National Park Management and Recreation

Order Code IB10093

CRS Issue Brief for Congress

Received through the CRS Web

National Park Management and Recreation

Updated September 27, 2004

Carol Hardy Vincent, Coordinator

Resources, Science, and Industry Division

Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

CONTENTS

SUMMARY

MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

History

Overview of Issues

Current Issues

Maintenance Backlog

Background

Administrative Actions

Legislative Activity

Personal Watercraft

Background

Administrative Actions

Legislative Activity

Snowmobiles

Background

Administrative Actions

Legislative Activity

Aircraft Overflights

Background

Administrative Actions

Legislative Activity

Recreational Fee Demonstration Program

Background

Administrative Actions

Legislative Activity

The National Trails System

Background

Administrative Actions

Legislative Activity

LEGISLATION

CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS, REPORTS, AND DOCUMENTS

FOR ADDITIONAL READING

IB10093

09-27-04

National Park Management and Recreation

SUMMARY

The second session of the 108th Congress

is considering legislation and conducting

oversight on National Park Service (NPS)

related issues. The Administration also continues to address park and recreation issues

through budgetary, regulatory, and other

actions. Several key issues are covered in this

report.

Maintenance Backlog. There is debate

over the funding level to meet the physical

maintenance obligations of the land management agencies and whether to provide new

funds or use funds from existing programs for

them. Attention has focused on the NPS’s

multibillion-dollar maintenance backlog,

which the Bush Administration claims to be

making “significant progress” towards eliminating. Congress includes money for some

backlog needs in Interior appropriations laws,

and is considering the needs of agencies for

FY2005.

Personal Watercraft and Snowmobiles. Motorized recreation, notably the use of

personal watercraft (PWC) and snowmobiles

in NPS units, has fueled debate over the balance between recreation on, and protection of,

park lands. Regulatory actions that restrict

use of these vehicles are particularly controversial. The NPS currently is evaluating PWC

use in some areas. NPS issued a proposed

rule to allow snowmobiles in three Yellowstone area parks for up to three years.

Aircraft Overflights. Grand Canyon

National Park is at the center of a conflict over

whether to limit air tours over national parks

to reduce noise. The NPS and the Federal

Aviation Administration continue to work on

Congressional Research Service

implementing a 1987 law that sought to reduce noise at Grand Canyon as well as a 2000

law that regulates overflights at other park

units. Recent regulations require air tour

operators to seek authority to fly over park

units, and the agencies then must develop Air

Tour Management Plans at park units. Also,

the Federal Aviation Administration is developing regulations to provide safety standards

for commercial air tours, including over park

units.

Recreational Fee Demonstration Program. The “Fee Demo” Program was created

to allow the NPS and other land management

agencies to test the feasibility of supplemental

self-financing through new fees. The Bush

Administration supports making the program

permanent, and Congress is considering related legislation for the NPS only as well as

for several federal agencies. P.L. 108-108

extended the program through December 2005

for fee collection and FY2008 for expenditures.

The National Trails System. While

designation of trails is often popular, issues

remain regarding funding, expansion, and

quality of trails. Congress is considering bills

to amend the National Trails System Act to

provide authority to acquire land from willing

sellers for certain trails; to authorize studies of

routes for possible additions to the system;

and to add routes to the system. Congress also

is considering legislation to reauthorize the

Recreational Trails Program. Further, legislation has been introduced to create a new

category of trails, called National Discovery

Trails.

˜ The Library of Congress

IB10093

09-27-04

MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Nine NPS areas that are closed to personal watercraft are pursuing a

rulemaking process to permit PWC use. Separate final rules now authorize

PWC use at seven NPS areas.

! On September 7, 2004, the NPS issued a proposed rule allowing

snowmobiles access to Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the

John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Memorial Parkway for up to three years.

! On September 22, 2004, the House Committee on Resources ordered

reported H.R. 3283, to establish a permanent Recreational Fee

Demonstration Program for five federal agencies.

! On September 21, 2004, S. 2822 was introduced to extend funding for

highway programs, including many trails projects, through March 31, 2005.

!

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

The National Park System (see [http://www.nps.gov/legacy/]) is perhaps the federal land

category best known to the public. The National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of

the Interior (DOI) manages 388 units, including 56 units formally entitled “national parks”

and a host of other designations. The system has more than 84 million acres.1 The NPS had

an appropriation of approximately $2.26 billion in FY2004, employs about 21,000 permanent

and seasonal employees, and uses an additional 90,000 volunteers. An estimated 266 million

people visited park units in 2003.

The NPS statutory mission is multifaceted: to conserve, preserve, protect, and interpret

the natural, cultural, and historic resources of the nation for the public and to provide for

their use and enjoyment by the public. The mission’s dichotomy of use and preservation can

sometimes be inherently contradictory. In general, activities which harvest or remove

resources from units of the system are not allowed. The NPS also supports the preservation

of natural and historic places and promotes outdoor recreation outside the system through

grant and technical assistance programs. Attention centers on how to balance the recreational

use of parklands with the preservation of park resources, and on determining appropriate

levels and sources of funding to maintain NPS facilities and to manage NPS programs.

History

The establishment of several national parks preceded the 1916 creation of the National

Park Service (NPS) as the park system management agency. Congress established the

Nation’s first national park — Yellowstone National Park — in 1872. The park was created

in the then-territories of Montana and Wyoming “for the benefit and enjoyment of the

1

This figure includes an estimated 79 million acres of federal land, 1 million acres of other public

land, and 4 million acres of private land. NPS policy is to acquire these non-federal “in-holdings”

from willing sellers or to create special agreements to encourage land owners to sell.

CRS-1

IB10093

09-27-04

people,” and placed “under the exclusive control of the Secretary of the Interior” (16 U.S.C.

§§21-22). In the 1890s and early 1900s, Congress created several other national parks mostly

from western public domain lands, including Sequoia, Yosemite, Mount Rainier, Crater

Lake, and Glacier. In addition to the desire to preserve nature, there was interest in

promoting tourism. Western railroads, often recipients of vast public land grants, were

advocates of many of the early parks and built grand hotels in them to support their business.

There also were efforts to protect the sites and structures of early Native American

cultures and other special sites. The Antiquities Act of 1906 authorized the President to

proclaim national monuments on federal lands that contain “historic landmarks, historic and

prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” (16 U.S.C. §431).

Most national monuments are managed by the NPS. (For more information, see CRS Report

RS20902, National Monument Issues, by Carol Hardy Vincent.)

There was no system of national parks and monuments until 1916, when President

Wilson signed a law creating the NPS to manage and protect the national parks and many of

the monuments then in existence and those yet to be established. That “Organic Act”

provided that the NPS “shall promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as

national parks, monuments, and reservations ... to conserve the scenery and the natural and

historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such

manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future

generations” (16 U.S.C. §1). A major step in developing a national system of parks occurred

in 1933, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt transferred 63 national monuments and

historic military sites from the USDA Forest Service and the War Department to the NPS.

Overview of Issues

The 108th Congress is considering legislation or conducting oversight on many NPSrelated issues. Several major issues are covered in this report: funding for the maintenance

backlog of the NPS and other agencies, regulation of personal watercraft, use of

snowmobiles, overflights of aircraft, extension of the Recreational Fee Demonstration

Program, and expansion of the National Trails System. While in some cases these issues are

relevant to other federal lands and agencies, this report does not comprehensively cover

issues primarily affecting other lands/agencies. For background on federal land management

generally, see CRS Report RL32393, Federal Land Management Agencies: Background on

Land and Resources Management, coordinated by Carol Hardy Vincent. Information on

BLM and Forest Service lands is contained in CRS Issue Brief IB10076, Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) Lands and National Forests, coordinated by Ross W. Gorte and Carol

Hardy Vincent. Information on appropriations for the NPS is included in CRS Report

RL32306, Appropriations for FY2005: Interior and Related Agencies, coordinated by Carol

Hardy Vincent and Susan Boren.

NPS-related issues not covered in this brief include funding of the Land and Water

Conservation Fund (LWCF), creating new park units, and designating heritage areas. First,

the LWCF is the principal federal source of money for the NPS (and other agencies) to

acquire new recreation lands. Issues include the size of the fund, need for an annual

appropriation, and Congress’s role in choosing lands to acquire. (For more information, see

CRS Report RS21503, Land and Water Conservation Fund: Current Status and Issues, by

Jeffrey A. Zinn.) Second, how national park units are created and what qualities make an

CRS-2

IB10093

09-27-04

area eligible to be an NPS unit are of continuing interest. (For more information, see CRS

Report RS20158, National Park System: Establishing New Units, by Carol Hardy Vincent.)

Third, legislation is pending to study, designate, and fund particular National Heritage Areas

(NHAs) as well as to establish a process and criteria for designating and managing NHAs.

(For more information, see CRS Issue Brief IB10126, Heritage Areas: Background,

Proposals, and Current Issues, by Carol Hardy Vincent and David Whiteman.)

Current Issues

Maintenance Backlog (by Carol Hardy Vincent)

Background. The four federal land management agencies — the NPS, Bureau of

Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and Forest Service (FS) —

have extensive physical maintenance of buildings, roads, trails, recreation sites, and other

infrastructure. There is debate over the levels of funds to maintain this infrastructure,

whether to use funds from other programs, and how to balance the maintenance of the

existing infrastructure with the acquisition of new assets. Congress continues to focus on the

agencies’ “deferred maintenance,” often called the “maintenance backlog” — essentially

maintenance that could not be done when scheduled or planned. The estimate of deferred

maintenance for the four agencies for FY2003 ranges from $11.68 billion to $16.47 billion,

for an average of $14.08 billion, according to agency documents. The FS and the NPS

together account for most of the backlog, with the FS estimated at $6.79 billion and the NPS

at between $3.54 billion and $7.59 billion, for an NPS average of $5.57 billion. The FWS

share is estimated between $1.01 billion and $1.36 billion, with the BLM between $0.34

billion and $0.73 billion. The backlogs have been attributed to decades of funding shortfalls.

The agencies assert that deferred maintenance of facilities accelerates their rate of

deterioration, increases their repair costs, and decreases their value.

Attention has centered on the NPS maintenance backlog. Since FY2000, the NPS (and

other DOI agencies) has submitted annually a maintenance and capital improvement plan

identifying deferred maintenance projects by priority over a five-year period. Also, an

Interior Department Inspector General report (December 2001) recommended establishing

a single maintenance budget funded through one appropriation for the entire department.

Administrative Actions. In FY2002, the Bush Administration proposed to eliminate

the NPS backlog (estimated at $4.9 billion in 2002) over five years, through a combination

of transportation fund money, appropriated funds, and revenues from recreation fees. On

July 2, 2003, the NPS issued a report and accompanying press release describing the

“significant progress” made in addressing the NPS maintenance backlog (see [http://www.

nps.gov/accompreport2003/]). Further, the Director of the NPS asserted that the agency is

“on track to exceed the President’s goal of investing $4.9 billion,” with $3.9 billion proposed

to date toward that goal (including money requested for FY2005).2 By contrast, the National

Parks Conservation Association (among others) contends that the Administration is not on

2

Testimony of Fran P. Mainella, National Park Service, Department of the Interior, House

Committee on Resources, Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands, Feb. 26,

2004, H. Hrg. 108-86, p. 13.

CRS-3

IB10093

09-27-04

track to eliminate the backlog, and that national parks have an annual funding shortfall of

about 32%. The association also asserts that the Administration has supported little new

money to address park maintenance, and has “mostly manipulated” accounts to appear to

be on track to eliminate the backlog.

It is uncertain if the NPS backlog has decreased, increased, or remained the same over

the past five years. For instance, while estimates of the NPS backlog increased from an

average of $4.25 billion in FY1999 to $5.57 billion in FY2003, it is unclear what portion of

the change is due to the addition of maintenance work that was not done on time or the

availability of more precise estimates of the backlog. Further, it is unclear how much money

has been provided for backlogged maintenance over this time period. Annual presidential

budget requests and appropriations laws do not typically specify the portion of funds for

backlogged maintenance, but instead combine funding for all NPS construction, facility

operation, and regular and deferred maintenance. According to DOI, the appropriation for

NPS deferred maintenance increased from $223.0 million in FY1999 to $311.2 million in

FY2003, with a peak of $363.2 million in FY2002. The President has requested an FY2005

appropriation of $332.5 million for NPS deferred maintenance. House and Senate versions

of the Interior appropriations bill (H.R. 4568, S. 2804) do not specify the amount of funds

for deferred maintenance needs of the NPS.

The agencies are defining and quantifying their maintenance needs. Efforts include

developing computerized systems for tracking and prioritizing maintenance projects and

collecting comprehensive data on the condition of facilities. Without such data, the extent

and nature of deferred maintenance might not be fully known, potentially hampering efforts

to overcome the backlog.

Legislative Activity. On July 8, 2003, the National Parks Subcommittee of the

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources held a hearing on the NPS maintenance

backlog. The hearing covered efforts to assess the condition of all facilities, estimate costs

of repairing facilities, and determine maintenance priorities. The Park Service has

acknowledged that until the effort is completed — by FY2006 — it will not have the data to

accurately estimate its maintenance backlog and assess the agency’s success in eliminating

it. To date, the NPS has completed facility condition assessments on all but four parks.

Witnesses from the private sector testified that the backlog results from a lack of adequate

funding for annual maintenance and that substantial additional funds are needed so that the

backlog does not continue to grow.

A March 25, 2004, subcommittee hearing focused on H.R. 1517, which seeks to amend

the Land and Water Conservation Fund to make the fund available to the Park Service and

the other land management agencies for maintenance. The bill requires that within five years

these agencies reduce their backlogged maintenance by at least 20%. Additional reductions

in backlogged maintenance are to be made during subsequent five year periods. The measure

also requires the agencies to report to Congress, every five years, on progress in reducing the

backlog and priorities for construction and maintenance.

Personal Watercraft (by Kori Calvert)

Background. PWCs are high-speed, very shallow draft, and highly maneuverable

watercraft “operated by a person or persons sitting, standing, or kneeling on the vessel rather

CRS-4

IB10093

09-27-04

than within the confines of the hull” (36 CFR §1.4). Often used to perform stunt-like

maneuvers, PWCs include watercraft known by their brand and generic names as jet ski, sea

doo, surf jet, water sled, wavejammer, wetjet, waverunner, and wet bike. While PWCs

represent a small segment of the recreational boat market, the number of PWC accidents has

been an issue. Critics of motorized recreation cite environmental concerns, including noise,

air, and water pollution; damage to land, plants, and wildlife; and public safety. Supporters

of motorized access argue that technological advances will enable manufacturers to produce

cleaner, more efficient machines, and point to the economic benefits to communities serving

users. PWC users also assert that in park units that allow motorized boating generally,

PWCs also should be allowed. Recent controversies have focused on regulatory actions that

would restrict recreational use or “access” of these vehicles, often in specific park units.

Administrative Actions. The NPS currently is evaluating PWC use in some areas.

That effort began in 2000 when the agency issued a rule prohibiting PWC use from 66 of the

87 units where motorized boats were allowed (65 Fed. Reg. 15077, effective April 20, 2000).

The rule allowed PWC use to continue until April 22, 2002, at the remaining 21 areas while

the NPS evaluated whether to permanently authorize PWC use and develop special

regulations. The rule recognized that PWC use might continue in certain National

Recreation Areas (NRAs), such as Lake Mead and Glen Canyon, where the establishing

legislation emphasized motorized water-based recreation as a primary purpose. An April,

2001 negotiated settlement of a lawsuit by Bluewater Network and Earth Island Institute over

the PWC rule prohibited PWCs from the 21 areas unless the Park Service initiated parkspecific rules and environmental analyses. PWCs could continue to operate during the

rulemaking process, which was to be completed by specified deadlines.

The NPS has been working on such park-specific rules and analyses for the 21 areas.

For 7 of them, the NPS lifted PWC bans and authorized their use in designated areas: Lake

Mead NRA, Assateague National Seashore, Glen Canyon NRA’s Lake Powell, Lake

Meredith NRA, Amistad NRA, Lake Roosevelt NRA, and Chickasaw NRA. Nine of the

areas are working on environmental reviews and special regulations to allow PWC use. The

NPS has proposed rules to re-open 2 of them: Bighorn Canyon NRA (May 5, 2004), and Fire

Island National Seashore (August 23, 2004). The agency prohibited PWC use in another 5

of the 21 areas (effective April 22, 2002) that had completed an environmental review

process and favored PWC bans: the Cape Cod and Cumberland Island National Seashores,

Delaware Water Gap and Whiskeytown NRAs, and Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. On

April 19, 2002, a federal judge denied an injunction sought by PWC users and manufacturers

to overturn these bans.

Legislative Activity. H.R. 1831, introduced April 12, 2003, would extend the grace

period for PWC use in Glen Canyon NRA, and H.R. 3621 would extend the grace period for

PWC use in Lake Roosevelt NRA. No action has been taken.

Snowmobiles (by Kori Calvert)

Background. On April 26, 2000, the NPS announced the strict enforcement of

existing, long-standing regulations on snowmobile use which would have substantially

reduced snowmobile use in those 42 national parks units that allowed recreational

snowmobiling. Exceptions included Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks, park

units in Alaska, Voyageurs National Park in Minnesota, and access to private land within or

CRS-5

IB10093

09-27-04

adjacent to a park. The snowmobile prohibition was both praised and reviled in the press and

prompted several congressional hearings. By July 2000 the Interior Department had backed

away from its strict enforcement stance — rather, there would be no snowmobile ban in park

units pending formal rulemaking, which to date has not occurred for parks generally.

Administrative Actions. Regulatory action to restrict or allow snowmobile use has

centered on Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr.

Memorial Parkway. The Clinton Administration issued rules on snowmobile use in these

areas (66 Fed. Reg. 7260, Jan. 22, 2001) to incrementally eliminate snowmobile use, with

limited exceptions, in favor of multi-passenger “snow coaches” by the 2003/2004 winter

season. The Bush Administration announced in April 2001 that it would allow the rule to

stand. A subsequent lawsuit settlement agreement (June 29, 2001) required NPS to prepare

a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS; 66 Fed. Reg. 39197, July 27, 2001)

on snowmobile use in these areas and to decide whether to keep or modify the ban. The

resulting SEIS outlined a controversial preferred alternative to allow continued snowmobile

use within specific phased-in parameters (68 Fed. Reg. 8616, Feb. 24, 2003). These included

daily limits on snowmobile numbers; use of cleaner, 4-stroke engines; commercially-guided

access for up to 80% of all snowmobiles; NPS-certified guides and a reservation system for

the remaining 20% non-commercial entries; development of snowcoach technology for

winter transit; and monitoring of effects of noise and pollution on park resources.

The Record of Decision (ROD) ([http://www.nps.gov/grte/winteruse/FinalROD.pdf])

announced on March 25, 2003 and a final rule issued December 11, 2003 (68 Fed. Reg.

69267) reversed the snowmobile ban. The rule establishes daily snowmobile entry limits in

each of the three areas. It outlines an “adaptive management strategy” to allow park

managers to take remedial action if park resource monitoring indicates unacceptable impacts

from air and noise pollution. Actions could include adjustments to Best Available

Technology (BAT) requirements or daily entry limits, road closures, or timed entries. Plan

proponents characterize the ROD as an attempt to achieve equilibrium between motorized

and non-motorized recreation, while opponents note that the plan identifies the Clinton

Administration snowcoaches-only policy as the “environmentally preferred alternative.”

Conservation organizations challenged the proposed regulations. On December 16,

2003, the day before Yellowstone’s winter season opened, D.C. District Court Judge Emmet

Sullivan struck down the Bush Administration final rule (see [http://www.nps.gov/yell/

planvisit/winteruse/index.htm]). His decision restored the Clinton Administration

snowmobile ban, effective with the 2004-2005 winter season, and reduced snowmobile

entries for the 2003-2004 winter season by about 50 percent from historic levels. The D.C.

District Court (December 29, 2003) and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (January 13,

2004) denied motions to stay Judge Sullivan’s decision. The judge’s opinion also required

NPS to re-examine the impact of trail grooming on bison and other wildlife, and to respond

to a 1999 rulemaking petition by Bluewater Network to ban snowmobiling in the entire

National Park System by February 17, 2004.

Both the International Snowmobile Manufacturers Association (ISMA) and the state of

Wyoming petitioned the Federal District Court for Wyoming to overturn the Clinton

Administration rules. On February 10, 2004, Judge Clarence Brimmer issued a temporary

injunction against implementing the Clinton-era plan (see [http://www.nps.gov/grte/

winteruse/winteruse_021104.htm]). He ordered the Park Service to issue temporary

CRS-6

IB10093

09-27-04

snowmobile rules for the remaining 2004 winter season ending March 14, 2004. NPS issued

these rules on February 11, allowing 780 snowmobiles to enter Yellowstone daily, a 287

machine increase; and 140 snowmobiles to enter Grand Teton and Rockefeller Parkway, a

90 machine increase. On February 17, 2004, the Park Service denied the 1999 rulemaking

petition to ban snowmobiling throughout the National Park System.

On March 10, 2004, with only days remaining in the snowmobile winter season, the 10th

Circuit Court in Denver denied an appeal of Judge Brimmer’s decision, determining that the

appellants did not make an “adequate showing of irreparable harm.” NPS announced its

decision to initiate a temporary winter use management plan for the three parks on June 2,

2004 (see [http://www.nps.gov/yell/press/0448.htm]). NPS asked the Wyoming federal court

to stay its case until new rules are published. Meanwhile, on June 30, 2004, Judge Sullivan

ordered the Park Service to issue its new snowmobile rules at least 30 days before trail

grooming for the winter season begins.

The NPS released its Temporary Winter Use Plans Environmental Assessment on

August 19, 2004 (see [http://www.nps.gov/yell/planvisit/winteruse/index.htm]). It highlights

a preferred alternative (Alternative 4) to allow up to 720 commercially guided Yellowstone

snowmobile entries daily during the winter seasons for up to three years while NPS conducts

studies on snowmobile impacts on park resources. Commercial guides would not be required

for the 140 daily snowmobile entries to Grand Teton and the Rockefeller Parkway. The plan

includes BAT requirements for all snowmobiles, with minor exceptions. NPS issued a

proposed rule to implement the interim winter use plan on September 7, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg.

54072). Meanwhile, on September 2, 2004, Judge Brimmer conducted a hearing on whether

to strike down the 2001 Clinton rule. In a separate final rule issued September 2, 2004 (69

Fed. Reg. 53626), NPS eliminated three of four designated snowmobile routes in Rocky

Mountain National Park. (For additional information, see CRS Report RL31149,

Snowmobiles: Environmental Standards and Access to National Parks, by James E.

McCarthy.)

Legislative Activity. Voting 224-198, on June 17, 2004, the House rejected an

amendment to the FY2005 Interior Appropriations bill (H.R. 4568) to reinstate the phaseout

of snowmobiles at the Yellowstone area parks. House and Senate bills (H.R. 1130 and S.

965), entitled The Yellowstone Protection Act, require implementation of the Clinton

Administration final rulemaking to phase out snowmobiles in Yellowstone and Grand Teton

National Parks and John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway. No action has been taken

on these bills.

During the first session of the 108th Congress, the House considered but did not adopt

floor amendments related to snowmobile use in parks. On a tie vote (210-210) on July 17,

2003, the House failed to approve an FY2004 Interior Appropriations (H.R. 2691)

amendment that essentially would have halted snowmobile use at Yellowstone and Grand

Teton National Parks and John D. Rockefeller Memorial Parkway, as stipulated in the

Clinton Administration rule. A House amendment intending to provide funds for the NPS

to purchase snow coaches was offered on September 4, 2003, to the FY2004 Transportation,

Treasury appropriations bill (H.R. 2989) but was subsequently withdrawn.

CRS-7

IB10093

09-27-04

Aircraft Overflights (by Carol Hardy Vincent and Kori Calvert)

Background. Grand Canyon National Park has been the focal point of a conflict

between groups seeking to limit overflights of national parks and air tour operators whose

economic stability, with ripple effects on local businesses, may depend on providing

overflights. The National Parks Overflights Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-91) directed NPS to

recommend a flight control plan for Grand Canyon that would provide a “substantial

restoration of the natural quiet” and prohibited flights below the Canyon’s rim. An October

3, 2002 Senate hearing explored why the act has not been fully implemented.

The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (Title VIII, P.L. 106-181,

hereafter “Air Tour Act”) regulates commercial air tours at most other park units. It requires

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and NPS to create management plans for air

tours at individual park units and within a half mile of their boundaries. Each plan could

prohibit or limit air tours, such as by route and altitude restrictions. The act also requires the

FAA to establish quiet aircraft technology standards for the Grand Canyon within one year

and to designate Grand Canyon routes or corridors for aircraft and helicopters using quiet

technology. Quiet aircraft would not be subject to existing caps on Canyon overflights.

President Clinton directed the Secretary of Transportation to develop regulations to

address the impacts of transportation, including overflights, on national parks (61 Fed. Reg.

18229, April 22, 1996), and set 2008 as the date to substantially restore natural quiet at

Grand Canyon National Park. That mandate, and congressional directives, have segued into

an ongoing and contentious rulemaking process.

Administrative Actions. Three FAA actions affecting Grand Canyon have been

controversial. First, a “limitations rule” capped the annual number of commercial air tour

overflights at Grand Canyon (effective May 4, 2000). An August, 2002 appeals court

decision directed the FAA to use NPS “natural quiet” standards and to consider commercial

flight-generated noise impacts in developing air tour overflight regulations. Also, the NPS

clarified that restoration of natural quiet for the day means on any given day (68 Fed. Reg.

63129, Nov. 7, 2003), which is viewed as likely to lead to increased quiet. The air tour

industry seeks exemptions to air tour caps, curfews, and air route restrictions if quiet aircraft

technology is used. Second, the “airspace rule,” imposes increased flight-free zones and

restrictive routing over the Canyon (65 Fed. Reg. 17736 and 17708, April 4, 2000). New

routes and airspace restrictions for the Canyon’s west end Special Flight Rules Area (SFRA)

took effect April 19, 2001. To address air tour operators’ safety concerns, east end SFRA

airspace changes have been delayed (68 Fed. Reg. 9496) until February 20, 2006.

Third, on March 24, 2003, the FAA published a supplemental notice of proposed

rulemaking (68 Fed. Reg. 14276) to establish a standard for quiet technology for certain

aircraft in commercial air tour operations over Grand Canyon. The goal is to help the NPS

achieve its mandate (under P.L. 100-91) to provide for the substantial restoration of natural

quiet at Grand Canyon, and to determine the role of quiet technology in that regard. The

proposal also seeks to comply with an FAA mandate (under P.L. 106-181) to designate

reasonably achievable requirements for aircraft to be considered as using quiet aircraft

technology. Currently, the agency is formulating a final rule.

CRS-8

IB10093

09-27-04

Other regulatory actions affect commercial air tours at park units. The FAA issued an

Air Tour Act final rule (67 Fed. Reg. 65661, October 25, 2002,) to complete the definition

of “commercial air tour operation.” The rule required air tour operators to apply for

authority, by January 23, 2003, to fly over national park and abutting tribal lands. The FAA

received applications for operating authority for commercial air tours over 107 of the 388

park units as well as six tribal lands. This application process triggers the development of

an Air Tour Management Plan (ATMP) by the FAA and NPS for each unit where none exists

[http://www.atmp.faa.gov/default.htm]. The purpose of the plans is to mitigate or prevent

any adverse impacts of commercial air tours on natural and cultural resources, visitor

experiences, and tribal lands. Development of an ATMP requires an environmental analysis

under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Currently, the FAA and NPS

are developing ATMPs for nine areas.

Additionally, an FAA final rule (68 Fed. Reg. 60832), effective October 26, 2003,

continues indefinitely existing safety requirements for air tours conducted in Hawaii. Using

the Hawaii rule as a model, on October 22, 2003, the FAA issued a proposed rule (68 Fed.

Reg. 60572) providing safety standards for commercial air tours nationally, including over

Grand Canyon and other park units. The proposed rule is intended to increase the safety of

tours by requiring certification of air tour operators and by establishing safety standards,

including regarding low level flights, over water flights, and visibility limits. It supplements

existing authorities governing tours over park units by providing safety requirements. The

proposal has been controversial. Many pilots and flight organizations as well as some

Members of Congress have opposed it, asserting that the cost of compliance would make it

infeasible for many to continue operating and that existing regulations are sufficient to keep

air tours safe. The FAA estimates that 700 small operators would not be able to comply with

the regulations and thus might cease to provide services. The National Transportation Safety

Board, which has recommended increased safety standards, has criticized the proposed

merger of helicopter and airplane traffic as increasing the chance of collisions. The FAA is

assessing public comment on the proposal.

Legislative Activity. P.L. 108-176 directed the Secretary of Transportation to issue

a final rule, no later than January 2005, establishing standards for quiet technology that are

“reasonably achievable” at Grand Canyon. It also established a mediation process for

rulemaking disputes. Conferees (H.R. 2115) stated that they were “greatly disappointed with

the lack of progress” the NPS and FAA have made in managing the impacts on national

parks of noise from air tours. They directed the agencies to expeditiously and collaboratively

develop ATMPs and determine environmental impacts of air tours.

On July 22, 2004, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National

Parks held a hearing on implementation of the Air Tour Act. FAA and NPS witnesses stated

that the agencies have finalized a Memorandum of Understanding guiding cooperative efforts

on implementing the act. The agencies are developing an overall implementation plan

covering the preparation of environmental documents, prioritization of park units, and role

of agency personnel. According to agency and other witnesses, ongoing issues include

methods to establish sound levels and assess potential impacts on park units, guidelines for

determining quiet technology, the accuracy of data on flights provided by air tour operators,

the issuance of interim operating authority to new tour operators, funding and timing for

completing ATMPs, and the relationship and roles of the agencies.

CRS-9

IB10093

09-27-04

Recreational Fee Demonstration Program (by Carol Hardy Vincent)

Background. Congress is considering whether to extend, amend, or make permanent

the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program (“Fee Demo,” 16 U.S.C. §460l - 6a note). The

program allows the four major federal land management agencies — NPS, Bureau of Land

Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Forest Service — to test the feasibility of

recovering some of the costs of operating recreation sites. Each agency can establish any

number of fee projects and spend the revenue collected without further appropriation; at least

80% of the funds are to be retained at the collecting site. The NPS typically collects far more

revenues than the other agencies combined, with revenues estimated at $123 million for each

of FY2004 and FY2005. The agencies may spend the money on the repair and maintenance

backlog; interpretation; signs; habitat and facility enhancement; resource preservation;

maintenance and operation, including the costs of fee collection; and law enforcement.

Originally a three-year trial authorized in FY1996, the program has been extended through

December 2005 for fee collection with the revenue available to be spent through FY2008.

The agencies generally favor Fee Demo because it generates substantial revenue and

allows discretion in determining fee locations, setting fees, and using the revenues. Critics

counter that the fees discriminate against those less able to pay, are a double tax on the

recreating public, and, together with other agency fees, confuse the public. The Forest

Service’s Fee Demo Program has received most of these criticisms.

Administrative Actions. The Bush Administration supports making the Fee Demo

Program permanent. The Interagency Recreation Fee Leadership Council, which facilitates

coordination and consistency among the agencies on recreation fees, has developed seven

guiding principles for a permanent program (see [http://www.doi.gov/ocl/2002/s2473.htm]).

The Administration has testified in support of an interagency program, a new fee structure

to replace entrance and use fees, a single interagency national pass, and site-specific and

regional multi-entity passes. The Administration supports using a large portion of the NPS

collections to address the deferred maintenance backlog. In the past, approximately 60% of

NPS Fee Demo funds have been allocated for the backlog, including new construction that

may result from deferred maintenance. The NPS has asserted that there may be a need to

shift the current 80%/20% split in funds to increase monies for deferred maintenance.

Legislative Activity. H.R. 3283 would establish a permanent recreation fee program

for the four federal land management agencies as well as the Bureau of Reclamation. The

bill outlines criteria for establishing fees; authorizes basic and expanded recreation fees as

well as special recreation permit fees; provides for the distribution and use of collected fees;

and creates an interagency recreation pass, among other provisions. On September 22, 2004,

the bill was amended and ordered reported by the Committee on Resources. While the text

of the amended bill is not yet publicly available, the committee reportedly agreed to

amendments detailing the process for setting fees and receiving public participation. For

instance, the bill would create recreational resource advisory committees in each state to

consider fee structures and allow local communities to receive a portion of the funds

collected. Another bill, S. 1107, would establish a permanent recreation fee program for the

National Park Service only. The Secretary of the Interior is to establish fees based on an

analysis of factors, including benefits and services to the visitor and comparable fees, and

may allow discounted or free admission or use. The bill seeks to coordinate fees collected

under the recreation fee program with fees collected for other purposes. In general, 80% of

CRS-10

IB10093

09-27-04

fees are to be returned to the collecting site, but not less than 90% of fees can be retained by

areas with revenue sharing agreements with states. The Secretary determines how the Park

Service uses the balance of the collections, and no more than 15% of revenues can be used

to administer the program. The Secretary is to report to Congress every three years on the

implementation of the program. On May 19, 2004, the bill passed the Senate.

A hearing of the Public Lands and Forests Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on

Energy and Natural Resources, held April 21, 2004, focused on the implementation of Fee

Demo by the Forest Service and BLM. DOI and FS officials supported an interagency

program and discussed changes made in agency implementation to improve the program.

Other witnesses testified on the shortcomings and successes of Fee Demo and whether and

how to create a permanent program. One witness testified against access fees and another

favored sharing FS collections with counties. Also, a September 17, 2003, hearing by the

Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health of the House Committee on Natural Resources

focused on the Forest Service’s Fee Demo program.

The Fee Demo Program was extended for 15 months (through December 2005) for fee

collection and for one year (through September 2008) for fee expenditures (P.L. 108-108).

The program was extended through an appropriations law to allow the authorizing

committees more time to consider whether to create a permanent program, according to the

Appropriations Committee. Also, a GAO report (GAO-02-10) found that agencies in the

program could increase innovation in setting and collecting fees, improve program

coordination and consistency, and establish performance measures for program managers.

The agencies continue to make administrative changes to address concerns.

The National Trails System (by Sandra L. Johnson)

Background. On October 2, 1968, the National Trails System Act (P.L. 90-543),

authorizing the National Trails System (NTS), became law (see [http://www.nps.gov/nts/]).

With the addition of the newly-designated Old Spanish National Historic Trail, the federal

portion of the trails system consists of 23 national trails (8 scenic trails and 15 historic trails)

covering almost 40,000 miles, more than 800 recreation trails, and 2 connecting and side

trails. More than three decades since the trails system began, issues remain regarding

funding, quality, and quantity of trails.

Administrative Actions. On June 5, 2004, the Administration designated 27 new

National Recreation Trails (NRTs) in15 states totaling 982 miles, as part of its “America’s

Public Lands Get Fit with US” initiative. These newly designated NRTs are part of an

ongoing effort to promote community partnerships and to foster innovative ways to

encourage physical fitness. Since 2001, the Administration has designated 91 NRTs, totaling

more 3,022 miles. Also, the NPS coordinates a traveling exhibition to commemorate the

Bicentennial of Lewis and Clark’s epic expedition of the West to find an overland route to

the Pacific Ocean.

Legislative Activity. The Federal Surface Transportation Program is a major

funding source for trails, shared use paths, and related projects in the United States. Prior

to 1991, highway funds were to be used only for highway projects and selected bicycle

transportation facilities. Many trail projects paths became eligible to receive federal highway

program funds with the passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

CRS-11

IB10093

09-27-04

1991 (ISTEA; P.L. 102-240), subsequently reauthorized as the Transportation Equity Act for

the 21st Century (TEA-21, P.L. 105-178). TEA-21 was to expire on September 30, 2003;

however, Congress has passed several extensions to continue funding for highway programs.

The most recent (P.L. 108-280) extended funding through September 30, 2004. S. 2822 has

been introduced to extend funding through March 31, 2005.

ISTEA established the National Recreational Trails Funding Program as a stateadministered, federal-aid grant program to provide funds to states to develop and maintain

recreational trails and facilities for nonmotorized and motorized recreational and diverse trail

uses. Under TEA-21, the program was reauthorized and renamed the Recreational Trails

Program (RTP). TEA-21 authorized $30 million for the RTP for FY1998, $40 million for

FY1999, and $50 million annually for FY2000-FY2003.

Currently, Congress is considering legislation to reauthorize the RTP, as part of broad

Highway Trust Fund legislation. H.R. 3550 would fund the RTP at $53 million for FY2004,

$70 million for FY2005, $80 million for FY2006, $90 million for FY2007, $100 million for

FY2008, and $110 million for FY2009. A conference was held on the bill on June 9 and 23

and July 7, 2004. In earlier action, the Senate passed its reauthorization bill (S. 1072) to fund

the RTP at $60 million per year through FY2009, then subsequently incorporated this bill

into H.R. 3550.

H.R. 4865 has been introduced to amend the National Trails System Act by adding

National Discovery Trails as a new category of long-distance trails, and designating the

American Discovery Trail (ADT) as the nation’s first coast-to-coast National Discovery

Trail. If designated by Congress, National Discovery Trails would be multi-modal and interurban, and protection of the routes would lie primarily with state and local jurisdictions.

There currently are four categories of trails created under the National Trails System Act:

national scenic, national historic, national recreation, and side-and-connecting. National

scenic and national historic trails are created by Congress. H.R. 4865 would establish the

ADT, stretching for more than 6,000 miles across 15 states, as the only coast-to-coast,

nonmotorized recreational trail. The ADT would connect several national scenic, historic,

and recreation trails, as well as many other local and regional trails. P.L. 102-461 had

directed the Secretary of the Interior to study the feasibility and desirability of adding the

ADT to the NTS. The resulting study indicated that the ADT had unique attributes to

possibly qualify as a fifth category of national trail. The 104th-107th Congresses considered,

but did not enact, ADT legislation.

Two national trails bills passed the Senate during the first session of the 108th Congress.

S. 635 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to update the feasibility and suitability

studies of four national historic trails: the California, Oregon, Pony Express, and Mormon

Pioneer National Historic Trails. S. 651 would amend the NTS Act to clarify federal

authority to acquire land from willing sellers for certain trails. It would limit land

acquisitions along the Oregon, Mormon Pioneer, Lewis and Clark, Iditarod, and Nez Perce

National Historic Trails and the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail to an average of

not more than one-quarter mile on either side of the trail. The measure would provide federal

land managers the authority to acquire land beyond the one-quarter width for the North

Country, Ice Age, and Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trails. A House companion bill,

the National Trails System Willing Seller Act (H.R. 3860), was introduced to provide willing

seller authority for the nine trails which do not have land acquisition authority.

CRS-12

IB10093

09-27-04

Two other national trails bills were among those examined at a May 6, 2003 hearing of

the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. S. 324 seeks to

clarify federal authority to acquire land from willing sellers for certain trails. It would give

acquisition authority to the Ice Age and the North Country NSTs. S. 634, authorizing a study

of the feasibility of designating the Trail of the Ancients, was not supported at the hearing

by the NPS since “the roads proposed for this trail are highways built by the States to connect

the various sites....” The area may be studied for possible designation as a National Heritage

Area instead of a trail. Some of the hearing testimony addressed the impact on private

property rights and development, including oil and gas drilling, of possible federal

restrictions on activities within view of a designated trail.

Measures introduced in the 108th Congress to designate, study, or extend specific trails

in the National Trails System are shown in the following table. Also, H.R. 4944 and S. 2841

designate the Ice Age Floods National Geologic Trail apart from that system. Additional

bills related to the National Trails System more generally are listed in the “Legislation”

section below.

Bill Number

Type

Title

Status

H.R. 461/H.R.

2327/S. 642/

S. 2018

Extend

Lewis and Clark NHT Amendments Act of 2003

Introduced

H.R. 897

Study

Mississippi River Trail Study Act

Introduced

H.R. 1051

Study

Pioneer National Historic Trails Studies Act

Introduced

S. 635

Study

Pioneer National Historic Trails Studies Act

Passed Senate;

Referred to House

Comm.

H.R. 1520

Study

Forks of the Ohio NST Study Act of 2003

Introduced

H.R. 3342

Extend

Trail of Tears National Historic Trail

Introduced

H.R. 3626

H.R. 4122

S. 2052

Desig.

El Camino Real de los Tejas National Historic

Trail

Introduced

Introduced

Passed Senate

H.R. 4240

S. 2354

Study

NHT or NST Study of the Arizona Trail

Introduced

S. 634

Study

NHT Study of the Trail of the Ancients

Hearing Held

LEGISLATION

P.L. 108-176, H.R. 2115 (Young, Don)

Contains a provision directing the Secretary of Transportation to issue a final rule, no

later than January 2005, establishing standards for quiet technology that are “reasonably

achievable” at Grand Canyon National Park. Signed into law December 12, 2003.

CRS-13

IB10093

09-27-04

P.L. 108-280, H.R. 4916 (Young, Don)

Extends surface transportation funding through September 30, 2004. Signed into law

July 30, 2004.

H.R. 1130 (Holt), S. 965 (Reid)

Requires implementation of the final rule to phase out snowmobile use in Yellowstone

and Grand Teton National Parks and John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway. H.R. 1130

introduced March 6, 2003; referred to Committee on Resources. S. 965 introduced May 1,

2003; referred to Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

H.R. 1517 (Graves)

Amends the Land and Water Conservation Fund to limit the use of funds to

maintenance needs of the land management agencies and to require those agencies to reduce

backlogged maintenance. Introduced March 31, 2003; referred to Committee on Resources

and Committee on Agriculture. Subcommittee hearing held March 25, 2004.

H.R. 1831 (Renzi)

Extends the grace period for personal watercraft use in Glen Canyon NRA until October

31, 2003. Introduced April 12, 2003; referred to Committee on Resources.

H.R. 2088, H.R. 3550, and H.R. 3994 (Young, Don); S. 1072 (Inhofe)

Reauthorize the Recreational Trails Program through FY2009, as part of Highway Trust

Fund legislation. H.R. 2088 introduced May 14, 2003; referred to nine committees.

Subcommittee hearings held May 2003. Conference held on H.R. 3550, June 9, June 23, and

July 7, 2004. H.R. 3994 ordered reported by Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

March 24, 2004. S. 1072 incorporated by Senate into H.R. 3550, May 19, 2004.

H.R. 3283 (Regula)

Establishes a permanent recreation fee program for four federal land management

agencies and the Bureau of Reclamation. Introduced October 8, 2003; referred to Committee

on Resources and Committee on Agriculture. September 22, 2004, ordered reported by

Committee on Resources.

H.R. 3532 (Ryun)

Amends the National Trails System Act to improve the acquisition of railroad rights-ofway for interim use as public trails by applying the procedures that govern other federal real

estate acquisitions. Introduced November 19, 2003; referred to Committee on Resources.

H.R. 3621 (Nethercutt)

Extends the grace period for personal watercraft use in Lake Roosevelt National

Recreation Area until December 31, 2004. Introduced November 21, 2003; referred to

Committee on Resources.

H.R. 3860 (Peterson, John E.)

Amends the National Trails System Act to clarify federal authority for acquiring land

from willing sellers for the majority of the trails in the system. Introduced February 26,

2004; referred to Committee on Resources.

CRS-14

IB10093

09-27-04

H.R. 4865 (Bereuter)

Amends the National Trails System Act to create a new category of trails called

National Discovery Trails, and designates the American Discovery Trail as the first such

trail. Introduced July 20, 2004; referred to Committee on Resources.

S. 324 (Levin)

Amends the National Trails System Act to clarify federal authority for acquiring land

from willing sellers for two NSTs. Introduced February 6, 2003; referred to Committee on

Energy and Natural Resources. Subcommittee hearing held May 6, 2003.

S. 651 (Allard)

The National Trails System Willing Seller Act seeks to clarify federal authority for

acquiring land from willing sellers for four NSTs and five NHTs. Passed Senate July 17,

2003. Referred to House Committee on Resources July 18, 2003.

S. 917 (Murkowski)

Requires that tax revenues from fuel purchased for snowmachine use be used for winter

motorized access trails. Introduced April 11, 2003; referred to Committee on Environment

and Public Works.

S. 1107 (Thomas)

Establishes a permanent recreation fee program for the National Park Service. Passed

Senate May 19, 2004. Referred to House Committee on Resources May 20, 2004.

S. 2822 (Reid)

Provides an extension of programs funded out of the Highway Trust Fund. Introduced

September 21, 2004; referred to Committee on Environment and Public Works.

CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS, REPORTS, AND DOCUMENTS

U.S. Congress, House Committee on Resources, Subcommittee on National Parks,

Recreation, and Public Lands, Fiscal Year 2005 Budget for the National Park Service

and Bureau of Land Management and Ongoing Efforts to Reduce Maintenance

Backlogs, H. Hrg. 108-86, 108th Cong., 2nd Sess., Feb. 26, 2004, Wash., D.C., 2004.

——The Impact Land Acquisition Has on the National Park Service Maintenance Backlog,

Park Service Management Priorities, and Local Communities, H. Hrg. 108-61, 108th

Cong., 1st Sess., Sept. 27, 2003, Sherman Oaks, CA.

U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, National Trails System

Willing Seller Act, S.Rept. 108-95, 108th Cong., 1st Sess., July 11, 2003, Wash., DC,

2003.

——Pioneer National Historic Trails Studies Act, S.Rept. 108-64, 108th Cong., 1st Sess.,

June 8, 2003, Wash., DC, 2003.

CRS-15

IB10093

09-27-04

——Recreational Fee Authority Act of 2004, S.Rept. 108-233, 108th Cong., 2nd Sess., March

9, 2004, Wash., DC, 2004.

——Subcommittee on National Parks, Land Acquisition From Willing Sellers; Trail of the

Ancients; Study of Four National Historic Trails; and Willing Sellers for the Majority

of the Trails in the System, S. Hrg. 108-47, 108th Cong., 1st Sess., May 6, 2003, Wash.,

DC, 2003.

——National Parks Backlog, S. Hrg. 108-94, 108th Cong., 1st Sess., July 8, 2003, Wash.,

DC, 2003.

——Sleeping Bear Dunes; Recreational Fee Demonstration; and Schools in Yosemite

National Park, S. Hrg. 108-193, 108th Cong., 1st Sess., Sept. 9, 2003, Wash., DC, 2003.

FOR ADDITIONAL READING

CRS Report RL32306, Appropriations for FY2005: Interior and Related Agencies,

coordinated by Carol Hardy Vincent and Susan Boren.

CRS Report RL32393, Federal Land Management Agencies: Background on Land and

Resources Management, coordinated by Carol Hardy Vincent.

CRS Issue Brief IB10126, Heritage Areas: Background, Proposals, and Current Issues, by

Carol Hardy Vincent and David Whiteman.

CRS Report RS21503, Land and Water Conservation Fund: Current Status and Issues, by

Jeffrey A. Zinn.

CRS Report RS20902, National Monument Issues, by Carol Hardy Vincent.

CRS Report RS20158, National Park System: Establishing New Units, by Carol Hardy

Vincent.

CRS Report RL31149, Snowmobiles: Environmental Standards and Access to National

Parks, by James E. McCarthy.

U.S. General Accounting Office, Information on Forest Service Management of Revenue

from the Fee Demonstration Program, GAO-03-470, Washington, DC, April 2003.

——Federal Lands: Agencies Need to Assess the Impact of Personal Watercraft and

Snowmobile Use, GAO/RCED-00-243, Washington, DC, September 2000.

CRS-16