APPENDIX

Hon. J. T. RUTHERFORD,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., August 30, 1961.

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: From time to time I have reported to you on the status of real estate subdivision encroachment within the area being considered by your committee for establishment of the Point Reyes National Seashore.

I enclose a status report on the subdivision situation as of August 17 and request that this letter and the enclosed table be printed in the record of the hearings on H.R. 2775, or in an appendix to the record.

Please note that the number of houses constructed or under construction in the Drakes Bay area-right in the heart of the proposed national seashore has now risen to five. Except for the inactive Fivebrooks subdivision, this activity and development has taken place since last year-long after introduction of the legislation.

This encroachment continues to accelerate. It appears probable that every month of delay in establishing the national seashore will cost the Treasury many additional thousands of dollars to acquire these "improved" properties when the national seashore is established and land acquisition begins. The four Drakes Beach Estates subdivisions, which I consider the principal problem, are located within the proposed public-use area, as distinguished from the ranching area.

Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,

1 20-acre lots do not require county-approved subdivision plans or utility services. Plus an additional 7-acre tract which developer plans to sell intact.

406 acres to be subdivided into 2- to 5-acre parcels.

4500 acres put on market in parcels of approximately 20 acres each. An old subdivision filed in 1919, but lots can now be sold.

174

Hon. J. T. RUTHERFORD,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., August 30, 1961.

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In connection with the proposed Point Reyes National Seashore, I have asked the National Park Service who would pay for maintenance of existing county roads within the boundaries that become essential to public use of the national seashore. This question becomes particularly important to the county government under the compromise proposal recently presented by Director Wirth. Under this proposal, as you know, the 26,000-acre ranching area could remain in private ownership so long as the lands remain in their natural state or are used exclusively for ranching and dairying purposes. I have received the enclosed reply from the Park Service and request that it, together with this letter, be printed in the record of the committee's hearings on H.R. 2775, or in an appendix to the record. Thank you for your consideration. Very sincerely,

CLEM MILLER.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, Washington, D.C., August 25, 1961.

Hon. CLEM MILLER,

House of Representatives,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. MILLER: You have inquired about who will pay for the maintenance of existing county roads within the boundaries of the proposed Point Reyes National Seashore that become essential to public use of the park.

There would be no authority for the National Park Service to expend funds for the maintenance or construction of roads on non-Federal lands. However, if the county would be willing to deed to the United States the rights-of-way of such roads as would fit in with the road system of the park, such maintenance and construction in these sections could be undertaken by the National Park Service.

In the event that the Point Reyes National Seashore is authorized for establishment, the Service would be willing to seek funds for this work. The work could be accomplished either directly by the Service or by contract with the county.

Sincerely yours,

Hon. J. T. RUTHERFORD,

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks,
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

E. T. SCOYEN, Acting Director.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., August 30, 1961.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: During the hearings on the Point Reyes National Seashore bill you have heard testimony on estimated effects of establishment of the national seashore on the tax situation of the various school districts on the Point Reyes Peninsula. The National Park Service's economic feasibility report also discusses this problem in some detail.

As you know, I have urged authorization of payments in lieu of taxes to protect the school districts from any possible temporary loss. I realize, of course, that policy on this matter was settled with enactment of the Cape Cod National Seashore Act, which does not provide for in-lieu payments.

Therefore, I am very gratified that the recent compromise proposal providing for enlargement of the ranching area and for retention of the ranching area in private ownership will substantially diminish any possible adverse effects of the national seashore upon the school districts' local tax revenues.

For your information, and the information of the committee, I submit the enclosed four tables setting forth estimates of maximum possible adverse

effects on the local tax situation. I respectfully request that this letter, together with the tables, be printed in the record of the hearings on H.R. 2775, or in an appendix to the record. The tables update data presented in the Park Service economic feasibility report and in previous testimony by myself and others which was based on the original proposal.

For one thing, a table included in my statement before the committee last March 24 should now be revised as follows:

Inasmuch as I do not have parcel-by-parcel assessed valuations for the current tax year, in making the estimates we used parcel-by-parcel valuations and tax rates for 1959-60. I am advised there should be little change in the situation for the current tax year. The estimates in the enclosed tables assume that all 23,000 acres of public use area would be acquired by the National Park Service within 1 tax year. As a practical matter, of course, this will not happen; acquisition will necessarily be spread out over many years as appropriations are made available. The estimates also assume a 26,000-acre ranching area, as outlined by Director Wirth in his testimony before your committee on August 11, and also a 2,000-acre Vedanta Society area and 2,000-acre A.T. & T. and RCA area-all remaining in private ownership. The estimates also assume no taxable public use developments leased by private concessionaires within the national seashore, and no nearby commercial development attracted to the area in order to serve visitors to the national seashore.

Each of the affected school districts, with the exception of the Point Reyes (elementary) School District extend significantly outside the proposed national seashore boundaries. I offer for the committee's files the enclosed map' outlining the boundaries of the school districts partially within, and within the proposed boundaries.

Concerning effects on the countywide tax situation, please note in the tables that the maximum possible depreciation in the county property tax base is now 0.24 of 1 percent, compared to 0.58 of 1 percent under the original proposal. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

1 On file with the committee.

CLEM MILLER.

Maximum possible effect of Point Reyes National Seashore on Marin County elementary school districts

NOTE. Based on 1959-60 assessments and tax rates except as noted. Based on August 1961 proposal by National Park Service.

Maximum possible effect of Point Reyes National Seashore on Marin County high school and college districts

$3,723, 150

52,000

$161, 700 $2,873, 320

$452

$4,780

0.053

0.128

$1,845

0.072

2.71

1.78

31.34

11

219

108

$84, 159

$18, 324

$28,083

! Point Reyes and West Marin Union School Districts pay only tuition tax. Based on 1960-61 school year.

NOTE.-Based on 1959-60 assessments and tax rates except as noted. Based on August 1961 proposal by National Park Service.

Maximum possible effect of Point Reyes National Seashore on Marin County taxes in various districts

NOTES. Based on August 1961 National Park Service proposal. Maximum possible total tax loss in Marin County due to Point Reyes National Seashore: $27,961. Percentage of all county property tax revenue: 0.17 percent. Average "cost" per resident of Marin County (1960 census: 146,820): 19.004 cents. No account taken in any figures of (1) increased tax revenues expected from adjacent areas due to additional taxable facilities to serve visitors--motels, restaurants, service station, sport fishing facilities, etc.; (2) increased sales use taxes, gasoline taxes, etc., expected in county following establishment of Point Reyes National Seashore. This data assumes that all public-use areas required will be acquired by the United States within 1 tax year. Actually, acquisition will be spread over many years.

Maximum possible effect of Point Reyes National Seashore on taxes in various areas of Marin County

1 Still lowest school tax rate in Marin County. All 6 school districts involved, with the exception of Point Reyes, extend significantly outside of the proposed boundaries of the proposed national seashore. NOTE. Based on 1959-60 assessments and tax rates. Includes city taxes, where applicable. Based on August 1961 National Park Service proposal.

STATEMENT OF THE SPORT FISHING INSTITUTE, PRESENTED BY PHILIP A. DOUGLAS,

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

Mr. Chairman, I am Philip A. Douglas, executive secretary of the Sport Fishing Institute, Washington, D.C. The institute is a private, nonprofit scientific and educational fish conservation organization, deriving its chief financial support from a broad representation of more than 150 manufacturing corporations. These corporations constitute a significant part of the Nation's important and diverse outdoor recreation industry. Their products are used regularly by some 28 million Americans, who achieve their vitally needed outdoor recreation through sport fishing. Our sole objective is "to help shorten the time between bites" by a three-phase program of research on fishery biology, education in concepts and principles of fish conservation, and technical fishery service to conservation agencies.