
are designed and overseen by agency personnel with expertise in various
fields of science. Related education materials may be peer reviewed by
the professional community, depending on the intended use of the
citizen-generated information.
Question 3. The eleventh goal includes creating a new competitive
state grant program within the Land and Water Conservation Fund State
Assistance Program for strategically selecting projects that support
large landscape conservation.
a. Will the selected project for large landscape conservation
be restricted to lands currently within the National Park
system boundaries?
b. If yes, what types of projects are envisioned with the
State Assistance Program?
c. If no, what type of projects are envisioned with the State
Assistance Program, and what types of lands will be considered
for large landscape conservation.
Answer. The state grant program helps state and local governments
preserve open space and provide outdoor recreational opportunities. It
is not used for purchasing land within national park boundaries.
The competitive component first proposed in the FY 2012 budget
request would address the public's concern about the lack of open space
and outdoor recreational areas in certain urban and other areas, which
was frequently conveyed during listening sessions for the America's
Great Outdoors initiative. It would fund ``signature projects'' that
create more outdoor recreational opportunities and conserve open space
where access to natural areas has been inhibited or is unavailable;
protect, restore, and connect open space and natural landscapes; and
provide access to waterways. The projects would be expected to be
larger in scale and would likely require and receive greater amounts of
funding than has typically been awarded.
Question 4. The twelfth goal includes the protection and
restoration of waterways across the country by establishing national
system water trails.
a. Is this goal different from the Wild and Scenic River
designation?
b. Water is obviously very fluid and crosses many ownership
boundaries. How will the NPS advance this goal as water ways
leave or come into NPS lands?
c. What criteria will be used for protection purposes?
d. What water trails need to be restored?
e. How does the NPS envision managing a national water
system?
f. What would the costs be for the NPS to manage a national
water system?
g. Will a national water system or water trails affect, in
any way, previously agreed upon water compacts between States,
localities, and tribes?
Answer. The goal for a national system of water trails is different
from Wild and Scenic River designation. Congress designates rivers as
part of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System in order to preserve them in
a free-flowing condition for the enjoyment of present and future
generations. The system of water trails, as currently envisioned, is
intended to support community-based efforts to expand access to water-
based recreation.
The national water trails system will use the authority of the
National Trails System Act, which provides for National Recreation
Trails to be designated administratively, for the designation of
national water trails. National Recreation Trails are designated in
response to applications from trail managers. Local trail managers
continue to manage their trails. The management of water trails would
not be related to the management of lands and waters within parks.
The NPS helps to manage the designation process for National
Recreation Trails. The process of application review and subsequent
designation has been estimated at $2,000 per application. This cost is
covered within existing NPS program's and budget. There are no expected
long term-costs to the NPS to manage a national water trail system.
Partnerships are a key component to water trails. Landowner support
will be necessary to receive designation. Community water trail users
and local trail managers will identify restoration and water
improvement goals appropriate to sustain water-based recreation.
National Recreation Trail applications require trails on State,
local government, or private lands to have a statement of support from
the State Trails Administrator. All concerns related to compacts
between States, localities, and tribes would be addressed before
designation and continue to be the responsibility of local and state
officials.
Question 5. The report states the NPS will manage the natural and
cultural resources of the NPS to increase resilience in the face of
climate change and other stressors.
a. What are the other stressors?
b. Can the National Park Service predict with accuracy what
the weather will be, and what the subsequent impact on the
landscape will be, in Yellowstone or any other park unit 5, 10,
50 years from now?
c. Can computer models predict with accuracy what the weather
will be, and the subsequent impact on the landscape, in
Yellowstone or any other park unit 5, 10, 50 years from now?
Answer. Climate change is not the only stress affecting resources.
Other stresses like habitat loss, invasive species, and pollution
complicate species' and ecosystems' abilities to be resilient in the
face of change. The NPS and its partners are analyzing historical
impacts of climate change and future vulnerability of species and
landscapes. Vulnerability comes from analysis of historical climate and
impacts data, climate projections, and peer-reviewed published
information on the sensitivity and adaptive capacity of plants,
animals, and other resources.
Because weather is the temperature, rainfall, and wind on a
particular day, computer models cannot accurately predict the weather 5
to 50 years from now. On the other hand, models can project future
climate, which is the average range of temperature, rainfall, and wind
over an extended period of time. The NPS and its partners are using
peer-reviewed published climate projections of climate 20 to 100 years
from now. These projections indicate what the climate may be under
different plausible scenarios of global trends in energy use,
population, economic activity, and technology development. So, computer
models can provide projections of future climate from which the NPS can
analyze potential future impacts of climate change on landscapes, and
take appropriate measures to make ecosystems more resilient to these
impacts.
Question 6. The twenty first goal calls for the creation of a new
basis for NPS resource management to inform policy, planning, and
management decisions and establish the NPS as a leader in addressing
the impacts of climate change on protected areas around the world.
a. Is the current basis for NPS resource management failing?
b. If yes, what are the shortcomings of the existing basis?
c. If no, why is a new basis needed?
d. Why does the NPS need to assume the role of a leader in
climate change?
Answer a). No. However NPS approaches to resource management must
respond to changing environmental conditions and new scientific
knowledge. In order to increase resilience and management effectiveness
in the face of emerging issues we believe now is the time to prepare a
contemporary version of the 1963 Leopold Report to advise the NPS on
focusing future resource management activities and resources. The
Leopold Report was written as an advisory document to the NPS Director
and Secretary of Interior by a committee of independent scientists, led
by A. Starker Leopold. It proposed a science-based foundation to
natural resource management in the NPS. Over the following decades,
many of the principles in this report were adopted by the NPS
professionals, used to train resource managers, and used to develop and
improve NPS policies. An updated report, expanded to include both
natural and cultural resource management will be useful in providing
contemporary advice to NPS decision-makers.
Answer c). Many elements of contemporary resource management are
robust. However, emerging challenges include climate change, habitat
fragmentation, biodiversity loss, and degradation of cultural
resources. New scientific knowledge including datasets collected via
remote sensing, increased modeling and computing power, new techniques
for wildlife monitoring, and substantial new research findings, inform
NPS resource management. This new knowledge must be integrated into NPS
resource management policies, if those policies are to remain
effective.
Answer d). The National Park Service is responsible for preserving
the Nation's natural and cultural heritage, a stewardship that now
includes protection of more than 84 million acres and reaches over 300
million visitors each year. Meeting that trust responsibility requires
a robust scientific understanding of current conditions as well as
future trends, and climate change affects both. Leadership is necessary
to increase scientific understanding of climate change, analyze
potential impacts, and effectively apply that information to resource
management decisions. The NPS demonstrates leadership by working
collaboratively through the Department of the Interior Climate Science
Centers and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, as well as with other
partnerships, including with state and Federal agencies, that promote
science-based decision making.
Question 7. The twenty second goal is to promote large landscape
conservation by protecting continuous corridors through partnerships
across public and private lands.
a. How does the NPS define what is and what is not a
continuous corridor?
Answer. Our working definition identifies a ``continuous corridor''
as that which functionally links two or more areas that support viable
ecosystems, natural habitats, wildlife populations, or cultural
resources. By functional, the NPS means that with minimal management
these corridors can allow the movement of species, continuation of
ecosystem services, and maintenance of cultural resource integrity that
are necessary to link and maintain the viability of the areas that the
corridors connect. This working definition is similar to The Western
Governors' Association Wildlife Council draft definition (August 2011),
which defines important wildlife corridors as crucial habitats that
provide connectivity over different time scales (including seasonal or
longer) among areas used by animal and plant species. Wildlife
corridors can exist within unfragmented landscapes or join naturally or
artificially fragmented habitats, and serve to maintain or increase
essential genetic and demographic connection of aquatic and/or
terrestrial populations.
b. What other federal land agencies will be public partners
in creating continuous corridors?
Answer. Protection of wildlife and cultural corridors requires the
collaboration of federal agencies that manage or support protected
lands including, but not limited to, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, Department of Defense, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Tennessee
Valley Authority, and National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration.
c. Will state lands be considered for the continuous
corridors?
Answer. Yes, states will be key partners in the conservation of
continuous corridors as landowners and as law-and policymakers that
affect land use.
d. Does the NPS believe the creation of continuous corridors
is in the public good and eminent domain powers could be used
to obtain strategic private lands to make a corridor
continuous?
Answer. The NPS believes that continuous corridors will result in a
public good through the conservation and restoration of intact natural
ecosystems and the preservation of cultural resources. As stated in
Action #22, NPS will achieve this goal through voluntary partnerships
across public and private lands. The NPS will work with willing sellers
to acquire land within park boundaries and will seek to create
partnerships with federal, tribal, state, and local governmental
entities, non-governmental organizations, and private landowners to
create continuous corridors. This approach is consistent with
recommendations in Rethinking the National Parks.* the 21st Century
(National Park System Advisory Board, 2001) which states: ``Parks
cannot survive as islands of biodiversity. They need to be linked with
other natural areas through wildlife migratory corridors and greenways.
These connections can only be created through partnerships.'' Other
land protection tools, such as conservation easements, will be
important parts of a strategy in conserving corridors as land ownership
when implementing landscape-scale conservation efforts.
e. What are the boundaries of the five geographic regions
mentioned in goal twenty two?
Answer. The five geographic regions referenced in Action #22 have
not been determined. The NPS is currently evaluating a number of areas
where continuous corridors could be identified, restored if necessary,
and conserved. The NPS is committed to involving landowners, other
stakeholders, and the general public in the selection of the regions.
f. Will the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund be
targeted to make strategic land acquisitions for corridors
outside of national parks?
Answer. The NPS has no authority to acquire lands outside the
boundaries of units of the National Park System except for
congressionally authorized trails in the National Trails System and
rivers designated in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
Question 8. The twenty sixth goal is to return the American Bison
to the landscape.
a. Where will the three wild bison populations be located
across the central and western United States?
b. Will the NPS, tribes, private landowners, or other land
management agencies manage the bison?
c. What is the target number for each of the three bison
herds?
d. How many total acres will be required to sustain the
desired population levels?
e. Will the NPS provide the funding for managing the bison
herds?
f. Outside of Yellowstone National Park, what current NPS
lands are candidates for bison population?
Answer. Specific locations and a target number are undetermined at
this time. The NPS is working closely with state, federal, and private
partners to discuss opportunities for bison conservation. Depending
upon location, bison could be managed by tribes, the Intertribal Bison
Committee, federal, or private partners. Bison are currently managed at
Badlands National Park, Wind Cave National Park, Theodore Roosevelt
National Park, Chickasaw National Recreation Area, Tallgrass Prairie
National Preserve, Grand Teton National Park, and Yellowstone National
Park. The NPS would only fund wildlife management on NPS lands.
The DOI Bison Conservation Initiative, signed by former Secretary
of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne on October 28, 2008, called for federal
agencies to coordinate management of existing bison herds on federal
lands, research bison genetics and disease, and study partnerships to
increase existing herds or establish new ones to assist in the
ecological recovery of the species. The NPS will continue to implement
bison conservation strategies based upon rigorous scientific goals and
objectives outlined in the 2008 Initiative in order to ensure the
perpetuation of this iconic species.
Question 9. The twenty seventh goal is to protect natural darkness
as a precious resource.
a. What basis is there for natural darkness to be managed as
a precious resource?
Answer. National Park Service 2006 Management Policies identifies
Natural Darkness as both a natural resource and a park value.
References to the value of starry night skies in a park setting are
also found in NPS policy statements dating back to at least 1997.
We note that protection of natural darkness is a growing park
visitor interest. This is evidenced by ranger program statistics that
shows sharply increasing participation in park stargazing programs,
visitor surveys conducted by academic institutions, and a high number
of popular media articles on the subject. Furthermore, the NPS has
conducted measurements of night sky quality at numerous parks, showing
that few NPS units still retain natural or near-natural night skies and
a large fraction of them experience degradation of night sky quality
due to poor quality outdoor lighting. The NPS is building on the
successes of local initiatives (private sector, academia, and local
government), which are grounded in opportunities for increased tourism
and other forms of economic growth.
b. What light sources are incompatible within a Dark Sky
Cooperative for natural darkness? For example, would a campfire
be incompatible? Would a flashlight be incompatible? Would a
highway with vehicles traveling at night be incompatible? Would
the lights from power plant be incompatible? What about house
lights from in-holder properties? What types of future light
sources would be precluded from use within a Dark Sky
Cooperative?
Answer. Best management practices for outdoor lighting recommend
using light only when it is needed (e.g. turning off when not needed,
using timers or motion sensors), shielding the light so that all light
shines downward, and using the right amount of light for the
application. This guidance does not preclude the use of light for human
safety, utility, and convenience. Many lighting manufacturers offer
``dark sky friendly'' outdoor lighting fixtures. Using such lighting
results in a substantial improvement in night sky quality while also
being energy efficient, reducing glare, and improving visibility.
Portable lights, headlights, and campfires cause far less impact to the
environment than permanent fixed lighting and generally are not
addressed within the context of lighting guidance for natural resource
conservation. Lighting from private residences, municipalities, and
industrial sites can impact night sky quality. Night sky friendly
solutions for those applications have been successfully implemented in
many locations and on many different levels, ranging from city and
county ordinances to purely voluntary measures.
We do not anticipate that any future sources would be precluded
from use within the Dark Sky Cooperative. On the contrary, most new
forms of lighting, including emerging Light Emitting Diode (LED)
lighting technology, can actually further the effectiveness of night
sky conservation. LEDs are more easily directed, can be more easily
controlled with smart circuitry, can shift colors and dim readily, and
can be more finely tuned to the human necessity.
c. What is the minimal number of square miles needed to
create a Dark Sky Cooperative?
Answer. The minimum size to protect natural darkness will depend on
the objectives set forth by those wishing to participate including
public land managers, local communities, chambers of commerce, state
tourism offices and the citizens of the area. The NPS expects the Dark
Sky Cooperative on the Colorado Plateau to unfold through voluntary
participation. There is not likely to be a contiguous boundary, but
instead a patchwork of supporters and participants across the
landscape. The larger the area, the more effective the measures will be
toward conserving the dark night sky. Success from an NPS perspective
would mean that the entire Colorado Plateau would see economic value
and growth through tourism, improvement to its natural resource
condition, and the preservation of its cultural heritage through
participation in a Dark Sky Cooperative.
Question 10. One of the major goals in the Call to Action is
connecting people to parks. National Parks in Wyoming attract nearly
6.3 million visitors every year. Many of these visitors come by
motorcycle and they help support local economies. Motorcyclists seek
out the sights, scenery, camping, recreation opportunities, and roads
suited to motorcycle touring that National Parks, like Yellowstone and
the Grand Teton offer in Wyoming and that other Parks offer across the
country.
a. What are your impressions of the economic impact that
motorcyclists have on areas surrounding many of our National
Parks?
b. What are you doing to encourage even more motorcyclists to
discover our National Parks?
Answer. Although many visitors travel by motorcycle to national
park units, the NPS does not calculate economic impacts specifically
for motorcyclists. The NPS National Tourism Strategic Plan encourages
parks to work with tourism partners in our gateway communities to
invite all Americans--and our foreign guests--to experience their
national treasures. In some cases, these tourism partners identify
package tour providers who accommodate a particular market interest
based on travel themes and transportation modes--motorcycles and
bicycles for example. A result of this is a growing trend among foreign
travelers to purchase tour packages that feature motorcycles as their
mode of travel to national parks. Wherever appropriate, park managers
work with their partners to educate these visitors on means of
enjoyment and safe routes and practices.
______
October 6, 2011.
Hon. Mark Udall,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, U.S. Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Udall:
The National Park Foundation and I greatly appreciated your
invitation to testify before the Subcommittee on National Parks at the
September 21, 2011 hearing to review the National Park Service report,
A Call To Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and
Engagement. As I stated in my testimony, the Foundation is eager to
assist the Park Service in finding creative and innovative ways to meet
the goals outlined in A Call To Action, including its call for an
endowment, and to strengthen the important role of philanthropy and
partnership in the next century for parks.
Senator Paul has asked me to estimate the amount of private funds
that the Foundation provides to the Park Service each year. I am proud
to share that the Foundation provided $22 million in grants, program
support and contributed goods and service to the National Park Service
in FY2010. In the previous five years (FY2006-FY2010) the Foundation
has provided $95 million in grants and program support and more than
$28 million in contributed goods and services to the NPS, a total
contribution of over $123 million and an average of $25 million
annually. I should also note that, unlike other Congressionally
chartered nonprofits established to support land management agencies,
the Foundation receives no federal appropriations and raises every
dollar it contributes to our parks.
I want to extend my sincere thanks to you and to Senator Paul for
your keen interest and questions at the September 21, 2011 hearing, and
for your ongoing support of the Park Service. Of course, I would be
delighted to provide additional information and respond to any further
questions you might have.
Sincerely,
Neil Mulholland.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Statement of Derrick A. Crandall, Counselor, National Park
Hospitality Association
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Derrick
Crandall and I am delighted to submit the following statement as a
representative of the National Park Hospitality Association (NPHA).
NPHA is honored to contribute to the discussion of the future of the
National Park System and, in particular, to provide the Subcommittee
with our comments on the recently released report entitled A Call to
Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement.
Concessioners are proud of the important role they play in helping
people enjoy parks. Visitors come to the national parks to be inspired
by the beauty of the parks while relaxing, recreating, learning, and
having a good time with family and friends. What we do as concessioners
has a great deal to do with the overall experience when they visit the
park. We are an integral part of the national park experience and an
important element in helping the NPS meet its mission. We are working
hard at demonstrating best practices in environmental management, and
are ISO-certified in many parks. We are active in offering healthy,
sustainable foods to park visitors. We are true partners with the
National Park Service.
Concessioners have served park visitors since the 1870's and today
serve some 100 million park visitors annually in approximately 160 park
units, providing food and lodging, transportation and retail services,
outfitter and guide services and more. NPHA members have a combined
workforce of nearly 25,000 persons--mostly front-line, visitor-contact
jobs--and provide in excess of $1 billion in goods and services to
visitors annually. Franchise fee payments to NPS generated from the
approximately 600 concessions contracts are now approaching $100
million annually, or about the combined sum raised annually by the
National Park Foundation and members of the Friends Alliance.
And concessioners do far more than generate franchise fees. Our
Guest Donation programs operate in partnership with local friends
organizations and the National Park Foundation (NPF). NPF-associated
programs alone, in 13 parks, have generated almost $2 million for
deserving park projects since 2006, including more than $500,000 in the
year ending June 30, 2011. Concessioner marketing and park promotion
efforts exceed $10 million annually, and are coordinated with the
marketing and promotion efforts of states and gateway communities that
equal that amount. In addition, concessioners have made significant
financial investment in the visitor infrastructure of many park units.
Concessioners are now actively involved in efforts to promote the
National Park System and to reach those Americans unaware of the great
benefits available through time in our parks rather than focusing our
efforts on specific parks and services and traditional park visitors.
Most importantly, concessioners are committed to meeting America's
needs--needs for healthier lifestyles, for better and lifelong
educational opportunities, for strong local and regional economies that
can sustain and protect our parks, and for connecting all Americans to
our parks across differences in regions, ages, income and ethnicity.
comments on a call to action
NPHA commends the efforts of the National Park Service in producing
A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and
Engagement. We applaud the report's overriding philosophical goals:
creativity, flexibility and partnerships. We believe the National Park
Service's commitment to these goals will support excellence in visitor
experience long into the future. The report is timely and deals with
important issues facing national parks today. A Call to Action focuses
on encouraging people to explore our parks and also recognizes an
increased role for parks in helping people to lead healthy and happy
lives.
Concessioners have expressed--and acted on--their commitment to
support parks in many ways. NPHA believes that the key to a healthier
America lies in encouraging people to have fun in the great outdoors--
and that increased physical activity, leading to better overall health,
will be a natural result of such encouragement. This value is
exemplified in Action Step #6 of A Call to Action: Take a Hike, Call Me
in the Morning. We have worked with the Institute at the Golden Gate on
several break-through meetings and the report Park Prescriptions:
Profiles and Resources for Good Health from the Great Outdoors, which
is attached.* We played a central role in bringing the health agenda to
the America's Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative, including uniting dozens
of recreation and health organizations for the special AGO listening
session on Health and the Great Outdoors in August 2010.
We also applaud Action Step #8, Eat Well and Prosper, which
highlights the role of national park concessioners in offering park
visitors healthy food choices. Our members already offer healthy food
to most park visitors, as well as information on continued healthy
eating at home. And we plan on increasing these efforts. But it takes
partnership and cooperation. Not all parks have easy access to locally
grown foods for the full period of operation, and National Park Service
approval of menus and pricing can be a barrier to these goals.
Concessioners seek to not only offer healthy, reasonably priced and
sustainably produced foods, but also to make our food operations
reflect environmental best practices. Our members have achieved
remarkable reductions in waste generation and energy and water use, and
have even worked with local food suppliers to ``return-ship''
compostable wastes to be used in producing more food. Some of these
efforts are showcased in another Institute at the Golden Gate report,
Food for the Parks: Case Studies of Sustainable Food in America's Most
Treasured Places, which is also attached.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Reports have been retained in subcommittee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Call to Action shows a very strong commitment to reaching
America's youth, helping our next generation abandon its increasingly
sedentary lifestyle and enjoy and sustain our nation's parks--a
sentiment NPHA supports completely. We are proud that concessioners
have long supported--and support today--outreach programs like
NatureBridge and school trips to parks. These actions and more will
become part of the broader effort to prepare the National Park Service
for another 100 years of serving and aiding the American public.
supporting and building on a call to action
The National Park Service can serve the nation well over the next
100 years, especially through actions and programs in partnership with
other government agencies, businesses serving visitors in and near park
units, national and local friends organizations, conservation
organizations and others. To unite and empower these park partners, the
National Parks Conservation Association, National Park Foundation and
NPHA will organize a first-ever America's Summit on National Parks in
January 2012. The Summit will draw leaders from across the nation to
Washington to meet with Members of Congress and National Park Service
officials, with medical and education community leaders and more. The
Summit will acknowledge the energies invested over several decades in
crafting visions for America's national parks and the National Park
Service, review A Call to Action and then unite park partners around
supplemental actions designed to make national parks relevant and
valued to all Americans.
As longtime partners of the agency in protecting park resources and
serving visitors, NPHA believes there are additional courses of action
required to fully prepare the National Park Service to welcome a new
century. We are delighted to pledge support to NPS efforts on the 36
identified action steps as well as outline important additional actions
that will build upon A Call to Action. In this light we offer the
committee several ideas and suggestions.
First, national parks have long been a major focus for family
activity. Yet the word ``family'' does not appear in A Call to Action
at any point in the report. We plan to continue to focus on helping
American families plan and enjoy multi-generational park experiences
for the next 100 years.
Second, we plan to continue another long tradition of involvement
in helping Americans--and international visitors--reach national parks.
Many of the early concessions operations in parks involved partnerships
with railroads. We continue to work with transportation companies and
public transportation agencies in the 21st century to help visitors
access our parks, and believe that there are exciting opportunities
ahead.
And third, we strongly encourage actions to reach active younger
American servicemen and servicewomen, their families and recently
discharged military members. Their service can and should be rewarded
with special invitations to enjoy America's national parks. Moreover,
the age and diversity of America's military community make them
especially important to efforts to share the benefits of parks with all
Americans.
npha offered suggestions to nps plan development
NPHA offered the National Park Service several specific suggestions
for inclusion in the A Call to Action plan. Our suggestions were not
included, but we believe these ideas deserve attention as you consider
actions regarding national parks and other National Park Service
activities. These steps would increase visitor satisfaction, better
connect guests to parks and increase and streamline fee collection
efforts--actions that we estimate would achieve a sustainable annual
gain of at least $110 million in revenue and savings. The key steps
include:
Campground Improvements: The National Park Service needs to take
action to reverse the decline in use of its campgrounds while also
reducing operation and management costs. The National Park Service
should take advantage of its partners in the private sector by calling
upon concessioners to develop and implement new operational strategies.
By modernizing, better marketing and better maintaining campground
operations, the National Park Service can increase visitor satisfaction
and campsite occupancy, save millions in operating costs and redeploy
staff to still provide the interpretive and other services so valued by
park campers.
Incentivize Concessioners: Concessioners are proud of their efforts
to meet visitor needs and protect park resources. Many exceed
performance required under concessions contracts. Yet current
evaluations do not provide for any rating above ``satisfactory.'' We
propose that concessioner evaluation include an opportunity to earn
``outstanding'' and/or ``superior'' ratings and become eligible for
contract extensions. Extending contract period for valuable partners
will also substantially reduce NPS costs for prospectus development and
offer evaluation.
Increase Franchise Fees: NPS now collects nearly $100 million
annually in franchise fee payments by concessioners. This income
stream--used for vital maintenance and other priority purposes--can
grow substantially if concessioner services are expanded appropriately.
A national strategic business plan could define added services and help
concessioner revenues increase by as much as 50% within four years.
Cooperative Research: NPS and concessioners each fund research on
visitor experiences and on attracting non-traditional visitors to
parks. These efforts should be unified, with the results guiding
cooperative actions.
Promotion of Non-Peak Periods: Cooperative efforts should be
launched to expand non-peak visitation. Part of the promotion can
involve activities showcasing American Indian artists and other
educational/cultural events. Increases in total park visitation of five
million will result in entrance fee and franchise fee increases with
little additional operational costs.
Expanding Annual Pass Sales: Sales of the America the Beautiful
Pass could be increased from the current level of 260,000 passes
annually to at least 500,000 annually if sales were promoted by
concessioners at the time lodging and other reservations are taken.
Holders of annual passes are more likely to plan visits to other park
units--including lesser visited sites. Purchased passes could either be
mailed to visitors or held for pick up--much like will-call tickets are
at theaters.
Expand the Guest Donation Program: The current Guest Donation
Program generates more than $500,000 annually for park programs and
projects in about a dozen units, mostly under agreements done in
cooperation with the National Park Foundation. The program is burdened
by red tape and poor communication to guests and concessioners about
the uses of contributed funds. The program can be re-energized and
expanded greatly to all park lodging operations, to non-lodging
services and to gateway communities. In addition, guests making a
donation during their visit to a park could be invited to learn how
they could make more significant contributions to either a specific
park unit or the entire system. Participating concessioners would then
arrange contact between interested guests and either the National Park
Foundation or a local friends group.
needed: a better visitor services initiative
Above and beyond A Call to Action, there is a critical need to
respond to changing needs and expectations by park visitors. We are
concerned that park visitation has declined by some 5% since the late
1980's--despite an increase in the U.S. population of nearly 30%. The
decline in hours spent in parks since the 1980's is even more
dramatic--meaning visitors are spending, on average, fewer hours during
each experience. Overnight stays in NPS campgrounds are also down--some
17%--when overall U.S. campground use is up, and when ownership of RVs
has reached a new high of one in every 12 U.S. households.
To address these concerns, NPHA members have developed a plan to
improve park visitor experience. Our plan is called the Better Visitor
Services Initiative and is attached. It has five elements:
Improve Visitor Infrastructure to Attract More Visitors.--
Park visitor infrastructure must support relevant experiences
for 21st century Americans, and must support an increase of
visitation parallel to the overall growth of the U.S.
population.
Revitalize NPS Campgrounds.--As mentioned earlier, NPS
campgrounds are significantly underutilized, and use has
declined markedly. Campgrounds need modernization and new
options, including simple shelters like cabins, tents and
tepees/chickees available for rent.
Encourage Concessioner Investment in the Parks.--Nearly all
concessions contracts under the 1998 National Park Service
Concessions Management Improvement Act have been for 10 years,
despite authority for longer contracts. NPS should reduce the
deferred maintenance backlog and reduce the need for taxpayer-
funded capital investments by encouraging concessioner
investments through longer contract terms.
Rethink Park Fees.--Entrance and other fees by the NPS
should be studied carefully to develop a fee program that
yields revenues to aid park operations and better supports
overall the park mission.
Initiate Outreach Efforts to Boost Visitation.--Park
experiences deliver great benefits--including better mental and
physical health, education about our nation's history and the
environment, regional economic benefits and more. Yet a large
portion of the public is unaware of national parks--especially
young people and the urban, economically disadvantaged, and
minority components of our population.
summary
Mr. Chairman and Members, we commend the National Park Service on a
job well done in its plan entitled A Call to Action: Preparing for a
Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement. The plan recognizes the
need for parks to encourage Americans to get back in touch with nature,
engage in physical activity and outdoor recreation, and connect to the
magnificent culture, heritage and landscapes that are showcased in our
National Park System. It recognizes the need to reach out to youth to
encourage them to share in the wonder and enjoyment of our national
parks and discourage the increasingly sedentary lifestyles that are
contributing to our healthcare crisis. It also recognizes the need to
expand park visitation to encourage minorities, disadvantaged
communities, new Americans and urban residents to see their national
parks for themselves and to build a broader constituency for America's
great outdoors.
The National Park Hospitality Association and the national park
concessioners want to help continue the contributions of the National
Park Service to our national well-being. The upcoming 100th anniversary
of the agency's creation offers a wonderful opportunity to find new and
innovative ways to improve the parks and create a new generation of
Americans who share in the wonder of this amazing legacy. We thank you
for considering our thoughts and recommendations. We would be delighted
to provide additional information and respond to any questions you
might have.
______
Statement of Jeff Chapman, Public Lands Committee Chair, Back Country
Horsemen of Washington
Representing Back Country Horsemen of Washington, I'd like to state
that I'm very disappointed with this report. I was a very active
participant in the Americas Great Outdoors effort from the beginning
and believed it held great promise for showcasing the various issues
that related to our federal public lands. While it seemed to have a
very limited agenda at first, recreation users from across the nation
became involved. There is indeed much disagreement among public land
users, but together we are the collective drama that is America. That
is what National Parks were supposed to be about, showcasing the
thoughtfulness and efforts of a growing Nation. The main group I am
part of, pack and saddle stock users, represent the continued legacy of
the working human and animal effort that built America and managed our
public lands as well as our National Parks. Aldo Leopold was an avid
horse rider. What led to treasured Wilderness areas throughout America
was the vision of horsemen and hikers, each of which I am an NGO
Director for.
The NPS A Call to Action has none of this in it. None of the goals
cover recreational trails or maintenance or even Wilderness. It doesn't
recognize the importance of stock use or even hiking for that matter.
It strips the AGO effort of all the rural, active recreation, and even
historic context. It is simply a sterilized gratuity to the Get Kids
Outdoors theme by allowing short attention span kids to observe
National Parks through a looking glass made of wireless technology and
very controlled visitations. It sets National Parks up as museums in
the name of conservation, and it makes conservation as a trendy look-
but-do-not-touch ethic. It does show that the intent of using LWCF
funds is not to improve our public lands experience but to purchase
private lands and make them off-limits to people. Simply said, we, the
Americans that lived our lives around public lands (I worked at Mt
Rainier National Park) are being written out of history.
A Call to Action would be fine if it was only one chapter of a much
bigger story. It reads more like A Call to Inaction.
Thank you