STATEMENT OF KAREN TAYLOR-GOODRICH, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, VISITOR AND RESOURCE PROTECTION, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, CONCERNING S. 3045, TO ESTABLISH THE Kenai Mountains-Turnagain Arm National Forest Heritage AREA IN THE STATE OF ALASKA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

JUNE 17, 2008

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. 3045, a bill to establish the Kenai Mountains-Turnagain Arm National Forest Heritage Area in the State of Alaska.

Similar legislation has passed the Senate in earlier Congresses and a small, grassroots organization in Alaska has continued to be an articulate advocate for this proposal.  In these earlier bills, the National Park Service (NPS) and the Secretary of the Interior were the principal federal government partners; in S. 3045, the U.S. Forest Service and the Secretary of Agriculture would be given that role.

Based on our experience over the past 24 years working with National Heritage Areas, the NPS has learned that a critical component for success is the completion of a feasibility study that evaluates a proposed area against interim criteria before designation. A study should be prepared that demonstrates evidence of place-based resources that tell a nationally important story, that has the support and involvement of the local community, and that evaluates the commitment and financial capability of the local coordinating entity and partners to carry out the approved management plan for the heritage area.  Studies that were done for the designation of the Iditarod National Historic Trail and the Seward Highway National Scenic Byway have confirmed the national importance of the region; however, they were undertaken before generally accepted criteria for designating heritage areas had been established, and were directed at a smaller region than the area encompassed by this bill.  While we defer to the Department of Agriculture for the official position on this legislation, the completion of a heritage area feasibility study, based on interim criteria used for similar studies, would allow for evaluation of the area prior to designation. The Department of the Interior is willing to provide advice or assistance to the Department of Agriculture in the completion of a study that meets applicable standards for other heritage areas and provides Congress with the necessary information and assessment upon which to base its decision regarding designation in the future.

With 40 National Heritage Areas designated across 28 states, and more heritage area legislative proposals forthcoming, the Administration believes it is critical 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 would also clarify the expectation that Heritage Areas would work toward self-sufficiency by outlining the necessary steps, including appropriate planning, to achieve that goal.

We would note that the majority of the acreage in the proposed Kenai Mountains-Turnagain Arm National Forest Heritage Area is under U.S. Forest Service management. The park contributes to the themes noted in the Section 1 of the legislation, particularly with regard to recreational resources, history, natural landscapes, and climate change.

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 of Agriculture, 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 Forest Service should have with respect to the heritage area.  We would recommend also that the Subcommittee make the appropriations language in Section 9 consistent with other recent National Heritage Area bills. 

Should S. 3045 be enacted, the NPS looks forward to working with both the U.S. Forest Service and the local coordinating entity as a management plan and other provisions are carried out.  We would be happy to share what may be applicable lessons learned from working with the other 37 heritage areas in 27 states that Congress designated prior to this year.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks.  I would be happy to answer any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have.