[DOCID: f:sr170.110]
From the Senate Reports Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
Calendar No. 368
110th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 110-170
======================================================================
SANGRE DE CRISTO NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA ACT
_______
September 17, 2007.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bingaman, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 443]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the bill (S. 443) to establish the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon
with an amendent and recommends that the bill, as amended, do
pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Heritage area.--The term ``Heritage Area'' means the
Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area established by section
3(a).
(2) Management entity.--The term ``management entity'' means
the management entity for the Heritage Area designated by
section 3(d).
(3) Management plan.--The term ``management plan'' means the
management plan for the Heritage Area required under section 5.
(4) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Proposed
Sangre De Cristo National Heritage Area'' and dated November
2005.
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
the Interior.
(6) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Colorado.
SEC. 3. SANGRE DE CRISTO NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA.
(a) Establishment.--There is established in the State the Sangre de
Cristo National Heritage Area.
(b) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall consist of--
(1) the counties of Alamosa, Conejos, and Costilla; and
(2) the Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge, the Baca
National Wildlife Refuge, the Great Sand Dunes National Park
and Preserve, and other areas included in the map.
(c) Map.--A map of the Heritage Area shall be--
(1) included in the management plan; and
(2) on file and available for public inspection in the
appropriate offices of the National Park Service.
(d) Management Entity.--
(1) In general.--The management entity for the Heritage Area
shall be the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area Board of
Directors.
(2) Membership requirements.--Members of the Board shall
include representatives from a broad cross-section of the
individuals, agencies, organizations, and governments that were
involved in the planning and development of the Heritage Area
before the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 4. ADMINISTRATION.
(a) Authorities.--For purposes of carrying out the management plan,
the Secretary, acting through the management entity, may use amounts
made available under this Act to--
(1) make grants to the State or a political subdivision of
the State, nonprofit organizations, and other persons;
(2) enter into cooperative agreements with, or provide
technical assistance to, the State or a political subdivision
of the State, nonprofit organizations, and other interested
parties;
(3) hire and compensate staff, which shall include
individuals with expertise in natural, cultural, and historical
resources protection, and heritage programming;
(4) obtain money or services from any source including any
that are provided under any other Federal law or program;
(5) contract for goods or services; and
(6) undertake to be a catalyst for any other activity that
furthers the Heritage Area and is consistent with the approved
management plan.
(b) Duties.--The management entity shall--
(1) in accordance with section 5, prepare and submit a
management plan for the Heritage Area to the Secretary;
(2) assist units of local government, regional planning
organizations, and nonprofit organizations in carrying out the
approved management plan by--
(A) carrying out programs and projects that
recognize, protect, and enhance important resource
values in the Heritage Area;
(B) establishing and maintaining interpretive
exhibits and programs in the Heritage Area;
(C) developing recreational and educational
opportunities in the Heritage Area;
(D) increasing public awareness of, and appreciation
for, natural, historical, scenic, and cultural
resources of the Heritage Area;
(E) protecting and restoring historic sites and
buildings in the Heritage Area that are consistent with
Heritage Area themes;
(F) ensuring that clear, consistent, and appropriate
signs identifying points of public access, and sites of
interest are posted throughout the Heritage Area; and
(G) promoting a wide range of partnerships among
governments, organizations, and individuals to further
the Heritage Area;
(3) consider the interests of diverse units of government,
businesses, organizations, and individuals in the Heritage Area
in the preparation and implementation of the management plan;
(4) conduct meetings open to the public at least semiannually
regarding the development and implementation of the management
plan;
(5) for any year that Federal funds have been received under
this Act--
(A) submit an annual report to the Secretary that
describes the activities, expenses, and income of the
management entity (including grants to any other
entities during the year that the report is made);
(B) make available to the Secretary for audit all
records relating to the expenditure of the funds and
any matching funds;
(C) require, with respect to all agreements
authorizing expenditure of Federal funds by other
organizations, that the organizations receiving the
funds make available to the Secretary for audit all
records concerning the expenditure of the funds; and
(6) encourage by appropriate means economic viability that is
consistent with the Heritage Area.
(c) Prohibition on the Acquisition of Real Property.--The management
entity shall not use Federal funds made available under this Act to
acquire real property or any interest in real property.
(d) Cost-Sharing Requirement.--The Federal share of the cost of any
activity carried out using any assistance made available under this Act
shall be 50 percent.
SEC. 5. MANAGEMENT PLAN.
(a) In General.--Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment
of this Act, the management entity shall submit to the Secretary for
approval a proposed management plan for the Heritage Area.
(b) Requirements.--The management plan shall--
(1) incorporate an integrated and cooperative approach for
the protection, enhancement, and interpretation of the natural,
cultural, historic, scenic, and recreational resources of the
Heritage Area;
(2) take into consideration State and local plans;
(3) include--
(A) an inventory of--
(i) the resources located in the core area
described in section 3(b); and
(ii) any other property in the core area
that--
(I) is related to the themes of the
Heritage Area; and
(II) should be preserved, restored,
managed, or maintained because of the
significance of the property;
(B) comprehensive policies, strategies and
recommendations for conservation, funding, management,
and development of the Heritage Area;
(C) a description of actions that governments,
private organizations, and individuals have agreed to
take to protect the natural, historical and cultural
resources of the Heritage Area;
(D) a program of implementation for the management
plan by the management entity that includes a
description of--
(i) actions to facilitate ongoing
collaboration among partners to
(I) promote plans for resource
protection, restoration, and
construction; and
(II) specific commitments for
implementation that have been made by
the management entity or any
government, organization, or individual
for the first 5 years of operation;
(E) the identification of sources of funding for
carrying out the management plan;
(F) analysis and recommendations for means by which
local, State, and Federal programs, including the role
of the National Park Service in the Heritage Area, may
best be coordinated to carry out this Act; and
(G) an interpretive plan for the Heritage Area; and
(4) recommend policies and strategies for resource management
that consider and detail the application of appropriate land
and water management techniques, including the development of
intergovernmental and interagency cooperative agreements to
protect the natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic,
and recreational resources of the Heritage Area.
(c) Deadline.--If a proposed management plan is not submitted to the
Secretary by the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of
this Act, the management entity shall be ineligible to receive
additional funding under this Act until the date that the Secretary
receives and approves the management plan.
(d) Approval or Disapproval of Management Plan.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
receipt of the management plan under subsection (a), the
Secretary, in consultation with the State, shall approve or
disapprove the management plan.
(2) Criteria for approval.--In determining whether to approve
the management plan, the Secretary shall consider whether--
(A) the management entity is representative of the
diverse interests of the Heritage Area, including
governments, natural and historic resource protection
organizations, educational institutions, businesses,
and recreational organizations;
(B) the management entity has afforded adequate
opportunity, including public hearings, for public and
governmental involvement in the preparation of the
management plan; and
(C) the resource protection and interpretation
strategies contained in the management plan, if
implemented, would adequately protect the natural,
historical, and cultural resources of the Heritage
Area.
(3) Action following disapproval.--If the Secretary
disapproves the management plan under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall--
(A) advise the management entity in writing of the
reasons for the disapproval;
(B) make recommendations for revisions to the
management plan; and
(C) not later than 180 days after the receipt of any
proposed revision of the management plan from the
management entity, approve or disapprove the proposed
revision.
(4) Amendments.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall approve or
disapprove each amendment to the management plan that
the Secretary determines make a substantial change to
the management plan.
(B) Use of funds.--The management entity shall not
use Federal funds authorized by this Act to carry out
any amendments to the management plan until the
Secretary has approved the amendments.
SEC. 6. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES.
(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act affects the authority of a
Federal agency to provide technical or financial assistance under any
other law.
(b) Consultation and Coordination.--The head of any Federal agency
planning to conduct activities that may have an impact on the Heritage
Area is encouraged to consult and coordinate the activities with the
Secretary and the management entity to the maximum extent practicable.
(c) Other Federal Agencies.--Nothing in this Act--
(1) modifies, alters, or amends any law or regulation
authorizing a Federal agency to manage Federal land under the
jurisdiction of the Federal agency;
(2) limits the discretion of a Federal land manager to
implement an approved land use plan within the boundaries of
the Heritage Area; or
(3) modifies, alters, or amends any authorized use of Federal
land under the jurisdiction of a Federal agency.
SEC. 7. PRIVATE PROPERTY AND REGULATORY PROTECTIONS.
Nothing in this Act--
(1) abridges the rights of any property owner (whether public
or private), including the right to refrain from participating
in any plan, project, program, or activity conducted within the
Heritage Area;
(2) requires any property owner to permit public access
(including access by Federal, State, or local agencies) to the
property of the property owner, or to modify public access or
use of property of the property owner under any other Federal,
State, or local law;
(3) alters any duly adopted land use regulation, approved
land use plan, or other regulatory authority of any Federal,
State or local agency, or conveys any land use or other
regulatory authority to the management entity;
(4) authorizes or implies the reservation or appropriation of
water or water rights;
(5) diminishes the authority of the State to manage fish and
wildlife, including the regulation of fishing and hunting
within the Heritage Area; or
(6) creates any liability, or affects any liability under any
other law, of any private property owner with respect to any
person injured on the private property.
SEC. 8. EVALUATION; REPORT.
(a) In General.--Not later than 3 years before the date on which
authority for Federal funding terminates for the Heritage Area, the
Secretary shall--
(1) conduct an evaluation of the accomplishments of the
Heritage Area; and
(2) prepare a report in accordance with subsection (c).
(b) Evaluation.--An evaluation conducted under subsection (a)(1)
shall--
(1) assess the progress of the management entity with respect
to--
(A) accomplishing the purposes of this Act for the
Heritage Area; and
(B) achieving the goals and objectives of the
approved management plan for the Heritage Area;
(2) analyze the Federal, State, local, and private
investments in the Heritage Area to determine the leverage and
impact of the investments; and
(3) review the management structure, partnership
relationships, and funding of the Heritage Area for purposes of
identifying the critical components for sustainability of the
Heritage Area.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Based on the evaluation conducted under
subsection (a)(1), the Secretary shall prepare a report that
includes recommendations for the future role of the National
Park Service, if any, with respect to the Heritage Area.
(2) Required analysis.--If the report prepared under
paragraph (1) recommends that Federal funding for the Heritage
Area be reauthorized, the report shall include an analysis of--
(A) ways in which Federal funding for the Heritage
Area may be reduced or eliminated; and
(B) the appropriate time period necessary to achieve
the recommended reduction or elimination.
(3) Submission to congress.--On completion of the report, the
Secretary shall submit the report to--
(A) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of
the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Natural Resources of the House
of Representatives.
SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act
$10,000,000, of which not more than $1,000,000 may be made available
for any fiscal year.
SEC. 10. TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.
The authority of the Secretary to provide assistance under this Act
terminates on the date that is 15 years after the date of enactment of
this Act.
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 443 is to designate the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado.
BACKGROUND AND NEED
The Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area encompasses a
unique part of our nation's history, where the villages and
lifestyles of some of America's earliest Spanish settlements
still exist along with spectacular natural landscapes. The
national heritage area includes a national park, three National
Wildlife Refuges, a National Forest, two wilderness areas and
15 State Wildlife Areas. The area's eastern boundary is marked
by the Sierra Blanca within the 14,000 foot peaks of the Sangre
de Cristo mountain range.
The heritage area includes the oldest continuously occupied
town in Colorado, San Luis; the oldest parish, the oldest
church, and the first water right. The cultural traditions
associated with these early Spanish settlements can still be
found in this area, where Seventeenth Century Spanish is still
spoken by a third of the local population.
In 2005 two organizations--the Los Amigos Caminos Antiguos
Scenic and Historic Byway and the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area Steering Committee--produced a feasibility study
of the proposed heritage area. The study concluded that the
area merited designation as a national heritage area.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 443 was introduced by Senators Salazar and Allard on
January 31, 2007. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a
hearing on the bill on March 20, 2007 (S. Hrg. 110-73).
Senator Salazar introduced a similar bill during the 109th
Congress, S. 2037. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a
hearing on the bill on June 22, 2006 (S. Hrg. 109-663). No
further action was taken on the bill.
At its business meeting on July 25, 2007, the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 443 favorably reported
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open
business session on July 25, 2007, by a voice vote of a quorum
present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 443, if amended as
described herein.
COMMITTEE AMENDMENT
During its consideration of S. 443, the Committee adopted
an amendment in the nature of a substitute. The amendment
deletes the Congressional findings, and modifies the management
language for the heritage area to make it consistent with the
authorities provided for other national heritage areas. The
amendment also adds a requirement that the Secretary of the
Interior conduct an evaluation of the heritage area not later
than three years before the date authority for Federal funding
terminates, to assess the progress of the management entity in
accomplishing the purposes for which the heritage area was
established and whether the goals and objectives of the
management plan for the heritage area were achieved. The
Secretary is required to submit a report of the findings of the
evaluation to the Congressional authorizing committees.
The amendment is explained in detail in the section-by-
section analysis, below.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1 provides the short title, the ``Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area Act.''
Section 2 defines the key terms used in the bill.
Section 3(a) establishes the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area (``heritage area'').
Subsection (b) describes the boundaries of the heritage
area.
Subsection (c) requires that a map of the heritage area
boundaries be included in the management plan for the heritage
area and available for public inspection in the appropriate
offices of the National Park Service.
Subsection (d) designates the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area Board of Directors as the management entity for
the heritage area. Members of the Board shall include
representatives from a broad cross-section of the individuals,
agencies, organizations, and governments that were involved in
the planning and development of the heritage area.
Section 4(a) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior
(``Secretary''), acting through the management entity, to make
grants in furtherance of the purposes of the heritage area,
enter into cooperative agreements or provide technical
assistance, hire staff, contract for goods and services, and
undertake to be a catalyst for any other activity that furthers
the heritage area and is consistent with the approved
management plan.
Subsection (b) lists the duties of the management entity.
Subsection (c) prohibits the management entity from using
Federal funds made available under this Act to acquire real
property or an interest in real property.
Subsection (d) requires any Federal funding for the
heritage area to be matched on a 50:50 basis with non-Federal
funds.
Section 5(a) requires the management entity to submit a
management plan for the heritage area to the Secretary not
later than 3 years after the day of enactment of the Act.
Subsection (b) lists the requirements for the management
plan.
Subsection (c) provides that if the management plan is not
submitted to the Secretary within three years after the date of
enactment, the management entity is ineligible to receive
further Federal funding until the plan is submitted.
Subsection (d) requires the Secretary to approve or
disapprove the management plan within six months after it is
submitted. The subsection also lists the criteria the Secretary
is to use in approving the plan, and describes the procedure to
be followed if the plan is not approved.
Section 6 describes the relationship of other Federal
agencies to the heritage area.
Subsection (a) clarifies that nothing in this Act affects
the authority of a Federal agency to provide technical or
financial assistance under any other law.
Subsection (b) encourages the head of a Federal agency
planning to conduct activities that may have an impact on the
heritage area to consult and coordinate the activities with the
Secretary and the management entity to the maximum extent
practicable.
Subsection (c) clarifies that nothing in this Act modifies
authorities of Federal agencies to manage Federal land, limits
the discretion of a Federal agency to implement an approved
land use plan, or modifies or alters any authorized use of
Federal land.
Section 7 contains several savings provisions to clarify
that the designation of the national heritage area will not
affect private property rights, affect governmental land use
regulation, reserve or appropriate water rights, diminish the
authority of the State to manage fish and wildlife, or create
any liability for property owners within the heritage area.
Section 8(a) requires the Secretary to conduct an
evaluation of the accomplishments of the national heritage area
not later than three years before the date Federal funding
authority terminates.
Subsection (b) provides that the evaluation shall assess
the progress of the management entity with respect to
accomplishing the purposes of this Act for the heritage area
and whether the management entity achieved the goals and
objectives of the approved management plan for the heritage
area. The evaluation is also required to analyze governmental
investments in the heritage area to determine the leverage and
impact of the investments.
Subsection (c) requires the Secretary to prepare a report,
based on the evaluation, that includes recommendations for the
future role of the National Park Service, if any, for the
heritage area. If the report recommends that Federal funding
for the area be reauthorized, it is required to include an
analysis of ways Federal funding may be reduced or eliminated.
The report is to be submitted to the House and Senate
authorizing committees.
Section 9 authorizes total appropriations of $10 million,
with not more than $1 million appropriated for any fiscal year,
and subject to the non-Federal match.
Section 10 provides that the authority of the Secretary to
provide assistance under this Act terminates 15 years after the
date of enactment.
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following estimate of costs of this measure has been
provided by the Congressional Budget Office:
July 31, 2007.
Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 443, the Sangre de
Cristo National Heritage Area Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis.
Sincerely,
Peter R. Orszag.
Enclosure.
S. 443--Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area Act
Summary: S. 443 would establish the Sangre de Cristo
National Heritage Area (NHA) in Colorado. The bill would create
a board of directors to serve as the first local coordinating
entity for the proposed NHA. The board of directors would be
responsible for developing a management plan for the NHA and
assisting local governments and nonprofit agencies in
implementing the plan.
The legislation would authorize the appropriation of $10
million, not to exceed $1 million annually, for financial
assistance to the commission or other eligible entities over
the next 15 years. CBO estimates that implementing S. 443 would
cost $5 million over the 2008-2012 period, with additional
amounts spent after 2012.
Enacting S. 443 would have no effect on direct spending or
revenues. The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-
sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA).
Estimated cost to the federal government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 443 is shown in the following table. The
costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300
(natural resources and environment).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of
dollars--
---------------------------------------
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level... 1 1 1 1 1
Estimated Outlays............... 1 1 1 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: Assuming appropriation of the authorized
amounts, CBO estimates that implementing S. 443 would cost $5
million over the 2008-2012 period and $5 million over the
following five to 10 years. Such amounts would be used to cover
a portion of the costs of planning, establishing, operating,
and interpreting the heritage area.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 443
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA. State and local governments could benefit from
grants and technical assistance authorized by the bill for
activities related to the new heritage area.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Deborah Reis and David
Reynolds; Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Leo
Lex; Impact on the Private Sector: Amy Petz.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION
In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in
carrying out S. 443. The bill is not a regulatory measure in
the sense of imposing Government-established standards or
significant economic responsibilities on private individuals
and businesses.
No personal information would be collected in administering
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal
privacy.
Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the
enactment of S. 443, as ordered reported.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at
the March 20, 2007, Subcommittee hearing on S. 443 follows:
Statement of Daniel N. Wenk, Deputy Director, National Park Service,
Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to appear before you today to present the
Department of the Interior's views on S. 443, a bill to
establish the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area in the
State of Colorado.
Two grassroots organizations, the Los Amigos Caminos
Antiguos Scenic and Historic Byway and the Sangre de Cristo NHA
Steering Committee, collaborated on a 2005 study which found
the Sangre de Cristo region appropriate for designation.
Nevertheless, we recommend that the committee defer action on
S. 443 and all other proposed heritage area designations until
program legislation is enacted that establishes guidelines and
a process for the designation of national heritage areas. Last
year, the Administration sent to Congress a legislative
proposal to establish guidelines and a process for designation.
Bills were introduced in the 109th Congress (S. 243, H.R. 760
and H.R. 6287) that incorporated the majority of the provisions
of the Administration's proposal, and S. 243 passed the Senate.
During the 110th Congress, a similar heritage area program
bill, S. 278, has been introduced, and we look forward to
continuing to work with Congress on this very important issue.
With 37 national heritage areas designated across 27
states, and more heritage area legislative proposals in the
pipeline, the Administration believes it is critical at this
juncture for Congress to enact national heritage area program
legislation. This legislation would provide a much-needed
framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas,
offering guidelines for successful planning and management,
clarifying the roles and responsibilities of all parties, and
standardizing timeframes and funding for designated areas.
Program legislation also would clarify the expectation that
heritage areas would work toward self-sufficiency by outlining
the necessary steps, including appropriate planning, to achieve
that shared goal.
S. 443 would establish the Sangre de Cristo National
Heritage Area (NHA) to recognize the outstanding and nationally
significant natural, cultural, scenic and recreational
resources found within the San Luis Valley of Colorado. The
Department testified, in a hearing before this subcommittee, on
S. 2037, a similar bill, in the 109th Congress.
S. 443 contains safeguards to protect private property,
including a prohibition on the use of federal funds to acquire
real property. The bill proposes no new restrictions with
regard to public use and access to private property and does
not convey any water right or water restrictions to the federal
government.
S. 443 designates the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage
Area Board of Directors as the management entity and outlines
their duties. The Board represents a broad spectrum of the
valley's residents, organizations, and agencies that were
involved in the planning for the NHA. The bill also authorizes
the development of a management plan within three years of
enactment and authorizes the use of federal funds to develop
and implement that plan. If the plan is not submitted within
three years of enactment of this Act, the Heritage Area becomes
ineligible for federal funding until a plan is submitted to the
Secretary. Additionally, the Secretary may, at the request of
the management entity, provide technical assistance and enter
into cooperative agreements with other public and private
entities.
Exceeding 7,700 feet in elevation, the San Luis Valley is
flanked by the Sangre de Cristo and San Juan Mountains and the
geology and climatology within the valley have contributed to
the formation of America's tallest Sand Dunes, part of Great
Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve.
The Rio Grande, the second largest river in North America,
has its headwaters within the proposed NHA and twists its way
through the San Luis Valley on a 1,900-mile journey, offering
outstanding scenic and recreational opportunities, including
trout fishing, rafting, and tubing. The availability of water
in this largely arid and alpine environment tends to
concentrate the abundant wildlife in highly visible and public
preserves creating exceptional wildlife and bird watching
opportunities.
The area's rich natural resources include one National
Park, three National Wildlife Refuges, one National Forest, two
National Forest Wilderness Areas, six Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern administered by the Bureau of Land
Management, and 15 State Wildlife Areas. The cultural resources
associated with the proposed national heritage are equally
impressive. The San Luis Valley with its abundant natural
resources may have been inhabited by native peoples including
the Ute, Navajo, Apache, Tiwa, Tewa, Comanche, Kiowa, and
Arapaho for more than 12,000 years.
More recently, the San Luis Valley served as a crossroads
for European exploration and settlement. Spanish explorers and
Franciscan priests first entered the valley in 1776 in an
attempt to strengthen Spain's weak hold on her remote empire.
Captain Zebulon Montgomery Pike camped in the shadows of the
Sangre de Cristo Range along the banks of the Conejos River and
was captured by Spanish soldiers, arrested for trespassing on
Spanish soil, and escorted to Mexico for questioning. His
campsite is commemorated as a National Historic Landmark along
with 22 other properties that are listed on the National
Register of Historic Places.
Extensive Mexican land grants triggered the initial
settlement of the area as families from northern New Mexico
found enough water to support their sheep and water their
crops. The proposed NHA contains the oldest continuously
occupied town in Colorado, (San Luis), the oldest parish (Our
Lady of Guadalupe), the oldest church (San Acacio), and the
first water right (San Luis People's Ditch).
The Hispanic cultural traditions associated with this first
wave of European settlement can still be found in this isolated
and predominantly agricultural region of Colorado where a
version of 17th century Spanish is still spoken by about 35% of
the population.
The feasibility of recognizing the area's impressive
cultural and natural resources as a national heritage area was
the subject of a study produced in 2005 by two grassroots
organizations, the Los Amigos Caminos Antiguos Scenic and
Historic Byway, in conjunction with the Sangre de Cristo NHA
Steering Committee.
The feasibility study was largely based upon the results of
a symposium held in the fall of 2002 where scientists,
historians, and anthropologists from interested colleges as
well as local ranchers, community leaders, and tribal elders
presented papers on the history, natural resources and local
culture of the San Luis Valley. The feasibility study
identified four interpretive themes for the NHA and addressed
the ten interim criteria that the National Park Service has
developed for designation of national heritage areas. The study
concluded that the area's cultural and natural resources met
those criteria.
All local governments within the proposed area have passed
resolutions in support of the establishment of the proposed
NHA. Moreover, State and federal land managers within the
proposed NHA have expressed a willingness to work with the
management entity in accomplishing their congressionally
authorized conservation and education responsibilities.
If the committee chooses to move forward with this bill,
the Department would recommend that the bill be amended to
include an additional requirement for an evaluation to be
conducted by the Secretary, three years prior to the cessation
of federal funding under this act. The evaluation would examine
the accomplishments of the heritage area in meeting the goals
of the management plan; analyze the leveraging and impact of
investments to the heritage area; identify the critical
components of the management structure and sustainability of
the heritage area; and recommend what future role, if any, the
National Park Service should have with respect to the heritage
area.
We also recommend that the bill be amended to remove
paragraph 5(d)(2) which would require 100 percent federal
funding prior to completion of the management plan and to
change the termination authority in Section 11 to expire 15
years after enactment. In addition, we would like to work with
the Subcommittee to ensure that the management planning process
is coordinated with the affected federal land management
entities. These amendments would make S. 443 consistent with
other, similar, national heritage area establishment bills.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would
be pleased to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no
changes in existing law are made by the bill S. 443, as ordered
reported.
<all>