Brue A10 The Herald-Bispatch SATURDAY, FEB. 27, 1988 Huntington, WIVA. National park system needs attention now The National Park Service is going international. The New York Times reports that the park service has agreed to help India develop the famed Taj Mahal as a national cultural park. That's nice. In the meantime, however, has anybody noticed that our own national parks could stand a bit of attention? The prime problem here at home has been a Reagan administration effort to halt any expansion of the national park system. The White House has tried repeatedly to phase out the federal government's principal park acquisition program the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The administration sought to slash the LWCF's annual appropriation from $185 million in 1987 to $21.5 million in 1988. Congress, to its considerable credit, rejected this attempt to trash the acquisition program. Those worried about the national parks point to the threat of encroaching development and increased demands by the public on the parks as twin arguments for pressing ahead with the expansion of existing parks and the establishment of new ones. They note that at the Reagan administration's slow rate of national park expansion (only four new parks in the past seven years), many of the nation's choice areas will be paved over before any rescue effort can take hold. Environmentalists also are recommending the establishment of an independent park service that would be less at the mercy of political patronage than it is under the present arrangement. Rep. Bruce Vento, D-Minn., chairman of the House National Park Subcommittee, has introduced legislation aimed at making the park service less vulnerable to partisan political manipulation. Any expansion of the park system or reforms such as those proposed by Vento are unlikely to advance beyond the talking stage in this election year, when so many other weighty topics are vying for attention.. But a new look at the national parks should be an important agenda item for the next president - whoever he might be. D evelopers in Washington want to build a 1.2 millionsquare-foot shopping center adjacent to a Civil War landmark, the Manassas National Battlefield Park. The site is where Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee established his headquarters during the second battle of Bull Run. Part of the proposal includes using federal highway money to improve roads around the mall site. The project not only has stirred up heated debate in the nation's capital, but it also serves to reflect the diverse pressures America's national parks currently face: While taxpayer dollars can always be found to aid commercial development, federal funds to acquire and maintain parkland have been cut by 42 percent since 1980. While record crowds are expected to visit our national parks this summer, the National Park Service is $2 billion behind in critical maintenance projects. Consequently, while visitor lines grow longer, hundreds of miles of park roads and hiking trails have been closed for safety reasons; visitor centers and related buildings continue to crumble at accelerating rates; aging sewer and water systems are unable to meet rocketing demands. ■While developers gobble up wilderness, the Park Service remains $500 million behind on its land-purchase program. Meanwhile, some $8 billion remains locked in a special trust fund. The money is earmarked for parkland acquisition, but Congress remains unwilling to release the money. Fortunately, Rep. Bruce Vento, D-Minn., has proposed a bill that would address the crucial defects in the outmoded way America runs its park system. A key provision in Mr. Vento's bill would make the Park Service independent of the Interior Department. Under the proposal, the president would appoint the Park Service director for a five-year term, subject to Senate confirmation. A three-member panel responsible to Congress would oversee the agency. Under the current system, the Park Service director is appointed by, and serves at the pleasure of, the interior secretary. As Mr. Vento explained in a telephone interview last week, the director is a political appointee who "represents interests other than parks." Consequently, the director is not free to lobby Congress for parkenhancement programs in a professional manner. That glaring weakness, which cuts across party lines and through administrations, helps explain why Congress continues to sit on the $8 billion trust fund. Mr. Vento also wants to establish a procedure that would enable the Park Service to work with local zoning officials and federal agencies to resolve overlapping issues, such as the divisive Manassas shopping center proposal. While it's true that Mr. Vento's bill would not resolve the Park Service's chronic funding shortage, it would provide the devotion, direction and professionalism the agency needs if it is to perform at a level millions of Americans have a right to expect. 2 MERICA'S national-park system includes some of The parks hold a special place in the hearts of As outlined in an NPCA report published late last Not all the troubles are of recent vintage. In many cases, boundary lines were drawn with insufficient care. The boundary of Death Valley National Monu- Nearly every park contains privately owned lands, Management by the National Park Service has been But the park service isn't wholly at fault. Much of The NCPA's proposed remedy makes sense: Remove the parks service from the Department of Interior; make the director subject to congressional approval TUESDAY, MAY 10, 1988 THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR EDITORIAL Time to rescue the parks T HIS time of year, thousands of Americans start thinking about a visit to one of the national parks. But the parks may not be quite ready to welcome them. Knowledgeable rangers will be on hand as usual, and roads and campgrounds will be open. Facilities will not, however, be what park managers would like them to be, since the overall system has a $1.9 billion maintenance backlog, according to a General Accounting Office survey. Equally disturbing, the budget squeeze has constricted the scientific research carried out by the National Park Service. Without thorough knowledge of the current state of forests and wildlife, it's impossible to spot environmental trends that could damage these vital resources. By one estimate, the Park Service has a research backlog of nearly $1 billion. What's the answer for the parks? Some free-thinking economists propose greater private management. Managers intent on making something pay always take better care of their assets, the analysis goes. But would the parks remain accessible to citizens of varying means? And would the crucial scientific research be given a high priority? Private enterprise doubtless can effectively run some of the facilities in parks campgrounds, restaurants, tours, to name a few - but the concept of parkland as a national treasure held in trust by the government remains valid. It would have more validity, however, if the Park Service were distanced from political infighting and control. Rep. Bruce Vento (D) of Minnesota suggests taking the service out of the Interior Department and making it an independent agency run by a presidentially appointed director and a three-member review board responsible to Congress. An alternative might be to restructure the Park Service along the lines of the Smithsonian Institution. The Smithsonian takes care of the country's cultural treasures; the Park Service should have the same kind of autonomy in safeguarding natural and historical treasures, rather than having to live with whatever chunk of the budget Interior throws its way. The time is right to rethink the way the natural heritage of the United States is managed. Places like the Everglades, Yellowstone, and the Grand Canyon are too precious to be left adrift in the swirl of budgetary politics. Mr. MARLENEE. Would the gentleman yield? Reserving the right to objection, Mr. Chairman-I don't yet see the connection. And for the newspapers and print media out there, I still do not make the connection between the management of the National Park Service and the appropriation of money to accomplish the goals. This committee, unless you want to abdicate that responsibility to a board that is separate and apart, I don't see the connection. Mr. VENTO. Is there objection-if the gentleman would yield under his reservation? Mr. MARLENEE. I will withdraw my objection, except I do reserve the right-where is this dispatch from? Mr. VENTO. From a fine town that I represent in Minnesota. [Laughter.] Mr. MARLENEE. That's right. St. Paul. Mr. VENTO. One of the most distinguished papers. And I think that editorial points out it does not resolve the money structure. In fact, it does answer the gentleman's query. But I think having a director and others that can advocate freely without being screened by OMB, without being screened by an Assistant Secretary looking over their shoulder, creates a much different circumstance. Without objection, the editorials are made part of the record. And I want to thank both the Director and the Assistant Secretary. It had to be a tough assignment to come up here. I was pleased to see you were not wearing your uniform and your hat, so you did not consider this an adversarial role, Mr. Mott. Thank you very much. Thank you both. We have a long list of witnesses. The Director and the Assistant Secretary have a lot to say with regard to this issue, as is appropriate. But I'm very pleased to welcome a good friend and former colleague, who is now serving and doing distinguished work at both the Akron School University in terms of teaching law, and working and volunteering on behalf of a variety of different groups. Today, he is appearing on behalf of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. John, it is with great warmth and affection and delight that I welcome you back to this room. I know you have spent many hours in here on this side of the table. But it is a pleasure to have you back in this capacity, as it was a pleasure certainly to serve with you for the 10 years and to learn from you and really look to you for assistance in help and guidance over the years. You have left a mark in various areas of public policy, especially of course the Alaska issue. That will be long remaining and long remembered as dedicated effort of a good public servant, a good Congressman. Mr. MARLENEE. I welcome my colleague back. I have one question before you ever start your testimony. Do you miss us, John? Mr. SEIBERLING. I was just going to say I was happy to pass on the mantel of Old Iron Pants to my successor, Mr. Vento. And sitting here for 2 hours has confirmed in me the wisdom of that deciion. |