PAGENO="0001" CANYONLANDS BOUNDARY REVISION 573 HEARING BEFORE TEE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PARKS!ANDIRECREATION OF TEE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE NINETIETH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON S.26 A BILL TO REVISE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE OANYONLANDS NATIONAL PARK IN THE STATE OF UTAH JULY 24, 1968 SEp 3 ~1968 GOV~RNMT~~~ tF~O~!TOflY ~,~RO~RcY OF RUT~RS, T~ SIAIE J~f~S~TY W~ COLLECE OF SOUTH JEF~SEY L~b~U~RY CAMDEN, N. J. 08102 Yl ~rinted for the use of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs / 3 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 98-236 WASHINGTON [ 1068 CI'/~L PAGENO="0002" COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR~ AND INSULAR AFFAIRS HENRY~M; JACKSON, Washington, Chairman CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico THOMAS H. KUCHEL, California ALAN BIBLE, Nevada GORDON ALLOTT, Colorado PRANK CHURCH, Idaho LEN B. JORDAN, Idaho ERNEST GRUENING, Alaska PAUL I. FANNIN, Arizor~a PRANK E. MOSS, Utah CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Wyoming QUENTIN N. BURDICK, North Dakota MARK 0. HATFIELD, Oregon CARL HAYDEN, Arizona GEORGE McGOVERN, South Dakota GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin J~EE METCALF, Montana Jxanv T. YEaRnER, Staff Director STEWART FRENcH, Chief Counsel E. LEWIS REID, Minority Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON PARKS AND RECREATION ALAN BIBLE, Nevada, Chairman HENRY RI. JACKSON, Washington CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Wyoming CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico ThOMAS H. KUCHEL, California PRANK CHURCH, Idaho MARK 0. HATFIELD, Oregon FRANK E. MOSS, Utah GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin (U) PAGENO="0003" CONTENTS Page S.26~.. 2 Departmental reports: Bureau of the Budget 3 Interior Department 3 STATEMENTS Alderson, George, representing the Sierra Club 14 Bill Harthon, Deputy Director, Frank E. Harrison, Assistant to the Director, National Park Service, and Bates Wilson, Superintendent, Can- yonlands National Park 6 COMMUNICATION Strickland, W. N., Wasatch Mountain Club: Letter to Hon. Henry M~ Jackson, chairman, Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, dated July 22, 1968 16 (III) PAGENO="0004" PAGENO="0005" It, PAGENO="0006" 2 corner of Canyonlands, and which contains some of the finest galleries of prehistoric pictographs in the country. All of these new areas contain unique features and natural phe-. nomena which have national significance. They should be kept in their undisturbed and natural state, and the best way to do this is to incorporate them into the park. Before Canyonlands National Park was established, there had already been some vandalism i~ southeastern Utah. Both geological formations as well as Indian artifacts and pictographs had been destroyed. It was partly to give protection to many of these national treasures that I pressed for action on the Canyonlands National Park bill in the first place. Now, the publicity on the establishment of the park is bringing thousands of additional tourists into the area, and as roads are improved and extended and more campsites are completed, the number of visitors both to Canyonlands and the lands adjacent to it will increase. A $234 million (Janyonlands roadbuilding program will be undertaken with fiscal 1968 and 1969 funds, and more camp- grounds and new trails will also be built. It is inevitable that as roads are built, and as hiking and horseback trails are pushed into formerly remote areas, there wifi be a new danger of vandalism and destruction-not necessarily deliberate marring of the fabulous stone arches, windows, spires, and pinnacles in which the area abounds, but of thoughtless treatment of these formations. We should be moving now to bring the most spectacular of the still unprotected areas under the protection of the National Park Service. The addition of the new tracts to Canyonlands National Park has been recommended by the Advisory Board on National Parks, Historic Sites, Buildings and Monuments. The Board had previously recommended national park status for most of the lands involved when it recommended the adoption of earlier proposals for a Canyon- lands National Park. Development costs of the proposed additions have been estimated by the Department of the Interior as $3,587,000 and increased annual operating costs at $47,000. Since most of the land involved is publicly owned, land acquisition costs have been estimated at only $20,000. The bill provides for in lieu Federal land exchanges for Utah State- owned land within the proposed new tracts. The Department of the Interior has recommended the enactment of 5. 26, with amendments, and at this point in the record I shall direct that a copy of the bill and a copy of the departmental reports be included. (The bill and reports follow:) [S. 26, 90th Cong., first sess.1 A BILL To revise the boundaries of the Canyonlands National Park In the State of Utah Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congre s assembled, That the first section of the Act of September 12, 1964 (78 Stat. 934), is revised to read: "That in order to preserve an area in the State of Utah possessing superlative scenic, scientific, and archeologic features for the inspiration, benefit, and use of the public, there is hereby established the Canyonlands National Park which, subject to valid existing rights, shall comprise the area generally depicted on the drawing entitled `Boundary Map, Canyonlands National Park,' numbered PAGENO="0007" 3 LNPSW-1001--CAN, and dated January 1967, which shows the boundaries of the park having a total of approximately three hundred and sixty thousand three hundred and twenty-five acres. The map is on file and available f~r public inspec- tion in the offices of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior," SEc. 2. Section 2 of the 1964 Act is amended as follows: (1) delete the words "described in section 1 hereof or" which appear after the word "area" in the first sentence; (2) insert the words "or any amendment thereto" after the word "Act" in the third sentence; (3) change the period after the third sentence to a colon and add the words "Provided further, That Dead Horse Point State Park may be acquired only by donation and upon the condition that it be administered as a part of Canyonlands National Park."; and (4) insert the words "or any amendment thereto" after the word "Act" in the fifth sentence. SEC. 3. Section 3 of the 1964 Act is amended as follows: insert the words "or any amendment thereto" after the word "Act". EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D.C., June ~4, 1968. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, New Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR Mn. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for the views on the Bureau of the Budget on S. 26, a bill to revise the boundaries of the Canyonlands National Park in the State of Utah. The Department of the Interior, in a report it is submitting to the Committee, explains the purposes of the bill and its background. The Department also recom- mends several amendments to the bill. The Bureau of the Budget concurs in these amendments. The Bureau of the Budget would have no objection to the enactment of 5. 26 if amended as recommended by the Department of the Interior. Sincerely yours, WILFRED H ROMMEL, Assistant Director for Legislative Reference. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., June ~6, 1968. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR Mn. CHAIRMAN: This responds to your request for the views of this Department on 5. 26, a bill "To revise the boundaries of the Canyonlands Na- tional Park in the State of Utah." We recommend the enactment of the bill, with the amendments indicated below. The Act of September 12, 1964 (78 Stat. 934; 16 U.S.C. 271 et seq.), established the Canyonlands National Park in Utah, containing weirdly eroded rocks, tower- ing Spires, mesas rising to more than 7,800 feet in elevation, and ancient petro- glyphs. The first section of the Act defines the boundary of the park by a detailed metes and bounds land description, and states that the park contains approxi- mately 257,640 acres. S. 26 amends the 1964 Act by substituting for such land description a boundary map on file in the offices of the National Park Service of the Department. The boundary depicted on the map adds to Canyonlands Na- tional Park four separate tracts totaling approximately 100,000 acres. Three of the tracts adjoin Canyonlands National Park and the remaining tract is located a few miles west of the park. All of the tracts contain scenic, scientific, and his- toric features of national significance and deserve the high degree of preservation they would be accorded as part of Canyonlands National Park. The four tracts are as follows: PAGENO="0008" 4 1. HORSESHOE CANYON ~ This tract of approxitnately 3,178 acres is located about 7 miles west of the northwest corner of Canyonlands National Park and contains a scenic portion of Horseshoe Canyon. Within the area are located several groups of nationally `significant prehistoric pictographs which should be preserved and, at the same time, made available for public benefit and enjoyment. All of the tract is Federal ~land administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management. Proposed developments at Horseshoe Canyon include a visitor contact shelter, interpretive exhibits and signs, overlook developments, utility systems, pictograph protection, lunch area, access road, and foot trails. 2. THE MAZE This tract contains approximately 49,233 acres and is located west of the Colorado River below its junction with the Green River. The tract includes the brightly colored, intricately eroded, and spectacularly scenic geologic features known as the Maze, the Land of Standing Rocks, and Ernie's Country. As a protected primitive area accessible only by jeep, foot, and horseback, the area has high potential for providing inspirational and spiritual refreshment to the visiting public. The tract contains 4,478 acres of State-owned land which the Department proposes to acquire by exchange. The remaining acreage is Federal land administered by the Secretary through the Bureau of Land Management. Access to the Maze would be over jeep trails and foot trails. Developments planned at Waterhole Flat consist of a 10-unit campground, a ranger station, a duplex employee residence, utility systems, and radio communication. Throughout the area there would be signs and markers, interpretative devices, and pictograph protection. 3. THE NORTH SIDE This tract of approximately 31,347 acres lies along the north boundary of Canyonlands National Park. In addition to the 4,562-acre Dead Horse Point State Park, which under S. 26 would be donated to the Federal Government by the State of Utah, the tract includes the balance of highly scenic Taylor Canyon which is now only partially within the national park. It also includes portions of the Big Flat, Shafer Canyon, and the White Rim which are needed primarily for administrative purposes and to meet development needs. In addition to per- mitting development of overlooks at Taylor and Shafer Canyons, the acquisition of the land would permit a more suitable alignment of the park entrance road from Long Canyon to the Island in the Sky by way of Dead Horse Point, and would protect the scenic view from the road. In addition to Dead Horse Point State Park, the tract includes 3,763 acres of other State lands which the Depart- ment expects to acquire by exchange. The remainder of the tract is Federal land administered by the Secretary through the Bureau of Land Management. De- velopments planned for the area include circulation roads, a parking area, trails, a visitor contact station, utility systems, interpretive exhibits and signs, signs and markers, and an overlook development. 4. LAVENDER CANYON This tract of approximately 11,952 acres adjoins the southeast corner of Canyon- lands National Park and contains the upper portion of Lavender Canyon and an important section of Upper Salt Creek Canyon. Both canyons are highly scenic and contain numerous prehistoric Indian ruins and several natural arches. Within the tract are 1,278 acres of State land and. 80 acres of private land. The remainder is Federal land administered by the Secretary through the Bureau of Land Management. The developments planned for the area are jeep trails to Lavender and Davis Canyons, signs and markers, interpretive signs and pit toilets. All of the above tracts are within the geologic basin defined by the inward facing Wingate sandstone cliffs which enclose Canyonlands National Park on the west, north, and east. As such, they and the existing park are part of a geologically significant physiographic entity which should be conserved and made available for public use and benefit. PAGENO="0009" PAGENO="0010" 6 ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL MAN-YEARS OF CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE FIRST 5 YEARS OF PROPOSED NEW OR EXPANDED PROGRAMS 19CY J9CY+1 19CY+2 19CY+3 19CY+4 Estimated additional man-years of civilian employment: Substantive: Park ranger 2. 0 Park ranger (seasonal) Maintenanceman Operator; general (seasonal) .5 Truckdriver (seasonal) 5 Laborer (seasonal) . 5 Total substaStive 3 5 5 0 5 5 Total, estimated additional man-years of civilian employment 3. 5 5. 0 5. 5 5. 5 5.5 Estimated additional expenditures: Personal services $21, 800 $30, 000 $32, 300 $32, 300 $32, 300 All other 262,800 766, 100565,700 379, 700 214, 700 Total, estimated additional expenditures 284,600 796, 100 598, 000 412, 000 247,000 Estimated obligations: Land and property acquisition 20,000 Development 434, 000 1, 053, 000 51, 000 565, 000 Operations (management, protection, and maintenance) - 30,600 43, 100 47,000 47, 000 47, 000 Total, estimated obligations 484, 600 1,096, 100 98, 000 612, 000 47, 000 Senator Moss. That has been a rather lengthy introduction, but I thought it important for the purposes that we have in opening these hearings this morning. First of all, I want to ask my colleague, Senator Hansen, of Wyoming a member of this subcommittee, if he has any opening statement or any remarks he would care to make at this point. Senator HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not have any remarks to make now. Senator Moss. Thank you. We are very pleased to have the Deputy Director of the National Park Service, Mr. Harthon Bill, to appear this morning before the committee. We also have Mr. Bates Wilson, the superintendent of Canyonlands National Park, who has come for the hearing this morning, and Mr. Frank Harrison, the Assistant Director for Legislative Affairs of the National Park Service. Would you gentlemen like to come to the table and sit together? Then if we have questions that we want to pose to any particular one, we will have you right there in place. We will begin with Mr. Bill. STATEMENTS OP HARTHON BILL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PRANK E. HARRISON, ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR, AND BATES WILSON, SUPERINTENDENT OP CANYONLANDS NATIONAL PARK, NA- TIONAL PARK SERVICE Mr. BILL. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is a pleasure to appear before you today to discuss this legislation and to report to you the Department's endorsement of it. The Department's report of June 26, 1968, urges enactment with certain amendments. It is a tribute to this committee and to Senator Moss that the original legislation to authorize Canyonlauds National Park was enacted. There is a singular magnificence to the wild canyons and PAGENO="0011" 7 stone spires of this area, as well as a ~vealth of archeological and his- torical resources that qualify them for national park status. Today, you are considering four additions to Canyonlands National Park. We are convinced that these important additions will add outstanding features to the park in that they contain additional natural and historical features of national significance. They are in all respects deserving of the beneficial preservation and utilization which is provided by inclusion within a national park. Describing the four tracts briefly: Horseshoe Canyon tract containing some 3,178 acres lies about 7 miles from the northwest corner of the park and contains nationally significant prehistoric pictographs as well as the most scenic portion of the Horseshoe Canyon. The second tract, The Maze, consists of 49,233 acres. It is located west of the Colorado River below its junction with the Green River, and contains spectacularly scenic geological features known as The Maze, the Land of Standing Rocks, and Ernie's Country. Senator HANSEN. May I interrupt, Mr. Chairman, to ask if Mr. Bill might have someone here who could take a pointer and indicate on the maps here the areas to which you allude? Mr. BILL. I would be delighted to, Senator Hansen. Senator Moss. Bates Wilson, the superintendent of the park, who knows the area better than any man alive, I guess, will point out the area. Senator HANSEN. You don't need it, Mr. Chairman, but I do. Senator Moss. Would you point out Horseshoe Canyon first? Mr. WILSON. Horseshoe Canyon lies here. It is the detached area. The Maze area, Ernie's Country, and Standing Rocks are here. Dead Horse Point area is in this upper corner here and the northern section referred to is this entire area, including the land west of the point~ The Lavender section has not been mentioned yet. Senator HANSEN. May I suggest that, as you continue with your testimony, Mr. Bill, Mr. Wilson might indicate the areas with the pointer. Mr. BILL. Very good, Senator. Senator HANSEN. Thank you. Mr. BILL. With respect to The Maze, the proposed method of administration would be as a primitive area accessible by jeep, foot, or horseback. The North Side tract adjoins the north boundary of the existing park. It contains approximately 31,347 acres. This would include the Dead Horse Point State Park, the balance of Taylor Canyon, which is now partially within the park, and portions of the Big Flat, Shafer Canyon, and the White Rim. The latter three areas are needed primarily for administrative purposes and to meet development needs, including a more suitable alinement of and scenic protection for the park entrance road from Long Canyon to the Island in the Sky, by way of Dead Horse Point. The Lavender Canyon tract of approximately 11,952 acres adjoins the southeast corner of the park. It includes the upper portion of Lavender Canyon and a significant section of Upper Salt Creek Canyon, both of which are highly scenic and which contain numerous prehistoric Indian ruins and several natural stone arches. PAGENO="0012" Mr. Chairman, it is, proposed for addition tc embellishments; in fact, t defined by sandstone Uf~. form a significant physiogr served for the Nation. Fe~ of such a natural unit. The proposed additi Advisory Board in I that all lands c The majority of lands we ha~ Federal ownership, administered by or owned by the State of Utah. Land acquisLion cost ~or the of private lands within the proposed additions are estimated at approxi- mately $20,000. Development costs proposed for the additions are estimated at $3,587,000 with increased annual operating costs of $47,000. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will be delighted to answer any questions that you may have. Senator Moss. Thank you, Mr. Bill. Does this map we are referring to have a designation? Mr. WILsoN. Drawing No. 164-20,000. Senator Moss. Thank you. On that map there are blue squares that appear to be sections. Are those school sections? Mr. BILL. They are State sections. Senator Moss. They are State school sections, and of course Dead Horse Point is colored in blue because that is owned by the State. Mr. BILL. That is a State park. Senator Moss. rfilese are the lands that would be acquired accord- ing to your testimony by exchange of in lieu Federal lands through the selection process that the State has made, is that correct? Mr. BILL. This is correct. Senator Moss. Mr. Wilson, could you point to the one area referred to as in private ownership, about 80 acres? It is down in the Lavender Canyon area at the southeast corner of the park. \h. WILSON. Yes, sir, at the head of Salt Creek. ~enatui Moss. WT]n) owns tlnit? Mr. V\ILS0Y. rflle L~edd Ranches. Senator Moss. You estimate that it would take about $20,000 to purchase it. Do the Red(I R~inchies O\Vfl other lands OkIlSi(le of the boundaries in that general area? Mr. WILSoN. Not iii I lInt immediate vicimty, but OII Jn(han Creek, about 15 miles from (his pomt, they (10 own quite a bit of land; about 4,800 acreas. Senator Moss. Does the legislation provide that the 80 acres migh.t be acquired by exchange if that could be worked out with the Redd Ranches? iMir. BILL. As to the provisions for the private land to be acquired, normalLy we would endeavor to have an option ~m1 preparation for the consideration. Negotiations ni Senator Moss. ri~hmC i(~l5O1I I that 5111110 county, Ii is 1)05511)1 lids land for other iau~Ls adju county that are now in tile Fe~ PAGENO="0013" PAGENO="0014" 10 WIL'~ \~TOlll(i be ver rwo t ~are t ~tdoespo stration and control of a vc Senator Moss If the L. e r~. State Park, but the rest of the northern acē ton i ~oresee any difficulties in administration between the two, between the State continuing to operate the State park and the national park being right adjacent to it? Mr. WILsoN. I certainly don't see any difficulties. Cooperation between the Park Service and the State park commission has worked both ways. We are pretty close neighbors already. Senator Moss. Do you foresee any appreciable difference in the way the Sta,te park area would be administered and taken care of if it were in the national park rather than in the State park? Mr. WILsoN. I think if we did get Dead Horse State Park within Canyonlands, we would probably operate it a little differently than the State park commission does now. Senator Moss. When I was first drafting these bills and considering this extension, I had some extensive conversations with the officers of the Texas Gulf Sulphur Co., which has some potash leases and actually owns some real property in fee that impinged on Dead Horse. I have a letter of agreement in my file from the president saying that h~ would convey that land to either the State or to the National Park Se1~vice. This has been in limbo now for some little time because the bill hasn't been moving, and we are just now getting underway again and I haven't reopened my conversations with him. Are you familiar with that situation? Mr. WILsoN. Yes, sir. What we might call the patented land lies right there, a little indentation, and actually it is owned by Texas Gulf. Also almost all of this area shown in blue is under potash and oil and gas leases. However, the operation of the potash leases and their actual mining is underground. You first drop about 1,100 feet to the White Rim, and then their operation is 2,800 feet below that to that point. Therefore, unless they put in another shaft right under Dead Horse Point fOr access or ventilation or something, we don't even see their operation. Senator Moss. Mr. Fogarty, the president-director of Texas Gulf Sulphur Co., indicated to me that if this went into the national park and if the statute governing uses of a national park would prohibit it, they would forgo their potash leases in this area and possibly try to exchange them for other areas. Is it your understanding that the law would permit the underground mining so long as it didn't surface any place .in the park? Mr. WILsoN. I am afraid I will have to call on Mr. Harrison to answer that. Senator Moss. Mr. Harrison, what is your opinion on that? PAGENO="0015" 11 Mr HARRISoN Mr Chairman, if this were included in the park, it would be the policy to extinguish this However, as an existing right, of course it would be continued until the Government acquired that right. It would be our policy, however, to acquire it inasmuch as it would be in a national park. Senator Moss. In other words, the Department would attempt to secure the right either by purchase or exchange or some other manner so that there would not be any mineral rights remaining m the park? Mr. HARRISON. This is right. Senator Moss. Let me ask you a question about Horseshoe Canyon now. If that were acquired as part of the park, would there be a road built going from the park to Horseshoe Canyon? Mr. WILsoN. Yes, sir; a road coming from the French Spring area down along Miller Canyon and branching off to Horseshoe, with access, probably by trail, down into the canyon. Senator Moss. You would not propose putting a road into the bottom, but just to a point where a trail could branch off. Mr. WILsON, A road up to an overlook and then a trail down to the bottom. Senator Moss. That is on the west side of the river. Where would a person that had been visiting the other parts of the park have to cross the river to get to Horseshoe? Mr. WILSON. At the present time he would cross at Green River, Utah, and take the State Route 24, which would be coming down about 52 miles west of the French Spring area, travel in on a paved road for 35 miles *down from Green River south, then 52 miles into French Spring and then, if he were in a jeep, about 35 miles off of State Route 24 would bring him into the canyon at Horseshoe. Senator Moss. That would continue to be quite a remote area as far as tourists are concerned? Mr. WILsoN. Yes; I think so. If we have these scenic parkway~ or whatever you might call them-the Canyon Country Parkway-that might possibly come in from the east side, crossing the Green River at Ouray, and right by Barrier Canyon. If this is ever developed, this would be a route to the French Spring. Senator Moss. The attractive thing in Horseshoe or Barrier are these great pictographs that are on the walls. Can you tell me for the record how they have been described by Dr. Brew, former director of Peabody Museum at Harvard University, or others who have been in there to look at them? I mean as to quality and interest and so on? Mr. WILSON. Dr. Brew described them as the best and most perfect Indian rock gardens on the North American Continent. Senator Moss. They are tremendous panels, aren't they? Mr. WILSON. Life size and some even over life size, 6 to 7 feet high, in red, in white, and a touch of blue in some of them, Then, in con- trast, an inch-and-a-quarter-size bird with perfect feathers done in color. Some of them also are petrogliphs, which are incised pictures on the rock; but the main panel in Barrier Canyon is painted or pictographed in red. . Senator Moss. There has been at least one attempt to pry off a layer of rock with some of these figures on them; has there not? Mr. WILSON. We haven't any proof that this was actually tried; but from the evidence on the face of the wall it looks as if somebody tried to take a slab. with a pictograph on it. PAGENO="0016" 12 Senator Moss. And it is lying there fractured in the canyon? Mr. WILsoN. Yes. rfhey definitely need prot~ctioii, Mr. Chairman. We can put up all kinds of signs, but I think a ranger in uniform on the job is a very good deterrent for any vandalism. Senator Moss. Some of our people just have an urge to scratch their initials or do something wherever they see a surface, especially if it has some unusual characteristic, and this is really what is feared f~r these marvelous pictographs; is that right? Mr. WILsoN. That is right. There has already been some vandalism. There are actually four different panels in Barrier Canyon, and on one there has been quite a bit of vandalism by writing names and scratching. Senator Moss. Now, about The Maze-I guess "The Maze" is quite a descriptive term-but could you enlarge that description just a little bit? What does that look like down there? Mr. WILsoN. It is actually a maze of canyons, branching off from a main canyon called Horse Canyon. We had a lot of horses in this country, Horseshoe, Dead Horse, and Horse Canyon. To the south of the main canyon lies a fan of deeply eroded and entrenched canyons, fingering out into literally hundreds of different tributaries to this one main Horse Canyon. They are all highly colored in multicolored sandstone of red and white and also in The Maze are other picto- graphs, a wall of pictographs very similar to those in Barrier Canyon. One very important discovery by Dr. Dean Brimhall, which Dr. Brew was shown and was very excited about, was a pictograph about the harvesting. It depicts two figures, one bending over with a sickle and another with a seed beater, two sticks tied together. Dr. Brow said this is the only pictograph or only indication in rock art that they have ever found of an actual harvest scene and that it is very impor- tant. Senator Moss. Very interesting. I think Mr. Bill's testimony is that the Park Service would propose to keep The Maze, Ernie's Country, and Standing Rocks as a primitive or wilderness area with nothing but foot trails; is that correct? Mr. WILSON. That is correct; jeep trails or let's say four-wheel drive routes up to the edge; but nothing other than foot trails or horse trails into the actual areas. Senator Moss. So to go into the bottom a person would have to go on foot or horseback? Mr. WILsoN. That is right. ~ :r Moss. When we were originally considering this legislation ~ original Canyonlands National Park bill include these tracts ~ ~1~~been taken c tof the bill? did. he ori~ ~i million-acre ~SON1~ the map was approxi~ changed it slightly due to ti discovery of the and asphalt deposits in the basin. Senator Moss. The line you point to on the map is one that is farther out on the west side, west of Canyonlands and west of any PAGENO="0017" A 13 proposed extension, but that is the section we are going to consider bringing into the Glen Canyon Recreation Area; is that your under- standing? Mr. WILsoN. Yes, sir. Senator Moss. In a recreation area multiple uses could be con- tinued, so that if there are grazing permits, mineral leases, or other uses, they would not be extinguished or there would be no attempt to extinguish them in a recreation area? Mr. WILSON. That is correct. Senator Moss. Did you have any prepared statement that you would like to make on this phase? I have been asking you questions and you, as the superintendent, I am sure, know the answers right on the ground. Mr. HARRISON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify the answer to the question you raised a moment ago, sir, regarding exchange of the Redd land, the privately owned land. I have taken another look at section 2 of the existing law and I think there is no doubt but what lands could be exchanged. rfIlat exchange authority goes to not only the State-owned land but to other land in the p~trk and there would be available any lands under the jurisdiction of the Secretary in the State for exchange. Senator Moss. I see. Thank you for filling out on that answer. Did you have a prepared statement to Iflake, Mr. Wilson? Mr. WILSON. No, 1\'Ir. Chairman, I didn't have. I just came hoping I was prepared to answer all your questions. Senator Moss. You have done very well for me, although I have some colleagues who may want to question you yet. If you did have any information you wanted to volunteer that we have overlooked, we would be glad to have you put it in the record. Maybe there is one other question about the Long Canyon approach that has been discussed. Would you explain what it is and how this proposal might fit in? Mr. WILSON. We do have an approach from the north, known as the Seven-Mile Canyon route, which comes in from U.S. 160. It is 15 miles of this junction to U.S. Highway 160. Our proposal and our plan would be to use the existing road down the river to the potash mine, No. 97. Senator Moss. That is a very spectacular road, isn't it? Mr. WILsoN. An award-winning road as far as construction goes, and a very spectacular drive down the river. In our three-level concept of how to use the northern end of the park, this is to start at the river, go up on the bench, and finally get to the high plateau. We have been contemplating what is called Long Canyon, a very deep canyon, a very steep canyon at the present time, and we feel that it is feasible to bring a road from the river road up the canyon, out on the plateau, swing by Dead Horse Point and tie into our existing Circle Road within the park. Senator Moss. This would give you another very scenic entrance and also a drive for visitation to the high canyon lands. Mr. WILsoN. Yes; a very spectacular road. It may cost a few pennies, but there is a distance of approximately 5~ miles up Long Canyon as compared to about 16 or 17 miles if we come in from the Seven-Mile Canyon route. So actually the cost is going to be approximately the same. PAGENO="0018" 14 Senator Moss. Senator Hansen, do you have any questions of Mr. Wilson about the bill? Senator HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't believe that I do. The few questions that did arise in my mind have already been posed by you and I have no further questions. Senator Moss. Thank you. Do you have any questions, Senator Burdick? Senator BURDICK. No questions. Senator Moss. Senator Hatfield? Senator HATFIELD. I have no questions. Senator Moss. Thank you very much, Mr. Wilson. We have one other witness, Mr. George Alderson, representing the Sierra Club. We will hear you, Mr. Alderson, and then we do have one other matter for Mr. Bill to testify on, but we will ask Mr. Alderson to come forward first. STATEMENT OF GEORGE ALDERSON, REPRESENTING SIERRA CLUB Mr. ALDERSON. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I am George Alderson, a resident of Logan, Utah, and presently on military duty in Washington, and I am appearing today on behalf of the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club supports the objectives of S. 26, to incorporate into Canyonlands National Park four key areas which were omitted when the park was established in 1964. We also recommend that S. 26 be amended to direct the Secretary of the Interior to report to Congress within 2 years on the areas in Canyonlands National Park which are suitable for designation as wilderness. When Canyonlands National Park was proposed in 1962 the Sierra Club endorsed the proposal. It was the club's position then, as it is now, that the area surrounding the confluence of the Green and Colorado Rivers should be in a national park adequate to protect the integral features of this area. rfhis expansive region of red-rock and rivers even now is just beginning to capture the national attention that it merits as one of the greatest and wildest parts of our Nation's scenic heritage. When the basic Canyonlands legislation took effect in 1964, much had been omitted that deserved and needed to be in the national park. We are pleased to support S. 26 as a first step toward remedying the deficiencies of the 1964 act. The need for these additions is clear. If a park visitor drives on the park road to Island in the Sky and looks out over the White Rim and acros~~ the rivers toward the southwest, the view is almost beyond words, and mostly beyond the park boundary. Much of what park visitors find satisfying in the view is outside the control of the national park and without the protection a national park provides against incompatible uses. By contrast, the popular Dead Horse Point, which overlooks parts of Canyonlands Park, is outside the boundaries and is handled by the Utah State Park and Recreation Commission. Else- where the park boundaries leave major landforms half in, half out of the park, clearly a situation which complicates protection and administration. These are some of the problems that arose from the failure to include the entirety of the national park at the outset, PAGENO="0019" 15 The additions in S. 26 will alleviate these failings in four areas. Even S. 26, however, does not go all the way to the Orange Cliffs, which form the west boundary of the Canyonlands as a geographic entity. The area between The Maze and the Orange Cliffs is covered by S. 27, to establish Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. We shall recommend during deliberations on S. 27 that this area be given the strongest possible protection. Because Canyonlands National Park is so new and so unimpaired, the progress of master planning for Canyonlands is a matter of concern to everyone interested in conservation of this park. We raise the sub- ject at this time because the National Park Service seems to feel that it lacks any congressional directive to study the wilderness potential of Canyonlands. This is a critical point, because the wilderness of Canyonlands is one of the park's greatest and most widely known features. Even the visitor who never leaves the road appreciates the wilderness values of Canyonlands, for example, in his enjoyment of views from Island in the Sky. This visual access to the wilderness is one of the most important ways people enjoy the park. The potential for designation of portions of Canyonlands as wilder- ness should be considered and incorporated into the planning process of the National Park Service. While Canyonlands is still largely wilderness is the time to consider this-to take inventory of what we have, then carefully to plan the means and routes of access, whether by car, jeep, or on foot, so that the wilderness resource will be minimally impaired. The Wilderness Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 890) provided for mandatory review of wilderness in National Park System units by September 1974. This provision, however, did not specifically mention new parks established subsequent to approval of the Wilderness Act. Canyon- lands thus is technically exempt from the 1974 deadline. It is a paradox that this park, in which the wilderness resource is so important and for which initial planning is being done which will set the pattern for development over many years' time, should be thus excluded from receiving high priority attention with respect to wilderness conservation. The Sierra Club reGommends that the wilderness of Canyonlands National Park be studied immediately. In the older parks wilderness studies too often, by necessity, consist of mapping out the patchwork of wild country left between long-established roads, which generally were not planned with wilderness in mind, but rather as a route between two points. In Canyonlands, roads are still sparse, develop- ment plans still tentative. Wilderness values should be considered, and their preservation planned, at the same time as other values and plans are considered. To this end, we suggest an amendment to S. 26 providing 2 years for the Interior Department to review the wilderness opportunity in Canyonlands National Park and directing the Department to report to Congress on what is suitable for designation as wilderness Congress would then have the option, as is provided under the Wilderness Act, to designate wilderness areas by act of Congress incorporating them into the National Wilderness Preservation System. PAGENO="0020" 16 The following language would appear to achieve this purpose: Within two years from the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall review the area within the Canyonlands National Park and the additions thereto authorized by this Act and shall report to the President, in accordance with subsections 3(c) and 3(d) of the Wilderness Act (78 Stat. 890; 16 U.S.C. 1132 (c) and (d)), his recommendation as to the suitability or non- suitability of any area within the park for preservation as wilderness, and any designation of any such area as a wilderness shall be accomplished in accordance with said subsections of the Wilderness Act. This language is patterned after the similar provision in the North Cascades legislation reported by this committee and passed by the Senate. The wilderness potential of Canyonlands is equally deserving of prompt and careful consideration while the whole range of options, both for designation of wilderness areas and for provision of access routes, is open to us. In conclusion, the Sierra Club is gratified by the progress S. 26 represents toward a Canyonlands National Park fully adequate and worthy of the canyon country. We support the proposed additions and urge that a wilderness review procedure be instituted at this time for the whole of Canyonlands N ational Park. Senator Moss. Thank you, Mr. Alderson. You point out what is sort of an anomaly. The Wilderness Act was enacted just before Canyon- lands was established. The Wilderness Act directed a wilderness survey in all existing national parks. Now you request that we write into the Canyonlands extension bill a requirement that a similar wilderness sur- v~y be made in Canyonlands. As far as I am personally concerned, I think that is a good amend- ment, and I will certainly see that it is proposed when the sub- committee begins to mark up the bill. We appreciate your bringing it to our attention. I think previous witnesses testified, particularly Mr. Wilson, that the intentions, at least right now, are to leave certain areas as wilder- ness but there may be other parts of Canyonlands that might also be designated as wilderness and left in that state. Mr. ALDERSON. Yes, sir. Senator Moss. So we appreciate your bringin~ that to our attention, and we are happy to have the general purposes of the bill endorsed by the Sierra Club, certainly one of the most active and vocal of our conservation organizations. Thank you very much, Mr. Alderson. The Wasatch Mountain Club has written a letter to the committee concerning both Canyonlands and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. Without objection, the letter will be included in the hearing record at this Point. (The letter referred to follows:) WASATCH MOUNTAIN CLUB, Salt La/ce City, Utah, July 22, 1968. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: On behalf of the Wasatch Mountain Club, I would be grateful if you would enter the following comments into the records of the hearings on the Senate bills S-26 and S-27. Firstly we find the bills most praiseworthy since they will extend and define the boundaries of both Canyonlands National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreational Area. However, we feel that in order to be really effective, the boundaries of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area should be extended to include the area bounded on the east by the line from Bullfrog Basin to the Boulder road; on the north by the Boulder road to the Escalante road; on the west by the Escalante road to J PAGENO="0021" 17 Hole-in-the-Rock and on the south by the present Glen Canyon National Recrea- tion Area. If the extension includes less than this area, then the upper Escalante and its side canyons will still be subject to exploitation. Such exploitation generally results in erosion and subsequent floods downstream. Furthermore, to afford full protection to this fragile ecological area, we feel that it should be designated as wilderness area. Rainfall in this area is quite low and the desert flora on the plateau are easily destroyed. Such destruction could lead to widespread devastation in the canyons below. Since the ecological situation is so precarious and will not withstand a great deal of abuse, we request that the National Park Service should conduct a study within two years to determine whether the area is suitable for classification under the Wilderness Act. Yours sincerely, W. N. STRICKLAND, Conservation Committee. Senator Moss. If there is nothing further on this legislation the hearing is adjourned. (Whereupon the subcommittee turned to other business.) 0 PAGENO="0022" PAGENO="0023" PAGENO="0024"