DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C. October 28, 1971.

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL,

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: As you asked, here is our report on H.R. 8382 and H.R. 9119, identical bills "To provide for the establishment of the Buffalo National River in the State of Arkansas, and for other purposes."

The Department of Agriculture recommends enactment of legislation to establish the Buffalo National River.

H.R. 8382 and H.R. 9119 are bills which would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish the Buffalo National River of not more than 95,730 acres in the Ozark Mountains of northwest Arkansas. Also pending before your Committee is a similar bill, S. 7, which has been passed by the Senate. We understand that the Department of the Interior prefers enactment of S. 7 in lieu of H.R. 8382 and H.R. 9119.

The proposed national river would include a segment of the Buffalo River, which would be preserved as a free-flowing stream, and adjacent land areas on both sides of the river containing unique scenic and scientific features. The boundaries of the proposed national river would be as generally depicted on the drawing entitled "Proposed Buffalo National River" numbered NR-BUF7103 dated December 1967. The area would be administered generally in accordance with the provisions of the Act of August 25, 1916, as amended and supplemented.

The bills would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire by donation, purchase with donated or appropriated funds, or exchange, lands and waters or interests therein within the national river boundaries, and outside of such boundaries in order to avoid the payment of severance costs. Lands owned by the State of Arkansas or its political subdivisions may be acquired only by donation. With concurrence of the agency having custody, Federal property within the boundaries of the national river could be transferred without consideration to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary would be authorized and directed to make certain payments to counties for 5 years to alleviate tax losses as a result of acquisition of property. The bills would permit hunting and fishing in accordance with applicable Federal and State laws. They would prohibit the Federal Power Commission from authorizing on the Buffalo National River the construction of any dam, water conduit, reservoir, powerhouse, transmission line, or other project works under the Federal Power Act. They would also direct that no department or agency of the United States shall assist or recommend any water resource project that would have a direct and adverse effect on the values for which the river was established.

The boundaries of the Buffalo National River would include approximately 2.220 acres of lands within the Ozark National Forest which are administered by the Forest Service of this Department. H.R. 8382, H.R. 9119, and S. 7 all involve the same National Forest lands. Most of this acreage includes high quality recreation lands along the Buffalo River which we acquired in recent years as they became available, with Land and Water Conservation Fund monies. We have discussed with the National Park Service the relationship of these lands to the proposed national river. We have agreed that should the Buffalo National River be established, we would have no objection to the transfer of these lands to the Department of the Interior for national river purposes.

Except for the inclusion of the small acreage of National Forest lands, the proposed Buffalo National River would not directly affect the responsibilities of this Department.

The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration's program. Sincerely,

J. PHIL CAMPBELL,
Under Secretary.

Mr. TAYLOR. Our first witness is a gentleman from Arkansas and the sponsor of H.R. 8382, our colleague, the Honorable John Paul Hammerschmidt.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN PAUL HAMMERSCHMIDT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, before I start my official statement, I would like to thank the chairman and Mr. Johnson for their great interest indicated by their trip to Arkansas. I note the presence of the chairman of the full committee, our distinguished colleague, Mr. Aspinall, and I feel greatly honored that he is sitting in on these hearings. I appreciate his leadership through the years in the formulation of meaningful legislation.

Mr. TAYLOR. I guess there's no Congressman that cooperates with the subcommittee as much as Mr. Aspinall.

Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I deeply appreciate the scheduling of these proceedings in regard to H.R. 8382-a bill to establish the Buffalo National River.

Apropos the subject, may I quote Mr. Justice Holmes who, in an important decision, stated: "A river is more than an amenity, it is a treasure."

Such, indeed, is the Buffalo-a treasure. H.R. 8382 seeks to preserve the Buffalo as a free-flowing stream, and to enhance its great potential for recreational pursuits, so that more and more people may enjoy this magnificent natural resource.

It is ideally suited for preservation since its headwaters lie within the Ozark National Forest, and the remaining 132 miles of the river can be preserved and administered as a single unit.

The river and its valley comprise a veritable natural museum and living outdoor laboratory, unique and unmatched between the Rocky Mountains and the Appalachians.

Massive bluffs and deep valleys provide spectacular settings along the entire reach of the river.

But its immense attractiveness goes beyond the breathtaking scenery. It possesses a combination of qualities historic, geological, cultural, botanical, and scenic found nowhere else in the Nation.

Perhaps foremost is the condition of the Buffalo; unspoiled, unmarred by heavy residential or commercial development and the municipal and industrial pollution which generally accompany such growth.

This "unpolluted" status establishes the Buffalo as "special" among today's rivers.

Geological features include massive beds of cavernous limestone; displays of faulting sedimentary rocks; dolomite, sandstone, and shale formations; fossil remains of ancient life.

Some 1,500 species of plants have been identified along the river. A variety of small animals exist in the area. It is among the richest waterways in terms of the total number of fish species.

Hunting and fishing will continue in accordance with State and Federal law. I expect that the Secretary of the Interior may designate zones where and establish periods when they may not be permitted for reasons of public safety or in the interests of resources management. Within the proposed boundaries are two especially noteworthy natural features. One is the Hemmed-In-Hollow, a 200-foot waterfall,

highest from the southern Appalachians to the Rockies. The other is Beauty Cave, with gypsum formations of outstanding size and variety, and containing one or more types not known to exist elsewhere.

Numerous archeological sites also are found within the proposed national river boundaries. They tell a story of American Indian occupation over a span of some 9,000 years before the settlers arrived.

The proposed national river bounds would include virtually the entire river-132 river miles, and land adjacent totaling 95,730 acres. The river traverses four counties, rising in Ozark National Forest lands in Newton County, and cutting through Searcy, Marion, and Baxter Counties before flowing into the larger White River.

The land which would have to be acquired is identified as to ownership as follows:

Federal Government-950 acres.

State of Arkansas-2,960 acres, including Buffalo River State Park and Lost Valley State Park.

The balance of the land, some 92,000 acres, is privately owned.

The land is not densely populated-approximately one occupied dwelling per square mile. Many of the occupants are lifelong residents of the valley. Most have no wish to leave their homes, their small farms, whatever the reason.

I am concerned that the people living along the river receive the best possible terms on their land. In my judgment, such assurances are contained in H.R. 8382 which provides for land acquisition at minimum hardship and inconvenience to residents.

Land or rights would be acquired in three different "zones" of the river. In the private use zone, about 10 percent of the river acreage, land, and dwellings would be subject to scenic easements only. In the preservation zone most fee simple purchase procedures would assure up to life tenancy to the occupants, at their option. Only in the public development zones would the Park Service need full public ownership to provide room for development of public recreation facilities and administrative sites. Some owners would have to vacate their properties at an early date, but not all.

To restate: the owners of "improved residential property" acquired for the national river, which can be continued in such use without undue interference with the administration of the national river, may retain a right of use and occupancy for a term, ending either upon the death of the owner or his spouse, whichever occurs later, or not more than 35 years from the date of acquisition, subject to terms and conditions the Secretary of Interior deems appropriate to assure use of the property in accordance with the purposes of the national river.

My bill provides that January 1, 1971, be the date limiting the retained rights of owners as to property improvements for which they may be reimbursed. This seems logical since the House committee is formally considering the bill for the first time in this session of the 92d Congress.

While earlier dates may be proposed, property improvements ought not to be held in suspense while the bills are pending. It would be unrealistic to expect no growth in this unique area.

The mere introduction of a bill, in the absence of meaningful hearings by both bodies of the Congress, in my view would not constitute due notice to the landowners involved.

The bill specifies that lands owned by the State of Arkansas or its political subdivisions may be acquired only by donation.

The director of the Arkansas Department of Parks and Tourism, William E. Henderson, has written me that the Arkansas State Parks, Recreation and Travel Commission has taken action to convey the lands in Buffalo River State Park and Lost Valley State Park to the National Park Service in the event the Congress approves and funds the Buffalo National River.

It is my understanding that Mr. Henderson will be testifying and available to respond to any questions the committee might have on this point.

The estimated cost for land acquisition is $16,115,000. Development cost, based on April 1971 indices, should be approximately $12,102,000.

If the Park Service were to recommend an amendment of the bill to take into account rising costs to relate the development cost ceiling to construction cost indices-I would have no objections.

The city of Marshall in Searcy County has particular interest in access to Buffalo River water. It has pending an approved EDA grant to develop a new water system with the Buffalo to be the source of supply. In my opinion it would not be fair to limit or endanger Marshall plans to use the Buffalo as this source.

If there should be extra costs due to Federal requirements-camouflaging for esthetic purposes, for example-added costs above present norms should be borne by the Federal Government.

H.R. 8382 also provides for some tax assistance to the four counties which would lose the land from the tax rolls.

The economies of these countries are not strong. In terms of the per capita income in 1969, Newton County was $1,144; Searcy County, $1,562; Marion County, $1,312; and Baxter County, $2,123.

The removal of land from State and local tax rolls due to Federal Government purchase would mean a revenue loss of $10,517 to Newton-43,610 acres; $6,628 to Searcy-24,530 acres; $4,163 to Marion— 26,000 acres; and $1,632 to Baxter-1,590 acres. Total: $21,570.

Since these countries are in such dire need of funds, I seek 5 years Federal payments in lieu of taxes to ease the transition. During this time, the national river could begin to bring new economic strength to the region.

Many organizations, public and private, and many institutions of government, have endorsed the proposal to establish the Buffalo National River.

I would like to call attention to one which I consider especially meaningful the report and recommendation of the White River Basin Coordinating Committee.

This group is made up of skilled and experienced career public servants, representatives from six Federal departments and agencies-Agriculture, Army, Commerce, HEW, Interior, and Federal Power Commission-and the States of Arkansas and Missouri. The committee reported

Of the many tributary streams supplying the Upper White River, the Buffalo River is probably the most impressive and deserving of special recognition.

The National Park Service has proposed a plan for the preservation and development of the Buffalo as a National River.

This project should be carried out as part of the recreation plan for the White River Basin.

The Commission carefully considered the multipurpose development alternatives, including flood control, irrigation, power production, protection of fish and wildlife, enhancement of recreation potential. It compared them with values to be realized by retaining the river in its free-flowing condition-and recommended the national river. I consider the benefits to the people of the Buffalo River country, to the State of Arkansas, and to the entire Nation, if this legislation is approved, to be in the best tradition of American conservation and resource development-the preservation of a unique and irreplaceable resource bringing perpetual economic and cultural benefits.

It is my hope that as a result of this hearing the committee will report favorably on H.R. 8382.

And Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleagues in the House from Arkansas for supporting this. I think two plan to testify this morning, and of course, I thank Mr. Alexander, certainly, for the cosponsorship of the bill, after he had made the trip in my stead with the distinguished chairman, Mr. Taylor.

And our distinguished colleague, Mr. Wilbur Mills, has specifically requested me to officially advise the committee that he fully supports this legislation and concurs in my statement and the legislative approach of H.R. 8382. He really wanted to be here to testify in person, but we all know the tremendous demands on Mr. Mills and his committee activities. He sends his regrets that he couldn't be here. I thank you, Chairman Taylor.

Mr. TAYLOR. I commend the gentleman on a very constructive and well prepared statement.

Let me say to my colleagues, we have 42 witnesses on the list. We will have very little chance for hearing this afternoon, and I hope we can move to dispatch and direct most of our factual questions to departmental witnesses who would be in a better position to answer them.

We will also use the 5-minute rule on questions for any one member. I have one question for the gentleman. Ordinarily, the committee has not been approving payments in lieu of tax losses on the theory that growth in tourism will more than offset the tax loss.

You have given figures, now, as to the tax loss. Do you have figures showing the tax base, so that we can determine the percent of loss? Now, you need not give them to us now. You may submit them for the record.

Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. I will supply them for the record, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAYLOR. Fine.

(The information for the record follows:)

TAX REVENUE AND ASSESSED VALUATION, 1970
Buffalo National River area, Apr. 12, 1971

1 The millage rate in Searcy County varies due to the difference in school district tax levys. Therefore, an estimated average rate was made after studying the school levys.