PAGENO="0001" BIG THICKET NATIONAL PARK (~,o2ozZ - r~ ~ ~Th BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PARKS AND RECREATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-THIRD CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON S. 314 A BILL TO ESTABLISH THE BIG THICKET NATIONAL PARK IN TEXAS S. 1981 A BILL TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BIG THICKET NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL RESERVE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES S. 2286 A BILL TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BIG THICKET NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL RESERVE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES H.R. 11546 A BILL TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BIG THICKET NATIONAL PRESERVE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES FEBRUARY 5 AND 6, 1974 0 Printed for the use /1 / Committee on Interior and j~//~/ /5/ ~t,~ij.? / / ~J U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING 30-061 0 WASHINGTON: 1974 PAGENO="0002" COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington, Chairm'uv ALAN BIBLE, Nevada PAUL J. FANNIN, Arizona FRANK CHURCH, Idaho. CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Wyoming LEE METCALF, Montana MARK 0. HATFIELD, Oregon J. BENNETT JOHNSTON, JR., Louisiana JAMES L. BUCKLEY, New York JAMES ABOUREZK, South Dakota JAMES A. McCLURE, Idaho FLOYD K. HASKELL, Colorado DEWEY F. BARTLETT, Oklahoma GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin HOWARD M. METZENBAUM, Ohio JERRY T. VERKLER, Stuff Director WILLIAM J. VAN NEss, Chief Counsel HARRISON LOESCH, Minority Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON PARKS AND RECREATION ALAN BIBLE, Nevada, Chairmau HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Wyoming FRANK CHURCH, Idaho MARK 0. HATFIELD, Oregon J. BENNETT JOHNSTON, JR., Louisiana JAMES A. McCLURE, Idaho GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin HOWARD M. METZENBAUM, Ohio JAMES P. BEIRNE, Special Counsel (II) PAGENO="0003" CONTENTS Hearings: Page February 5, 1974 1 February 6, 1974 167 S. 314 2 Department reports: Agriculture 5 Management and Budget 6 S. 1981 7 Department report: Interior 14 S. 2286 19 Department report: Interior 24 H.R. 11546 37 TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5,1974 STATEMENTS Allen, Judith C., Batson, Tex 161 Bentsen, Hon. Lloyd, a U.S. Senator from the State of Texas 73 Bible, Hon. Alan, a U.S. Senator from the State of Nevada 1' Bonney, Orrin, regional vice president, Sierra Club, Washington, D.C__ 150 Gunter, Pete A., chairman, Big Thicket Coordinating Committee, Sara- toga, Tex.; accompanied by Maxine Johnston, president, Big Thicket Association, and Russell Long, member of the board, Big Thicket Asso- ciation 120, 125 Henley, Dempsie, chairman, Texas Commission for Indian Affairs, Liberty, Tex 162 Johnston, Maxine, president, Big Thicket Association, Saratoga, Tex 135, 139, 146 Kittell, Mary, president, Council of National Garden Clubs of America, Fort Worth, Tex 148 Long. Dr. Russell, Lamar University, presented `by Mrs. Russell Long 148 Reed, Nathaniel P., Assistant Secretary, Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, De- partment of the Interior 64 Steelman, Hon. Alan. a U.S. Representative from the State of Texas 63 Tower, Hon. John G., a U.S. Senator from the State of Texas 48 Webster. James, president. Texas Forestry Association, Houston. Tex___ 156. 158 White. Char, chairman, Environmental Action Coalition of Texas, San Antonio, Tex 118 William, J. T.. `board president and W. M. Nelson, superintendent. Lum- berton Independent School District 155 Wilson. Hon. Charles, a U.S. Representative from the State of Texas 75, 80 Yarborough, Hon. Ralph W., former U.S. Senator from the State of Texas 82, 116 COMMUNICATIONS Brow-n, Ken M., legislative counsel, Department of the Interior, letter to Senator .Tackson, dated February 28, 1974 69 Gunter, Pete, chairman. Big Thicket Coordinating Committee, Saratoga. Tex.. letter to Senator .Jackson. dated February 15, 1974 134 Webster, James B., president, Texas Forestry Association, Lufken, Tex., letters to Senator Bible, dated February 11 and 15, 1974 159, 160 (III) PAGENO="0004" Iv ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Big Thicket: Park or Tree Farm? by Pete Gunter, from Environmental Page Action, December 22. 1973 56 The Big Thicket-A Texas Treasure in Trouble, article and photographs by John L. Tveten, from National Parks and Conservation magazine, January 1974 o0 The Destruction of the Big Thicket-An Audubon magazine report, by Edwin Way Teale W~NESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974 STATEMENTS Bible, Hon. Alan, a U.S. Senator from the State of Nevada 167 Bonney, Lorraine. Houston, Tex 183, 185 Cashen. Alice, Batson, Tex 201 Cooper, Toby, representative, National Parks Conservation Association, Washington, D.C 232, 235 Dickerman, Ernest 31.. Wilderness Society, Washington D.C 230, 231 Dorman. James 31.. Sour Lake. Tex 227 Eisner, Prof. Thomas, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y 202 Fritz, Edward. Texas Committee on Natural Resources, Dallas, Tex 214, 216 Fullingim. Archer. Kountze. Tex 226 Gossett, Sharon, Citizen's Coordination Committee 182 Harless, C. 31., Silsbee, Tex 192 Harrel. Richard C.. assistant professor of biology, Lamar University, Beaumont, Tex 178 3lalnassy. Phillip. assistant professor of biology, Lamar University, Beau- mont, Tex 179 3loxon, Gay B.. attorney, Beaumont, Tex 188, 191 Thompson. Houston, attorney, Silsbee, Tex 179, 180 Trest, Mrs. Paul, chairman of SOHAL, Save Our Homes and Lands, Sils- bee, Tex 207 Watson, Geraldine, Silsbee. Tex 175, 177 Williams. J. T.. school tax department, Lumberton, Tex., accompanied by William Nelson and John C. Billings 228 Yarborough, Hon. Ralph W., former U.S. Senator from the State of Texas-- 168 Yellot, Mrs. Oscar, chairman, Citizenship Coordinating Committee, Silsbee, Te~ 212 CO3I3IUXICATIONS Bible, Hon. Alan, a U.S. Senator from the State of Nevada: Letters received: Frank J. Hradesky. president, Houston Sportsmen's Club, Feb. ruary 21. 1974 169 Mike Wiesner, chairman, University Big Thicket Association, Austin. Tex., January 29, 1974 171 31. E. Warren. head, Department of Biology, Beaumont, Tex., February 1. 1974 1'78 3lrs. Paul Trest, director of S.O.H.A.L., Lumberton, Tex., Jan- uary 29. 1974 210 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Position Paper Prepared by Thomas Eisner and Paul Feeny, professors of biological science at Cornell University and representatives of the Ad Hoc Committee to Save the Big Thicket 203 The Big Thicket National Park, from Science, February 9, 1973 207 PAGENO="0005" V APPENDIX Page Allen, Mrs. Fred H.. Jr., Hardin County, Tex., statement 239 Bible, Hon. Alan, a r.s. Senator from the State of Nevada: Letters received: Mrs. Harry Weisbrod, American Association of tniversity Women, Dallas. Tex., February 15, 1914 252 Raymond H. McDavid, conservation vice president. Outdoor Na- ture Club, HOuston, Tex., February 18, 1914 254 Archibald C. Rogers, president, the American Institute of Archi- tects, February 4, 1914 255 Frederick R. Gehibach, associate professor, Baylor tniversity, Waco, Tex., February 18, 1914 257 Dr. Wendall N. Spreadbury, political alert chairman, Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. February 13, 1974~_ 258 William E. Towell, executive vice president. American Forestry Association, February 5, 1914 260 Anella Dexter, editor, Texas Conservation Council. Inc., Houston, Tex., February 5, 1914 262 Clayton 31. Sylestine, chairman, Alabama-Coushatta Tribal Coun- cil. February 1. 1914 264 Joe Pedigo, mayor. city of Livingston, Livingston. Tex., January 24. 1974 266 Cynthia E. Wilson, Washington representative. National Audubon Society, February 6. 1974 268 Peyton Walters, county judge. Polk County. Livingston. Tex., Jan- uary 24. 1974 270 Lois Williams Parker, Beaumont. Tex.. February 1, 1974 272 Arthur Temple. chairman of the board. Temple Industries. Diboll, TeL, February 19. 1974 273 Hallmon. Billy W.. Euless. Tex.. statement 275 Jackson. Hon. Henry 31., a T.S. Senator from the State of Washington: Letters received: Hon. James A. Haley, chairman. House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. December 7. 1973 239 John Marble, Box 742. Sour Lake. Tex 240 Jeffrey R. Short, Chicago. Ill.. January 7. 1974__ 241 Mrs. Edna Jagoe. State Big Thicket, chairman. Texas Federation of Womens Clubs 241 Robert W. Kaelin. New- Paltz. N. Mex.. January 8, 1974 243 Mrs. Claude E. Gossett. Beaumont. Tex, November 17, 1973 244 Sandy Kress, president, student government, Fniversity of Texas, Austin. Tex.. February 2, 1914 245 Alfred A. Knopf. New- York. N.Y.. January 2, 1974J 250 Mrs. R. B. Strain, secretary, Gordon Womans Club, Gordon. Tex., January 23, 1974 251 Kress, Sandy, president. student body. Fniversity of Texas. Austin. Tex., statement 246 PAGENO="0006" PAGENO="0007" BIG THICKET NATIONAL PARK TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1974 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PARKS AND RECREATION, OF THE COMMITPEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Waeltington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 3110, Dirksen Office Building, Hon. Alan Bible, chairman, presiding. Present: Senator Bible. Also present: Jerry T. Verkler, staff director; and James P. Beirne, special counsel. OPENING STATEMENT OP HON. ALAN BIBLE, A U.S. SENATOR PROM THE STATE OP NEVADA Senator BIBLE. The hearing will come to order. This morning we are hearing for a second time the various bills on establishment of Big Thicket National Biological Reserve, establishing the Big Thicket National Park and establishing-the House passed bill establishing the new name that has cropped up since the last Congress, the Big Thicket National Biological Preserve. During the 91st Congress, the subcommittee conducted extensive hearings on similar legislation which was proposed by Senator Yar- borough. Hearings were held in Beaumont, Thx. and here in Wash- ington. The Senate subsequently passed legislation which was unfortunately not enacted by the House. The Big Thicket area of eastern Texas con- tains a great diversity of plant communities. These vegetative units range from the drier upland country to the baygall, bog, streainbank, and floodplain forest communities. The effect of development on this area since the Senate originally con- sidered this legislation has altered somewhat the various proposals. At this point I shall request that copies of the various bills pending before the siibcommnittee and the Departmental report to each be in- serted in the record. [The texts of 5. 314, 5. 1981, S. 2286, and H.R. 11546 together with departmental reports follow:] (1) PAGENO="0008" 2 93D CONGRESS 1ST SEssIo~ S. 3 14 IN TIlE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES JANUARY 11, 1973 Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD (for Mr. BENTSEN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the committee on Interior and Insu]ar Affairs A BILL To establish the Big Thickct National Park in Texas. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That in order to preserve in public ownership an area in the 4 State of Texas possessing outstanding botanical, zoological, 5 geological, archeological, and ecological values, together with 6 recreational, liistoiical, scenic, and other natural values of 7 great significance as free-flowing streams and wildlife liabi- 8 tat, and to provide for the use and enjoyment of the outdoor 9 recreation resources thereof by the people of the United 10 States, the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to 11 as the "Secretary") shall acquire, in accordance with the 12 provisions of this Act, one hundred thousand acres of lands 11 PAGENO="0009" 3 2 1 and interests in lands in ilardin, Jasper, Jefferson, Liberty, 2 Orange, Polk, and Tyler Counties, Texas, including the most :~ significant ecological units of the area and acreage along 4 impoi~tant rivers and streamways, and shall establish such 5 one hundred thousand acres of lands and interests so acquired ~j as the Big Thicket National Park. 7 SEC. 2. (a) In order to establish the Big Thicket Na- 8 tional Park, the Secretary may acquire land or interests ~ therein by donation, purchase with donated or appropriated 10 funds, exchange, or in such other manner as lie deems to be ~ in the public interest. `Wherever feasible, land shall be ac- 12 quired l)y transfer from other Federal agencies. 13 Any property, or interest therein, owned by the State 14 of Texas or political subdivision thereof may be acquired oniy 15 with the concurrence of such owner. 16 (b) In order to facilitate the acquisition of privately 17 owned lands in the park by exchange and avoid the payment 18 of severance costs, the Secretary may acquire land which 19 lies adjacent to or in the vicinity of the park. Land so ac- 20 quired outside the park bouiidary may be exchanged by the 21 Secretary on an equal-value basis, subject to such terms, con- 22 ditions, and reservations as he may deem necessary, for pri- 23 vately owned land located within the park. The Secretary 24 may accept cash from or pay cash to the grant or in such ex- PAGENO="0010" 4 1 change in order to ~qua1ize the values of the properties 2 exchanged. 3 Si~c. 3. When title to all privately owned land within 4 the boundary of the park, other than such outstaiidmg in- 5 terests, rights, and easements as the Secretary determines 6 are not objectionable, is vested in the United States, notice 7 thereof and notice of the establishment of the Big Thicket s Natioiial Park shall lie published in the Federal Register. 9 Thereafter, the Secretary may continue to acquire the re- 10 inaining land and interests in land within the boundaries of ii the park. 12 SEc. 4. The Big Thicket National Park shall be ad- 13 ministered by the Secretary in accordance with the provi- 14 S1OIIS of the Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535; 16 15 U.S.C. 1-4), as amended and supplemented. 16 SEC. 5. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated 17 such funds as are necessary to accomplish the purposes of 18 this Act. PAGENO="0011" 5 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY * WASHINGTON, D. C. 20250 cEa Senator Henry H. Jackson Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States Senate Dear Mr * Chairman: Here is our report on S~ 314, a bill "To establish the Big Thicket National Park in Texas," S. 1981 and S. 2286, bills "To authorize establishment of the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve in the State of Texas, and for other purposes," and H.R. 11546, an Act "To authorize the establishment of the Big Thicket National Preserve in the State of Texas and for other purposes." Each of these bills would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire and administer lands within the Big Thitket area of east Texas for scientific study, interpretive, and recreational~'purpdse~. S. 2286 contains the legislative proposal set forth by the Department of the Interior. The provisions of the three Senate bills and the House Act would not change the status of any National Forest lands, would not affect lands `immediately adjacent to the National Forests, or have a major effect on other responsibilities of the Department of Agriculture in the area. This Department therefore defers to the reconinendations of the Department of the Interior in this matter. The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is no objection to the presentation of the report from the standpoint of the Administration's program. Sincerely, 1~'ICHARD A. ASHWORTH Deputy Under Secretary PAGENO="0012" 6 EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET WASHINGTON D.C. 20503 FEB 2 2 ~974 Honorable Henry M. Jackson Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States Senate 3106 New Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Mr. Chairman: This is in response to your requests for the views of the Office of Management and Budget on the following bills: 1. S. 314, a bill "To establish the Big Thicket National Park in Texas' (requested i.~ay 24, 1973); and, 2. S. 1981, a bill "To authorize th... establishment ~of the Big .Th.icket.~Nati~flal Preserve in. the:State o.f * Texas., and for oth~r~ ~rpos~'~~ (requested Deccr~ber 28, 1~73) * .. . ... . . . The Office of Management and Budget concurs in the views of the Department of the Interior in its report on these bills, and accordingly recommends enactment of the Department's proposed legislation to authorize the establish- ment of the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve in Texas, S. 2286, in lieu of S. 314 or S. 1981. Sincerely, Wilfred H. Roromel Assistant Director for Legislative Reference PAGENO="0013" 7 93D CONGRESS 1ST Szssio~ 1 981 T.N THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JUNE 12, 1973 Mr. TOWER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs A BILL To authorize the establishment of the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve in the State of Texas, and for other pur- ~ 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Represent a- 2 tires of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That in order to preserve for scientific study and for the 4 education and benefit of present and future generations cer- 5 tam unique areas in Tyler, liardin, Jasper, Polk,. Liberty, 6 Jefferson, and Orange Counties, Texas, which contain vege- 7 tational types and associations of national significance, there 8 is hereby authorized to be established the Big Thicket 9 National Biological Reserve. II. PAGENO="0014" 8 1 ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY SECRETARY OF THE INTERTOR 2 SEC. 2. (a) In order to efiectuate the purpose of this 3 Act, the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter ref~rred to as 4 the "Secretary") ~s authorized to acquire by donation, pur- 5 chase, transfer from any other Federal agency or exchange, 6 lands, waters, and interests therein, within the areas gen- 7 erally depicted on the map entitled "Big Thicket National 8 . Biological Reserve, Texas", numbered NBR-BT-91,019, 9 and dated February 1973, which shall be on file and avail- 10 able for public inspection in the Office of the Nationa.l Park 11 Service, Department.of the. Interior. The Secretary may from 12 time to time make minor revisions in the boundaries of the 13 area by publication of a revised map or other boundary de- 14 scription in the Federal Register, and he may acquire prop- 13 erty within the revised boundaries in accordance with the 16 provisions of this section: Provided, That the boundaries of 17 the area may not encompass more than one hundred thou- 18 sand acres of land. Property owned by the State of Texas or .19 any. political subdivision thereof may be acquired only by 20 donation. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, Fed- 21 eral property withjn the bounda.ries of the area may, with the 22 concurrence of the head of the administering agency, be trans- 23 ferred to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary for 24 the purposes of this Act, without a transfer of funds. PAGENO="0015" 9 3 1 (b) The Secretary shall take such steps as he deems 2 necessary in order to preserve the ecological and recreational 3 interests and fish and wildlife resources of thelands described 4 in subsection (a) of this section. For purposes of this Act, 5 the term "waste" means any action inimical to such interests 6 and resources. In such connection he shall purchase land in an 7 order of preference commensurate with the threat of waste of 8 such lands respecting such interests and resources giving first 9 consideration to the prevention of any clearcutting or of any 10 waste having the effect of despoiling the lands described in 11 subsection (a) of this section prior to the acquisition for the 12 reserve. In all offers of purchase and in all condemnation pro- 13 ceedings, the Secretary shall take due account of the diminu- 14 tion of the value of the land occasioned by such waste as 15 described herein. 16 RIGHTS OF OWNERS OF IMPROVED PROPERTY. 17 Si~c. 3. (a) The owner of improved property on the 18 date of its acquisition by the Secretary may, as a condition 19 of such acquisition, retain a right of use and occupancy of 20 the improved property for noncommercial residential pur- 21 poses for a definite term of not more than twenty-five years 22 or, in lieu thereof, for a term ending at the death of the 23 owner or the death of his spouse, whichever is later. The 24 owner shall elect the term to be reserved. Unless this 25 property is wholly or partially donated to the United States, PAGENO="0016" 10 4 1 the Secretary shall pay the owner the fair market value of .2 the property on the date of such acquisitiofi, less time fair 3 market value retained pursuant to this section. Any such 4 right so retained shall be subject to termination by the See- 5 retary upon his determination that it is being exercised in a 6 manner inconsistent with the purposes of this Act. Upon the 7 Secretary's notifying the holder of any such right of such a 8 determination and tendering to him an amount equal to the 9 fair market value of that portion of the right which remains 10 uñexpire& such right shall be deemed terminated. U (1)) As used in this Act, the term "improved property" 12 - ~means a detached, one-family dwelling, construction of which 13 was begun before June 1, 1973, which is used for noncom- 14 mercial residential purposes, together with not to exceed three acres of the land on which the dwelling is situated, ~ such land being in the same ownership as the dwelling, to- ~ gether with any striict ores accessory to the dwelling which 18 are situated on such land. 19 ADMINISTRATION BY TUE SEORETA~Y 20 SEa. 4. (a) The area within the boundaries depicted 21 on the map referred to in section 2, or as such boundaries 22 may lie revised, shall he known as the Big Thicket National ~ Biological Beserve, and shall he administered by the Secre- ~1 lary in aecordar~ce wIll) tile laws applicfll)le to the National PAGENO="0017" 11 1 Park System, and in a manner consistent with the purposes 2 of this Act. (b) The Secretary shall permit hunting, fishing, and 4 trapping on lands and waters under his jurisdiction within 5 the reserve in accordance with the applicable laws of the 6 United States and the State of Texas, except that he may 7 designate zones where and periods when no hunting, fishing, S or trapping may be permitted for reasons of public safety, 9 administration, fish or wildlife management, or public use 10 and enjoyment. Except in emergencies, any regulations pre- 11 scribing such restrictions shall be put into effect only after 12 consultation with the appropriate State agency having juris- 13 diction over hunting, fishing, and trapping activities. 14 COURT REVIEW 15 SEc. 5. (a) Any Owner of any right terminated on the 16 basis of a. determination by the Secretary under section 3 (a) 17 may obtain review of such termination in the District Court 18 of the Eastern District of Texas, or in the United States ~ district court for the district in which he resides~ by filing 20 in such court within ninety days following the receipt of the 21 notification of termination a. written petition praying that the 22 determination of the Secretary be set aside. If the determi- 23 nation by the Secretary is not in accordance with this Act or 24 ~f he ha~ `icted upon fictu~l deteimin~tions which `ne not 30-061 0 - 74 2 PAGENO="0018" 12 6 1 supported by substantial evidence, the court shall set aside 2 the termination. 3 (b) The commencement of proceedings under this sub- 4 section shall operate `as a stay of the termination of such * right. Upon a sliowmg that iiTeparal)le harm may be done 6 to the reserve pending the final judicial determination, the 7 court having jurisdiction of the PriliciPal case shall have 8 jurisdiction to grant such injunctive relief as may be appro- priate. 10 COMPENSATION FOR TAX LOSSES 11 SEC. 6. (a) In order to provide compensation for tax 12.. losses to taxing jurisdiction sustained as a result of any i3 acquisition by the United States, on and after the date of the 14 enactment of this Act, of privately owned real property for 15 the reserve, the Secretary shall make payment to an officer 16 designated for such purpose by the Governor of the. State of 17 Texas for distribution to the local body which assessed taxes 18 on the property immediately prior t:o its acqmsitioii by the 19 United States, in accorda~icë with the following schedule: 20 (1) For the fiscal year in which the real property 21 is acquired and the next following five fiscal years, there 22 shall be paid an amount equal to the full amoimt of an- 23 nual taxes last a~sessed and levied on the *Pr0i)C1~t~T by 24 plTldic taxing bodies,. less any amount, to be determined PAGENO="0019" 13 1 by the Secretary, which may have been paid on account 2 of taxes during such period; and 3 (2) For each of the four succeeding fiscal years fol- 4 lowing such six-fiscal-year period rcferre~l to in para- 5 graph (1) of this section, there shall be paid an amount 6 equal to the full amount of taxes referred to in paragraph 7 (1) , less 20, 40, 60, and 80 per centuin, respectively, S of such full amount for each fiscal veai, including the 9 year forwhich the payment is to be made. 10 (B) For purposes of paying such compensation under 11 this section, the Tsses~ed value of such ie'il piopeity si `ill In. 12 that `~o deteimined as of June 1, 197'3 j3 AT 2JJORTZA~1 IO~ S 14 SEC. 1. There are authoi~zed to be appropriated such sums as may be necess~uy to cairy out tlic piovisions of this 16 Act PAGENO="0020" 14 United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 FE84 1~74 Dear Mr. Chairman: This responds to the request of your Conanittee for the views of this Department on S. 1981, a bill "To authorize the establishment of the Big Thicket National Biological ,Reserve in the State of Texas, and for other purposes", and S. 3l1~, a similar bill. There is also pending before your Coimnittee, H.R. U5~46, a bill passed by the House of Representatives on December 3, 1973, which would authorize the establishment of a Big Thicket National Preserve. We reconirnend ~nactment of S. 2286, which is identical to the legislation proposed by this Department to the Congress by a letter dated July 114, 1973, in lieu of S. 3114, 5. 1981, or H.R. U5146. S. 1981 would establish a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve of a maximum of 100,000 acres, consisting of seven units and three river corridors. S. 3114 would establish a Big Thicket National Park of 100,000 acres in the general area described in the bill. H.R. 115146 would establish a Big Thicket National Preserve of eight units and four river corridors which would total approximately 814,550 acres, using the device of legislative taking. The taking would be effective 6 months after enactment of the bill or at such time as a boundary map is published by the Department, whichever occurs earlier. The Department's legislation, 5. 2286, would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to establish the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve, consisting of not to exceed 68,000 acres, in eastern Texas. The. biological reserve would be managed in accord with the laws appli- cable to the National Park System, and emphasis would be placed on preserving and interpreting the biological values in the Reserve. Property could be acquired for the Reserve by purchase, donation, transfer from any other Federal agency, or exchange, provided that property of State or local governments could be acquired only by donation. Owners of improved property could retain a right of use and occupancy for noncommercial reSidential purposes for 25 years or, alternatively, for the lifetime of the owner or his spouse, whichever is a~longer period. The language concerning rights of use and occupancy is the same as that used in a number of recent pieces 4' Let's Clean Up America For Our 200th Birthday PAGENO="0021" 15 of legislation dealing with acquisition of lands for addition to the National Park System, and we recommend its use in this case as well. Hunting and fishing are to be allowed, in accord with applicable State and Federal laws, except that the Secretary may designate periods when and zones where these would not be allowed for reasons of public safety, administration,, fish and wildlife management, or public use and enjoyment. The language in the bill concerning hunting and fishing is also the same as that used in other recent National Park System legislation, and we recommend its use. We would recommend permitting hunting, trapping and fishing in the Big Thicket Reserve subject to limitations such as those contained in our proposal. The Department's proposal contains a provision which authorizes the Secretary to decline to acquire interests in, or all or any part of the oil and gas minerals and other minerals on lands or waters in the Reserve. The Secretary shall allow, subject to regulations promulgated by him, reasonable use of Reserve lands to extract such minerals. Easements are also preserved under the pro- visions of the bill. We believe that any bill dealing with the Big Thicket should include a provision such as section 6 of our proposal, to make it clear that the Secretary is not obligated to acquire the extremely expensive rights to oil and gas resources situated in the Reserve. The Department's proposal, of about 68,000 acres, is the result of careful evaluation of the resources of the Big Thicket, weighing costs of acquisition against the resources to be preserved and inter- preted, and taking into account administrative requirements. The seven units of the Reserve are representative of the diverse eco- systems found in the Big Thicket area. River corridors were considered for inclusion in the Reserve, but these were not included because of the large number of homesites along these waterways and because of the difficulty of administering the extensive boundaries along these corridors. As a general matter, ye recommend the specific provisions contained in our proposal in lieu of those contained in the other bills which are the subject of this report. A number of the provisions found in these bills restate existing policy on management and acquisition priorities and are not necessary if reference is made to a general PAGENO="0022" 16 statutory authority such as the Act of August 25, 1916. We would, however, have no objection to the provision in H.R. U51~6 requiring recormnendations pursuant to the Wilderness Act to be made within 5 years. Wehave the foflowing specific comments: 1. H.R. U5)~6 provides that a person electing continued use and occupancy waives benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. Such a provision is apparently based on the theory that since persons retaining a right of use and occupancy experience, no sudden dislocation, they are not entitled to benefits under the Act in the same degree as persons who are forced to move immediately. We have no objection to such a provision, and would suggest use of the following language: * "Whenever an owner of property elects to retain a right of use and occupancy pursuant to this Act, such owner shall be deemed to have waived any benefits or rights under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (814 Stat. 18914)." 2. 5. 1981 provides for district court review of decisions by the Secretary to terminate a right of use and occupancy. The owner must file for review within 90 days of receipt of notification of termination. We would oppose such a provision on the ground that it imposes an added burden on the owner of the property that he would not otherwise have. We interpret language cd~erning termination such as that contained in our proposal, as requiring court action before the Secretary can acquire full title, unless, of course, the owner wiflingly surrenders his right of use and occupancy. The Secretary must initiate such court action. Under the provisions of S. 1981, on the other hand, the Secretary would not have this obligation and the owner would automatically waive his rights if he did not come forward and file for review within 90 days. We believe that, in fairness to the owner,. the burden of initiating court action should continue to be on the Secretary. .3. 5. 1981 contains provisions for in lieu of tax payments. We oppose such payments to State and local governments as a general matter, because there is, in fact, generally no net loss to such governments. Although property will be taken off the tax rolls by being included in the reserve, acquisition will take place over several years. During this period, visitation to the area wifl increase, providing increased income to the area. Increased tax revenues resulting from visitation have been found to more than off-set loss of real property tax revenues. PAGENO="0023" .17 1L H.R. 1151t6 provides for creation of the preserve through legislative taking. We strongly reconsnend against this approach. Legislative taking can result in greater costs, because the Government is obligated to make interest payments to the owner during the period between taking and payment, and these interest rates can substantially exceed the inflation rates in the area during this same period. Further, legislative taking reduces budget flexibility, because pay- ment must be made at the tine that a final judgment is rendered, rather than according to an orderly acquisition schedule. While a taking may be justified in some instances where an area is in immediate danger of irreparable harm and where funds are not available for purchase of that area, we do not believe that such conditions exist in Big Thicket. Sufficient funds will be budgeted in the first year so that if any particular tracts are endangered, they can almost certainly be acquired through normal acquisition procedures. In addition, we are concerned about the constitutionality of the provisions of section 2(b) of H.R. U5~46 that limit payment under the taking provisions to Land and Water Conservation Fund moneys, subject to appropriation authorization ceilings under section 6. It is possible that the appropriation ceiling might be reached before all valid claims for compensation by persons whose property was acquired by legislative taking were paid. The Federal Government would then be in the position of holding title to lands for which it could not, because of the restrictions of section 2(b), legally compensate the former owner. The taking arguably would be an unconstitutional taking without compensation. A similar problem could conceivably arise if the Land and Water Conservation Fund were not adequate to cover obligations created by the taking provisions. .5. We recommend the following perfecting amendments to S. 2286: On page 1, line 9, amend "purpose" to read "purposes"; on page 2, line 17, amend the phrase "law. ~ to read "law, federal"; on page 5, line 6, amend "hte" to read "the" and on line 9, amend "reseve" to read "reserve". PAGENO="0024" 18 We urge prompt and favorable action by the Congress on our proposal for the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve, because we believe that time is running out for this valuable national resource. The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration's program, and that S. 2g86 is in accord ~dth the program of the President. Honorable Henry M. Jackson Chairman, Cormnittee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States Senate Washington, D.C. PAGENO="0025" 19 93D CONGRESS S. 2286 IN TIlE SENATE OF THE TJNITET) STATES JULY 30, 1973 Mr. JAc1~soN (for himself and Mr. FANNIN) (by request) introduced the fOl- ]owing bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs A BILL To authorize the establishment of the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve in the State of Texas, a.nd for other purposes. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That in order to preserve for scientific study and for the 4 education and benefit of present and future generations cer- 5 tam unique areas in the Big Thicket of eastern Texas which 6 contain vegetational types and associations of national sig- 7 nificance, there is hereby authorized to be established the 8 Big Thicket National Biological Reserve. 9 SEc. 2. In order to effectuate the purpose of this Act 10 the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the II PAGENO="0026" 20 2 1 "Secretary") is authorized to acquire by donation, purchase, 2 transfer from any other Federal agency or exchange, lands, 3 waters, and interests therein within the areas generally de- 4 picted on the map entitled "Big Thicket National Biological 5 Reserve", numbered NBR-BT 91,023, and dated July 1973, 6 which shall be on file and available for public inspection in 7 the Office of the National Park Service, Department of the 8 Interior. The Secretary may from time to time make minor 9 revisions in the boundaries of the area by publication of a 10 revised map or other boundary description in the Federal 11 Register, and he may acquire property within the revised 12 boundaries in accordance with the provisions of this section: 13 Provided, That the boundaries of the area may not encompass 14 more than sixty-eight thousand acres of land. Property owned 15 by the State of Texas or any political subdivision thereof 16 may be acquired only by donation. Notwithstanding any 17 other provision of law. Federal property within the bound- 18 aries of the area may, with the concurrence of the head of 19 the administering agency, be transferred to the administra- 20 tive jurisdiction of the Secretary for the purposes of this 21 Act, without a transfer of funds. 22 SEc. 3. (a) The owner of improved property on the 23 date of its acquisition by the Secretary may, as a condition 24 of such acquisition, retain for himself and his heirs and assigns 25 a right of use and occupancy of the improved propel ~y for PAGENO="0027" 21 3 1 noncommercial residential purposes for a definite term of 2 not more than twenty-five years or, in lieu thereof, for & term 3 ending at the death of the owner or the death of his spouse, 4 whichever is later. The owner shall elect the term to be 5 reserved. Unless this property is wholly or partially donated 6 to the United States, thQ Secretary shall pay the owner the 7 fair market value of the property on the date of acquisition 8 less the fair~ market value on that date of the right, retained 9 by the owner. A right retained pursuant to this section shall 10 be subject to termination by. the Secretary upon his deter- 11 mination that it is being exercised in a manner inconsistent 12 with the iurposes of this Act, and it shall terminate by 13 operation of law upon the Secretary's iiotifying the holder 14 of the right of such determination and tendering to him an 15 amount equal to the faii market value of that portion of the 16 right which remains unexpired. 17 (b) As used in this Act the term "improved property" 18 means a detached, one-family dwelling, construction of which 19 was begun before July 1, 1973, which is used for noncom- 20 mercial residential purposes, together with not to exceed 21 three acres of the land on which the dwelling is situated, 22 such land being in the same ownership as the dwelling, to- 23 gether with any structures accessory to the dwelling which' 24 are situated on such land. 25. Sno. 4. The area within the boundaries depicted on the PAGENO="0028" 22 4 1 map referred to in section 2, or as such boundaries may be 2 revised, shall be known as the Big Thicket National Biologi- 3 cal Reserve, and it shall be administered by the Secretary in 4 accordance with the laws applicable to the national park 5 system, and in a manner consistent with the purposes and 6 provisions of this Act. V 7 SE0. 5. The Secretary shall permit hunting, fishing, and 8 trapping on lands and waters under his jurisdiction withiu *~ the reserve in accordance with the applicable laws of V the 10 United States and the State of Texas, except that he may ii designate zones where and periods when no hunting, fishing, 12 or trapping may be permitted for reasons of public safety, ad~ ia ministration, fish or wildlife management, or public use and 14 enjoyment. Except in emergencies, aiiy regulations prescrib- 15 ing such restrictions shall be put into effect only after consul- 16 tation with the appropriate State agency having jurisdiction 17 over hunting, fishing, and trapping activities. * 18 Snc. (3. When acquiring lands, waters, and interests 19 tnerein, the Secretary may decline to acquire all or any part 20 of, or interest in, the oil and gas minerals or other minerals 21 in such land. or waters, and shall allow, under such regula- 22 tions as he may prescribe, occupation and use V of so much 23 of the surface of the lands and waters as may be required for 24 all purposes reasonably incident to the mining or removal of 25 such from beneath the surface of these lands and waters and PAGENO="0029" 23 5 i the lands and waters adjacent thereto. Any acquisition here- 2 under shall exclude and shall not diminish any established 3 right of occupation or use of the surface pursuant to grants, 4 leases, or easements executed on or before the date of enact- 5 ment of this Act, which are determined by the Secretary to 6 be reasonably necessary for hte exploration, development, 7 production, storing, processing, or transporting of oil and gas 8 minerals that are removed from outside the boundaries of the 9 reseve, and `the Secetary may grant additional rights of occu- 10 pation or use of the surface for the purposes aforesaid upon ii the terms and under such regulations as may be prescribed 12 by him. 13 SEC. 7. There are authorized to be appropriated such 14 sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this ~5 Act. PAGENO="0030" 24 United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 JUL141973 Dear Mr. President: Enclosed is a draft of a bill "To authorize the establishment of the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve in the State of Texas, and for other purposes." We recommend that this bill be referred to the appropriate committee for consideration, and we recommend that it be enacted. The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire lands, waters and interests therein, within an area depicted on a map on file with the Department, to be known as Big Thicket National Biological Reserve. The Reserve, as depicted on this map, is 67,150 acres, most of which is in private ownership. The bill provides that the Reserve may not include more than 68,000 acres. The Big Thicket of East Texas contains eight different biological habitats, ranging from savannah, to bald-cypress swamp, to upland mixtures of Jenerican beech, southern magnolia, white oak and loblolly pine. This biological crossroads is unique in the United States. Changes in elevation from 400 feet on the north to a few feet above sea level on the south, as well as changes from well-drained to swampy areas, and from fertile soil to intrusions of less fertile soil types, account for the variety of plant communities in the Big Thicket area. In addition to its extraordinary diversity of flora, the area contains a wealth of animal life, and magnificent specimens of individual tree species. The larger mammals include the Texas whitetail deer, red and gray fox, raccoon, ringtail,. mink, otter, skunks, opossum, bobcat, mountain lion, armadillo and on occasion, black bear. Three out of four species of insectivorous plants occur there. Over 300 birds have been listed for the Big Thicket, including the American egret, roseate spoonbill and the relatively rare red-cockaded woodpecker. The ivory- billed woodpecker, which was the largest woodpecker in North America, may survive in the area. The Thicket also contains the largest known specimens of American holly, black hickory and planer tree, as well as 40 wild orchid species, some found nowhere else. PAGENO="0031" 25 Thescientific resources of Big Thicket are outstanding, not only because a variety of biological communities are in close proximity, but because of the ecologic interplay between species. Explanation of these scientific values will be a major part of the interpretation by the Park Service of the Reserve. In addition to its scientific interest, the area is also one of great natural beauty, including park-like beech and magnolia stands, virtually inpenetrable "thicket" areas, and picturesque bald cypress-water tupelo swamps. The Big Thicket once comprised several million acres, but it has been greatly reduced by logging, clearing for agricultural uses and oil field operations, and more recently, vacation home subdivisions. It is now divided into strips and blocks of ecological islands and these islands are steadily being encroached upon. Interest in preserving the Thicket as a part of the Park System began before the Second World War, and Congressional interest has been manifested since the 90th Congress.' We hava studied the area to determine which of the remaining parts of the Thicket would be suitable for inclusion in a unit of the park system intended to preserve and interpret the biological values of the Big Thicket. Specifically, studies of the area were made in 1965 and 1966, and in April 1967, the Advisory Board on National Parks, Historic Sites, Building and Monuments, found that "The Big Thicket, with its great variety of vegetational types, its magnificent specimens of individual tree species, its diversity of bird life..., and its unusual animal communities, is of national significance." In October 1972, the Board reaffirmed its position and endorsed the establishment of the area as a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve. After review of the current status of the lands and waters in the Big Thicket, we are now proposing a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve, consisting of 7 units and encompassing outstanding representative sec- tions of the remaining Thicket and neighboring ecosystems. The principal purpose of the Reserve would be to preserve key areas for scientific study, rather than to provide solely for outdoor recreational opportuni- ties. Development of the area for visitor use would consist mainly of access roads to the edges of the units, trails, interpretive facilities, primitive campsites and boat launching facilities go that visitors could explore the Reserve from the numerous streams, rivers, and bayous. In preserving the area for a scientific purpose, the Big Thicket National PAGENO="0032" 26 Biological Reserve is similar to the proposed Big Cypress National Fresh Water Reserve now before Congress, one of the purposes of which is to protect the unique natural environment of the Big Cypress area "from further development which would significantly and adversely affect its ecology". It is also similar to the joint federal-state effort at the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve in Wisconsin (16 U.S.C. 469d et~j), which was created to protect, preserve, and interpret nationally significant values of Wisconsin continental glaciation, including moraines, kettleholes, swamps, lakes, and other reminders of the ice age. The seven areas we are proposing for inclusion in the Reserve, and their approximate Sizes, are as follows. Descriptions of these areas are set out in an attachment accompanying this report. Unit __ Big Sandy 14,300 Hickory Creek Savannah 668 Turkey Creek 7,800 Beech Creek 4,856 Neches Bottom and Jack Gore Baygall 13,300 Beaumont 6,218 Lance Rosier 008 Total - 67,150 Under the terms of the proposed bill, owners of improved property acquired for the Reserve could retain noncommercial residential rights of use and occupancy for 25 years, or in lieu thereof, for a term ending at the death of the owner or the death of his spouse, whichever is later.. Hunting, fishing and trapping on lands and waters under the Secretary's jurisdiction within the Reserve will be permitted, in accordance with applicable state and federallaws, except that the Secretary may designate zones where, and periods when, no hunting, fishing or trapping may be permitted for reasons of public safety, administration, fish or wildlife management, or public use and enjoyment. In addition, the bill authorizes the acquisition of the Reserve without purchase of oil, gas and other mineral rights. It is not our intention to acquire existing oil and gas leases or to acquire any other oil and gas rights. PAGENO="0033" 27 It is expected that, based on June 1973 prices, total development costs will be approximately $4,572,000, of which $4,221,000 would be expended during the first five years following enactment. These costs will be primarily attributable to a visitor center, interpretive shelters, comfort stations, nature and hiking trails, boat launching facilities, maintenance unit construction, rehabilitation and restoration of a pioneer farm in the Turkey Creek Unit, parking areas, and access roads. Annual operating costs will range from $94,000 in the first year to $853,000 in the fifth year following enactment. A man-year and cost data statement is enclosed. Estimated land acquisition costs are expected to be $38,000,000. Of the land to be acquired, 66,987 acres are in private ownership, 25 acres in state ownership, 8 acres are owned by the City of Beaumont, and 130 acres by the Lower Neches Valley Authority. Under the terms of the bill, lands belonging to the state or a political subdivision of the state could be acquired only by donation. At the present time we anticipate substantial new 1975 funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which would be used to acquire lands for the Reserve, and we hope to approach full funding for this important program. Assuming this occurs, we can move ahead agressively in the land acquisition program for Big Thicket. We estimate that visitation to the reserve will be 190,000 visitor days during the first year and by the tenth year following enactment should reach 600,000 per year. Time is running out for the Big Thicket, as development encroaches on the few areas remaining of this nationally significant resource. We urge prompt and favorable action by the Congress on this proposal for a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve. The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration's program. ~ Msistan~ Secretary of t e Interior Honorable Spiro T. Agnew President of the Senate Washington, D.C. Enclosures 30-061 0 - 74 - 3 PAGENO="0034" 28 A BILL To authorize the establishment of the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve in. the State of Texas, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in order to preserve for scientific study and for the education and benefit of present and future generations certain unique areas in the Big Thicket of eastern Texas which contain vegetational types and associations of national significance, there is hereby authorized to be established the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve. Sec. 2. In order to effectuate the purpose of this Act the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the "Secretary") is authorized to acquire by donation, purchase, transfer from any other Federal agency or exchange, lands, waters, and interests therein within the areas generally depicted on the nap entitled "Big Thicket National Biological Reserve," numbered NBR-BT 91,023, and dated July 1973, which shall be on file and available for public inspection in the Office of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior. The Secretary may from time to time make minor revisions in the boundaries of the area by publication of a revised map or other boundary description in the Federal Register, and he may acquire property within the revised boundaries in accordance PAGENO="0035" 29 with the provisions of this section: Provided, That the boundaries of the area may not encompass more than sixty-eight thousand acres of land. Property owned by the State of Texas or any political subdivision thereof may be acquired only by donation. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, Federal property within the boundaries of the area may, with the concurrence of the head of the administering agency, be transferred to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary for the purposes of this Act, without a transfer of funds. Sec. 3(a). The owner of improved property on the date of its acquisition by the Secretary may, as a condition of such acquisition, retain for himself and his heirs and assigns a right of use and occu- pancy of the improved property for noncommercial residential purposes for a definite term of not more than twenty-five years or, in lieu thereof, for a term ending at the death of the owner or the death of his spouse, whichever is later.~ The owner shall elect the term to be reserved. Unless this property is wholly or partially donated to the United States, the Secretary shall pay the owner the fair market value of the property on the date of acquisition less the fair market value on that date of the right retained by the owner. A right retained pursuant to this section shall be subject to termination by the Secretary upon his determination that it is being exercised in a manner inconsistent PAGENO="0036" 30 with the purposes of this Act, and it shall terminate by operation of law upon the Secretary's notifying the holder of the right of such deter- mination and tendering to him an amount equal to the fair market value of that portion of the right which remains unexpired. (b). As used in this Act the tern "improved property" means a detached, one-family dwelling, construction of which was begun before July 1, 1973, which is used for noncommercial residen- tial purposes, together with not to exceed three acres of the land on which the dwelling.is situated, such land being in the same ownership as the dwelling, together with any structures accessory to the dwelling which are situated on such land. Sec. 4. The area within the boundaries depicted on the map referred to in section 2, or as such boundaries nay berevised, shall be known as the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve, and it shall be administered by the Secretary in accordance with the laws applicable to the national park system, and in a manner consistent with the purposes and provisions of this Act. Sec. 5. The Secretary shall permit hunting, fishing, and trapping on lands and waters under his jurisdiction within the reserve in accordance with the applicable laws of the United States and the State of Texas, except that he may designate zones where and periods when no hunting, fishing, or trapping may be permitted PAGENO="0037" 31 for reasons of public safety, administr~ttion, fish or wildlife management, or public use and enjoytneni. Except in emergencies, any regulations prescribing such restrictions shall be put into effect only after consultation with th~~ ~ippropriate State agency having jurisdiction over hunting, fishh~g, and trapping activities. Sec. 6. ~1hen acquiring lands, Waters, and interests therein, the Secretary may decline to acquire nil, or any part of, or interest in, the oil arid gas minerals or other n~nerals in such land or waters, and shall allow, under such regulation~; ns he may prescribe,, occupation and use of so much of the surface of t1~ lands and waters as may be required for all purposes reasonably incident to the mining or removal of such from beneath the surfat~ of these lands and waters and the lands and waters adjacent ther~to. Einy acquisition hereunder shall exclude and shall not diminish any established right of occu- pation or use of the surface pursuant ti~ grants, leases, or easements executed on or before the date of enact nt'nt of this Act, which are determined by the Secretary to be rea~ontbly necessary for the explora- tion, development, production, storing. processing, or transporting of oil and gas minerals that are rexnov~tI 1~rom outside the boundaries of the reserve, and the Secretary may grant additional rights of PAGENO="0038" .32 occupation or use of the surface for the purposes aforesaid upon the terms and under such regulations as may be prescribed by him. Sec. 7. There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as nay be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. PAGENO="0039" 33 UNITED STATES DEPARTNINT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE BIG THICKET NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL RESERVE (PROPOSED) 19CY 19CY+1 19CY+2 19CY+3 19CY+1~ Estimated Expenditures Personnel Services All Other Total Estimated Obligations Land and Property Acquisition Development Operation & Management (Protection, Maintenance Planning, Rev. & Oper. of Nec. Facilities Total Total Estimated Man-Years of Civilian Employment $ 51,000 16,068,000 11,1415,000 69,000 218,000 12,627,000 ~o8,ooo 1,9014,000 1491,000 1,2514,000 $16,119,000 11,14814,000 l2J314S000 24l2.000 1.7145.000 $16,000,000 25,000 11,000,000 3514,000 11,000,000 1,1425,000 - 1,5214,000 - 892,000 914,000 130,000 1420,000 788,000 853,000 $l6,ll9~ooo 11,14811,900 3.0 5.0 12,8145,000 19.0 2,312,000 38.0 1,7115,900 145.0 PAGENO="0040" 34 DESCRIPTION OF UNITS BIG THICKET NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL RESERVE 1. Big Sandy Unit - size, 1L~,3OO acres The Big Sandy Unit is located in the northwestern portion of the Big Thicket area and extends from the Alabama-Coushatta Indian Res4rvation southwest along Big Sandy Creek approximately 12 miles. The unit is a wild, well-watered, relatively unaltered area containing some of the finest examples of the Thicket's recognizable subtypes, ranging from the drier upland community to the stream bank and baygall community. Such diversity has its counterpart in the many kinds of mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles which inhabit the area. Thus the tract has outstanding possibilities for mature-trail interpretation and wilderness hiking. 2. Hickory Creek Savannah - size, 668 acres While not strictly Thicket-type vegetation, the longleaf pine-grassland association comprising the savannah is a distinctive threshold community bordering the true Thicket and bears an important relationship to it. The Hickory Creek example occupies part of a discontinuity in the Big Thicket type. This hiatus owes its existence primarily to an intrusion of soils that do not support the Thicket ecosystem. The contrast between the savannah and the actual Thicket is so marked that it serves admirably to illustrate the strength of the influence exerted by soil types on plant distribution, particularly in the case of the Big Thicket. This unit is of outstanding value to botanists and naturalists because of the great variety of herbaceous plants it contains. The many different species here include many rare forms. Dominating the association is the dignifi~d longleaf pine, one of the characteristic trees of the drier parts of the Big Thicket, here displayed in solitary prominence. 3. Turkey Creek Unit - size, ~,8oo acres The Turkey Creek Unit extends from State Route l9~+3 south to State Route I~2O, The area illustrates a remarkable diversity of Upper Thicket PAGENO="0041" 35 vegetation types, including the largest known field of insectivorous pitcher plants in the region. The Southern portion of this tract is a locally important botanical study area and many regard it as the most beautiful area in the Big Thicket Region. In this area will be located the only visitor center development for the Biological Reserve. All other areas will be devoted to hiking trails, self-serving information. exhibits, and comfort facilities only. The unit embrades several miles of the lower reaches of Turkey Creek down to and including its confluence with Village Creek. Along its length are found splendid examples of the Big Thicket's `upper division' vegetative types. Two particular portions of the unit highlight its qualities. First, near the north end is a tract displaying perhaps the greatest variety of subtypes, each in outstanding condition, to be found within any comparable acreage in the Thicket. The series begins with what may be the largest known field of the fascinating insecti- vorous pitcher plant in the region, followed in quick succession by areas containing the savannah, upland hardwood, baygall, cypress swamp, stream bank, and beech-magnolia communities. Also, the northern end contains the now record Shagbark Hickory tree. The second outstanding portion of the Turkey Creek Unit is that containing the Village Creek confluence. It is an unusually well-preserved tract of mixed hardwoods typifying the stream bank community. 1~. Beech Creek Unit - size I~,856 acres The rolling uplands at the head of Beech Creek support some of the best examples of mixed hardwood forest in the Big Thicket. The area extends South of Highway l71~6 and along the west side of Highway 97. This unit lies in the heart of what may be considered the richest expression of the Big Thicket's "upper division." It occupies a well-drained, gently rolling benchland bordering the Neches River valley. The deep, fertile soils of this area support fine stands of the beech-magnolia-~white oak-loblolly pine association which is the symbol of the Thicket. The entire unit has been subjected to some logging, but is believed to have the potential to recover fully once protection is instituted. It is selected on the basis of inferred quality, in both vegetative properties and wilderness values. 5. Neches Bottom Unit and Jack Gore Baygall - size, 13,300 acres The broad channel of the Neches River closely follows the eastern border of the Big Thicket Region. Its flood plain supports mature lowland hardwood forest that contain many species not found else- where in the Big Thicket. The Neches Bottom and Jack Gore Baygall Unit includes bottomland areas along the Neches River, which provide valuable habitants for endangered wildlife species. PAGENO="0042" 36 It is laced with sloughs connecting with the river, and these contain immense specimens of bald cypress and water tupelo. The slightly elevated lands between the sloughs support equally large trees of many species representative of the Big Thicket's streambank community. The area has sustained some cutting and a few pine plantations exist between the Jack Gore Baygall and the river. Authorities consider this area to have promising potential to be one of the finest stands of lowland hardwood forests in the gulf coastal region. It, too is a good wildlife area and lies in the expected range of the ivory- billed woodpecker. 6. Lance Rosier Unit - size, 20,008 acres Located near the southern end of the Big Thicket, the Lance Rosier Unit is a relatively isolated and undisturbed example of the Lower Thicket vegetation type. This is the only representative of the Lower Thicket communities. This large area will facilitate preser- vation of wildlife species that might become endangered in the smaller tracts. This 20,008-acre unit is the largest of the eight units, which comprise the National Biological Reserve. 7. Beaumont Unit - size, 6,218 acres This unit is an irregular wedge of land at the confluence of Pine Island Bayou and the Neches River, immediately north of the city of Beaumont. The western boundary of the unit is formed in part by the Nechas Canal, which starts at the Neches River and then passes underneath Pine Island Bayou on its southward course; thus the major portion of the unit is literally an island, surrounded by streams--both natural and Manmade. The unit is a superlative representation of the Thicket's flood plain forest. and stream bank communities. It is doubtful if a finer stand of the various hardwoods comprising these types exists. From all evidence, at least the southern third of the unit is that extrexre rarity-- an area which has never been logged, unless a few bald cypress were removed many years ago. This inviolate condition is probably attributable to the difficulty of access across the many sloughs and fingers of swampland which penetrate the area. Its isolation and size give the Beaumont Unit the highest rank in wilderness quality in the entire area studied. It abounds with varied bird and animal life. Alligators have persisted in its interior sloughs, and the rare ivory-billed woodpecker was recently reported there. PAGENO="0043" 37 93D CONGRESS 1ST SEssioN . 1 1 546 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES DECEMBER 4, 1973 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs AN ACT To authorize the establishment of the Big Thicket National Preserve in the State of Texas, and for other purposes. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Bepresenta- 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That (a) in order to assure the preservation, conservation, 4 and protection of the natural, scenic, and recreational values 5 of a significant portion of the Big Thicket area in the State 6 of Texas and to provide for the enhancement and public 7 enjoyment thereof, the Big Thicket National Preserve is 8 hereby established. 9 (b) The Big Thicket National Preserve (hereafter 10 referred to as the "preserve") shall include the units gen- 11 erally depicted on the map entitled "Big Thicket National II PAGENO="0044" 38 2. 1 Preserve", dated November 1973 and numbered NBR-BT 2 91,027 which shall be on file and available for public in- ~ spection in the offices of the National Park Service, Depart- ~ ment of the Interior, Washington, District of Columbia, and ~ shall be filed with appropriate offices of Tyler, Hardin, 6 Jasper, Polk, Liberty, Jefferson, and Orange Counties in ~ the State of Texas. The Secretary of the Interior (hereafter 8 referred to as the "Secretary") shall, as soon as prac- ~ ticable, but no later than six months after the date of 10 enactment of this Act, publish a detailed description of the ~ boundaries of the preserve in the Federal Register. In 12 establishing such boundaries, the Secretary shall locate 13 stream corridor unit boundaries referenced from the stream 14 bank on each side thereof and he shall further make every 15 reasonable effort to exclude from the units hereafter de- 16 scribed any improved year-round residential properties 17 which he determines, in his discretion, are not necessary for 18 the protection of the values of the area or for its proper 19 administration. The preserve shall consist of the following 20 urnts: 21 Big Sandy Creek unit, Polk County, Texas, com- 22 prising approximately fourteen thousand three hundred 23 acres; 24 Menard Creek Corridor unit, Polk, Ilardin, and 25 Liberty Counties, Texas, including a module at its con- PAGENO="0045" 39 3 1 fluence with the Trinity River, comprising approxi- 2 inately three thousand three hundred and fifty-nine 3 acres; 4 Hickory Creek Savannah unit, Tyler County, Texas, 5 comprising approximately six hundred and sixty-eight 6 acres; 7 Turkey Creek unit, Tyler and Hardin Counties, 8 Texas, comprising approximately seven thousand eight 9 hundred acres; 10 Beech Creek unit, Tyler County, Texas, compris- 11 lug approximately four thousand eight hundred and 12 fifty-six acres; 13 Upper Neches River corridor unit, Jasper, Tyler, 14 and Hardin Counties, Texas, including the Sally Withers 15 Addition, comprising approximately three thousand 16 seven hundred .and seventy-five acres; 17 Neches Bottom and Jack Gore Baygall unit, Har- 18 din and Jasper Counties, Texas, comprisipg approxi- 19 mately thirteen thousand three hundred acres; 20 Lower Neches River corridor unit, Hardin, Jasper, 21 and Orange Counties, Texas, except for a one-mile seg- 22 ment on the east side of the river including the site of 23 the papermill near Evadale, comprising approximately 24 two thousand six hundred acres; 25 Beaumont unit, Orange, Hardin, and Jefferson PAGENO="0046" 40 4 1 Counties, Texas, comprising approximately six thousand 2 two hundred and eighteen acres; 3 Loblolly unit, Liberty County, Texas, comprising 4 approximately five hundred and fifty acres; 5 Little Pine Island-Pine Island Bayou corridor unit, 6 ilardin and Jefferson Counties, Texas, comprising ap- 7 proximately two thousand one hundred acres; and 8 Lance Rosier Unit, Hardin County, Texas, com- 9 prising approximately twenty-five thousand and twenty- 10 four acres. 11 (c) The Secretary is authorized to acquire by donation, 12 purchase with donated or appropriated funds, transfer from 13 any other Federal agency, or exchange, any lands, waters, or 14 interests therein which are located within the boundaries of 15 the preserve: Provided, That any lands owned or acquired 16 by the State of Texas, or any of its political subdivisions, 17 may be acquired by donation only. After notifying the Corn- 18 mittees on Interior and Insular Affairs of the United States 19 Congress, in writing, of his intention to do so and of the 20 reasons therefor, the Secretary may, if he finds that such 21 lands would make .a significant contribution to the purposes 22 for which the preserve was created, accept title to any lands, 23 or interests in lands, located outside of the boundaries of 24 the preserve which the State of Texas or its political sub- 25 divisions may acquire ~nd offer to donate to the United PAGENO="0047" 41 5 1. States or which any private person, organization, or public 2 or private corporation may offer to donate to the United 3 States and he may administer such lands as a part of the 4 preserve after publishing notice to that effect in the Federal 5 Register. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 6 federally owned lands within the preserve shall, with the 7 concurrence of the head of the administering agency, be 8 transferred to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary 9 for the purposes of this Act, without transfer of funds. 10. SEC. 2. (a) Effective six months after the date of the 11 enactment of this Act or at such time as the Secretary 12 publishes the detailed description of the boundaries of the 33 preserve in the Federal Register as required by subsection 14 1(b) of this Act, whichever is earlier, there is hereby vested 15 in the United States all right, title, and interest in, and the 16 right to immediate possession of, all real property, except 17 the mineral estate, lands or interests in lands owned by the 18 State of Texas or its political subdivisions, or existing ease- 19 ments for public utilities, pipelines, and railroads, and except 20 as provided in subsection (c) of this section. The Secretary 21 shall allow for the orderly termination of all operations on 22 real property acquired by the United States under this sub- 23 section, and for the removal of equipment, facilities, and 24 personal property therefrom. PAGENO="0048" 42 6 1 (b) The United States wifi pay just compensation to 2 the owner of any real property taken by subsection (a) of 3 this section and the full faith and credit of the United States 4 is hereby pledged to the payment of any judgment entered 5 against the United States pursuant to the provisions of this 6 Act. Payment shall be made by the Secretary of the Treasury 7 from moneys available and appropriated from the Land and 8 W~ter Conservation Fund, subject to the appropriation 9 liniitation contained in section 6 of this Act, upon certifica- 10 tion to him by the Secretary of the agreed negotiated value ii. of such property, or the valuation of the property awarded 12 by judgment, including interest at the rate of 6 per centum 13 per annum from the date of taking to the date of payment 14 therefor. Any action against the United States for just 15 compensation for any lands or interests taken pursuant to 16 this subsection shall be brought in the district court of the 17 United States for the `district in which such property is ~ situated. In the absence of a negotiated agreement or an 19 action by the owner within one year after the date of 20 enactment of this Act, the Secretary may initiate proceed- 21 ings at any time seeking a determination of just compensation 22 in the district court of the United States for the district in 23 which the property is situated. In the event that the Secre- ~ tary determines that fee title to any lands taken pursuant 25 to this provision is not necessary for the purposes. of this PAGENO="0049" 43 1 Act, he may, with the concurrence of the former owner, 2 revest title in such lands to such owner subject to such terms 3 and conditions as he deems appropriate to carry out the 4 purposes of this Act and he may compensate the owner for 5 no more than the fair market value of the rights so reserved: 6 Provided, That the Secretary shall not revest title to any 7 lands for which just. and full compensation has been paid. 8 (c) This section shall not apply to any improved prop- 9 erty as defined in subsection 3 (b) of this Act: Provided, 10 That the Secretary may, in his discretion, initiate eminent 11 domain proceedings if, in his judgment, such lands are sub- 12 ject to, or threatened with, uses which are or would be detri- 13 mental to the purposes and objectives of this Act. The district 14 court of the United States for the district in which such prop- 15 erty is situated shall have jurisdiction to hear evidence and 16 determine just compensation for any lands taken pursuant to 17 thç~ provisions of this subsection. IS .Snc. 3. (a) The owner of an improved property on the 19 date of its acquisition by the Secretary may, as a condition of 20 such acquisition, retain for himself and his heirs and assigns a 21 right of use and occupancy of the improved property for non- 22 commercial residential purposes for a definite term of not 23 more than twenty-five years or, in lieu thereof, for a term 24 ending at the death of the owner or the death of his spouse, 25 whichever is later. The owner shall elect the term to be re- 30-061 0 - 74 - 4 PAGENO="0050" 44 8 1 served. Unless this property is wholly or partially donated to 2 the United States, the Secretary shall pay the owner the fair 3 market value of the property on the date `of acquisition less 4 the fair market value, on that date, of the right retained by 5 the owner. A right retained pursuant to this section shall be 6 subject to termination by the Secretary upon his determina- 7 tion that it is being exercised in a manner inconsistent with 8 the purposes of this Act, and it shall terminate by operation 9 of law upon the Secretary's notifying the holder of the right 10 of such determination and tendering to him an amount equal 11 to the fair market value of that portion of the right which 12 remains unexpired. 13 (b) As used in this Act, the term "improved property" 14 means a detached, one-family dwelling, construction of which 15 was begun before July 1, 1973, which is used for noncom- 16 mercial residential purposes, together with not to exceed 17 three acres of land' on which the dwelling is situated and to- 18 gether with such additional lands or interests therein as the 19 Secretary deems to be reasonably necessary for access thereto, 20 such lands being in the same ownership as the dwelling, 21 together with any structures accessory to the dwelling which 22 are situated on such land. 23 (c) Whenever an owner of property elects to retain a 24 right of use and occupancy as provided in this section, such 25 owner shall be deemed to have waived any benefits or rights PAGENO="0051" 45 9 1 accruing under sections 203, 204, 205, and 206 of the Uni- 2 form Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition 3 Policies Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1894), and for the purposes 4 of such sections such owner shall not be considered a displaced 5 person as defined in section 101 (6) of such Act. 6 SEC. 4. (a) The area within the boundaries depicted on 7 the map referred to in section 1 shall be known as the Big 8 Thicket National Preserve. Such lands shall be administered 9 by the Secretary as a unit of the National Park System in a 10 manner which will assure their natural and ecological integ- 11 rity in perpetuity in accordance with the provisions of this 12 Act and with provisions of the Act of August 25, 1916 13 (39 Stat. 535; 16 U.S.C. 1-4), as amended and supple- 14 merited. 15 (b) In the interest of maintaining the ecological integ- 16 rity of the preserve, the Secretary shall limit the construe- 17 tion of roads, vehicular campgrounds, employee housing, 18 arid other public use and administrative facilities and he 19 shall promulgate and publish such rules and regulations in 20 the Federal Register as he deems necessary and appropriate 21 to limit and control the use of, and activities on, Federal 22 lands and waters with respect to: 23 (1) motorized land and water vehicles; 24 (2) exploration for, and extraction of, oil, gas, 25 and other minerals; PAGENO="0052" 46 10 1 (3) new construction of any kind; 2 (4) grazing and agriculture; and 3 (5) such other uses as the Secretary determines 4 must be limited or controlled in order to carry out the 5 purposes of this Act. 6 (c) The Secretary shall permit hunting, fishing, and 7 trapping on lands and waters under his jurisdiction within 8 the preserve, in accordance with the applicable laws of the 9 United States and `the State of Texas, except that he may 10 designate zones where and periods when, no hunting, fish- 11 ing, trapping, or entry may be permitted for reasons of 12 public safety, administration, floral and faunal protection 13 and management, or public use and enjoyment. Except in 14 emergencies, any regulations prescribing such restrictions 15 relating to hunting, fishing, or trapping shall be put into 16 effect. only after consultation with the . appropriate State 17 agency having jurisdiction over hunting, fishing, and trap- 18 ping activities. 19 SE0. 5. Within five years from the date of enactment of 20 this Act, the Secretary shall review the area within the pre- 21 serve and shall report to the President, in accordance with 22 section 3 (c) and (d) of the Wilderness Act (78 Stat. 891; 23 1~ U.S.C. 1132 (c) and (d)), his recommendations as to 24 the suitability or nonsuitability of any area within the pre- 25 serve for preservation as wilderness, and any designation of PAGENO="0053" 47 11 1 any such areas as a wilderness shall be accomplished in ac- 2 cordance with said subsections of the Wilderness Act. 3 SEc. 6. There are authorized to be appropriated such 4 sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this 5 Act, but not to exceed $63,812,000 for, the acquisition of 6 lands and interests in lands and not to exceed $7,000,000 7 for development. Passed the House of Representatives December 3, 1973. Attest: ` W. PAT JENNINGS, Clerk. PAGENO="0054" p 48 Senator BIBLE. Let the record show that I have marched over all of this Big Thicket land, not all of it but I guess most of it, a rather thorough inspection in a very thorough hearing, I think, in Texas dur- ing the last Congress. So I am hopeful that we can see this bill through to final passage during the session. The first witness this morning is the senior Sena- tor from the State of Texas, the Honorable John G. Tower. Senator Tower. STATEMENT OP HON. JOHN G. TOWER, A U.S. SENATOR PROM THE STATE OP TEXAS Senator TOWER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have accompanying me this morning Miss Melanie McCoy and Miss Rachel Seifrey of my staff who have been working on the Big Thicket matter. Senator BIBLE. Happy to have them here. Senator TOWER. They have extremely explored the area. Before I start I would like to.note that I. am glad to see our old friend and col- league, Senator Yarborough here, who has, been a real pioneer in the effort to get Big Thicket legislation. Senator BIBLE. I can certainly testify to that. Senator TOWER. He really has. He has laid the foundation, Mr. Chairman, on which I hope we can build a superstructure. Before discussing specific aspects of the Big Thicket legislation, I would like to emphasize why I am testifying here `today. During my tenure in the Senate, I repeatedly supported efforts to establish a Big Thicket Preserve. Years have passed `and the Congress has yet to en- `act this vital legislation. I have a deep interest in this matter. My family lives near this famous area of Texas and I am quite familiar with it. When I speak of the need for preserving the Bi~ Thicket I am not merely jumping on the bandwagon, nor am I setting myself up as an expert on the basis of a mere one-time flying visit to the area. I know it well. I have sent members of my staff recently to once again go over the area, to be sure that there is, indeed, a Big Thicket worthy of preservation. The Big Thicket is ecologically unique, not only to Texas but to the entire North American continent. Once the Big Thicket stretched westward from the Sabine River almost to the banks of the Brazos, an area as large as many of our smaller States. Although this legandary wilderness no longer exists in its original state, the Big Thicket does remain and is worthy of pres- ervation. Located at the crossroads between the forests of the south and east and the vegetation of the west, the Thicket contains elements from all convergent zones. A wet climate, and a water storing soil combine to nurture these. elements to lushness. Fully 15 of the trees designated as national champions are in the Thicket. It is a place of bayou, bald-cypress, semijungle, arid sandy- lands, and hardwood forests. It is full of legend and folklore. The Thicket has a reputation as a sanctuary. In the Civil War con- scientious objectors hid there and escaped convicts fled from Hunts- ville Prison to disappear into the uncharted Thicket. Texas' only Indian reservation lies on the northwest border of the area. PAGENO="0055" 49 The Thicket provides one of the last havens for the alligator, the golden eagle, and the Texas red wolf. There are even some who still insist that there are bear and panther there. When I was a boy there were bear and panther there. But I cannot attest to it at the moment. I had my staff photograph a number of representative scenes of the Big Thicket, and I thought it might be helpful to you if you could visualize exactly the nature of the area we are considering. Another point that I would like to emphasize is that this matter is of interest nationally, not only to the people of Texas. Two recent articles pointed out this national interest. Environmental Action stated that this Nation must preserve the Big Thicket and that any pre- serve should include acreage in the arid sandylands area~ The National Parks and Conservation magazine stated that the Big Thicket is a unique area dwindling away while agreement is sought on the best method for protecting it. I would like to request that these articles be placed in the record. Senator BIBLE. That will be the order. [The articles referred to above follow:] PAGENO="0056" 50 Vol. 48, No.1, Jan., 1974 THE BIG THICKET A TEXAS TREASURE IN TROUBLE A unique natural area is dwindling away ivhile agreement is sought on the best method for protecting it article and photographs by JOHN L. TVETEN THE BIG THICKET of southeast Texas is a treasureland of biological diversity. Within the Big Thicket can be found every plant community known to exist in the en- tire southern evergreen forest range. This "biological crossroads," as the Big Thicket is often termed, is a transition area between the moist eastern woodlands, the arid southwest, the tropical coastal marsh, and the cen- tral prairie. Plants of the East meet those of the West. Northern species grow next to tropical ones. Such a mix- ture of plant forms occurs nowhere else. Forests of pine, oak, magnolia, and beech contain world-record trees of many species covered with Spanish moss and flowering vines. Swamps of cypress and tupelo are flanked by stands of giant palmetto. About thirty species of ferns carpet the forest floor. Botanists identify some forty or- chids and find fascination in four types of carnivorous plants. The Big Thicket, too, is the land of alligators. bobcats, deer, and snakes. The endangered red-cock- aded woodpecker makes its home in the mature pines, and reports of ivory-billed woodpeckers-once thought to be extinct-persist. The now rare red wolf has been reported here. Transcending the plight of any single endangered species found in the Big Thicket is the threatened extinc- lion of the Big Thicket itself. Big Thicket is perhaps the most ecologically significant region in the United States that remains unprotected, and it is dwindling fast. The persistent song of the chickadee and the ringing call of the pileated woodpecker are drowned out by the whine of chain saws. The life of an opossum crossing a forest trail is ended by a speeding truck loaded with logs. A wet bog, the home of wild orchids and carnivorous plants, is drained of water and its diversity of life and be- comes a cultivated field. Deer trails beneath towering pines and spreading magnolias are bulldozed into streets for another rural subdivision or secondary housing de- velopment. The relentless destruction goes on and on while the timber industry, local residents, conservationists, bu- reaucrats, and politicians continue their decades-long search for a mutually acceptable plan for protecting a portion of the Big Thicket for future generations. From an original virgin expanse of 3.5 million acres before the onslaught by the timber industry in the l850s the Big Thicket has been reduced to somewhat less than 300,000 acres that have not been destroyed by the chain saw and the bulldozer. The uniquely diverse forest of the Big Thicket is being destroyed and replaced by single- species tree plantations of stash or loblolly pine at a rate of nearly fifty acres a day. Claims that the Big Thicket is virtually the same today as it was in 1935 or earlier are made because the total number of forested acres, 2,100,000 has remained the same. However, this argument ignores the fact that less than 300,000 acres of this total are of the same varied and diverse character as the original Big Thicket; the remainder of the area is now either a barren desert of slash pine or individual pockets of housing develop- ments. Scientists have saidthat the monotonous forest of pine plantations in the Big Thicket area cannot support the diversity of mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, and insect life found throughout the other Big Thicket areas stilt covered by their native plant species. Pine planta- lions are operated for the maximum yield of the species NATIONAL PARKS & CONSERVATION MAGAZINE PAGENO="0057" 51 ~T IT A ~T ~ ~ (1 & Conservation 1~ IL I tJIi IL IL ~ Magazine The Environmental Journal Vol. 48, No. 1, January 1974 NPCA * National Parks & Conservation AssociatIon * NPCA 2 The Prevention of Pollution from Ships 4 The Big Thicket: A Texas Treasure in Trouble by John L. Tveten 9 Beggars and Bums in Our National Parks and Forests by Richard McNeil and Anne LaBastille 13 Power from the Sun: A New Look at an Old Idea by Michael Allegretto 1 6 The Auto and British National Parks by Nicholas Pole 20 Geography and the Environmental Crisis by Gene Wilhelm, Jr. 21 The American Paddlefish: Signs of Distress by Branley Allan Branson 24 NPCAatWork 30 News Notes 33 Conservation Docket COVERS Treasures of the Big Thicket, by John L. Tveten A dazzling variety of plant and animal life and scenery is on display in Big Thicket country in southeastern Texas. Winter sunrise along a quiet bayou silhouettes trees draped with Spanish moss (front cover). Eight major plant associations have developed in the region during thousands of years of ecological succession. The small-mouthed salamander can be found under fallen logs and among moist leaves (back cover). Reptiles and amphibians proliferate in the Big Thicket, as do more than 300 species of birds and a profusion of mammals and insects. This area has been proposed for many years for some kind of federal protection. (See page 4.) EDITORIAL STAFF Eugenia Horstman Connally, Editor Kathryn Rushing, Assistant Editor ~ Pamela Ann Smith, Assistant Editor National Parks & Conservation Association, established in 1919 by Stephen Masher, the first Director of the National Park Service, is an independent, private, nonprofit, public service organization, educational and scientific In character. Its responsibilities relate primarily to protecting the nationat parks and monuments of America, in which it endeavors to cooperate with the National Park Service while functioning as a constructive critic, and to protecting and restoring the whole environment Life memberships are 5500. Annual membership dues, including subscription to National Parks & Canservation Magazine, are: $100 sustaining, $50 supporting, $t5 contributing, and $10 associate. Student memberships are $g* Single copies are Sf50. Contributians and bequests are needed to carry an our work. Dues in eacess of 010 and contributions are deductible from federal losable income and gIfts and bequests are deductible for federal gift and estate tan purposes. Mail membership dues, correspondence concerning subscriptions or changes of address, and postmaster notices or un~ deliverable copies to Association headquarters in Washingfon. When changing address, please allow six weeks' advance notice and send address label from latest issue along with new address Advertising rateg and circulation data are available on request from the Advertising Manager in Washington. PAGENO="0058" 52 In the areas of the Big Thicket that hace not yet been apoited by man a feeling of peace and solitude percades. Aboce. a quiet pond flanked by feathery cypress trees dozes through a hot summer afternoon. At right the wide bases of a stand of tupelo trees are mirrored in a Big Thicket swamp. The area pictured below was once a quiet place where endangered plants and animals made their home.Now the stillness has been disrupted by the roar of a buildocer clearing pines and oaks for a new subdicision. Such destruction takes place in Big Thicket on a daily basis. And as each new home is built and each new tree isfeiled, the prospects forpresercing even a portion of this remarkable and ecologicaily significant area are that much dimmer. PAGENO="0059" BIG THICKET A BIOLOGICAL CROSSROADS A diversity of animal life is found in the Big Thicket. At left a little blue heron perches atop a tree and displays his nuptial plumage. The copperhead at center has such effective camou- flage that he poses an ever-present danger around fallen logs and in dry leaves. The Virginia opossum, bottom left, is the only marsupial found in North America. This species is ii common sight throughout the Big Thicket region. A baby fox squirrel searches forfood in an old stump in the picture at top on the opposite page. Center right a palamedes swallowtail rests on the sand. This butterfly is one of seven species of large swallowtails readily found in the Big Thicket. The Carolina chickadee below and right is just out of the nest and has some growing yet to do, but there is no question as to its identity. The fight to save Big Thicket is a fight to save the habitat of the many animals, birds, reptiles, and insects that live there. Be- cause there is such a variety of life in the Big Thicket, the area isan invaluable study groundfor scientists and students, In ad- dition to being the home of the animals pictured on these pages, Big Thicket is the home of two endangered species-. the ivory-billed woodpecker, once thought extinct, and the red- cockaded woodpecker. planted to thenearly total exclusion of other plant life, with the possible exception of some grasses. The effort to ensure preservation of at least a part of the Big Thicket has been a study in futility and frustra- tion, The concept of a Big Thicket National Park goes back at least as far as 1927 with the formation of the East Texas Big Thicket Association, Upon conclusion of a biological survey of the region in 1938, local conserva- tionists and state politicians conceived a plan to preserve 430,000 acres of wooded land in the region. In addition, the National Park Service concluded its own study in 1939 and recommended inclusion of the Big Thicket in the national park system. However, the outbreak of World War II interrupted normal congressional activi- ties, and the recommendation fell by the wayside. It was not until the early 1960s that the Big Thicket park concept again began to gain strength, The Depart- ment of Interiors 1961 West Gulf Coastal Plain Type Study again recommended consideration of Big Thicket as a possible addition to the national park system, The 53 TEXAS NATIONAL PARK5 & CONSERVATION MAOAZ1NE PAGENO="0060" Big Thicket Association of Texas was formed in 1964 out of the remains of the old East Texas group, but it seemed that the new association's efforts would be lost in the depths of Texas politics when former governor Price Daniel, a park supporter, was defeated by John Connally, a man known to be sympathetic to the timber company interests. It is probable that the Big Thicket park concept would have been forgotten had it not been for the timely inter' vention of the federal government, primarily in the per' son of former Texas senator Ralph Yarborough, one of the few successful conservationistpoliticians in Texas history. He introduced a bill in October 1966 to establish a Big Thicket National Park not to exceed 75,000 acres- later increased to 100,000 acres. However, at the same time the National Park Service was concluding a study of the region in which they recommended a 35,000'acre "string of pearls" park of widely disperaed tracts that represented the various plant communities and would be connected by scenic highways. THE ENVJRONMENTAL JOURNAL U JANUARY 974 54 PAGENO="0061" 55 The lumber companies immediately endorsed the plan and began to campaign for the smaller park in an effort to undercut Senator Yarborough's bill. Conservationists' jubilation at this new apparently affirmative stance of the lumbermen ended when they realized that the 35,000-acre concept was not ecologically feasible for preservation and when they recognized that the lumber companies had stepped up cutting schedules and were even cutting over some of the areas that had been endorsed for preservation. Senator Yarborough campaigned vigorously for passage of a Big Thicket National Park bill until he left the Senate in 1971. As a result of his efforts a bill finally had passed the Senate on December 16, 1970, but Con- gress adjourned before Congressman Bob Eckhardt's similar bill could make it through the House. From that point to the present several diverse Big Thicket bills have been introduced, including a total of ten separate bills in the ninety-second Congress. Among these bills was Con- gressman Eckhardt's l9l,000-acre park proposal, which was well conceived and ecologically sound, though it never received serious attention. Recently, during the ninety-third Congress, the House Parks and Recreation Subcommittee reported a Big Thicket bill that apparently has the support of the Na- tional Park Service. The bitt would establish a protected area of some 84,000 acres to be called the Big Thicket National Biotogica~ Reserve. The bitt seems to have the support of the Office of Management and Budget, a seemingly necessary prerequisite these days. Many local as well as national conservationists still hope that the acreage to be protected can be increased to at least 100,000 acres. Establishing a "biological reserve" seems to be a compromise between the absentee timber com- pany owners and the real estate developers on one hand and the National Park Service and conservationists on the other. The timber interests have been very effective in resisting the establishment of a large single tract as a national park in East Texas, Yet they have recently begun to realize that the pressure for some form of pro- tection in the Big Thicket is inevitable. The reserve con- cept embodies the designation of seven tracts of several thousand acres each connected by ribbons of land following stream basins. This "string of pearls" concept protects worthy tracts essential for preservation of the unique character of the Big. Thicket as well as the streams essential to the life of the Big Thicket ecosys- tems, The main purpose of the reserve would be to preserve outstanding representative sections of the Big Thicket for scientific study rather than to provide solely for outdoor recreation opportunities. The Big Thicket of East Texas deserves to be seen and savored by alt who love the world around them. It can be saved only by a concerted effort of all who share these values-or it may be destroyed by those who do not. I Big Thicket is not only the home of rare and unusual ani- mal life, it is also the meeting place of northern and tropical species of plants and of arid species of the West and plants found in moist eastern wood' lands. At top are water hya' cinths whose shiny green leaves cover many of the bayous and ponds in the area. The pitcher plant, center, is one of several kinds of car- nivorous plants that can be seen; the tall pitcher stands John L. Tveten holds a Ph.D. in organic chemistry. He waiting quietly for lunch to presently works as a freelance natore photographer and come along. The delicate writer. He has photographed wildlife across much of North fringed orchid at left is one of America as well as in Mexico and parts of South America. approximately forty species His Texas residence provides ready access to the Big Thicket of orchids that dwell within where he spends much of his time photographing the plants Big Thicket. and animals found there. NATiONAL PARK5 & CoNsvRvATioN MAGAZiNE PAGENO="0062" 56 Vol. 5, Dec.22, 1973, No.16 Big Thicket: park or tree farm? By Pete Gunter While Congress looks the other way, a unique area of jungle, swamp, woodland and desert is being bulldozed to death. EnvironmentalAction Drormbet 22, 1973 11 Texas conjures up an image of desert, dry creeks and sagebrush. But the Big Thicket of southeastern Texas is far removed from this image: it is a place of bayou bald cypress and semi-jungle. The Thicket's proximity to the Gulf of Mexico provides both a stable semi-tropical climate and over 50 inches of rainfall a year. Its soils are ideally suited to the storage of uvater and the growing of trees, at least 15 of which are the largest of their species in the United States. But while the region has the climate and the ecosystems of the deep South, it also has a northern and a western expo- sure. Beech, sugar maple and witch hazel are found there, sometimes in plant grosvth patterns almost identical with those found in the southern Appalachians, many miles to the east. Other areas, the "arid sandyland" communities, contain the wild flowers, mesquite trees, post oak, yucca and cactus of the American Southwest. Other areas resemble jungles in the Mexican states of Tamaulipas and Vera Cruz. The Big Thicket is also a place of legend and folklore. Long cut off from the nearby cities of Beaumont and Houv ton, it has a reputation as a sanctuary for "outsiders" of every stripe. During the Civil War, conscientious objectors hid there to avoid conscription, in spite of the persistent efforts of Confederate troops to root them out. Escaped convicts used to flee from a nearby state prison in Hunts- ville, Texas, to the Thicket a step ahead of the baying hounds. East Texas's lone Indian reservation is on the northwest bor- der of the Thicket which has traditionally afforded the Indi- an a refuge. The region provides one of the last havens for the alligator, the golden eagle and the Texas red svolf, and some people insist that a fesv last bear and panther still exist there too. But the Big Thicket is in danger. The unique area's abun- dant natural resources are coveted by lumber companies and developers. Efforts to preserve the Big Thicket date back as far as 1927, svhen the first Big Thicket Association was formed. At that time the ecological importance of the sprasvling wilderness was barely beginning to be realized, although con- servationists asked for a contiguous block of 440,000 acres as a minimum wilderness preserve. Unfortunately, the drive to create a Big Thicket National Park in the 1930s was de- stroyed by the Second `iVorld War. Today, as the remarkable ecological diversity of the Thicket becomes more apparent, conservationists are pleading for 100,000 acres of wilder- ness - before the region is lost forever. Bi,ecent controversy over the Thicket began in the mid-l960s and has consisted largely of a struggle be- tween conservationists and lumber interests. The lumber companies and their s~ipportrrs originally argued that the Big Thicket deserved no environmental protection. But as public interest grew they opted for a 35,000 acre park, the "String of Pearls," made up of widely separated tracts. In the meantime, conservationists had gradually united behind a park configuration of 100,000 acres, or at a high point of optimism, 191,000 acres. Conservationists found little to complain about in the individual tract concept pro- posed by lumber interests, but they did object to the fact thai these isolated areas would be cut off from their natural water supply and svould soon die, as they were surrounded by sprawling subdivisions. In contrast to the lumber com- PAGENO="0063" 12 EnvironmentalActjos December 22, 1973 57 panies' "postage stamp" proposals, conservationists opted to run corridors between the pearls based Qfl existing streams, and add acreage to the pearls wherever possible. The original lumber-snterest proposal included several eco- systems: a longleaf pine savannah, a virgin loblolly pine for- est, two beech groves, a virgin river-bottom forest, a river- bottom swamp area noted for its heron and egret rookeries, a virtually untouched swamp-bottomland forest and a corridor ranging from the hills at the Thicket's northern limits to the poorly drained cypress-palmetto'hardsvood ecosystems on its southern edge. However, soon after the industry proposal svas made, two of the areas were cut by private lumber operators and a third was bulldozed to create a vacation subdivision. Subsequently the lumber companies imposed a cutting moratorium on 35,000 acres, but since they owned or controlled only 18,000 acres of the total, as much as one-third has been cut by smaller lumber operators and local land owners. Meanwhile the movement to create a park continued to grow. While lumber company lobbyists toured the state insisting that their 35,000 acre plan svas an environ- mentalist proposal, conservationists protested loudly, insist- ing that new areas had to be added or the park could not sur- vive, To preserve the Thicket, they argued, it svould be neces- sary to protect its major wateecourses: the Neches River Valley, the Big Sandy-Village Creek corridor and the Big Pine and Little Pine Island Bayou. Besides saving three com- pletely different types of streams, such a system of corridors would ensure the svater supply of the isolated "pearls" and ivould provide uninterrupted hiking and canoeing oppornsni- ties. Along with the proposed stream corridors, three biologi- cal units were envisioned: Jack Gore Baygall (semi-swamp), the Saratoga Triangle (lowlands laced svith streams and sloughs) and the Turkey Creek Minibiome (an area which includes all of the Thicket's ecosystems). But while the conservationists made the rounds of televi- sion and radio talk shosvs and argued their case before ser- vice clubs and newspaper bigwigs, they felt the pressure of time. The Thicket cannot last forever because the lumber companies that were once svilling to cut selectively in the area now propose to convert the great majority of the area into monoculture: row after row of nothing but pines. In such "pine plantations" only one species of tree, the pulp or slash pine, svould be allosved to exist, and the ferns, vines, wading birds, owls, mushrooms, orchids and small game of the original Thicket could not survive. Some of the giants of American industry are heading the assault on the Thicket: Santa Fe Indostires (Chicago) svhich owns Kirby Lumber Company; International Paper (New York); Owens-Illinois (Toledo); Champion Inter- national (New York); Southland Paper Mills (Lufkin, Texas, but 40 percent osvned by St. Regis of New York); and Time Inc., nosy the third largest land owner in Texas (1,060,000 acres) after a merger of its Eastex subsidiary ivith locally. owned Temple Industries. In the past, Temple avoided bull- dozer and monoculiure timber technology while Easiex planned to turn at least 80 percent of its 600,000 acre Texas holdings into slash pine. It is unclear whether the two con- tradictory policies will be maintained in the tsvo divisions or whether one of the tivo will prevail. Student boycotts of Time Inc. Magazines (Time, Sports Illustrated and Fortune) have made that corporation more sensitive to public opinion and the addition of Texas's most rational and far-sighted lumberman, Temple Industries' Ar- thur Temple Jr., to Time's ranks may foster a more balanced land-use policy in the region. Temple, for example, has offered to protect all rare or endangered species on Time's Texas lands. Whatever the future may hold, conservationists concede ruefully that the Thicket's remaining 300,000 acres are being irretrievably lost at the rate of 35,000 acres per year to sterile pine monoculture. The problem with sterile pine monocultus-e - a termwhich is liable to send lumbermen into fits of frustrated rage - is that it does not permit multiple use. During the first fesv years a pine plantation constitutes essentially a prairie ecosystem and in such an ecosystem quail, rabbits and deer manage to survive, And, assuming a rotational system of cutting and replanting, a certain amount of the original pine-hardwood forest svould be kept in prairie, and thus be available to hunters. But besides this minimal multiple use, pine plantations are as mono-usage as they are monoculture, They are not attrac- tive for hiking, photographing or picnicking. After they are bulldozed right up to the stream-banks and the resulting brush, refuse and debris are pushed into the stream (as used to happen in the Thicket with regularity), the stream is no longer a good place to canoe, fish, swim or camp. Most of the scientific value is also lust in a monoculture, Virtually every major university in the United States has at one time or another sent scientists to the Big Thicket looking for biological specimens. More recently biologists have used the Thicket to study those intricately interrelated groups of species known as ecosystems, such as a series of ponds in different stages of ecological succession, or a swamp contain- ing several species of aquatic fauna not known to co-exist Inuide The Big Thicket. The author io otanding bcoidc u'hae io ho- limed to be the largest cypreuo in North A nerica. (photo by Roy Hn,nric) PAGENO="0064" 58 EnvironmentalAvtiOn December 22, 1973 13 elsewhere, or a hill whose slope contains four different eco- systems in 100 feet. But in a pine plantation there is little to interest the scientist except the pine bark beetle and pine "root rot." ormer Texas Senator Ralph Yarborough, one of the Thicket's staunchest defenders, scored a big vic- tory in 1970 with the Senate passage of a bill to establish a 100,000 acre Big Thicket National Park. Tragically, the House did not act in time to pass a similar bill because Wayne Aspinall, then the Chairman of the House Interi- or Committee, got married and went on a vacation which lasted until the Congressional session ended. This made it necessary to start all over again with new legislation. Equally tragic for the Thicket's prospects was Senator Yarborough's defeat at the pçills and subsequent retirement from Congress. Though he continued to fight from the political sidelines, it became necessary for Rep. Bob Eckhardt (D-Tex.) to take up the crasade. On December 3, 1973, the House passed a nr'v compro- mise bill (H.R. 11547) to establish a 84,500 acre pork. The compromise, worked out last summer between Rep. Eck- hardt and nesvly-elected Rep. Charles Wilson (D-Tex.) whose district contains the Big Thicket, drops the magni- ficent Big Sandy-Village Creek corridor from the park while picking up a corridor along heretofore neglected Menard Creek, which flosvs west into the Trinity River. The compro- mise was necessary to pass the bill, but valuable acreage was lost in the process and an entire ecosystem, the arid-sandy- land community, was left out of the national area. Since the point of the Big Thicket National Preserve is to safeguard specimens of each ecosystem in the area, this is a serious A Senate Interior Committee staff member told Environ- mental Action the Committee may reinstate the Big Sandy- Village Creek corridor in the Senate bill, scheduled for hear- ings in late January or early February. If the Senate passes a bill which includes the corridor, the dispute svould be settled in a House-Senate conference. Texas's two senators, Lloyd Bentsen (Dl and John Tower (R) have both committed themselves to passage of Big Thicket legislation. But failure to pass a bill early in 1974 could cause the Big Thicket to be swept aside as congressmen rush home to begin Senate and House election campaigns. If no bill has been enacted by the time the 93rd Congress adjourns, all current efforts svill be erased from the lawmaking process, and by the time new bills have cleared all the nooks and crannies of Congress again, there may be little left of the Big Thicket. For its diversity, richness and sheer abundance of life, the Thicket may not be equalled on the surface of the planet. It must be preserved, a WHAT TO DO: Write your Senator, as well as Texas Senators Bentsen and Tower, and Senator Henry Jackson (D-Wash.) who beads the Interior Coniniittee to express your support far the Big Thicket National Park. Urge them to include Big-Sandy Vil- lage Creek corridor in the Senate version of the hill. Doui't delay - heariiigs niay be held before the end of Jaiiiiary. PAGENO="0065" 59 Senator TOWER. As you know, I introduced legislation for the pres- ervation of the Big Thicket in the first session of the Congress, S. 1981. I am happy to see the House has passed a bill similar to mine in many respects. To simplify the situation, I would like to state that I support the House bill, H.R. 11546, with certain important exceptions and rwill particularly refer to this legislation during the remainder of my testimony. I encourage the committee to include 100,000 acres of any preserve established. This is only 15,450 acres more than the 84,550 called for in the House version. The majority of scientists, conservationists, and the Texas delegation who have been working on this issie for a number of year~, feel that 100,000 acres is the absolute m ~imurn amount of acreage needed to preserve the area. After reading the testimony before the House, I have not changed my mind or been convinced that the amount of acreage should be reduced. I am certainly not inflexible on this issue, but I cannot stress enough that I think the Senate should stand by the 100,000-acre con- cept and should go into conference with a 100,000-acre preserve. The Menard Creek Unit of 3,359 acres should be deleted. Nothing I have read has stated that it is either unique or even a part of the ecological unit which we are trying to preserve. This is not au attempt to dow-ngrade this specific area. However, we have the problem of trying to preserve that which is most unique while keeping the amount of acreage and funding down. Consequently, I think that there are many other areas that are morç~ worthy of inclusion than is Menard Creek. For the same reasons stated above, I have decided that there is excessive acreage included in the Lance Rosiei~ unit, both in H.R. 11546 and in my own S. 1981. The House version contains 25,024 acres and my bill containS 29,000 acres. Acreage should be added in the area of Village Creek. This area is completely different than other streams in the Big Thicket. It flows under bluffs 30 to 50 feet high for most of its distance. Beyond the bluffs the arid sandylands lie flat and well-drained except for a series of ponds, from hundreds to thousands of years old. It is the only stream which cuts through six separate geological formations. The arid sandylands is one of the eight major plant associations of the Thicket. Three hundred and forty-one species of wildflowers have been collected there. Additionally, 24 species of freshwater clams. the river otter, and the alligator all live in the area. The succession ponds in this area are probably the world's best ex- ample of ecological succession ponds. ranging from a relatively young abandoned channel lake, through Cleark Lake. Yellow Lake, Mud Lake, and a spatterdock pond. Alligator Grass Pond, Sedge Marsh. Devils' Pocket Acid Bog to finally Sweetspire Baygall, a closed acid bog. The ponds lie within 24 miles of each other. Scientists have found no other such series of ponds in such a small area. Needless to say. the inclusion of this area would provide protection to other areas of the preserve and would provide unusual oppOrtunities for canoeing and hiking. At this point I would like to quote from a 30-061 0 - 74 - 5 PAGENO="0066" 60 number of letters written to me and to the Senate Interior Committee which express an interest in this area. Biology Prof. Paul A. Harcombe of Rice University wrote: There are sandy bluffs along Village Creek which support oak woodlands, which are distinct from the other forest or woodlands types I have observed in south- east Texas. Also, there is a series of oxbow lakes south of the Hardin County Dump which offer an interesting and possibly unique opportunity for study of hydrarch suc- cession, the process of gradual filling of a lake bed and conversion to a big thicket or a tupelo swamp. Biology Prof. Peter Marks of Cornell University wrote: It is my opinion that the bill for a Big Thicket Biological Reserve would be significantly enriched by the inclusion of the land near the Hountze Dump that contains both a representative example of the driest, most desert-like vegetation characteristic of southeast Texas and a series of lakes and various stages of gradually being filled in by natural processes and converted to forest. It is be- cause this desert-like vegetation is one of the distinctive features of the vegeta- tion of that part of the state that I believe it would be short-sighted to omit the area from the National Reserve. The series of lakes would be an added bonus. The lakes and vegetation to- gether make this a most attractive package, in my opinion, as a plant ecologist. Mr: George Alderson of Friends of the Earth states: Friends of the Earth wishes to urge the inclusion of a key area that was omit- ted from the House-passed bill, the Sandylands-Ponds Unit. This area is important for its arid sandyland plant community and it would allow the Interior Department to provide a long, dry trail for public use. The area, as proposed by Texas citizen groups, contains no private residences. Mr. Lloyd Tupling of the Sierra Club wrote: The House bill leaves out one of the major plant communities in the Big Thicket, the Sandylands-Ponds Unit. One of the major purposes for preserving the Big Thicket is the number and diversity of plant communities which exist in close proximity, making it a biological crossroads of America. The House hearings also pointed out the necessity of preserving this area. Congressman Steelman tried to include this area during markup but was defeated. It is, therefore, the Senate's responsibility to assure this area's preservation. I did not include this area in my original bill, 5. 1981. However, after seeing the interest in this area, I sent two members of my staff to the Big Thicket to check the various areas proposed. After receiving their report I became convinced that the arid sandy- 1ands-succession ponds was one of the most impressive and unique areas. It is central to the preserve and should be included. The testimony befoie the House brings up the question of acquisition cost of this area. I think the committee must look into this closely be- cause there seem to be conflicting views. The National Parks Service cost estimates seem vague. Also, I un- derstand that it figures the price based on the highest and best use for- mula. An independent real estate appraisal that I have seen submitted a much lower figure. I am in no position to judge the validity of either appraisal. However, it seems to me that essentially the same average price paid for other land in the preserve would apply to this area. After reviewing the House testimony, I conclude that the higher price tag was put on the area because of the number of improved residences. PAGENO="0067" 61 The evidence niy. staff has accumulated discloses very few residences in the area. To remedy this, I would suggest that the committee in- struct the National Park Service to draw the boundaries of this area to insure that no residences or as few as possible are included. I do not believe that opposition to the area's inclusion can be real- istically based on cost alone. Senator BIBLE. Can I ask a question there? How many residences do you have in the taking area of the House bill approximately? We can develop that through Mr. Reed of the Park Service. Senator TOWER. I think we would have to find an answer for you and submit that for the record, Mr. Chairman. Senator BIBLE. We will ask the Park Service. They should have that figure. Senator Towr~i. I am not so sure that they have an accurate figure either. Senator BIBLE. Well, we will ask them. We will question them and ask them to get the information if they don't have it. Senator TOWER. I don't believe opposition to this area's inclusion * can be realistically based on cost alone. At this time I would like to depart from the statement I have already submitted, to add another additional word. The timber industry is heavily invested throughout much of the area which is included within the bounds of the proposed preserve. The wood products industry is the mainstay of my State's economy, in this portion of east Texas.. Son~e concern as originally in my proposal that acreage along Village Creek be added to the preserve, the fear being that prime timber under indeed the various wood products interests would thus be absorbed by the Government and ruled out of bounds for cutting. I have studied my maps of the area and it appears that a great deal of this acreage could not include prime stands of timber, especially in the arid sandylands succession ponds area. It is possible that some prime timber might be included at the north end of Village Creek. I do think the timber industry deserves consideration and I encourage the subcommittee to consider the eco- nomic impact if such losses did occur. If acreage is included in the Village Creek area it could certainly be drawn so as to exclude most of the prime timber, if that is the wish of the subcommittee. Senator BIBLE. How did the House pass the bill? Did they include it orexclude it? Senator ToWER. It is excluded in the House bill. The whole area is excluded in the House bill. We are talking about an area that we wish to have included. Senator BIBLE. You want to add it but you don't want to add it all; is that what it boils down to? Senator TOWER. We want to include the important parts of it.. As we look at the map it really doesn't impact with much adversity on the timber industry. Senator BIBLE. All right. Senator TOWER. If acreage is included in the Village Creek area it could certainly be drawn to exclude most of the prime timber. The purpose of this legislation is not punitive, neither are we attempting PAGENO="0068" 62 to detrimentally affect the economy of the area or dispossess home- owners. But some homes in tracts of timber have to be included in any pre- serve. The powers of the subcommittee will, I know, be as equitable as possible to all interests. This 100,000 acre proposal, which essen- tially agrees with the acreage and configurations of the House bill is, in my opinion, the best method of preserving the area. It might be well to mention why I chose to include acreage in the area of Joe's Lake. It is an ancient forest. Ancient oaks and black gums thrive in this dense closed-canopy forest in the Big Thicket. It contains the only stand of jewel flower in the entire area. It also contains the heaviest population of ~white-tailed deer in the thicket. It has all the aspects of a virgin forest. At this point in my testimony I would like to speak to some elements in H.R. 11546 which I hope the subcommittee will support. I believe that the House provision that allows for immediate possession by the United States is essential because of the documented evidence that between 30 and 50 acres of the thicket is being destroyed every day. 1~\Tithout such a provision, I fear that by the time the major parts are acquired the ecological value of the preserve will be considerably diminished. As this committee well knows, there is precedent for such a provi- sion in Public Law 90-545, the Redwood National Park Act. The pro- vision will allow the Government to enter into negotiations immedi- ately with the private interests. Additionally, the provision will limit Government cost by requiring negotiation and subsequent purchases without undue delay thereby avoiding the effect of quickly escalating land values. Let me mention briefly that I think that traditional hunting and fishing rights within limits should continue to be allowed. I think that every effort should be made to protect the homeowners in the area. The legislation should require the National Park Service to draw its boundaries to exclude as many homes as possible and to investigate closely the contention that some areas within the proposed boundaries are possibly more densely populated than some research has shown. Although I am well aware that the Federal Government has no pro- gram in such cases as this to restore lost tax base to local governments, I ask that the subcommittee consider this and that the National Park Service be asked to explain, as it did to me, that these areas usually become more prosperous not less as a result of visitors and the services they require. It has been estimated that 190,000 visitors will come to the preserve the first year and up to600,000 after 10 years. Senator BIBLE. Have you any idea how many came there in 1973, an estimate? Senator TOWER. We don't have it, but we can submit it for the record. Senator BIBLE. We can ask the Park Service. Senator TOWER. For your information, the Texas Legislature did lass a resolution in support of the preserve and the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife is favorably disposed towards it. I strongly encourage the State of Texas to join in the efforts to preserve the area and to acquire acreage in the area to complement that acquired by the Federal Government. PAGENO="0069" 63 I urge you to consider my views favorably, to act expeditiously on this legislation and to report out a bill which will preserve, to the best of our abilities, the unique and magnificent area which is the Big Thicket. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for letting me come up first this morn- ing. I have to report a meeting of the Armed Services Committee that I must attend now. I appreciate the opportunity to testify before the committee. If the committee has any additional questions of me I will be glad to submit them in writing. Senator BIBLE. We will be happy to query you if they arrive during the course of the 2-day hearing. But most of the questions I ask I will ask of the Park Service people who should have more of the statistical information available. Senator TOWER. Thank you very much. But if you have any addi- tional questions I will be happy to take the opportunity of answering them. Senator BIBLE. That's a fine statement. We were happy to have you here this morning. Senator `TOWER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator BIBLE. Our next witness will be Senator Bentsen. Is Sena- tor Bentsen here yet? We will return to him as soon as he does arrive. Our next witness is-is Congressman Steelman here? I have a memo- randum he is unable to be here. Apparently his son had an accident. He has sent in his statement. Without objection, Congressman Steelman's statement will be incorpo- rated in full in the record at this point. [The statement of Congressman Steelman follows:] STATEMENT OF HON. ALAN STEELMAN, A TJ:S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear here today to speak in support of legislation to create a Big Thicket National Preserve. Regarding the size of the Big Thicket, I introduced a bill for 100,000 `acres, supported the House- passed version consisting of 84,000 acreo, and realize that both Texas United States Senators sponsored legislation calling for 100,000 acres. Therefore I feel that this will be resolved in Conference and would like to limit my remarks this morning `to why it is important to include legislative taking and a sandydand unit in this legislation. Only 100 years `ago, the Big Thicket covered more than three million acres. In 1938 there were still one million acres of the Thicket. Today there are hardly 300,000 acres remaining of the Big Thicket, and it is disappearing at the rate of 30 to 50 acres daily. H.R. 11546 has a provision included that I feel is essential `to any legislation establishing a Big Thicket National Preserve. Because the Big Thicket is being destroyed `by up to 50 acres daily, time becomes very important to its preservation. If, and I respectfully hope when, a Big Thicket bill becomes enacted into law, I hope `the usual time lag between the date of enactment and the actual date of land acquisition by the United States will not see destruction of the forests con- tinue. To eliminate this time lag, H.R. 11546 has a proviSion to give `the United States `the right to immediate possession of most land included. This provision excludes all public lands an'd all tracts of less than fifty `acres used for residential or agricultural purposes. Precedent is taken from the land acquisition procedure in the Redwood National Park Act, P.L. 90-545. There are two major benefits from this "redwoods" provision. With the United States acquiring title to the land on the date of the President's signing the bill into law, large private interests will be required to immediately cease their operations in the forests. Negotiations for compensation for the land taken will then proceed between the federal government and the private concerns, or through the appropriate courts if agreement cannot be reached. PAGENO="0070" 64 The second benefit concerns the rapidly escalating estimated values of lands involved. The lengthy delays iii negotiating settlements with private owners would probably be followed by increases in the value of the property sought. This was precisely what was prevented by the Redwoods National Park Act. President Johnson had warned in 1906 that the public must not "be burdened" by "artificial price spirals" caused by speculation on lands to be acquired by the Government. An example of such an increase in land prices occurred in the Point Reyes National Seashore, authorized in 1962, where there was a 30-percent increase in prices over a 12-month period. Today, with President Nixon at- tempting to hold the lid on public spending, this provision will most likely save the federal government a substantial amount of money. I would like to emphasize that the "redwoods" provision does not interfere with the right of homeowners to live on their property. Residents are guaranteed the right to occupy their homes for 25 years, or for their entire life. The ov~mer elects the option lie or she prefers. It is also important to note that all property acquired by the United States will be paid for at fair market value. I believe an arid sandy land-ponds unit, one of eight major plant associations in the Big Thicket, is most important in accomplishing the intent of this legis- lation. Certainly an integral part of the Biological Crossroads of North America would be the best documented series of ecological succession ponds in the world. As you are probably aware, there are also over three hundred species of wild- flowers in this proposed unit. Not only would this unit protect the waters from pollution and insure the biological integrity of downstream units, it also provides outstanding canoeing. Mr. Chairman. I thank you for allowing me to give my views on the Big Thicket. In closing I w-ould like to let this Subcommittee know that the mail I have received on the Big Thicket has been overwhelmingly in favor of enacting Big Thicket legislation. It would be a great loss to not only Texas, but to the entire nation, if we allow the Big Thicket to be decimated. Thank you very much. Senator BIBLE. Is Congressman Wilson here? Charles Wilson. I understand the Congressman has been delayed but will be here shortly. I would like to ask Senator Yarborough if he would like to appear now or if he would like to hear Nat Reed, and then appear. Senator YARBOROUGH. Mr. Chairman, if it suits the convenience of the Chair better, I will present mine now. If Mr. Reed is ready, of course-- Mr. REED. No, Senator; please go ahead. Senator BIBLE. Whichever way you want it. However you gentlemen want to handle it is all right with me. Now we will hear from Nat Reed, the Assistant Secretary of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, U.S. Department of the Interior. Secretary Reed. STATEMENT OF NATHANIEL P. REED, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Secretary REED. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased today to recommend enactment of S. 2286, which incorporates this administration's proposal to establish the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve in the State of Texas. The President, in his recent state of the Union message, described the Big Thicket area of east Texas as "a biological crossroads unique in the United States" and urged prompt enactment of legislation to preserve it. Mr. Chairman, I need not detail `before this committee the magnifi- cent resources of the Big Thicket or stress the necessity of acting now to pieserve it from continuing threats to its integrity. PAGENO="0071" 65 The Senate recognized these facts long ago, having decisively passed Big Thicket legislation on December 16, 1970. What we need to do now, Mr. Chairman, is to address two fundamental issues squarely. First, why are we in the Big Thicket? Is our concern preservation for scientific purposes, recreation, land use management, or perhaps river basin planning? Second, having defined our objectives, what will it cost the taxpayer to accomplish them and how much should we expend? This administration believes that the Federal interest in the Big Thicket is biological and scientific in nature. Consequently, we have recommended use of the term "reserve" to designate this potential unit of the national park system rather than one of the more traditional designations suggesting other management philosophies. Over a period of years this Department has carefully studied the Big Thicket for possible inclusion in the national park system. As a result, we transmitted a proposal to the Congress on July 14, 1973, recommending establishment of a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve consisting of 68,000 acres in seven units. They represent outstanding segments of the diverse biological com- munities encountered in the area. The big Sandy unit of 14,300 acres contains some of the finest examples of the Big Thicket's recognizable subtypes ranging from the dier upland to the streambank and `baygall communities. The Hickory Creek Savannah unit, comprising 668 acres, is of outstanding value because of the great variety of herbaceous plants it contains. It represents the Longleaf Pine-Grassland Association, a distinctive threshold comrnunit.y bearing an important relationship to the true Big Thicket. The Turkey Creek unit illustrates n remarkable diver- sity of upper Big Thicket vegetation types, including the largest known field of insectivorous plants in the region. This unit comprises 7,800 acres. The Beech Creek unit, `consisting of 4,856 acres, contains some of the best examples of mixed hardwood for- est, especially the Beech-Magnolia-White Oak-Loblolly Pine Associa- tion which is the symbol of the Big Thicket. The Neches Bottom and Jack Gore Baygall unit comprises 13,300 acres. Its flood plain supports mature lowland hardwood forests, that contain many species not found elsewhere in the Big Thicket. It is laced with sloughs containing immense specimens of Bald Cypress and Water Tupelo. The Lance Rosier unit is a fine representative of the lower Big Thicket communities. Its 20,008 acres will facilitate preservation of wildlife species which may be threatened in the other smaller units. The seventh unit, Beaumont, contains 6,218 acres of superb wilder- ness. It is an outstanding representation of the Big Thicket's flood plain forest and streambank communities. Mr. Chairman, these seven units truly are representative of the Big Thicket. The primary purposes of the reserve will be the preserva- tion of the biological systems represented and interpretation of their values to visitors. Recreational opportunities would primarily be associated with those purposes. This is preservation of the highest order, Mr. Chairman, and will provide the American taxpayer the greatest return on his investment. PAGENO="0072" 66 H.R. 11546, passed by the House on December 3, 1973, would estab- lish a Big Thicket Natitonal Preserve of 84,550 acres. S. 314 `and S. 1981 would establish a 100,000-acre national park and biological reserve, respectively. The administration proposal `does not include corridor areas along streams, `as do these three proposals. Certainly, Mr. Chairman, the streamsides of east Texas are as lovely as any I have ever seen. But why must the Federal Government acquire them in order to as- sure their preservation? We are convinced that the State should take some role in this preservation, particularly in light of the recreational benefits to be derived, and we believe strongly that provision of recrea- tional opportunities and river basin management are State respon- sibilities. Senator BIBLE. At that point, have you ever explored this with the proper representa'tives in the State of Texas? Whatever their depart- ment is, department of natural resources- Secretary REED. It's the parks and wildlife service. Senator BIBLE. Has that been explored with proper officials of the State of Texas? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. With what result? Secretary REED. We expect some news from the Governor's office and from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission as to what they think their proper role should be in the Big Thicket. They recognize some role. They do not `recognize as extensive a role as we have indicated in our report. Senator BIBLE. Where is the `title to these corridor areas which are excluded from' the administration bill but which I understand are included within the bill at least of Senator Tower `and possibly Senator Bentsen? Are they included in both of them ? The corridor areas? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. Where is the title to the corridors now? Secretary REED. They `are in private ownership, sir. Senator BIBLE. Would it have to be. acquired voluntarily or by combination? Secretary REED. Voluntary or combination; correct, si'r. Senator BIBLE. Do you have any idea of when you will hear from the proper board of the State of Texas? Secretary REED. We were hoping today, sir. Senator BIBLE. I see. But that hasn't come up, as of 10 :30, is that right? Secretary REED. Correct, sir. Senator BIBLE. We are going to be in session again tomorrow on this bill. Maybe you will have an `answer by tomorrow. It might be well for you to say that this bill will be delayed until you get the answer. Would that help you? Secretary REED. I would hate to have a contingent on this excellent bill in this great area of Texas. But it is one that we could certainly press to get `an answer on. Senator BIBLE. Tell them that the chairman is most anxious to have that `because of his affection for the great State of Texas. My private secretary is a Texan and she won't let me in the office until I get this thing resolved. PAGENO="0073" 67 So I hope you will evidence the continuing interest I have in try- ing to move this forward. We passed it once in the Senate and I hope we can pass it again without too much delay. OK. Secretary REED. In accord with this policy, and consistent with the recommendation of the Advisory Board of National Parks, historic sites, buildings, and monuments, made in October 1972, that a Big Thh±et National Biological Reserve be established, I recommend en- actment of 5. 2286. This legislation incorporates the administration's biological reserve proposal. We estimate that the cost of acquiring the 68,000 acres involved will total $38 million, which of course does not include acquisition of lands in corridor areas along streams. It is instructive to note that acquisition of the 11,800 acres of stream corridors included in the House-passed proposal would rep- resent approximately 30 percent of the total land acquisition cost in- volved, but that those corridors would constitute only about 14 percent of the total acreage. For these reasons we have not included in our proposal the Neches and Little Pine Island Bayou corridors which at one time we con- templated acquiring. Furthermore, we never considered including the Menard Creek Corridor which is of relatively unknown quality and has substantial subdivision development along its banks. 5. 2286 would permit acquisition of real property for the reserve by purchase, donation, exchange, or transfer from any other Federal agency, except that property could be acquired from State and local governments only by donation. We strongly recommend against enactment of the legislation tak- ing provision of H.R.. 11546, as passed. While such takings may be advisable in some situations, the fact that this project would entail acquisition of many tracts from numerous owners over a period of years precludes the efficacy of that procedure here. In addition, we believe that deletion of year-round homesites from the reserve, as proposed in the House-passed measure, would seriously compromise preservation and complicate administration of the Big Thicket. Mr. Chairman, S. 2286 would permit owners of noncommercial resi- dential property to retain rights of use and occupancy for period~ of 25 years or life, whichever is longer. In addition, hunting and fish- ing would be permitted in the reserve, subject to State and Federal laws and to Tegulation by the Secretary. Senator BIBLE. At that point, are you in a position to indicate how many noncommercial residential properties are included within the administration proposal? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. We are able to give you a full breakdown of the areas. The total is 58 improvements worth $403,493 by our estimates. They include 4 farm units, 24 year-round dwellings, 26 cottages and cabiiis, 3 house trailers, and 1 boat ramp. Senator BIBLE. Are those all covered under the so-called, and we have used it frequently in this committee over the years in these park proposals, they are exempt and under the Cape Cod formula. I mean the residential properties. Secretary REED. The provisions are similar to Cape Cod formula, indeed. Owners will have the 25 years or life occupancy option. That is correct, Mr. Chairman. PAGENO="0074" 68 Senator BIBLE. Whichever is the longest. Secretary REED. Whichever is the longest. Correct, sir. Senator BIBLE. That has worked out extremely well as you know in Cape Cod and other areas around the United States, so I think we have built in a fine concept there. The total number that would be under the Cape Cod formula is 58, you say? Secretary REED. Yes, sir; 58. Senator BIBLE. Well, you have a boat landing in there. Do you exclude that? Secretary REED. Fifty-seven, sir, without the boat landing. Senator BIBLE. And you said how many farming? Secretary REED. Four, sir, and that compares with 297 in the House passed bill. Senator BIBLE. Do they have a Cape Cod formula in the House passed bill, same as you do in the administration bill? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. All right. You may proceed. Secretary REED. A provision is included in 5. 2286 to make it clear that the Secretary may decline to acquire rights to oil and gas and other minerals when acquiring surface rights. Senator BIBLE. Will you explain that? . Secretary REED. Yes, sir. We feel very strongly about this provision and I speak to it later in the testimony- Senator BIBLE. If I. anticipate you, go ahead and develop your full statement. Secretary REED. All right, sir. The bill also preserves a right of reasonable access to mine or extract these minerals and preserves existing oil and gas easements and rights- of-way across the reserve. We have no intention of acquiring the pro- hibitively expensive oil and gas rights in this fossil fuel rich area. Although the House passed measure would exempt the mineral estate and existing pipeline easements from legislative taking, we be- lieve that any Big Thicket bill should contain a provision specifically allowing the Secretary to. decline to acquire mineral rights. Senator BIBLE. Explain that. What does that mean? Secretary REED. The legal reason for that, Mr. Chairman, is that the area has been heavily drilled for oil. It has been a big producer of oil for almost 60 years. Senator BIBLE. Not within the taking area. Secretary REED. Certain parts of the taking area have been- Senator BIBLE. Certain parts of the taking area have been oil pro- ducrng? Secretary REED. Yes, sir, and we don't want tO get in a long hassle in the court as to what the value or potential value of mineral. rights are on the lands chosen for the American people. We feel very strongly that legislation should include the provision for the Secretary to specifically deny the opportunity to buy those mineral rights, or the charges that he must buy those mineral rights.~ or a legal action requiring him to buy those mineral rights because they will be very expensive and difficult to prove in a court of law. PAGENO="0075" 69 Senator BIBLE. Are there any actually producing oil wells in the taking area today? Secretary REED. Yes, sir, there are. Senator BIBLE. Within the areas marked in red? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. How many? Secretary REED. There* are not many, sir. I do not have the exact number of wells, but I think there are fewer than a dozen. Senator BIBLE. How much oil do they produce a year? Secretary REED. On the entire Big Thicket or out of the areas of taking? Senator BIBLE. Out of the taking areas. Secretary REED. Not a substantial amount, sir. Senator BIBLE. What does that mean? Secretary REED. I would have to get the production figures. Senator BIBLE. `Would you supply that for the record, because we are in an energy crunch or crisis or shortage. But anyway, we have a problem. So I think it is well that we rather thoroughly explore the potential that is here for oil and gas. Is it more important for oil and gas or is it more important for a biological reserve? Secretary REED. We think both can be accommodated at the same time, Mr. Chairman. This. is an area of unusually high rainfall. An area that recovers very quickly. `We think both can go along together very nicely. They have been going along together very nicely for a long time and with some simply understood rules that the oil industry and Na- tional Park Scrvice can live as happily as they are on Padre Island. Senator BIBLE. Are they happy on Padre Island? Secretary REED. They are very happy on Padre Island, sir. Senator BIBLE. I have heard some different versions, but we have made them simpatico on Padre Island. I think it has worked out reasonably well with the few problems that always come up in any type of a national park. But I would like to have, for the record, the statistical information. Secretary REED. Fine, sir. `We will furnish that. [The information follows:] U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., February 28, 1974. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insuiar Affairs, U.S. Senate, Wasllingt Oil, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: At the November 5-6, 1973, hearing before the Subcom- mittee on Parks and Recreation on the proposed Big Thicket National Biological Reserve, this Department's witness was asked to provide to the Committee the current oil production within proposed units of the Administration's 68,000-acre Big Thicket proposal. We have been advised by the Texas Railroad Commission, Division of Oil and Gas the production records are kept by oil field and pool. These pools may be separated horizontally or vertically with from several to hundreds of wells oper- ating on each pool. They were, therefore, unable to provide production data oii specific wells. We did, however, receive the following information: East Village Mills Oil Field-262,000 barrels per year (Estimated 5 percent of field production is within Turkey Creek Unit) Gulf Peel Oil Field-No current production (60 percent of field is within Lance Rosier Unit) PAGENO="0076" 70 Silsbee Oil Field-198,000 barrels per year (Estimated one percent of field production is within Neches Bottom-Jack Gore Baygall Unit) We were advised that the oil fields in the vicinity of the proposed Big Thicket National Biological Reserve were average producers with a downward production trend. We are pleased to be of assistance regarding this matter. Sincerely yours, KEN M. BROWN, Legislative Counsel. Senator BIBLE. You may proceed. Secretary REED. As a general matter, Mr. Chairman, we recommend the language contained in S. 2286 in lieu of differing language in other Big Thicket proposals. For example, we recommend use of the Depart- ment's standard language concerning retained rights of use and occu- pancy, and regulation of hunting and fishing. In addition, as discussed in our report to your committee, we recom- mend deletion of the provisions in certain proposals providing for initiation by owners of district court review of termination of their rights of use and occupancy, and for in-lieu-of-tax payments as well as deletion of provisions that restate existing policy on management and acquisition. We recommend inclusion of authority for the Secretary to make minor future revisions in the boundaries, such as that found in our proposal. Senator BIBLE. I hope you define that a little better than we defined it in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, because I have been wrestling with that problem ever since we passed the basic bill. We did allow the Secretary to make minor future revisions but we failed to define what minor was. They included a certain rather sub- stantial acreage, just north of the Golden Gate, generally in the Point R.eyes area. We have `been hassling about it ever since. I hope that that can be spelled out. I see no objection to having the Secretary make minor future revisions as long as I understand what minor future revisions are. Do you have any idea of what a minor future revision is? Secretary REED. I see your point, sir, and we will have to go `back to the drawing boards and define that. I understand your concern. Senator BIBLE. Because it gave us trouble in the Golden Gate, and we are still having problems with it, so I wish you would take a close look at that. Secretary REED. Yes, sir. And I have been told that we may have the opportunity to exclude some year-round residences which we feel would be so expensive to purchase that it would not be worthwhile. We will come back to the committee with a reasonable definition of "minor". Senator BIBLE. You say not only that but you are going to come back with some exclusions `of some residences that you now have included in the taking area; did I understand you to say that? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. How many residences will you total as a result? Secretary REED. I will have to give the chairman and the committee a further definition of that. Senator BIBLE. It is not a definition problem as I see it. You say you are going to exclude certain residences. The last figure you gave me was that there would be 57 residences in the taking area. PAGENO="0077" 71 If you exclude some, how many will there be when you come back with your revision? Secretary REED. Mrs. Bonney corrects me. We refined our proposal to exactly what I have testified to; namely, 57 and one boat landing. Senator BIBI~. Fifty-seven and one boat landing. Secretary REED. As we go into the field, if there is anything else we would have to come back to the committee. Senator BIBLE. We hope to move this along rather expeditiously. If you are going to make revisions you had better start making them right now. Secretary REED. Understood, sir. Senator BIBLE. You may proceed. Secretary REED. We have no objection to inclusion of provisions, such as those contained in the House passed measure, providing that persons electing continued use and occupancy rights waive benefits under the* Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisi- tion Policies Act of 1970, or that the area be studied to determine its wilderness potential. Development of the reserve for visitor use, consisting mainly of access roads and trails and interpretive facilities, is expected to cost $4,572,000. Estimated annual operating costs will total $853,000 in the fifth year following establishment. As previously indicated, the cost of acquiring lands is expected to total $38 million, in the administratioi~'s proposal. We are proposing to acquire those lands over a 3-year period, expanding $16 million in the first year and $11 million in each of the 2 subsequent years. As you. know, Mr. Chairman, the President wisely called for full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund at $300 million for fiscal year 1975. You and the concerned members of this com- mittee are to be commended for your strong expressions of support for funding at that level. Because those funds will be available, some land acquisition for this project could occur in that year if this legislation is enacted soon. Senator BIBLE. What does it mean, "in that year"? Secretary REED. That means in this year now, sir. Senator BIBLE. Fiscal year 1975 coming up? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. We have not got a line item as you see when we come for appropriations for Big Thicket in 1975. We have been able to go and have a look at our funding for 1975 and see there is a strong possibility that we will be able to put $3 million by coming and asking for reprograming, $3 million to work in fiscal 1975 and go to $13 million in fiscal 1976 and whatever it takes to conclude. Senator BIBLE. Over a 3-year span? Secretary REED. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. I am happy to see that you have built that into your official presentation. One of the most difficult problems I have had, and I have handled these for 13 or 14 years is the fact that we create these parks and recreation areas and lake shores and sea shores. Th~ people expect us to get going and we don't carry out our promise to acquire the land. The Indiana Dunes is a prime example of that. I don't know how many years that has gone on, and \ve still have not acquired it all. I think that is failing to keep faith with the American public. PAGENO="0078" 72 So I am happy to see that you have built into your statement a realistic timetable, which you can rest assured, as far as I am per- sonally concerned as chairman of the Interior Appropriations Com- mittee that full funding will be granted. I think it was a terrible, terrible mistake and I expressed it to you and the Secretary a number of times, that it was almost cata- strophic really to reduce the land and water conservation fund from $30() million to $55 million. * We will pay for that. We are paying for it now. So I am delighted it will be funded at the full level. Secretary REED. We also have some reserve funds tlia~ will be spent. As you can see, when we come to testify in appropriation. So it's even a brighter picture this morning than it was when this testimony was finalized and cleared. Senator BIBLE. I am. happy to hear that. I have iio specific questions of you. You are opposed to the legislative taking- Secretary REED. We have a hard time with it from the Redwood experience, sir. We still haven't settled there. Senator BIBLE. I share that view-. That, to me, that would end up in a conference if we cannot resolve it, because that Redwoods has been a miserable experience and you know it better than I do. Secretary REED. Yes, sir. You asked me when I first came here to try to get that solved rapidly. I have put 3 years at it, and we are still arguing over the same things we w-ere arguing over 3 years ago and the court seemingly cannot make up its mind as to the real valuation of certain lands. Senator BIBLE. Do I not understand that some type of court deci- sion. is coming momentarily right around the corner? Secretary REED. It was momentarily around the corner 90 days ago. I certainly don't want you to hold your breath, Mr. Chairman. Senator BIBLE. I w-on't because I kind of like to breathe. But legis- lative taking I understand. But was I given to understand that in the House-passed bill there was some specific earmarking of the land and water conservation fuiids for this particular project, or was that an erroneous impression? Secretary REED. I think that was an erroneous impression, sir. I have the bilL Senator BIBLE. You don't have to look it imp now. I can ask the staff on it. I could be in error. But in any event., I would not favor creatmg a new park today and then dipping in and giving Big Thicket pref- erence over other demands and priorities that you have. Secretary REED. Just the legislative taking, sir. Staff has told me that the legislative taking was the only thing that was in the bill. Senator BIBLE. Well, I am glad to hear that. As you w-eli know we have about a. $250 million backlog of acquisition. Secretary REED. I brought Mr. Stewart with me in case there was a question on the backlog. I don't. know whether you want it now, sir, but-or whether you will wait for Appropriations. Senator BIBLE. I will ask him. How much money would it cost as of today to acquire all of the lands that have been authorized for parks and recreation areas, seashores and anything within the Interior Department dealing with parks and recreation areas? Mr. STEWART. I believe that figure is around $245 million. PAGENO="0079" 73 Senator BIBLE. Well, I was in the ball park. I just wanted a round figure and I thought I had it right in my mind. I wasn't sure. Will you leave Mr. Stewart or one of your other men here, Mr. Reed, when these problems arise as we go through this bill and there will be prob- lems arising as we go through the bill. It will be unique if they didn't. Secretary REED. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. 1 have no further questions of you. I appreciate your appearance here today. Secretary REED. Thank you, Mr. C'hairñian. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much. Our next witness will be the Senator from Texas, Lloyd Bentsen. Senator Bentsen. STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD BENTSEN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM * THE STATE OF TEXAS Senator BENTSEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I apolo- gize for arriving late, but I was chairing my own committee's hearings one floor below and I `have to return to that. Senator BIBLE. I uiiderstand, and we will understand when you leave. Senator BENTSEN. I am very pleased to see Congressman Wilson here who has had a great interest in this. My predecessor, Senator Yarborough, who is a strong and ardent proponent of this legislation and was effective in this passage of your legislation with this com- inittee some 3 years ago. Senator BIBLE. Correct. Senator BENTSEN. I heard the chairman say that we had other projects that had earlier funding authorization. I would want to as- sure the chairman that I have no objections to this particular project taking precedence over those others. Senator BIBLE. I am sure that would be a typical Texas attitude, and it will be properly noted. Senator BENTSE~. Mr. Chairman, it is a great pleasure for me to have this opportunity to be before you in support of my proposal to establish a Big Thicket National Park and others calling for a biologi- cal reserve. This is a long-awaited day for the advocates of a Big Thicket Park or Reserve, and we owe you a great debt, Mr. Chairman, for your interest and steadfast support in that effort. It is a testament to your foresight that this committee reported out some 3 years ago a bill that would have established a Big Thicket National Park, and it is an indication of the gemilne quality of this natural wilderness area that after years of controversy it has ad- vanced to the point where we can finally say that the Big Thicket will be saved and that this session of the 93d Congress is the time it w-ill be done. I plan to discuss today why I think the establishment of a Big Thicket Reserve is necessary and why certain features should be in- cluded in any bill to accomplish that purpose. When I think of the Big Thicket, I am reminded of the words John Muir once spoke concerning the great western forests of our country. PAGENO="0080" 74 God has cared for these trees, saved them from drought, disease, avalanches and a thousand straining, leveling tempests and floods; but He cannot save them from Man's folly-only Uncle Sam can do that. His words were true of the great forests of the Sierras at the turn of the century, and they are equally true of the dwindling remains of the Big Thicket of southeast Texas today. At one time, the Big Thicket was the westernmost part of a primordial forest system that spread from east Texas to the Atlantic seaboard. It comprised almost 3.5 million acres of forests and streams ex- tending across 12 counties in the southeast Texas area. Today that figure has been reduced to a little over 300,000 acres in the area pro- posed for protection, and even that is being reduced by constant de- velopment and lumbering which threaten it with total destruction. Those who have visited the Big Thicket and studied its ecology call it the "Biological Crossroads of North America". This crossroad con- stitutes a joining of beech-white oak forest from the north, pines and magnolias from the south, and cactus and yucca from the west. They come together in a stream-laden forest that contains an in- credible range of plant and animal life. The Big Thicket is defined and supported by its bayous, streams, and rivers which is why so much attention has been gIven to the protection of these water corridors in the bills you have before you. It would be difficult to sav~ the Thicket without somehow protect- ing the water corridors that shape its development and sustain its natural life. I believe, in this regard, that a bill of 100,000 acres is necessary in order to provide full protection for the most elementary components of the Big Thicket Reserve. I know the House has reported a bill of less acreage and that the National Park Service, under 0MB constraiiits, has supported even a smaller figure than that endorsed by the House. While I am not .in a position to recommend specific additional acreage to be included in the reserve, I do believe that experts at the National Park Service are in a position to do so and should be relied upon by this committee.. In addition, you will receive considerable private testimony supporting a park of 100,000 acres. I know how frequently you must hear calls for larger parks and other portected areas, but when one considers the growth and de- velopment that have taken place in the gulf coast region of Texas, 1 believe that saving 100,000 acres of the Big Thicket for the enjoy- ment of future generations will look like a very modest step indeed. This is why I supported the establishment of a part of the size that I have suggested. You will be hearing their testimony and, as their representative here in the Senate, I would like to. say a word about their oppOsition to the establishment of a biological reserve. It is essential, I believe, that the establishment of a Big Thicket Reserve be accomplished in harmony with the basic economic activity and the individual rights, of the citizens living in the Big Thicket area. I think this can be done~ and I believe language should be included in the final bill which will protect the rights of all property owners in the area, and which will provide fair value and . treament to those who aredisturbed by the esta~blishment of the reserve. Senator BIBLE. How do you protect the property rights of all the owners? You have reference there to the insertion of the Cape Cod PAGENO="0081" 75 formula allowing people who have homes there, these 57 homes, to stay for a period of their life- Senator BENTSEN. You could have a life estate for them. You could do it in a variety of examples, as we have seen in previous instances in the country, Mr. Chairman. Senator BIBLE. That's what you referred to ~ Senator BENTSEN. Exactly. Senator BIBLE. Very well. Senator BENTSEN. I am particularly concerned that permanent home- sites be avoided in establishing the boundaries of the reserve and that full Federal assistance be provided to local jurisdictions which will be affected by loss of tax revenue due to the establishment of a Federal reserve. If the Big Thicket is to be saved, it will require a spirit of both cooperation and consideration on the part of all of the parties in- volved, cooperation among those who support the establishment of a reserve and. consideration for the views of those who oppose it. The spirit I refer to was expressed by our greatest conservation President, Teddy Roosevelt, when he said: We have become great because of the lavish u~e of our resources and we have just reason to be proud of our growth. But the time has come to inquire seri- ously what will happen when our forests are gone, when the coal, the iron, the oil, and the gas are exhausted, when the soils have been still further impoverished and washed into the streams, polluting the rivers, denuding the fields, and obstructing navigation. These questions do not relate only to the next century or to the next generation. They are with us now. It is time for us now as a nation to exercise the same reasonable foresight in dealing with our great natural resources that would be shown by any prudent man in conserving and wisely using the property which contains the assurance of well-being for himself and his children. That is why we must save the Big Thicket, and when we do, those who will be most in our debt will be the future generations who will share in its beauty and applaud our foresight in leaving such a legacy. Senator BIBLE. That is a splendid statement, and I appreciate it a great deal. You have my personal assurance a~ far as I am concerned that we will certainly get some type of Big Thicket out, whether it is a park or biological reserve or a preserve. But we will do everything we can to measure up to our responsibili- ties and get this out very soon. Senator BENTSEN. Thank you very much for the assistance of your secretary and some of us needling you. I know we will get your con- tinued attention. Senator BIBLE. You sure have a lot of Texas around here. Thank you very much for coming, and I understand you have to preside over another meeting. Senator BENTSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator BIBLE. We will next hear from Congressman Wilson. Mr. Congressman it is good to see you. Sorry to have kept you waiting. STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES WILSON, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Congressman WILSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to make a very formal statement, you have my prepared statement and I ask that it be incorporated in 30-061 0 - 74 - 6 PAGENO="0082" 76 the record. I am not going to talk too much about the great attHbutes of the biological preserve because you know those as well as I do. I `do. want to make one suggestion to you, though, and that is if you are going to wait for the State. of Texas to take `any positive action in this `particular controversy, I think you might as well adjourn the hearings now and consider reconvening them maybe in 3 or 4 years. Senator BIBLE. You don't share the views of the. secretary that they will be `here by tomorrow morning? Congressman WILsON. I certainly don't and the Department of the Interior `has made'many efforts in this regard, and I commend them for their efforts. But the local opposition to the preserve is such that the State legislature in my view would never allow the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to do such a thing. Senator BIBLE. We will not wait an undue length of time. Congressman WILSON. In. Texas also, the State legislatures are fa~r more sensitive to the wishes of the people who have `been elected from those particular areas than Congress tends to be. For that rea- son I would not advise waiting for the State to act. I would like to give you just a little background, which again I am afraid I am redundant and you already know. But the National Park Service has refused through the years to consider the Big Thicket as a national park, or has refused to recommend it, because the Big Thicket, of course, does not meet national park standards, due to the fact that in the view of the Department the Big Thicket lacks the recreational potential that is necessary for a national park. Therefore, I think we should realize that since it does not meet na- tiona.l park criteria that it does lack recreational redemption. So all of this effort we are making is not for something for a broad segment of the population to enjoy. But the effort we are making is for rather narrow academic group and for preservation of a natural resource for future generations. I think that we should keep this in mind as far as priorities are concerned. I personally support the preservation of the Big Thicket, but I think that we should never lose sight, there simply is not enough money to do everything we have to do. I think we should not lose sight of prior- ities. I think we should n.ot loss sight of the fact that in the House bill we are spending $70 million for the enjoyment of, again, a rather narrow segment, but one that I believe is worthy. But we are spending $70 million for this, and we are spending not a cent for development of the great recreational areas that exist in this very area, Sam Rayburn Dam and Reservoir, Toledo Bend Reservoir, Big Livingston. Areas that are in my district also, as is 95 percent of the Big Thicket and areas that are in great demand by the vast broad scope of the public who are turned away every weekend because thero is not money spent for boat ramps and camping facilities and for sani~ tary facilities. So it would seem to me that $70 million being spent for academic preservation is a rather generous amount, when we consider that we are spending nothing for all of the people who do not have the benefit of the great sophistication that eiij oys unique ferns and bogs. I would like to tell you also a little bit about the House bill when it passed. I personally introduced a bill of 75,000 acres which was PAGENO="0083" 77 far more than my constituents wanted. I introduced the bill for 75,000 acres because that was the amount that the Department of Interior was gomg to recommend. I did not feel that anything more than the Department would recom- mend could possibly be justified, from a fiscal standpoint, or from a political standpoint, in my case. As it turned out I had a very difficult time justifying the 75,000 acres. Then the Department which was prepared to recommend 75,000 acres had to come down to 68,000 from 75,000, under pressures of the Office of Management and Budget. However, I still felt that if there was any recreational redemption at all in the Big Thicket that it was along the Neches River. I wanted something for my less enlightened constitutents to enjoy. So I stuck with the 75,000. I was determined to go no higher. Through the months that ensued we, of course, reached an impasse and a deadlock. I think that Congressman Eckhardt who in the House has long been the leading advocate of the Big Thicket- Senator BIBLE. He appeared before us at Beaumont. Congressman WILSON. Whose environmental credentials are without. question realized that if we were going to pass a bill in the House and we understood you said you were not going to pass one over here until we did, we- Senator BIBLE. That is exactly what I said. Congressman WILSON. I am glad I understood correctly. Then Con- gressman Eckhardt and I understood, although we were quite emotional about our positions, we both understood that perhaps the public good would be better served if we would make some effort to reach some kind of compromise. This was very difficult for both of us. In addition to that, it was extremely difficult for us to understand- Senator BIBLE. Would you carve out your district for me-is the Big Thicket completely in your district? Congressman WILSON. The Big Thicket is completely in my district, which makes very little difference to some of my colleagues, except for that small- Senator BIBLE. Where is Jack Brooks' district? Congressman WILSON. He has this little strip along Pine Island Bayou and Congressman Brooks is completely in support of an 84,000- acre compromise as were 21 of the 24-member Texas delegation in the House. Now, to continue the history of the compromise a little bit. Included in the compromise were several of the more influential heads of the environmental groups and several of the groups who had been the strongest advocates for the Big Thicket. They, too, represented that they understood the necessity for a compromise, that if we did not do something probably no bill would come out of the House committee. And if a bill did come out it would more likely be my bill than the 100,000-acre bill. So we all got together in a spirit of harmony and got the 84,000-acre bill through the Interior Committee. We added 550 acres, making 84,500 that was not controversial. We were then able, because we were all in agreement, to put it on the suspension calendar in the House PAGENO="0084" 78 which I, of course, easily could have defeated that move since it took two-thirds if Iso desired. Senator BIBLE. But you were for the bill. Congressman WILSON. At that time, yes. Because we had the very reluctant agreement of some of the larger landowners. We had the apparently rather enthusiastic agreement of the environmentalists, and I felt it was in the public interest to go ahead and do it. The ink was not dry on the Speaker's signature on the House- passed bill until all of those in the environmental field who had been a party to this agreement immediately denounced the bill as being too small, and suddenly attached themselves to the Village Creek Corridor as being the single, most important part of the Big Thicket. And that the House had created a horrible sin against mankind in leaving it out, the very peopleS who had participated in the com- promise. The Village Creek Corridor, or the Sandylands, which have been made so much of and will be made so much of in the next 2 days. In the House committee, Mr. Chairman, I want you to remember this, if you remember nothing else about what I say. In the House committee this amendment was offered by Congressman Steelman and was defeated 19 to 1 by the committee. It is absolutely unnegotiable, as far as the people of Hardin County are concerned. It is a great symbol that some concession will be made to the citizens who live in the district. There are going to be three or four people here today who will dis- pute my analysis of the public opinion and the feeling of my con- stituents. But I wOuld like to point out, and I think you will under- stand this, that in the Democratic primary, ~which is the only serious elective contest in east Texas, happily, that in the Democratic primary in this county against four opponents, I received 82 percent of the vote in Hardin County. Happily, this time I do not have an opponent. Senator BIBLE. Is the filing date passed? Congressman WILSON. Yes, sir. Yesterday. I accept congratulations. Senator BIBLE. Well, I will congratulate you, then. Those are the easiest elections. Congressman WILSON. So I think you can't say that I am without credentials to estimate the opinion of the people who have elected me to represent them. They feel, and I think you will hear some of this testimony, the House testimony was very strong, because many of them at that time and they are not people of wealth, or people to whom airplane tickets come easily, but many of them pooled their resources. I was able to borrow a DC-3 and help many of them come up. There was a vast number of them, and the intensity and sincerity of their committee was very impressive to the House committee. I do not think there are many of them here today because they can only make a trip like that once a year or every 10 years. But they feel very much that the Federal Government has very little concern for their feelings. They are a small county in the light of representing an entire State, such as Senator Yarborough so ably did and as Senator Tower does and as Senator Bentsen so ably does. Their voices are sometimes a little diluted. But for those of us who primarily represent them, who represent them in the commissioner's court, who are their sheriffs, who are their county judges, who are PAGENO="0085" 79 their State senators, who are their State representatives, and who are their Congressmen, their voices are, indeed, important. And we find in our own minds great resentment to the arrogance with which they are treated by their big city cousins. Senator BIBLE. I suppose that is true anywhere in the U.S.A. That is true in my own State. Congressman WILsoN. It may be true, but it is certainly nothing that I like or will ever become used to. Senator BIBLE. I understand. But it is a fact of life, I think it really is. Congressman WILSON. Yes, sir. Now the attitude of some of the advocates is one of total contempt for these people. They simply do not know what they should have and what is good for them. It is now focused on Village Creek Corridor. I want to point out to you that in neither Senate bill that was introduced in the Senate this year was that corridor specifically included. The corridor that runs from here to here. Senator Bentsen's bill allowed the Department of Interior to decide. what areas should be included. No Department of Interior recom- mendation that has ever been made has that Village Creek Corridor included. Senator BIBLE. I think he took pretty much the same position this morning. Congressman WILSON. That is right. And Senator Tower's bill that was introduced this year and his past bill that has been introduced, at no time has the Village Creek Corridor been included. So why has it suddenly become important? It has become important because that was the one thing insisted on and demanded by the Dallas and Houston environmentalists that was left out by the House-passed bill in a spirit of compromise. Senator BIBLE. Is that in the House-passed bill now or is it not? Congressman WILSON. It is not. Now, if we had left out the Turkey Creek unit the same group of people would have delivered impassioned testimony that the ecological crossroads of the United States conflu- e.nced the Turkey Creek. If we left out the Lance Rosier unit it would have been Lance Rosier. If we left out the Big Sandy unit it would have been Big Sandy. And in other words, if they do not get every single inch they want, it is the end of the world. Senator BIBLE. I have heard lots of park proposals so it will not be the first time they have taken this approach. Congressman WILSON. I am sure, but because of the fact that my meager influence as a freshman Congressman in the House primarily existed in the House Interior Committee, because they, of course~ do have a certain amount of regard for the feelings of the local Con- gressmen, I allowed myself to be outsmarted because I believed them when t.hey said that we needed to get this bill passed now. That in a spirit of compromise we would all give a little. And I think now that they smell blood and they feel that I was outsmarted a.nd outmaneuvered, and now the Senate will pass the 100,000 acres although the Department of Interior has only i~ecomnmnended 68,000. That they can all conic here today and testify that it is absolutely useful and we should not even have a park if we cannot have the PAGENO="0086" 80 Village Creek Corridor, and that they will eventually prevail. But I would advise caution to them. The Senate has not yet passed the bill. I do not think the House conferees are going to be inclined toward the essential bogs along the Big Sandy. Then the House still would have to include such a conference report, so to all of those who are willing to jeopardize the entire Big Thicket proposal to which we are all committed, for this one area, which was never included in an Interior Department report, wrhich was never included in a Senate bill, which was left out of the compromise that was certainly agreed to by Congressman Eckhardt who has been the leadmg House advocate and which is a great emotional .and important symbol to the people who live in Hardin County. And which is the only concession that has been made to the local citizens. Again, I would advise caution. Thank you very much. Senator BIBLE. You sounded a caveat there. I understand what you are saying very clearly, and we will hear everybody fairly and im- partially and then make an independent judgment. Congressman WILSoN. Thank yom Senator. Senator BIBLE. Thank you, Mr. Congressman. I can guess why you got elected unopposed. You are to be complimented. Are you the first one there that has ever been elected unopposed from your district? Congressman WILSON. Oh, I think Congressman Dowdy was elected unopposed. We have had precedents for this. Senator BIBLE. It is a good precedent, if you happen to be on the winning side. Tell me this. Isn't this the general area from which Gov. Price Daniel and U.S. Senator Price Daniel comes? Congressman `WILSON. Yes. It is the general area. It is adjoining counties. Senator BIBLE. Refresh my memory. What county is that? Congressman WILsON. Liberty County. Senator BIBLE. How far is Liberty from Big Thicket. Congressman 1\TILSON. It is an adjoining county. This is Liberty County right here and this is Hardin County right here, and the House-passed bill part of it goes through Governor Daniel's home county. I might also add that his son is now the Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives and president of the constitutional con- vention in Austin. Senator BIBLE. Is he a justice in the State Supreme Court of Texas? Congressman WILSON. Yes, sir. He is associate justice on the State supreme court. Senator BIBLE. He was an advocate of this in the last bill that ap- peared before Congress. He appeared here and in Baltimore. Thank you very much, Mr. Congressmam You are welcome to stay and hear all of the testimony. And I do appreciate your coming here today. Thank you. [The prepared statement of Congressman Wilson follows:] STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES WILSON, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE PROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: I will be brief and make an effort to be calm. As most of you know, the entire boundaries of every Big Thicket Park proposal lie in my District with the exception of one creek bank PAGENO="0087" 81 which is in Congressman Brooks' District. In the year that I have been in Con- gress this matter has required a major portion of my attention, probably to the detriment of other items of importance. In my efforts to arrive at a reasoned and equitable proposal I have met on several occasions with environmental groups, held public meetings with the small landowners and homeowners, and met several times with representatives of the timber industry. Additionally, I have spent a great deal of time with the Department of Interior as well as organized labor and other interested parties. As you can well imagine there is great emotional disagreement, as is probably the case with most new national parks or preserves. The vast majority of the local people whom I represent want no park larger than 35,500 acres which was the original recommendation of the Department of Interior. Many of them want no park at all. In the course of this testimony you will probably hear this assessment disputed, but I hope that you will give my judgment some weight in light of the fact that I estimated public opinion in the county principally involved well enough to receive 79 percent of the vote in the Democratic Primary in a field of five. `I do bilieve that the wishes of the people most affected are due some considera- tion by you. On the other side are the environmental groups who advocate no less than 100,000 acres. I have regard and respect for this viewpoin:t, but I strongly `believe it to be excessive and without justification. The original legislation introduced by me wa's for 75,000 acres and was the same as the Department of Interior's recommendations with the exception of the streambed corridors. According to the Department, the approximately 68,000 acres recommended is all that can be ecologically justified; it is all that is needed for the protection of that which is *biologically unique, and the Department's recommendation is the result of many years diligent study. It is the only authori- tative study we have which makes any claim to be impartial. As I understand it, the Department would have `included the streambed corridors but were told by the Office of Management and Budget that scientific justification is the only acceptable justification, as opposed to recreational useage as with the corridors. However, the corridors would provide something in the preserve for those of us who are not quite as sophisticated as our urban `brothers. I. cannot think of a greater outrage than spending 60 to 70 million dollars on a project of very narrow appeal without adding something for the general public to enjoy. H.R. 11546, which is the bill developed by my colleagues and myself and passed without opposition in the House, is a compromise between those who wanted a small preserve of no more than 68,000 acres and those supporting a preserve of 100,000 acres. The 68,000 acre proposal included no corridors and the 100,000 acre bills provided for the acquisition of some highly controversial corridors. Even the bill which was passed in the House of Representatives encompasses land with ex- pensive homesites. To e~xpand the preserve further and include such areas as Big S'andy Creek and Village Creek corridors would disrupt many existing home- owners and increase the cost to such a degree that the preserve might never be established. The bill passed by the House limits the amounts authorized to be appropriated to $63,812,000 for land acquisition and $7,000,000 for development. In my view, this figure is conservative. The money is important for two reasons. The first being, of course, all of our concern about the large budget deficits and inflation. Secondly, it is important because of priorities. In my District there are three huge impoundments-~Sam Rayburn, Toledo Bend, and Lake Livingstone. Every weekend in the late summer and fall w-orking iieople from Beaumont and Hous- ton, as well as my own District, are turned away because of the lack of~ roads and developed camping facilities. `Certainly if federal dollars in excess of the 60 to 70 million are to be spent by the Park Service in East Texas, they should be spent on wholesome recreation potential for the working families of the entire area rather than on excessive biological preserve acreage which will be enjoyed by a very narrow academic clientele. For t.welve years `in the State Legislature I maintained a perfect environmen- tal voting record as determined l)y Texas environmental groups. I believe this bill extends that record. In my mind, I have given the benefit of every doubt in this instance to the environmental position. My instincts tell me that 84,550 acres are `too many for this biological preserve, `but recognizing and respecting the posi- tions of my colleagues, I introduced and fully support the bill which we passed to the `Senate. I again emphasize that this preserve lies almost wholly within my District. I am the one who must answ-er to those w-ho are displaced from their family homest~ads. I am the one who mnu'st answer to the labor unions who feel PAGENO="0088" 82 that their jobs may be je&pardized. I am the one accountable to every civic club and every Ohamber of Commerce in the area which is on rechrd as favoring no more than 35,500 acres. Nevertheless, I have accepted the inevitable political damage accompanying support of the recommendations of the Department of Interior and my colleagues, and I do so enthusiastically. I hope in your delibera- tions you will put yourselves in my place and consider what your attitude would be if the Big Thicket was in your District, as it is in mine. Thank you. Senator BIBLE. The next witness will be the Honorable Ralph W. Yarborough, former U.S. Senator from Austin, Tex. I guess he is the first man who ever talked to me about the Big Thicket and he has been talking to me ever since. Go right ahead. STATEMENT OF RON. RALPH W. YARBOROUGH, FORMER U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Senator YARBOROUGH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and we are tre- mendously grateful for your patience and consideration. The fact that you went to Texas, held a hearing there, not only held a hearing but flew over the Big Thicket in a helicopter, landed, viewed it, went over part of it, and walked over a lot of it and know a great deal about it. Senator BIBLE. I think I have a little feel for the area. Senator YARBOROUGH. You know more about it than many people who speak for or against it. We appreciate very much that the chairman has set this hearing so early after the reconvening of Congress, the 21st of January, following, the recess. And, shortly afte.r, the passage of this bill in the House late in 1973. Mr. Chairman, the chairman has heard me a number of times, so I will make my statement very brief. In fact I have it written out here, and it is only half as long as the one we used in the House last July, in the interest of time. I want to say this. The action of this chairman is appreciated not only by the few witnesses here but by. the many thousands of I)eoPle who have worked over the years for the creation of a Big Thicket Na- tional Park or Biological Reserve. Mr. Chairman, just to illustrate t.he interest in eastern Texas, a book was printed last year by the University of Texas Press, "Impressions of the Big Thicket," with some paintings by Dr. Frary. This book sells for $17.50 and the University Pre.ss does not have the means of exploiting the book like the big book publishers of the country. T)espite that fact, a month ago the director of the University Press told me that it had already sold over 3,000 copies of this book at $17.50. There is not a great market down there for* art books, generally. There are just paintings of the Big Thicket. It has done so largely be- cause of the fears of the people of east Texas that the Big Thicket will be destroyed, and it is being destroyed and destroyed very rapidly. I want to say again that I disagree wholly with Congressman Wil- son that he was the only one interested in this area. My people have lived in the. Neches River watershed for 125 years. I was reared a little distance from the. Neches, north of the Big Thicket. If you will pardon a personal reference to my own campaigns, out of the 254 counties in Texas in one campaign or another I have been fortunate enough to receive, at different times in different counties, a majority and 249 of those 254. PAGENO="0089" 83 But the only two counties I have ever carried in every campaign has been Henderson, my native county, and Hardin County, the coun- ty in which the bulk of the Big Thicket lies. Hardm gave me a major- ity both in 1970 when. I failed to come back to the Senate, and in my last campaign in 1972. . When I started it was very strong, and my introduction to this Big Thicket bill was greeted with great hope in that country. It is true that has changed due to the propaganda of the lumber companies down there. The agents infest the whole area. They have gone in and told people that if this bill passed their honies will be taken. But if you cut the lumber on it now, if you spoil it, they will not put it in a national park. That is one reason for legislative taking. People have great fear- have been told the land will be seized. The chairman will remember in the case of Padre Island they had people so frightened they thought the Army was coming in to take the land away from them for nothing, and they would be driven out of their homes. I am not going into deal. There are here from Big Thicket on both sides of this. Much of the opposition has grown up, since my bill was entered, by the great fear, but the chairman knows after national parks have been established no one in the area of the national park has ever sought to disestablish that after that. They are delighted that it came and that they have got it when they see the great benefit of a national park to the area. They are told schools will close. There will be no money and resulting development around has always aided the country, so they are relieved when it came. Mr. Chairman, the fine hearing that the chairman held at Beau- mont, we have a copy here- Senator BIBLE. It will be filed for reference. We have it available to us. Senator YARBOROUGH. We had this fine hearing held in the House last year for 2 days here in Washington, a large volume. If this corn- inittee doesn't have copies of that, I would like to file this for reference. Senator BIBLE. `We have copies of that, Senator, so it will be readily available to us. Senator YARBOROUGH. I did wish to pursue this with all the diligence at my command. I left the Senate in 1970. I was asked why I waited until 1966 to introduce the bill because former U.S. Senator Price Daniel was Governor. He lived at the edge of the Thicket and was reared there. His people have been there under a Spanish grant since 1824, I believe. He wanted to have ~ He was Governor for 6 years, three terms, he urged the legislature to do something about it, but lie couldn't overcome the influence of certain lumber interests in there against it. `When lie left the governorship lie wholeheartedly endorsed this natic~ial park bill. He told me he had given it up, and he said, "Ralph, I am for your bill now-" Senator BIBLE. He so testified. I am aware of that. Unless he changed his mind. He was for it the last time it came, up. Senat~r YARBOROUGH. That is right. He went down with us and met with us in the park to tell the people at Liberty that he was for the PAGENO="0090" 84 national park. He was a very strong advocate. As the chairman said, he is now on the Supreme Court of Texas. I think there is great cause for encouragement now. At the time the bill was passed by the Senate in 1970 the then Congressman Dowdy said that he would use all of his influence to kill any bill that provided for anything more than a 35,000 acre monument. Of course, a monument is what the name implies. You build a monu- ment to something dead. `We wanted a living park. I had people urge me, "Why don't you take that, Ralph. Then your name will be on there. You will be known as the man who introduced the bill that was passed." I said "I don't want my name on a bill that kills the na- tional park idea." I refused, and despite Congressman `Wilson's statement here, in effect, killing anything more than 84,000, I want to compliment him for agreeing to that 84,550 acre park, biological reserve. It is two and a half times as big as~ anything his predecessor would ever agree to. I hope that he will think better of his recommendation. `When I recall one of the most strong willed men in the history of the United States, Chief Justice John Marshall. In his autobiography he. told of sailing back from Europe where he had beeii Ambassador on a special mission on a sailiiig boat. On the way he thought over and over of his status. He was in his thirties. He had nothing. He had to do something for his family. He then resolved to quit politics. He was a Whig, and they were iiot exactly in the majority. He would quit politics and never again hold public office. He wrote letters when lie came in. He was on a sailing vessel, landed at Philadelphia, the main port of entry for the South- ern half of the country for sailing vessels from Europe. `When he got to Philadelphia there was a delegation from his home district in Virginia asking him to ruii for Congress. They talked to him 3 or 4 days and got him in the race for Congress which got him in his great service to serve the Supreme Court. I hope Congressman `Wilson will not be more firinminded than Chief Justice John Marshall was and will listen to this coequal branch, the Senate, his colleagues in the House. After all, I am certain he would be influenced by the other 534 Members of the Congress, if they lad strong feelings on it. A great deal has been talked about for recreation. For recreation you have a bunch of horses out there and be riding all the time. You have to set up great fields of something. I point out to the chairman, who knows more about national parks than any other Member of the Congress since the passing away of ,John Sailor and the defeat of Senator Aspinall, but with their depar- tiire, no one in the Congress knows as much about parks as this chairmaii. You establish great things for people to see. Most of the people who go to the Grand Canyon don't ride the mules to the bottom. They stand at the. rim and look. The fact that this is mainly things to see, iather than get out there and have great exercise like you have on Lake Sam Rayburn or Lake Toledo Bend. or water skiing or fishing. That is not what a national park is supposed to be. I dom, `~ know ex- actly what a biological reserve is, Mr. Chairman, and I do not know if anybody else does. It is undefined. The Secretary of Interior says PAGENO="0091" 85 we will issue hunting permits. Hunting permits in this fragile environ- ment where the endangered species, the red cockaded woodpecker, the Texas red wolf almost gone. Hunting permits is a death warrant to some endangered species. Senator BIBLE. You are opposed to the hunting section? Senator YARBOROtTGH. Yes, sir. These are just little narrow corri- dors and the animals need some breeding grounds, Mr. Chairman. If we open that up to hunting it means their death. That is one of the rea- sons for these endangered species. Now oil development has been mentioned. Mr. Chairman, I am taking this up with the railroad commission of Texas, which is the oil regulatory agency in Texas. They said if we discovered more oil we don't think there ever will be, because they had a big field in 1960. It was explored early. Some of the earliest oilfields in Texas, we do not think there will ever be any more oil development. But if there is with the size of this area, they have written the official letters with slant hole drilling. You wouldn't have to drill a well any more in this. We can build a slant hole drilling and drill all the oil out. There would be no lost oil and they are not wori~ied about that. So I want to point out this effort to frighten the people has been the main reason why people are fright- ened. They have been scared by these tales put out by the lumber companies. I have here a map, Mr. Chairman, that I ask to introduce in evi- dence. It is a map of Texas. I have outlined in red the 34 lumber-pro- ducing counties in east Texas. Senator BIBLE. We are very happy to have that adopted by ref- erence. Senator YARBOROUGII. I would like to offer, in addition to that map, this reprint from the Texas Almanac of 1974-75. It shows of those 34 counties, deleting Jefferson, Beaumont, Port Arthur, Harris, Houston, and Chamberlain, deleting those six, the 34 east Texas counties, in those counties 65 percent of all the land is in commercial timber pro~ duction. It is not lumber. It is pulp. Pine, mainly. In these counties where the Big Thicket lies, Tyler County, 94 percent in commercial lumber. The other counties there, Jasper County, 98 percent, and Hardin County is 87.6 percent. Mr. Chairman, there are just enough areas left now in those corn- mercial pine plantations for the county seats, the railroads, the roads, and these little remaining stream corridors that they want to destroy because they do not want people in there for recreation purposes. They talk about no recreation and they do not want people in there. These maps of the area all are different proposals of the park, are little corridors along streams to let natural life have a chance to migrate, flow back and forth, and exist. Senator BIBLE. Each of your exhibits can be made a part of the record. Senator YARBOROUGH. I ask that these exhibits be placed in the record. Senator BIBLE. They will be included in the record. [The exhibits referred to above follow:] PAGENO="0092" 86 SANDYLAND-PONDS UNIT 16,000 ACRES THICKET: BIOLOGICAL CROSSROADS it ioflro of dotort plotto foot tho orid Soothoo:t roopbotot bi010girol rroorrod: ot tho Thirkot. Tho Soodyltrd-Potds Ojoit rootoiot too boot ootrplos of thit roid sordylord pltot ot:iotioo. Bloojook rob, yorro, rod ptiokly poor otto opt tho diorot oogetotioo. Otor 340 dttort oildflrorroptoioo thriro hoot. Oroot poodo otood it oloy pookoto botoroto tho tordylord dopooito. Thoot torobto fillod ooith oodgoo ord ottor hObo. Thoy oopport oido rorioty of oqootio lift, ioolodiog ohhigotor. thoroordo of ytor:, ropr0000t rrooy otogo of toologirol oooooooioo froororootly obordoood :trooo oboorol to rboood ooid bog. Thoro took tho oroioot :trooot hod of Vi110go Crook ood oootoio 24 oporiot of riot, rod or hooto too irrotod it thio Ooit. G---- Pond WILDERNESS RECREATION A ootbiood Thrhty Crook toit oood Soodylord-000do toit toold rottto tOot ooiy dolt, Y00r_ roord borkpock broil ito tOot Big Thioket Ro:oooo, 40 eoiloo of :trootbook, high-bioff hikiog. Viilogo brook ooold prooidt tOot boot otoroth ot000t 05500iog bttooootoot Toot: rod 010rido, 33 tiles order rlooedoooopyforeot. PAGENO="0093" 87 A 300,000-acre National Area is necessary to preserve the Big Thicket On Decensber 13, 1970, the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee, a coalition of national and local cnnneatianandcicicorganieationn, adopted thin 300,000-acre Natjnnal Area proponal. P renercatlon in boned span ecnlngioally-dis'erse and sniqse areas, intern onnected by waternayn and ncenic trails. For masienuns cottnersatioa, all content inns will be pros'ided oatnide the National Area byprivatcenterprine and the another of internal roads will be strictly limited. The Area will tolerate eninting ecologically-compatible oil wella, pipelines and powerlinen andwillbeadmininteredby the National Park Sersioe. PAGENO="0094" 88 TEXAS COMMERCIAL TIMBER LAND TEXAS! INCOME: TOURISM VS. TIMBER Daring 1970, 21.1 million tourists dosated $ 1.5 billion to Texas ` economy. With 11.5 million-acres of commercial timber laud, the total annual income from the forest produotu industry noas $Sllmilliss. Tourism contributed three times an much as the timber products industry to the yearly income of Tenas. $ 500 MILLION -- S TIMBER TC,ccOST PRODUCTS INDUSTRY INDUSTRY Based oncurrcststateinccme, 350,000-acren is timber production averages $ 13 million yearly. A Big Thichet National Area would attract seer two million annual visitors. Regional income from tourism would total 9 142 million. Southeast Texas' income from a 30S,llS~acresational area would be ten times greater than the i000me from that name land is timber production. $ 142 $ 13 MILLION MILLION I-. NATIONAL TIMBER AREA INDUSTRY INCOME INCOME COST A 300,090-acre Big Thicket National Area would cost little more than the amount of federal funds wanted on the ecologically-destructive Crons-Florida (Oklawahu) Barge Canal preciously under construction by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers $60 MILLION: Cout of Big Thichet National Area at 9 200 per acre A Big Thicket National Area would increase SE Texas' income BIG ~ THICKET NATIONAL AREA A 300,000-acre Big Thicket National Area could remove only 2.6% of Teuas' 11.5 million-acre commercial timber land from euploitatios. SOUTHEAST TEXAS' INCOME: NATIONAL AREA VS. TIMBER INDUSTRY Assembled by Bill Hallmon for the BIG THICKET COOROINATINO COMMITTEE PAGENO="0095" 89 I~'~'~ ~4~f Texas' Big Thicket is ecologicalLy unique 1 Thio biological ecoado Ocee 300 bied opecieo 1 ttaesitioo acea .beteoeee (ohooo ie oilhoaette) the moitteaoteeeo'oodlaodo, the acid ooathcest, Ocee 200 teee cod ohtob speoiet the ttopioal coattal macoh, oececal oocld chaeopiooo) and the central prairie. Its sioty-inch aeooal rainfall 40 scud orchid opecies prosides foe a onique denoity, oiee cod satiety 0 carnicoroao place specieo ofplantsandaetimals. 4 It I _ I POTENTIAL NATURAL ZOOLOGY I PAGENO="0096" 90 Texas provides no protection Tesas State Packs sod Wildlife has so plass see fasds foe Big Thioket pets vattos How the Texas timber industry tota11~r destroys the Big Thicket ecosystem Texas has so federal public domais. All the Btg Thtoket is pt-Irately oxsed, mostly by sis laege timber oompastes. tisdee this isdusteys sets forests program, oatural areas of eegetatios aod scildlife are being cosserled mto pulp pine plaslatioss at the pretest rate of 105 acres pee day. These gesetioally-ortificial m oescsltsres ace biologeal deserts, sepeesestisg a complete breahdocs is the sataral chats. REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT PAGENO="0097" C', PAGENO="0098" 92 Senator YARBOROIJGH. What they are proposing to put in those 15,000 acres they have stated on there not a single home in there. They have excluded the homes. Just put the steam beds to tie these units together. That is the area right in the middle. If you cut it out there is hardly enough for these ecosystems to survive. So we have not only a park for that purpose, Mr. Chairman, we have the very survival of the ecosystems there. What is left is being butchered very fast. In the summer when it dries up, since the hearings before you in 1970, they have had eight bulldozers at a time out in one area, bulldozing away. They are telling the landowners, "Go cut yours, too. They have new contracts. Where they used to cut lumber the biggest and leave the others to grow, they have little fine print now, for clear- cutting. That leaves the sc.orche.d earth. Everything is taken away. I have here a reprint, of an article from Audubon Magazine from Edward Way Teale, Pulitzer Prize winner. He calls a spade a spade. He tells what companies. He prints pictures of it the way it is. Senator BIBLE. Without objection, it will be included in the record. [The article follows:] PAGENO="0099" 93 THE DESTRUCTION OF THE BIG THICKET An Audubon Magazine Report By EDWIN WAY TEALE Portfolio by JIM BONES This reprint of an outstanding article by one of the great nature writers of America, Edwin Way Teale, and a rising young Texas photographer, Jim Bones, from the Audubon Magazine of May, 1971, is timely now because of the bills to create a Big Thicket National Park, now pending before the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee in Washington. Edwin Way Teale, author of nature books that won him a Pulitzer Prize, tells of the beauties of The Big Thicket and its callous, systematic, and, I will add, planned destruction. Jim Bones graphically photographs it. As the author of numerous Senate Bills, which I introduced in an effort to save The Big Thicket, I have obtained permission from the editors of Audubon to reproduce their stirring article. We quote the closing paragraph: "In this whole country - Alaska and Hawaii included - there is only one Big Thicket. If it is destroyed, an area unduplicated in America will be lost forever. We can rebuild an Empire State Building or an Eiffel Tower but not a Big Thicket. In the time that is left before all is gone, a time that is steadily decreasing, as much as possible should be preserved of this beautiful, vulnerable, unique, and irreplaceable remnant of the American wilderness." Act now, before it is too late. Call on the Congress for action. Texas is about to lose its greatest ecological gem. Read the Teale-Bones article. Act - act now. Austin, Texas Sept. 15, 1972 PAGENO="0100" AS OUR LIGHT PLANE ssvung toward the sun its shadow curved in a great arc across the varied land- scape belosv. It raced over brown bayous and cypress sloughs gray with Spanish moss, over the infinitely diver- sified greens of the forest, over backcountry roads of pale sand and red clay. In its swift advance, it traced a path across the heart of an area unlike any other in North America, a unique remnant of the original wilderness, the Big Thicket of East Tunas. North of Beaumont and just over the line from Loui- siana, the Big Thicket once embraced an area of more than 3,000,000 acres, In a rough triangle, it estended across the basins of three rivers, the Sabine, the Neches, and the Trinity. Even as late as the 1930s, there remained nearly 1,000,000 acres. Today, after generations of esploitation and abuse, it has been reduced to hardly more than 300,000 acres, less than one-tenth its initial size. Yet this shrunken fragment of the great wilderness still contains green solitudes and untamed beauty and regions that are remote and mysterious, filled with contrast and surprise. For the Big Thicket has well been called "The Biologi- cal Crossroads of North America." It is a meeting and mixing place for the fauna and flora of North and South, East and West. It contains, according to a National Park Service report, "elements common to the Florida Ever- glades, the Okefenokee Swamp, the Appalachiane region, the Piedmont forests, and the open woodlands of the coastal plains." Trees of the North, elm and beech, sugar maple and shagbark hickory, grow here as well as species of the South, cypress and magnolia, sparkleberry and two-wing silverbell. Deep sphagnum bogs, such as are character- istic of far-northern regions, are a feature of the area, Among the Big Thicket's twenty-six species of ferns are the sensitive fern, the royal fern, the New York fern, the Christmas fern, the ebony spleenwort, the cut-leaved grape fern, the cinnamon fern, and the bracken, all com- mon to New England. Here you find the wood thrush, associated with damp northern forests, and the roadrun- ner, familiar to Ihe dry desert country of the Southwest. Trillium, grass-of-Parnassus and lack-in-the-pulpit bloom where also gross' the western tumbleweed and mesquite, the palmetto, yucca, and several species of cactus. On that spring morning of our aerial reconnaissance- at times flying high with the Thicket outspread below us and horizons far off, at other times slipping down for a nearer view in low-level flight-my svife, Nellie, and I ranged over all the amazing diversity of this land of or- chids and wiII-o'-the-wisps and "svood rooters-long- snouted hogs whose ancestors escaped into the wilder- ness generations ago. The first oil well in Texas was sunk in the Big Thicket in the 1860s. Pre-Civil War "dogtrot" cabins are still in use. And in its depths backwoods dwel- lers continue to embrace the culture of Elizabethan En- gland. On later days, for the better part of a week, we be- came acquainted with it on the ground, closeup, follow- ing its trails, its dirt roads, its bayous and streams. They (Story continues on page 25) 94 Cypress and beech trees a/ong a Big Thicket creek Big -. Thicket CROSSROADS OF NATURE story by EDWIN WAY TEALE portfolio by JIM BONES 12 AUDUBON PAGENO="0101" 95 PAGENO="0102" 96 PAGENO="0103" 97 Resurrection ferns on a magnolia trunk Mossy cypress knees and rich, deep soil PAGENO="0104" 98 PAGENO="0105" 99 The erect fertile branches of clubmoss PAGENO="0106" 100 Water shield and a spider PAGENO="0107" 101 PAGENO="0108" 102 PAGENO="0109" 103 The fallen bra Co of dogwood PAGENO="0110" 104 PAGENO="0111" 44- "44~ 44- ~ I I 4~1~i4 :~ 7; ~` / ~ 1~ 44/ \ ~4-'4 44 44 ~ 4- 141 4- ~1f 44<( I 4%/s 4- ¶ ç ~t4-~';4- ~ ~ A I &I3i~ ~4- ~.i4 ~ 414 I fl3(44441 ~, 3 4-4 $ n I t~44ii I r 4- .~ 1 44 4- 4- -- 4 ¶4 4 ~ ¶44-44 ¶4 ¶~ 4~ ~ ~ k / ~ e 1k~~~4 I j 444* 44 / $4- I ~I~I I 4- L 4% ~ Ii~j4- ¶ti4t*~4/ c~144~Jv ~`4-44%~I~ f ¶~ 1 - 4-' ¶4 4 4- ~2 i~ - ~ 4. 44 4444~ -~ 44- ci- 2 ft o a 3 0. - 3 eq R 6 9 -4 ~~~Aii/$ 3~f44~4 ~fr ~`I~,I ?~j~-i ~ ~ 4-4 1; 4(444/ `44,4 4- r~ I ~ $ $1; 4 4- 4-. ¶4., ~A4 \ `4- ¶41 4- ¶4 ~48, ~T i~~1tr~r ~ I 4- `4-~~~44~3Nt 4 4-It - ¶j~, 4%; `44% ~4! V~ 94-4 - 444 C PAGENO="0112" 106 PAGENO="0113" 107 In a Big Thicket bog, a bouquet of the orchid called grass- pink; the insectivorous yellow trumpet, the only pitcher plant in Texas; and two closely related but quite dissimilar ferns, the cinarnmon and royal. carried us through a region of giant trees, champions of their kind. For the Big Thicket and its immediate vicinity contains not only the world's largest American hotly and the world's highest cypress, but the world's largest red bay, yaupon, sweetleaf, planertree, black hickory, two- wing silverbell, sparkleberry, and eastern red cedar, In all probability no other area of similar size in North America has so great a botanical diversity. Here are found four of America's five kinds of carnivorous plants and more than forty kinds of orchids and more than 1,000 kinds of fungi. Because many of the plants have reached the limit of their range, they tend to differ from others of their kind growing elsewhere. Such changes are some- times sufficient to warrant classifying variant plants as new species. Botanists refer to an area of the kind where evolution is meeting the challenge of environment as "a region of critical speciation." As such the Big Thicket is of immense interest to science. In spite of the great fascination of the area for scientists and nature observers in general, parts of it remain sur- prisingly unknosvn. Although it reaches almost to Beau- mont and extends to svithin fifty miles of Houston, it is considered inaccessible and remote. Those who follow the few hardtop roads which traverse it see only com- monplace second-growth svoodland and keep asking: "Where is the Big Thicket?" When old-timers speak of the Big Thicket they refer to the heart of this svilderness which is confined largely to the watershed of Fine Island Bayou. This is the traditional Big Thicket, the Big Thicket of ballad and legend. But there is a more modern concept-the ecological Big Thicket. This grew from the work of a survey team sent out in 1936 by the Texas Academy of Sciences. Its con- clusion, based largely on indicator species of plants, was that the original area of more than 3,000,000 acres had possessed similar characteristics and similar plant and ani- mal life. The wilderness, however, was never uniform. Different areas exhibit different conditions, elevations, types of soil, and amounts of water. Rather than one unique area, the Big Thicket is an assemblage of unique areas. Variety is tlse key word in considering the overall character of the region. Its habitats range from open beech woods of the higher land to the dense baygalls, swampy and loss-lying. Diaries dating from the early Spanish missions tell how all the trails skirted around the Big Thicket. later, pio- neers traveling west through the region were turned aside by this "impenetrable wood." Over a span of three cen- turies the Big Thicket provided a hideout, first for Indians and later for outlaws, runaway slaves, and army deserters. Sam Houston, during the Texas Revolution, planned, if he lost the Battle of San lacinto, to disappear with his army into this wild sanctuary. In the time of the Civil War, whole families of Southern pacifists, svho owned no slaves and refused to fight to preserve slavery, hid in the Big Thicket. Living largely on game and wild honey, they MAY 1971 took up stands on remote islands of higher ground deep in the lush and tangled vegetation. Why is this growth so lush? What accounts for the unusual character of this particular portion of Texas? Along its northern border runs a range of low hills. To the south of this ridge the Miocene rock slopes down to form a titanic basin filled to a depth of as much as 30,000 feet with rich soil, much of it deep, fine sandy loams deposited in the Pleistocene Period. The water table is high. Rainfall in the region is heavy, about sixty inches a year. The elevation of the land is low, between 100 and 400 feet above sea level. Winds from the Gulf maintain the moderate climate. The result is an area characterized by dense growth and an unusual variety of species. Among the innumerable wildflowers of the Big Thicket, more than 400 species have been studied while in bloom by the artist and botanist, Geraldine Watson, of Silsbee. Although she is only in her forties, Mrs. Watson's memory spans many of the changes that have overtaken the re- gion. As a child, she recalls walking among the spring flowers of the open forests of longleaf pine near Wood- ville and later going that way and seeing only miles of blackened stumps left in the wake of lumbermen. With this knowledgeable and dedicated conservationist as our guide, see wandered day after day through the Big Thicket in its varied forms. At times we found ourselves among palmettos that here grosv high enough to hide a man on horseback. Al other times we were in open woodland or among wet meadows dotted with the slender trumpets and yellow flowers of pitcher plants or in arid stretches where sand verbenas bloomed. Again we edged our way around dense baygalls, areas new to us, where sweet bay and gallberry holly are the dominant trees and where acid bogs are deep with sphagnum moss and cinnamon ferns lift six feet into the air. Most of these sseampy, moccasin- haunted baygalls are surrounded by tangled vegetation, dense green walls of intertwining laurel-leaf smilax, poi- son ivy, and muscadine grape vines. They comprise some of the most impenetrable thickets of the Big Thicket, One afternoon we followed a moist trail where "cut- ants" in a long procession were carrying bits of yaupon leaves to their nests. The trail ended at the top of an ancient plank stairsvay that dropped in an almost vertical descent. At the bottom of its fifty-sin mossy steps we en- tered a secluded and magic place beside a forest stream. Immense cypresses, sweet gums, and water lupelos lifted their tops far above a woodland floor blue with violets. Tree frogs called from among the resurrection ferns massed in the crotches and along the moss-covered limbs above us. This tract by Village Creek-a name de- rived from a long-ago Indian village on its bank-is one of the fesv, if not the only remaining fragment of the virgin forest. Often our path seas white with the fallen bracts of flowering dogwood and the moist air was filled with a strange, sweet perfume; the fragrance of the tiny flowers of the holly trees. And all along the sunlit wind- ing flosv of Village Creek, from bushes and trees border- ing its course, came the wild music of nesting songbirds. For tIle Big Thicket is a meeting place for birds as well as for plants. The great Mississippi Flyway and the flyway along the Gulf Coast into Mexico intersect in its vicinity. 2n 3e-061 0 - 74 - B PAGENO="0114" Spring and fail, a host of migrants stream through, joining for a time the more than 300 species of resident birds. The latter include such rarities as the Swainson's warbler and the red-cockaded woodpecker. The ivory-billed wood- pecker, given up for extinct by many ornithologists, has been reportered here. Among the mammals, in remote portions of the Thicket the black bear and panther base made their last stands in eastern Tesas. As late as the 1930s the jaguar and the Mesican ocelot svere numbered among the inhabitants of the area. And here occasionally still is sighted the rare red wolf, a mammal close to cx- Fifteen hundred feet in the air, when we had flown down the Neches and were nearing Evadale, we had sud- denly been enveloped in the sickish ssveet stench of a vast pulp-paper mill. To local people this is "the ssveet smell On his famous travels across tire continent, following the American Seasons for the four books thai earned him a Pulitzer Prize, Edwin Vs'ay Teale somehosv missed the Big Thicket of Texas. He journeyed there recerrtly on as- sigrrment for Audubon to tell the story of its wonders and its callous (and systematic) destruction. His most recent book is Springtime in Britain, and he is nosy svork- ing on the story of Trail Wood, Itis osvn sanctuary in northern Connecticut. Photographer Jim Bones is a young Texan who makes his national debut xvitls tfsis stunning essay for Audubon. His work promises the talents of an Eliot Porter or Bill Ratcliffe, and will be appearing~ frequently in these pages in the future. of money." This tells much about the attitude of the re- gion. The main sources of employment here are associ- tied svith tire destruction, rather than tIre preservation, of the Big Thicket. Most of the remaining acreage is in the possession of lumber companies-particularly such giants as the Kirby Lumber Company, osvned almost entirely by the Atcheson, Topeka arid Santa Fe Railroad, and the Southsvest Timber Company, a division of Eastex, Inc., a subsidiary of Time, Inc. Many of the people of the region have become convinced that their svelfare is dependent on maintaining the status quo, tlrat any effort to preserve any substantial portion of the area is a threat to their lis'elilsood and that any movement to halt use destruction of tIre Big Thicket svould affect them adversely through lost jobs and raised taxes. Let us consider taxes Srst. in the year before our visit, the timberland of tlse big corporations xx'as x'alued at $83.37 per acre in Hardin County, svhere figures are typical. The tax assessment rate sx'as 20 percent, giving a tax assess- ment of $16.68 per acre against svhich to apply a county tax of 42 cents per hundred dollars. At this rate, the total tax loss from removing evdn 65,000 acres from the tax rolls of the seven counties involved ss'ould average less than $7,000 per county. This total, in counties ss'here tIre budgets run in the millions, is an insignificant amount. Even the favorable tax situation tltey had so long en- joyed seas not enough to satisfy the timberrrren. Last fall, before the 1970 elections, a heax'ily financed TV cam- paign urged at thirty-minute intervals the adoption of a constitutional amendment. tt svould brave changed the 108 Smokestacks of the Eastex paper mill at Evadale tower over piles of hardv.'ood logs and belch "the sweet smell of money." 26 AUDUBON PAGENO="0115" method of taxing so the timber corporations in East Texas would have paid taxes only on the production value of land being used. tn a prevalent local method of harvest- ing, larger trees are cut out at intervals of about tss'enty years. All the rest of the time, belsveen such hars'esting, immense tracts of limber company land could have been tax-free. The blitz campaign failed and the amendment svas defeated at the polls. Ralph Nader, the consumer crusader, a fess' months ago, reported that millions of dollars had been lost to East Texas through special tax treatment for timber inter- ests. As lf'ttle as one-fifth the amount of taxes that should have been paid, based on market value in comparison to olher properties, Ire pointed out, svas being paid by tim- ber companies of the area. Any loss of taxes resulting from setting aside part of the Big Thicket for all the people svoutd be mere peanuts compared to what has been lost and is now being lost through special tax con- sideration for the large limber owners of tire area. As far as ultimate loss of jobs is concerned, innumer- able instances have shown that, on the contrary, pre- serving the best of the remaining Big Thicket as a nation- ally protected area would bring to the region an income from tourism far greater than is derived from the present sources. And that income svould be spread out to more people. It would provide more diversified forms of em- ployment. The ecorromy of the region would not rise and fall with one or two industries. Such arguments have been used for years by the Big Thicket Association, svhose membership has grown to more than 5,000. tdeas are slowly changing in the region and, as fustice William 0. Douglas points out in his Fare- well to Texas, there is hope that with increasing educa- tion "a new generation will realize the awful destruction 109 wInch tIre lumber companies, the oil companies, the real estate deeelopers, the road builders and the poachers have wrecked on one of tfre loveliest areas with which God had blessed this nation." We sasv this loveliness from a new angle during the day we drifted down the winding miles of the upper Neches. This wilderness stream, with its chain of gleaming svhite sandbars that extend out from the inner curve of every loop of its serpentine advance, was to the Indians "The Snow River." You can float with its unpolluted flow for three days and never see a community of any knnd. We came to no bridges. The only human being we en- countered that day was a backwoodsman out with his horn calling a lost hound. To reach the river at Timber Slough and launch our twelve-foot, flat-bottomed float boat, we bumped over eleven miles of dirt roads after we left the hard-top. When we pushed otnt into the current, I sat in the squared-off stern, Nellie sat in the middle, and Geraldine Watson, by paddling on either side of the narrowed, also squared-off bow, guided us around snags and fallen trees. In long arcs we swept around the curves on a current surprisingly strong for a stream so serpentine. In high green walls, the Big Thicket pressed close on either hand. Often it was so dense our eyes could pene- trate no more than a few feet. Vines clambered over the bushes or dangled from the trees-the heavy ropes of the muscadine grapes, the slenderer coils of the pepper vines and wild wisteria with massed blooms descending in cas- cades of purple. From time to time, over the rrver, from wall to wall, the white svings of common egrets and the slaty-blue wings'of Louisiana herons passed in steady, si- lent flight. We seemed a thousand miles from smoke and noise "Tire train srnurce of errrnfof'nleirl a e acsociatecf in itin tIre destruction, rallier tfrnrr tire pee ervaliorr, of tIre Big Thicket." - -. -,t7 p ~ ,~ -, r . - - : .- ` - Jan~x 4 -` ~ ~ - , - -. `- -~- `.-.: - ~ ~ -- 1.~ - - ~ F~LLOW FM /05- f>'~ MILES -°~` ~ ~ - - - -- -. - - .- -- I 1i~G~LiBL~LiM GREATER AMERICA ~ ~:` ~ - .. -- n. -~ ~ - .` --"~r ~ MAY 1971 27 PAGENO="0116" and pollution. Each curve brought some fresh enjoyment. The most unespected of them all, and the most ethereally beautiful, was the sudden appearance of a moth of the night, a pale-green lana. Shimmering and luminous in the backlighting of the midday sun, it fluttered abos'e us over the river and into a clump of willosvs. Except for the splash of leaping mullet and the plop of turtles dropping into the svater from sunning.logs, almost the sum total of the sound we heard came from the spring music of the birds. For miles we svere accom- panied by the singing of prothonotary warblers. We could see them flitting from uvillow to svillosv along the sandbars. Back in the ris'erbottom forest sve could hear the calling of pileated svoodpeckers, the singing of parula warblers, tufted titmice, and white-eyed vireos. The Neches, that day, was a river of bird.song. Sometimes only a foot of water-stained the color of tea by swamp leachings-lay beneath us as we skirted some bar of pure white sand. At other times, the depth increased to forty feet or mote when we snere carried by the river's flow close to the steep face of the outer bank where the current had scoured deeply. Along the louver reaches of the Neches, which Mrs. Cleve Bachman, of Beaumont, showed us on another day, the sandbars are gone and the wide, dark river, nearing sea level, mirrors the blue and yellow of wild iris and the massed white of spider lilies. But all along the upper stream, each curve brings its shining sandbar, some shaped like gigantic white clamshells, others like scimitars pointing down- stream. When we pulled up on one at noon to eat our lunch, tiger beetles, glittering in metallic colors, darted asvay ahead of us. And as we ate, a large dragonfly in a sudden ssvoop a dozen feet away snatched a painted lady butterfly from the air. Entbmologists have hardly touched the fertile field of the Big Thicket. Everysvhere sve sasv the richness of insect life. In fact, it is the emergence of in- sects of the evening, clouds of hungry mosquitoes, that reminds a visitor that the Big Thicket is not a paradise unalloyed. However, those svho find in this remnant of the svitderness only "mud, moccasins, and mosquitoes" are missing much. Often that day sve had the sensation of drifting on the current in another century. But, as sve rounded one wide curve, sve were jerked back to the present literally with a bang. In quick succession, like tsvo blasts of dynamite, the sonic boom of high-flying military planes struck us and reverberated over the river. We svere back in the tsventieth century. It had caught up svith us even on this remote wilderness stream. Tosvard the end of that day, I remember, we swung to shore from time to time and gathered handfuls of the fruit of the mayhasv hanging on bushes like tiny red ap- ples. Drifting on, we enjoyed their tart, unfamiliar flavor, so prized in that famous dish of the Big Thicket, hot biscuits and mayhaw jelly. When at last we hauled our flat-bottomed boat out at a landing where another dirt road wandered out through the forest, we rested for a time, watching the river flow away downstream. That pass- ing water svould follous' the windings of the Neches for a full two days more before it reached and passed the first community below us. Such scenes as these come first to mind when I recall 110 `tn the uvake of immense machines that trample down, crush, and bury vegetation, only bare, cleared land remains . . 28 AUDUBON PAGENO="0117" the Big Thicket. But there are also memories of other surroundings, vastly different. We saw them from the air; we visited them on the ground-areas raw and wrecked by man's exploitation and abuse. The pressure of destruc- tion increases yearly. Like spreading sores, bare, sterile patches-some as much as 500 acres in extent-stand out in the green landscape. They record where salt water, flowing from oil-drilling operations, has killed each stem and leaf and root. We passed through areas pockmarked with water-filled holes where pine stumps had been blasted from the ground for their turpentine. Oil pipe- lines crisscross the region, each gashing the width of its right-of-way. Land speculators are clearing choice sites to subdivide for small vacation homes. Drainage plans have been advanced that would alter the whole ecology of the region. And always across vast stretches first the axe and then the power saw have laid waste the forest. The Big Thicket, this irreplaceable sanctuary for rare species of plant and animal life, is shrfnking in a destruction that, year by year, is speeded up through the newest advances of technology. Probably the most serious threat the Big Thicket faces has developed in recent decades. This is the wiping out of the forest completely and replacing it with pine plan- tations. These regimented rows of trees, largely slash pine, grow rapidly and produce greater income for the forest products industry. In the wake of immense machines that trample down, crush, and bury vegetation several feet be- neath the ground, only bare, cleared land remains. Here pines, and nothing but pines, are permitted to grow. Her- bicides sprayed from helicopters kill every hardwood seedling, chemicals are used to control weeds and fungi, and aerial sprayings drench thousands of acres at a lime with insecticides. The result is very nearly a biological desert. It is an area devoid of trees which provide nesting holes for birds, without underbrush for cover, without the necessary vari- ety of habitat for food supply. In these areas, streams of the forest are turned from shaded, winding avatercoarses into bare drainage ditches bulldozed up to the bank on either side. Each such operation, wiping out the growth that has characterized the Big Thicket for thousands of years and substituting artificial conditions maintained, by chemical spraying, means that, in such places, the Thicket will dis- appear forever. A cutover forest, if left to itself, even, tually will restore itself. But a forest that is wiped out and replaced with entirely new conditions, conditions that will change even the character of the soil, is a forest lost. In flying over the Big Thicket we saw belosv us large squares and rectangles of such cleared land. We saw other areas ribbed with the lines of planted trees. I was told that, according to present plans, the forest products industry will transform 35,000 acres each year from diver- sified forest into such tracts devoted to pines alone. For decades plans have been advanced to preserve part of the Big Thicket before it is too late. Hopes ran high a few years ago when the Big Thicket Association interested a governor of the state. He flew to East Texas to make an on-the-spot personal inspection. But the hopes evapo- rated. Nothing happened-a result that might have been predicted from the fact that he arrived for his inspection 111 "Pines, and nothing but pines, are permitted to grow. Herbicides, sprayed from copters, kill every hardwood seedling." MAY 1971 29 PAGENO="0118" 112 "For miles along the land of one timber company, all the magnificent magnolias within sight of the road had been felled and left to rot." Elsewhere, salt water, flowing from oil wells, "has killed each stem and leaf and root," leaving "spreading sores, bare, sterile patches as much as 500 acres in extent, standing out in the green landscape" of the Big Thicket, 30 AUDUBON PAGENO="0119" 113 tour in the private plane of one of the largest of the timber corporations. When a National Park Service study team first in- vestigated the area in 1938, preservation of a portion of the Big Thicket seas highly recommended. Lack of funds and the Second World War caused the proposal to be shelved. In the postwar building boom, the cutting of the forest was accelerated. During the years 1965 and 1966, the Park Sers'ice again made first a "preliminary recon- naissance" and then an intensive study of the area. The conclusion: "The scientific and recreational values of the Big Thicket are so outstanding in quality and importance, and their threatened loss to the nation so grave, that their preservation by the Federal Government for the entoy- meet, education, and inspiration of all the people is im- peralis'e," In making its recommendation, this study group sug- gested that "unique specimen areas," outstanding fea- tures of the Big Tfiicket, might be preserved, and at the same time have the least adverse effect on the economy of the region, by setting aside nine units, ranging in size from 18,180 acres to 50 acres svith a total of 35,500 acres. This plan became knosvn as the "String of Pearls" con- cept. This ss'as an important step forward. Every one of the "specimen areas" well deserves to be preserved. And certainly saving 35,500 acres is better than saving nothing. But the problem, as it was soon pointed out, ss'ould be to keep the pearls from becoming unstrung. No strong connection svould combine the separate parts into a larger unit. The portion of the Big Thicket that would be preserved would be fragmented. The protection of nine relatively small, disconnected tracts could easily become an administrative nightmare. Early in 1967 this recommendation of the study group appeared under the heading: "A Study of Alternatives." Later that same year, the Dallas attorney, Edevard C. Fritz, of the Texas Committee on Natural Resources, proposed a variant of the "String of Pearls" idea. This was to con- nect the major units with environmental corridors at least half a mile wide to produce a continuous wheel or double-circle, running up the Neches. and curving dosvrr to Pine Island Bayou, svith another connection the length of Village Creek. Such a "Green Wheel" would have the administrative advantage of continuity of territory; it would supply a web of trails more than a hundred miles in length: and it would provide wildlife with uninter- rupted protection. The corridor concept has been strongly urged by the Sierra Club and has been hacked by more than fifty conservation organizations in Texas. During several sessions of Congress, former Senator Ralph Yarborough introduced bills proposing the saving of as much as 100,000 acres of the Big Thicket. Although no action s"as taken on these bills, by the time Senator Alan Bible's Parks and Recreation Subcommittee held hearings in Beaumont last June, all witnesses agreed the Big Thicket is unique; none opposed the idea of pres- ervation completely; testimony dealt almost exclusively svith different ideas about the size and character of the area to be saved. Even the timber companies have recently assumed new stance. Over the years, with lobbying, propaganda, fear campaigns, they have been the most bitter oppo- nents of every effort to withdraw from cutting any part of the Big Thicket. This former attitude was exemplified by the reply of one corporation official to a question about setting aside a relatively small area of his timberlands. That, he said, evas "sort of like asking someone if they can get by without their little finger." But more recently, through a change of heart or the recognition of an idea whose time has come, the organization of the Big Thicket timbermen, the Texas Forestry Association, has been urg- ing people to "have a part in preserving the best of the Big Thicket for everyone." Thuis assuredly is a step in the right direction. However, svhat support is solicited for is the minimum proposal, the one least feasible administratively, the one least likely to be effective, the 35,500-acre "String of Pearls." It seems rather apparent that this is accentuating the positive to achieve the negative, that by pushing for the smallest acreage proposed-about the equivalent of the area the forest products corporations plan to destroy with pine plantations each year-it is hoped to undercut efforts to achieve more effective and substantial preservation. The industry's speakers, color films, and a beautifully-printed, full-color brochure called "Stewards of the Land," all urge garden clubs and other groups to work for this min- imum proposal, Inasmuch as "Stewards of the Land" is the designation the timbermen of the Big Thicket have chosen for them- MAY 1971 31 PAGENO="0120" selves, it is fair to ask: What kinds of stewards have they been? A comparison of words and deeds will indicate the The initial paragraph of the brochure slates: "Much of the forest land is owned by timber producers whose pro- duction practices specifically include preservation of Un- usual plant life and the protection of birds and other forms of animal life." Because of this, it continues, the forests of East Texas contain the orchids, trees, shrubs, and birds now found there. On the contrary, their lim- bering operations continue to destroy orchids, azaleas, and other native species of flowers and shrubs. They con- tinue to svipe out rare plants by draining acid bogs to improve growing conditions for their pine plantations. They continue to reduce the habitats of many birds. In truth, what remains today of wild nature that character- ized the Big Thicket before the first axe fell is there largely in spite of, rather than because of, the practices of the East Texas timbermen. LJOW CONCERNED have they really been over the R 1 preservation of unusual plant life? Dr. Clarence Cottam, director of the Welder Wildlife Foundation and former assistant director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, told me of visiting the Big Thicket when magnolias were in bloom. For miles along the land of one timber company all these magnificent trees within sight of the road had been felled and left to rot. This destructive effort appeared to have as ils only aim reduc- ing the beauty and attractiveness of the landscape. Justice William 0. Douglas reports a similar instance of wanton destruction. Many conservationists in the region are con- vinced that the timber interests of the Big Thicket have been engaged in a calculated program of making the area less attractive to the public by destroying the beautiful and the unusual, by eliminating what might attract tour- ists and encourage the establishment of a large federally- administered area set aside for the use and enjoyment of all the people. In Tight-Eye, an area so dense "you can't walk with your eyes open," three Texas counties, Hardin, Polk, and Liberty, meet. From the lime of the earliest pioneers, at this meeting place stood an immense magnolia famed as The Witness Tree. For, it is believed, as long as ten cen- turies, this landmark, the oldest known individual of its species, had put forth its richly glossy leaves. Then in 1966 the leaves were gone. The ancient tree was dead. But it had died in no natural accident. It had been delib- erately poisoned. Five holes had been bored into its trunk, filled with arsenate of lead, and slopped up with wooden pegs. Who was responsible for this seemingly senseless act is so far unknown. But it may be significant that the tree stood in one of the areas considered for preservation. And what of the timber interests' concern for the wel- fare of birds? Not long before his death in the spring of 1970, Lance Rosier, the self-taught authority on the Big Thicket and steadfast advocate of its preservation through the years, visited an extensive rookery he had known for decades. It was inhabited by anhingas, herons, roseate spoonbills, and egrets. As part of a national preserve such a rookery would have been a special attraction for many visitors. Rosier found everything changed. Silence had replaced the sound and animation of the pasL Except for three birds, all the hundreds of inhabitants of the rookery, young and old, were dead. All around was evidence that heavy aerial spraying had drenched the area with chem- icals. The whole colony of nesting birds, easily recognized from the air, had been wiped out in what appeared to Rosier to be a deliberate act by the lumber company that owned the land. So the past has demonstrated the kind of preservation the forest and its inhabitants can expect from these "Stewards of the Land." For so many decades have the timber interests of the Big Thicket dominated the politics and enjoyed special consideration in the courts and the tax offices of the region that they view with hostility any new departure that might loosen the hold of their en- trenched power. They fear even tourism as a competitor. If anything beyond the mere minimum is to be saved in the Big Thicket, the effective change must come from federal action rather than on the local level. About fifty-five percent of the area that would be in- cluded in the "String of Pearls" is owned by major lum- ber companies. A large number of smaller companies hold title to the rest. So far, the major companies appar- ently have observed a self-imposed moratorium on log- ging in these areas. But some of the smaller companies have continued cutting. The National Park Service reports that in the beautiful Beech Creek Unit, with its superb grove of immense beech trees, nearly one-tenth of the tract has been felled since it was listed as a "unique spec- imen area" especially deserving protection. And in the proposed "ehvironmental corridors" cutting by all com- panies continues. Each year there is less of the Big Thicket left for saving. Time is on the side of the lumbermen, the pipeline oper- ators, the oil-well drillers, the land speculators. Every two days there are 100 fewer acres to save. While various proposals are debated, the bulldozer and the power saw continue their uvork of destruction. Give the despoilers enough time and there will be little of aNy importance to save. As Dr. Claude A. McLeod, biologist and authority on the region, writes in The Big Thicket of East Texas: "Hopes for the preservation of any sizable part of the Big Thicket forest in its pristine naturalness become less ten- able yearly." A lumber company executis'e put it more succinctly. He is reported to have said: "What Big Thicket? In a few years there won't be any Big Thickell" Whatever delays action, whatever obstructs prompt deci- sion, whatever confuses or divides conservationists, these form the most potent weapons in the hands of the oppo- nents of effective preservation. In this whole country-Alaska and Hawaii included- there is only one Big Thicket. If it is destroyed, an urea unduplicated in America will be lost forever. We can rebuild an Empire Slate Building or an Eiffel Tosver but not a Big Thicket. In the lime that is left before all is gone, a time that is steadily decreasing, as much as pos- sible should be preserved of this beautiful, s'ulnerable, unique, and irreplaceable remnant of the American wil- derness. 114 32 AUDUBON PAGENO="0121" 115 Senator YARBOROUGH. The only place I have seen that is in Saigon where we have scorched it and put chemicals down to keep anything from growing. One company alone in Texas owns 10 percent of all the timberlands of Texas. They are all out-of-State owned. There has been a great change in `just 10 years. That is the reason you find this opposition. Kirby Lum- ber Co. is owned by the Santa Fe Railway. The Great Carter Lumber Co. is owned by Champion Paper Co. They bought up the great complexes, the way industries have all these multinational corporations, international, and then all these integrated companies in the country bought all that up. So foreign landlords are just scaring the people, "You will be de- stroyed if the Government saves the park for the people down here." I would like to leave enough of these, Mr. Chairman, with the photo- graphs of what the Big Thicket really looks like. Senator BIBLE. Leave as many as you like, and we will see that all the members of the committee get them. Senator YARBOROUGH. Mr. Chairman, in addition to that, this great book, printed in Texas by Dr. Pete Gunter, the head of the Depart- ment of Philosophy for Northeastern University. He is here to testify, but I want to introduce this book. I want to leave it with the committee, because his book, too, calls a spade a spade. It has many photographs of the Big Thicket as it has been and photo- graphs of the destruction in it and calling a. spade a spade and telling who is destroying it. And the scorched earth policy that they are using there to destroy it so it would have no viability or value. I have personally gone down there, when Justice Douglas of the Supreme Court was down there. We went along roads and as far out as you could see and the mag- nolia trees are cut and rotting. They deliberately cut them and let them rot among the other trees. Senator BIBLE. That will be adopted by reference. Senator YARBOROUGH. The one Secretary of the Interior who wanted to save this park was Secretary Hickel. I have dealt with all of them and none showed much interest except Secretary Hickel. He said to me, "Why don't you have a 300,000-acre bill? This ought to be 300,000". I said, "Yes, Mr. Secretary, you are right. It ought to be." But we have worked hard. It looks like it is a feasible matter. They will have it all destroyed if we don't start with 100,000. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that it. should be at least 100,000. But Secretary Hickel wrote the foreword to this book, "The Big Thicket" and in that Secretary Hickel said, When we consider the value of a piece of land like the Big Thicket area, or the beach at Santa Barbara, or the Everglades in Florida, we must never forget to consider what is the value of a sunset, what is the value of a walk on the beach or the right to roam or the right to simply have a place in nature where Man can refresh his spirit. These things we cannot buy on the New York Stock Exchange. Then he goes on with the plea that this book will help awaken 200 million Americans, the stockholders, to save this before it is too late. In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to read, "Out of this 300,000 left of the original million acres of this wonderland of hardwoods and flowering shrubs". Mr. Chairman, I mentioned growing up in east Texas. PAGENO="0122" 116 There are two kinds of lands where you don't find ducks and turkey and wild deer and quail and doves, and that is in cotton patches and pine patches. The hardwoods is the place that produces the food that wild animals and songbirds and even endangered species live. When you have 90 percent of a county in pine plantation that ought to be enough for people to have a little bit left for themselves and wild things of this Earth. I want to read the closing paragraph of Mr. Teale's article, and it will be my close. In his article in the Audubon, appealing for this area that it be saved. In this whole country, Alaska and Hawaii included, there is only one Big Thicket. If it is detroyed, an area unduplicated in America will be lost forever. We can rebuild an Empire State Building or an Eiffel Tower, but not a Big Thicket. In the time that is left before all is gone, a time that is steadily decreasing, as much as possible should be preserved of thuis beautiful, vulnerable, unique, and irreplaceable remnant of the American wilderness. I know the Chairman remembers tIne testimony of the attorney from New Orleans to Beaumont. Louisiana used to have better, more beauti- ful forests, but they destroyed them nfl and the state of Dr. Correll, of the IRenner Institute and the Research Institute of Dallas, that in all of this great area, from above the Potomac here to sweep around the southern Appalachians, west of the Great Plains of the southern hard- wood forest, this remnant of it in tine Big Thicket was the only area left big enough now for a national park. The only place to have a national paik of that typical southern hard- woods were there also. It meets the vegetation of the western gulf coast. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for his great patience over the years, for the many private hearings as well as the public ones lie gave me in the 4~/2 years that I worked on this while he was chairman of the committee, and I want to thank him for having passed this bill in 1970 and called on the people of the State to pass it then in the House. I regret the circumstances of its passilig in the House at that time. ~We are tremendously grateful to the chairman. Senator BIBLE. WTC will progress as expeditiously as we can, Senator. It is great to see you. I can detect that you have lost none of your en- thusiasm for the Big Thicket. As far as I am concerned, you are the father of the Big Thicket and always will be. [The prepared statement of Senator Yarborougli follows:] STATEMENT OF RALPH Y. YARBOROIJGH, FORMER SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Chairman Bible and members of the Parks and Recreation Subcommittee, tine action of Chairman Bible in calling this hearing early after the return of the Con- gress to Washington in late January, and following tine passage of a Big Thicket Bill by the House of Representatives late last year, is appreciated by the ninny thousands who have worked over the years for the creation of a Big Thicket National Park or Biological Reserve. The courtesy of the Committee in scheduling me for a statement on the sub- ject is particularly appreciated. I testified at length at time thorough hearing on a Big Thicket Natitonal Park Bill authored by me, at Beaumont, Texas on June 12, 1970. The able Chairman of this Parks Committee, the distinguished Senior Senator from Nevada, presided over that hearing and steered a Big Thicket Na- tional Park bill to passage through the Senate in 1970. And, Mr. Chairman, I tes tified at length in the hearing on the House Big Thicket Bills before the House Subcommittee on National Parks and Recreation here in Washington, on July 10, PAGENO="0123" 117 1973. I hold here the printed records of each of those hearings, and in the interest of time request permission to file those records for reference only, as I do not intend to consume time repeating my testimony which the Committee heard, but will make my statement brief. I do come with a great personal feeling for the area, having known of it all my life, as I was reared one mile from the Neches River, in whose valley my family has lived for more than a century and a quarter. I introduced in the United States Senate in 1966, the first Big Thicket National Park Bill ever introduced in either House, and pursued it with diligence until leaving the Senate at the end of 1970. Then, Congressman Bob Eckhardt of Texas took over, and has pushed bills to create a Big Thicket National Park or Preserve, with great diligence ever since. Mr. Chairman, there is great cause for encouragement in the hopes for legislation since you held that pioneering Big Thicket hearing in Beaumont, Texas in 1970, because the House at that time, with a Congressman opposed to a meaningful sized Park or Biological Reserve, now has passed a bill to create such a Reserve of approximately 85,000 acres. And, both Texas Senators have introduced bills for a Federal Big Thicket area of 100,000 acres. Though there is cause for Legislative Rejoicing, there is cause for sorrow at the vast amount of beautiful mixed hardwood areas that have been bulldozed away since 1970, by as many as eight (8) bulldozers at a time, working in unison, in their coordinated efforts to destroy what is left of The Big Thicket before the Congress could act. The opponents of a Big Thicket National Park have attempted to frighten the people there by telling them that hundreds of families would be driven from their homes, and their schools closed. Of course, these wild stories are false. That country will be more prosperous with a National Park than with nothing but unbroken pulp paper pine plantations. Of the thirty-four (34 East Texas counties where wood is produced, most of it is pulp wood for paper mills; sixty- five percent (65%) of the total area of these thirty-four (34 counties is in commercial wood production. And, in the area where the sad remnant of The Big Thicket lies, Hardin County is 87.6% commercial woodlands, Jasper County is 90.2%, Pouk County is 82.6% commercial wood, and Tyler County is 94% in wood production, which means pulp pine plantations. Why, there is hardly room enough left in those counties now, for the homes, county seats, highways and stream corridors. And what is left of those narrow streani corridors is being butchered fast. At some places on the stream banks, where it is too close to the water for pulp pine, the bulldozers just push the hardwood trees over into the creeks to stop canoeing and kill recreational values in the areas. Of course, the proponents of a park do not want pine plantations in a Big Thicket Park-pine plantations are not Big Thickets; they are a biological desert w-here deer, wild turkey, dove, quail, ducks or song birds or most other wild things, have to take their rations with theni when crossing a pulp pine plantation. Having grown up in a rural area of East Texas with mixed farming, hard- wood and pine forests, I observed for years the absence of wild animal life from cotton and pine fields. It is the hardw-oods, the supporters of such a varied fauna, and friendly and sustaining neighbors to a varied flora, that are being ruthlessly bulldozed away. This article which has been reprinted from the Audubon Magazine of May, 1971, is an article by Edwin Way Teale, Pulitzer Prize winning author of nature, which forcefully documents the ruthless destruction of The Big Thicket now going on. Mr. Chairman, I file a copy for reference, and would like for staff to distribute a copy to each member of the Committee. Dr. Pete Gunter has authored a fine work on The Big Thicket, which also, in word and photographs, documents this ruthless destruction. The Big Thicket in East Texas, northwestward from Beaumont, contained about 3,500,000 acres w-hen the first Anglo-American settlers reached that area. Now, less than 300,000 acres of this wonderland of hardwoods, flowering shrubs, clinging vines, of baygalls, bayous, sloughs, semi-swamp land, fresh running streams, this last refuge of endangered species~ is left, and that remnant is going fast. `I personally recommend a Big Thicket National Park of 100,000 acres, rather than a Biological Reserve, b~cause the latter is undefined. No one knows what one is. But whether it he a National Park or a Biological Reserve, the Village Creek Corridor, as shown by these maps, is an integral and necessary part. PAGENO="0124" 118 I quote the closing paragraph of Mr. Teale's article in Audubon Magazine: `In this whole country-~Ala~ska and Hawaii included-there is only one Big Thicket. If it is destroyed an area undu.plicated in America will be lost forever. We can rebuild an Empire State Building or an Eiffel Tower. but not a Big Thicket. In the time that is left before all is gone, `a time that is steadily decreasing, as much as possible should be preserved of this beauti- ful, vulnerable, unique, and irreplaceable remnant `of the American wilder- ness. Mr. Chairman, `as this `bibliography shows, `hundreds of hooks and magazine artIcles `have been written about this great ecological gem. I could talk about its uniqueness and the endangered species of wildlife it nurtures, for hours, but I have promised to be brief, and so I close with a plea to save some of this treasure chest area of plant change and evolution, before it is too late. You have the last best chance to save it; into your hands we commend its salvation. Senator. BIBLE. Our next witness will be Mary Kittell, president, Council of National Garden Clubs of America, Fort Worth, Tex. VOICE. Senator, her plane was delayed. Can she be deferred until the afternoon Senator BIBLE. She will be deferred. She will drop to the last place on the list. That is the only way that we can do it.. The next is Char White, chairman, Environmental Action Coalition of Te~ças, San Antonio, Tex. Mrs. White? Mrs. White, it is nice to have you here as a witness. STATEMENT OF CHAR WHITE, CHAIRMAN, ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION COALITION OF TEXAS, SAN ANTONIO, TEX. Mrs. WHITE. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity. Today I am representing the Environmental Action for Texas, which is the legislative counterpart of the Texas Environmental Coalition, an association of some 60 organizations located through- out Texas. Although we are a relatively young organization we are well aware of the importance of the Big Thicket to Texas the longstanding ef- fort to preserve this unique area. This effort of many Texans has been underway for some 40 years. During that time, the wilderness area has shrunk at an alarming rate, reducing the original reserve proposal of 436,000 acres to the present 100,000 acres or less now being considered by this committee. Logging operations, agricultural uses, oil drilling operations and now vacation homes are diminishing this unique biological area at a rate estimated to be as high as 50 acres per day. Conflicts which have long delayed the preservation of the Big Thicket must be re- solved soon if we . are `to save the area from complete destruction. Our comments today will be confined to three areas of concern. One, the number of acres to be included. Two, the legislative taking issue, and three, the matter of acquisition cost. 1. Environmental Action supports a Big Thicket National Biologi- cal Reserve of at least 100,000 acres as proposed by both Senators Bentsen and Tower in Senate bills 314 and 1981 respectively. We will not attempt to prescribe specific units to be included, or to recommend boundaries. Several other Texas environmental organizations who have a long history of working for the preservation of this unique area will later argue `the merits of various units. WTe hope you will give these rec- ommendations your full consideration. PAGENO="0125" 119 2. Acquisition `through legislative taking was provided in the bill passed by the House of Representatives. We would urge that this provision also be included in the final formulation of the Senate bill. Otherwise, destruction to the area will èontinue until such time as funds are made available to acquire the total acreage. We realize that legislative taking does not give the Big Thicket acquisition priority over previously authorized projects. However, it would fix the pur- chase price at the date of taking and prevent escalation of costs. Without this provision it is estimated the price may increase from 2 to 10 times the current estimates, as it has recently in subdivisioi~s along the Guadalupe River in Texas. 3. Lastly, we think the acquisition costs for the Big Thicke't Na- tiona.l Biological Reserve should be authorized from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. There is sufficient precedent for this method of financing and we believe it offers the most feasible alternative. As of July 1, 1974, we have been informed that the Land and Water Conservation Fund `showed a balance of $473.5 million authorized and appropriated, but not expended. During fiscal year 1974, Congress appropriated an additional $76.2 million. Approximately $34 million of the 1974 appropriations was spent, leaving a. bala.n~e of some $42 million from the 1974 appropriations. This amount added to the remaining balance of $473.5 million should bring the total remaining in the fund to approximately $515.5 million An additional $300 million should also be available in fiscal year 1975 if the full authorization is allowed as we heard it will `be today. Of the total, it is our understanding that 33 to 40 percent is to be used for acquisition of Federal lands with the remainder going to the States. While we realize the other projects now `hold a higher acquisition })riority due to earlier `authorization, we urge that Land and Water Conservation Fund financing be coupled with legislative taking to acquire the Big Thicket area at the earliest possible date. In closing, let me reiterate the urgency of resolving any remaining conflicts in the Big Thicket proposals so that we can preserve this unique and important wilderness area before it is totally gone. We have never been so close to agreement, and while there are many areas excluded in the House bill we would like to have included in the reserve, our prime concern is to protect as much as possible as soon as possible. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much. That is a very fine statement. I appreciate your being here today. Our next witnesses will be a. panel. Mr. Pete Gunter, Miss Maxine Johnston and Mrs. Russell Long. We will hear that panel now. I suggest as the panel comne~ up and makes their presentation that you avoid duplication. I have heard this. I am going to pass something on the. Big Thicket.. So you will help the chairman a lot if you just shorten up your testimony. Say you are for. Say you are against and then say why you are for and why you are against it.. Is this panel for or `against? Mr. GIJNTER. For. * Senator BIBLE. Are you for the 100,000, `the 84,000 or 68,000 or some other fig~ure? PAGENO="0126" 120 Mr. GUNTER. That is what the talk is about and I wish to make some distinction. I do not think it can be that simple. Senator BIBLE. All right.. Hurry up. Move along. The only reason I say that, let me make an explanation. I have 15 more witnesses for this morning, and I have 22 witnesses for tomorrow. So just draw tile distinctions. STATEMENT 01? PETE A. GUNTER, CHAIRMAN, BIG THICKET CO- ORDINATING COMMITTEE, SARATOGA, TEX.; ACCOMPANIED BY MAXINE JOHNSTON, PRESIDENT, BIG THICKET ASSOCIATION, AND RUSSELL LONG, MEMBER OP THE BOARD, BIG THICKET ASSOCIATION Mr. GIJNTER. I will try to do that as fast as I can. I would like to add that I have put into the record a speech by Jim Haley of the Wild- lands Preservation Society, pointing out that the Big Thicket is a bar- gain, in the terms of number of bird species that it contains. And I think that is a very important point.. Senator BIBLE. Fine. That is the way I would like to have you de- velop it. Mr. GUNTER. No. 2, a distinction needs to be made of the number of kinds of dwellings along the Big Sandy-Village Creek unit which is the bone of contention. There are some homes in there and other parts of tue park which are not year-round dwellings. Whell you consider 110w many homes are going to be in this park, you have to consider that a few are year-round dwellings and many of tile others are weekend cabins or that kind of thing. Senator BIBLE. I think they made a distinction on that ill the number of 57, but you may not agree with that distinction. If you do not, just poilit out why you do n~t. Is there a figure of 57 in the taking area, cor- rect or not? Mr. GUNTER. This is 57 for the 68,000 proposal by tile Department of Interior. These would be 57 dwellings. It does not follow if they are all permanent dwellings. Senator BIBLE. They did not say they were. How many did you say were all year-round and how many did you say were summer homes? Mr. BONNEY. WTe had five year-round dwellings in tue 68,000 acre proposal. Senator BIBLE. I just want to get on the same wave length as all of you. Does that agree with your figures, five year-round? Mr. GUx~rEil. Yes. The 68,000, five year-round dwellings, five homes. Senator BIBLE. They say you are right, so that certainly isn't in contention. Proceed. Dr. CURRY. Mr. Chairman, could we correct that statement? In the breakdown of the 58 units that we gave you for the 68,000 acres, tile farm units were four. Year-round dwellings were 24. Cottages and cabins, 26. House trailers, three, and one boat ramp. That rounds out our figure of 58 improvements. Senator BIBLE. Do you agree with that or disagree with it. Mr. GUXTER. That's fine. Senator BIBLE. Thank you. Mr. GUNTER. I put into tile minutes iiere a long discussion about tile history of environmental efforts in tile area. They date back to tile PAGENO="0127" 121 1920's. It is not something new. I add a letter from myself to Senator Yarborough, dated March Il, 1961, indicating that some of us had been working on this intensively, for at least 13 or 14 years. Senator BIBLE. Did you appear before inc at the time we reported this out? Mr. GUNTER. Yes, sir; I did. Senator BIBLE. I thought you did. Mr. GUNTER. Then I point out, despite all these years of that effort, this thing still hangs in the balance. I brought out that I am chairman of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee. This is a group of some 45 ~onservationist organizations mostly ba.sed in Texas, and having 60,000 members or so. Senator BIBLE. Where is Saratoga, Tex.? Mr. GTJNTER. It is the headquarters of one of our groups. It is right above the Lance Rosier Unit, the large, contiguous block of land off of Little Pine Island Bayou. I am from Denton, Tex., myself. Senator BIBLE. I still do not have that in mind-oh, it is right down in the area. Mr. GUNTER. Right down in the area; yes, sir. I point out the con- servationists could have come down from 196,000 acres to 191,000 acres to 100,000 acres to 84,500 acres. I point out, therefore, we scarcely look like fanatics. We have tried to be politic and we have tried to consider the needs of the local people in the area. And I want to say some things about the bill passed by the House. I want to point out that I was privy to that bill, and I want to say some things about it. That bill is a compromise. As such, it is not a bad piece of work. Everything it contains is valuable, and for the Senate to pass the House bill as it stands, that would he a reasonably acceptable Big Thicket National Reserve. Two elements are missing. One is the arid sandyland unit. By now you know this is the bone of contention before this committee. Another area you might consider is the Big Sandy Corridor. I make a point here, the Big Sandy Corridor connects two units which would otherwise stand completely isolated from each other. Senator BIBLE. The Big Sandy Corridor was one pointed out by the Congressman. Mr. GUNTER. It is right in here. Senator BIBLE. Wha~t was the other one that he said was excluded? Mr. GUNTER. Village Creek. This is really one creek. In the upper area, it is Big Sandy. In the lower area, it is called Village Creek. These are two separate corridors. I point out the Village Creek is missing. The Big Sandy is missing. They can be considered separately, and the Big Sandy would unite two areas otherwise isolated. Senator BIBLE. They are excluded from each of the Senators' bjlls and excluded from the bill passed by the House. Is that a correct statement? Mr. GUNTER. This is true. But not from the Senator's recommenda- tions.. Senator BIBLE. WThat was that last statement? Mr. GUNTER. Not from the Senators' recommendations. Each of the Senators spoke in favor. I know Tower did and I believe Bentsen PAGENO="0128" 122 did this morning, in favor of including Village Creek or Arid Sandy- lands. Senator BIBi~. I think you are correct. Mr. GtTNTER. In any case, the effort to add new acreage, particularly the Arid Sandylands to the areas already protected in the House ver- sion of the Big Thicket Preserve has led to a deadlock which is serious. As a consultant to Congressman Bob Eckhardt last summer, it was my good fortune to sit in on the conversations between Congressman Eckhardt and Congressman Wilson, which led to the compromise bill later passed by the House. I agreed that the Wilson-Eckhardt bill provided a viable compromise and I did what I could to back it, because there seemed to be no other way to get action out of the House Interior Committee. Nonetheless, my constituency is a group of conservationists. They will not go along with that bill. And I wish to represent the views of the conservationists, which is we want `the Arid Sandyland acreage. Since Congressman Wilson says he will do his best to kill this bill if additional acreage is added at any point, we find ourselves in the midst of a political thicket without a compass, and the politi- cal bears growl around us. The entire affair is in the hands of Senators and Congressmenover whom we have no control. So I wish to make three recommendations. Senator BIBLE. You have control by virtue of the right of the bal- lot, I guess. I do not know that that would reach me, but- Mr. GUNTER. Senator, I do not vote in your State. Senator BIBLE. I know. That is why I said I do not know if you can reach me. But I have heard this so many times and it is the same story over again, with a few variations. But the Senate will do their best and we will try to get it passed. We will try to do it at au early date and then we will go to con- ference and try to get it settled out of the conference. That is the way we legislate. Mr. GuNTER. Okay. As for me, this is no spring morning. This is 1 `book, 5 psalms, 20 records, 15 book reviews, 7 petitions, 150 speeches and around 2,000 letters later. So the following list of priorities is pared down to rock bottom. First, whatever else this committee may do, we beg you to act, and act quickly. It is unfair to those who do own .land in the thicket within or near the boundaries of the proposed reserve to keep them dangling year after year, unable to know if their land `will be taken. It also causes baseless apprehensions ~tnd unfounded rumors, and these in turn spark what we have called "spite cutting", the cut- ting of areas whose owners react to rumor and apprehension with the rower saw. Perhaps "panic cutting" would be a more appropriate name. But by any name, the results are the same. Your political time of meet- ings, committees, and long deliberation is completely out of joint with our rates of environmental destruction. Politics is a slow business. Power sawing and bulldozing are not. Second. Given the prevalence of panic cutting in the thicket, and given the cutting of some areas by large lumber companies, ap- PAGENO="0129" 123 parently, unsure of the prospective boundaries of the preserve, legislative taking is a necessity. Without legislative taking, possibly one-third of the thicket re- serve could be cut before moneys could be found to buy the land. This is the land not owned by large lumber companies but by small land- owners and they are all shaky. Thus, one-third of our 84,500 acre remainder is virtually irreplace- able. It would take 50 to 100 years or longer in many cases for the ecosystems to reach their present state of development. Congress would have a difficult time, I think you will agree, ex- plaining a one-third cutover biological reserve to the public. Legis- lative taking would make all such explanations unnecessary. Third, and here I state my own considered opinion, which is guar- anteed to satisfy neither side of the present dilemma. It does make sense to add arid sandyland acreage to the biological reserve. Un- questionably, Village Creek is a beautiful canoe stream and borders a fascinating plurality of ecosystems. Equally true, this creek will gradually be despoiled and degrated if it is not given some kind of protection. What are the alternatives? If a simple addition of acreage is required, there are at least five alter- natives, in order of preference. One, arid sandyland, but including very ]ittle creekba.nk. Two, Village Creek, with arid sandyland. Three. Big Sandy Creek, uniting Big Sandy and Turkey Creek units. Four. Additional acreage for the Lance Rosier unit. Five. Addi- tional acreage for the Jack Gore Baygall, for example Maple Slough. But Congressman Charles Wilson insists he will do his best to kill the preserve if more acreage is added. Unforunately, I feel compelled to believe him. If there. is a peaceful way out of the situation, it would be for Time, Inc., to step forward with a pledge to add suitable arid sandylands to the Big Thicket Reserve., either now or in the future.. That would break the back of the deadlock. Though I am fully aware that it is presumptuous for one who has sharply criticized that corporation to ask for such magnanimous action from it, nonetheless, I make the plea.. Time, Inc. and other lumber companies have informed us over and over that they would like to get this whole affair over with. Some pledge now on their part could do no more than any of us conserva- tionists `u e able to do with i esol\ ing the Big Thicket issue once `tnd for all So to conclude, yes of coui se w e believe that an arid sandy land unit belongs in the Big Thicket Reser\ e But there `tre some pretty stark polit~c't1 realities invoh ed in any `~ction this committee may take Smce we do not control the committee or the Congressmen, we ask ~ oui w isdom in `tssessing these i e~hties I w ould like to nvtke one other point A lot of what happens in south east Texas in ternis of the en~ ii onment w ill lay w dl beyond the boundaries of any Big Thicket Biologic'il Resei ~ e A lot of it has to do w ~tl~ land use In the summer heaungs, Aithur Temple, Jr, of Time, mc, pledged to protect `my i `mre 01 endangered species in any of the l'mnds owned by his corporation in Tex'ms We w ould hke to bi ing this pledge of his to light `mg'un 30 001 0 74 9 PAGENO="0130" 124 We would like to say we would like to work with him on this. We would like to say to this committee that a lot can be done outside of the boundaries of this preserve. Do not forget that southeast Texas. just because we have a preserve, it is land use in the whole area that makes a differei~ce and these corporations can do a lot to help. Senator BIBLE. I very much appreciate your testimony, and will cer- tainly take it under careful consideration. This resolves, then, with the usual type of problem that we have in all of these parks. Some want a larger park. Some want a smaller park. Some want none at all and we have to sit in judgment of that and try to resolve it. It looks to me like you made some headway in getting the bill through the House. You are further ahead now than you were in the last Congress. I will just repeat what I said earlier; and that is that I will do my best to see that this is sent to the White House some time in the reasonably near future. Mr. GUNTER. Thank you. [The prepared statement and a letter received subsequent to the hearings from Mr. Gunter follows:] PAGENO="0131" 125 COMMON SENSE AND THE BIG THICKET: A PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE The effort to save some significant remnant of the Big Thicket is scarcely new. It dates back as far as 1927, when the Big Thicket Association of East Texas was formed. In fact, it dates farther back than that. Organizations are usually late to crystalize `grass roots' enthusiasms and apprehensions, and the earlier Big Thicket Association was no exception. The desire to protect the Thicket antedates the creation of an organization dedicated to doing so by many years. Incidentally, this first Thicket conservationist drive made more headway than is realized, even by those with some familiarity with the history of conservationism in the region. By 1938 a ~ Thicket Biological ~ was completed and published, the Department of the Interior was made acquainted with the area, and prominent politicians (for example, Senator Morris Sheppard, D.-Tex.) were enlisted in the fight to save it. Had the cecond World War not erupted, there might now exist a Big Thicket National Park dating back over thirty years. That original park, incidentally, would have consisted of 420,000 contiguous acres: a far cry from the acreages we are considering here today. It is understandable that, with the close ot ~orld War Two, over a decade was required to generate interest once more in the sprawling Thicket. That interest was bound to be local, at least initially. But Texas, with its eighty years of pioneer experience and its deeply ingrained pioneer attitudes towards nature, has been slow to awake to an ecological conscience. Equally important, the Big Thicket is not a dramatic physical feature like a mountain, a geyser or a canyon. It is a plant growth region of truly remarkable diversity and exuberance. Some maturing and some educating of the public mind was necessary before the value of S region like the Thicket could be understood. That value is becoming yearly more apparent as scientific research into the region continues. PAGENO="0132" 126 Even with the best of luck, few of us are raised with a knowledge of botany, geology and zoology. As a boy I used to hunt and fish in the Big Thicket. To us kids the Thicket was the only place we could get to that wasn't crisscrossed with roads and bordered with subdivisions. It was a place where old men could spin yarns about panthers, and bear hunts, and alligators and people lost back in the woods. We could understand the legends, and see the vastness and the solitude. But what did we know about orchids, mushrooms or ecosystems~ We had more anmiunition than sense,and less knowledge of what the Thicket really was than either. The early tendency among Thicket conservationists, therefore, was to over- stress the tall-tale, bear hunt, legendary aspects of the place. It took time for many of us to see what a biological gem our old `stompin' ground" really was. In any case, by the 1960's the drive to save the Thicket was getting off the ground once more. A few weeks ago the following letter (now yellowed with age) tumbled out of a book of metaphysics on my desk. It dates from March 11, 1961 and probably makes more. sense than the metaphysics: New Haven, Connecticut March 11, 1961 Senator Ralph Yarborough Washington, D. C. Dear Senator Yarborough, As a senator who has taken a constant interest in the cause of conservation, it is hoped that the following may be of interest to you. On reading a recent book (I'll Take Texas - by Mary Lasswell), I was saddened to discover that the Big Thicket region of southeast Texas is threatened with almost total extinction within the next ten years unless government takes strong steps to curb the activities of lumber and oil interests in that area. As you probably know, the Big Thicket is not just another backwoods area, but contains many varieties of rare plants, mosses, birds, wild animals extinct in all other parts of the state and some of the very last virgin timber in Texas. If one may be pardoned for quoting Mary Lasswell: "The handfull of people in Texas and the United States who know anything about the region are sick at heart, indignant, and impotent PAGENO="0133" 127 to stop destruction of one of the worlds treasure houses. The depredations of the oil people and the lumber companies become greater every day. . . . the boy in Holland with his finger in the dyke had a sinecure compared to what these men and women are trying to accomplish. They have fought valiantly for over twenty years to save the plant life of the region they love from inevitable destruction." Since you are willing to work for a Padre Island National Park, would you be willing also to hslp fight to preserve the Everglades of Texas - the Big Thicket? If so, it would be greatly appreciated if you could be of help with the following information. First, the names of any persons or organizations private or governmental, national or local who would be interested in trying to save the Thicket - or who are already interested in so doing. Second, advice as to what practical means are at the disposal of an interested citizen to try to bring the Thicket into the National Parks System. I am personally quite aware (being from East Texas, and having taken a long interest in Texas politics) what it is to oppose oil and lumber interests in our state; nevertheless, if there is the least hope for saving the Thicket, I stand ready to put in considerable time and persistent effort in trying to do so. Thank you very much for taking the time to look over this letter; I hope it will be possible for you to respond affirmatively. Sincerely, Pete A. Y. Gunter To my surprise the senator answered warmly and pe~onally by return mail. He became a kind of rallying point around which a large and very diverse group of people could gather. It is fortunate that his energies were so abundant and his enthusiasm so undying. Had any of us known at the time how long the struggle would last or how much anxiety and effort it would exact, we would have thrown upourhands in despair. That was thrteen years ago. Since then there have been two hearings before the House Interior Committee and one hearing before the Senate Interior Committee, the U. S. Senate has passed a 100,000 acre Big Thicket National Park bill (1970), the House has passed an 84,500 acre Big Thicket Biological Reserve bill (1973), we are having still another Senate hearing --- and the issue continues to hang in the balance. Probably the bitterest disappointment came in 1970 when then-Congressman PAGENO="0134" 128 Wayne Aspinall, Chairman of the House Interior Committee and 72 years old, responded to the passage of Senator Yarborough's Big Thicket bill by getting married and going on a four month vacation. The session ran out without action. The merry-go-round began again. Not all that long ago it was convenient for those who opposed the creation of a park or preserve in the Big Thicket to complain that conservationists all disagreed among themselves and could not make up their minds about where the Big Thicket is or what part of it ought to be saved. The result of such complaints was the creation of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee (of which I am the present chairman) and the adoption of a single park configuration supported by all those backing the park's creation. The Coordinating Committee consists of some 45 organizations. They are all based in Texas and nave a total of around 40,000 members, Originally the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee backed a 191,000 acre proposal. (As originally stated, in fact, the proposal consisted of 196,000 acres.) Subsequently the Committee compromised, proposing a 100,000 acre configuration. The Committee was under the impression that lumber interests would accept that figure. Subsequent events made it clear that they would not. The 100,000 acre configuration proposed by the Coordinating Committee closely resembles that of the Big Thicket Preserve bill passed by the U. S. House of Representatives in December, 1973. The main difference lies in the addition of a Nenard Creek corridor and the subtraction of the corridor along Big Sandy-Village Creek. But there is another difference. We are down now to 84,500 acres. We are down from 196,000 to 191,000 to 100,000 to 84,500 acres. Would you say then that the conservationists have been fanatical, intolerant, inflexible? If anything, they could~ha charged with the opposite. Now, the 84,500 acre bill recently passed by the House of Representatives PAGENO="0135" 129 is a compromise. As such, it is not a bad piece of work. Everything that it con- tains is valuable. And, were the Senate to pass the House bill as it stands, that bill would create an acceptable Big Thicket National Biological Preserve. Only two elements are missing. One is the heatedly disputed aird sandyland area. The other is a corridor along Big Sandy Creek connecting the Big Sandy and Turkey Creek Units. The arid sandyland acreage constitutes the real bone of contention before this committee. The reason conservationists want to include part of this area in the Thicket is very simple. It contains trees, cacti~ flowers, birds and reptiles characteristic of the arid west. The Big Thicket is a biological crossroads, and like most crossroads reaches in four directions. In the recently passed House bill the road west is missing. Since one of the basic rationales behind creating a Big Thicket Reserve is to save significant specimens of each of the area's many ecosystems, conservationists are certainly consistent in wishing to see part of the arid sandyland included. They are, moreover, extremely puzzled over the opposit- ion to such inclusion. The sandy, dry country or' either side of Village Creek hss less value for timber production and/or real estate promotion than any other area considered for protection. The second element missing is a corridor along Big Sandy Creek (which is, in fact, the upper region of Village Creek). This corridor would connect the Big Sandy and Turkey Creek Units which would, incidentally, be far more likely to survive as a single, contiguous area than as disjoined units. The political and economic pressures against inclusion of Big Sandy Creek are less than those which have been brought to bear against inclusion of Villlage Creek and/or its adjacent sandylands. Time, Inc. has already pledged, in last summer's hearings, not to cut up to within 100 feet of Big Sandy Creek in any case. They are thus protecting PAGENO="0136" 130 95'h of that corridor anyhow, and will perhaps get tired of paying taxes on it. In any case, the effort to add new acreage (particularly the arid sandylands) to the areas already protected in the House version of the Big Thicket Preserve has led to a deadlock which is serious, and which conceivably could end in needless disaster. As a consultant on Congressman Bob Eckhardt's staff last summer, it was my good fortune to sit in on the conversations between Congressman Eckhardt and Congressman Charles Wilson which led to the compromise bill later passed by the House. I agreed that the Wilson-Eckhardt bill provided a viable compromise and did what I could to back it. There seemed then to be no other way to get action out of the House Interior Committee.1 At that time it seemed highly unlikely that the Senr'e would add additional acreage to the House bill. The Office of Management of the Budget had opted for a 68,000 acre configuration, one which categorically excluded all stream corri- dors from the preserve, in spite of their importance. This proved that accountants may make poor ecologists. It also suggested that Congress would remain conserva- tive in its actions. In any case, the unexpected nappened. Senators Tower and Bentsen both reaffirmed their desire to save 100,000 acres of the Big Thicket. Congressmen Wilson and Eckhardt have reaffirmed their defense of the 84,500 acre configuration and Congressman Wilson has gone so far as to say that he would fight to the death to keep further acreage from being added. The death in question, of course, might be that of the Big Thicket itself. What, then, are responsible conservationists to do? We find ourselves in the midst of a political Thicket, without a compass. Political bears growl around us. The entire affair is in the hands of senators and congressmen over whom we have no control. Remember: We have seen the Congressional machinery drag on and on before, PAGENO="0137" 131 as the wilderness around us dwindled and precious, irreplaceable areas fell to the bulldozer and the power saw. As for me, this is no spring morning. This Is one book, five songs, one record, twenty articles, fifteen book reviews, seven petitions, one hundred and fifty speeches and around two thousand letters later. The follow- ing list of priorities is, thus, pared down to rock bottom. First: Whatever else this committee may do, we beg you to act, and act quickly. It is unfair to those who do own land in the Thicket within or near the boundaries of the proposed reserve to keep them dangling year after year, unable to know if their land will be taken. It also causes baseless apprehensions and unfounded rumors, and these in turn spark what we have called "spite cutting": the cutting of areas whose owners react to rumor and apprehension with the power saw. Perhaps "panic cutting" would be a more appropriate name. But by any name, the results are the same. Your political time of meetings, committees, and long deliberation is completely out of joint with our rates of environmental de~truc- tion. Politics is a slow business; power sawing and bulldozing are not. Second: Given the prevalence of panic cutting in the Thicket, and given the cutting of some areas by large lumber companies (apparently) unsure of the pros- pective boundaries of the preserve, legislative taking is a necessity.2 Without legislative taking, possibly one third of the Thicket Reserve could be cut before moneys could be found to buy the land. This one third of our 84,500 acre remain- der is virtually irreplaceable. It would take fifty to one hundred years or longer in many cases for the ecosystems to reach their present state of develop- ment. Congress would have a difficult time ~plaining a one-third cutover biological reserve to the ~ Legislative taking would make all such explanations unnecessary. Third: (And here I state my own considered opinion, which is guaranteed to satisfy neither side of the present dilemma ) It does make sense to add arid PAGENO="0138" 132 sandyland acreage to the biological reserve. Unquestionably, Village Creek is a beautiful canoe stream and borders a fascinating plurality of ecosystems. Equally true: This creek will gradually be despoiled and degraded if it is not given some kind of protection. What are the alternatives? If a simple addition of acreage is required, there are at least five alternatives, in order of preference:3 1. Arid-sandyland, but including very little creekbank 2. Village Creek, with arid sandyland 3. Big Sandy Creek, uniting Big Sandy and Turkey Creek Units 4. Additional acreage for the Lance Rosier Unit 5. Additional acreage for the Jack Core Baygall (e.g. Maple Slough). But Congressman Charles Wilson insists he will do his best to kill the pre- serve if more acreage is added, in the sandyland area or ~lsewhere, and I, for one, believe him. If there is a peaceful way out of the situation, it would be for Time, Inc. to step forward with a pledge to add suitable arid sandyland to the Big Thicket Reserve, either now or in the future. That would break the back of the deadlock. Though I am fully aware that it is presumptuous for one who has sharply criticized that corporation to ask for sucti magnanimous action from it, nonetheless, I make the plea.4 Time, Inc. and other lumber companies have informed us over and over that they would like to get this whole affair over with. Some pledge now on their part could do more than any of us conservationists are able to do to resolve the Big Thicket issue once and for all. So to conclude: Yes, of course we believe that an arid sandyland unit belongs in the Big Thicket Reserve. But there are some pretty stark political realities involved in any action this committee may take. We ask your wisdom in assessing these realities. Pete A. Gunter Chairman Big Thicket Coordinating Committee PAGENO="0139" 133 1. As it turned out, many members of the Coordinating Committee were, in spite of my urging, unwilling to go along with the 84,500 acre Wilson-Eckhardt bill. At a Fall meeting of the Committee the general consensus was reached that the original position in favor of a 100,00 acre configuration should be reaffirmed. Subsequently I have reaffirmed that position in response to Senator Bentsen's and Senator Tower's statements in favor of a 100,000 acre reserve. 2. I refer to cutting in the Devil's Pocket Acid Bog area along Village Creek by champion Corporation. In fairness it must be said that Champion halted the cutting when conservationists brought the area's location to their attention. Still, it was a needless error. 3. The state of Texas is at the present time considering buying land in the Big Thicket. Several of these five areas are being considered as possibilities. Action has been delayed, however, until after the conclusion of these present hearings. 4. I would also like to reaffirm the desire of conservationists to cooperate with lumber companies in any way possible to protect biologically valuable features of the Big Thicket region. In particular I would like to r~fer to the pledge made by Arthur Temple, Jr. of Time, Inc. at last summer's House hearings. Mr. Temple then affirmed the willingness of Time, Inc. to protect all rare or endan.. gered species on its 1,000,060 acre Texas holdings. To date I am unaware of any action taken to fulfill this pledge. Such action can, and should, be taken. PAGENO="0140" 134 BIG THICKET ASSOCIATION Box 377 Saratoga, Texas 77585/Phone (713) 27$2971 Advisory Board: Dr. Clarence Cottam, Dr. Donovan Correll, U. S. Supreme Court Justice William 0. Douglas, Dr. Thomas Eisner, Alfred Knopf, Mary Lasswell, Richard Poe, Dr. John Silber, Hart Stilwell, Edwin Way Teale, Hon. Ralph W. Yarborough. February 15, 1974 Senator Henry Jackson, Chairman Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs c'o Gerald R. Gereau Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Jackson: Would you please have the following remarks placed on the record of the Big Thicket hearing, February 5-6, 1974: I would like to add two remarks to those made at the February 5-6 Big Thicket hearings. First, it must be stressed that the essen- tial reason, the sine ,g~ non, for having stream corridors in the proposed Big Thicket National Reserve is biological, not recreational. Two important biological functions are performed by the stream corri- dors: they preserve the water-flow which is essential to the life of the Big Thicket and they provide pathways by means of which animals and plants can move through the preserve. For an incisive account of the importance of this latter function I refer you to Dr. Thomas Eisner's all-important remarks, which have been included in the hearing record. Healthy populations of organisms of every kind must possess continually enriched "gene pools," which can be assured by the protec- ted mobility afforded by corridors. As for the former function (i.e. that of protecting the regions water flow): the Big Thicket is the Lower Neches River drainage basin. If you save the drainage you can save the Thicket; but you can not do one without the other. Sincerely, Pete Gunter Chairman Big Thicket Coordinating Committee PG:mw PAGENO="0141" 135 Senator Bmu~. Are the other members of the panel, Miss Maxine Johnston, president of the Big Thicket Association, Saratoga, Tex. here? Miss JOHNSTON. Yes, sir. STATEMENT OP MAXINE ~FOHNSTON, PRESIDENT, BIG THICKET ASSOCIATION, SARATOGA, TEX. Miss JOHNSTON. I am Maxine Johnston, president, Big Thicket As- sociation, an organization with over 900 members. These members pay dues and are not .jtwt names on petitions. We use those dues to sup- port the efforts, one, to save for posterity a meaningful portion of the remaining Big Thicket Wilderness, and, two, to maintain a museum of natural and local history to interpret our area. * We are the only organization whose sole purpose and entire activity involve Big Thicket. Formed in 1964, we trace our lineage back to an earlier organization, the East Texas Big Thicket Association, which was trying to preserve 436,000 acres of the east Texas wilderness. Some of the members of that organization are still active in this one. Along with 40 other conservation groups, we are members of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee, and we support the goals of that committee as stated by its chairman, Dr. Pete Gunter. The scientific justification for a Big Thicket National Preserve has been stated expertly by many witnesses in the two Senate and two House Committee hearings which preceded this one, and in the reports of the National Park Service. You are referred specifically to the statements of Dr. Donovan Correll, Dr. Clarence Cottam, Dr. Richard Harrel, Dr. Russell Long, Dr. J. P. Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Claude McLeod, Dr. Robert A. Vines, Dr. Paul Feeny, Dr. Thomas Eisner, and Ger- aldine Watson, among many others. This statement will deal only with, one, acreage, two, legislative taking, three, provisions for homeowners and four, with opposition to the preserve. Acreage. Some of you received letters from me as presi- dent of the Big Thicket Association reporting that we had endorsed the Wilson-Eckhardt compromise of 84,000 acres as described in H.R. 11546 and in the map accompanying it. We pointed out that arid-sandyland areas were inadequately repre- sented in the compromise proposal, and noted that our continued com- promises from 191,000 to 100,000 to lesser acreages had seriously eroded the ecological integrity of the proposed preserve. It now appears that Senator Lloyd Bentsen and Senator John Tower would like to add acreage to the preserve to improve the situa- tion, and the Big Thicket Association is grateful for their efforts and for the efforts of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee. We probably want that 16,000 acres as much, or more, than they do, but we also have a deep-seated conviction that time is running out and that Big Thicket is more in crisis than ever. If the Senate can add 16,000 acres and obtain House approval rapidly, we shall be pathetically grateful. If, however, you delay an- other year and add only a few thousand acres, I can assure you that the overall gain will be slight, for much more than that will have vanished. PAGENO="0142" 136 Senator BIBLE. May I ask you, because you point up the real problem possibly the dilemma the chairman and Members of the Senate are in. What if we do add the additional acreage, and we go to conference and they say, `Well, we are not going to take it." Then would you cave in? Would you agree to the House position Miss JOHNSTON. The Big Thicket National Association wants 191,~ 000, but there is no chance of getting it. Senator BIBLE. I understand that. My question to you is a very simple one. The House one is 84~000. Senator Bentsen's proposal and Senator Tower's proposal is 100,000. Suppose the Congress, the Senate passed the 100,000 proposal and we go to the conference and we are told we are not going to go for any more than the House acreage. What would you do at that stage of the game? Miss JOHNSTON. What I am asking you for right now is action, and as quickly as possible. If all I can get out of it is 84~000 acres, believe me, I will take it. But if you can give me any additional acreage, I would be delighted. Senator BIBLE. I just wanted to know your position. I understand it now. Just tell me, are you for legislative taking or against it? Miss JoHNSToN. I am for legislative taking, and my next remarks have to deal with that. Senator BIBLE. How about the homeowners' provisions? Miss JOHNSTON. I am interested in every possible provision for home- owners that will be as generous as possible. I would like, along with the statements that Congressman Wilson has made, to urge that every home be excluded. Senator BIBLE. You would exclude them all? Miss JOHNSTON. We feel they can be, if they are on the edges of these units and if they are on the corridors. There is nothing of any botan- nical value about a house or grass lawn. Senator BIBLE. You would exclude them all in perpetuity. Miss JOHNSTON. Yes. Well, I would exclude-I am sorry. I do not get your point. Senator BIBLE. If you have a home within the taking area, you feel your home should be excluded forever? Miss JOHNSTON. i~ you were on the periphery of the unit, if you are on the corridor, and they can take a right-of-way in front of you, yes. They should be excluded. Senator BIBLE. I just wanted to clear up your position. Now, your next provision is-you simply mention the opposition to the preserve. Miss JOHNSTON. May I at this point depart from part of this text and show you some of the exhibits that I have brought along? Senator BIBLE. Sure. Miss JOHNSTON. In connection with my point that the Big Thicket is vanishing and that if we delay too long you are going to lose what- ever gains we may make in the additional acreage, I took n flight over the Big Thicket this last week with two photographers and we took some pictures. This map points out the locations where the pictures were taken. Two of them are in the Sandylands Pines unit, as proposed and the other two are in units that are in the House bill. These particular photographs here were taken just below Farm Road 418 in the Sandylands Pine unit, and they show log roads and PAGENO="0143" 137 turning area where logs are loaded on trucks. In the next photograph here you have some cutting that is south of Farm Road 327, and right on the banks of Village Creek. The area is not clear cut. There are a few trees left standing there. Senator BIBLE. Were those photographs taken within the ta.king area? Miss JOHNsTON. No. This is the Sandylands Pine unit, which is proposed. The next two are within the taking. These may be, if they are added by the Senate. This is in the Turkey Creek unit. This cutting began about 3 weeks ago and has not progressed too far yet. But you can see log roads running through there, and at the point where I have arrows, there are piles of logs. Senator BIBLE. What kind of timber is it in those pictures? Miss JOHNSTON. On the higher ground you have beech, magnolia, and loblolly and on the area next to the creek itself you have cypress, and this sort of vegetation. That is in the Turkey Creek unit. On this photograph, in these photographs we have the Lance Rosier unit. This cutting began last year, but they came back this year and ex- tended it further to the west. You have here approximately 1,000 acres that have been selectively cut. From 1,000 feet up you do not see tree- tops littering the place. You do not see the scarred earth. Believe me, you can see it from the ground. The other point that I wanted to make had to do with the corridors and the flooding they are on. All of the streams in the Big Thicket are subject to flooding, this year more than most. We have had one flood after another all year long. As you can see in this picture, Village Creek, the creek comes out and covers the countryside. This, therefore, makes it very unsuitable for homesites, quite obviously. In the last page of my statement there is a map of the Beaumont unit and of the area adjacent to it. The history of this unit is that when it first was endorsed by the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee it had 51 acres in it and was bounded by Pine Island Bayou. The Neches River and the LEDA Canal. I understand that the Kirby Lumber Co. wanted some land added to this area, and the conserva- tionists agreed that it should be added. In this area, there is a small, dotted road which you will see going across there, which is Cook's Lake Road. This Cook's Lake Road, most of the homes in that area are north of the roads. I believe there are a few that are down in the bayou. I mention this particularly because this is where the center of the opposition is now. When Congressman Wilson was here before you he indicated that the primary opposition was coming from Village Creek area. It has now shifted, and is down in this area that you have the map before you. Senator BIBLE. That means you have at least 2 areas that are agin you? Miss JOHNSTON. Yes, sir. In the Cook's Lake Road area here you see pictures of flooding, houses along this road that were flooded last week and the week before. On this map still more of the-these two are the property of one of the most critical opponents of the park. Here is a home that is in Artesian Acres. And here is one on Pine Island Bayou, west of Highway 96. There was another picture that PAGENO="0144" 138 was left off of this display, which is a real estate development and it should have been included on it. As you can see, this real estate development is under water. My point here is that any further development in these areas is most un- desirable, because they are flood plain and we will be faced with costly flood protection measures. Senator BIBLE. I never understood why subdividers build homes and subdivisions on flood plains, but they do, everywhere in the United States, and there ought to be some type of code or some type of law that would prohibit it. I have just gone through the hearings on the flooding of the Missis- sippi last year and if anyplace needed some flood plain legislation it was the lower Mississippi. That gets into Arkansas and it undoubtedly gets over into your areas, from what you are telling me. Very fine. I think that is a fine presentation. Miss JOHNSTON. May I say one more thing? I know you are in a hurry. Senator BIBLE. The only reason that I am in a hurry is because I have 38 witnesses. But I am a patient man, so you go right ahead. Miss JOHNSTON. I did want to include for the record a copy of this which is a sheet put out by the opponents with a number of gross errors and misrepresentations on it, and I think it will be obvious to the committee staff. Senator BIBLE. That will be adopted by reference. The prepared statement and subsequent letter of Miss Johnston follows:] PAGENO="0145" 139 HEARINGS BEFORE THE SENATE PARKS AND RECREATION SUBCOMMITTEE, SENATE INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, ON BIG THICKET NATIONAL PRESERVE, February 5-6, 1974 Statement of Maxine Johnston, Président, Big Thicket Association, Saratoga, Texas I am Maxine Johnston, president, Big Thicket Association, an organization with over 900 members. These members pay dues and are not just names on petitions. We use those dues to support the efforts 1) to save for posterity a meaningful portion of the remaining Big Thicket wilderness, and 2) to maintain a Museum of natural and local history to interpret our area. We are the ~ organization whose sole purpose and entire activity involve Big Thicket. Formed in 1964, we trace our lineage back to an earlier organization, the East Texas Big Thicket Association, which was trying to preserve 436,000 acres of the East Texas wilderness. Some of the members of that organization are still active in this one. Along with 40 other conservation groups, we are members of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee, and we support the goals of that Committee as stated by its chairman, Dr. Pete Gunter. The scientific justification for a Big Thicket National Preserve has been stated expertly by many witnesses in the two Senate and two House committee hearings which preceded this one, and in the reports of the National Park Service. You are referred specifically to the statexñents of Dr. Donovan Correll, Dr. Clarence Cottam, Dr. Richard Harrel, D~. Russell Long, Dr. J. P. Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Claude McLeod, Dr. Robert A. Vines, Dr. Paul Feeny, Dr. Thomas Eisner, and Geraldine Watson--among many others. This statement will deal only with 1) acreage, 2). legislative taking, 3) pro- visions for homeowners, and 4) with opposition to the Preserve. ACREAGE. Some of you received letters from me as president of the Big Thicket Association reporting that we had endorsed the Wilson-Eckhardt compromise of 84,000 30-061 0 - 74 - 10 PAGENO="0146" 140 Johnston - page 2 acres as describrd in HR 11546 and in the map accompanying it. We pointed out that arid-sandland areas were inadequately represented in the compromise proposal, and noted that our continued compromises from 191,000 to 100,000 to lessor acreages had seriously eroded the ecological integrity of the proposed preserve. It now appears that Senator Lloyd Bentsen and Senator John Tower would like to add acreage to the preserve to improve the situation, and the Big Thicket Asso- ciation is grateful for their efforts and for the efforts of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee. We probably want that 16,000 acres as much--or more--than they do, but we also have a deep-seated conviction that time is running out and that Big Thicket is more in crisis than ever. If the Senate can add 16,000 acres and obtain House approval rapidly, we shall be pathetically grateful. If, however, you delay another year and add only a few thousand acres, I can assure you that the overall gain will be slight, for much more than that will have vanished. LEGISLATIVE TAKING. Legislative taking is a necessity for the same reason. Small landowners DON'T have a moratorium on cutting or developing this land and some of them have dollar signs in their eyes. Withbut legislative taking, much that is of value in the preserve will be near-destroyed and will take many years to recover. Moreover, land speculation in the area has already begun, and with each passing month and year, values will skyrocket thus requiring more public funds to be expended. HOMEOWNER PROVISIONS. The Big Thicket Association is also deeply concerned that all homes on the edges of proposed units and along proposed corridors be excluded. They have nothing to offer botanically, and, there are human values which mush be considered. With Congressman Wilson, we believe and we hope that the actual number of homes taken can be fewer than 50, and that even among these, it Iray be appropriate to revest title in owners. We find the provisions of HR 11546 to be generous, providing for either 1) sale PAGENO="0147" 141 Johnston - page 3 at fair market value with provision for relocation assistance, or 2) lifetime occupancy with payment on date ci acquisition at fair market value Ia ssr_ghts retained by the owner. If all permanent dwellings with small agricultural acti- vities are excluded, then the three-acre provision for the remaining homes seems adequate. OPPOSITICN TO THE POESERVE. The present local opposition to the proposed preserve centers in the lower Pine Island Eayou area. The problem there stems primarily from misinformation on what is to be included in tho preserve. The Beaumont Unit boundaries were originally an island encompassed by the Lawar Neches Valley Authority Canal, Pine Island Bayou, and the Neches River. I am told the the Kirby Lumber Company requested that some of its acreage below Cook. a Lake Road be added to the preserve and that conscrvationists agreed that it should be added. The addition is shown on the attached map. The dotted lines represent Cook's Lake Road, and most of the hares in this area are north of this road. Only a corridor of minimum width (a right-of-way) would be necessary for the banks of Pine Island Bayou as it passes some of the nearby housing developments. Incidentally, this area is subject to flooding. Attached is a copy of a newspaper article describing some of the conditions there in the last two waeks. If the area continues to develop d~spite its undesirability as homesites, we will soon have demands from residents for costly flood protection. Ecur attention is also directed to this newspaper advertisement prepared by opponents of the preserve. It will not be necessary for re to point out the gross errors and distortions incorporated in it, bat it is representative of the effort to create unrest and uncertainty among our citizens. Cormont should also be made `on the resolutions from county commsssioner courts. Please note that most of them do nnt c'nnsce the preserve but are merely for limiting acreage and excluding homes. It is difficult to understand why PAGENO="0148" 142 Johnston - page 4 these commissioners acted at all upon the request of so few of its citizens, and still more difficult to conceive why they cannot recognize the benefits that will accrue to their counties from this preserve. Ten years after this preserve becomes a reality, I hope to call on these coimsissicners with a copy of their resolution in hand and to request that they pass another resolution thanking the Big Thicket Association and Texas conservationists for their work in saving the Big Thicket. Unfortunately, some of the present commissioners will have retired by that time. When these opponents testify, they will charge that the Big Thicket Association has been taken over by heartless outsiders. For your information, about 15 per cent of our members live in Congressman Wilson's district and another 20 per cent life in the immediate area--particularly Jefferson County. You hould also know that my name is number 23 on the Association's 1964 membership list, and that 12 of the present 36 board members were on the first board of directors. Sore takeover~ In concluding, may I again appeal for immediate action. Trees are falling and their numbers will increase. And however baseless citizen fearsmay be, they deserve to know whether their homes are affected. Please add acreage to make this biological crossroads truly representative of its potential--and do it quickly. PAGENO="0149" 143 Soc PAGENO="0150" \t I ~ i' If plA I ~ - ~ ii 1 IL t~y s R f \ I Ii lb I I fStfl \K dl M h501 It ti I dl I I~ It I I) IV. ~.w tn n l'uesdty I~ CXIR'(k1 the Arab oil coni tit~u t on Ki:;~.Iiii~er's ~taten~cnt. ~I lilOl ~ fund to ht*!; Afr~cnu ~ cun!r~~'s I~1)u~I ~t d I~ ~ ~ th~ i~ethig Cfld~ ~ i;a%nst tIe linitcd SI;tes w~,ti!d be lifted M~b~uk also declined to say what would be d~veIcp thoir own oit ro~tircc~. ore Se~ Join planned to LoIn reoplelianof Lb~sopsiotiux of Egyplino out discussed at the meeting in TrIpoli. But other Arab league SecretouyGceerot Matiwoud fli~d, roal . ElGHTYFiy~ YEoR~ IN THE PUSL_ ~ERV)CE 1~°~ `~ (imlss\ ~ 1 (1~N H TLfl~) .`.~ )l.\ I ~ ~U1V~1!~U)1~ j ~ ~U \~ /~ `°~° VI . ;d, 1' Tv : IIIsIUMONT, TEXAS, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, 1974 PACES 4 SE~TI0N arc, E~ ~L ~ 1'IY2L.' ~ IJyJOIINI105Y rondo or contaning severat feet of water, .y5'r fesac `i, o:e!r. :~ ro.sa.y i'.'sc fs!'r.d "a. ht a Stalf If rOar The high neater report eooiraots will other signs that the 3),: `i':;;. ,i~,' ~ t.r ..a~ c.:,!a ii' r Ii's sos's i;ca ~, I' WI mg 0) It IsO b thtffld hi) idtdC tyi If d pta I f ii d ~ I i hIs d 11 I it f t I t t I' t r row we're wvrrn d Ih:it the tiea!~3's eni~:ht collapse. huseo the best two (lays of Ibis meek. ,,.~`! c' - 0', . .rc: . :.. 3-u 0'.: :ai':ii- ti .c -i `.`i'O'.s'i - * `Vie need volunteers to hrlp is',) - sore already worn nut A spoheoo'm for Ihe ffosrihu County Sheriffs Deporlneent t:-.s-. c . s-wa;. ss el `ecu rcae.~s `0.1 ,o Ii I h 111' 1 It g dl f tltfb t `ml IF' I e- d `It I II I I t I y ( I,al, I t dl) 1 1 ft t I) ft I i b IS d y i,~t I 0 ft U C ty I I I I ft t k Al b I t Ip I tSt II) I I It t lb Is I I t trier `welled ci'cehs.-wst rivers lios'vvrat feel hove tOwel ehige, are.sbii bong wed to transport students that couhf get out of --- , ` .~5 i--c i'' i i:~ .: a Js.re 1.3 .1 Oilier areas of Cordon 0(1(1 Jeilersier, ecusihes are also cx- their homes across parts of Cooks lake Road. c: c c-s.. . 5' "i 3 -` ";) 1~.~-.,~ i-ca," Tees' ccl as!, y. r II III 1 I I II ft I C ly w 1 1 1! II d th I I I F tO ~ I I Uly I If I I~ d A I 0 1 ~ I! i d t S C - lemphug to sheen up lou keotgeo that common Ike Cooks aloe lay's, v. `a' cys; :1 ic me `i n.c.r lI `it s': :e a.isi ~:- ,a0~ue. LU! I TIN It ty thihm T I II 1,1 1 y TI 1 .`sko ft. l)eVries, SI, of Pert Niches was found DAily Isday lsq heulgo (sin gosstsbapc,leutihesioaltcrliridge (510 )taei3rr of ,,,m 3 :~ i-:s's, 3::,-- .- :- -v_cs ~,,., 1 v. lOse a'.' `3 5 ` I I It f ll~ i lIt C II II fl I fOp I I J t,orglary in the sfi.istJsg death nsf `rub f-roe Yardley last Oat. Too hsisrs om Artesian Aries rid keen evsseeamteet by early ~ `:;.--`"`eJ Ly ```. `a `.` :` 0.': :a s! I,'e,.y. a. ` this owning, one of It-si seiih v'-o-crat fort of sailer tnside. ` -a~' -` * - *-- .., _.`-~,~- . *~* `the Crioi'vel lilstiiolfcsmt more relorciet he scrdiml shinrlly The Iwo) O:iks c'somsordy in nci Itone.'I Jetlel `on County . * 5 a - ` .,, -. I,rt,,'c,i,,s,i, 13cr to's trio tic' a.. Ia 1,-i! 1', `rio of ml,sliiie'rahicu, has Ole ossly ro,'mt iii ll'e roiimily eli oil because sf high voter `see--rIo en smosis.firocnl sore .":io-rlaii is. lirgin later today. am., ordsng In 11(0 shieiil's ii- `vie ii' i-silt- eir:s~et `ccclii coO I-s. 0 a Us -C. ir.riuly `in life mm- .01 leash haslm,.seeso'i liver llrsil Drier oc~esornissnsIasf liy aNNUM. Il,lt'l'ENING-EIli sIt llseosfe n.000)s his 3i'.iC. II. ``5' `1 I'- `5 i'adi'i' 00.9' `ii i':' 30) - Sea e'tJ,00l3'Ji,1i.,grl.t) liiinilesl emoiil:nee Ia iIes.I `sIn, si m,~'-el siliv.Iioi !isiis. `.1 I-i er a.' 0 `:i\Ts-n[i~T.~iPi'a'E~' i~'~"Ct~-I°~'i ~ ~ / * C I - /- :i - ~0~'.n ,e 0, 00"',' "0 0.05, /` `".0T.0w0'50~7 PAGENO="0151" 145 BIG' THICKET ASSOCIATION Box 198 Saratoga, Texas 77585/Phone (713) 274-2971 Advisory Board: Dr. Clarence Cottam, Dr. Donovan Correll, U. S. Supreme Court Justice William 0. Douglas, Dr. Thomas Eisner, Alfred Knopf, Mary Lasswell, Richard Pough, Hart Stilwell, Edwin Way Teale, Hon. Ralph W. Yarborough. February 21,. 197!~ Mr. Jim Beirne Committee on Interior & Insular Affairs U. S. Senate Washington, 1). C. 2O~lO 1~ear Mr. Beirne: Attached is a supplementary statement for the record of the Big Thicket National Preserve hearings held Feb. 5.6, 19Th. We understand that you plan to visit this area soon in order to check personafly on the number of residences involved in the corridor along Little Pine Island Bayou and Fine Island Bayou. This is a matter of interest and concern to our asso- ciation, also, and I hope that I may have the opportunity to accompany you on your inspection tour. If I may be of any assistance, please call on me. Sincerely, hnston President PAGENO="0152" 146 SENATE INTERIOR & INSULAR AFFAIRS COMMITTEE PARKS & RECREATI~ SUBCOMMITTEE Hearing Record-on Big Thicket National Preserve Supplementary statement of Maxine Johnston, President, Big Thicket Association At the Feburary 5 hearings on Big Thicket National Preserve, Senator John Tower submitted recommendations for acreage which differ from the configuration included in the House-passed bill HR 115146. While some of the areas he proposes to add are undoubtedly worthwhile, if we have unlimited acreage., they do not - have the, high priority and agreemant of public offcials and conservationists that support the configuration in HR 115146. Indeed, the Big Thicket Associa- tion considers HR 115146 sacrosanct, and it should be passed without delay. We urgently request that the Senate make this bill the basis for its action with only one change: the addition of a unit to include the arid sand- lands and the successional lakes. Conservationists agree that this addition is necessary in order to represent alloof Big Thicket's facets. If this area is not added now, you can be sure that conservationists will continue to ask for the addition in future years. It should be added at this tine--before land values increase and the area is invaded by homesites. We cannot emphasize too strongly the need for quick action. With n~ earlier testimony, I have submitted photographs of cutting in progress in two Preserve units * Moreover, a large real estate development firm is moving ahead with- plans that will affect approximately 1i,OOO~5,ooo acres of Preserve lands. They will be joined by other small tract owners attempting to anticipate and `to frustrate efforts to create the Preserve. It is difficult to stand by help- lessly while acres are lost, and we urge the Senate to end the debate by accepting the House proposal with the one addition noted above PAGENO="0153" 147 SENATE INTERIOR & INSULAR AFFAIRS COMMIT2EE PARKS & RECREATICX~ SUBCOMMITTEE Hearing Record on Big Thicket National Preserve Supplementary statement of Maxine Johnston, President, Big Thicket Association At the Feburary S hearings on Big Thicket National Preserve, Senator John Tower submitted recommendations for acreage which differ from the configuration included in the House-passed bill HR llSL~6. While some of the areas he proposes to add are undoubtedly worthwhile, if we have unlimited acreage, they do not have the high priority and agreerrent of public offcials and conservationists * that support the configuration in HR 115146. Indeed, the Big Thicket Associa- tion considers HR llLt6 sacrosanct, and it should be passed without delay. We urgently request that the Senate make this bill the basis for its action with only one change: the addition of a unit to include the arid sand- lands and the successional lakes. Conservationists agree that this addition is necessary in order to represent alloof Big Thicket's facets. If this area is not added now, you can be sure that conservationists will continue to ask for the addition in future years. It should be added at this time--before land values increase and the area is invaded by homesites. We cannot emphasize too strongly the need for quick action. With my earlier testimony, I have submitted photographs of cutting in progress in two Preserve units. Moreover, a large real estate development firm is moving ahead with plans that will affect approximately 1~OOo..5, 000 acres of Preserve lands. They will be joined by other small tract owners attempting to anticipate and to frustrate efforts to create the Preserve. It is difficult to stand by help- lessly while acres' are lost, and we urge the Senate to end the debate by accepting the House proposal with the one additioü noted above. PAGENO="0154" 148 Miss JOHNSTON. In explanation, for the next witness we have Mrs. Lois Williams Parker on the list next. Mrs. Parker could not appear, so I have asked another board member, Mrs. Russell Long, to read a ~tatement which her husband prepared. Senator BIBLE. Mrs. Long, we will be happy to hear from you pro- vided it isn't too long. Mrs. LONG. It is very short. STATEMENT OP DR. RUSSELL LONG, LAMAR UNIVERSITY, PRESENTED BY MRS. RUSSELL LONG Mrs. LONG. The area under consid~ration for a national biological preserve are unique in that it. represents a meeting place of northern- southern and eastern-western plants. In turn the wildlife reflects this varied habitat. I taught a course in vertebrate field biology for more than 15 years at Lamar and can testify to the destruction of this area and the nec- essity for a national preserve. A favorite study area was a beech- magnolia forest on Village Creek north of Beaumont. It is now being developed and sold as "estates." Two acid bogs near Hountze have had all surrounding forest bulldozed bare and' planted into a pine farm. A collecting area between Beaumont and Saratoga has been bulldozed into a rice farm. A fellow teacher recently asked me about a shallow natural pond in the area and came back and told me, "It is not there anymore." We have the power machinery to totally destroy that part of the thicket being considered at this hearing. Let us utilize this part of this land for our children and grandchildren by ma1~ing it a liational biological preserve. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much. I am very happy to have that testimony. It is the chair'~ intention to hear one more witness this morning and then to recess until 2~ o'clock. The next witness that I am going to hear, `because she has run into some transportation prob- lems, is Mary Kittell. Then this afternoon we will hear Dave Davidson and Orrin Bonney, then J. T. Williams, William Nelson, John C. Billings, Dempsie Henley, and James Webster. And that will complete the hearings for this afternoon and then we will hear 18 other witnesses tomorrow morning. Do I pronounce your name correctly? Ms. KITTELL. Yes. STATEMENT OP MARY KITTELL, PRESIDENT, COUNCIL OP NA- TIONAL GARDEN CLUBS OP AMERICA, PORT WORTH, TEX. Ms. KITrELL. I am Mrs. Howard S. Kittell, vice president of Texas Garden Clubs, Inc., w-ith approximately 30/)OO members. I am 1973-75 president of National Council State Garden Clubs, Inc., with approxi- mately half a million members in this country and an equal number of international affiliates in other 1aIts of the world. With the permission of both organizations, I am today speaking for Texas Garden Clubs, Inc. Texas Garden Clubs, Inc., officially adopted the policy statement which we have today presented on May 28, 1969, PAGENO="0155" 149 as a great deal of research and soul-searching on a compromise for a suggestion of 100,000 acres rather than approximately 200,000 which we originally wished to present. This statement was officially re-ratified by Texas Garden Clubs, Inc., in session October 18, 1973, and again by the executive committee January 29, 1974. Since you are in such a hurry I would like to say that this has been presented to you twice before, and I will just touch the highlights if you want me to. I have cut it down, so I think I can do it in about 5 minutes. Senator BIBLE. All right. You are recognized for 5 minutes. Ms. KITTELL. I am not accustomed to speaking to groups of such distinguished men. I am more at home with women. We feel B1g Thicket National Park, which would include a minimum of 30,500 acres proposed in the preliminary report by the National Park Service study team with the following modifications and additions. They have been carefully worked out and are enumerated. I know you have heard them any number of times before, so I will skip them if you want me to. Senator BIBLE. Yes. Because I am familiar with them. We passed the bill once in the Senate before. Ms. KITTELL. I know you are familiar with those. Now such addi- tions would form a connected tw-o-loop green belt of about 100,000 acres. There are more than 3 million acres in the overall Big Thicket area, through which wildlife and people could move along a continu- ous circle of more than 100 miles. We recommend that the headwaters be in or near the line of profile unit. We are absolutely opposed to any trading or cession of any na- tional forest area in the formation of the Big Thicket National SPark or monument. In addition, but not as part of the Big Thicket National Park or monument, we recommend an establishment of national wildlife ref- uge, comprising the lands of the U.S. Corps of Engineers around Dam B, be a State historical area encompassing communities of typical dwelling forms, et cetera. Other State parks to supplement the national reserve. We agaiu urge on this day, Tuesday, February 5, 1974, that the President ol the United States, the Senate and Congress, the Department of the Interior, the TJ.S. Corps of Engineers as to Darn B, and appropriate State agencies as to supplemental State and historic parks take ap- propriate action to implement. this policy as soon as possible. Senator BIBLE. That is a very fine statement. If you had been here at the opening of the session you would have heard me say that I was very, very hopeful that we could move this bill through very quickly through the Senate, then to the Congress and then to settle the differences. These park proposals generally end up in basic differences of size. Some of them want no park at all. Some of them want a small park. Some want a medium-sized park. Some want a large park. So we have to try to settle the differences between those various areas. So we will do the best we can and try to get you some legislation through the Senate in a reasonable time so we can take it to conference and resolve the differences between the House version and the Senate version. PAGENO="0156" 150 If there are differences when the Senate finally acts. Ms. KIrrELL. I might say, too, that we definitely feel that the taking clause must stay in. Senator BIBLE. That is a controversial point.~ We ran into nothing but problems in Redwoods. If you had been with Redwoods as I have for the last 5 years you would shudder because it has been a nightmare. But we will consider it very carefully. Ms. Kittell. We have followed that. Thank you so much for the privilege of appearing here. Senator BIBLE. I am so sorry you were delayed in your airplane. Ms. KITPELL. I got up at 3 o'clock this morning to get here. Senator BIBLE. Well, you Texans are tough. We will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. [W~hereupon, the hearing was recessed at 12 :15 p.m., to reconvene at 2p.m.] AITERNOON SESSION Senator BIBLE. The hearing will resume. The panel next to be heard will be Mr. Dave Davidson, chairman of the Lone Star Chapter, Sierra Club, San Antonio, and Mr. Orrin Bonney, regional vice president, Sierra Club, Washington, D.C., appearing as a panel. Mr. BONNEY. I do not see Mr. Davidson here and I will proceed. STATEMENT OP ORRIN BONNEY, REGIONAL VICE PRESIDENT, SIERRA CLUB, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. BONNEY. I would like my statement filed in the record and then I will make some comments from it. Senator BIBLE. You can make your comments as long as your com- ments are not longer than your statement. Your full statement will be incorporated in the record. [The prepared statement of Mr. Bonney follows:] STATEMENT OF ORRIN H. BONNEY, REGIONAL VICE PRESIDENT, SIERRA CLUB, WASHINGTON, D.C. Senator Bible and members of this subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. I am a lawyer. I am also presently a vice president of the Sierra Club. I was the first chairman of the Big Thicket Coordinating Com- mittee and have had a strong interest in preservation efforts on behalf of the Big Thicket for many years. I have previously testified in the Senate hearings on Big Thicket on June 12. 1970 in Beaumont, Texas. the House hearings in Beaumont June 10, 1972, and the House hearings held in Washington July 16-17, 1973. These hearings have been published. I own 200 acres of land in Montgomery County. Texas. This county was once entirely Big Thicket country and my land still is, but the Big Thicket is gone from most of the county. I have watched it dissolve around my property over the last 45 years, and can see what is in store for land that is not put in a Big Thicket Preserve. A great deal of information has already been presented 1)0th in `the Senate and in the House about the Big Thicket and the overwhelming opinion of necessity for preserving it. BOth the senators from Texas. Senator Tower and Senator Bentsen felt it was so important a piece of legislation that they not `only intro- duced `bills in the `Senate to establish a Preserve but they each took time out from their busy schedule to `appear before the House Subcommittee on National Parks and Recreation la'st July to testify in its behalf and in favor of at least 100,000 acres being set aside. Big Thicket was supported in the House by bills sponsored and co-sponsored `by 21 Texas representatives, almost unanimous. PAGENO="0157" 151 The purpose, location, size and description of the Big Thicket country was excellently detailed and summarized in the Report Accompanying HR 11546 which was passed by the House on December 3, 1973. 1 refer this Committee to it for details concerning the magnificent variety of plant and animal life which is assembled in this Biological Crossroads of North America and the strong case presented there to preserve it. The first federal legislation on Big Thicket was a bill introduced by Senator Yarborough in October of 1966 in the 89th Congress which started the ball rolling. He reintroduced it in January 1967 as S. 4 of the 90th Congress and again as S. 4 of the 91st Congress. It was passed by the Senate in the 91st Congress in December of 1970 for 100,000 acres. Senator Yarborough stated (see Congressional Record, 91st Congress, January 15, 1969) that he had originally introduced his Big Thicket bill "not as a detailed proposal ready for immediate enactment but as an attempt to focus attention on this need until the best recommendation from all in- terested parties became available . . . I have recently received other sugges- tions from such nationally known groups as The Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club who have become quite concerned with this project." Senator Yarborough had been defeated for reelection in 1970. Both he and this Senate Committee felt that his great efforts on the Big Thicket should have recognition before the Senator left office by the passage of a Big Thicket bill. After the hearings in Beaumont on June 12, 1970, this Senate Committee made a great effort to obtain from the National Park Service the necessary details and description of the tracts involved. The Park Service had made several comprehensive studies of the Big Thicket. George Hartzog, then Director of the National Park Service, attended the Beaumont Senate Committee hearing and heard all the testimony.. This Senate Committee asked the National Park Service for its recommendations and set the date for a hearing on September 5. 1970, which was subsequently postponed by request of the Administration. The Administration continued to stall. The Chairman of this Senate Committee felt that action should be taken on the bill before Mr. Yarborough left office and set down a definite hearing date for November 24, 1970, and notified the Department of the Interior to present its report at that time. A representative of the Department appeared and said there was no report. The Chairman of this Senate Committee then publicly insisted that the Department make a report. He reset the hearing for two weeks. This Committee was ignored and no report was made. We were told by Hartzog that the Administration had ordered that no report be made. (In fact, for almost three years this situation between the Administration and Congress continued.) So S.4 was enacted in December 1970 as originally drawn and not as a detailed proposal. It provided only that: "the Secretary of the Interior shall establish the Big Thicket National Park consisting of land and interests in land not more than 100,000 acres in Hardhx, Liberty, San Jacinto, Polk and Tyler Counties, Texas." The bill was not in complete form, but it was neither the fault of Senator Yarborough nor of this Committee that the details were not completed. Senator Bentsen, who had defeated Senator Yarborough in the primaries and subsequently won the election, as one of his first acts as senator, reintroduced on January 25, 19:71, the previously passed Senate bill, now under S. 118. The other senator from Texas, Senator Tower, likewise offered a bill for 100,000 acres. Some of its details were incorporated into the House bill. A great deal of work and considerable discussion was done in the House Sub- committee and by members of the House in developing the details for HR. 11546. It was passed and is now before this Senate Committee. In general we hope the Senate will follow the House bill except for adding acreage to bring it up to the 100,000 acres as previously determined by the Senate. We certainly support the areas included in the House bill which represent most of the unique plant communities of the area. However, it does omit a major, one-of-a-kind botanical and geological wonder that should have a high. priority in a Biological Preserve. We feel that the Arid Sandylands-Ponds Unit is extremely significant and should be included, being an area that carries no permanent residences at this time. Acreage not now occupied by homeowners in the Saratoga Triangle could also be added to bring up the desired acreage The present provisions in the House bill, such as those that follow, are excel- lent and should not be changed. 1. Legislative Taking-Failure to include this provision would have two results: PAGENO="0158" 152 (a) There would be no protection for the areas being taken. We would have no way to prevent further cutting, particularly on those lands not protected by the industry's voluntary moratorium. TI1ere has already been some spite cut- ting, and more is threatened. (b) Another effect would be speculation and increase in prices which might even double the cost of the Preserve to the American taxpayer a whole lot more than the 6% interest involved. Merely discussing a Big Thicket Park has already resulted in a substantial increase. 2. Autkorization Out of the Land and Water Conservation Fun4.-This is ex- actly the purpose of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. As pointed out, prompt action in acquiring the Preserve is necessary. It is estimated that each day we delay establishing the Big Thicket Park, we lose 50 acres. To go through the regular appropriation process might take several years more (as it did on Padre Island) and would result in an irreparable loss. The Land and Water Con- servation Fund is ample to take care of the financing. 3. Park )Jlanagenwnt-Hunting.-This provision is politically necessary in or- der to obtain local support and I would not want to see it changed. I think the House bill has adequate provisions to enable the Secretary of the Interior to regulate or forbid hunting in any part of the Park necessary, and I feel that this can be done gradually, equitably, and adequately without stirring up a political hornet's nest at this time. I am sure, Senator Bible, you will see that the people of Texas and the Nation get the best possible Big Thicket Preserve. Mr. BONNEY. I am a lawyer. I actually live in Montgomery County, Tex. I have property there. Montgomery County was once part of the Big Thicket. I have had a home there for 45 years. It is no loiiger Big Thicket country, my land, but the rest of it is. And I have, watched it dissolve away with the subdivisions and various things they call im- provements and that sort of thing. So it is no longer that sort of country. I am a lawyer and `as you mentioned I am vice president of the Sierra Club. I was first chairman of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee and I have had a strong interest in preservation efforts in behalf of the Big Thicket for many years. I previously testified before the Senate in Beaumont before the House hearings in Beaumont and the House hearings in Washington. Those have been published. And my statements are there, and I will not elabo- rate on those. A great deal of information has already been presented both in the Senate and in the House on the Big Thicket, and the Senators from Texas testified here this morning, Senator Tower and Senator Bentsen also appeared before the House, which I think is somewhat unusual. It showed the.ir intense interest in the Big Thicket and they testified there last July when the hearings were held there. They testified for 100,000 acres as they did this mormng. The purpose, location, size and description of the Big Thicket coun- try was excellently sumamrized in the report accompanying the House bill, which was passed by the House on December 3. I just referred to it rather than elaborate on it now. There has been some further mention of it today. In the 91st Congress of 1970 a Big Thicket' bill was passed there for 100,000 acres. Senator Yarborough at that time stated that he felt it ought to be passed and it ought to be passed before he left the Senate. He had been defeated for reelection in 1970, but he felt that it ought to be passed by the Senate, and the Senate did pass it. Quoting Sen- ator Yarborough from the Congressional Record, quote: "Not as a detailed proposal, ready for immediate enactment but as an `attempt to PAGENO="0159" 153 focus attention on this need until the best recommendation from all interested parties becomes available." Unquote. The bill merely specified that the Secretary of the Interior shall establish the Big Thicket National Park, consisting of land and interests in land of not more than 100,000 acres and named the six counties. Then Senator Bentsen, one of the first acts that he did, he defeated Senator Yarborough in the primaries and had been elected. But the first act he committed was to introduce, reintroduce the bill which had already passed the Senate. That was one of his first acts as Senator, to reintroduce that bill. So it is still-if you go back to that bill, it is not a complete bill, and it is necessary t~ consider some of the revisions that should go into the bill. Fundamentally, most of us feel that the House bill, H.R. 11546, a great deal of work was done there and it is a good bill. The provisions are very good and in general we hope that the Senate will follow that bill, except for adding acreage which would bring it up to the 100,000 acres. We felt that it omitted one of a kind of botanical and geological wonder. It should have a high priority in a biological preserve, and we felt that the arid sandylands ponds unit was significant and should be included. A map of that was introduced in evidence this morning, I think by Senator Yarborough. And the area there advocating introducing car- ries no permanent residences. We understand Senator Wilson's hav- ing worked out a compromise, and we think he is to be commended in working out a compromise. I do not know why he should not go the full limit of the 100,000 acres. I sympathize with him. He is in a county which is controlled by the timber interests. He worked for the Temple Lumber Co. before he was elected to Congress. So he is working against some of what those people feel at times. They had come out for 35,000 acres, as you recall, from Beaumont, and now it has been worked lip to this. I am sort of a practical individual. If it develops into too much controversy, I do not think you would find any problem with Charlie Wilson agreeing that when you take it to conference agreeing that more land appear along the Neches, just in the narrow corridor there, and this small acreage, in this Lance Rosier unit, those are other possibilities. I am not trying to compromise it myself or tell anybody to com- promise it, because you are all more expert on that sort of thing. Senator BIBLE. It is just obvious to me that if you do not compro- mise with some, you are not going to get any bills. So you had better make up your mind. Mr. BONNET. That may be~ the facts of life. So I suggest that if- I do not know why there is any opposition to the sandylands. But if there is, why this other property would be- Senator BIBLE. We will try to work it out. Mr. BONNET. It would still keep it up to what the Senators have declared themselves for, everybody except Charlie Wilson declared themselves for 100,000 acres. PAGENO="0160" 154 Senator BIBLE. I do not think everybody but I will take your state- ment. I have gone through this once and I have a little familiarity with it. Mr. BONNEY. Yes. Now, on some of the other features, I am in favor of this legislative taking. The Sierra Club is also. It is quite imperative. I think Senator Tower this morning was commenting on it, that if we do not do that, if we do not take it immediately, this legislative taking, and you saw the photographs here that the lady presented this morning: We may lose the whole thing. Senator BIBLE. I understand the position. Mr. BONNEY. If we wait 1 or 2 or 3 years, we are not having any- thing to legislate about. So it needs immediate taking. Another thing, there has been a lot of speculation as a result of the publicity that has been given the idea of the Big Thicket. If we do not take it immediately, it would probably more than double the cost of it. If we wait 1, 2, or 3 years, as the administration suggested, then it will cost us a whole lot more than just a mere 6-per- cent interest involved. That is about the main reasoii they did not want to bring it in and then they wanted to spread out the claiming of the fund. But I think we should take it immediately. I think it is well to take it out of the land and water conservation fund. The fund is ample. Prompt action is necessary. If we go through a regular appropriation process it might take several years, as it did on Padre Island, and would result in irreparable loss. There is nothing in the bill saying what the priorities are, and I do not think that came up this morning. I do not think we-I think we ought to let the administration fol- low through on that. Hunting. Senator Yarborough felt that hunting should be prohibited. I think the bill as written is very good. I think that it will take care of any situation there. It permits the Secretary of the Interior to designate any area which lie feels there should not be any hunting, because of safety and other features. So lie caii gradually take care of that situation. If, as time goes on. it appears that hunting is being taken care of elsewhere and that there should not be any hunting. there,, why he can gradually put th'it into effect So those `ire the m~uii things that I w `tnted to point out Senator BIBLE It is very good to see you again Again, I repeat I hope w e cm 1flQ\ e this bill on its w `ty to the White House w ithin the near future. Mr. BONNEY. I realize you have been doing very well with this your- self to keep it moving, and I hope you continue that. Senator BIBI r I w ould not be here he'trrng this if I did not intend to do it. .. Mi BONi~E~ Wegieatly appieciateit Senator BIBLE. Our next panel will be composed of Mr. J. T. Wil- li'tms `tnd Mi William Nelson Are these gentlemen in the audieiice ~ If not their st'ttement w ill be incoipor'ited in full in the record PAGENO="0161" 155 L The statement referred to above follows:] STATEMENT OF J. T. WILLIAMS, BOARD PRESIDENT AND W. M. NELSON, SUPERIN- TENDENT, LUMBE1iTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT GEOGRAPHIC, DEMOGRAPHIC, AND FISCAL INFORMATION OF LUMBERTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AS RELATED TO THE PROPOSED BIG THICKET NATIONAL PRESERVE Lumberton Independent School District is a political subdivision encompassing 115 square miles of the southeast corner of Hardin County, Texas. It is a subur~ ban rural area with approximately 8,000 residents. The district is bounded on the north by Village Creek, on the east by the Neches river and on the south by. the Pine Island Bayou. The southern boundary is shared by the City of Beaumont. The annual school budget is in the neighborhood of $1,147,061.00, approxi- mately 41.5% of which is derived by local taxation with the ad-vaiorcm~ prop- erty tax as its base. Currently, and for the past few years, the district has been taxed at $1.59! $100.00 valuation and valuation has been set at 100% of true market value. Local effort is considered hig when compared with other districts in the state. In the event that a large portion of the tax base is excluded from the jurisdic- tion of the school taxing body, the patrons of this district will either have to pay more taxes or the school program will have to be curtailed to a less desirable standard. The present enrollment at Lumberton is approximately 1650 students. This represents more than 100% growth within the past ten years. There is presently no indicatiomi of any tendency toward a reduction in the rate of growth of this area which suggests that in the future the district will be charged with more to do with less tax base on which to depend for school finance. The Big Thicket National Preserve as proposed suggests educational disadvan- tage to tIme youth of Lumberton. BIG THICKET NATIONAL PRESERVE The Lumberton Independent School District is a political subdivision which is to be included in part of the Big Thicket National Preserve as the bills are currently written. As in the case of all Texas public schools a large portion of revenue for opera- tion and maintenance, and total costs of construction of buildings is furnished by local ad-valorem property taxes. Inclusion of lands and properties as outlined by H.R. 11546 (Report No. 93-676) would cut deeply into the financial and therefore the educational ca- pabilities of Lumberton Independent School District. Areas of direct concern to the school district are: The Beaumont unit (p. 3, line 24-p. 4, line 4) comprising approximately six thousand acres; the Little Pine Island-Pine Island Bayou Corridor unit (p. 4, lines 10-12). These areas include properties in three categories as follows: I. Improved properties within an incorporated municipality. II. Improved properties within an unincorporated subdivision and other im- proved properties. III. Unimproved properties. The House Resolution provides (p. 2, lines 14-22) "that the Secretary of In- terior shall locate the boundaries of the stream corridors and . . . shall make every reasonable effort to exclude from the units . . . any improved year round residential propeities which he deternunes in his discretion are not necessary for the protection of the values of the area or for its proper administration." It therefore is uncertain the extent to which the tax base of the school dis- trict will be reduced. If the Secretary of Interior chose at his discretion to remove the corridors from the preser~ e there would be no economic or educ'ttional damage On the other hand, if he chose to include all resident property within the corridors, the result would be the loss of approximately 10% of the local revenues. Further as I umuberton I S D has had `i histor~ of giowth in pupil popula tion it has h~d a concurrent giowth in ad valorem tax base Inclusion of the corridors as proposed would ser~ e to limit if not preclude industrial grow th `is suggested on page 10 lines 1-11 30 001 0 74 ii PAGENO="0162" 156 Implicit in the definition of the Lower Neches River corridor unit (p. 3, line 24, through p. 4, line 4) industry must have access to fresh water sources. Hav- ing further stipulated that existing railroads, pipelines, and public utilities and their easements are excluded suggests that further growth in the area will be limited. The proposal makes no provision for payment in lieu of taxes or for any form of compensation for damage to future growth of value within the tax jurisdic- tion of the school district. It is felt that a bill lacking in provisions for loss of revenue, both present and future, will have an immediate and lasting detrimental effect on the educational capabilities of the Lumberton Independent School District. In summation there has been no quid pro quo offered in relation to loss of tax base and loss of future growth. We therefore ask that corridors contiguous to and inclusive of properties within the Lumberton Independent School District be excluded from the Big Thicket National Preserve. Senator BIBLE. Our next witness will be Mr. Dempsie Henley, Texas Commission for Indian Affairs, Liberty, Thx. Is Mr. Henley here? LN0 response.] Our next witness is Mr. James WTebster. STATEMENT OF JAMES WEBSTER, PRESIDENT, TEXAS FORESTRY ASSOCIATION, HOUSTON, TEX. Mr. WEBSTER. I would say very briefly we would like to support the 75,000 acres recommended by the Park Service for two reasons. One, their experts recommend it, and second, I understand we can fund it. Like almost everybody else here we would like the issue resolved as quickly as possible. One of the reasons is that I think we stand in grave danger of losing the existing moratorium on some of the timberlands there, if we do not. As you know, the original string of pearls proposal, the 35,000-acre proposal, had an official moratorium put on it by members of the Texas Forestry Association. Then we also had sort of a nonofficial moratorium on some of the other proposed areas, probably another 80,000 acres, plus or minus. It would be a little bit hard to say. Some of the people are getting a little bit edgy. For that reason, particularly, we would like the issue to be resolved. I would like to mention that we would strongly urge that compensation be arranged for the local taxing jurisdictions who will be sustaining losses by the establishment of the biological reserve. Particularly, I think, since the nature of the reserve itself does not lend itself, in my opinion, to tourist attractions that might increase the tax base of the area. So in sum, we would like the Congress to act as promptly as possible~ sir, in the interest of the landowners and the taxing jurisdictions in the Nation. And I would be glad to answer any questions that I can. Senator BIBLE. When does this moratorium that you mentioned ex- pire.? The self-imposed moratorium by the Forestry Association? Mr. WEBSTER. It has no expiration date. The only problem is that some of the people begin to get a little edgy. In the first 5 years of the moratorium ad valorem taxes among the major owners in the 35,000-acre proposal had totaled up to something over $1~5,000. *Of course there is no compensation for that. They are willing to sit still and since that time a number of other areas have been suggested for inclusion. For example, the Triangle area, spoken of here today. rfax~ go right on in areas like this. And sometimes some of the owners begin to get a little edgy and come by and say, "Jim, how long PAGENO="0163" 157 do we have to do this?" We say, "Well, we try to hold out as long as we can." Senator BIBLE. Is there any cutting by the forestry people, the lum- ber interests in the taking area of the Big Thicket at the present time? Mr. WEBSTER. Insofar as I know, but then where is the taking area? This is the problem that we get into. Senator BIBLE. I realize it is a little fluid. But Miss Johnston showed some pictures indicating that there was some lumbering and clear- cutting in part. The picture showed there was clearcutting. Whether that was in the taking area-you have three versions. Maybe you have four versions. Mr. WEBSTER. Sir, we have more than that. Senator BIBLE. I mean before us. You have the administration bill, Senator Tower's bill, Senator Bentsen's bill and the House bill. So, is there any taking within any one of those four bills? Mr. WEBSTER. Sir, insofar as I know, no. But today was the first day I heard of this, I talked to Miss Johnston about it afterward. She asked me about a particular company that she thinks is doing some clearcutting. I do not think that that particular landowner is a member of the TFA, but I will have to go back and find out. Senator BIBLE. You are going to supply her with that and the committee? Mr. WEBSTER. Yes. Senator BIBLE. I would hope that as president of the Texas For- estry Association you would have members of the association hold back on clearcutting or any other kind of timbering until this is resolved. This should be resolved rather quickly, I think. Mr. WEBSTER. Do you have any idea about the time? Senator BIBLE. Anybody who ever speaks on the timetable for Con- gress would probably be subject to recall or he would not get elected again. But I would think-we have heard this once. We passed this once, I would think within 30 to 40 days. Maybe I am a little opti- mistic, but I am not too much off base. So 1 would say within 2 months, 60 days. Mr. Webster, I will do everything that I can to hold it down. We are facea with this one thing down there. `We have had so much rain. I think Galveston `Weather Bureau says we have had more rain in the last year than we have had in 103 years. A lot of the companies are short on logs, and if a small landowner comes in and says he wants to sell timber, then they are put between the rock and the hard place. But we will certainly do our very best to encourage them not to do any cutting in what we assume to be the taking area. Senator BIBLE. I think the Congress would appreciate it. I know that I, personally, would appreciate it. `We are coming down to grips in this problem where we should be in the homestretch, barring some- thing unforeseen. So I would appreciate that spirit of cooperation. Thank you very much. Mr. WEBSTER. Thank you. [The prepared statement and subsequent communications of Mr. Webster follow:] PAGENO="0164" 158 STATEMENT OF J. B. WEBSTER, REPRESENTING THE TEXAS FORESTRY ASSocIATIoN I am J. B. Wobster, president of the Texas Forestry Association, an organiza- tion which has promoted forest conservation and the forest economy of TeXaS for 60 years. Our Association's membership is made up of over 2,000 Texans and Texas firms. It includes forest industry members such as pulp and paper producers, sawmills and forest products processors as well as tree farmers, woodland own- ers, civic groups and individuals of various professional occupations. From the beginning, the Texas Forestry Association has recognized the desir- ability of setting aside lands for the preservation of portions of that area of Texas known as the Big Thicket, and I am happy today to again appear before this sulbcommittee in support of the creation of a Big Thicket National Preserve. We only ask that the Senate now move quickly to resolve this knotty issue which has been under consideration for over six years. To fully comprehend the extent and implications of the controversy related to the establishment of such a preserve, one must first understand the meaning of the term "Big Thicket." In recent years, the term has become associated with virtually all the forest land in East and Southeast Texas, much like Broadway has become associated with the theater, Madison Avenue with the advertising world, and Wall Street with finance. Consequently, many alternative Big Thicket proposals have been suggested by various groups and individuals, alternatives ranging in size from 35,500 acres to an area ten times that large, and each proposal moved about to meet the objec- tives of those who proposed it. As a result, the Texas Forestry Association's argument has been one concern- ing size and location of key areas to be preserved. We have not suggested that such a preserve is not desirable, merely that areas set aside should be selected for the ecological contributions they can make rather than mere contributions to overall size. in 1967, a repor.t issued by the National Park Service cited various ecological units totaling 35,500 acres as containing examples of unique biomes and sug- gested that the units be preserved in a national monument. During the years of our organization's existence, our members have become well acquainted with our state's woodlands, and we, too, recognized these units as "pearls" exemplary of nature's gifts. We agreed that they should be preserved. The proposed monument was the first definition of the Big Thicket, and we immediately endorsed and promoted the concept. Our initial endorsement of the proposal included a cutting moratorium on all timber harvesting on the lands owned by members within time recommended area. This action preserved some one-hundred million feet of pine and hardwood timber, and the halt of timber cutting has been observed over the past six years in spite of allegations to the contrary by some misinformed individuals and organizations. Since the announcement of the Department of Interior's initial plan, six years of intensive consideration should have provided Congress with sufficient infor- mation to resolve the issue; however, a final solution doesn't exist at this time. The Texas Forestry Association encourages you to resolve this impasse before greater complications arise. Through 1972, the major landowners alone paid over $100,000 in ad valorem taxes for the lands they voluntarily placed under moratorium in the 35,500-acre mnonument proposal. In addition, there are now roughly 80,000 acres under un- official moratorium in other areas Congress is considering for inclusion in the "Big Thicket National Area ;" unfortunately, I have no official summary of tax losses for these areas. If negotiations continue to drag on as they have in time past, how long caii we expect landowners to maintain this moratorium on good faith alone when faced with compounding taxes without offsetting income? PAGENO="0165" 159 The House of Representatives recently voted favorably on a resolution which would create a Big Thicket National Preserve. Although the House has enter- tained its share of Big Thicket park bills, the action was the first time it had voted favorably-or voted at all-for legislation preserving the Big Thicket. The House approval was the first action accomplished in the history of the controversy which would significantly contribute to the objective of saving the Big Thicket. But it includes more land than we think is desirable for preserva- tion, since it is larger than the National Park Service's 1973 recommendation for establishment of the Preserve. We feel the Senate should adjust downward to the approximately 75,000 acres proposed by the Park Service. In summary, the issue has been worked on and fully debated in Congress for over six years. In that time, its members have had ample opportunity to become well informed of the consequences of the controversy and should be able to arrive at a logical solution to the dilemna. Preservation of the Big Thicket is not an issue-the quarrel now involves the dozens of proposals for expansion and relocation of the areas to be preserved. We strongly advocate the establishment of a preserve following the basic 1973 Department of Interior proposal for the establishment of roughly a 75,000 acre national preserve. We urge also that the Congress provide appropriate compen- sations to those local taxing jurisdictions whose tax bases will be reduced by establishment of the preserve. Please act promptly to resolve this matter in a manner equitable to the land- owners concerned, the taxing jurisdictions concerned, and to the nation as a whole. Thank you. TEXAS FORESTRY ASSOCIATION, Luflthm, Te~v., February 11, 1974. Hon. ALAN BIBLE, U.s. senate, `Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR BIBLE: In accordance with your request at your Subcommittee hearings last week concerning the Big Thicket National Preserve, I am enclos- ing, for your information, a copy of the letter I have sent to Forest Products Industries in Southeast Texas. I do hope the Big Thicket Issue will be resolved at an early date. Respectfully, JAMES B. WEBSTER, President. Enclosure. TEXAS FORESTRY ASSOCIATION, Luf h-in, Tex., February 11, 1974. To: Texas Forest Industry Executives of South East Texas Gentlemen: On February 5, 1974 Senator Alan Bible, chairman of the Senate subcommittee on Parks and Recreation advised that he anticipate final passage of the Big Thicket Biological Reserve legislation will take place within the next two months. In order to cooperate with the Senate subcommittee, I am taking this manner of askeing each of you to avoid any cutting of timber within the confies of the Reserve area, designated by Congressman Charles Wilson on the attached map, during that two month period. A decision on the matter appears to be close at hand. I do urge that each of you cooperate with our stated position of support for final resolution of this matter by observing this temporary moratorium for cutting (on your own land or that of others.) Respectfully, JAMES B. WEBSTER. PAGENO="0166" TEXAS FORESTRY ASSOCIATION, Luf kin., Tece., February 15,1974. Hon. AlAN BIBLE, Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR BIBLE. Thank yoi~ for your courtesy in listening to my testi- mony before the Subcommittee on February 5. My comments may not change the course of history, but I do appreciate having had the opportunity to make them. My purpose in w-riting is to verify one point which developed during the hear- ing: Several of those testifying (and I particularly recall Mr. Fritz' comments on February 6) implied or stated that "lumber companies" had been grossly remiss in permitting cutting operations to go on in the sandy lands pond areas" in direct violation of their stated moratorium positions. The implications involved are greatly misleading, since the various industrial landholders in the area have formally declared a moratorium on cutting opera- tions only in the original, 35,500-acre "String of Pearls" National Monument proposal; this was done under the aegis of the Texas Forestry Association. Be- 160 PAGENO="0167" 161 yond that, several of the industrial owners involved have individually declared moratoriums on several additional portions of their holdings in which strong interest has been evidenced by the Park Service, the Congress, and/or certain of the more vocal environmental activities. However, to the best of my knowl- edge, no Texas Forestry Association member ever heard of the "sandy lands pond areas" prior to the hearings February 5 and 6, 1974. I believe this action to be typical of the environmental activists who demand the preservation of each bit of Southeast Texas which happens to strike their fancy. Depending upon the environmentalist with whom one is speaking, the "real Big Thicket' `is moved about and added to regularly (I do not recall its having been reduced in size in their plans). Thus, it becomes impossible for timberland owners in the area to ever "do the right thing" by establishing a cut- ting moratorium (at the landowners expense) ; the landowner always winds up touted as a crass materialist dedicated to the destruction of the environment. It has become obvious to me as president of the Texas Forestry Association that the private landowner can never voluntarily satisfy the greed of these people. Therefore, I again urge that the Congress act quickly to settle this matter once and for all so that each landowner involved can get on about the business of managing his remaining forests for the perpetual benefit of the people. Sincerely, J. B. WEI3STER. Senator BIBLE. iDid Mr. Dempsie Henley return? That is the last listed witness that I have for today. We will resume tomorrow morning. Are there others here-is everyone else out in the room witnesses? Everyone who is a witness raise their hand. [A show of hands.] Senator BIBLE. Well, maybe we can dispose of two or three of them. We have about 30 minutes. We will start right at the first. Is Mrs. Judith Allen of Batson, Tex. here ? We can hear you today, if that helps you. Mrs. ALLEN. Fine. Senator BIBLE. Then I will go to Mrs. Geraldine Watson. Is she here? Mrs. WATSoN. I am scheduled for tomorrow. Can't I go tomorrow? Senator BIBLE. Sure enough, honey, I just tried to take you people who want to go back to Texas. Mrs. Allen of Batson, Tex. We will hear Mrs. Judith Allen and then we will hear Mr. Dempsie Henley and we will be in session tomorrow at 10 o'clock. You may proceed. STATEMENT OP JUDITH C. ALLEN, BATSON, TEX. Mrs. ALLEN. As a resident of Batson, and Hardin County, Tex., and as an owner of acreage which has been marked for inclusion in the Big Thicket National Biological Preserve, I am heartily in favor of the legislation recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. My grandparents came to this area in 1903, and my husband's grand- parents settled here in 1905, although my husband and I have had the opportunity to live in many different parts of our Nation, we have chosen to establish our home in this small community which is near the proposed Saratoga Triangle unit. `\~Te believe our remote area affords many opportunities for ouv children to grow in contact with and respect for the beauty and diver- sity of nature, both plants and animal species. The opportunities afforded by the development of a biological preserve will aid us greatly in teaching our children the many mysteries of the woodlands, which surround us. We are of the opinion, also, that the healthy development of tourism in our area would be most beneficial to the depressed community which presently exists in Batson and surrounding small towns. PAGENO="0168" 162 We endorse the request of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee that the arid sandylands unit be included in your legislation, and that the provision for legislative taking of property is absolutely necessary. We have found that many voices have been raised against this preserve, which lacks foresight for future development in our area. We hope you will act with all deli'berate speed to protect the birth- right of our children, which appears threatened if the Big Thicket National Biological Preserve does not become a reality. Thank you for your consideration. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much. I am happy to hear you and I like the brevity of your statement. I think that says just as much as the statements that are 20 pages long. I appreciate it. Our next witness is Mr. Den-ipsie Henley, Texas Commission for Indian Affairs, Liberty, Tex. You look familiar. Didn't I meet you down there? Mr. HENLEY. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Senator BIBLE. I remember you now. STATEMENT OF DEMPSIE HENLEY, CHAIRMAN, TEXAS COMMIS- SION FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS, LIBERTY, TEX. Mr. HENLEY. I am from Liberty, Tex., Mr. Chairman. I am sub- mittrng a resolution here today for the Texas Commission for Indian Affairs, of which I am chairman, for the county court at Liberty, the city of Liberty, Liberty chairmen, port of Liberty, Liberty Industrial Foundation, and myself as an individual. I will make my remarks very brief. I will not go into detail as to the merits of the Big Thicket. You have reams and reams of- Senator BIBLE. I visited there personally and I visited with you and went over the Indian reservation, as you remember. Mr. HENLEY. Thank you, sir. To qualify myself as a witness, not necessarily as au expert, but as a witness, my parents, too, my forefathers were born in the Big Thicket and received a Mexican land grant. My people still live on this land. I have served four times as the mayor of Liberty. I have been 8 years chairman of the commission. I have served 5 years as secretary of the Big Thicket Association which originally fronted this effort, to get the momentum going. I had the good pleasure of hosting Senator Yarborough and William Douglas in my home. I was also a chairman of a 31-man study com- mittee when Governor Price Daniel first made an effort to do some- thing at a State level. I am just here to say that while we all are trying to get a 100,000- acre park which would be ideal, it appears from my public service and my judgment that it would be nearly impossible, at. this point, to get the 100~000 acres. And I am convinced that. concessions have been made by everyone, including the lumbering industry. and it appears that the Texas dele- gation of the House are resolved to stick by the 85,000 acres. Being in public service I find that we, too, would like to support this position~ because time is of the. essence. We should go ahead and try to get the 84,500 acres as it is presently presented. It has some shortcomings, as do most public arrangements. PAGENO="0169" 163 But we feel maybe in the future we could supplement this and comple- ment this. I know personally I can refer to the government of Texas who has assured me, and the Texas Park and Wildlife Commission, another State agency, are very interested in, this moment, acquiring additional acreage. Perhaps in a recreational area, that could corn- plernent this park and also the University of Texas, considering the requirements of the unique areas down there. So I would urge this committee, rather than going through long debate and conflict, that we go ahead and pass .the 84,500 acres and get on with this. And, like Padre Island, we have complemented that with some additional acreage since its inception. For my own responsibility as chairman of the Indian commission~ we are thriving in Texas with no Federal aid, with no assistance from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, of tourism. I am convinced that with one of the entries to this park, it would just cinch our goals of self-determination and end all future appropriations from the Federal Government and the State, because we would have another 500 or 500,000 or a million visitors per year that would come into an area that has national status. So I urge that you consider this and hopefully it does not go into a long, drawn-out battle. Everyone seems to be more or less agreed upon this, and if we cannot get the 100,000 acres we should immediately go ahead and take the compromise position of 84,500. I am positive, from my interviews and discussions with the other people of Texas, and the House of Representatives and the Congress that they would approve this without any difficulties. I hope your committee can come up somewhere within this range that we can get on with this, get this park created. I appreciate your great work as chairman of this committee. Not only on this park, but all the others throughout the country. We owe you a great deal of gratitude. I salute Senator Yarborough and Senator Bentsen and Senator Tower for their efforts in keeping their word and trying to get a 100,000-acre park. But if that cannot be at this time, we should immediately proceed to go ahead and get the 84,500-acre park or biological preserve as quickly as possible. [The resolution submitted by Mr. Henley follows:] PAGENO="0170" 164 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the citizens of Liberty County and the State of Texas and of the United States benefit from the facilities of National Parks, and WHEREAS, the citizens of Liberty County, the State of Texas and the United States would materially benefit by the preservation of botanical and wilderness areas, and WHEREAS, the creation of a 84,500 acre Big Thicket" National Park would preserve one of the nation's last botanical wildernesses and preserve the remaining virgin timber, provide additiànal recreational areas, and aid in preserving many species of wildlife. WHEREAS, the preservation of rare wildlife is of great interest to the citizens of the United States, and NcW, therefore, Let It Be Resolved, that the Liberty Industrial Foundation, Liberty, Texas, does hereby urge that the United States Sub-Committee on Parks and Recreation give favorable recommendation to the creation of and the maintenance of a National Park of at least 84,500 acres in East Texas area to be known as the `Big Thicket National Park, and FURTHER, Let It Be Resolved, that Dempsie Henley, former Mayor of the City of Liberty, be requested to deliver this resolution to the Honorable Alan Bible, Chairman of the United States Senate Sub-Committee on Parks and Recreation in Washington, D.C., February 5 & 6, 1974. APPROVED on this 25th day of January, 1974. PAGENO="0171" 165 Senator BIBLE. I think that is a very fine statement. I think it is practical. It seems to me that you are talking good, commonsense. I do not know what the correct size of this park is or should be. I have never been positive of that. I do not think anybody is positive. But as a practical politician, I am aware of what can be done and what cannot be done. I think it is better to get what you can rather than get nothing. I suppose that is what this boils down to. We will hear the witnesses tomorrow and will try to move it forward at a very early date. Thank you very much. We stand in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. [Whereupon, at 2:40 p.m., the subcommittee recessed to recon- vene, Wednesday, February 6, 1974, at 10 a.m.] PAGENO="0172" PAGENO="0173" BIG THICKET NATIONAL PARK WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1974 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PARKS AND RECREATION, OF THE COMMIr2EE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 3110, Dirksen Office Building, Hon. Alan Bible, chairman, presiding. Present: Senator Bible. Also present: Jerry T. Verkler, staff director; and James P. Beirne, special counsel. OPENINGS STATEMENT OF HON. ALAN BIBLE, A U.S. SENATOR PROM THE STATE OP NEVADA Senator BIBLE. The hearing will come to order. This is a continuation of our hearing on the various bills that we have before us on the Big Thicket. I think it might be well, preliminarily, to indicate to this list of witnesses, because we still have a lot of them, I see no need of repeating the beauties of this area and that it should be made either a reserve or a park, because one bill provides for a park, the other provides for a national biological preserve. I would hope that you would take your statements, incorporate them in full in the record, and that you would highlight it and say which size park or preserve you prefer. Make a comment on the leg- islative taking. Make a comment on the corridors. It seems to me that is what this problem resolves itself into. As yu know, we passed a park bill introduced by Senator Yarborough when he was in the Senate. It passed the Senate, and that bill, I think was 100,000 acres, if I recall correctly. It was 100,000 acres and not to exceed 100,000 acres, I believe is the way it read. Now the Department wants 68,000 and the House bill passed was 84,000. So I would just like to have you comment on your preferences in that. I am very anxious to clear the hearing this morning and notwith- standing the headway we thought we made yesterday, I have more witnesses today than I had yesterday. But we will proceed in that manner. Our first witness will be Geraldine Watson, Silsbee, Tex. Senator YARBOROUGH. Mr. Chairman, may I make the statement I spoke to the Chair about yesterday? Senator BIBLE. Yes; I will first recognize Senator Yarborough. (167) PAGENO="0174" 168 STATEMENT OF HON. RALPH W. YARBOROUGH, FORMER U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Senator YARBOROTJGH. only 2 minutes, Mr. Chairman, to tell you that we appreciate very much the opportunity for a fuller presenta- tion yesterday. But since then I have been phoned from Texas, and make that statement on behalf of the following organizations in addi- tion to just myself. The Texas Sportsman Club, headquartered in Houston, with 26,500 members, some in each one of the 50 States. That is the Texas Sportsman's Club. There is another oganization in Texas, Mr. Chairman, Sportsman's Club of Texas, headquartered at Dallas. I do not speak for them. I also speak for the Houston Sports- man's Club, which is 6,000 families. And for the Texas Statewide Bow Hunters' Club. There are 1,675 members of the Bow Hunters' Club. They join in the position request- ing a national park of 100,000 acres. I also ask your leave to have the statement printed in the record from Mike Wiesner, president of the University of Texas Big Thicket Association. He is chairman of it, and 40,000 students there that have been very active, militant organization that has had so much publicity, Mr. Chairman, and so much activity that Time has bought a quarter of a page ad in the Dallas Texan to answer them. I also ask leave, Mr. Chairman, to have printed in the record this article in the last issue of Environmental Action of December 22, 1973, "Last Chance for the Big Thicket." It was authored by Pete Gunter, who has already testified. Senator BIBLE. We would be happy to have that in the record. Senator YARBOROUGH. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to add these additional statements on behalf of the people supporting the Big Thicket. [The documents referred to above follow:] PAGENO="0175" 169 / ~ Houston Sportsmen's Club ,~jç\:~~ ~!=9P%41\ 0FNcE:oi::xs::ETARY February 21, 1974 The Honorable Alan Bible, SENATOR Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Re: BIG THICKET NATIONAL RESERVE IN TEXAS Dear Senator Bible: TRUTH IS TRUTH. Error is Error. Truth cannot be changed to Error; nor can Error be transposed. to TRUTH, TRUTH needs no guidelines. An organization, headquartered in Austin, Texas, testified on behalf of special interests at the hearings held on the above Bill. The Executive Director stated that his Sports.. mens Club of Texas represented all outdoorsmen in this State, Please be advised that that organization of pompous and self.. ish individuals does not speak for, represent, nor is it affiliated in any way with the TEXAS SPORTSMEN'S CLUB, the HOUSTON SPORTSMEN'S CLUB, the TEXAS BOWHIJNTERS ASSOCIATION and other affiliated kindred organizations in the Gulf Coast area, It is a Judas organization and will remain so among outdoorsmen of all types. The position of the Texas Sportsmen's Club, the Houston Sportsmen's Club, the Texas Bowhunters and otherassociated conservation organizations is 100,000 acres and not 84,5000 acres as approved by the House. We ask that you and your Committee hold steadfast for the 100,000 acre biological preserve. Wildlife does not flourish in a desert of soft pine trees; nor in any desert. Please check the wildlife and human population in the Gobi Desert and the Sahara Desert. There isn't any, When wildlife disappears, man disapears, It is our God..given duty to preserve and enhance all wildlife species; ot1~erwise man himself~wi11 vani~h. PAGENO="0176" 170 Our organizations are the vanguard for all other conservation groups in the Gulf Coast Region. This Region needs the 100,000 acre Reserve to give wildlife a chance to breed and survive. The additional 14,500 acres when assessed against the total acerage of the special interests can be compared to urinating into the Potomac River by one man. Corridors are necessary for the maintenance of game trails from habitat to habitat. As wildlife population increases and expands, it must have escape trails to extend its lebensraum, Compare the effort and monies expended to increase the Whooping Crane population from a low of 15 to the present 47 to the initial cost of acquiring an additional 14,500 acres. The comparison is that of a hub cap to a new Cadillac automobile. Our members do not belong to rich ments exclusive, lease hunting clubs. We are the people who carry the burden for our nation to survive. Please hold steadfast and preserve for us the 100,000 acre Reserve. We all ask this of your Committee, Senator. Bible; please print this letter. in the record of the hearing,, so that our members in all of the fifty(50) states will know of our appeal, as well as all of the members of the Senate, On behalf of the Board of Directors, the Executive Committee, and our families,we extend to you and members of your fine Committee, the warmest of personal regards and felicitations, I am Frank J. desky, Pre iden THE HOUSTON SPORTSMENt CLU THE TEXAS SPORTSMENtS C THE TEXAS BOWHUNTEPS ASSOCIATION FJH/jcm PAGENO="0177" 171 UNIVERSITY BIG THICKET ASSOCIATION CHAIRMAN: Texas Union 340 Mike Wiesner University of Texas 506 W. 16th St. Austin, Texas 78712 Austin, Texas 78701 ~anuary 29, l97Li. Honorable Senator Alan Bible, United States Senate Washington D.C. 20010 Dear Senator Bible, Our organization is concerned about the final fate of the B'ig Thicket National Preserve which is to be decided in the Senate Hearings on February 24.* We wish to stress the need to include all of the Village Creek, Big Sandy Creek, and Pine Island Bayou portions of the area. We believe that these water- ways are particularly important in preserving the ecological balance within the various units of the Thicket. These waterways are also necessary in preserving much of what remains of the zoology native to this region. Thank you veyr much for your help. Sincerely, yours, Mike Wiesner 30-061 0 - 74 - 12 PAGENO="0178" 172 Environmental Action December 22, 1973 11 Big Thicket: park or tree farm? By Pete Gunter While Congress looks the other way, a unique area of jungle, swamp, woodland and desert is being bulldozed to death. Texas conjures up an image of desert, dry creeks and sagebrush. But the Big Thicket of southeastern Texas is far removed from this image: it is a place of bayou bald cypress and semi-jungle. The Thicket's proximity to the Gulf of Mexico provides both a stable semi-tropical climate and over 50 inches of rainfall a year. Its soils are ideally suited to the storage of water and the growing of trees, at least 15 of which are the largest of their species in the United States. But while the region has the climate and the ecosystems of the deep South, it also has a northern and a western expo- sure. Beech, sugar maple and witch hazel are found there, sometimes in plant growth patterns almost identical with those found in the southern Appalachians, many miles to the east. Other areas, the "arid sandyland" communities, contain the wild flowers, mesquite trees, post oak, yucca and cactus of the American Southwest. Other areas resemble jungles in the Mexican states of Tamaulipas and Vera Cruz. The Big Thicket is also a place of legend and folklore. Long cut off from the nearby cities of Beaumont and Hous- ton, it has a reputation as a sanctuary for "outsiders" of every stripe. During the Civil War, conscientious objectors hid there to avoid conscription, in spite of the persistent efforts of Confederate troops to root them out. Escaped convicts used to flee from a nearby state prison in Hunts- ville, Texas, to the Thicket a step ahead of the baying hounds. East Texas's lone Indian reservation is on the northwest bor- der of the Thicket which has traditionally afforded the Indi- an a refuge. The region provides one of the last havens for the alligator, the golden eagle and the Texas red wolf, and some people insist that a few last bear and panther still exist there too. But the Big Thicket is in danger. The unique area's abun- dant natural resources are coveted by lumber companies and developers. Efforts to preserve the Big Thicket date back as far as 1927, when the first Big Thicket Association was formed. At that time the ecological importance of the sprawling wilderness was barely beginning to be realized, although con- servationists asked for a contiguous block of 440,000 acres as a minimum wilderness preserve. Unfortunately, the drive to create a Big Thicket National Park in the 1930s was dc- stroyed by the Second World War. Today, as the remarkable ecological diversity of the Thicket becomes more apparent, conservationists are pleading for 100,000 acres of wilder- ness - before the region is lost forever. ecent controversy over the Thicket began in the mid-1960s and has consisted largely of a struggle be- tween conservationists and lumber interests. The lumber companies and their supporters origina~y argued that the Big Thicket deserved no environmental~ protection. But as public interest grew they opted for a 35,000 acre park, the "String of Pearls," made up of widely separated tracts. In the meantime, conservationists had gradually united behind a park configuration of 100,000 acres, or at a high point of optimism, 191,000 acres. Conservationists found little to complain about in the individual tract concept pro- posed by lumber interests, but they did object to the fact that these isolated areas would be cut off from their natural water supply and would soon die, as they were surrounded by sprawling subdivisions. In contrast to the lumber corn- PAGENO="0179" 12 Environmental Action December 22, 1973 173 panics' "postage stamp" proposals, conservationists opted to run corridors between the pearls based ~n existing streams, and add acreage to the pearls wherever possible. The original lumber-interest proposal included several eco- systems: a longleaf pine savannah, a virgin loblolly pine for- est, two beech groves, a virgin river-bottom forest, a river- bottom swamp area noted for its heron and egret rookeries, a virtually untouched swarnp-bottomland forest and a corridor ranging from the hills at the Thicket's northern limits to the poorly drained cypress-palmetto-hardwood ecosystems on its southern edge. However, soon after the industry proposal was made, two of the areas were cut by private lumber operators and a third was bulldozed to create a vacation subdivision. Subsequently the lumber companies imposed a cutting moratorium on 35,000 acres, but since they owned or controlled only 18,000 acres of the total, as ~ruch as one-third has been cut by smaller lumber operators and local land owners. Meanwhile the movement to create a park continued to grow. While lumber company lobbyists toured the state insisting that their 35,000 acre plan was an environ- mentalist proposal, conservationists protested loudly, insist- ing that new areas had to be added or the park could not sur- vive. To preserve the Thicket, they argued, it would be neces- sary to protect its major watercourses: the Neches River Valley, the Big Sandy-Village Creek corridor and the Big Pine and Little Pine Island Bayou. Besides saving three com- pletely different types of streams, such a system of corridors would ensure the water supply of the isolated "pearls" and would provide uninterrupted hiking and canoeing opportuni- ties. Along with the proposed stream corridors, three biologi- cal units were envisioned: Jack Gore Baygall (semi-swamp), the Saratoga Triangle (lowlands laced with streams and sloughs) and the Turkey Creek Minibiome (an area which~ includes all of the Thicket's ecosystems). But while the conservationists made the rounds of televi- sion and radio talk shows and argued their case before ser- vice clubs and newspaper bigwigs, they felt the pressure of time. The Thicket cannot last forever because the lumber companies that were once willing to cut selectively in the area now propose to convert the great majority of the area into monoculture: row after row of nothing but pines. In such "pine plantations" only one species of tree, the pulp or slash pine, would be allowed to exist, and the ferns, vines, wading birds, owls, mushrooms, orch,ids and small game of the original Thicket could not survive. ome of the giants of American industry are heading the assault on the Thicket: Santa Fe Industires (Chicago) which owns Kirby Lumber Company; International Paper (New York); Owens-Illinois (Toledo); Champion Inter- national (New York); Southland Paper Mills (Lufkin, Texas, but 40 percent owned by St. Regis of New York); and Time Inc., now the third largest land owner in Texas (1,060,000 acres) after a merger of its Eastex subsidiary with locally- owned Temple Industries, In the past, Temple avoided bull- dozer and monoculture timber technology while Eastex planned to tom at least 80 percent of its 600,000 acre Texas holdings into slash pine. It is unclear whether the two con- tradictory policies will be maintained in the two divisions or whether one of the two will prevail. Student boycotts of Time Inc. Magazines (Time, Sports Illustrated and Fortune) have made that corporation more sensitive to public opinion and the addition of Texas's most rational and far-sighted lumberman, Temple Industries' Ar- thur Temple Jr., to Time's ranks may foster a more balanced land-use policy in the region. Temple, for example, has offered to protect all rare or endangered species on Time's Texas lands, Whatever the future may hold, conservationists concede ruefully that the Thicket's remaining 300,000 acres are being irretrievably lost at the rate of 35,000 acres per year to sterile pine monoculture, The problem with sterile pine monoculture - a term which is liable to send lumbermen into fits of frustrated rage - is that it does not permit multiple use. During the first few years a pine plantation constitutes essentially a prairie ecosystem and in such an ecosystem quail, rabbits and deer manage to survive. And, assuming a rotational system of cutting and replanting, a certain amount of the original pine-hardwood forest would be kept in prairie, and thus be available to hunters. But besides this minimal multiple use, pine plantations are as mono-usage as they are monoculture. They are not attrac- tive for hiking, photographing or picnicking. After they are bulldozed right up to the stream-banks and the resulting brush, refuse and debris are pushed into the stream (as used to happen in the Thicket with regularity), the stream is no longer a good place to canoe, fish, swim or camp. Most of the scientific value is also lost in a monoculture. Virtually every major university in the United States has at one time or another sent scientists to the Big Thicket looking for biological specimens. More recently biologists have used the Thicket to study those intricately interrelated groups of species known as ecosystems, such as a series of ponds in different stages of ecological succession, or a swamp contain- ing several species of aquatic fauna not known to co-exist Inside Tite Big Thicket, The author is standing beside what is be- Iiëved to be the largest cypress is North A merica, (photo by Roy Hamric) PAGENO="0180" 174 Environmental Action December 22, 1973 13 elsewhere, or a hill whose slope contains four different eco- systems in 100 feet. But in a pine plantation there is little to interest the scientist except the pine bark beetle and pine `root rot." ormer Texas Senator Ralph Yarborough, one of the Thicket's staunchest defenders, scored a big vic- tory in 1970 with the Senate passage of a bill to establish a 100,000 acre Big Thicket National Park. Tragically, the House did not act in time to pass a similar bill because Wayne Aspinall, then the Chairman of the House Interi- or Committee, got married and went on a vacation which lasted until the Congressional session ended. This made it necessary to start all over again with new legislation. Equally tragic for the Thicket's prospects was Senator Yarborough's defeat at the polls and subsequent retirement from Congress. Though he continued to fight from the political sidelines, it became necessary for Rep. Bob Eckhardt (D-Tex.) to take up the crusade. On December 3, 1973, the House passed a new compro- mise bill (H.R. 11547) to establish a 84,500 acre park. The compromise, worked out last summer between Rep. Eck- hardt and newly-elected Rep. Charles Wilson (D-Tex.) whose district contains the Big Thicket, drops the magni- ficent Big Sandy-Village Creek corridor from the park while picking up a corridor along heretofore neglected Menard Creek, which flows west into the Trinity River. The compro- misc was necessary to pass the bill, but valuable acreage was lost in the process and an entire ecosystem, the arid-sandy- land community, was left out of the national area. Since the point of the Big Thicket National Preserve is to safeguard specimens of each ecosystem in the area, this is a serious omission. * A Senate Interior Committee staff member told Environ- mental Action the Committee may reinstate the Big Sandy- Village Creek corridor in the Senate bill, scheduled for hear- ings in late January or early February. If the Senate passes a bill which includes the corridor, the dispute would be settled in a House-Senate conference. Texas's two senators, Lloyd Bentsen (D) and John Tower (R) have both committed themselves to passage of Big Thicket legislation. But failure to pass a bill early in 1974 could cause the Big Thicket to be swept aside as congressmen rush home to begin Senate and House election campaigns. If no bill has been enacted by the time the 93rd Congress adjourns, all current efforts will be erased from the lawmaking process, and by the time new bills have cleared all the nooks and crannies of Congress again, there may be little left of the Big Thicket. For its diversity, richness and sheer abundance of life, the Thicket may not be equalled on the surface of the planet. It must be preserved, WHAT TO DO: Write your Senator, as well as Texas Senators Bentsen and Tower, and Senator Henry Jackson (D-Wash.) who heads the Interior Committee to express your support for the Big Thicket National Park. Urge then: to include Big-Sandy Vil- lage Creek corridor in the Senate version of the bill. Don't delay - hearings may be held before the end of January. PAGENO="0181" 175 Senator BIBLE. It has been called to my attention that some of my statements yesterday about my unhappiness with the redwood experi- ence and the difficulties of the legislative taking might. have been inter- preted by some as meaning that the.re would be no taking at all. That certainly is not my intent. If I did leave that inference, then I am sorry, because that was not my intention because it should be made very clear that with the redwoods legislation, if the Big Thicket national legislation. is passed in one form or another or whatever size, certainly there would be a right of combination. So there could be taking, and taking at an early date, as a matter of protecting the area. So I want to make that very clear. The legisla- tive taking is another means of doing it. We have had that unhappy experience in Redwood, and I am not sure it is in the best interest of the public that we proceed that way. But certainly there will be protection for the area, because that is the purpose of acquiring this area. I thought I would make that clear. Our first witness is Mrs. Watson. STATEMENT OF GERALDINE WATSON, SILSBEE, TEX. Mrs. WATSON. Senator Bible, I always argued for preservation of the Big Thicket on the basis of its scientific value. But this has been well covered by all the scientists, and there is no longer any question of its scientific value, so I will not go into that, other than to say this. People say that I know the. Big Thicket better than any- one since Lance Rosier died. I hope you will accept, or at least give credit to what I am about to say. Senator BIBLE. I am sure I will. Mrs. WATSON. Any plan for preservation which does not include arid sandylands has missed the entire mea.ning of the Big Thicket. Senator BIBLE. That is along that creek that they referred to yesterday? Mrs. WATSON. Ye.s. Now Congressman `Wilson felt that we had been unfair in not bringing this up before. The reason we have not brought this up before is that we had hoped to get Village Creek with cor- ridors so that we could expand the corridors in certain places, to take in the best of the arid sa.ndylands. But Congressman Wilson left Village Creek completely out of his bill, so we had no choice except to add another unit to include some arid sandylands. I also want to make an appeal for corridors. We desperately need corridors, to protect our streams. `We have some of the most beautiful, unpolluted stream~ left in the country. But they are being ruined by overdevelopment, by being bulldozed rig'ht up to the very banks and the debris pushed in. We need protection for our streams and the States is not going to lift a finger. You can rest assured in that. Senator BIBLE. I was told that yesterday so I will take what you say as true. Mrs. WATSON. We need the corridors, not only to protect the streams but to protect people. Senator BIBLE. To what corridors do you refer? Mrs. WATSON. I would like to see corridors down all of them. Senator BIBLE. I understand. But you are a realist and so am I, and if you want a bill you have to make some concessions. PAGENO="0182" 176 Mrs. WATSON. Yes. Especially Pine Island Bayou and especially Village Creek, because these two creeks are singled out for development. Senator BIBLE. Are they in the Bentsen bill, the Tower bill, the administration bill? Mrs. WATSON. Pine Island Bayou is included in Charles Wilson's bill and a large section of Village Creek is included in Tower's bill, in the arid sandyland area. But these two streams have been singled out by the developers. Unscrupulous developers take people to these lands in the dry sum- mertime. People who do not know about our periodic floods. They sell these lands. People build big homes right on the banks, and when we have our periodic floods they are flooded out. There has been a tragic thing this past year to see people fighting with sandbags to save their homes. Those are the two points that 1 wanted to make on that. I want to speak today simply as a citizen of the Big Thicket. Most of us are poor people here. We have been literally scarced to death by false propaganda into signing petitions. All our area is in a state of hysteria because of this false propaganda, but most of the people there are for preserving the Big Thicket. But I want to make a few points. We are poor people in southeast Texas. According to the 1973 Survey of Buying Power, the average effective buying income per family in this five-county area is $5,950 yearly. That is poverty level. Our young people have to leave home to find jobs. We need the boost to our economy that a national preserve will bring. We need the tax money it will bring. Our county and school administrations stay on the verge of bankruptcy. We need to diversify our sick one-product econ- omy to break the stranglehold our one industry has on every aspect of life in southeast Texas. A Big Thicket national preserve will bring in visitors and the eco- nomic benefits that we will enjoy from this will equal those that Flor- ida enjoys from that of the Everglades. We do have many, many visi- tors coming in now. There is no way to keep any records of it. But I am in close contact with the people who come in. My people have been in this area for generations. Unfortunately, neither they nor I had any talent for making money, nor were we lucky enough to inherit any, so we have no legal claim to any land in Texas. Still, I grew up believing this was my land. We had no home, just a sawmill rent house, but I did not feel deprived. Daddy and I walked the virgin forests together, along every stream, lake and pond in southeast Texas, freely, and to us this was home. I have a nice house today, a stereo and a collection of musical mas- terpieces, yet I would give it all to go back and sit under a virgin longleaf pine and listen to the music of the birds and the wind in the branches. This is still my homeland, but it is a captive land, and I want to free at least some of it. I want to make a comment at this point. Senator BIBLE. I want you to make your comments quickly because I am for you. You might talk yourself out of the bill before you get done. PAGENO="0183" 177 Mrs. WATSON. Let me make this point. I resent Congressman Wil- son's inference that we people in southeast Texas do not have the intelligence to appreciate the finer aspects of southeast Texas. Senator BIBLE. I do not think he said that. You may have inter- preted it that way. I think he thinks you are great people, just like I do. Mrs. WATSON. We do have the ability to appreciate the finer as- pects of the Big Thicket. Senator BIBLE. He must have a few friends there if he was unop- posed for his election. Mrs. WATSON. He was unopposed because nobody has the money to match him, but I will not waste time going into that. Senator BIBLE. I don't want to rerun a Texas political campaign. There is no need of paying your respects to the various Congressmen because I think they are dedicated people and I think he is trying to be helpful to you. I was much impressed with him. Mrs. WATSON. We like Charlie. We hope he has a long and good political career. Senator BIBLE. Just finish your statement. Mrs. WATSON. We have to straighten him out on a few points. Let me finish my statement. There are around 360,000 people in these six counties. The people who want to use it to make money are to have 3,400,000 acres while all of the 360,000 of the rest of us plus all the nature lovers and scientists of the world are to have maybe 100,000 acres to roam in. That is pitiful. Only those who have the money to buy land or join hunting clubs can have access to our forests and streams. Senator BIBLE. Why don't you stay with your script? Mrs. WATSON. I was under the impression that I did not have to. Senator BIBLE. Yes, indeed, you have to stay with the statement be- cause otherwise I will never get done, my dear. You give me one statement. I have been trying to follow you and you have not said any- thing that you say here. But why don't you just finish your statement? You are over on the last paragraph on page 2, "We live within sight of Village Creek." Mrs. WATSON. Yes, sir. If you have my statement and can read my statement then why do I have to read it? Senator BIBLE. You do not have to read it if you do not want to, and that is really what I was hoping you might do. Just say, "I would like to file my statement for the record and make a few points." I want to hear everybody and I have 18 witnesses to go. Mrs. WATSON. Then we have already finished my 5 minutes. Thank you very much, Senator Bible. [The prepared statements of Mrs. Watson, Richard C. Harrel, and Phillip Malnassy follows:] STATEMENT OF MRS. EARL (GERALDINE) WATSON, SILSBEE, TEX. In previous hearings, I have urg~d the preservation of the Big Thicket on the basis of its scientific value. The words of the many scientists submitted for this hearing record, some of which are appended to this statement, should be sufficient on that point. PAGENO="0184" 178 Today, I wish to speak simply as a citizen of the Big Thicket. Most of us are poor people here. According to the 1973 Survey of Buying Power, the average effective buying income per family in this five-county area is $5,950 yearly. That's poverty level! Our young people have to leave home to find jobs. We need the boost to our economy that a National Preserve will bring. We need the tax money it will bring. Our county and school administrations stay on the verge of bank- ruptcy. We need to diversify our sick one-product economy to break the strangle hold our one industry has on every aspect of life in Southeast Texas. My people have been in this area for generations. Unfortunately, they nor I had any talent for making money, nor were we lucky enough to inherit any, so we have no legal claim to land. Still, I grew up believing this was my land. We had no home-just a sawmill rent house-but I didn't feel deprived. Daddy and I walked the virgin forests together, along every stream, lake and pond in South- east Texas-freely-and to us this was home. I have a nice house today, a stereo, and a collection of musical masterpieces, yet I would give it all to go back and sit under a virgin longleaf pine and listen to the music of the birds and the wind in the branches. This is still my homeland, but it is a captive land, and I want to free at least some of it. There are 3,500,000 acres involved here. There are around 360,000 people in these six counties. The people who want to use it to make money are to have 3,400,000 acres while all of the 360,000 of the rest of us plus all the nature lovers and scientists of the world are to have maybe 100,000 acres to roam in. That's pitiful. Only those who have the money to buy land or join hunting clubs can have access to our forests and streams. We live within sight of Village Creek yet my children can't swim there-someone owns the land between it and us. There are two public campgrounds in Big Thicket country, but I can't recommend them to student groups because there might be a black, tan or brown child among them. The campgrounds are closed to blacks. I had my life threatened at one of them because the driver of a chartered bus hired by a group I was with was black, and I refused to ask the group to leave in the middle of their picnic lunch. Hunting clubs are closed to blacks, Is it fair to ask black boys to be loyal to their country and fight for their land when it is closed to them? I am only asking that you give back to us a little of piece of the ground we walked with our fathers, so that our children may walk it with us. LAMAR UNIVERSITY, Beaumont, Teiv., February 1, 1974. Senator ALAN BIBLE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR BIBLE: I am the head of the Department of Biology at Lamar University. We are located near the Big Thicket. The Big Thicket National Biological Preserve of not less than 100,000 acres is needed for use by students from not only Lamar but other educational institutions ringin.g the Big Thicket. The previous plans for the Thicket Park Area does not include the desert vegetation, an important part of the unique biological area making up the Big Thicket Ecotone. This desert area should be included and protected within the park complex. Yours truly, M. E. WARREN, Head, Department of Biology. STATEMENT OF RICHARD C. HARREL, AssISTANT PROFESSOR OF BIOLoGY; LAMAR UNIVERSITY, BEAUMONT, TEX. For the past eight years I have been an instructor of undergraduate and gradu- ate terrestrial ecology and aquatic ecology classes at Lamar University. The major portion of the laboratory of these courses involves collection and analysis of field data that illustrates the stages of ecology succession. The Sites of these studies ha~ e been w ithin the proposed Sandylands Ponds Unit along Village Creek. This area extends from the McNeely Lake area southeast to the Massey Lake area. Within this area there is a very diverse number of ecological corn- inunities in a small geographic area. The various developmental stages of ter- restrial and aquatic ecological succession can be visited in a single day. These areas clearly illustrate the changes in physical, chemical and biological con- ditions that characterize ecological succession. PAGENO="0185" 179 This area also includes the most scenic portion of Village Creek from which most of the lakes and ponds developed. I believe the inclusion of the Sandylands-Ponds Unit would greatly enhance the scientific value of the Big Thicket National Preserve. STATEMENT OF PmLLIP MALNASSY, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF BIOLOGY, LAMAR UNIVERSITY, BEAUMONT, TEX. After finishing my doctoral studies in plant science at Rutgers University and teaching for two years in West Virginia, I became attracted to Lamar Uni- versity in part because of its proximity to the Big Thicket. As a plant scientist and teacher, I feel that the Big Thicket area of Southeast Texas offers an unparalleled opportunity to study the flora of various plant communities within a small area. Floristically, this area is unique because it is a biological cross-roads consisting of diverse vegetational areas. Each individual plant community results from different combinations of geologic, soil, and en- vironmental factors. Indeed, it would require at least 100,000 acres to preserve the ecological and biological integrity of this unique area. I was extremely surprised to learn that the xerophytic communities were omitted from the proposed Big Thicket National Preserve. These sandyland communities are among the most unusual and interesting of all the plant com- munities in the Big Thicket. The study of desert plants in this community is an integral part of the laboratory segment of my plant taxonomy course at Lamar University. I feel that these xerophytic communities would constitute an invaluable addi- tion to the Big Thicket National Preserve. Senator BIBLE. Our next witness will be Sharon K. Gossett of Beau- mont, Tex. VOICE. Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Gossett has been very ill and could not be here. I note the men from our school board are here and I wonder if they could go in this space. Senator BIBLE. No, but I will put them down at the end of the list. But the next witness will be Mr. Houston Thompson, attorney from Silsbee, Tex. Mr. Thompson. STATEMENT OP HOUSTON THOMPSON, ATTORNEY, SILSBEE, TEX. Mr. THOMPSON. Senator, I would ask that my complete statement be filed. Senator BIBLE. `Without objection, the full statement will be in the record. Mr. THOMPSON. I want to say that I am in favor of each bill that has been introduced and my position is that we need the most we can have without too great an interference with those people who live there and who are near occupancy of the property. Actually, I favor 100,000 acres. But what we want is a bill. And if we cannot get the 100,000 we want 90,000. If we cannot get 90,000 we will get something, because we have been fighting for this since 1930. Senator BIBLE. I realize that. As I said repeatedly yesterday I will do everything that I can to see that you get a bill. It may not be what everyone wants, but it will `be the best we can get. Mr. THOMPSON. I would like to point out, since there was some talk about Representative `W'ilson, he carried Hardin County, I believe, by 76 percent and one of his four planks was the establishment of the Big Thicket Park. I think if the people of Hardin County were not for the park he w-ould not have gotten that kind of vote. I think that 95 percent of the people of Hardin County are for some kind of a park. We argue over how big, where it ought to be and things of that sort. PAGENO="0186" 180 But everybody that I know of thiiiks it will do Hardin County good. Now there are people who feel that it ought to be over yonder instead of w'here they live. I have four pieces of land that will be taken. They are small. They would be taken in the 100,000 acre one. I would rather see my land put into this use. I think it is the `highest and best use that could be `made of my land. I `have `a `personal interest in the Big Thicket because I am 52 years old and since I was 50 I `have developed a sinus condition. I find that I cannot live in areas where there is a lot of pollution. In the Big Thicket area, with your pine trees and your greenery I find it is easier to breathe. We need a place somewhere that we can go. I started to move to Houston one time and I `had to get out before dark. I came back to the Big Thicket area and I intend to stay in Hardin County the rest of my life. I would like to have a place where I can live in some `kind of hap- piness. Sin'ce I have been up here I have been sick. I do not know what is wrong with lVashington- Senator BIBLE. There are a lot of things wrong with Washington, but I do not want you to tell me about that. I do not want you- Mr. THOMPSON. Well, I am ready to go `back to the Big Thicket and I t'hink that is all I need to say. I would be open to `any questions you might have. [The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson follows:] STATEMENT OF HOUSTON THOMPSON, ATTORNEY, SILSBEE, TEx. My name is Houston Thompson. I am an Attorney at Law with my office in Silsbee, Texas. I was born in Silsbee ~2 years ago and have spent all my life in Hardin County with the exception of the time I spent in the Air Corps in World War II and while attending school. I am familiar with most of Hardin County and the areas proposed to be put into the National Park or Preserve. My father was the Big Thicket Watkins Products peddler from 1915 to about 1925 when he decided to take advantage of the `benefits of the Volstead Act. As a Watkins Products salesman he traveled throughout Hardin. County peddling extract, linament, soap and the various sundry items that he carried in his horse drawn buggy. In those days he was the main link of communication for the Big Thicket residents. In those days of few visitors and little or no mail, the people of the Big Thicket were hospitable to the traveling salesman, particularly after they found out that the salesman was not a nosey revenue agent whose business was the `discovery of the location of the shinney mill's that dotted the woodlands. My Dad used to sa~ that he was as welcome as the Sears Roebuck Catalog. My Dad would peddle his wares all day, stopping at the farm homes for meals and lodging. He became acquainted with almost everyone in the isolated areas and he would trade the news and his company for the homesteaders' hospitality. At night, around the open fire of a mud-stick chimney, the peddler and his hosts would swap yarns and their knowledge of what was going on. When my Dad came home on the weekends, be would entertain us with what he had learned in Bragg, Batson. Saratoga and other Thicket towns during his weekly rounds. About 1925 my father~s business as a traveling salesman declined, so he joined that growing profession in the area and lie became the best and most famous s'hinney maker in the Big Thicket. I know lie made the best whiskey because he told me so. And I know he was the most famous and the hardest to catch because he was the only one that received a code name by the District Revenue Agent. "Old Battle Ax" w-as what they called him and he dodged the Feds for years. He put his knowledge of the woods and streams of the Big Thicket lip against the skill and detecting equipment of the Revenue Agents and the Federal Government. He was caught once but he got out of it because lie was able to prove that the sack of sugar found on his horse's saddle at his PAGENO="0187" 181 still in the Neches Bottom Unit was really salt and was for his cattle instead of the mash barrels at his still. At least, the officers couldn't prove otherwise, and the sugar that had been confiscated came up missing at the trial, which he always contended was further proof that his whiskey had good enough flavor to get the stamp of federal approval. My Dad used to have a delivery route in the Thicket country. He used to de- posit Mason fruit jars full of his product behind stumps and trees for his regular customers. He was usually paid in U.S. currency although some of his customers still were under allegiance to Jeff Davis and the Confederacy. My Dad said the Thicketeers were honest because Overyone respected his neigh- bor's moon-shine drop. When I went off to school, I went to Texas A&M. In my studies in the Depart- ment of Rural Sociology I studied the effects of rural isolation on the life of rural Anglo-Saxons. I read about Kentucky and Tennessee Highland folks. I wrote my thesis in rural sociology. I wrote about the Sandy Creek Community southeast of Fred very near the border line between Hardin and Tyler County in the `Swampl'ands of the Neches Bottoms. This area is included in the proposed National Park and near by are over a dozen log cabins that are representative of the Big Thicket of about 1850. After World War II and law school, I drifted back to the Pineywoods of South- east Texas. I have been here ever since. In 1962 I established a political newspaper in Hardin County. Its name was the "Pine Ne~d1e" and we claimed to print all the truth about the politics of the County. Very soon after we got started, we became aware of the hold that the Forest Products Industry has on Hardin County. Hardin County was under the influence of a single industry that tried to control the political life of the County. If the County officials sought to equalize the tax base, the land and oil companies staged tax strikes against the County government and the school districts. Through the political power of their employees' votes they controlled the outcome of the local elections except in the few cases where the issues were obvious even to the most uninformed voter. The companies were able to determine the tax rate, receive favorable tax valuation, determine bond elections, etc. Through the subsidization of the local newspapers by the placing of weekly company institu- tional ads, the land and oil companies kept the local press in line and kept down any effort to break their hold. If one raised his voice in opposition, he was branded a radical seeking political power. And the local kept press was able to convince the voters to stay with the established political leaders who owed their existence to the Companies and their political machine. With the obviou's need to break the hold of the one industry economy, the Pine Needle newspaper set out to promote the establishment of other industries that would broaden the tax base and widen the jo'b opportunities of the people. With the long campaigi~ to save `the Big Thicket almost a tradition in Hardin County, the newspaper moved in that direction to improve the economy of the area. In the 1960's a small group under the leadership of R. E. Jackson of Silsbee established the Big Thicket Association of Southeast Texas. This organization tried to persuade the federal and state government to save four hundred and thirty-six thousand `acres of the Big Thicket. But the `depression and World War II intervened `and we missed the chance to save this great forest at a time before the push of residential development and a't a time when the cost would have been minimal. In 1964 in answer to `a call issued by the Pine Needle, a small group of interested people met in the Methodist Church in Saratoga and formed the present Big Thicket Association. From this group has come the leadership in our efforts to save `the Big Thicket. Since World War II the influx of people has greatly increased `the populated areas an'd have `strengthened the need to take affirmative action to preserve the forest if we are going to preserve `any of it at all. Fifty acres of land per day is being cut up by the `timber `companies and sub-dividers. Speculators are now buying up much of the wood `ands and real est'ate prices are sky rocketing. If the Federal Government `does not put a workable legislative taking `provision in the bill adopted, vast areas will be lost and the price of acquisition will greatly in- crease in a matter of weeks. If the U.S. sets up a representative, meaningful national Park in this Area of Southeast Texas, it will be one of the finest and most used of our Nati'onal Parks System. Most of our `National Parks are in areas remote from centers of popula- tion and are inaccessible except on vacations. The Big Thicket is within a five hours drive of the residences of over thirteen million people. Over five million are PAGENO="0188" 182 within two hours drive. The recreational benefits to a major part of the United States will be available and at close hand. Because this great forest is so close to centers of population means that many homeowners are apprehensive about the possibility of their land being taken. I hope this committee can give these people reassurance because no one wants to take brick `homes and developed areas. We would rather spend the money and get niore wilderness area. I believe ninety-five percent of the people in Hardin County favor the Big Thicket Park. Some want a smaller park, but just about everyone believes it will be good for Hardin County. Most of the opposition comes from those that are afraid their homes or land will be taken without adequate compensation. Some of the opposition comes from those that want to save different parts of the Thicket. They argue a'bout the location, size, shape and type, but the people want to save as much of `the Thicket as possible without undue hardship on the people that `are in `actual occupancy. Now, I am not a scientist-not even an ecologist. I don't know the difference between a mushroom and a toadstool. I do know the difference between a pine tree and cypress. I know the difference between fresh air and the polluted air from the Eastex Papermill. I can look and see the difference between fresh water and what is now in Mill Creek. I know unless the U.S. Government steps in, the forest u-ill be cut and the streams of the Big Thicket will be ruined for now and for future generations. I want to continue to live in Hardin County with my sinus condition. I know I can't live in Houston-I've already tried it And I want the protection that the trees and green chlorophyll give to me and all others in my situation. I have refused to get involved in the argument about where the Big Thicket is. My contention is that w-e should save that area that is still available for saving, that u-ill promote-not stop-the economic development of the area, and that is w-orth saving. This is a beautiful area and America will benefit if it can be preserved in its present state. Senator BIBLE. I have no questions of you, and I appreciate your appearance here, and your coming up hero and telling us of your interest. Our next witness, I want to put the statement of Mrs. Gossett in the record. I have her full statement and that will be incorporated in full in the record at this point. [The prepared statement of Mrs. Gossett follows:] STATEMENT OF SHARON GOSSETT, CITIZEN'S COORDINATION COMMITTEE Gentlemen, my name is Mrs. Sharon Kaye Gossett. My home is in the lower part of the Turkey Creek Unit of the Proposed Big Thicket National Preserve. I am Vice Chairman of the Citizens Coordinating Committee and on the Board of Directors of Save Our Homes and Land Assoc. We represent every citizen con- cerned over the Big Thicket Preserve. The people in this Preserve area are working people, the very backbone of America. Most of us have spent our lives working on and for the land this Pre- serve threatens to take away from us. There are thousands of acres of unde- veloped land in South East Texas. Why come into such a highly populated area to try and make a Preserve? I have herd the expression th'at every Park or Preserve in the United States Represents someone losing their home. This could be true, but if so, it should not have been if the owners were not entirely willing. As far as I can find, other Parks and Preserves were established in sparsely populated areas, not in areas such as ours. House Bill 11546 states that the Secretary of Interior shall make every reason- able effort to exclude from the Units any improved year-round residential properties which lie determines, in his discretion, are not necessary for the protection of the value of the area or for its proper administration. Then it comes back and defines the term "improved property" as a one-family dwelling not exceeding three acres of laud. Most of our people have over three acres of land. They are fa'rmers and cattlemen. They keep various kinds of livestock as part of their livelihood. They raise hay to feed their cattle through the winter. Surely anyone can see this takes more than a house and three acres of land. Because of `the high cost of living, people should be encouraged to provide for their own needs as much as possible. PAGENO="0189" 183 Some of this land has been in families for generations. Others bought their land in good faith to work on and build homes for their children, grandchildren and so on down the line. They had no idea all this work would be for nothing. A Preserve of this type will not be for family or general public recreation, only a few hard-core naturalist will be able to enjoy it. We feel this Preserve should be limited for the few that will use it. I have also heard it said that you can not get to the creek for the privately owned land and homes. Just off Farm Road 420, which is the lower line of the Turkey Creek Unit, there is a large area betw-een Highway 69 and any privately owned land or homes. Farther down Farm Road 420 there is an area set aside for the naturalist and just off the blacktop all the way to Highway 418 there is 6,500 acres with six or seven miles of creek, as the crow flies. All this land joins Vil- lage Creek. The public can hike, camp and fish anywhere in any of these areas. As for canoeing, the creeks belong to the state arid any one can canoe all they want to. We feel that an impartial committee to work with a team of scientific natural- ists should be appointed to make a thorough study of the Big Thicket Preserve area. If this should happen, we feel our situation ivill speak for itself. We feel if one person is hurt by this Preserve, it is one person too many. Senator BIBLE. Our next. witness w-ill be Mrs. Lorraine Bonney of Houston. Tex. We will be very happy to hear from you. Your state- ment. will be incorporated in full in the record. I remember you very well. I just hope you will file your full statement and `then respond to any questions. Mrs. BONNET. I also testified before you in Pineville, Wyo., Senator. Senator BIBLE. That is absolutely right. I had forgotten about that.. Mrs. BONNET. You accused me of following you around the country. Senator BIBLE. Well, I kind of like that. I thought that was pretty good. Your full statement has been incorporated in the record. Why don't you just comment on whether you want the big park, the medium sized park or the little park. STATEMENT OF LORRAINE BONNEY, HOUSTON, TEX. Mrs. BONNET. I am all for the full sized park, 100,000 acres or more. I would like t.o emphasize several points in my statement and make them my last pitch for the inclusion of from Village Creek, Big Sandy Corridor. Senator BIBLE. Which one of the corridors is that? Mrs. BONNET. That is the uiiit that we have been talking about, the Sandylands Ponds Unit and the Village Creek. Senator BIBLE. All right. How many acres does that embrace? Mrs. BONNET. There are 16.000 acres, or 12.000 at least that have no homesites in it. Senator BIBLE. Is it iii the bill that the House passed? Mrs. BONNET. No, sir. Senator BIBLE. Is it in the bill that the administration testified to? Mrs. BONNET. No. Senator BIBLE. Is it in Senator Bentsen's bill? Mrs. BONNET. Senator Bensen asked for it. yesterday. Senatoi- BIBLE. And Senator Tower? Mrs. BONNET. Senator Tower asked for it yesterday. Senator BIBLE. Thank you. Mrs. BONNET. A viable. Big Thicket Preserve should not be depend- (`lit on one man's whims. I believe the test for a Big Thicket Park will be when fulure generations look at. the Big Thicket Preserve, will they thank this generation for doing a good job or will they say, "Thanks a PAGENO="0190" 184 lot for nothing." I consider Village Creek to be the jugular vein of the Big Thicket. If Village Creek has become a symbol to the home- owners as Mr. Wilson charges it has also become a symbol for the sur- vival of Big Thicket. Senator BIBLE. You want Village Creek in, you make it very clear. Mrs. BONNET. I do not think Big Thicket can survive without Vil- lage Creek. Senator BIBLE. Your statement is, "WTe must have Village Creek ifl.~' We put Village Creek in on the Senate side, we go to conference and they say, "You will either take Village Creek out or you will not get a bill." What would you say then? Mrs. BONNET. Well, of course~ Senator BIBLE. I am inclined to put it in. I think that is what I will do. Mrs. BONNET. This is for you to decide. I am only making my pitch for Village Creek. If you will remember Everglades, the American public has beemi watching the Everglades dying because of the lack of water control. Senator BIBLE. Let us not get into the Everglades. I have enough problems on Big Thicket. Mrs. BONNET. But legislation has had to be created to create a Big Cypress Natural Water Preserve to save the Everglades.. Senator BIBLE. Part of that bill gives me great concern because it is going to cost between $175 million and $200 million, and that is the only problem that I am worried about. Mrs. BONNET. The same thing is going to happen to Big Thicket. Big Thicket is so water dependent that if you do not give it its water Village Creek, its juglar vein, `and protect it- Senator BIBLE. If that is your argument for including it I am in- clined to include it. Now, what else did you want to say? Mrs. BONNET. Well, the National Park Service even admits that there is a need for water control, but instead of putting it in the park while they can get it now they suggest the alternative, that they will try to control any projects, private, State, local, or otherwise. They will try to control any proj ects that will affect the water con- trol of the Big Thicket Park. Here they have this chance now of get- ting Big Thicket in, of getting the corridors in of Big Thicket now. Senator BIBLE. Which corridors are you talking about? There is more than one corridor. Mrs. BONNET. I think Village Creek is the most important corridor. Senator BIBLE. You are for putting Village Creek in. Senator Bentsen is putting Village Creek in. Senator Tower is for putting Village Creek in. I am inclined to put it in, so you do not have to ask me to put it in because I say I will do it and then we will take it to conference. Mrs. BONNET. Yes, sir. There have beeii rumors of a dam to be built on Village Creek. Rumors have persisted for years. But they are get- ting stronger lately. Should this happen, the U.S. Government will spend many times the sum now required to buy Village Creek corridors. When they start to buy out all the homeowners and all the developed acreage that will be flooded by the reservoir. A dam and a reservoir would wipe out homes, land, trees, and everything. But a Big Thicket PAGENO="0191" 185 Preserve would allow those same homeowners to live in their homes until they die, or for 25 years, whichever they choose. The should be far better off with the preserve than with the reservoir, that is bound to come if Village Creek is- Senator BIBLE. I think you make your point. I still am for a Big Thicket Preserve, so you do not have to convince me. Mrs. BONNEY. All right. Then I will get into something else. One other point that I would like to make is, I was interested to hear that the National Park Service is waiting for word from the State on what the State will do for Big Thicket. The. National Park Service. has a very short memory. They ask the. question- Senator BIBLE. You do not need to convince me of that I am not going to wait to hear from the State of Texas, because it was pointed out yesterday that they are apt to do nothing. So that will not enter into my judgment on this bill. Mrs. BONNEY. I want to make one point. Back in 1944 the State of Texas, through donations, legislation, and purchases acquired and donated to the National Park Service all of the 768,000 acres that is now Big Ben National Park. No strings attached. No other State has done such a thing that I know of. Senator BIBLE. Yes, they have. North Carolina is the leader of the whole bunch. They gave all of the land at Cape Hatteras. They bought it themselves as a State project and deeded it to the Federal Government. I thought they set the best example of everybody. Texas did that, not only at Big Ben but they did it at Guadalupe. They deserve a little credit, and we are very happy to spread it on the record. Mrs. BONNEY. It came up in the House at the hearing last July that Texas should do something for Big Thicket and put its money where its mouth was, and I feel that Texas ha..s already done that. Texas should not have to beg. Senator BIBLE. I am willing to buy your argument. Mrs. BONNEY. All right. I guess that is a point that is made. I have a picture here. that I would like to enter into the record. Senator BIBLE. Without objection, the picture will be incorporated by reference. Mrs. BONNEY. I have an article here that I wrote. Senator BIBLE. Without objection, the article will be incorporated by reference. Mrs. BONNEY. All right, thank you. [The prepared Statement of Mrs. Bonney follows :11 STATEMENT OF LORRAINE BONNEY, HOUSTON, TEX. Senator Bible, honorable members of the committee, my name is Lorraine Bonney. I am a citizen of Texas, and an 18-year resident of Montgomery County in Rep. Charles Wilson's district. My husband and I live on 200 acres in what used to be considered Big Thicket country until proximity to Houston and over- zealous land developers have turned the county into a bedroom district to Houston. It's not easy to sit back and watch the relentless change from forest wonderland into instant suburbia. .1 have found it only takes a day or two to bulldoze out a project area and destroy the work of centuries. Because of this I have long been interested in saving as much of a Big Thicket Park as is possible. Consequently I wrote the script to a slide show called "The Vanishing Big Thicket" and have given numerous talks and lectures on Big Thicket. The PAGENO="0192" 186 slide show has appeared hundreds of times throughout Texas and the Na- tion. Everywhere I personally talked I found unabated enthusiasm and a great desire for a Big Thicket Park of 100,000 acres. I strongly believe that the glorious natural resource called Big Thicket should be preserved as part of our heritage as is Williamsburg, Plymouth Rock, the Redwood's or Everglades. Your Committee controls the climax of this long and hard struggle for a Big Thicket Park. I believe your Committee is the best qualified in deciding what should go into a National Park or Biological Pre- serve. I believe the Senate is less influenced by special interests than the House. You've heard the arguments, pro and con, many times before-the locality is different, the name is different, but the arguments' are always the same. You know that almost every other park has had to deal with property owners within those boundaries, and you know the problem is resolved satisfactorily because YOU judge what is best for the Nation. It isn't easy, of course. And Big Thicket IS controversial. At stake now are crucial stream corridors without which a Big Thicket Preserve will be a Nothing Preserve because, like the Everglades, it cannot exist without control or protec- tion of its streamways. It is up to you to make the right decision-to save the National Park Service from its disastrous choice of seven disconnected units- and to convince Rep. Wilson that an ecologically sound park will benefit best the American public and bring lasting glory to his name as a leading force in the fight for a viable Big Thicket Preserve. I consider HR 11546, the Eckhardt-Wilson bill, to be an excellent bill in all but acreage, and I am adamantly for 100,000 acres. These two gentlemen niust be commended in their effort's to bring the Big Thicket as far legislatively as it is now. I am with them all the way with their clauses of Legislative Taking, fund- ing by the Land and Water Conservation Fund (for which the Fund was estab- lished), and with hunting in the Park controlled by the Secretary. I disagree only on the matter of acreage. I am not being arbitrary or hard to get along with. I simply believe we need 100,000 acres to make Big Thicket a viable park, able to survive the onslaught of encroaching developments that will desc~nc1 upon it. Even the 100,000 acres will one day prove to be insufficient, but only time can prove that statement right. Will following generations look at Big Thicket Preserve and thank this generation for doing a good `job? Or will they say, "Thanks a lot for nothing !" We have never been so close to having a Big Thicket Preserve as now, thanks to Representatives Eckhardt and Wilson. Emotionally I can only compare the struggle for this park to climbing a mountain. There are physical and mental challenges every inch of the way as you search and explore the right route toward a difficult summit. Once won, there are a few exhilarating moments, a glorious view, and feelings of accomplishment. However, a glance in the West shows thunderheads looming. And the real test comes in the long, grueling descent, `the time of accidents. The test will prove whether the leader had the foresight and vision to anticipate and prepare for the pitfalls involved in the descent-the race against time and weather, the weakened state of his party, etc. Establishing a Big Thicket Preserve has to be done with just as much fore- sight and planning-keeping the long range view in mind. To leave stream corridors out of the Big Thicket package as the National Park Service has delib- erately done is like cutting the jugular vein of Big Thicket. No doubt the Pres- erve will survive for a few years, like the Everglades has managed to squeak through the time of drouth. Meanwhile, unlimited development, uninhibited growth, lack of zoning and drouth will attack and squeeze mercilessly around those disconnected areas, those priceless islands of biological gems, like arterio- sclerosis thickens the veins to the heart and cut off the blood supply. Village Creek is the jugular of Big Thicket. There is no way that Big Thicket can survive without water control. Expert after expert has testified again and again for the need of protected stream corridors for the survival of Big Thicket. The scientists call for 200,000 acres be- cause they know the importance all the corridors will have in `the survival of Big Thicket. About the most foolish statement I've heard in a long time is that of the National Park Service in its Draft Environmental Statement in trying to justify its request for 7 disjunct units with no unifying stream corridors. First the Park Service admits the importance of w-ater control to the ecology of Big Thicket: "Control of hydrological manipulation within the reserve's watersheds is critical in the preservation of the natural hiota. Alteration of existing water flows has potentially significant adverse ecological effects." PAGENO="0193" 187 But instead of asking for the much needed water control, the Park Service allows itself to be ruled by economics of 0MB and deliberately hedges with an impossible alternate course of action in one of the weakest, most thoughtless and impractical utterances of the entire Draft Environmental Statement: "Alteration in the objectives and implementation plans for other Federal, State, local and private projects within watersheds that affect the reserve's units may become necessary to preserve the integrity of natural ecosystems." Incredible as it may seem, the NPS is actually saying that the Federal Gov- ernment will try to control what goes on outside the Reserve, if those projects, including private projects, would affect the Reserve. Needless to say, if the NPS doesn't get control NOW when it has the chance, it simply will have no say in what goes on outside its jurisdiction. The NPS has forgotten three important things: 1. The long battle to get ANY land in a park; 2. ALL the land in Big Thicket involved is in private ownership. No one is about to let the Feds dictate to them on how to manage their land; 3. The. Florida Everglades is in such a mess now because the NPS has no control over the water system. outside the Park boundaries. I am very glad the House saw fit to override the NPS by adding the much needed Neches River corridors. You, gentlemen of the Committee, must also keep the National Park Service on the right track by doing what is necessary- saving the jugular to Big Thicket and by selecting an even more ecologically sound Park. (I am submitting for the record a newspaper article I wrote on the above matter which I hope can be placed in the record following my statement.) I am for a Big Thicket Park of 100,000 acres or more including that section of corridor on Village Creek called the Sandyland-Ponds Unit. A thorough in- vestigation of the area has turned up nO permanent homes and very few vaca- tion homes. I know Rep. Wilson can see no redeeming value to this unit. How- ever, he has also called the Big Thicket a place of "rats and snakes, mosquitoes and humid weather," so someone else must judge the value of the Sandyland- Ponds area and it looks like you will have to do it. The House found it too con- troversial because of the homeowners fight against its addition but there are no homes in it. According to the experts, this area is one-of-a-kind and should rightly take its place in a Biological Preserve as a major plant community that is represented nowhere else. A Biological Preserve should represent ALL major plant communities in the area. How would it be possible to leave one out, as unique geologically and botanically as it is. You would never live it down. In addition, most of the Big Thicket Preserve in the House bill is swampy floodplain area. A combined Turkey Creek Unit and Sandyland-Ponds Unit would create the only dry, year round backpack trail in the Big Thicket Pre- serve-48 miles of streambank, high bluff hiking. (It must be remembered here, for the record, that until a few years ago Texas had only a total of 106 miles of hiking trails in the entire state including Big Bend National Park. The situation has changed a bit since then by the addition of the Lone Star Hundred Mile Hiking Trail which the Sierra Club built in the National Forest, but with the boom in hiking throughout the Nation it is still all peanuts. Texas cer- tainly needs all the trails it can get.) There are other reasons why Village Creek should be placed into a Park or Preserve. It is the finest smoothwater family canoeing stream between East Texas and Florida, and extremely popular as such. Parents teach their children to canoe on this stream. The establishment of a reserve will increase its popu- larity and unfortunately ~ill also increase clashes between the landowners and the canoists if th~ situation remains as is. All navigable streams in Texas are state owned. It's too bad Texas was not very farseeing in reserving public access to its streams and still hasn't done right by the public on the newly built reservoirs that are surrounded by developments and private property. Con- sequently the streams and reservoirs are landlocked by indigimant owners who resent trespassing. Access to canoing streams like Village Creek is at bridge crossings only. Canoists are often paced by irritated landowners or land léas- era wielding guns to make sure nobody gets out on the land. (The Guadalupe River is the best example of how landowner-canoist clashes have resulted in one killing of a canoist because of trespassing. The law is behind the landown- ers See Guns along the Guadalupe Texas Observer Sept 21 1~73) Rep. Eckhardt. has worked long and hard for the open beach-open stream concept He says if beaches and stream corridors are left open to the public land~ values on ALL lots-front and back-increase. In this way everybody- 30-061 0 - 74 - 13 PAGENO="0194" 188 land developers, landowners, fishermen, boaters-all enjoy the benefits of the open beach and stream corridors. Village Creek doesn't just flood every 50 or 100 years. It floods every year and last year it flooded eleven times. Yet if that corridor is not put into a Park, developers will sell those floodplains, people will build there and get flooded out as a routine matter in the life of the stream. (I enclose a picture of Village Creek herewith for the record.) Last spring's floodings in East !Pexas were enough for the governor to call it a disaster area. And the taxpayers foot the bill because special interests fight land use planning. The establishment of a Big Thicket Park is an opportunity of a lifetime to place the corridors of Village Creek into the Park for the enjoyment of the public at minimum cost. Otherwise, undoubtedly the local plans to dam Village Creek will be fired up again. Rumors of a dam on this stream have persisted for years, but are getting stronger lately. Should this happen, the U.S. Government will end up paying many :times the sum now required to buy Village Creek corridors in order to buy up all the developed acreage to be flooded `by the reservoir. It's really odd how the building and widening of highways and freeways and the building of giant reser- voirs can gobble up many more homes than a Big Thicket Park ever would and with no fuss made. Reservoirs like Toledo Bend, Darn B, Rayburn not only take people's lands but they wipe out entire communities-homes, lands and all, with never a word of organized resistance. Again, thousands of acres owned by the timber industry were inundated by Toledo Bend (181,600 surface acres) on the Sabine River with never a rumble out of the timber industry who lost plenty. But try to take some of their acreage for a Big Thicket Park for the `benefit of the public and the industry fights you eyeball to eyeball down the line. Rep. Wilson likes to say `that only hardcore naturalists will ever use Big Thicket. That's about like saying that only hardcore. moun'tain climber's use Grand Teton or Yosemite National Parks, or that only hardcore naturalists use Everglades. The annual Big Thicket Pilgrimage attracted hundreds of Texas families eager to learn a little something about Big Thicket. You certainly can't call the many children who attended hardcore naturalists. In any case the addi- ti.on of Village Creek would add hiking and canoeing recreation for the non- naturalists that will visit the areas. The greatly visited Everglades has nature and canoe `trails. Canoe trails are most popular, where one follows colored tags through the mangrove swamps and river of grass for miles. Canoeing in Big Thicket will be the favorite way of seeing the area, especially for families, and Village Creek will be `by far the most popular year-round stream with the heavi- est traffic whether it is included in t'he Park or not. Texas should not have to beg for an ecologically sound and viable Big Thicket Park. The National Park Service has a short memory. Back in 1944 the State of Texas through donations legislation and purchases acquired and donated to the ~PS ALL of the 768000 acres that is no~ Big Bend National Park no strings attached. No other state has done such a thing. N'ow Texans should not be forced to accept a second rate short sighted Big Thicket Preserve `Again I want to thank you, Senator Bible and your Committee for holding this hearing. I `want to thank Senators Bentsen and Tower for their Big Thicket bills and for taking up the cause of Big Thicket. I `again want to thank Rep. Eekhairdt and Wilson for resolving their differences in the House compromise bill Without that we wouldn't be here today. The decision is now in the hands of your Corn- m'i'ttee. I have faith in your ability to work the miracle that will save a't least 100 000 acres of that unique forest ~s onderland called Big Thicket Senator BIBLT Thank you very much It is good to see you again Have a happ~'y trip back to Wyoming The next witness is Gay B Moxon, attorney, Beaumont Tex STATEMENT OP GAY B MOXON, ATTORNEY, BEAUMONT, TEX Ms Moxo~ Mr Ch'urman, I `tm Gay Baker Moxon, legal counsel to the Spirit organization, and I would like my statement entered into the record I iepresent a gioup called Spirit, `t group of concerned citizens and property owners who support an amendment to the `bill under discus- sion which would exclude that part of the so c'tlled Pine Isl'uid Bayou Corridor which is heavily populated PAGENO="0195" 189 To avoid any confusion as to which area I specifically refer, I would like to point it out to you on the map. From about here over. I am sp6aking of apprximately a 5-mile strip. Senator BIBLE. All right. Ms. MoxoN. This group is anxious for passage of a bill, a bill which will accomplish the aims of a national preserve. Inclusion of a heavily populated area of no ecological value is certainly not within the con- cept of a national preserve, nor does the inclusion of this corridor have any particular recreational value. This bayou is now and has always been open to the public. Access to the stream is limited. However, those wishing to travel upon the bayou have been provided with public access areas. Further, pollu- tion control is already under the jurisdiction of the Texas Water Quality Control Board. The concept of joining the Lance Rosier unit with the Beaumont * unit via the Pine Island Bayou Corridor has certain merit when only drainage maps are studied. At the time the idea of including Pine * Island Bayou as a corridor was conceived there were no population density maps available, specifically depicting permanent improve- ments on the Pine Island Bayou. Such lack of information was admitted by the Honorable Nathaniel ~ P. Reed, Assistant Secretary of the Interior, in his statement to the House committee which conducted previous hearings. Lack of information about this area is additionally evidenced by the omission of the environmental impact statement to make any mention of the proposed corridors. There is no suggestion of impact to the areas included in the corridors. But the statement does state clearly and unequivocally that there is no pressing need for additional recreational facilities in the area. The general vicinity abounds in locations available for recreation. It is understandable how the error of including the Pine Island Bayou was made. In past hearings good information was not available and there- fore a mistake was made. This is no longer the situation. The next speaker, Mr. C. M. Harless, will present maps which show clearly and concisely that there are almost 100 homes and permanent improvements contained in a small part of the proposed Pine Island Corridor. There is no longer any excuse for error. You will have the facts. You already have the Parks Department statement that the corridors as now designed are not feasible, not necessary and are impossible to manage. I would like to point out that there is precedence in House bill 11546 for excluding areas in the corridors, as was done for a special interest group on the Neches River Corridor. I speak specifically of the papermill plant. No one would argue that the inclusion of a papermill plant is in- tegral to the park. We want the papermill. We need the papermill. Senator BIBLE. Now, this Pine Island Corridor is in the House- passed bill. Is it in Senator Bentsen's bill? Has he introduced it? Ms. MoxoN. It is in three of the four bills that were listed. It was in Tower's. Senator BIBLE. Is it in the administration bill? Ms. MoxoN. No, it is not in the administration bill. PAGENO="0196" 190 Senator BIBLE. You prefer the administration bill insofar as it deals with the Pine Island Corridor problem? Ms. MoxoN. Yes, sir. And we will present very hard evidence. Evi- dence that has never been available before. The maps used before were 3 years out of date. They were drainage maps and it is an odd situa- tion, because this is a county line and a district line, with Jefferson County being `below and Hardin County being above. Most maps `will quit there. There were no overlaps. The maps we will present have been made by a civil engineer in the area, who has made onsite inspections. The time has come to exclude the heavily populated portion of the corridor from the preserve. There are no viable alternatives. You either have a corridor which takes within its boundaries 100 homes or you do not. There is no way to have a corridor- Senator BIBLE. That was the testimony yesterday. I thought they said there were only 57 homes in the taking area. Ms. MoxoN. This has `been the problem all along. They will tell you,~ this, but show me a map which shows 57 homes. We have it. Senator BIBLE. You say there are 100 homes there? Ms. MoxoN. Yes, sir. We have tax roll information. Senator BIBLE. The Park Service man is here. Can you clear this point up? Mr. HENNEBERGER. The 57 properties are only in the Department's bill. We have no complete analysis of what is in the corridors. Senator BIBLE. Why don't you have th~ analysis of what is in the corridors? Oh, you exclude the corridors in the administration bill?'~ Mr. HENNEBERGER. Yes. Senator BIBLE. That accounts for it. Have you ever made a count of the homes in the Department? Mr. HENNEBERGER. Yes, we have, sir. We figure around 45 in that corridor on Pine Island Bayou, but with the expectation that we have to delete as many permanent homes as we possibly could. Senator BIBLE. There is quite a variance between 45 and 100. Mr. HENNEBERGER. Forty-five we show as being taken in the 14-mile corridor of Pine Island Bayou. Senator BIBLE. That is the corridor that is in three of the four bills? Mr. HENNEBERGER. Right, sir. Senator BIBLE. You say there are 45 homes and this very beautiful witness here says there are 100. I would rather believe her, I think. But what are the facts? As a good lawyer you ought to be able to reconcile that. Ms. MoxoN. The next speaker will present the very hard, specific evidence. He has the number of homes. My primary purpose, really, is to introduce `him. In 5 minutes lie cannot do all of it. Senator BIBLE. You may proceed. Ms. MoxoN. We have also estimated, and believe me it is an esti- mate, depending upon where the lines are drawn, it could cost $5 million to acquire about 1,000 acres, which is about 1.2 percent of the entire preserve. And it is patently obvious that this narrow strip containing resi- dences should not be taken in order to protect its unique biological features. I fail to see how this committee could, in light of new infer- PAGENO="0197" 191 ~ mation to be brought forth in this hearing, decline to exclude that portion of the Pine Island Bayou Corridor, which is heavily populated. You have been told that this area is neither necessary nor integral to the preserve. Its inclusion would not in any way complement the preserve. The next speaker, Mr. C. M. Harless, will provide hard evidence in support of these statements. In addition, you have been shown that the bill in its present form does not afford certainty of protection to the small landowner but ~ does specifically provide protection to special interest groups. Fur- ~: ther, to include this area would be inviting extensive litigation which, even if unsuccessful, would delay the fulfillment of the purposes ~: for which this preserve is intended. The high cost alone of taking this small area should provide enough basis for exclusion from the preserve, especially in view of the fact that the purchase adds little or nothing of value to the preserve. Gentlemen, I refuse to believe that you of this committee, repre- sentatives of our country's most august legislative body, can or will ignore the facts which have been presented to you. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much. That is an excellent state- ment, and I am going to call the next witness. [The prepared statement of Ms. Moxon follows :J STATEMENT OF GAY BAKER MOXON, LEGAL COUNSEL TO THE SPIRIT ORGANIzATIoN Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, SPIRIT is a group of concerned citizens and property owners who support an amendment to the Bill under dis- cussion which would exclude that part of the so-called Pine Island Bayou Cor- * ridor which is heavily populated. This group is anxious for passage of a bill, a bill which will accomplish the aims of a National Preserve. Inclusion of a heavily populated area of no ecological value is certainly not within the concept of a National Preserve, nor does the inclusion of this corridor have any particular recreational value. This Bayou is now and has always been open to the public. Access to the stream is limited; however, those wishing to travel upon the Bayou have been provided with public access areas. Further, pollution control is already under the jurisdiction of the Texas Water Quality Control Board. The concept of joining the Lance Rossier Unit with the Beaumont Unit via the Pine Island Bayou Corridor has certain merit when only draining maps are studied. At the time the idea of including Pine Island Bayou as a corridor was conceived, there were no population density maps available specifically depicting permanent improvements on the Pine Island Bayou. Such lack of information was admitted by the Honorable Nathaniel P. Reed, Assistant Secretary of the Interior, in his statement to the House Committee which conducted previous hearings (see p. 122 of the published hearings). Lack of information about this area is addi- tionally evidenced by the omission of the Environmental Impact Statement to make any mention of the proposed corridors. There is no suggestion of impact to the areas included in the corridors. But the statement does state clearly and unequivocally that there is no pressing need for additional recreational facilities in the area. The general vicinity abounds in locations available for recreation. It is understandable bow the error of including the Pine Island Bayou was made. In past hearings, good information was not available and therefore a mis- take was made. This is no longer the situation. The next speaker Mr. C. M. Hariess, will present maps which show clearly and concisely that there are al- most 100 homes and permanent improvements contained in a small part of the proposed Pine Island Corridor. There is no longer any excuse for error. You will have the facts. You already have the Parks Department statement that the Cor- ridors as now designed are not feasible, not necessary and are impossible to manage. Numerous statements have been made in the press as well as by political representatives that the provision in the Bill which gives the Secretary of the Interior discretion to exclude permanent residences or other property not con- sidered necessary to the integrity of the Preserve will give the homeowner ample PAGENO="0198" 192 protection from the taking of his property. However, if this protection is so obvious and clear cut then why did a special interest group find it necessary to have their property specifically excluded from the Neches River Corridor? Few would argue that the taking of a large, industrial paper mill complex, employing many of the local population, would enhance the Preserve. The mere expense of purchasing such a large plant would be prohibitive. Yet, in order to be adequately protected, the plant owners managed to have their complex specifically excluded from the Preserve. Are homeowners not entitled to the same consideration? Are we not speaking of the same philosophy when we say that a five mile stretch of Pine Island Bayou is not complementary to the Preserve and the expense of such taking unreasonable? Congress can ill afford, at this time, in particular, to protect special interests of big business and at the same time ignore and fail to protect the small landholder. The time has come to exclude the heavily populated portion of the Pine Island Bayou Corridor from the Preserve. There are rio visible alternatives. You either have a corrider which takes within its boundaries 100 homes or you ~ don't. There is no way to have a corridor through this area which can be justi- ~ fled on any basis. It has little or no value as a recreational area; it is not imeces- sary in order to control pollution, such control being already under the auspices of a Texas Board; the cost is incredible. A rough estimate of the cost of ac- quiring this five mile stretch is more than 5 million dollars. An excess of 5 mil- lion dollars would be spent in order to acquire about 1,000 acres, 1.2% of the entire Preserve. And it is patently obvious that this narrow strip containing residences should not be taken in order to protect its unique biological features. That a heavily populated area of little or no preservational, recreational or .~ biological value should be included in this proposed Preserve might well form .4 the basis of legal action to forbid such taking. Any Court action would well forestall condemnation proceedings and tie up the whole Preservation concept for some time. The possibility should be taken into consideration before this committee makes its final decision. I fail to see how this Committee could, in light of the new information brought forth in this hearing, would decline t.o exclude that portion of the Pine Islan.d Bayou Corrider which is heavily populated. You have been told that this area is neither necessary nor integral to the Preserve. Its inclusion would not in any way compleement the Preserve. The next speaker, Mr. C. M: Harless, will pro- vide hard evidence in support of these statements. In addition, you have been shown that the Bill in its present form does not afford certainty of protection to the small landowner but does specifically provide protection to special interest groups. Further, to include this area w-ould be inviting extensive litigation which, even if unsuccessful, wolud delay the fulfillment of the purposes for which this Preserve is intended. The high cost alone of taking this small area should pro- vide enough basis for exclusion from the Preserve especially in view of the fact that the purchase adds little or nothing of value to the Preserve. Gentlemen, I refuse to believe that you of this Committee, representatives of our country's most august legislative body, can or will ignore the facts which have been presented to you. Senator BIBLE. The next witness will be Mr. C. M. Harless. Be- cause you, in effect. indicated von were introducing him. I am going to take a 5-minute recess, so that I can go out into the audience aild shake hands w-ith my two Randolph Hearst scholars from the great State of Nevada. ~Just as soon as I say hello to them and compliment them on win- ning a thousand dollars apiece then I shall return. We stand in recess for 5 minutes. [Whereupon, a short recess was taken.] Senator BIBLE. The hearing will resume. Mr. Harless is to be our next witness. STATEMENT OF C. M. HARLESS, SILSBEE, TEX. Mr. HARLESS. Mr. Chairman, I am C. M. Harless~ a resident of the city of Rose Hill Acres. in the Liimberton area of Hardin County~ Tex. I am here on behalf of many interested citizens and the member PAGENO="0199" 193 of Spirit, an organization formed to support Pine Island residents included in the thicket. We do not have a membership of thousands throughout the Nation, nor funds to promote our cause nationally through lobbyists rather than personal efforts. We are a group of concerned homeowners directly affected by the broad and indefinite provisions of the proposed Big Thicket Reserve as established by recently passed House Bill 11546, as applied to the Pine Island Bayou Corridor. Our friends, neighbors, and many others join us in objecting to the inclusion of this corridor because there is no way such a corridor could be effectively established without including many homes and other structures, plus much developed and semideveloped land defi- nitely not desirable as part of a preserve. H.R. 11546 apparently was acted on and passed without benefit of a correct environmental impact statement, as I understand the statement originally prepared as inaccurate and contained errors and omissions, particularly as regards homes, et cetera, in the Pine Island Bayou and Beaumont areas. In the House hearings in .July 1973, Congressman Eckhardt stated his estimate was in the neighborhood of 50 or 60 people with perma- nent residences who could possibly be affected against their will. Con- gressman Wilson also had a statement in the newspapers that he esti- mated fewer than 50 year-round homes would be affected. These statements are indefeasibly and inexcusably inaccurate and indicate a serious lack of true information as to homes involved. In the Pine Island Bayou Corridor and Beaumont unit alone there are twice that many homes directly affected, based on our best interpre- tation of the indefinite boundaries indicated in H.R. 11546 as generally depicted on the official map. In support of this statement, we have gone to considerable expense and effort to prepare maps showing the large number of structures and improved areas included in only `approximately 41/4 miles of Pine Island Bayou, measured along the bayou following the windings of the indicated corridor. We procured fairly recent aerial survey photos for the areas shown, from which our maps presented herewith were prepared after making on-the-ground checks to `assure that all structures were included so far as possible. The general preseiice of many trees, which we cherish and preserve, prevents an aerial view from revealing all of the homes below. Map No. 1, beginning just west of the Beaumont city limits, were unable to find recent aerial survey photos for any farther west, includes some 11/4 miles of corridor. In this distance, there are shown, by our count, 26 homes, 2 mobile homes, 3 vacation homes, 1 business place, a pl.astic pipe manufactur- ing plant and attendant buildings near some homes. It should be emphasized that practically all of these structures are on paved streets of Beaumont, hardly suitable as a biological preserve area, Map No. 2, continuing east, includes approximately 3 miles of corridor, in which there are structures on both sides of the bayou. These include 59 or more homes. some attendant structures, a mobile home park with 8 homes, 2 mobile homes on individual lots, 1 business place and a Lower Neches Valley Authority pump station. PAGENO="0200" 194 Of these, 23 are fine homes in a restricted subdivision in the incorpo- rated city of Rose Hill Acres, having an estimated market value in excess of $750,000. Others, in Pine Island Estates in Beaumont and on Cooks Lake Road in Hardin County are mainly brick homes of com- parable value. It is not unreasonable to estimate that the cost of acquiring all the homes and other property indicated to be in the corridor in this por- tion would well exceed $1 million per mile, and provide nothing suit- able for the purposes of the preserve. Map No. 3, continuing east, contains four or more homes, some at- tendant `buildings, and three or more vacation homes. The Beaumont unit north boundary has been interpreted to follow the south side of Cooks Lake Road to a juncture with the LNVA water canal. Any movement northward of this boundary would undoubtedly in- crease the number of homes involved. Senator BIBLE. You want this excluded; is that right? Mr. HARLESS. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. And the administration bill does exclude it? Mr. HARLESS. It excludes it to this point. Senator BIBLE. How about coming to your left? Mr. HARLESS. From here to here it is not in the administration bill. Senator BIBLE. But it is in the House passed bill. Mr. HARLESS. In the other bill. Although we were unable to secure or prepare maps of the areas farther west along Big and Little Pine Island Bayous, there are homes and land developments in that area that have been overlooked by others. The city of Bevil Oaks lies on the east side of the bayou in a bend where Big Pine Island Bayou turns sharply south and Little Pine Island Bayou continues west. The River Oaks Ranchette subdivision in Bévil Oaks extends to the banks of the bayou, with surfaced streets, drainage ditches, et cetera. We do not have accurate information of the number of homes there. A short distance to the west on Little Pine Island Bayou the Pine- wood subdivision, a well-established community, has fine brick homes, a country club and part of the golf course within the corridor. Senator BIBLE. Is that within the taking area? Mr. HARLESS. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. Which bill? Mr. HARLESS. All but the administration bill. Senator BIBLE. You mean the bills introduced by the two Senators and the bill that passed the House include the country club and part of the golf course; is that your statement? Mr. HARLESS. And some homes. Senator BIBLE. Yes, I understand the homes part. Mr. HARLESS. We keep talking about Pine Island Bayou- Senator BIBLE. I will ask the staff people to follow this very closely. Mr. HARLESS. Originally, everything that we said about Pine Island corridor said Little Pine Island Bayou. Little Pine Island Bayou is that little speck right there. This is Big Pine Island Bayou. Later they got into both of them and included Big and Little Pine Island Bayou in the corridor. At one time they had a corridor down this part of Pine Island, but that was removed by somebody. But this is Little Pine Island Bayou and this is Big Pine. Island Bayou. PAGENO="0201" 195 Senator BIBLE. I understand that. And if I understand the problem correctly, neither one of those two areas that you pointed out are in the administration bill. Both of them are in the House passed bill and the bill introduced by the two Senators; is that a correct statement? Mr. HARLESS. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. How many homes do you say are within that area? Do you say 100? Mr. HARLESS. Of one kind or another, yes. Senator BIBLE. Can you distinguish from one kind or another? Mr. HARLESS. I listed them as I went through this thing. On the first area, on Map No. 1, there are 26 homes, which I consider permanent homes. Senator BIBLE. How do you define a permanent home? Mr. HARLESS. As against a mobile home. Senator BIBLE. What is a vacation home? Mr. HARLESS. A place where they would spend part of their time and not all of it. Senator BIBLE. They do not stay there year-round? Mr. HARLE5S. That is right, but they are nice, well-built structures. They are not shacks. Senator BIBLE. Did anybody bring a picture of the homes in this area? Mr. HARLESS. I have a picture of two or three of the homes in the area where I live. Senator BIBLE. But you are not within the taking area, are you? Mr. HARLESS. Yes, sir. I sure am. [Off the record.] Senator BIBLE. We are back on the record now. Would you like to put these various newspaper clippings in the record? I think we ought to put the pictures in the record. I am not interested in the news- papers- Mr. HARLESS. I have some Polaroid photos in my briefcase that I can give you of some houses. Senator BIBLE. All I am trying to do is build a record that would show to the other committee members the character of these homes and a picture does tell, as Confucius said a long time ago, "A picture is worth a thousand words" and I really think that is about right. So we will put the photographs in the record. We cannot reproduce them, but we will have them by reference, so they will be included by reference to illustrate the character of the homes in the-taking area. The staff will make these pictures available to illustrate to the other committee members the type of homes that Mr. Harless is talking about. Is this your home, you say? Mr. HARLESS. The long one is. Senator BIBLE. You have a nice looking home there. Mr. HARLESS. I built it to retire in and st.ay there and I still do not want it taken away. Senator BIBLE. I appreciate your positiQn. I understand that. These photographs will be adopted by reference. You may proceed, Mr. Harless. Mr. HARLESS. It is evident, from the maps presented that to move the corridor boundary to the stream bank for each populated area to avoid taking homes, le'ive out developed and cle'ired hnds, et ceter't, PAGENO="0202" 196 would be absurd to even consider, would serve no useful purpose in establishing a preserve and would be impractical to administer. We are, therefore, strongly requesting that the Pine Island Bayou corridor be eliminated and removed from any consideration as part of the Big Thicket preserve. We believe your full agreement to comply with this request is justified and would be reasonable and desirable for the following reasons. 1. The criteria of biological and botanical uniqueness is not met by this area. 2. There are so many homes and other structures within the Pine Island Bayou corridor that the cost of acquiring the property there would be prohibitive and beyond any justification. 3. Exclusion of permanent residences is strongly recommended in H.R. 11546 and supported by Miss Johnston's statement in the House hearings that the Big Thicket Association stressed they are interested in wilderness areas not developed areas, and want every possible home excluded. Another representative of this organization has publicly ststed lo- cally that there was no intention to take homes here and people should not worry about it. These exclusions should be accomplished by specific language in the legislation or complete omission of the corridor, as the case may be, and not left to the discretion of the Secretary of Interior. 4. The Department of Interior has not favored stream corridors be- cause of high cost of acquiring the desirable streamside properties and homes, and the difficulty of administration and control. Also, they, as do many others, believe the corridors have only recreational value and are not justified as to their biological preserve content. Congressman Wilson's plea for the Neches River corridor was based directly on recreational consideration. The current effort is to establish a preserve, not provide recreational areas, and that purpose should control the acquisition of property. 5. The plea of environmentalists that it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to protect quality and integrity of units within the preserve unless the water courses feeding them are included cannot very well be applied here. Pine Island Bayou, as discussed here, flows from the Lance Rosier unit to our area, and below, not through, the Beaumont unit, which is being included as a cypress bog. As the stream does not flow through this unit, it would suffer in no way from exclusion of the bayou corridor Senator BIBLE So I can clear my ow n thinking on this stream sys tern, what is the dii ection of the flow of these v'irious streams ~ Is it from north to south? Mr. HARLESS. Pine Island flows from left to right and the Neches River from top to bottom. SenatorBIBLE. The general flow is from top to bottom. Mr. HARLESS. That is right. SenatorBIBLE. Thank you. Mr HARLESS I h'ive seen no builclozeis pushing trees into the Pine Island Bayou We value trees `md I have not seen `my subdivision cut trees out They work those subdi~ isions to keep the ti ees A lot of trees have ~ alue A baie lot up there has no value Also, in testimony given yesterday, pictures of recent flooding were shown PAGENO="0203" 197 intentionally to show that the properties in the flood plain are not suitable for development, with the knowledge that this flooding is not normal or frequent. It has occurred because `of very excessive rainfall this past year. The heaviest in 100 years, I believe, was mentioned by another wit- ness. This most recent flood was undoubtedly aggravated by the fact that water is being released from dam B to the Neches River, and had the water level in that stream in Pine Island Bayou 4 feet above normal when heavy rains came. In establishing boundaries, we recommend that those of the BeauS mont unit, over in this right-hand corner, be changed so that it is bounded on the west by the LNVA Canal, the little strip that creates a boundary at the northern part. That is to be bounded all the way by the LNVA Canal, from Pine Island Bayou to the Neches River, on the south by Pine Island Bayou and on the east by the Neches River. This should adequately preserve anything desired to be protected and at the same time eliminate any possible inclusion of homes in that little corner out there. In conclusion, I again ask your serious and favorable consideration and adoption of the request to eliminate the proposed Pine Island Bayou Corridor from any Big Thicket legislation recommended by this committee, for the reasons and on the evidence `presented here. While we feel the entire corridor should be excluded, our particular concern is the portion along Big Pine Island Bayou from Little Pine Island Bayou to the Neches `be excluded. Senator BIBLE. How many people live in this area you propose ex- cluding from the Big Thicket legislation, approximately? What is a rough figure, year round? Mr. HARLESS. Are you talking about just within the corridor? Senator BIBLE. Within the Pine Island Bayou Corridor that you want excluded. How many people actually live there? Mr. HARLESS. I would have to add up these homes and multiply by an average, I would say, of three or four. Senator BIBLE. You could use a factor of four. That is fair enough. How many would that be? Mr. HARLESS. It would be in the neighborhood of 400, I assume, `plus people ~vorking for the `business establishments. Senator BIBLE. 400 or 500 people; is that fair figure? Mr. HARLESS. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. Very fine. You made a fine statement, Mr. Harless. We will carefully consider this and as I have indicated, I am certainly going to send some staff people down to make an inspection. [The maps submitted by Mr. Harless follow:] PAGENO="0204" PAGENO="0205" 199 PAGENO="0206" .5) ~eae)M~fo~v,~ Ornt ~fL~ PAGENO="0207" 201 Senator BIBLE. Our next witness is Alice Cashen, Batson, Tex. STATEMENT OP ALICE CASHEN, BATSON, TEX. Ms. CASHEN. Senator, my testimony is on the record. I am an average, normal, taxpayer of }iardin County and I am for the Thicket. And I think I speak for a lot of other people, but not officially. I am for the 100,000 acres if we can get it. I think we need all possible corridors. I think there is just one plea that I want to make. Let us do it fast, because it will be gone in another 2 years, and we want to save a little of it for groups like we had here this morning. [The prepared statement of Ms. Cashen follows:] STA~rEMENT OF ALICE CASHEN, TEACHER, RESIDENT OF BATSON, HARDIN COUNTY, TEX. My name is Alice Cashen, and I am native of Hardin County and a taxpayer. I own a small piece of land in the proposed Rosier Unit, and I am grateful for the opportunity to express support for the creation of a 100,000-acre Big Thicket National Preserve. There was a railroad engineer from Silsbee, R. E. Jackson, who organized the first drive to preserve part of the Thicket in the late Twenties. He received dedicated support from a lot of Hardin County natives as well as natives of Polk, Tyler, Liberty and Jefferson counties. Some of these are still around and recall that the East Texas Big Thicket Association was trying to save 430,000 acres. Any movement of this type soon develops opposition because of tax and owner- ship problems. As a teacher and a former school board member, I am reminded of drives to consolidate school districts. Here the battle is always hotly con- tested, but the irony of the whole situation is that the very residents who fought so bitterly against these consolidations, within two or three years, prove to be the strongest supporters, and they seem to forget that they ever opposed it. So it will be with the Thicket movement. Once residents see that a. park will benefit the entire economy of the area, and when they know that the impact on the h~meo~vner is much less drastic than they thought, they will know that this a good thing for the majority of the residents of the county. As a resident and a taxpayer, I am grateful for the unending efforts of the Big Thicket Associa- tion and supporting groups from all over the U.S. Not many people can make a special trip to Washington to tell you thi~. `but I assure you that many of our citizens, who are quietly going about their business, agree with me. Like the man who roamed the world in search of diamonds and returned to his home to find acres of them on his doorstep, so do we the residents of Hardin County realize what we have here. Our understanding of the biological significance of our home area is limited by our general educational level, but the generations coming up are taking an entirely different look at the Thicket. Having been a teacher for 43 years, I have observed a change in the attitude of the average high school youngster. His values have changed from an appreciation of fast cars to back-packing. He goes to the woods, as Thoreau did, to open his eyes to his environment. He looks to his political representatives for consideration and understanding, and it behooves all of us to listen. I sincerely believe the next generation will have far greater respect for its environment than my generation has. Surely we can save a small part of what he has inherited for those who come hereafter. Many Hardin County and area residents have worked hard and long to support the continuing efforts of teachers, scientists, naturalists, nature-lovers, and just plain citizens, who formed the Big Thicket Association and the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee. While we have worked and waited, we have seen much of the Thicket disappear into pine farms and housing developments. We, therefore. urge that all possible consideration be given to efforts to establish this unique preserve without delay. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much. That is a fine statement. Our next witness is Prof. Thomas Eisner, of Cornell University~ Ithaca, N.Y. PAGENO="0208" 202 STATEMENT OP PROP. THOMAS EISNER, CORNELL UNIVERSITY, ITHACA, N.Y. Professor EISNER. Senator Bible, I appreciate the opportunity of testifying before your committee. My name is Thomas Eisner. I am professor of biology at Cornell University and a member of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences and a former editor of National Science Magazine. I have two documents with me and I would like to introduce them for the record. The first of these is a position paper. Senator BIBLE. It will be incorporated into the record. That's the one prepared by yourself and Paul Feeney, is that correct? That will be incorporated in full in the record. It does not need to be read, because you have heard my indications. Professor EISNER. I might point out that Professor Feeney is a mem- ber of the Ecological Society of America. This second document is an editorial that appeared a year ago in Science magazine, the Journal for the American Association for the Advancement .of Science. This urges preservation of the Thicket and urges preservation now. Senator BIBLE. Without objection, this will be incorporated in full in the record. This is an editorial written by you; is that correct? Professor EISNER. Correct. The editorial also calls attention to the point that I would like to bring out, mainly that a thousand scientists from almost 30 States, including prominent biologists from the Na- tional Academy of Science, have recently petitioned the Government to save the Thicket. I will not read or comment on these documents which speak for themselves. But I would like to direct attention to two points which I feel are of importance. First, the matter of the corridors. The so- called waterways that lead these various interlocked ecological en- claves that have been singled out for preservation, it needs to be emphasized, I think, in strong terms that these waterways are, from an ecological point of view, an integral part of the Thicket Preserve. The waterways are essentially lifelines. They are thoroughfares that provide for proper movement of organisms, big and little, be- tween the enclaves. Birds, mammals, as well as the myriad of pol- linates, assuring the pollination of these enclaves need to move through these corridors, and the corridors must be preserved in an unspoiled condition. This means that buffer zones must be maintained along the streams to protect them from siltation and contamination such as would in- evitably result from lumbering or development along the banks. The buffer zones must be appropriately wide so that the corridors can be able to hold their own in the face of potential pesticide con- tammation by without, by wind blowing or soil seepage. I would hope in the deliberations that will precede the formula- tion of a final bill consideration of these corridors will be given very serious attention. To save time I might point out that in our position paper on page 8 the case is made for why the corridors are necessary. And it specifies the corridors by name. The second point refers to the apparent omission of the arid sandylands from the-as it has been proposed in the various bills. As is pointed out on page 4 PAGENO="0209" 203 of our position paper which was written 2 years ago, the sandy- lands are most worthy ecological region of t:he Thicket. Especially, also, because of the ponds in various stages of ecological succession associated with them. I would hope a means could be found of saving these sandylañds, whether they are included formally in the bill or perhaps one may persuade the owners to donate these as a pre- liminary matter that I will not comment on. I will keep my statement short. I have two formal documents for the record. Senator BIBLE. Those are the two that I have already incorporated. Thank you very much, Professor. We appreciate your testimony. You make a good case. [The material submitted by Prbfessor Eisner follows:] POSITION PAPER PREPARED BY THOMAS EISNER AND PAUL FEENY, PROFESSORS OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE To SAVE THE BIG THICKET As professional ecologist acquainted with a diverse range of natural environ- ments across four continents, we consider the Big Thicket region of Texas to be of unique and inestimable biological value. There is no question in our minds, or in those of many other scientists familiar with the area, that preservation of what remains of the natural flora and fauna of the Big Thicket would most defi- nitely be in the Nation's best interests. It is fair to say that though the region lacks spectacular natural grandeur it is from an ecological standpoint better deserving of preservation than any existing National Park in the United States, with the possible exception of the Florida Everglades. Nowhere else in North America is there found such a diversity of plant and animal species; nowhere else is there such a unique combination of habitats, northern temperate and sub- tropical, arid western and humid south-eastern, freshwater and saltwater, forest and prairie, calcareous and acid. Though preservation of rare species such as the Texas Red Wolf and Ivory-billed woodpecker might in itself justify creation of a wildlife refuge, it is *the incomparable ecological diversity of the Big Thicket which renders the region of such priceless biological value. It is this diversity which renders imperative the preservation of a substantial acreage of the Big Thicket with boundaries carefully defined so as to include adequate portions of each major ecological community. Without such specified boundaries, the variety of the Big Thicket may be lost, thus greatly reducing its ecological interest. The whole is considerably more valuable than the sum of its parts. ECOLOGICAL DIVERSITY OF THE BIG THICKET The Big Thicket has aptly been termed the "Biological Crossroads of North America". It is a meeting and mixing place for the fauna and flora of North and South, East and West. It contains elements common to the Florida Ever- glades, the Okefenokee Swamp, the Appalachian mountains, the Piedmont foi'- ests, midwestern prairie, southwestern desert, tropical forests of the Mexican east coast, as well as elements found nowhere else. Northern trees such as elm and beech, sugar maple and flowering dogwood occur as well as the southern cypress and magnolia. Acid sphagnum bogs, typical of the far north, occur not far from subti~opical baygall swamps. The wood thrush, associated with damp northern forests, breeds in the Big Thicket, as does the roadrunner fa- miliar to the deserts of the Southwest. Northern tiger swallowtail butterflies fly through the same forests as do their subtropical zebra swallowtail and tropical palamedes swallowtail relatives. Trillium and Jack-in-the-pulpit bloom in the Big Thicket where also grow the western tumbleweed, mesquite, palmetto, yucca and several species of cactus. The Big Thicket contains more than 40 species of orchid, more than 1,000 species of fungi, 26 species of fern and four of the five genera of carnivorous plants to be found in North America. More than 300 species of bird breed in the Thicket and many others pass through on migration. Because many of the species reach in the Big Thicket the limit of their geo- graphical range, they tend to differ genetically from other populations of their species and in many cases are considered to be distinct subspecies. The Big Thicket is a region of great biological productivity. It contains the world's largest American holly, red bay, yaupon, sweetleaf, planer tree, black hickory, 30-061 0 - 74 - 14 PAGENO="0210" 204 two-wing silverbell, sparkleberry and eastern red cedar as well as the world's tallest cypress tree. The prodigious ecological diversity of the Big Thicket results from a combina- tion of soil characteristics, topography, local climate, water drainage patterns and biogeographical history which is unique to southeast Texas. Deposited as alluvial plains and deltas during the warm interglacial periods of the Pleis- tocene ice age, a diverse range of underlying sediments were shaped by the meanderings of local rivers into a large shallow basin which today embraces most of what remains of the Big Thicket. Into this basin from the higher ground to the north and west flow the Neches River. Turkey Creek, Big Sandy Creek and Pine Island Bayou. Impeded from southward drainage by the southern rim of the basin-a low ridge lying between Beaumont and Liberty-these creeks all even- tually join the Neches River which leaves the basin at Beaumont, the south- eastern corner of the Big Thicket. Elevation and drainage patterns have a profound effect on the vegetation. The northern highlands are dry and well-drained, supporting beech-magnolia-lob- lolly pine forest and other less water-tolerant plant formations. By contrast, the lower part of the basin is underlaid with impermeable clay with poor drainage and a high water table year round. The vegetation in these areas is dense and jungle-like, giving parts of the Big Thicket the swampy, tropical atmosphere for which it is famous. Elevation and distance from the coast seem also to affect rainfall; this varies from about 60 inches annually in the lower Thicket to about 50 inches in the upper Thicket. The heavy rainfall characteristic of the region contributes to the luxuriance of its vegetation and results from close proximity to the Gulf Coast combined with rising elevation. A further feature of the local climate, which permits many tropical and subtropical species to penetrate so far north, is the mild winter season. Warm breezes and moisture from the Gulf prevent most cold air masses from reaching the region and seldom do winter temperatures drop below freezing point. Vegetational diversity is further enhanced by the wide range of soil types to be found in the Big Thicket. More than 100 soil types are reported from Hardin County alone. Broadly speaking the central portion of the Thicket consists of relatively acidic clays, silts and sands while surrounding areas on the north, south, east and west are characterized by more calcareous soils. During and since the Pleistocene epoch, the regions surrounding the Gulf coast, along with much of North America, underwent a series of major climatic changes resulting in successive invasions by northern western and tropical vegetation types. Much of the present diversity of the Big Thicket results from the survival of so many species through further climatic changes which brought about their extinction in surrounding areas. No fewer than eight major plant formations and their associated animal communities are represented in the Big Thicket today, though some of these have been reduced to small remnants of their former extent. These formations are as follows: Prairie Formerly extensive, only a few small islands now remain along the south- western rim of the Big Thicket basin. Rich in typical prairie grasses and wild- flowers. Palmetto-Hardwood Flats Found most extensively along the Pine Island Bayou floodplain, where the palmettos may reach 15 feet in height. The combination of palmetto and cypress swamps at the confluence of Pine Island Bayou and the Neches River is remini- scent of parts of time Florida Everglades. Arid ~an4yianA Sandhills supporting desert flora and fauna, occurring as exposed river terraces near several of the larger Big Thicket creeks. Especially well developed along Village Creek, where they alternate with baygalls and oxbow lakes. Acidbog-Baygall Acidic sw'amnps and bogs occurring throughout the central Big Thicket basin. Rich variety of vegetation and wildlife, including many rarities. Fine examples include, Jack Gove Baygall, northeast of Silsbee, Devil's Pocket acid bog, north of Kountze, and several baygahls along Village Creek. PAGENO="0211" 205 Upland Pine Bavanncth Rolling grasslands with widely-spaced long-leaf and short-leaf pines, formerly extensive on higher ground between the major creeks. A few areas remain, a particularly fine example being near Hickory Creek, south of Warren. Wetland Pine ,S'avannalt Originally widespread in poorly drained areas of pine uplands but now greatly reduced by drainage for hybrid pine plantations. Rich varieties of orchids. Some wetland savannah remains near Hickory Creek. River Flood Plains Occur along all the major creeks of the Thicket. Series of terraces, lowest of which are flooded annually. Very rich subtropical forest, varying in composi- tion from one creek to another depending on soil type, includes, bald cypress, tupelo gum, sweetgum, and various oaks. Fine examples along Village Creek, the lower Neches River and Pine Island Bayou. The region encompassing the confluences of Village Creek and Pine Island Bayou with the Neches River, just north of Beaumont, represents a mingling of river flood plain communities and brackinh cypress swamps. It contains an enormous variety of aquatic plants. Beech-Magnolia-Loblolly Pine Forest Tall subtropical mixed deciduous forest, occurring on relatively well-drained soils along all the major creeks, usually between the river flood plain and upland pine savannah formations. Especially rich in northern tree and shrub species, many of which reach the southern limit of their range here. SIZE OF AREA TO BE PRESERVED Preservation of a natural enclave automatically raises the question of the minimum area that needs to be preserved to insure the long range survival of the habitat. Such questions are often difficult to answer, since there are many in- tangibles or even total unknowns that enter into the picture. There are two major ecological considerations to be borne in mind, namely (1) insulation from outside interference and (2) maintenance of adequate population sizes of the larger animals. (1) Insulation From Outside Interference-A relatively self-contained natural area such as a small island, lake, or mountain need require only a few acres to insure undisturbed survival. On the other hand, the entire Everglades National Park is dependent upon flow of fresh water from further north and may thus be threatened by events many miles from its boundaries. The Big Thicket is totally dependent on a complex pattern of water drainage and seepage into and through the basin. At the very least, therefore, the rivers and creeks of the Thicket require careful protection. This should include preservation of creek lieadwaters either by inclusion in the preserve or by other arrangements necessary to prevent their potential pollution and a consequent threat to the flora and fauna of the Thicket. Such protection of the water systems should include, also, preservation of substantial acreage bordering the creeks and rivers to prevent contamination from adjacent private lands. Such buffer areas bordering the creeks should be especially wide in areas where aerial spraying of herbicides or insecticides could conceivably be carried out on neighboring lands. A width of at elast one mile on either side of such creeks might guarantee protection against such chemicals, either wind-drifted, accidentally sprayed or carried through soil seepage. In the Big Thicket we are concerned with preserving not one but many dif- ferent kinds of habitat. It is important that each be considered carefully and adequate areas of each be preserved to ensure survival of the ecological integrity of the region as a whole. A considerably larger area should thus be preserved than would be the case if only one habitat type was worthy of preservation. (2) Maintenance of Adequate Popvlation sizes oj Larger Animal Species.- To prevent regional extinction any population of organisms must maintain itself above a certain critical size. If it falls below this size, extinction results from inability to find mating partners or from loss of genetic variability through imbreeding. In the case of small animals, there is little problem since territories and home ranges usaully are also small and relatively large populations may occupy comparatively small areas. In the Big Thicket, however, there are several PAGENO="0212" 206 large mammal and bird species in which each breeding pair requires a cor- respondingly large territory or home range. A single pair of Texas red wolves, for example, may require several square miles of suitable habitat. It is easy to see, therefore, that a considerable area of contiguous habitat may be needed to prevent the population sizes of larger animals from falling to the danger level. It is not so easy, however, to come up with a precise figure for the minimum acre- age required. Clearly such acreage must be considerably increased if it takes the form of narrow strips of suitable habitat since freedom of movement of ter- restrial mammals would be more impeded than in uniform areas of suitable habitat. Preservation of the larger mammals and kinds is of considerable import- ance to the diversity of species in an ecosystem and hence, also, to its stability. It is now generally established that predators maintain diversity in food webs by preventing any one prey species from reaching outbreak levels and outcompeting other prey species. It is also clearly established that such diversity within foodwebs provides the `check and balances' which maintain the long term stability of the community. Whereas loss of a plant or insect species might not be critical to the ecology of a region, loss of a large carnivore could have widespread rami- fications. CONCLU5ION5 Considerations such as the above have led us to the belief that 200,000 acres is the minimum area that can guarantee the long-term preservation of the essential ecological components of the Big Thicket. We are joined in this belief by the more than 1,000 professional biologist.s from over 27 states who have cosponsored our petition to save the Big Thicket. One hundred thousand acres would clearly be better than nothing, though such a compromise would inevitably expose the preserve to considerable risk of interference from activities on adja- cent private lands. If 100,000 acres is the maximum area which can be pre- served-which we would regret-then there is one point, on which there can be no debate. The areas to be preserved must be carefully specified so that adequate enclosures of each of the different community types are properly represented. Among the areas which are most worthy of preservation are the following: A. The Creeks and Rivers.-The vital importance of protecting the water quality and balance of the Big Thicket has been mentioned earlier. As many as possible of the creeks should be included along with a substantial buffer zone on either side. The major such creeks are, Pine Island Bayou, Big Sandy Creek, Cypress Creek, Turkey Creek, Beech Creek, Village Creek and the Xeches River. Preservation of these creeks along with wide margins would,also include accept- able areas of river flood plain and beech-inagnolia-loblohly pine forest communi- ties. Also included would be some areas of acidbog-baygall and palmetto-hard- wood communities. B. Confluence of Pine Island Bayou and Neches Ri.ver.-This region, just north of Beaumont, contains well-developed areas of palmetto-hardwood and impressive stands of river flood plain and cypress swamp forests. C. Hickory ~Yreek.-One of the very few remaining areas of upland pine savan- nah occurs south of Warren on both sides of Highway 69. Also present here are some small remaining areas of wetland pine savannah. As much as possible of what remains should be preserved since this habitat type is especially vulnerable to human destruction. D. Jack Gore Baygall.-A particularly fine example of acidbog-baygahl habitat, this area northeast of Silsbee could be included in a widened Neches River preserve. B. Prairie.-Every effort should be made to secure at least one of the few remaining islands of prairie between Pine Island Bayou and the Trinity River. We understand that remnants of the Bessemay Prairie remain in a natural state, though much of it has been drained for pine plantations. Marysee Prairie, another of the last virgin prairies of the region, has apparently been reduced to less than 100 acres and is being converted into homesites. It is possible that part of it may yet be saved. At the very least, part of the loblolly pine area northeast of Moss Hill could be preserved. This area represents former prairie which has been invaded by trees since prevention of the grass fires w-hich formerly main- tained the prairie formation. Inclusion of the above regions in a preserve would assure protection of speci- men areas of each major habitat type from immediate destruction. It is vitally important for the long-term survival of the flora and fauna of the Big Thicket, PAGENO="0213" 207 however, that substantial additional acreage be included, preferably in large contiguous areas. It is only in these larger areas of undisturbed natural vege- tation that many of the larger birds and mammals can maintain a refuge from regional or total extinction. [From Science, Feb. 9, 1973] THE Bia THICKET NATIONAL PARK Texas, to the unknowing, conjures up an image of monotony-cattle, sage- brush, and mesquite in a setting of unvarying vastness. But to the resident and traveler, Texas is a land of contrasts and splendor, and to the biologically alert, it is a land of many resources worth preserving. One of the most interesting areas of the state is the sprawling semiwilderness north of Houston and Beaumont that goes by the name of Big Thicket. A region of extraordinary botanical exuberance, the Thicket is ecologically unique not only to Texas but to the entire North American expanse as well. Located at the crossroads between the forests of the South and East and the vegetation of the West, the Thicket includes in its pine-hardwood stands elements from all convergent zones. A wet climate and a water-storing soil combine to nurture the mixture of lushness. Fully 15 of the trees designated by the United States as "national champions" are from the Thicket, including longleaf pine. American holly, black hickory, Texas honey locust, sweet bay magnolia, Rugel sugar maple, and water tupelo. The fauna is no less impressive. Vertebrates, and par- ticularly birds, abound in number and kind, and the diversity of arthopods is second to few that I have encountered in field work in 45 states and three other continents. But sheer abundance or record sizes is not what matters about the Thicket. It is the way in which diversity of kind is combined with diversity of association that gives the area its special mark. Plant communities of very different types exist in contiguity or near-contiguity in the Thicket-upland communities, savan- nahs, beech-magnolia communities, bogs, palmetto-bald cypress-hardwood com- munities, floodplain forests, and several others have been recognized. Seen in worldwide ecological perpective, the Big Thicket may well be one of the most richly substructured regions in existence. For this reason alone, if not also for its magnificence, the Thicket is worth saving. It is an invaluable and irreplace- able natural resource. Today, after years of encroachment upon the area, mostly through lumbering, only about a tenth of the original 3.4 million acres of the Thicket remains in a state that can be called wild or semi~vild. But the remnant includes much of what is most valuable in the Thicket, and its preservation should be assured now. Creating a Big Thicket National Park is an obvious and immediately practicable solution, and there are welcome signs these days that legislators, lumbermen. and conservationists have begun to agree on the need for a park. But what re- mains unsettled is whether the park will encompass sufficient acreage to ensure its survival. The consensus among scientists who recently petitioned the govern- ment-a total of several hundred from almost 30 states, including some of the most prominent biologists in the nation-is that at least 200,000 acres will need to be set aside for the preserve. It is to be hoped that this judgment will be ap- popriately weighted-THoMAs EISNER, Division of Biological Sciences, Cornell University, Itivaca, New York 14850 Senator BIBLE. The next witness is Mi's. Paul Trest, chairman of Save Our Homes and Lands, in Silsbee, Tex. STATEMENT OP MRS. PAUL TREST, CHAIRMAN OP SOHAL, SAVE OUR HOMES AND LANDS, SILSBEE, TEX. Mrs. TREST. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I will try to be as brief as possible. As you know, there is not very much left of the Big Thicket, and that has been concluded. Now we have worked for many, many years on this so we do know this to be so. The problem now, as I see it, is that we have been hemmed in by forests to the north of us. PAGENO="0214" 208 We were very happy to have them but we have Angelita, Davy Crockett, Sabine National, and Sam Houston. In the process of form- ing these forests, we have been pushed down into the southern corner. So these seven counties naturally have more population than one would imagine. I come `bearing resolutions from the counties involved. These are certified resolutions. The first one is from Polk County, which states that they only would go for about 35,500-acre park. They seem to think that this is necessary. They want to delete all homes and onstream corridors. Our second one is the Tyler County resolution. All of these are signed, of course, by the county govern- ing bodies. Tyler `County also wants a 35,500-acre park, with no homes or no corridors. Next, we come to Jasper County. Jasper County goes along with us with the 35,500-acre park. Let me go back to Polk County, sir. I have made a mistake. Polk County only wants Menard Creek deleted. Menard Creek has four subdivisions plus its dams and improved areas. Of course, this is too much property, they feel, to be taken. Now the Commissioner's Court of Jasper `County, as I said, they would like 35,500 contained acre park. They want no rivers, bayou, or creek corridors or no homes taken. Jasper County has a great amount of property to lose, as you can see. The Sally Withers, the Jack Gore Baygall Unit, the Neches River corridor, clear from dam B to the `Orange County line. All of these areas that I have mentioned do contain many, many homes, farms, ranches, and permanent campsites. What I mean by permanent is they do own the land. But it is a part-time home. The Jefferson County resolution is signed by the court and they stand opposed to the bill as it is. They would like the bill changed or amended. Now we go back to Hardin County which is the `hardest hit of all of them. This is our county. They want over 50,000 acres from our county. Our commissioner's court has signed a resolution, also, for 35,500-acre contained park with no homes or no stream corridors te. be taken. We have taken from our county the lower half of the Turkey Creek Unit which contains the oldest settlement in Hardin County. We have the Neches Bottom and Jack Gore Baygall Unit, the Beaumont Unit, the 25,500-acre Lance Rosier Unit, the Neches River corridor, Little Pine Island Bayou and part of the Big Pine Island Bayou. All of these units do contain many homes, ranches, farms, and permanent campsites. In Big Pine Island Bayon alone we have many homes appraised from $20~000 to $70,000 dollars. The school and county tax tructure of Hardin County cannot stand this catastrophic impact of losing over 50,000 acres of prime taxable items. This is over 10 percent of the entire county. We are also losing factories, et cetera, that are afraid to come into our area until the Big Thicket park issue is resolved. Hardin County needs these to up- grade their economy. The last census of Hardin County population is now completely wrong. We have had a great influx of people escaping the congestion of Beaumont. Lumberton alone in the corporated and incorporat~d areas has grown to over four times the census figure. PAGENO="0215" 200 These people are here. You can no longer look the other way and hope they will disappear. We have amendments that I would like to bring up just now that we feel should be put to any bill, just what- ever bill comes through. Section 1, page 10, line 11, should be amended- Senator BIBLE. Do you have extra copies of those, Mrs. Trest? Mrs. TRE5T. I have an extra copy. I have given extra copies to the numerous Senators, et cetera. Senator BIBLE. I do not seem to have a copy before me. Will the staff get it? Then I can follow it better. I now have the proposed amend- ments. I do not think you need to read them in full because we will have to study and analyze them. Mrs. TREST. We would like a provision to be made for rebate of taxes, loss from revenue of ad valorem taxes. We would like a pro- vision to be amended on section 3 to provide for more than 3 acres in a one-family dwelling for a farmer or a livestock producer. The allocation of 3 acres, one-family dwelling, is inadequate for a farmer or rancher. Mr. Chairman, I do not need to tell you that in this time of scarcities and inflation that we need all the farms and ranches right now that we can get. Senator BIBLE. How many are there within the taking area? Mrs. TREST. I do not have the exact number, but there are many be- cause I speak for seven counties and we have traveled at great lengths and there is a lot of ranches. In all of these units you will find ranches and farms. Senator BIBLE. Does the Park Service have a figure on the 3-acre farms within the taking area, an approximate figure? Mrs. TRE5T. These are not 3-acre farms. These are large farms. They allow only a 3-acre dwelling for anyone. Mr. HENNEBERGER. Not at this time, no. Senator BIBLE. They will secure that information. Mrs. TREST. Good. Now, in the river corridors, we want this amended to eliminate the units d~signat.cd as the Upper Neches Val- ley Rivers addition, Neches Bottom, Jack Gore Ba.yga.ll IJnit, Lower Neches Ba.ygall Unit and Pine Island Bayou Unit. This is an acquisition of streams and banks that will prohibit the growth in the area by elimination of access to the. banks and navigable streams and bogs. As you can see from your nmp, they all ~ay they need water for the units and we agree with this. Because as I said we do want a. park. But. I see. streams in every one of these units. I do see water without. taking the corridors. We want all the private homes removed. Senator BIBLE. You mean you want them excluded from the taking area? Mrs. TREST. That is bad phraseology, isn't it? Senator BIBLE. I understand what you are. saying. Mrs. TnnsT. We also would like, this determination of homes up- dated. We have a determination of homes of July 1, 1973. We would like this updated to at least December 3, 1973, when the bill passed the House. so people. are at. least alerted to the. fact that there might finally be a bill passed. Senator BIBLE. How many homes fall in that category? Mrs. TREST. In our area. the Liimberton area, there is quite a number of homes that fall into this category that. have recently been built. PAGENO="0216" 210 Senator BIBLE. What does "quite a number" mean? Ten? Twenty? Thirty? Forty? Fifty? Mrs. TREST. Along the bayou, I would say six or seven in our area. When you go up to the Menard Creek area where `all the numerous subdivisions have been recently built, there are 50 homes in one area in Polk County and I would say at least 10 of those were built since July 1. Now, the size of the preserve. We want that amended to have either less than 84,500 acres or to more evenly distribute the acreage. Senator Bmi~. Among the seven counties Mrs. TREST. Right. I believe Liberty County has the same biological and botannical features as Hardin County. So we would be willing to shunt a little of this land over from Hardin County to relieve us. The last, of course, this is a clarification. We would like it in more simple language. They say in this bill I believe that on the date of acquisition they will pay you for your home and on this same date of acquisition less the amount of time that you will stay there. In the meantime we must, of course, maintain this `home up to its proper level at the time they acquired it. Then, if this person leaves, they forfeit all moving rights, et cetera. So this should be further clarified, to keep, perhaps, an older person, or something, from misunderstanding. I believe this is about all that I can bring you in a hurry. But I would like to tell you that I think it is far past the time that our representatives ignore our problem in these seven counties, because the population has increased so much and this is an entirely different picture we present this year than it was even last year. It is growing this fast. Senator BIBLE. I understand. You are saying whatever we do, do it quickly. Mrs. TREST. Do it quickly and unbiased. [Subsequent to the hearings Mrs. Trest submitted the following :~ LUMBERTON, Tnx., January 29, 1974. Hon. ALAN BIBLE, Chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks and Recreation, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. Gentlemen: As a prelude to this letter of testimony, may I say that in 1938 when the first Resolution was introduced for a Big Thicket Preserve the Big Thicket was there. In 1965 when a bill was presented, some of the Big Thicket was there. Now in 1974, there is very little of the Big Thicket. This is what we have asked to be preserved, and after years of research we feel tha.t 35,500 acres is more than a sufficient amount to preserve the Botanical and Biological species that are left. The bill as it is will place a greater burden on the United States Tax Payers, and a double burden on the people of the Park area, and all for a walk through Preserve from which we cannot expect a very great monetary return, as only very devout naturalists will brave this rugged area. These are troubled times of inflation and many shortages, we need, more than ever our Farms and Ranches. When I come before your Committee, I will bring Resolutions from the Texas Counties that will contain parts of the Big Thicket National Park Pre- serve. These are signed by the County Governing Bodies and represent over 80% of the thinking of their people. I also bring letters from Texas Representa- tive Herman Adams, Texas Senator Don Adams and Texas Governor Dolph Briscoe. Resolutions The Polk County resolution is signed by County Judge Peyton Walters and Commissioners Donald Hill, Gary Walker, Sidney Adams and Ester Duff, and states PAGENO="0217" 211 Be it resolved all taxing jurisdictions be paid a cash settlement in lieu of Taxes, at the date of taking; That the proposed water corrider along Menard Creek be deleted; That the Department of Interior exercise discretion in eliminating Residen- tial areas. The Menard Creek area has four subdivisions in Polk County, 510 Lots and over 50 homes. They have an office, recreation center, stores, a 97 surface acre Lake with a dam and 2 smaller lakes, all built at great expense. The Tyler County resolution is signed by County Judge Tom D. Mann and Commissioners Joe I. Best, H. M. Parks, and states: Be it resolved that the Commissioners Court of Tyler County, Tex., opposes the establishment of a Big Thicket Biological and Botanical Preserve of more than 35,500 contained acres; and Be it furt her resolved That no homes be taken; and Be it resolved That no river, bayou or Creek Corriders `be taken. Tyler County will lose the Hickory Creek Savannah Unit, Beech Creek Unit and the Neches Corrider along their east boundary. There are homes, farms and ranches in these units and many homes and permanent camps along the corridors. The Jasper County resolution is signed by County Judge Glibert Adams and Commissioners E. B. May, Doyle Hancock, Charles E. Smith and Corbit White- head, and states: Be it resolved That the Commissioners Court of Jasper County, Texas opposes the establishment of a Big Thicket National Preserve of more than 35,500 con- tained acres; and Be it resolved That no homes be taken; and Let it be further resolved that no river, bayou, or creek corriders be taken. Jasper County will lose the Sally Withers addition, a part of the Jack Gore Baygall Unit and the Neches River Corridor that follows their west `boundary from Dam B to the Orange County Line. All these areas contain many homes, farms, ranches and permanent camps. The Jefferson County resolution is signed by County Judge Chester C. Young and Commissioners Ted R. Walker, Dave Smith Jr., James A. Smith Jr. and Norman Troy, and states: We move that this Court oppose the Big Thicket National Park preserve bill as it is now written. Jefferson County will lose 1,050 acres of prime waterfront lots, and beautiful subdivisions with many homes. The Hardin County Resolution is signed by County Judge Emmett Lack and Commissioners Virgil Carraway, `Hugh Bevil Means, Rex Moore and Paul M. Trest, and states: Be it resolved That the Commissioners Court of Hardin Oounty, Texas opposes the establishment of a Big Thicket National Park Preserve of more than 35,500 contained acres; and Be it resolved That no homes be taken; and Be it further resolved That no river, bayou or creek corridors be taken. Hardin County is the hardest hit of all the counties included in the preserve. H.R. 11546 will take the lower half of the Turkey Creek Unit, that contains the oldest settlement in Hardin County, the Neches Bottom & Jack Gore Baygall Unit, the Beaumont Unit, the 25,500 acre Lance Rozier Unit, the Neches River Corridor, Little Pine Island Bayou, and part of the Big Pine Island Bayou. All these Units contain too many homes, ranches, farms and permanent camps for anyone to get an accurate count in so short a time. Big Pine Island Bayou has many homes appraised from $20,000 to $70,000 on the Hardin County side. The school and county tax structure cannot stand the catastrophic impact of losing over `50,000 acres of Prime Taxable Items. This is over 10 percent of the entire county. We are also losing factories, etc., that are afraid to come into our area until the Big Thicket Park issue is resolved. Hardin County needs these to upgrade their economy. The last census of Hardin County population is now completely wrong. We have had a great influx of people escaping the congestion of Beaumont. Lumber- ton alone (corporated and incorporated) has grown to over 4 times the census figure. These people are' here, you can no longer look the other way and hope they will disappear. Gentlemen, it is far past the time that you, the elected leaders of our great United States, sworn to protect the civil rights and liberties PAGENO="0218" 212 of we the people, keep your oath of office, gather with us, and look at this issue in a true and unbiased light. Thank you, Mrs. PAUL TBEST, Director of ~S.O.H.A.L. Senator Bmu~. We will certainly try to be unbiased. Thank you very much. Our next witness is Mrs. Oscar Yellot, chairman, Citizenship Coordinating Committee, Silsbee, Tex. STATEMENT OP MRS. OSCAR YELLOT, CHAIRMAN, CITIZENSHIP COORDINATING COMMITTEE, SILSBEE, TEX. Mrs. YELLOT. Thank you, Senator. I am Mrs. Oscar Yellot. I reside in Hardin County, Tex., on Pine Island Bayou. I am a charter member of the Big Thicket Association and worked hard and long to promote the beautiful dream of a Big Thicket Park. Now, we find that what we have is not suitable for a park. The bill is for a preserve. There is a lot of difference, as you know. However, if we are to stick to our original purpose of preserving that which is unique from the biological, botanical, and ecological standpoint, a preserve is what we wanted all the time. By the same token, we need to be `honest with the people who are to pick up the ticket, the American taxpayer. We the `people are faced with the tragedy of our lifetime. We are caught in the fight between two special interest groups. The timber interest and the environmentalist. In addition, the energy crisis and the runaway inflation have dealt us a staggering blow and that, gentlemen, is my reason for standing here before you today. I wish to appeal to you in the name of justice to study this proposed Big Thicket Preserve legislation as individuals and to give every con- sideration to we the people who will suffer from the catastrophic ha- pact of the bill which passed the House. Remember that not one man who endorsed this bill or who urged its passage, lives in either of the seven counties involved, knows the con- ditions existing in our area, or its problems. The same is true of the men who are members of this `body who have introduced `bills pertain- ing to the Big Thicket Preserve. Hopefully, we may help you to better understand. The scientists who have so freely spoken of the wonders of the area not only do not live in the area but in most instances have flown over in helicopters, stopped, walked a few miles around the edge of the area and then gone their way to talk of the sand beds and little ponds as expert witnesses. Gentlemen, we want you to insist that there be a scientific search for truth. Let there be proof of what is still left to preserve. Is it a group of bogland units, each possessing the surrounding, acreage bought up by investors with the hope of bleeding the taxpayers of America for a handsome profit? Is it some family's cherished home, their pasture land, ga~rden or farm? You can find the answers. You can expose the truth. You can pass a bill to create a Big Thicket Preserve that will bring justice to all. To do this we must forget all the Alice-in-Wonderland stories and think of the hard core facts. One fact that sticks out over and over PAGENO="0219" 213 again is that the only valuable acreage left to preserve is that which has been placed under moratorium orders by the timber companies. We are told that 550 acres known as the loblolly unit is virgin tim- ber. Also, that several other tracts are beautiful timberlands and have been protected by the companies who own them waiting for a decision to be made. I know no one in the timber industry and, therefore, do not share the hate and distrust that some may have nor the blind faith that others feel. However, I do know that during the 35 years that a Big Thicket Park was being proposed many changes have taken place. The added years of man's life expectancy has resulted in a need for several generations to live on the same homestead. We find communi- ties in the area like the Brown Settlement which represents a settle- ment started in the early 1830's. Providence, which is said to be one of the oldest settlements in Texas. We are told that the antiquity laws of the State protect these settle- ments from encroachment for a 5-mile square area. Yet you have been included in the House bill which passed on sus- pension Monday and with voice vote. Also we know that since America was settled people have always built homes on the banks of streams and many fine homes are built upon these corridors which are included in this bill. Homes are built all through the Lance Rosier unit and Menard Creek and upon the corridors of the Neches River. Why were these corridors included in the bill? They are no part of the Big Thicket and the improvements upon them will cost the taxpayers millions of dollars, if the people are to receive fair market value. Let us talk about the discrimination against Hardin County. Over 50,000 acres of this proposed preserve is to be taken from one county? Why? Don't tell us that tourism will take care of the lost taxes. Our Indian reservation has been closed except on weekends because of the lack of tourism. The energy crisis has caused motels, eating establish- ments, filling stations and many other kinds of businessses which catered to tourist to close. Mr. Wils~ himself made the statement to the managing editor of the Beaumont Enterprise and Journal, Mr. Leonard Duckett, that, quote: The average person wanting to get away from Beaumont, Orange or Port Arthur won't get any benefits from this. It will be left a wilderness, and only the hard core naturalist will want to hike there. Let's face it. It is a mass of rats, snakes, swamp, and mosquitoes. The money should be spent to further develop Steinhagen, Sam Rayburn and Toledo Bend facilities. The people of Hardin County should not be asked to suffer the tax loss to provide a hobby for a few hardcore naturalists. The only fair way to determine how many acres the preserve should need is to employ a team of scientific naturalists to work with a committee composed of representation from the timber interest. We tile people and the Big Thicket Association and this group should submit their report to Congress. We would soon know why a gift of 30,000 acres for a preserve was turned down by the Big Thicket Association. We would soon know if this bill is truly to establish a preserve or to control our waterways. We would soon know whether it is possible to satisfy the people who put certain Texas politicians in office. PAGENO="0220" 214 We do not want Mr. Orwell's 1984 to come to pass. The interest on our national debt is costing us $2 billion per month. When will this stop? Never, unless we refuse to be coerced into pleasing special-inter- est groups and unless we stand staunch and true besides the people who must pay this interest and say, "The moment of truth has arrived." Only that which is worth `preserving shall be preserved. There are hundreds of homes in this proposed area. You can count them for yourself. The appropriation by the Office of Management and Budget is not enough to buy the unimproved land let `alone the $40,000 to $75,000 homes which are in Rose Hill Acres and other corridor developments. There should be no legislation without appropriations. The person who reportedly speaks of this legislation as greased legislation should explain to this Senate committee just what he means by this expression. Last but not least, remember what was once called the Big Thicket is no more. Instead you have people living in homes, raising cattle, plant- ing gardens, building schools and churches, raising children and send- ing them to school and to church. Certified resolutions from the elected officials of our counties have been furnished you. These are the men who represent every human being in these counties. They were put in office just as you have been placed in office, by the vote of the people. Surely, you as no other men know just how concerned they are about the disastrous effects of this legislation on their counties. There must be ample tax rebates. These men are on the local front. They live on the scene. These men have met. These men have spoken. Do you think they should be ignored? I am representing 18,000 persons by resolutions and 2,500 by signed petitions. A total of 20,500 people who have said loud and clear, "We ask you to reconsider." Give us a preserve we can live with. Forget the size and determine the true quality of that which is to be preserved. Forget recreation. We have 180 miles of undeveloped shoreline on Toledo Bend Lake. We do not need to pay for more land for recreation. Just develop that which we have already paid for, and i~ever forget the cold, gray flint rock by the side of the road. It remains there inani- mate, year after year, but hit it hard enough and the sparks will fly and sparks and forest and preserves are not a good mixture. Thank you. Senator BIBLE. That is a very emphatic statement. That is a beauti- ful statement. I understand what you mean. I have no problem under- standing it. It is a fine statement. Our next witness will be Mr. Edward Fritz, Texas `Committee on Natural Resources, Dallas, Tex. Mr. Fritz. STATEMENT OP EDWARD PRITZ, TEXAS COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, DALLAS, TEX. Mr. FRITZ. Mr. Chairman, we are for the 100,000-acre park includ- ing each addition recommended by Senators Tower and Bentsen. We are for the Pine Island Bayou corridor flexible in width. Mr. Harless has `based his testimony on an inflexible 600-foot corridor on each side. But H.R. 11546 is flexible. It could go down to 100 feet in order to PAGENO="0221" 215 avoid a few homes that are about 150 feet away. Most of them are more than that. We hope that the Senate will tell the National Park Serv- ice to zig-zag the boundaries so that they will exclude all homes in the Pine Island Bayou corridor. If they had done so sooner I do not think we would have had quite so much prOblem. The people might want the banks, but the banks are essential to the preservation of the Beaumont unit below as well as to a magnificent corridor there that does add much to the Big Thicket. Now, Mr. Harless is mistaken in his written statement in saying that it does not go through the Beaumont unit. It actually does, and you can see on NPS map 91026 that the House bill calls for land on the south side as well as the north side of the Beaumont unit. It calls for land in Jefferson County as well as Hardin County, therefore, and it is protecting both banks and not just one bank. But even if it was just to protect one bank of the valuable Beaumont unit, it would be essential. We are for Big Sandy Village Creek preserve. That would stretch all the way from the Big Sandy unit up there all the way down to the Neches River. But we are particularly for the Sandylands-Pines unit. I have a detailed map of that among the exhibits which I am about to present which excludes all permanent residences. We are for legis- lative taking for five reasons that are set forth in exhibit Q here. Since the Senator has expressed an interest, if there is time, I would like to reason with the Senator and I hope reassure the Senator about that. There is one thing, though. The first reason the Senator has al~ ready heard in part and that is that these areas are being cut and in part spike cut and in part accidental cut. But the areas that should be included are being cut, and one of them that has not been mentioned in particular is that a big timber com- pany has cut into the Sandyland-Ponds unit within the last 2 month's. This is the kind of thing, also, that needs to be stopped. The only way that it can be stopped in this instance is by legislative taking. There are many other considerations for it that are in my exhibit. Senator BIBLE. Fine. That will be made a part of the record. Mr. FRITZ. Exhibit R is a list of some of the unusual wildflowers. Exhibit S is the breakdown that I mentioned which shows the Sandy- lands-Ponds unit and the precise boundaries that we might recom- mend, subject to change by the National Park Service, to follow prop- erty lines, instead of biological lines, if necessary. Exhibit T is a beautiful illustration of how the Sandylands-Ponds unit fits in and pictures showing some of the rare `and actually unique qualities of this area. Nowhere else in 24-mile length is there a com- plete stretch of ecological succession ponds known to science. A stream-oriented very unique factor. Senator BIBLE. Without objection, the total package will be made a part of the record. Mr. FRITZ. Exhibits U, V, and W are by Mrs. Geraldine Watson, which are beautiful illustrations of how th~ Sandylands-Ponds unit form, showing why it is so unique. Exhibits X, Y, and Z are copies of the maps introduced by the Pine Island Bayou Association, asking homes to be relieved and. show- ing the two or three homes only that are about 150 feet,, where a special, deeper zig than usual would have to be done in order to enable the public to have. access up and down the streams and its banks. PAGENO="0222" 216 Senator BmLL Very fine. And I appreciate your testimony. You have always been a valuable witness and very helpful.~ * Mr. FRITZ. Thank you, Senator. It has been a pleasure to be with you on these trips and we appreciate your acute observation of all of the facts involved. [The prepared statement of Mr. Fritz follows:] `STATEMENT OF EDWARD C. FRITZ, CHAIRMAN, TEXAS COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, DALLAS, TEX. The Texas Oommtttee on Natural Resources, a citizens organization, favors a Big Thicket National ~reserve which includes: (1) The units and corridors in the House-passed H.R. 11546, with minor exceptions. (2) In addition, a Sandy lands-Ponds Unit containing 16,000 acres.' `(3) `in addition, Big Sandy Creek Corridor, 2900 acres. (4) `In addition, Joe's Lake Unit, 3000 acres. (5) `In addition, `a northward expansion of Jack Gore Baygall, up to 10,000 acres. (6) A total of at least 100,000 acres. `(7) `If necessary to replace any area of H.R. 11546 in order to allow addition of items (2), (3), and (4), above, the following pieces should be deducted from H.R. 11546: the northeast adjunct of the Lance Rossier Unit, 5000 acres; and the downstream % of the Menard Greek Corridor Unit, 3000 acres. `(8)' Legislative taking, effective upon enactment, as to all lands as to which The National Park Service can define the boundaries. `Let us summarize each of `these items: (1) H.R. 11546 IT.R. 11546 resulted from a compromise between two of the several sponsors of Big Thicket bills sometime prior to the House subcommittee hearings in Wash- ington, D.C., and months before mark-up began. True, one of those `two men is Congressman from the d'istridt embracing most of the National PreServe. But the entire Preserve lies in the district of bot'h Texas Senators, and they di'd not join in the compromise. The two compromisers have given no convincing reason why some areas were omi'tted. Onl~y one organization out of some 60 endorsers of a 100,000-acre National Area has yet agreed to this comprom'ise. (2) SANDY LANDS-PONDS UNIT (a) Need To Add Sandy Lands-Ponds Ecosystem: The House-passed bill (H.R. 11546) fails to include a representative sample of arid saudylands with cactus, yucca, and blue-jack oak typical of southwestern desert plant association. With- out sandy lands, the `Preserve does not set aside the Biological Crossroads which make the Big Thicket unique. Attached is a list of some flowers of this unit: Southwestern `Desert Cactus yucca Eastern Forest Beech-Whiteoak Southeastern Forest Ma'gnolia-longleaf pine-loblolly pine (b) Need To Add Ecological Succession Ponds: The aforesaid Sandylands- Ponds Unit of 16,000 acres, omitted by the House, includes a string of ponds covering every stage of succession including a young abandoned channel, a yellow lake beginning to cloud up, a mud lake beginning to fill, a grass-lake with rare vegetation taking over and with floating islands, a sedge pond covered with plants, a closed acid bog through which you can walk on sphagnum moss, to dryland covered with azaleas, all within 24 miles of each other. Such a stream-associated complete succession is unique to science in the entire world. Studies are beginning to establish more knowledge about wetland animal and plant succession than man has ever known. (3) BIG SANDY CREEK There are three special reasons for acquiring that portion of the streamside zone which stretches from the southern boundary of Big Sandy Unit on down- stream to where the Turkey Creek Unit roots onto a small part of Village `An adequate Sandylands-Poncls Unit comprises 16,000 acres. PAGENO="0223" 217 Creek. This zone contains the longest line of beech-magnolia-loblolly forest in proposed national area, much of it uncut for 40 years. This zone contains a 30-mile stretch of a trailsite, high along the bluff, close to the stream, the only long stretch in the proposed national preserve which remains unflooded at all times. This zone is the only one in the proposed preserve which is paralleled by a nearby paved road, thus making it ideal for the construction of short spurs into the zone for such vehicular purposes as parking, canoe-launching, fishing, and reaching the hiking trail. (4) JOE'S LAKE UNIT The Unit, itself, is pure forest. Ancient oaks and black gum thrive in this densest closed-canopy forest in the Big Thicket. Here flourishes the only stand of jew-el flower (impatiens biflora) in the entire region. Here thrives the heaviest population of whitetailed deer in the Big Thicket, and, perhaps, the world. This has all the aspects of a virgin forest, except for a few scattered old stumps. Following are further characteristics: elevation 55 feet; grey clay and sandy soils; mature riverbottom hardw-ood forest with occasional loblolly pines; mostly open w-oods w-ith 100 foot overhead canopy; several sloughs with cypress and tupelo gum trees; bordered on east by Neches River; cypress and oak timber selectively harvested many years ago. (5) NORTHWARD EXPANSION OF JACK GORE BAYGALL From Timber Slough Road northward to along the ~est side of the Neches River almost to Bush Lake is an old forest which contains the largest known stand of big bitternut hickories in the nation, and the biggest red maples in the Big Thicket, and other unique forest features. The oldest forest is in the east half (5,000 acres). This forest inc'udes many giants, including the state champion bitteriiut hickory, a monster rising to 120 feet in height. One shumard oak (quercus shumardii) also classified as an endangered species, reaches the awesome height of 136 feet, tallest tree in the Big Thicket, tallest of its species in the nation, and one of the ten tallest of all species east of the Rocky Moun- tains. One bald cypress has knees fifteen feet high. (6) 100,000 ACRES The House bill contains 84,500 acres of good plant associations. Adding a Sandylands-Pond Unit alone would necessitate an increase to 100,00(1 acres. (7) R~LACEMENT The Big Thicket Coordinating Committee and National Park Service recom- mended 20,000 acres for the Lance Rosier Unit. H.R. 11546 provides 25,000. BTCC recommended only the upper 1/3 of the Menard Creek Corridor Unit. NPS recommended none. H.R. 11546 provides 3600 acres. Of this, about 3000 acres is west of the Big Thicket geotopic basin. If necessary, these 8000 acres could be replaced in order to make room for more vitally needed areas. (8) LEGISLATIVE TAKING (a) Small landowners who own close to 50% of the acreage covered by H.R. 11546, are cutting their timber, partly from spite. One timber company has cut extensively in the Sandyland-Ponds Unit. The only way to stop this is by legis- lative taking. (b) Legislative taking does not give the Big Thicket acquisition priority over previously authorized projects. (o) Nat Reed, Assistant Secretary of Interior, has stated that the Adminis- tration plans to fund the entire purchase in three years-$16 million budgeted the first year and $1 million each succeeding year, totalling 38 million dollars. This is without legislation taking. That plan covers only the 68 thousand acres proposed by the Interior. The cost of additional acreage is the same per acre, according to independent appraisers, thus requiring about $25 million more to bring it up to $100 million. This would take another year. At 6% interest per year on the unpaid purchase price, the interest cost might run only $7.5 million in interest. (d) Legislative taking would fix the purchase price at date of taking and prevent escalation. Without it, the price would probably escalate from two to ten times, as it has recently in sub-divisions along the Guadalupe River in Texas. PAGENO="0224" 218 (e) The National Park Service has had five months since the House subcom- mittee report to determine boundaries in the 84,500 acres. Therefore, a six month delay for legislative taking is no longer necessary, as in the House bill. The Senate should provide for taking on enactment. I shall now discuss in detail the five vitally needed additions, items (2) through (6), above. VITALLY NEEDED ADDITIONS [Map A attached hereto, shows the location of these proposed additions superimposed on the configuration adopted by the House Parks and Recreation Subcommittee on October 16, 1973, NBR-BT- 91026] 1. ARID SANDYLANDS Entering the Big Thicket geatopic basin from the arid southwest is a branch of desert-like ecosystem. This branch, joining the beech-white oak forest from the northeast and the longleaf pine-loblolly pine-magnolia-baldcypress plant as- sociations from the east, gives the Big Thicket that extra leg which aggrandizes it from a biological corner to a biological crossroads. The principal expanse of arid sandylands in the Big Thicket lies along both sides of Village Creek from its junction with Turkey Creek down to just below Highway 96. Map 1 shows this stretch, called Sandylands-Ponds Unit, compris- ing some 16,000 acres. As a twin result of the geologic history of Village Creek, the arid sandylands embrace another phenomenon, the ecological succession ponds described below as Vitally Needed Addition No. 2. These ponds are scattered among the arid sandylands and Village creek bottomlands. Within Addition 1-2, the northermost stretch of sandylands-ponds surrounds McNeely Lake, east of Turkey Creek, and extends eastward and southward along `both sides of Turkey Creek. On the south side, it includes Devil's Pocket Acid Bog and Parker's Pond. It joins the Aligator Grass-Pond section at Highway 416. Map 2a depicts this Devil's Pocket Acid Bog section. Map 2b depicts the most outstanding strech of handylands-ponds, he Al- ligator Grass-Pond `section, embracing some eight ponds and baygalls. This middle section contains 5,000 acres. The northern half of it, starting at Highway 416, is the most concentrated of all, `but is not considered large enough to with- stand, alone, the tremendous tourist pressure which would be placed on the sandylands, and certainly not the ponds. Map 2c covers the southern (Clear Lake) section of the Sandylands-Ponds Unit, including Clear Lake, Pirate Perch Pond, Yellow Lake, Mud Lake and Snowy Orchid fields. Inclusion of all three sections of the~ Sandylands-Ponds Unit is essential to demonstrate the full succession from recently abandoned channel to closed acid bog. No two sections have it all. A. Geologic wonders Village Creek basks in a fascinating geologic history, which helps to give Additions 1-2, and each portion thereof, great interpretive potential. Guides to the area explain the ecological rarities to visitors by telling the following story: In some ancient era, long millennia before the American Indian first braved the depths of the Big Thicket, the `sea retreated, the land lifted, the rains poured, and a stream cut a wide valley from northwest to southeast. Then conditions changed, and the stream re-filled its valley with sands from upstream. These sand deposits are often hundreds of feet deep alone the sides of the stream. By the time white man came, the stream had shrunk. It now carves only a small wedge in the top of its former sand deposits. White man, `seeing an Indian village near the stream, called it Village Creek. Other white men named its upper stretch Big Sandy Out of its unique geological aspects Big Sandy Village Creek is strikingly different from all the other streams in the Big Thicket It flows under bluffs thirty to fifty feet high for most of its distance because its sandy base is easy to cut through The sandy inclines afford an excellent milieu for a beech mug nolia loblolly forest which holds the soil along many stretches in almost verti cal escarpments Beyond these forested bluffs the arid sandylands lie flat and well-drained, except in spots where layers of clay hold the frequent rains in ponds These ponds range in age from hundreds to thousands of years PAGENO="0225" 219 There is no other stream like Village Creek in the Big Thicket. The Neches River, to the east, is quite different. It meanders through a broad, flat flood- plain. South of Highway 1013, there are no bluffs above its cutlvanks. Pine Island Bayou, to the south of Village Creek is also different. It loiters through palmetto flats, with hardly even a cutbank, much less a bluff. Without Village Creek, the Big Thicket National Preserve would miss much of its depth and diversity. This zone is the only stream in the proposed national area which cuts into six geological formations (the Neches, its nearest rival, cuts through only three). B. Botanical importance The arid sandylands are one of the eight major plant associations of the Big Thicket.2 The arid sandylands, containing some plants characteristic of south- western desert, provide the western leg of the diversity which makes the Big Thicket the Biological Crossroads of America. In the sandylands, 341 species of wildflowers have been collected, more species than in any other plant association of the Big Thicket. Some of these species are rare, including red catchfly, purpose rocket, small paronychia, polonosia erosia, miniature shrankia, and a rare variety of cassia fasiculata. In one sandy flat, the largest remaining stand of snowy orchid (habaneria nivea) still thrives, although roads have gone in for a subdivision. Typical larger plants are pricklypear cactus, yucca and sandjack oak. The best example of arid sandyland in the Big Thicket lies along Village Creek from above the Beech Creek confluence on downstream to below Silsbee. A Big Thicket National Preserve without a representative sample of arid sandylands is like Everglades National Park without any of its Carribean Islands type of vegetation. U Zoological J'eatures This zone contains an amazing variety of limnological life, including twenty- four species of fresh water clam. Only a long segment like this zone would accommodate the needs of certain types of wildlife so as to permit survival in viable, numbers. This is particularly true of such species as the endangered river otter and alligator, which tend to expand their populations up and down streams. The same needs apply to some form of plants, including some streamside species. D Other ecological values This zone would protect the waters from septic tank pollution dumping and other cabin-type pollution, from draining for irrigation, from dams and channel- ization and from other damaging uses, and would thus facilitate preservation of the Lower Neches Corridor and Beaumont Unit. E Recreational and administrative values By providing additional space, particularly elongated areas, this addition will help to disperse the anticipated concentrations, of tourists away from the basic units. By permitting non-mechanical means of travel, this addition would alleviate the vehicular traffic jams which will occur on the roads between various portions of the Preserve. This alleviation will be particularly effective if the National Park Service plans public transit to and from the ends of the trails. This zone would enable the visitor to travel (by horse or foot or canoe) from Big Sandy Unit to Turkey Creek Unit to the Neches Corridor without having to leave the preserve. By providing a long branch of a trail network, this addition will help to meet the growing demands for a trail-type recreation. 2 Testimony of the following persons at Hearing Before' the Subcommittee on National Parks and Recreation of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of Repre- sentatives, on HR 12034, held June 10, 1972: Page 106,. Prof. Thomas Eisner and Prof. Paul Feeny; p. 31, Edward C. Fritz; p. 35. Edward C. Fritz; p. 93, Anella Dexter; p. 119. Burgess Griesenbeck; p. 180, Geraldine Watson; p. 209, Mr. & Mrs. Jim E. McPeek; p. 210, Billy W. Halimon; p. 213, BIlly W. Hailmon. The foregoing testimony was re-enforced at the July 16-17 Big Thicket hearing of the same subcommittee in Washington, D.C. on which the record has not yet been printed. 30-061 0 - 74 - 15 PAGENO="0226" 220 This zone contains the best stretch for smooth stream canoeing between East Texas and Florida, under closed canopy forest for thq greater part of. 90 miles. The Lone Star Sierran for May, 1973, contains a description of the canoeing features of Village Creek in excerpts from Canoeing GuideL by Emil 0. Kindschy. The most popular stretch of thIs beautiful creek is from Highway 418 down to Highway 96. Because the latter is a heavily used take-out place, the Sandylands- Ponds Unit should extend on downstream a short distance to the old. Silsbee- Kountze Highway (bridge out for years). The same stretch is featured in Teexis Rivers and Rapids, Volume II, p. 62, by Ben M. Nolen and Robert E. Narramore. F. Development Maps ~1, 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2e have been drawn so as to exclude all permanent residences. The only structures included are some vacation cabins. Small pump- ing stations, pipelines and producing oil well sites will be allowed to continue in operation until oil is depleted. Visitor trails can be planned so as to stay away ,from these in-holdings. G. Cost of &,,ndylands-Ponds t~n4t Although the National Park Service has stated to the House Parks and Recrea- tion subcommittee a higher estimate, the true coat of the Sandylands-Ponds area in particular, and Village Creek, as a whole, is only $500.00 per acre, minus mm- erals, about the same as for the 68,000-acre plan recommended to the House by the Department of the Interior July 15, 1973. Attached is a real estate appraisal to verify this cost. It also covers Big Sandy Creek, which is described under Addition 5, below. The staff of Congressman Alan Sherman has interviewed the National Park Service personnel who made the appraisals which were stated to the House subcommittee. This interview revealed that NPS projected its high valuation of Big Sandy-Village Creek lands by mere speculation. NPS had ascertained no comparable sales near the creeks, In contrast to the comparable sales listed in the attached appraisal. The 35 comparable sales ascertained by NPS were for other parts of the proposed National Preserve. Moreover, the interview reflected that the cost estimates stated by NPS approxi- mately doubled the appraised prices, in order to cover administrative and legal expenses. On being confronted with the attached appraisal, these personnel acknowledged that it was apparently accurate, on the whole, being actually higher than the cost of land which had been timbered recently and was not fronting a highway, but low on land which contained presently merchantable timber or was fronting a highway. Most of the lands in Additions 1 and 2 falls within the former cate- gory. Therefore, the attached appraisal, on the whole, may run higher than the actual cost. An important point is that the government need not purchase the streambed of Village Creek because the State of Texas owns the streambed, and the public is entitled to use it. VITALLY NEEDED AREAS 2. ECOLOGICAL SUCCESSION PONDS Studded along the arid sandylands shine a score of aquatic gems. Together, they comprise the only example in the proposed National Preserve, and the best- documented example in the world, of a string of stream-oriented ecological suc- cession ponds, demonstrating every phase from relatively young abandoned channel lake, through Clear Lake, Yellow Lake, Mud Lake, a spatterdock pond, Alligator Grass Pond (almost covered by vegetation, except for alligator holes), and Sedge Marsh, completely overgrown with vegetation, to largest open sphag- num bog in Big Thicket (Devil's Pocket Acid Bog) and a beautiful gem of a closed acid bog. (Sweetspire Baygall) From north to south, these ponds lie within a line 24 miles long. Nowhere else in the world is such a complete series of stream-generated euthorphic ponds known by science to be encompassed in such a short distance. Scientists from Cornell, Rice, and Lamar Universities are intensively studying these ponds and their teeming life. At least ten of the ponds contain species dis- tinctive from the others. For example, Alligator Grass Pond is surrounded by two rings, the inner one composed of the rare floating heart, nympho'ldes aquatica and the outer ring composed of the rare decodon vertullatus. Clear Lake's specialty is PAGENO="0227" 221 the rare purple bladderwort (utricularia purpurea). Parker Pond features spat- terdock. Pirate Perch Pond features a rare fish whose anus is directly below its mouth. In Sweetspire Baygall, among the titi and white bay, hides the national cham- pion tall inkberry (galiberry) holly tree, rising above yellow-fringed orchids. Between Cypress Swamp and Village Creek, the second largest farkleberry tree in the nation hangs on for dear life. * There is one trail along Sweet.spire Baygall where, on the baygall side, the eyes of a visitor can be enraptured by wild azaleas and cinnamon fern. If the visitor turns his eyes to the opposite side of the trail, those eyes will be dazzled by yucca, cactus, and other xerotic species, approaching within thirty feet of the wetland azaleas. Devil's Pocket Acid Bog is rich in ferns, calopogon orchids, snakemouth orchids, and representatives of four of the five genuses of carniverous plants in the United States-pitcher plants, sundews, bladderwort and butterwort. Many visitors to the Big Thicket remember this series of ecological succession ponds, marshes and bogs more favorably than any other phenomenon. VITAI~Ly NEEDED AI3EAS 3. BIG CREEK CORRIDOR; BIG SANDY-VILLAGE CREEK The creek known in its upper half as Big Sandy and in its lower half as Vil- lage Creek is the central carver of the Big Thicket geotopic basin. The Neches, as an alluvial river, has cut through the eastern fermations of this region, leaving an arm of Beaumont clay as the east rim of the basin. Pine Island Bayou, generally sluggish, has cut the same fermations on the west and south, leaving a vast sweep of Beaumont clay along its side as the other boundaries of the geologic cup. It is Big Sandy-Village Creek, free-flowing down the middle of the basin, often between high bluffs, which has hollowed out the heart of the basin and deposited the rich sands which give the Thicket its diversity. The other streams of the Big Thicket are all smaller; lack the arid sandylands and ecologi- cal succession ponds; lack the high bluffs; and lack the year-round canoeability of Big Sandy-Village Creek. Map 3 attached hereto, depicts the length of the stress and some of the high- lights along its route. There are some feet from the ereek. A preserve corridor could be designed so as to exclude most of these cabins. The upper fifth is already embraced in the Big Sandy Unit. In addition to being the sorts for the arid sandylands and ecological succes sion ponds Big Sandy Village Creek is vital to a Big Thicket National Preserve for other reasons In the first place, the ecological value of preserving the watershed is of great sigmficance Drs Thomas Eisner and Paul Feeny of Cornell University testified as follows before the Parks and Recreation subcommittee of the House Interior Committee on June 10, 1972: A relatively self contained natural area such as a small island lake or mountain need require only a few acres to insure undisturbed survival On the other hand the entire Everglades National Park is dependent upon flow of fresh water from further north and may thus be threatened by events many miles from the boundaries The Big Thicket is totally dependent on a complex pattern of water drainage and seepage into and through the basin. At the ~ ery least therefore the rivers and creeks of the Thicket require careful protection This should include preservation of creek headquarters either by inclusion in the preserve or by other arrangements necessary to prevent their potential pollution and a consequent threat to the flora and fauna of the Thicket Such protection of the water systems should include also preservation of substantial acreage bordering the creeks and rivers to prevent contamination from adjacent private lands Such buffer areas bordering the creeks should be especially wide in areas where aerial spraying of herbicides or insecticides could conceivably be carried out on neighboring lands A width of at least one mile on either side of such creeks might guar antee protection against such chemicals either wind drifted, accidentally sprayed or carried through soil seepage. The vital importance of protecting the water quality and balance of the Big Thicket has been mentioned earlier As many as possible of the creeks should be included along with a substantial buffer zone on either side The major such creeks are Pine Islands Bayou Big Sandy Creek Cypress Creek Turkey Creek Beech Creek Village Creek and the Neches River PAGENO="0228" 22)2 This corridor would protect the waters from septic tank pollution, dumping and other cabin-type pollution, from draining for irrigation, from dams and channelizatlon and from other damaging uses, and would thus facilitate preserva- tion of the downstream units-Turkey Creek Unit, Lower Neches Corridor and Beaumont Unit, and the herewith proposed Sandyland-Pond Unit~ In the absence of floodplain management, which is non-existent here, the only way to preserve this watershed is by governmental acquisition. The State of Texas does not have funds available for acquisition of this entire stretch, and has not stated an interest in buying any ofit. From a recreational viewpoint, great values could be provided, including observation by canoeists and hikers of the key ecological features of the Preserve. Recreation can actually be helpful to the ecosystem in the following ways: 1. A long trail corridor may aslo serve as a natural passageway for certain species of wandering animals. 2. In providing traliways between one unit and another, the corridor can reduce the air pollution which would result from everyone having to drive be- tween the units. 8. A publicly owned corridor serves as a buffer zone, preceding the encroach- ment of private commercial and residential development. 4. The recreational values of the area may so supplement its ecological values as to make pubic acquisition very favorable economically; and without such acquisition, the ecosystem of that area would be ruined by exploitation. There are three special reasons for acquiring that portion of the streaniside zone which stretches from the southern boundary of Big Sandy on downstream to where the Turkey Creek Unit roots onto a small part of Village Creek. This zone contains the longest line of beech~magnolia-lOblolly forest in pro- posed national areas, much of it uncut for 40 years. This zone contains a 30-mile stretch of trailsite, high along the bluff, close to the stream, the only long -stretch in the proposed national preserve which remains unflooded at all times. This zone is the only one in the proposed preserve which is paralleled by a nearby paved road, thus making it ideal for the construction of short spurs into the zone for such vehicular purposes as parking, canoe launching, fishing, and reaching the hiking trail. This Big Sandy Creek portion of the corridor should, at its western half, be wide enough to border on Highway 943 on the south. This would comprise some 13,000 acres. However, it could be squeezed down to an average of 150 acres per mile, for a total of only 4,500 acres. The estimated cost of acquiring the Big Sandy Creek corridor is cheaper than the appraised value of the Village Creek corridor (see appraisal attached). For Big Sandy, the appraised value is $300.00 per acre, as compared to $500.00 per acre for Village Creek, based on comparable sales. Apparently, Village Creek land costs more because it is closer to Kountze and Silsbee, and has better access by road. The Village Creek portion of the corridor is described under Additions 1 and 2, except for the stretch below Highway 96. Some distinctive reasons support the inclusion of this lowest stretch in the national preserve. This stretch contains the most diverse streambottom hardwood forest in the zone, including cypress swamps at its lower end. The forest near the confluence with the Neches River has some of the biggest trees in the Big Thicket. This stretch features the longest sandbars, deepest pools, and best swimming and fishing in the zone. If the Sandylands-Ponds Unit is included in the preserve, the Lowcr Village Creek corridor would connect it to the Lower Neches Corridor, thus rounding out the ecological and recreational values of corridors, described above. This lower stretch comprises 1500 acres, zig-zagging to avoid residences. In toto, Big Sandy-Village Creek corridor will provide many distinctive elements and will vastly increase the likelihood that the national preserve can survive the harmful effects of people-pressure, without and within. VITALLY NEEDED AREAS 4. ANCIENT BLACKOUM FOREST; JOE'S LAKE UNIT In late 1967 an ancient forest was called to the attention of the National Park Service. Known as foe Lake's Pasture, it is situated in the west side of a bend of the Neches River from three to seven miles downstream from highway 1013. PAGENO="0229" 223 The National Park Service promptly sent James T. Tanner to inspect it. Dr. Tanner, among whose works is the text on The Ivory-Billed Woodpecker, sent back an enthusiastic report. In 1968, the National Park Service study team included Joe's Luke Unit in its recommendations (NRA-BT-20,023, Sept., 1968 RP SSO). This unit is approximately 3,000 acres. Joe's Lake Unit was subsequently included in most NPS maps from NP-BT- 91,001 (Cong. George Bush), through NP-BT---91,008 and 91,009 (Cong. Bob Eckhardt); NM-BT-91,010 (prepared by NPS at its own initiative), NM-BT- 91,014; NBR-BT-91,019 (Sen. John Tower, Feb. 1973) ; N~BR-92,021 (Cong. Bob Eckhardt, Mar. 1973); and NBR-BT-92,025 (Cong. Alan Steelman, Sept. 1973). Joe's Lake Unit was not included in the Department of the Interior recoin- mendation to the House of Representatives July 15, 1973, because of an economy ruling by Office of Management and Budget, not justifiable on ecological or recreational grounds. The ancient forest is just east of a hunting lodge used by executives and guests of Eastex, Inc., which also has experimental tree plantations west of the proposed Joe's Lake Unit. The Unit, itself, is pure forest. Ancient oaks and black gum thrive in this densest closed-canopy forest in the Big Thicket. Here flourishes the only stand of Jewel flower (impatiens biflora) in the entire region. Here thrives the heaviest population of white-tailed deer in the Big Thicket, and, perhaps, in the world. This has all the aspects of a virgin forest, except for a few scattered old stumps. Following are further characteristics: Elevation 55 feet; grey clay and sandy soils; mature riverbottom hardwood forest with occasional loblolly pines; mostly open woods with 100 ft. overhead canopy; several sloughs with cypress and tupelo gum trees; bordered on east by Neches River; cypress and oak timber selectively harvested many years ago. VITALLY NEEDED AREA 5 RED MAPLE BITTERNUT HICKORY POREST MAPLE SLOUGH HICKORY SLOUGH UNIT Bitternut hickory trees (carya cordiformis) are now classified as endangered (Preliminary List of Texas Rare, Endangered and Peripheral Plant Species). From Timber Slough Road northward to along the west side of the Neches River almost to Bush Lake is an old forest which contains the largest known stand of big bitternut hickories in the nation, the biggest red maples in the Big Thicket, and other unique forest features. The area is depicted on MapS, attached hereto. In Senator John Tower's 5. 1981, it is a part of his northern expansion of Jack Gore Baygall (NBR-BT-91,019). It comprise about 10,000 acres. The oldest forest is in the east half (5,000 acres). This forest includes many giants, including the state champion bitternut hickory, a monster rising to 120 feet in height. One shumard oak (quercus shumardii) `also classified as an endangered species, reaches the awesome height of 136 feet, tallest tree in the Big Thicket, tallest of its species in the nation, and one of the ten tallest of all species east of the Rocky Mountains. One bald cypress has knees fifteen feet high. From Sandy Loop Road, west of the Unit, a road, of sorts, winds about a mile riverward to Becky Lake, a small, abandoned channel where some local folk go to fish. The last half-mile of Becky Lake road is passable by passenger automobiles only in good weather. Further north, another road leads in about a mile to a few old oil wells. The remainder of the tract is roadless, except for a trail cut from Shady Lake to the river by four-wheel drive vehicles driven by two families who have camp-houses there. Over much of this forest, the timber has not, within memory, been com- mercially harvested. Therefore, the ecosystem from the ground up contains the speciation of a virgin forest, both zoologically and botanically. PAGENO="0230" 224 Over 100,000 acres of botanical units and stream corridors are required for adequate ecosystem preservation, tourist dispersion * and wilderness recreation in the Big Thicket National Biological Reserve 5 MILES fl~iiD HICKORY CREEK SAVANNAH UNIT LOBLOLLY * UNIT PINE ISLAND BAYOU CORRIDOR CigThicketCoordinatingCOmmillee PAGENO="0231" 225 SANDYLAND-P0F~S U~i' 16,000 AC~iS THICKET: BIOLOGICAL CROSSROADS An teflux of dvsert plant-a from the arid Southwest onepletes a biological crossroads at the Thicket. The Sandylond-Poode Unit contains the best eeeoçles of this arid sandyland plant aaeociation. Blue~ack oak, yucca, and prickly pear cactus ace the. dnninant vegetation. Over 340 desert wildflower species thrive here. Grace ponds stand in clay pockets * between the eandyland deposite. These sarehee are filled with aedgse and water lilies. They support a wide variety ef aquatic lifa, including alligetor. Several cutoff lakes, ranging in age over thousands ef years, represent every stage of ecological success ion from recontly ebandoned stress ohannel * to cloeed acid bog. These sark the anoisct stress bed of Village Creek and cnntain 24 spacise ef elan sod othsr freshwater life, Sn homes sos located in this knit. Grace Pond I 4i~ - ~ ~ Alliqator Pond - -`~-- ~ t1~s~ 2~ _~i ~ Unit Send land Unit ~, WILDERNESS RECREATION Ic A combined Turkey Creek Unit `%~-,~ 5 and Saodyland-Pcnde Unit would *-d create the only dry, yenr- ~ round backpack trail in ths %~-n.~ ~ hibing. Villngn Creek could (` 1.\ provido the bent nonoth etroon ¶ & ~ Tenu: \ cloned cscnyy fcroet. PAGENO="0232" 226 Senator BIBLE. Our next witness will be Mr. Archer Fullingim. STATEMENT OP ARCHER PULLINGIM, KOUNTZE, TEX. Mr. FULI4INGIM. I live in Kountze, Tex., which is in the Big Thicket. I won't read my statement.~ I will just. make a few remarks. You asked a question- Senator BIBLE. Why don't you read your statement? It looks like a good one and it is short. Mr. FULLINGIM. I have some things I want to say that are not in there. Senator BIBI~. Your full statement will be incorporated in the record, and you go ahead and testify. Mr. FULLINGIM. I would like to ask the question that you asked two or three times. That is, if the House will not accept the Village Creek Corridor, I would say what we want is a bill. Now if we can talk Timber Charlie into accepting 100,000 acres, why I am for that. But if we can't I will take what we can get. Senator BIBLE. Who is Timber Charlie? Mr. FULLINGIM. Excuse me. That is our Congressman. Our beloved Congressman. He has done a good job and we are proud of him. Senator BIBLE. You are talking about Congressman Wilson? Mr FULLINGIM That is right Senator BIBLE. Now the record is clear. You may proceed. Mr. FULLINGIM. As far as Village Creek, I live in Kountze, which is the county seat of Hardin County and that is on Village Creek. The only reason that I would like to see Village Creek taken in is because it may turn into a drainage ditch and~ may ruin the creek. It is called the most beautiful creek in America. I don't know. A lot of people refer to it as that. But I would like to see it be made public. But if we cannot get it we will take what we can get and what we want fast. And that is all I am going to say. [The prepared statement of Mr. Fullingim follows:] STATEMENT OF ARCHER FULLINGIM, EDITOR-PUBLISHER, KOUNTZE NEWS, KOUNTZE, TEX. My name is Archer Fullingim, and I am the editor and printer of a weekly news- paper, the Kountze News, and the following quotation from Chief Crazy Horse of the Oglala Sioux apepars on my newspaper's front page on every issue: "One does not sell the earth upon which the people walk." I have already testifed before two House committees on why I want the Big Thicket saved, and I have written thousands of words on the subject for my paper. Today, I want to say a few words about the most recent attack on Big Thicket preservation by a handful of local and vocal people. This attack comes mainly from the Lumberton area which is notoriously racist, notoriously combative. Lumberton is less than a decade old, for the most part, but it already has enough internecine fights to last a lifetime. Mostly they fight each other, but now they seem united on attacking the Big Thicket bill which is not going to hurt their tax structure. But there is a story in the Beaumont Enterprise from Supt. Nelson of the Lumberton schools screaming that the Thicket would take one million dollars out of the school's tax structure. I challenge Mr. Nelson to prove to me that the corridors of Big Pine Island Bayou, marked for preservation, are on the tax rolls at a million dollars. I'll bet they are not on the tax rolls at $100,000. The banks of the bayou have the lowest taxable valuation of any land in Hardin County. What those people down there DON'T want is for Pine Island and its banks to PAGENO="0233" 227 be saved from the depredations of man. They look upon~ environmentalists and ecologists as kooks and outsiders ; and who is an outsider in the good old USA? ` These folks `cite what they call statistics, the tax structure, the school ~ kids, jobs, mother, home, and sky-blue heaven to justify their objections. So I urge the Senate to take the yelling from Lumberton' with a grain of salt. They' have bad statistics, they have' scarcely any facts, they have worked up a case of `hysterics with no cause, they don't know what they are talking about, they are screaming and hollering because they are used'to screaming and hollering in Luxnberton on any subject. They are disgruntled and mad because they fled Beaumont to keep from paying taxes and' being `flooded, and now their taxes' are `higher than any in Hardin County and they are being flooded. And most of them are not inside the areas we want to save Senator BIi3I~ Very fine By gosh, you have said it very well, too Thank you Our next witness is Mr James M Dorman of Sour Lake, Tex. Mr. Dorman?' VOICE I am sorry, Mr Chairman, but Mr Dorinan is also ill Senator BIBLE If he has a statement he can send it in We will keep the record open for quite awhile [The prepared statement of Mr Dorman follows] STATEMENT OP JAMES M DORMAN, SouR LAKE TEN DEAR SENATOR: We live, farm, operate a meat packing business and earn our sole income on our farm. We live 1 mile North of Little Pine Island Bayou and 1 mile West of highway 326, but our West property line is 114 miles West of high- way 326 in the proposed Lance Rosier Unit of the Texas Big Thicket National Biological'Reserve in Hardin County. All the proposed Texas Big Thicket Park and Biological Reserve Bills in the `past, except the National Parks Commission's 35,000 acre String `of Pearls Concept saw fit to go around all Rice Farms but mcluded our Forage Farm inside their boundaries. We produce high protein feed for the cattle industry on 70 acres of our farm which is completely cleared and in `production. `We run cattle on the rest of our property. We bought our property fifteen years ago. It cost $500.00 per acre.~ We spent all `our earnings developing our forage farm, building a home and ~building a Packing House business ~ our farm. The Packing Plant is registered with the Federal Government and State inspected Our forage farm will produce 240 bales of hay per acre from ~three cuttings per year. This amounts to 16,800 bales annually. We have our own machinery and do our own baling.. We realize that to most people our farm and our business would appear to be a small operation This is true but we would remind you that this property is all we have and we do earn our sole income from it. There `are several other farming and ranching operations in the Lance Rosier Unit. We couldn't afford to accept a fair market value for our farm `or business because we `would be getting robbed of our future prospective earnings, and be- cause we can t buy anything especially farmland in East Texas for a fair market value The cut over woodland in this area is appraised at $10000 per acre, but' small `tracts are now selling for as' much `as $2,150.00 per `acre. An- other ~reason~ we couldn't give up `our `farm is because it is~ located on a high sandyloam knoll which is never flooded, and is very rich land. I serve on the board of directors for the Save Our Homes and Land Associa tion We don t think there is anything worthy of saving for Park or Reserve material in Hardin County. I am certain `that' the proposed Lance Rosier Unit is less' valuable of all the Units proposed. If a `Park or Biological Reserve is im- minent, we believe the proposed Lance Rosier Unit could be `left out. The' Save Our Homes and Land Association ~has been very interested in all the proposals The $35 500 acre ~ ational Parks Commission proposal was sup. posed to have had everything the ecologist wanted. It did not include one acre in the Saratoga Triangle orLance Rosier Unit. ` If a Park or Biological Reserve Bill `is imminent, and the National'Parks sub- committee is considering adopting one of these chopped up and scattered proposals they should and could go around `all homes, personal farms, and businesses, plus they should more equally distribute the acreage among the seven counties involved PAGENO="0234" 228 by making the Units in Hardin County smaller and adding acreage to the Units in the other counties. The Save Our Homes and Land Association is wholeheartedly against the acquisition of land in Hardin County for Biological Reserve use. We are against a Biological Reserve because to condemn the peoples homes, personal farms, and businesses in Hardin County for a Biological Reserve would be unfair because it would be land acquisition for a minority group. The Botanist and the Biologist are very much a minority group any way you lock at it. The Lance Rosier Unit is of very little importance to the Ecologist. It only contains one plant association, which is the Palmetto Hardwood fiats. I per- sonally know that this plant association can also `be found in several other pro- posed units, so you can see there is nothing unique in our area. Most of the pro- posals contain a Palmetto Unit on the Big Pine Island Bayou. To create a Biological Reserve with land from Hardin County and especially from the Lance Rosier Unit, through peoples power and the peoples money and the people's government for the benefit of a favored few would abuse and pervert our whole system of American government. The people who live in the proposed Lance Rosier Unit are good neighbors and tightly organized in the Save Our Homes and Lan'd Association. They have been told that if their homesteads, personal farms, and businesses are included inside the boundaries of a Park or a Biological Reserve that `they should sue to have the boundaries amended. They `have agreed to take this advice. The Save Our Homes `and Land Association does not demand that this matter be settled right away. Take your `time and we feel that after you have studied the issue at length you will take no action at all. No `legislation would be the best legislation for the little people. Thank you. Sincerdly, JAMES M. DORMAN. Senator BIBLE. Our next witness will be Mr. J. T. Williams, school tax department of Lumberton, Tax., Mr. William Nelson, superin- tendent of schools of Lumberton, Tex., and Mr. John C. Billings, Hardin Jefferson School, Sour Lake, Tex. STATEMENT OP ~. T. WILLIAMS, SCHOOL TAX DEPARTMENT, LUM- BERTON, TEX.; ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM NELSON AND ~1OHN C. BILLINGS Mr. WILLIAMS. Senator Bible, I am John Williams. You have our statement before you. Senator BIBLE. Yes, I do. I have it right here, Mr. Williams. Mr. WILLIAMS. It seems the entire framework running through all of the testimony seems to be money. That is certainly our problem in trying to operate a school with a 10 percent compounded annual growth in a `bedroom-type school district. We just plead our case that in a school with 1,650 students and the growth rate that we have and with 100-percent evaluation or 100- percent taxation on evaluation of property at $1.59 per hundred dol- lar evaluation, our tax structure is about as high as we can possibly go with it, without really hurting the other people. And if any of this is removed from our school district taxation then it is going to jeopardize the educational process of our community. Senator BIBLE. How much taxable property would be removed from your school district if the Big Thicket was passed? Mr. WILLIAMS. I will let Mr. Nelson answer that. Senator BIBLE. Mr. Nelson, you are Superintendent of Schools. Mr. NELSON. Yes, sir, and I live in Hardin County, Lumberton, Tex. and I live in Village Creek. It would depend on the decision of the Seci~etary as to how- PAGENO="0235" 229 Senator BIBLE. I realize the question is a little indefinite and neces- sarily has to be. Mr. NEr~soN. Let us say you could go to a minimum of not costing us anything if you decide not to except our corridors or it could cost us in excess of 10 percent of our local tax base. As you know, we have 1,650 students and I am sure that you are aware that we have had Federal cutbacks in our various title prog'ams. We have had cutbacks in our State programs. Senator BIBLE. I am sorry to say that that is true. Mr. NELSON. We are losing money in various areas, and if we lose money in these particular areas and as I interpret the bill there is no provision to assist us in this particular law, so it would make it a definite hardship. We are in favor of a Big Thicket Preserve. We are not opposed to one. We would like it of the lesser acreage mentioned in the 35 to 40,000 area range. We would like to exclude Pine Island Bayou, because we do have several homes in that particular area. They are all on our tax rolls and they are available, if you would like to see them. We also do not want Village Creek in because it is also very populated in the north end of town, and I live on Village Creek. The northwest part of Village Creek that goes north on 96. was open to the public by one of our major timber companies. Due to people abusing it, cutting trees, dumping trash, stealing dirt, break- ing into the homes in that area, and I personally, myself, made a citizen's arrest of three young men on narcotics. There have been several others arrested in this area. It was closed by the timber company. So we have had a small pilot program in this particular area. We have had it open to the public and had to have it closed for these reasons. So we ask you to exclude Pine Island and the Village Creek area, and we would like to go on record with that and we would appre- ciate your consideration and I welcome your investigation into the area. Senator BIBLE Thank you very much That is a very fine statement, gentlemen. Let me just see if I understand you, Mr. Nelson. As I understand it, you would lose approximately 10 percent of the taxes that you take today if-depending on which version of the Big Thicket passed. Obviously you would lose more the bigger it was Mr. NELSON. We would lose about 10 percent if the Pine Island Corridor was taken.~ If you include the Village Creek area we will lose another percent. Our areas are divided like this. On the south we have Pine Island Bayou, a school district On the north we have Village Creek and on the east we have the Neches River, so we are affected in three different places. We have only one boundary that is not affected. Senator BIBLE If you exclude any one of those corridors, excluding the Neches River, it takes about 10 percent ~ Mr NELSON Yes, sir If you exclude Pine Island it would be about 10 percent If you include Pine Island and Village Creek it will be way in excess of 10 percent, if you put both of them in the bill. Senator Bnuii Would it be 20 percent ~ Mr NELSON I would say somewhere between 13 and 15 percent PAGENO="0236" 230 Senator BIi3n~. Thirte,en or 15 percent if you include both. If you exclude both you get an additional 13 percent? Mr. NIlI4soN. Yes, sir. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much, gentlemen. Our next witness is Ernest M. Dickerman. Your full statement will be incorporated in the record, Mr. Dickerman. STATEMENT OP ERNEST M. DICKERMAN, WILDERNESS SOCIETY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. DICKEBMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to read the first two paragraphs and then summarize. Senator BIBLE. All right. Just tell us which of the areas you are for. You and I have visited many times. Mr. DICKERMAN. My name is Ernest M. Dickerinan, representing the Wilderness Society, National Conservation Organization. We are strongly in favor of establishment of the Big Thicket National Preserve. We would urge that this committee in their final work propose at least 100,000 acres for the Big Thiáket Preserve. It has been our obser- vation that this committee has consistently wanted to establish parks that, indeed, are viable and that do cover the choice parts of the area that have been proposed. And that otherwise the park be a real credit to the country. Our view is that this 100,000 is a minimum figure for the purpose that is suggested in addition to the 84,000 acres that are already in the House bill, that the additional 16,000 acres be referred to as the Sandyland- Ponds unit, should also be incorporated, in the Big Thicket National Preserve. According to our information as we have discussed this matter with local people in our prior examination some years ago by a staff mem- ber, the Sandylands-Ponds area will make possible the inclusion of one of the special ecological associations of the area. It is the special ecological associations that form our primary moti- vation in establishing the Big Thicket Preserve. Accordingly, we recommend the 100,000 and hope that the committee can see it that way as they examine it. We would also like to indicate our full support for legislative tak- ink in this case. We recognize that constitutes a special procedure, but we are fully aware, as we believe this committee is, of the history over these last several years, as the strenuous effort has been made, to establish a Big Thicket National Park System unit that consistently portions of the area are being physically changed, so that they can no longer qualify. In order to prevent further deterioration we strongly recommend continuation of the legislative proposal now in the bill. Finally, as you will recognize, Senator Bible, we heartily endorse a provision in the present bill for a wilderness study. In the course of the next few years. The area seems to have the qualities and in due course they should be recognized and consideration given~ We do raise the question of whether 5 years are required. Per- haps 3 would be sufficient. Thank you, sir. [The prepared statement of Mr. Dickerman follows:] PAGENO="0237" 231 STATEMENT OF ERNEST M. DICKERMAN, WILDERNESS Sooirrrir, WASHINGTON, D.C. My name is F~rnest M. Dickerman representing The Wilderness Society, a national conservation organization of some 80,000 members living all over the United States. Consistent with the Society's policy to seek the preservation and protection of natural areas of special or outstanding qualities, the proposals before this committee today for the establishment of a Big Thicket National Preserve are a matter of keen interest to us. We appreciate the opportunity provided by the Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation to testify on HR. 11546. The Wilderness Society strongly supports the proposed establishment ot' a Big Thicket National Preserve to contain at least 100,000 acres and preferably more, as a unit in the National Park System. In common with most national park proposals the Big Thicket proposal has an extended history before the Congress. The earliest bills date back to the 1930's according to newspaper reports. Over the years the various proposals offered have been modified and significant differences which at one time existed have been largely overcome. HOW MANY ACRES FOR THE BIG THICKET PRESERVE? We would first comment on the total acreage proposed for the Big Thicket National Preserve. In our view an area well in excess of 100,000 acres is fully justified by the character and quality of the lands and waters available for this purpose. We urge the committee in the course of its deliberations not to limit itself to 100,000 acres but to exceed this figure to the extent that its own exam- ination of the evidence warrants. It is worth bearing in mind that the original Big Thicket was estimated to encompass something like 3,000,000 acres. Most of that area has been radically changed and its natural qualities severely depreciated since the white man first moved into the east Texas region. Since the first hills were introduced in the Congress for a Big Thicket park, the pro- posed acreage has been steadily reduced. Darly bills proposed as much as 400,000 acres. To a marked degree, the reduction has been necessary because of logging in the area which has meanwhile occurred. Such logging continues, threatening further reduction of the area qualified for consideration. As recently as the 92nd Congress, Big Thicket bills proposed an area of 191,000 acres. As we see it, there has already been too much reduction of the proposed acreage. THE SANDYLAND-PONDS UNIT H.R. 11546 as presently written provides for a Big Thicket Preserve totaling 84,550 acres. While this acreage includes several of the principal units which have been consistently proposed for inclusion in a Big Thicket park, it still omits one principal unit which we would particularly call to the attention of this committee. It is a modification of the earlier Big SandyVillage Creek Zone and is referred to as the Sandyland-Ponds Unit. We are aware of the concern with respect to Big Sandy Creek of Congressman Charles Wilson, within whose congressional district most of the Big Thicket proposal lies. The Sandyland-Ponds Unit completely leaves out Big Sandy Creek, thereby settling any problems seen there. The Sandyland-Ponds Unit consists of 16,000 acres strung out along Village Creek. Here is found one of the major ecological areas which it has all along been a prime objective of every Big Thicket proposal to preserve. Here occurs the extraordinary merging of the arid flora of the southwest-the prickly pear cactus, yucca, sagebrush and such dry plants-with the eastern pine, beech, magnolia and deciduous plants. Inclusion of the Sandyland-Ponds Unit is consistent with the intent of every group or committee, whether critizen or Congressional, which has sought to hammer out a sound Big Thicket proposal. The amazing variety of ecological associations that thrive in the Big Thicket, coupled with its natural beauty, is the major reason for placing appropriate parts of it in the National Park System We strongly support the knowledgable individuals and citizen organizations in their insistence on the importance of protecting this unit and unqualifiedly recommend to the Members of the Senate Interior Committee that the 16,000 acre Sandyland-Ponds Unit be added to H.R. 11546 for a total Big Thicket National Preserve of 100550 acres LEGISLATIVE TAKING It is extremely gratifying to see in H.R. 11546 (Sec. 2) the provision for imme- diate vesting of title in the federal government of virtually all privately owned PAGENO="0238" 232 real property within the authorized boundaries of the Preserve. The steady depreciation over the years by logging of areas otherwise physically qualified for inclusion in a Big Thicket national park system unit and the accelerating rate at which destruction of the outstanding natural qualities can be expected to con- tinue without a legislative taking provision fully warrants such provision. With- out it there is every reason to expect and fear that important parts of the pro- posed Big Thicket Preserve will be stripped of the rich forests that contribute so much to the area's high quality, before the expressed will of the Congress can be exercised. The Wilderness Society most strongly urges this committee to retain the immediate vesting of title provision already in H.R. 11546. We do question any need for a six months delay in the effective date of the legislative taking. It is our understanding that this delay was provided at the request of the National Park Service who earlier had doubted whether they could determine the final boundaries with completeness by the time the act would become law. It is our further understanding that the Park Service has in fact determined careful boundaries for approximately 68,000 acres of the proposal presently described in H.R. 11546. If this is so, we raise the question whether immediate taking may be provided for such 68,000 acres and a reduced period of delay apply only to the balance of the final total acreage. We feel a high degree of concern over the risk of losing one or more choice portions of the Big Thicket by continued logging or other harmful action during any period of deferment, and therefore seek to assure that legislative taking will indeed take place at the earliest possible day upon enactment of the legislation. WILDERNESS STUDY PROVISION We commend the provision in H.R. 11546 (Sec. 5) for a wilderness review of the Big Thicket area as established. Inclusion of a wilderness review provision in acts which establish new National Park System units has become a standard practice. It is certainly reasonable to expect that an area which is to be admin- istered essentially as a biological reserve and covering approximately 100,000 acres would contain areas appropriate to be given the protection of the Wilder- ness Act under the policy and the terms of that Act. The wilderness review pro- vision assures that the administering agency will examine the wilderness qualities of the National Park System unit in question, will consider the presence of such qualities in drawing its management plans, and will submit its recommendations for wilderness designation to the Congress for that body's utlimate decision. Whether the wilderness review period should extend for five years, as presently written in the bill, is a question. Three years would appear to be ado- quate. Such review should be made as early as practicable in planning for the future management of the park. Inasmuch as the National Park Service will have completed prior to September of this year the wilderness reviews required of it under the Wilderness Act of 1964 and hence be free of that workload, there would appear to be no serious obstacle to developing a wilderness proposal and the customarj Master Plan within three years f'ollowing passage of this act. COnclusiOn In conclusion, we again express our appreciation to the committee for the opportunity to express our views in support of the establishment of the Big Thicket National Preserve and urge that the committee adopt a proposal of 100,550 acres as recommended herein. Thank you, Mr. Chairma~i. Senator Bnitai. Always good to see you, Mr. Dickerman. You are a very effective witness for the Wilderness Society. Mr. Toby Cooper, Representative, National Parks Conservation Association. STATEMENT OP TOBY COOPER, REPRESENTATIVE, NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. COOPER. Thank you very much. You probably have my state- ment, so I will not go into reading that totally. I will simply point out some things that I do not feel are covered adequately in the statement. PAGENO="0239" 233 Senator BIBLE. Without objection, your statement will be incor- porated in full. Mr. COOPER. The first thing that I would like to say concerns the witness-you asked one of the former witnesses to name you the three- tion of the flow of these rivers. I would like to point out on the map that we are dealing in the Big Thicket situation with a watershed concept. It resembles, somewhat, perhaps, the Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio River drainage, which creates a basin of the entire central part of the United States. These rivers continually flow in this direction with Neches down this way, Village Creek down this way, Big Sandy this way and Pine Island Bayou like his. They all converge. Senator Bn3u~. Generally north to south, with a little west to east configuration. Mr. CooPER. Each one essentially converges on the Beaumont unit, towards the community of Beaumont. The point is, ~w~hatever is taking place in all these areas up here, it will have an ecological impact on the areas downstream. The point in raising this is that there are pine plan- tations, cutting, farming, hom~building and so forth without these interim areas, these higher ground areas in between the areas marked in red. W~hat this effectively means is that there is a continual influx of siltation and pesticides and pollution of one form or another moving down the watershed. So the key to the protection of the Big Thicket is going to lie in adequate watershed protection. That is the reason that we feel that it is essential to augment the existing proposal with some additional watershed and stream bank corridors. Senator BIBLE. Those corridors are what? Mr. COOPER. Well, the Neches River corridor is very important. Senator BIBLE. That is included. Mr. Cooprn. It is included, but it is important, because it is very large. And the Village Creek corridor, there is a gap there. Senator BIBLE. So you think the Village Creek corridor should be included? Mr. COOPER. Yes, I do. Senator Bn3u~. It is included within the bill of each of the Texas Senators; is that right? Mr. Coopr~ii. I think so. Senator BIBLE. But it is not included in the House bill? Mr. COOPER. That is right, and there are proposed additions in here. The Sandyland-Ponds unit and so forth which have been kicked around considerably in this hearing. I would like to add one more reason why I think it is important to talk about that area, because of the needed watershed protection. And if there is any feasibility of getting Big Sandy Creek as well, that would be important, too. One of the former witnesses mentioned flooding in the recent years. I think that is as importnnt as well. This bears out my point here. Flooding has been undoubtedly caused to some extent by heavy rains. PAGENO="0240" 234 But I think the situation has been deeply:aggravated by clear-cut- ting and bulldozing of areas between the watersheds. Senator BIBLE. I would not doubt that. That usually happens where you clear-cut. Mr. COOPER~ That is right~ Ecologists no longer.go with clear-cutting. Here again, getting adequate watershed protection is the only mean ingful concept involved in preserving the remaining areas of the Big Thicket over and above the preservation of unique life forms and habitat and so on There are several good proposals mentioned Sandylands Ponds area, additions on. the Neches River. This reaches a total of somewhat over 10,000 acres, I believe, which I feel is important and is a. good addition. We feel that legislative taking is important, mainly because it avoids complications in the future. I would like to go on record that if the present private in-holdings and private interests in all the na- tional parks were to be acquired today, it would take $100 million. This includes Yellowstone, Yosemite, Rocky. Mountain National Park. The Yellowstone National Park ~has been in existence for. 100 years and to this day there are private in-holdings there and the, land values are escalating all the time. *Senator BIBLE. Uncle Sam was broke back at the time he acquired that. It would be pretty difficult to acquire everything. We would have to have $250 million in our hands today to acquire what we have already authorized. Mr. COOPER. That is right. That adds to the total cost of acquiring. And to leave out legislative taking allows for, a continued inflation of land values, which I feel is too bad. In closing, I. think that the Big Thicket is important because it reinforces what happened in the Everglades. It is the emergence of the American people becoming aware that certain `areas are worth preserving, simply for their ecological inter- est and the organisms that live there, the life forms that live there. All the other parks and monuments we have for the most part are centered around a giant crag or some giant canyon. Or inert rock formations `and so on. Here we have a place that is a lowland and a swamp. You heard the words, mosquitoes and. things mentioned here today." This is very true. To. some people. it may bean uncomfortable place, but it is life and it is an interesting, intriguing, fascinating, diverse natural area, and if it is not preserved' at this time it will be destroyed. ` ` Senator BIBLE. I hope I made the record very clear. I am for pre- serving. My problem `and my fellowcommittee' members, is to say how much, and do you put the corridors in or do you leave them out, and which ones do you put in and which do you leave out ~ I am. for preserving. I have no problem with it. ` Mr. Coopii'~n. I agree. There' are some problems in deciding which corridors. But if you should guide yourself to some extent on the basis of watersheds and' preserving the unique habitats, I think it will work out satisfactorily Thank you.' Senator BIBLE. Very fine. I appreciate your appearance here. You are a new spokesman for the National Parks Conservation. Who is your predecessor? PAGENO="0241" 235 . Mr. Coopi~. One of my predecessors is Clay Pcthrs, who is now the minority staff member on the House Oommittee. [The prepared statement of Mr. Cooper follows:] STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL PALK5 AND CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION PRESENTED BY TOBY COOPER Mr CHAIRMAN I am Toby Cooper Adnumstrative Assistant for Parks at the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPOA). Our building is located at 1701 Eighteenth Street N W Washington D C The National Parks and Conservation Association is a non-profit, educational and scientific organization devoted to the preservation of the environment and particularly to the protection of the national parks and monuments of the United States. Our organization is supported by a nationwide membership of about 42 000 citizens each of whom receives our monthly publication National Parks and Conservation Magazine The Environmental Journal NPCA was extremely pleased to learn of the passage of H.R. 11546, establish- ing the Big Thicket in Texas as a unit of the National Park System, to be man- aged under the Act of August 25 1916 (39 Stat 535 16 U S C 1-4) At one time there was support for calling the Big Thicket a national park but unfor tunately such support has dissolved in part because the National Park Service has often failed to protect and preserve the wild character of some areas Thus the present bill defines a Big Thicket National Preserve, a concept which we support, but which does not replace the need for management policies designed to preserve the natural values m parks of the present or future The wilderness and park quality resources in the Big Thicket are being de pleted rapidly with only remnants of a once vast complex of lowland habitats remaining The unique distribution of North American plant and animal popula tions with characteristic communities of the west southwest and southeast lying close together has led to the popular concept of a biological crossroads in east Texas Clearly the Big Thicket deserves its reputation as a natural area of national significance and its protection is long overdue NPOA supports the concepts in H.R. 11546, but we have some strong com- ments concerning the future of this legislation Our objectives are to seek guide lines for a Big Thicket National Preserve which combine the preservation of unique habitats with a recognition of basic ecological relationships. We are strongly in favor of adding a unit to the proposed national preserve in the Big Sandy Creek-Village Creek corridor. The citizens of Texas have devel- oped a viable proposal known as the Sandy Land-Ponds Unit. We support this addition to the proposed Big Thicket National Preserve for two reasons. (a.) Maps of the proposed preserve show that we are still working with the familiar "string of pearls" pattern. The "pearls" are tied, of course, not only geographically but also ecologically by converging watersheds, with each area receiving the effects of runoff from above. The Beaumont Unit receives the com- bined effects of all areas upstream. Thus, the key to preservation of the Big `1 hicket lies in adequate watershed protection without which many parts of the preserve would be subjected to serious pollution and siltation. The proposed Sandy Land-Ponds Unit adds a significant measure of watershed protection which will help to unify the whole preserve. (b) The new Sandy Land-Ponds Unit contains natural habitats which are not represented elsewhere in the preserve. The new area would be unique, and it would help to illustrate how natural communities from east and west are blended in the Big Thicket. Other additions have been proposed by the citizens of Texas and the Texas Congressional delegation to extend the protection of the Big Thicket. These additions include a Big Sandy Creek corridor upstream from the Sandy Land- Ponds Unit, a lower Village Creek connection between Highway 96 and the con- fluence with the Neches River, Joe's Lake Pasture on the Neches River, and a northern extension to the Jack Gore Baygall Unit. These additions meet the same criteria applied to the Sandy Land-Ponds Unit, and add strength to the proposal. Our additions would increase the acreage of the preserve to about 110,000 acres. Section 2 of H.R. 11546 provides for the legislative taking of lands designated as part of the new preserve. NPCA strongly urges the inclusion of such a pro- vision by the Senate. At this time, the National Park System is badly marred by private inholdings, and funding needed to `acquire these interests is staggering. At least $100 million would be needed to acquire existing inholdings in all of the 30-061 0 - 74 - 16 PAGENO="0242" 236 older parks such as Yellowstone and Yosemite. In Grand Teton National Park alone, lands valued at $22 million are held by private interests. Legislative tak- ing for lands to be placed in any new park or preserve is an important provision. Legislative taking would serve two other purposes in Big Thicket legislation. It would fix the price of most of the land to be acquired, thus reducing the impact of land value inflation on the cost of the new preserve; and it would curtail ex- ploitation of natural resources found in the proposed preserve, especially timber resources in presently untouched areas. The inclusion of legislative taking by this Committee is a measure which would communicate a serious intent to pre- serve the natural values and pristine character of the Big Thicket. A further comment on Section 2 of H.R. 11546 concerns the delay of six months between enactment of the Act and legislative taking, to allow for boundary sur- veys. We understand that much of this work has been completed, and we pro- pose that all lands already surveyed be slated for legislative taking immediately. All additional surveys and taking should be completed mandatorily within six months. This comment reflects the urgent need for protection of the remaining wild habitats in the Big Thicket. Section 5 of H.R. 11546, concerning wilderness provisions, needs to be strength- ened. Specifically, a delay of five years is unnecessary, and allows time for sub- stantial degradation of the wilderness character for the Big Thicket National Preserve. NPCA strongly recommends that a wilderness review be initiated im- mediately, and that a provision be written into the bill calling for completion of wilderness review within two years. The Big Thicket National Preserve is timely legislation. Proposals for this preserve have always been founded in the desire to preserve and appreciate life. Because many people, in the words of Dr. Pete Gunter, tend to "limit themselves to the . . . conception of a park as a place for canyons, geysers, mountains, and weathered rocks," the Big Thicket may seem to some to be outwardly unspec- tacular. But when the complexity and diversity of its life forms are examined, the true value of this preserve emerges. The Big Thicket, like Everglades Na- tional Park, represents the reinforcement, on a national scale, of an "ecological perspective," through which the appreciation of life is seen as equal to the tradi- tional scenic wonders of our other national parks. We feel this trend will grow in the future, and Big Thicket will be regarded as landmark legislation in this respect. Senator BIBLE. You have always been very helpful in making con- tributions over the years since I have been handling this, so it is good to see a good-looking newcomer. Do `we have any other witnesses? If not, I am prepared to stand in recess. I want to make it very clear, while the press is here, that I am going to do my dead-level best to move legislation through this conimittee onto the floor as reasonably soon as Possible. The record will be kept open for those of you who wish to make addi- tional comments or suggestions, proposed amendments or whatever, the record will be kept open until F8bruary 22. During that period of time, and hopefully during that recess, I am going to ask the staff people to make a field trip. I have been there. I will have them consult with the Park Service people. I want to develop with a little more accuracy the num'ber of homes within the corridor and what homes would be taken or should be taken and approximately what `the value ~f those homes is. So I think the record is a little weak on th'at at this time. So we will do that and when we come back `here, after the record is complete, I would hope that we can move forward, as I said earlier during the hearing, some time within `the next 60 days. We will stand in recess subject to the call of the Chair. [Whereupon, at 11. :50 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned, subject to the call of the Chair.] PAGENO="0243" APPENDIX [Under authority previously granted, the following statements and communications were ordered printed:] MEMORANDUM FROM THE CHAIRMAN Many persons have requested that their comments be made part of the printed record. Not all could be accommodated. This volume, however, con- tains a broad sampling from the mail we have received. We have tried to ensure that all points of view have been included and that the weight of comments pro and con has been preserved. Those letters which were not reprinted here remain as part of the Committee's file and they, too, will be considered in our further work on the problems under study. Over the past several weeks we have received a large number of letters from interested individuals and groups throughout the country, containing their opinion on the proposed legislation to establish the Big Thicket National Preserve. PAGENO="0244" PAGENO="0245" TESTIMONY RENDERED IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED BIG THICKET NATIONAL BIO- LOGICAL PRESERVE FOR THE U.S. SENATE, INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS COMMIT- TEE BY MRs. Fnun H. ALLEN, JR., ON FER. 5-6,1974 As a resident of Batson, Hardin County, Texas and an owner of acreage which has been marked for inclusion in the Big Thicket National Biological Preserve, I am heartily in favor of the legislation recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. My grandparents came to this area in 1903 and my husband's grandparents settled here in about 1905. Although my husband and I have bad the oppor- tunity to live in many different parts of our nation, we have chosen to establish our home in this small community, which is near the proposed Saratoga Triangle Unit. We believe our remote area affords many opportunities for our children to grow in contact with and respect for the beauty and diversity of nature, both plant and animal species. The opportunities afforded by the development of a Biological Preserve will aid us greatly in teaching our children the many mysteries of the woodlands which surround us. We are of the opinion, also, that the healthy development of tourism in our area would be most beneficial to the depressed community which presently exists in Batson and surrounding small towns. We endorse the requests of the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee that the "arid sandylands" unit be included in your legislation, and that the provision for legislative taking of property is absolutely necessary. We have found that many voices have been raised against this preserve which lack foresight for the future development of our area. We hope you will act with all deliberate speed to protect the birthright of our children which appears threatened if the Big Thicket National Biological Preserve does not become a reality. Thank you for your consideration of our plea. C0MMIUPEE ON INTERIOR AND `INStILAR AFFAIRS, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washingt&n, D.C., December 7, 1973. Hon. HENRY JACKSON, Uhairnuz4i, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate, WasMngton, D.C. DEAR Mn. CHAIRMAN: For your information I an enclosing a copy of a Resolu- tion recently forwarded to this `Committee from the Commissioners Court of Hardin County, Texas concerning the Big Thicket National Preserve. As you know the House has approved legislation on this matter, so this infor- mation cannot be placed in our record. You might find it useful information for your Committee deliberations. Sincerely yours, JAMES A. HALEY, C1~a'irman. Enclosure. THE STAVE OF TEXAS: County of Hardin: On this the 26th day of October, 1973, The Commissioners' Court in and for Hardin County, Texas, convened in a Special Session of a regular term at the regular meeting place at the Courthouse in the Commissioners Court Room in Kountze, Texas, Hardin County, with the following members of the Court present, to wit: Emmett Lack, County Judge Rex Moore, Commissioner, Prect. #1 V. L. Caraway, Commissioner, Prect. #2. Hugh Bevil Means, Commissioner, Prect. #3. Paul M. Priest, Commissioner, Prect. #4. (239) PAGENO="0246" 240 the following absent, None, thereby constituting a quorum, when among other things, the following proceedings had, the following orders were passed, to wit: Upon .the motion of Commissioner Moore and a second by Commissioner Trest and the unanimous vote of the Court do hereby adopt the following Resolution to supersede the Resolution passed by this Court in February, 1973. A RESOLUTION WHEREAS, The National Park Service recommended in May, 1967, the estab- lishment of a 35,500 acre "string of pearls" Big Thicket National Monument in Southeast Texas to preserve the unique ecology and historically interesting characteristics of the area; and WHEREAS, use and development of land already owned by the Federal Gov- ernment should be of primary consideration in planning for the Big Thicket Park or Monument, with the purchase of additional lands from private landowners secondary; and WHEREAS, the economic progress of Texas, is, to a great extent, dependent upon our forest resources which supply the materials to help build our homes, schools, churches, towns and cities, which would be substantually reduced by creating a Big Thicket Park of more than 35,500 contained acres; and WHEREAS, countless forest products are required to improve the standard of living, and furnish compensation of this and future generations; Now Therefore, Be It Resolved, That the Commissioners Court of Hardin County, Texas opposes the establishment of a Big Thicket Biological and Botani- cal Preserve of more than 35,500 contained acres; and Be it resolved, That no homes be taken; and Be It Further Resolved, That no river, bayou or creek corridors be taken. Whereupon Court stands recessed. CLARENCE MCNEELY, County Clerk. EMMET LACK, County Judge. By GERALDINE GALLIN, Deputy. COMMISSIONERS' COURT MINUTES CERTIFICATE Tun SPATE OF TEXAS: County of Hardin: I, CLARENCE MCNEELY, Clerk of the County Court in and for Hardin County, Texas, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and cor- rect copy of a certain ORDER passed by COMMISSIONERS' COURT on Octo- ber 26, 1973, as the same appears of record in VOLUME. 13 of the MINUTES OF COMMISSIONERS COURT in and for Hardin County, Texas. * GIVE~N UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, This the 26 day of October 1973. [SEAR] CLARENCE MCNEELY, County Clerk, Hardin~ County, Tear. By GERALDINE GALLIN, Deputy. Box 742, Sour Lake, Tear. Dn~R MR. JACKSON: I am writing in strong opposition to the Big Thicket Biological Reserve H.R. 9562. I am against anyone taking homes from thousands to satisfy that of a few biologists or bird watchers. My home is very sacred to me and my family as I'm sure yours is to you and your family. And don't believe for one minute there are only 42 homes involved for that is a lie. There are thousands! And if you have been told of life-tenancy; investigate it; It is a farce! * Please help us save our homes, as it could be your own in jeopardy some day. * JOHN MARBLE. PAGENO="0247" 241 JANUARY 6, 1974. Senator HENRY JACKSON, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAJ~ SENATOR JACKSON: We `would like to express our support for the estab- lishment of the Big Thicket National Park in Texas. As you are aware, the Senate Interior Committee is to hear the case for establi~hment of the Park in the near future. We ask that you support the Park and urge the inclusion of the Big-Sandy Village Creek corridor in the `Senate's version of the bill. The Big Thicket represents a unique combination of ecological habitats which must be protected from irresponsible lumbering, monocultural planting and resi- dential development. We hope that you will heartily endorse the establishment of the Big Thicket National Park. Sincerely, Mr./Mrs. GARY N. Mooiu, 6608 BOULEVARD VIEW, B-I, Ale~randr'ia, Va, JEFFREY R. SHORT, Jr., 20 NORTH WACKER DRIVE, OHICAGO, ILL., January 7, 1974. Hon. HENRY R. JACKSON, U.S. Senate, Senate Office Building, Wasle'ington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: Can you do anything to support the establishment of the Big Thicket National Park or Biological Reserve? I know this was passed as a new compromise bill, H.R. 11547, and there are going to be hearings in the Senate Interior Committee. Senator Bentsen and Senator Tower have both committed themselves to the passage of this legisla- tion. Here is something that might help you understand the difficult situation. I would urge you, please, to consider favorably the establishment of a Big Thicket National Park or Biological Reserve. I have spent five days at the Big Thicket, saw two Ivory Bill woodpeckers in 170, and this is a marvelous American heritage that must be preserved, somehow. It should include the Big- Sandy Village Creek corridor in the Senate version. You can't imagine the beauty of this sub-tropical wilderness, which is being chopped away at the rate of 35,000 acres a year. Please, please do your best to get this through. It takes so long to get any- thing done, and by the time it is done, I ani afraid that a great deal will be lost forever. Sincerely, JEFFREY R. SHORT. To: Hon. Henry Jackson, Chairman, Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Com- mittee and committee members. From: Mrs. Edna Jgoe, BrownwOod, Texas, State Big Thicket chairman for Texas Federation of Women's Clubs, member of `board of directors of Big Thicket Association, member of Big Thicket coordinating committee. MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS: I wish the following testimony placed in the Senate Hearing Record. I am Mrs. Edna Jagoe from Brownwood, Texas, serving as State Big Thicket Chairman for the Texas Federation of Women's Clubs. I represent and am `spokesman for 24,000 Texas clubwomen who have worked for years in behalf of saving the Big Thicket. I `testified last July before the House hearing held by Rep. Roy A. Taylor, Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Parks and Recreation of the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee asking that 100,000 acres be saved. When a bill was passed in the House calling for 84,550 acre Big Thicket National Biological Preserve the Board of Directors of TFWC went on record to accept the compromise acreage of 84,550. That is our stand today. As a member PAGENO="0248" 242 of The Big Thicket Association and The Big Thicket Coordinating Committee my personal stand is for the 84,550 acres. There is no need for a lengthy statement from me at this time-you have all the information necessary concerning the Big Thicket. The 24,000 clubwomen trust that you act quickly in the preservation "of this beautiful, unique, and irreplaceable remnant of the American wilderness." Imagine having to ask why the Big Thicket should he saved! What is a dollar worth? Signed, Mrs. EDNA JAGOE, State Big Thicket Chairman, Texas Federation of Women's Clubs. 74 SWEET BRIAR Dnivn No. 6, CLARK, N.J., January 5, 1974. Hon. HARRISON WILLIAMS, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR WILLIAMS: I urge you to support the bill which would establish a Big Thicket National Park in Texas. (The bill in the House was H.R. 11547.) If possible, I think it would be a good idea to expand the park as provided for in the House version of the bill. Specifically, I think the Big-Sandy Village Creek corridor should be added, as it represents an ecosystem not represented in the present park proposal, and the Big Thicket is unique because of its great variety of ecosystems. Sincerely yours, Pars S. ROBERTS. NOVEMBER29 1974 Subject: Support for 84,550 Acre Big Thicket bill, H.R. 11546 Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairmai~, Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR Sm: We urge you to actively support and vote for the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee compromise Big Thicket bill of 84~550 acres, H.R. 11546. It is important that we preserve this outstanding biological reserve, with its diverse terrain and unique plants and wildlife. The establishment of a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve will benefit us and future generations of Americans. Very sincerely yours, REUEL SMITH, Senior, Architecture, Unsverslty of Texas NORMAN CARLEOIS, Senior, Chemical Engineering, University of Texas. MELISSA PROSPER, JunIor Bwlogy University OJ Texas. LAUME KIS5LING, Junior, Studio Art, UnIversIty of Texas ANGOLA NY January 6 1974 Senator HENRY JACKSON, Senate Office Bu,Ziding, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: Mr. Stevenson and I congratulated you for your efforts in the preservation of the Big Thicket in Texas. It should have been pre- served years ago. It is long in coming. There is one omission in H.R. 11547. It does not include Big Sandy Village Creek. This ecosystem is representative of this area and must be included in PAGENO="0249" 243 the final Senate version of the bill. Will you kindly take care of this? We trust you will. Very truly yours, Mr. and Mrs. RICHARD C. STEVENSON. NEw PALTZ, N.M., January 8, 1974. Daaa SENATOR JACKSON: I understand there is now a bill in Congress to make a national park of the Big Thicket Forest. While stationed in Texas during World War II I had an opportunity to visit the Big Thicket Forest. I urge you please to use your power to support this bill. The Big Thicket is an exciting forest. It has an abundance of animal and plant life. The forest should be preserved for our children and generation's to come. It is a national wonder that can enrich our lives. America needs more national parks! It is one act Congress can pass for the neglected middle class. Respectfully yours ROBERT W KAELIN 01 ROSEWOOD TERRACE, EAST RUTHERFORD, N.3., January 7, 1974. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: I am writing to you to express my support for the és- tablishment of the Big Thicket National Park I also urge you to include the Big Sandy Village Creek corridor in the Senate version of the bill Thank you very much for your attention Sincerely JANET LYONS YOUTH AGAINST POLLUTION, INC., Clvainibersbwrg, Pa., Ja4inary 10, 1974. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: We support `the bill Thicket National Park ancl'Big Sandy Village Creek. It is a part of all America history and it may have the larg- est cypress in North America. So we hope you will vote for the bill not for us but for all kids. Sincerely, ROBERT L. KEMP. MT. CLEMENS, MICH., January 1, 1974. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: We strongly urge you to support the "Big Thicket National Park" bill. We feel though that Big Sandy Village Creek corridor should be included in the Senate version of this bill. For its diversity, richness, and sheer abundance of life, the Thicket may not be equalled anywhere on this earth. It therefore deserves special attention and definite preservation. Sincerely, LLOYD and MARIA SCHEIDERMAN. BLACKWOOD, N.J., January11, 1974. Senator HENRY JACKSON, " &inate Office Building, Washington D C DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: May I urge your ardent support for the passage of the bill to include Big `Sandy Village Creek corridor in the Senate version of `this bill. Please do all you can to support this and to get it passed at this session. Sincerely ELIZABETH WALBIIOEHL. THETFORD HILL, VT., January 9, 1974. Senator HENRY JACKSON, U.s. senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: I urge you to support the Big Thicket National Park In SE Texas and to work to include the Big Sandy Village Creek corridor in the bill. Thank you. DOREEN SCHWEIZER. PAGENO="0250" 244 LOUISVILLE, Ks., January 9, 1974. Senator HENRY JACKSON, f~enate Office Building, WasMngton, D.C. DK&R SENATOR JACKSON: As head of the Interior Coniuiittee, I hope you will support the Big Thicket National Park in Texas, and include the Big Sandy Village Creek in the Senate version of the bill. We must save few remaining natural areas. Yours truly, Mrs. B. THOMAS. Beaumont, Teo., November 17,1973. Senator HENRY JACKSON, Senate Office Building, Wa8hington, D.C. Dn&i~ Sm: My name is Mrs. Sharon Kaye Gossett of 4715 Loredo, Beaumont, Texas. My parents are Mr. and Mrs. C. H. Votaw. They have sixty-six acres of improved pasture land and an eight room all masonry home on Farm Road 420 north of Kountze, Texas. We have done all the work on this place ourselves. We have lived there for 23 years. This area is included in the Turkey Creek Unit of the so-called Big Thicket Park. This area is not the Big Thicket. Neither are the corridors on the proposed water ways. If 600 Ft. are taken on each side of these water ways there is an Outrageous number of homes to be affected. In this new compromise bill 9562, or whatever, people inside the pack bound- aries will be left with one home dwelling and three (3) acres. Our land is all cleared pasture land. Daddy was planning to retire and have their income off our cattle. Daddy is 66 and Momma is 64. My husband, little girl and I were going to move up there and help run the place. This 25 year thing will not do for us, besides this is ilke paying rent on your own land. Olaud and I want this place for ourselves and our children. We are not the only ones in this situation. Most people in the Turkey Creek Unit, Big Sandy Creek Unit `and the Lance Rosier Unit have more than three (3) acres. We run livestock as part of our livelihood. We need our pastures. We consider home all our land, not just three acres und a house. There seems to be a belief that the almighty dollar shall prevail, but money is not what we want. We want our land we have worked on for all our lives. Our land is almost like a child we have molded and watched grow into something we can be proud of. Money can not buy what we feel for our land. When the Big Thicket thing first started up, it was supposed to be 35,500 acres over in the Big Thicket. Not this preposterous thing scattered all over the country, gutting Hardin County and disrupting the people, or back bone of the county. Way over half this park comes out of Hardin County. When in the life time of the good ole U.S.A. did a bird become more im- portant than a human being? We should seek a happy medium with nature, but breeaking hearts and ruining lives is not the way to do it! Let me tell you something about us Southeast Texans. We are proud of our heritage and our piney-woods. We must have taken pretty good care of it up until now or I can not see why anyone would want it for a park. Anyone that really knows the woods can understand if it is not cut over once in a while it will die out. People have been lead to believe there is practically no one living in this park area. A thousand families would be a conservative number and over half own more than three (3) acres. On top of that 35,000 people in Hardin County, Texas alone will be greatly affected by this great land grab. The 35,000 was taken from a 1961 census. The population has steadily increased since then. We were assured Domestic Tranquility by the Constitution of these great United States of America. Where has it gone? We still maintain the idea there can be a park or reserve without taking any homes and improved land. If this cannot be accomplished, there should be no park or reserve of any kind. Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs. CLAUDE E. GosSrnu. PAGENO="0251" 245 STUDENT GOVERNMENT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN AUSTIN, TEXAS Office of the President February 2,1974 The Senate Cctmlittee on the Interior Senate office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Mr. Chairman and Meabers of the Ccrnaittee: With regard to the hearings concerning the creation of a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve I am suliaitting a copy of my testiiixny before the House Subccmnittee on National Parks and Recreation of July 16, 1973. In addition to reaffirming my position concerning the Big Thicket I s~ould like to add a camient on the need to acquire the land by means of legislative taking. It is in~erative that the land that is to constitute the Big Thicket be acquired as swiftly as possible. The possibilities of inadvertant destruction of this invaluable acreage, fully one-third of which is not under federal control as of now, require that it be placed under government control and supervision at the earliest feasible date. I hope that the casnittee will find these materials useful and that you will act swiftly and favorably upon the legislation to preserve this unique and imgnificent area. Sincerely yours, C-" San~y Kress President~tudent Government University of Te~ws at Austin Chairperson Student Coalition To Save the Big Thicket SK:lr cc: Sen. John Tower Sen. Lloyd Bentsen PAGENO="0252" 246 STUDENT GOVERNMENT~ THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN AUSTIN, TEXAS SANDY KRSIS ~12-471-372l Prssia':sll CAPPY MCG4RR Vks-PresiIs'nS STATEMENT OF SANDY KRESS, CHAIRPERSON OF THE STUDENT COALITION TO SAVE THE BIG THICKET, BEFORE THE US HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION HEARINGS ON THE BIG THICKET NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL RESERVE, JULY 16, 1973. Mr. Chairman, I am Sandy Kress, President of the student body at the Universit~ of Texas at Austin I would like to thank you for this opportunity to speak to your committee on behalf of the students who are concerned about this issue. I represent the Student Coalition to Save the Big Thicket, students from across Texas and Louisiana who are deeply concerned about preserving the unique. ecological systems of the Thicket. Our steering committee includes the elected student body presidents from ten campuses with a total enrollment of more than 150,000 students. They come from all parts of Texas: The University of Texas campuses in Austin, Arlington and El Paso; the University of Houston; Texas A&M University in College Station; Texas Tech University in Lubbock, Pan. American University in Edinburg and Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, near the Big Thicket in East Texas. The president cf the Texas Inte±'collegiate Students PAGENO="0253" 247 Association, which includes all the student governments across Texas, has joined our effort, as has the president of the student body of, Louisiana State Univer~ity'1n'.Baton Rouge~. We have come together to urge Congress to create a National reserve that, will preserve the greatest amount of the natural wonder of the Big Thicket. As students, we believe we have a vested interest in the preservation of the Big Thicket. Within this now small area of East Texas, there is the continent's greatest biological laboratory. The thousands of varieties of plant life make it a gold mine for the interested student or scientist. To preserve this area with as little damage as possible to the life systems is paramount. It would be foolish to think these systems, or for that matter any system co~ld survive' if their lifelines `were cut off. Each of the units considered for inclusion, from the Big Sandy to the Neches River, have unique characteristics. This is especially true for the Turkey Crekk area, without which a reserve would be deficient. ` ` Mr. Chairman, many people, including thousands of students, `have been trying to return to nature recently. But it is getting increasingly difficult: the cities are encroaching on what was once widerness area; places like the Big Thicket are being rapidly destroyed. People are concerned., They want to be able PAGENO="0254" 248 to leave the city~. They want to get away from the crowds, the cars and the smog. Where can they go? Is the time far off when they will be unable to find these recreational areas close enough for a weekend trip? Is it too much to ask to save 100,000 acres of this beautiful virgin forest for these people? It is a part of their heritage: a reflection of what America once was before the coming of the sterile rows of pines that reflect "forest management," but disregard the infinite varieties of. life found in the Thicket. Many people say the national concern for the environment began on the campuses of this country. As we witnessed the continuing pollution of our air and water, we started to turn the expertise we were gaining in the colleges and universities towards reversing this cycle. Now we see the Big Thicket, and the opportunity to save this one samll piece of America is preserved as it once was, so we can study it to better understand how life systems work, and .so we can consider what iq~ have done there and to the rest of our world. . Mr. Chairman, this is our plea: the students of the state of Texas, indeed the whole country, want to see the protection of the Big Thicket. As we see it, tine is critical. I do not want to be redundent, but each day the continued destruction in the area is taking.its toll on the ecological systems there. PAGENO="0255" 249 To set aside 100,000 acres of this area for preservation seems like a token when you consider what the Thicket represents. It is a part of the heritage of every Texan. It is a classrobn of iTninense value to those who study the nature and variety of life. It is a beautiful place. It is a reflective place whe2e a nan can go and consider his role on this snall planet. On behalf of the students of the state of Texas, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you again for this opportunity to speak. These student body leaders have Joined the Steering Committee of the Student Coalition to Save the Big Thicket: Darwin McKee, President, Texas Intercollegiate Students Assoc. Larry Zacharias, Student body President, San Houston State Universit: Ken Curry, student body president, University of Texas at Arlington Russell Autrey, student body president, UT-El Paso Sandy Kress, student body president, UT-Austin * Ricky Alexander, ~tuderit body president, Texas Tech University Shariq. Yosufzai, student body vice-president, Texas A&M University Jim Liggett, student body president, University ofHouston * Mike Perez, student body president, Pan American University Charles J. Yeager, student body president, Louisiana State Universit: PAGENO="0256" 250 ~ Alfred A. KnOpf Incor~ orated (212)751-2600 201 East 50th Street, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10022 January 2, 197k The Honorable Henry N. Jackson United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator: I have been enormously Interested In, for the last twenty- odd years, everything that Involves the National Park Service and System. I have been particularly Interested during the last few years In seeing the Big Thicket added to the System and have tried to help the local people down In Texas get a bill through Congress that ~uld save the Thicket before that l*xnber company owned by Time Inc destroyed It all Now $ am Informed that the House has passed both a Big Thicket and a Big Cypress bill, but that the Senate has yet to take action on these. I think It extremely important that the Big Thicket bill in particular should be passed by the Senate during the coming session, and I hope you will be able to help to this end. With best wishes, I am, Yours faithfully, Alfred A. Knopf AAK:gb PAGENO="0257" 251 P~. 0. Box 1 Gordon, Texas 76453 January 23, 1974 The Honorable Henry Jackson Senate Interior & Insular Affairs Corn. Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Sir: The following statement is for the Senate hearing record: I understand the Texas Federation of Women's Clubs has agreed to the reduction of 100,000 acres to ~4,5OO acres in the Big Thickett in East Texas. I wholeheartedly support the action of the Senate Committee to save these ~4,50O acres. Sincerely, ~ Mrs. R. B. Strain Secretary Gordon Woman's Club Gordon, Texas c~c; -Senator Lloyd Bentsen Senator John Tower 30-061 0 - 74 - 17 PAGENO="0258" 252 Senator ~ ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN Senate Interi(or Committee DALLAS BRANCH United States Senate DALLAS, TEXAS Feb. 15, 19T4 Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator (3~j'~2_.~ On behalf of the members and Board of Directors of the Dallas Branch of the American Association of University Women, I wish to express our concern over the Big Thicket National Eeserve Bill passed by the House on Dec. 3, 1973. The Texas Division of the A.A.U.W. has dedicated i~se1f to the cause of reserving at least 100,000 acres of the Big Thicket as a national park. We believe that the bill as passed by the House of Representatives needs to be strenhthened. In addition to the 84,500 acres provided for in the bill, an additional 16,000 acres of the arid Sandylands should include the elongated area along Village Creek as this would allow dispersal of tourists through trails and provide excellent canoeing. The ecological succession ponds and the plants characteristic of the Southwestern desert make this area especially valuable for a national reserve as it would complete the biological crossroads of North America. Stream corridors should be included in the preserve which cannot survive without protective water flow. Also we would like to request legislative taking to allow immediate government ownership and protection of land within the Thicket reserve in order to prevent needless spite cutting as has occurred in the past. Futherinore funding paid out of the Federal Land and Water Fund would allow the Big Thicket National Reserve to be paid for immediately. We trust that the Senate Interior Committee will act favorably as soon as possible and help in the creation of a Big Thicket National Reserve of at least 100,000 acres. We believe that this amount of acreage will not work any hardship on the timber industry as the companies own huge amounts of land throughout East Texas and the United States. We believe that the interests of this and future generations of American citizens should take precedent over the interests of the timber industry and real estate developers in this area. We hope that our testimony will be made a part of the official record for the February hearings now in progress in Washington, D.C. Yours truly 14r~. Harry Weisbrod, Legis ative Representative Dallas Branch A.A.U.W. PAGENO="0259" 253 THE UNIVERSITY OP TEXAS AT AUSTIN AUSTIN, TEXAS 78712 Department of Zoology -- January 21, 1974 Senator Alan Bible Chairman, Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation United States Senate Washington, D. C. Dear Senator Bible: We wish to express our support for the Big Thicket National Preserve being evaluated on the 5-6 February at a hearing of your Subcommittee. We have, collectively, 50 years of experience studying the vertebrate biota of Texas, including extensive studies in the Big Thicket area. Out pro- fessional expertise includes studies on all vertebrates, except birds. We feel that the present area of 85,550 acres for a biological preserve is minimal but should suffice to enhance the protection of the rich south- eastern biota still remaining in the Big Thicket. We have noted that the undisturbed parts of the Austroriparian Biotic Province region are becoming more and more restricted, reducing the available areas to maintain our national biological heritage. Setting aside the Big Thicket for a national preserve will be of benefit to the biological elements with which we have familiarity. We would suggest that the region proposed in HR 9562 is minimal and urge in- creases in acreage where feasible. Any increase in acreage should emphasize one or both of the elements below 1) The acreage of primary refugia should be as large as possible, i.e., it would be preferable to have each of the areas in- creased in acreage to minimize the edge effect. 2) Each of the preserve areas should be interconnected by preserve corridors where feasible. This will permit gene flow between disjunct populations and significantly re- duce the probability of extinctions within each isolated unit. Sincerely yours, Clark Hubbs Professor Professor PAGENO="0260" 254 OUTDOOR NATURE Ct~i~ OF HOUSTON February 18, 1974 Statement to the Senate Interior Committee for record of Big Thicket Hearings of February 5th and 6th, 1974: The Outdoor Nature Club of Houston has been interested in the preservation of some of the Big Thicket since 1923, and has its own 653-acre "Little Thicket Nature Sanctuary" in the Thumb of the Big Thicket near Evergreen. Some years ago the Outdoor Nature Club endorsed, like other conservation groups, the concept of a 100,000-acre park or preserve for the Big Thicket. There have been numerous areas proposed for the park, and several versions of a lOO,OQO-acre park and, at times, a 300,000-acre park was suggested. The compromise Eckhardt-WilSOn Bill seems, however, to be the park plan which seems most likely of enactment. There are limitations on size due to cost, local opposition, and the limited really good areas of Big Thicket remaining. The 84,550-acre plan from the House seems to be accepted, and should be enacted without delay. Controversy has raged over which areas should be in the park, and the current dispute centers of the possible addition of the Village Creek area to the Wilson-Eckhardt Bill. Village Creek is a lovely stream, but its inclusion is not absolutely essential to the park. In order to be fair to the small land-owners whose land will be in the park, cash payments should be made if possible so that they may be able to purchase land elsewhere to replace their lost lands. Acquisitions should be made as rapidly as exact boundaries can be surveyed. Fair market prices should be paid, of course. The 25-year or lifetime occupancy provision should be retained, in the case of homes being included in the park. Raymond H. NcDavid Conservation vice~President PAGENO="0261" * 255 * THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS Archibald C. Rogers, FAIA President February 4, 1974 The Honorable Alan Bible Chairman Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Mr. Chairman: On behalf of the American Institute of ArchItects, 1 wish to express support for the creation of a Big Thicket National Biological Preserve in the State of Texas. It is our belief that priority should be given to park proposals for lands which are threatened with imminent disruption and which are convenient to large population centers. The Big Thicket Is one such area. It has suffered abuse from various interests and is now threatened by Increasing residential develop- ment. However, approximately ten percent of the original forest still retains its natural quality and character. This area has been called the `biological crossroads of North America." A number of nearly-extinct animals and birds and a remarkable variety Of trees and flowers are found in the Big Thicket, and countless migratory birds seek refuge there annually. As passed by the House, H. R. 11546 authorizes the establishment of a Big Thicket National Preserve consisting of 84, 550 acres. The Institute believes the area should be declared a biological reserve which Is expressive of its character and Intended purpose rather than a preserve the designation In the House-passed bill. The reason for creating such a reserve Is to maintain this unique natural area for scientific study. Potential recreational activities in the Big Thicket, while important, should be restricted to specific areas. Neither the Senate proposals (S.3l4, 5. 1981, and S. 2296), norH.R. 11546 (as passed), restrict with sufficient detail the uses and recreational equipment *to be permitted in the area. Therefore, the Institute strongly urges that specifications as to the limited degree and location of human activity allowable in the Big Thicket be Included In the legislation This Is especially Important with regard to the restriction of allowable types of motor vehicles and areas for camping 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE N W * WASHINGTON D C 20006 * (202) 785 7300 PAGENO="0262" 256 By resolution, the Board of Directors of the American Institute of Architects endorsed the creation of the Big Thicket National Park during its meeting on March 6, 1972. We would appreciate the inclusion of this letter In the hearing record related to this legislation. Thank you for this opportunity to express our views. Sincerely, Archibald C. Rogers, FA4IA Pre sident PAGENO="0263" 257 February 18, 1974 The Honorable Alan Bible Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Bible: I am writing to you as Conservation Committee Chairman, in behalf of the Southwestern Association of Naturalists. In the past, we have submitted a resolution on the desirability of having a Big Thicket National Biological Preserve. I will not take time to reiterate the unique features of the Big Thicket region of Texas in this letter, but I want to remind you of the organization's earlier statemamts and its present support of the national biological preserve concept. As to the controversial acreage involved, we earlier supported the 100,000 acre concept. Now, however, we believe INSTITUTE OF that the present 84,000 acre proposal by the House is ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES suitable. In any case, we wish to remind you of our position and ask for an early decision to protect a Saylor University minimum of 84 000 acres of the Big Thicket of Texas. Waco, Texas 76703 Sincerely, Frederick R. Gehlbach Associate Professor FRG : jw cc: Dr. Pete A. Gunter 1903 Locksley Lane Denton, Texas 76201 PAGENO="0264" 258 AETS ASSOCIATION FOR THE EDUCATION OF TEACHERS IN SCIENI A Section of the Nationet Sctonce Teachere Aesociafion and a Member of the Cooperative Committee of the American Aaeociation fot the Advancement of ccience. February 13, 1974 Senator Alan Bible, Chairman Parks and Recreation Subcommittee Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Bible: Thank you so nuch for initiating and holding a "Big Thicket" Senate hearing. You are the model of what a genuinely interested elected legislator should be in that you have shown the foresight to pre- serve irreplaceable natural entities for the benefit of future generations. The Association for the Education of Teachers in Science is an organization composed of teachers of science, scientists, science education specialists and teachers of science teachers. There are AETS members in 50 states, the District of Columbia, ten Canadian provinces, and Puerto Rico. The more than 650 members of AETS respectfully request that this letter be included in the printed record of the "Big Thicket" Senate hearing for being in favor of a 100,000 acre "Big Thicket National Reserve." Specifically, we favor additions foL Congressman Charles Wilson's 84,550 acre bill that passed the House of. Representatives. 1) Addition of ecologically desirable acres originally included in Congressman Alan Steelman's bill(HR9253) and 2) inclusion of the "Redwood"provision in order that all destruction of irreplaceable hardwoods would cease immediately'on passage of the bill by both the House and Senate. AETS members have for thome time been involved in a letter writing campaign~to save what remains of the "Big Thicket." More than 6000 letters have been sent to elected and appointed membersof the U.S. Government. We would like to be officially noted as holding the posi- tion that the unique combination of flora and fauna species found in the "Big Thicket" must be saved for future study and for the benefit of our children and their children's children. There are literally millions of acres in Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas that will more PAGENO="0265" 259 than adequately support the rapid growth of commercial cottonwood and pine for future generations and large corporate profits without destroying the "Big Thicket." Further we would expect that the owners of snail private domiciles on tracts in the "Big Thicket" will be justly compensated by "Life Leases" or "more than market value" by a sage and considerate Congress. Thank you again for your unselfish and persistent efforts for the preservation of the "Big Thicket." Future generations will be forever in your debt. Respectfully, Dr. Wendall N. Spreadbury Political Alert Chairman, AETS dj PAGENO="0266" 260 Founded 1875 1319 Eighteenth Street NW Washingtab IC2OO3~t~?&~hone (202) 467-5810 February 5, J974 Senator Alan Bible, Chairisan Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States Senate Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Bible: This letter is for the record in support of a Big Thicket National Preserve in Texas, as passed by the House in H. R. 11546. The American Forestry Association has been interested and involved in the Big Thicket proposal from its beginning and feels that the time has come to resolve this issue. The House-passed bill is a compromise and probably does not fully satisfy any group, but it does have the support of nearly everyone who has been concerned with various proposals. We testified before the House Committee that purchase of a Big Thicket Pre- serve would entail an enormous drain on the Land and Water Conservation Fund, already obligated beyond its limit. We still are concerned but see no other way that the problem can be resolved at this time. It would be our recommenda- tion that future authorizations for new additions to our federal conservation system carry authorizations for general revenue appropriations. The only other solution would be for major increases in the Land and Water Conservation Fund itself. This $63,812,000 estimated cost of acquisition for the Big Thicket probably represents a bigger load than the federal share of the Land and Water Conservation Fund can carry. H. R. 11546, as passed by the House, is much improved over earlier Big Thicket bills, such as H. R. 5941. Sec. 4 (b) gives the Secretary needed management authority without undue restrictions by law and contains a good authorization for hunting and fishing in accordance with state laws and cooperation Although 84,000 acres is more land than we earlier recommended for a Big Thicket Preserve, we support the compromise figure as being the most logical solution to a long-time controversy. It would be our recommendation for future areas of this type, however, that consideration be given to working our land use permits or zoning stipulations that would keep much of the land in private PAGENO="0267" 261 ownership with uses limited to those compatible with preservation of its natural qualities. There was a good probahility that some of the major landowners to be encompassed within Big Thicket Preserve would have been willing to work out use agreements that could have considerably reduced the needed area of federal acquisition. We urge prompt and favorable action of the Senate on H. R. 11546, however, because it does represent years of careful evaluation and compromise efforts on the part of many people. Sincerely, illiam E. Towell Executive Vice President The American Forestry Association PAGENO="0268" 262 ~J~as Cor~s~roc~±&ft Coanc~, fJr~c. For the Record of the Hearing on the proposed Big Thicket Reserve by the Parks and Recreation Subcommittee of the Senate February 5 - 6, 1974 Senator Bible and Members of the Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation: The following statement was approved by the Board of the Texas Conservation Council, a non-profit organization dedicated to the establishment of parks and recreation areas, the preservation of natural areas and the protection of wildlife: We are delighted that the House has finally passed a hard-fought Big Thicket compromise for an 86,500-acre reserve. It has taken nearly eight years to get the House to approve or even seriously consider any Big Thicket bill. While we are somewhat disappointed in the bill, its passage is a big step toward what we hope will prove to be a very valuable Big Thicket Reserve. Late in 1969 the Senate approved then-Senator Ralph Yarborough's bill for a 100,000-acre Big Thicket National Park. This bill did not designate specific areas. Whether it would have resulted in the preservation of the best ecological areas or in a park that would have been more recreational in character is anyone's guess. Biologists have been advocating conservation of a large part of the Big Thicket for its unique ecological features ever since 1928. In the meanwhile civilization has destroyed much of the area's character with its cities, highways, pipelines, second-home developments and lumbering practices. Preservation of a single large area that would include the various ecological features - the streams, the ox-bow lakes and ponds, the uplands, the acid-loving plant communities and those found in more alkaline soils - has become impossible. In order to select the best examples of the many types of plant and animal associations, a Big Thicket Co- ordinating Committee was organized. It includes representatives of the 40 organ- izations interested in working for the preservation of the Big Thicket. The most knowledgeable people we could find scouted the Thicket and selected the finest examples they could find of each type of habitat and mapped them together with corridors along the streams that are the life-blood of these units. The resulting PAGENO="0269" 263 plan called for 200,000 acres. Because of opposition from a number of sources, we later reduced this to 100,000 acres, which we considered the irreducible min- imum. To cut below this acreage would require leaving out one or more ecologic- ally important areas. This is what happened when the House excluded the corridors along Village Creek and its tributary Big Sandy Creek. The best examples of sandyland ecology are found along Village Creek west of Silsbee in Hardin County. Here we find the prickly pear, yucca, and many other plants characteristic of the arid southwest. This is not an important timber-growing area and should not be expensive to buy. The boundaries could be elastic enough to leave out any permanent residences along the creek. The 16,000-acre sandykind-ponds addition mapped by the Big Thicket Co- ordinating Committee would round out the ecological story of the Big Thicket. Included in this proposed addition are sedge ponds, sandhills, a bluffline along the creek, and a number of particularly interesting ponds that show the geomorph- ological changes that take place when an abandoned stream channel is gradually converted from shallow lake to bog and eventually to dry land. We are told this is the only area known to science where the complete chain of events may be seen along a 24-mile stretch of river. It certainly is of such interest that it merits special consideration for inclusion in the Big Thicket Reserve~ We urge that the Senate Committee accept the House-passed Big Thicket bill with the following additions: 1. Inclusion of the proposed sandyland area of 16,000 acres along Village Creek to round out the ecological story of the Big Thicket. This will also open Village Creek to canoeing. 2. Inclusion of a clause to provide for Legislative-taking of the Reserve. The fact that small landowners recently cut the timber on a tract in the proposed Turkey Creek unit points up the need for immediate government ownership. 3. Funding through the Land and Water Conservation Fund for rapid purchase. This would avoid the long wait for passage of an appropriation bill by Congress. Mrs. L. N. Dexter, Editor 11909 Knippwood Lane Houston, Texas 77024 PAGENO="0270" 264 TRIBAL COUNCIL TEXAS COMMISSION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS Dempsie Henley, dairrnaa Herbert Johnson, Secretory :. Victor Pain Raymond Poncho, Treasurer .*` Barney Wieland B I Walk . , Walter IV. Broemer, Exec. Dir. Alabama-Coushcitta IndIan ReservatIon Calvin Bassist Martin Sylestino Office Location: Indian Village, Us 190 SUPERINTENDENT 17 Miles East of Livingston, Texas Emmett Bastes, TRIBAL CHIEFS ROUTE 3, BOX 640 Fulton Dastits LIVINGSTON, TEXAS 77351 BUSINESS MGR. Emmett Battiss PNONE~ 7I3/nnn-436I James A, 01cc February 1, 1974 Honorable Alan Bible, Senator Chairman, Subcommittee of Parks & Recreation United States Senate Washington, D.C. Dear Senator Bible: We are enclosing a resolution adopted by the Tribal Council in support of an 80,000 to 100,000 acre area to be used for the creation and development of the Big Thicket National Park or the Biological Reserve Concept in the Big Thicket area. The creation of the Big Thicket National Park would provide tremendous job opportunites and economic development throughout this area. We also feel that our beautiful forests must be preserved in a way to benefit not only ourselves but future generations. Sincerely yours; Clayton N. Sylestine Chairman, Alabama-Coushatta Tribal Council CMS/dd PAGENO="0271" 265 TRIBAL. COUNCIL TEXAS COMMISSION OP Cloyto. Syfr::I.s, c~ro. (~(`4~' INDIAN AFFAIRS Cbs Sylvsti.v, VI.... Chdrw %~~1~J1 J D,mfr:i. He.I,y, C14r*ioa Hori.'rt bk.:.., Svco.ta7 Victor Pa/N R.sy..o.i Pooch., Trw...., 54Y*07 W'la/a9i DorIs Wa/ks? Alabama-Coushattc, Indian Reservation Wa/tsr W. Bro,ovsr, Dxi... Dir. Mini. Sybsai.. Of/irs Loctitos: liii.. Villags, 115 190 SUPERINTENDENT 17 Mi!.: Etit of LIvit,g:to., Too., EO70I5II Dolt!:.. TRIBAL CHIEFS nouTz 3, BOX 040 Pa/to. Din/to LIVINGSTON. TEXAS 77351 BUSINESS MGR.~ E~.u Do#i:s PHONO' 71)/502.4391 Jfl 4, 01.. RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO DEVELOPMENT OF A BIG THICKET NATIONAL PARK WHEREAS, The Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas are vitally concerned with the economical development that will offer job opportunities for their members and other residents of the Big Thicket Area and, WHEREAS, the Tribes have committed themselves to making the Indian Reservation self-sufficient by creating a Tourist Business to meet this objective and, WHEREAS, tourism has supplied more job opportunities and generated more revenue than any other new economic development potential in East Texas and, WHEREAS , the creation of a Big Thicket National Park would provide a tremendous asset to the tourist development for the tribes and local communities and, WHEREAS, the Alabama-Coushatta Indian Tribes have demonstrated economic and ecological benefits of multiple purpose use of forests lands, having been honored by receiving the 1971 State Award for Forest Conservation Practices, managing a sustaining yeild of forest products yet providing wholesome recreation for the general public and. providing additional income from the timber lands and, WHEREAS, the Tribal Council does feel qualified in recommending the creation of a Big Thicket National Park, S THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Tribal Council does request the assistance of the Congress of the United States in passing legislation that will implement the creation of a Big Thicket Natlional Park, and, . . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Tribal Council wishes to state that the greatest assistance that the Congress can give the Alabama-Coushatta Indian Reservation, is to help the Tribes help themselves to gain self-sufficiency by providing the necessary economic development that wou'd be generated by the creation of a Big Thicket National Park, Passed June 8, 1972 - PAGENO="0272" 266 (~11~ c~im~~ QF~ ~ Telephone 327-4311, P.O. Box 867, Livingston, Texas 77351 January 24, 1974 Honorable Allan Bible, Senator -. Chairman, Subcommittee of Parks & Recreations Senate House Committee Washington, D.C. Dear Senator Bible: We enclose herewith a Resolution adopted by the City Council in support of an 80,000 to 100,000 acre area to be used for the creation and development of the Big Thicket National Park or the Biological Reserve Concept in the Big Thicket area, and sincerely solicit your help in this matter. We feel the creation of this national park or the Biological Reserve Concept in the Big Thicket area to be of vital importance for the preservation of one of our greatest heritages; the beautiful timber lands. The timber industry being para- mount in this area, our timberlands will soon be replaced by building sites and structures if this great heritage is not preserved for future generations. Tourism is fast becoming one of our principal industries and for its promotion and growth, and for the economic development of our area we feel the preservation of our timberland to be of vital concern. Respectfully, CITYOF LIV STON o P JP/jr Enc.l PAGENO="0273" 267 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF LIVINGSTON, POLK COUNTY, TEXAS IN SUPPORT OF CREATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF A BIG THICKET NATIONAL PARK. WHEREAS, the economic development of Polk County, Texas is of vital concern to the citizens of the City of Livingston, Texas and our entire area, and WHEREAS, the City of Livingston recognizes the value of a National Park in contributing to the area development, and WHEREAS, the City Council, on behalf of the citizenry of said City of Livingston is desirous of expressing their support of such Big Thicket National Park or the Biological Reserve Concept in the Big Thicket Area, now THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Livingston, Texas that the City, by adoption of this Resolution, pledge support and urge the creation and development of the Big Thicket National Park or the Biological Reserve Concept in the Big Thicket area, and the designation of an 80,000 to 100,000 acre area for such National Park development and creation. RESOLVED this the 23rd day of January, 1974. 4 Signed: - V V V 30-061 0 - 74 - 10 PAGENO="0274" 268 NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY NATIONAL CAPITAL OFFICE 1511 K STREET, N. W., WASHINGTON, D. C. 20005 - (202) 833-3892 February 6, 1974 Honorable Alan Bible, Chairman Senate Interior Committee Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation Washington, D.C. 20510. Dear Mr. Chairman: We appreciate the opportunity to comment on S.l9~1, to establish a Big Thicket National Biological Reserve. As you know, the National Audubon Society is one of the largest citizen conservation organizations with more than 300,000 members around the nation. The Society's basic purpose is "the conservation and appreciation of wildlife and wilderness, natural resources and natural beauty." Preservation of a significant area of the Big Thicket surely fits this goal. Whether the area is called a biological reserve or a preserve, we wish to support creation of a national area of a minimum of 100,000 acres in the Big Thicket. We feel that this is urgent, for with the inroads of land speculation, clear-cutting and pine monoculture, one of America's unique natural areas could be destroyed, if bold steps are not taken soon to preserve it. The history of the Big Thicket preservation movement, and its biological importance are well documented, as is the delineation of key areas that should be preserved; thus, we shall not mention all of them here. However, we would like to note that we were pleased that the House included a Big Sandy unit of 14,300 acres in its bill and we hope your Committee will also consider adding the Sandylands-Ponds Unit suggested by the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee, as this is also a key area. Texas is ecologically unique in the nation in that it alone possesses flora and fauna of the eastern forests as well as western deserts and mountains. The latter have been amply recognized and thanks to this committee, legislation to preserve Big Bend and the Guadalupe Mountains has been enacted. Where the eastern varieties are concerned, however, the case is different. With meagre exceptions, no or very little protection is afforded. (It is true that there are over 600,000 acres in four national forests in East Texas, but these are under constant multiple use pressures, such as lumbering and farming. These national forests, being situated as they are, most certainly do not contain the diverse ecological zones found within the B~g Thicket and their basic purpose for being is different.) The entire area is subject to constant lumbering, drilling and all the other inroads of "progress." In a very short time, the PAGENO="0275" 269 whole ecological region could entirely perish and scarcely be remembered by the majority of Americans, who regard Texas as an arid, prairie land and do not know that an area almost the size of Mississippi is forested and populated in a very similar fashion. The destruction of the Big Thicket would, without doubt, affect the ecology of an even wider area.. It is known that destruction of forests in Greece, Italy, and other areas within historic times altered the area through erosion, decreased rainfall, loss of fertility, etc. The same effects could occur in Texas through this loss. In fact, erratic weather patterns in recent years in Texas are thought by some to result from destruction of brush and timber over wide areas. One of the best reasons for preserving the Big Thicket now is the population factor. The Houston area is one of the fastest growing in the nation. Well over 13 million people live within a five hour drive of the Big Thicket, and relatively unspoiled areas are rapidly being subdivided. We cannot allow our last large wilderness to be eaten away by land speculators and developers. We would add a note of caution here. While the Big Thicket can provide an opportunity for education and wilderness experience, its fragile ecosystem cannot withstand hordes of visitors and it will have to be very carefully managed to protect its unique natural values. Its enormous scientific value mandates a special type of protection which we believe can be provided by the legislation and subsee~uent administrative action. Aside from the ecological considerations, the Big Thicket area, according to John P. Landers, noted east Texas historian, "has nurtured a unique culture drawing its traditions from the older Southern and Appalachian region whence most of the early inhabitants immigrated. It is rich in folk music, oral literature, mountain Southern dialect (a seventeenth century survival), the rural decorative arts, and is a depository of early American customs and folkways." If the Thicket is destroyed, these elements will die with it. We note that the House bill authorizes "legislative taking" in order to prevent land prices from escalating before these properties can be acquired. We believe the House bill overcomes the problems which have arisen with the Redwoods Park, by enabling the Secretary to go to court to settle disputes one year after enactment of the Act. Because of the pressures on the Big Thicket, we hope that your Committee will also adopt this approach. We urge the Committee to act promptly and favorably on this legislation, and we request that this letter be included in the hearing record. Sincerely, ~ ~ynthia E. Wilson Washington Representative PAGENO="0276" 270 January 24, 1974 Senator Allan Bible, Chairman Parks and Recreation Subdivision Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 78711 Dear Senator Bible, The enclosed Resolution is a reaffirmation of our support of the Big Thicket National Preserve and a request for your consideration of suggested amendments. Please be assured that we shall continue to actively support the efforts to transform this Reserve into a Reality. ,~R~ect ully eyt~n. itérs County fudge Office Phone: 327-8113 Home Phone: 327-8287 Livingston, Texas FEYTON WALTERS County Judge COMMISSIONERS Prect. 1, Dude Hill, Livingston Prect. 2, Gary Walker, Livingston Prect. 3, Sidney Adams, Corrigan Prect. 4, Ester Duff, Livingston P~ ~ LIVINGSTON, TEXAS Enclosure PW/ch PAGENO="0277" 271 RESOLUTION THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF POLK The Commissioners Court of Polk County net in Regular Session on the 28th day of December, 1973 and the following resolution was presented to the Court. WHEREAS, the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States of America has passed H.R. Bill No. 11547 concerning the Big Thicket National Preserve, and WHEREAS, previous members of the Commissioners Court has supported the proposed Big Thicket National Preserve by Court Resolution, and WHEREAS, the members of the present Commissioners Court, realizing that the proposed Big Thicket National Preserve as defined by H.R. 11547 will affect a portion of Polk County, wish to propose an amendment to H.R. 11547 as follows: (1) All taxing jurisdictions be paid a cash settlement in lieu of taxes at the date of taking (2) The proposed Water Corridor along Menard Creek be deleted (3) The Department of Interior exercise discretion in eliminating as many residental areas as possible; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution be presented to the Senate Committee respectfully requesting their consideration of amending H.R. 11547 as outlined above. Done in Open Court this 28th day of December, 1973. ~ L~c~ Fey (~5alters, County Judge Don id Hill, C mmissioner 1 Gary Waler, Commissioner 2 Sidney Adams, Commissi r 3 Attest ~ J~f!Lift~ ____________________ K. W. Kennedy, Co4tjty Ester Duff, Commissioner 4 Clerk `j PAGENO="0278" 272 BIG THICKET ASSOCIATION Box 198 Saratoga, Texas 77585/Phone (713) 274-2971 Advisory Board: Dr. Clarence Cottam, Dr. Donovan Correll, U. S. Supreme Court Justice William 0. Douglas, Dr. Thomas Eisner, Alfred Knopf, Mary Lcrsswell, Richard Pough, Hart Stilwell, Edwin Way Teale, Hon. Ralph W. Yarborough. February 1, 19Th Honorable Alan Bible Parks and Recreation Subcommittee Washington, D.C. Dear Senator Bible: As a member of the Board of Directors of the Big Thicket Association, I voted (very reluctantly) for Ni. Wilson's 81i000 acre Big Thicket National Park Bill. In my opinion some of the most worth- while areas were left out of this bill, but being in close touch with the whole situation prompted us to want to rush the business by sacrificing, I am afraid, too much. 1 am in favor of legislative taking of the land for Big Thicket Park and of fpnding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Lois Williams Parker l8SS Central Drive Beaumont, Texas PAGENO="0279" 273 TEM RL.E~ IN DUSTER ES DIBOLLIE)~~ 75941 ARTHUR TEM PL~ February 19,~ ~ The Honorable Alan Bible, Chairman Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs Room 3106 Dirksen Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments for the record of your hearing on the proposed legislation to establish a Big Thicket Biological Reserve. Speaking then for Temple Industries, which has since merged with Time Incorporated to form the company Temple-Eastex, of which I am President, I testified last July 16 before the House Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation in favor of a reserve of 75, 000 acres as defined in HR 8655. I said then and believe now that 75, 000 acres was more than adequate to protect the biological species which this legislation seeks to preserve. I continue to have the reservations that I expressed to the House Committee. One of these is my feeling that federal recreational funds are more needed to develop the facilities on the Toledo Bend and Rayburn lakes. Another reservation has to do with the cost. I believe that the cost of acquiring 75, 000 acres will exceed $75 million, which is considerably more than any estimate I'm aware of from governmental sources. As you know, representatives of many points of view and diverse economic interests tried to find the common ground of compro- mise in the House. This led to a concept of an 84, 500-acre reserve which was embodied in HR 11546 and passed unanimously. It is my opinion that this bill does represent a reconciliation of opposing ideas, and in the desire to see this matter finally settled, I would make no objection to its adoption by the Senate. PAGENO="0280" 274 I would point out, however, that this would involve additional financial burden in acquisition. I estimated before the House Committee that about one thousand dollars an acre would be required for those lands specified in HR 8655. This judgment is in no way altered by the land transactions that have taken place in the last six months. It is my understanding that you want your Committee and the Senate to act quickly on this legislation. Certainly I hope, and I know other property owners share this feeling, that Congress will be able to complete action early in this session. We all want to see the long, drawn out uncertainty ended. You are considering, I know, the method by which the government would acquire title. If the legislative-taking provision of HR 11546 is objectionable, I would hope your Committee could devise a method that would have the same desired result of rapid settlement. We intend to continue the cutting moratorium as previously pledged. Since this represents financial and operational handicaps for my company, I respectfully urge your consideration of this time element. Again, Mr. Chairman, my thanks for your courtesy. With my neighbors, I hope that your efforts will lead quickly to the establishment of the Big Thicket Reserve. AT/bb like to submit our views on the Arthur Temple Chairman of the Board P. S. In a separate letter I would `Legislative Taking". PAGENO="0281" 275 BILLY W. HALLNON. 1007 Collin Drive Euless, Texas 76039 February 19, 1974 Honorable Alan Bible United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Bible: Please enter my testimony in the Big Thicket National Preserve hearing record of February 5 and. 6th, 1974. Sincerely (IQ ~ Billy W. Halimon BWH/c end. PAGENO="0282" 276 STATEMENT OF BILLY W. HALLNON ON ThE PROPOSED BIG THICKET NATIONAL PRESERVE MY POSITION I support the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee recommendation for a Big Thicket National Preserve of 100,000-191,000 acres. This preserve should include the Sandyland-Ponds Unit of 16,000 acres. MAPPING TES -PQN~S UNIT N CLUD PER~~SWDS I mapped the Sandyland-Ponds Unit of 16,000 acres for the Big Thicket Coordinating Committee during October, 1973. I followed two strict require- ments in this task: 1. That the best arid sandyland and successional ponds be included. 2. That all permanent residences be excluded. To get the best arid sandyland and ponds, I consulted with those persons most knowledgeable in Big Thicket ecology, particularly Geraldine Watson, of Silsbee, Texas. The ecological description of this unit hasbeen supplied to the U.S. Senate by Mrs. Watson and several other scientific experts. My success in eliminating all homes from the Sandy1and-Po~lds Unit can serve as a model toward eliminating most residences from the Big Thicket National Preserve, especially from the stream corridors. I found that by following natural and man-made boundaries and by zigzagging, I was able to get the best wilderness areas while excluding any subdivisions. I believe that all homes can likewise be eliminated from the other stream corridors by the National Park Service. The Sandyland-Ponds Unit is the best-mapped unit of the proposed Big Thicket National Preserve. First, the combined knowledge of several Thicket experts PAGENO="0283" 277 went into selecting outstanding ecological features to be included. Second, the unit was completely surveyed on the ground, not by aerial photographs. I made a field investigation of the entire unit during October, 1973, to determine the merit of its various areas for wilderness and esthetic values, in addition to Its ecological value. I checked the frequency of any adverse acts of man -- pine plantations, timber harvesting and so forth. To exclude all homes from the unit and to draw its exact boundaries, I used both U.S. Geological Survey topographical maps and Hardin County Road Naps. My initial boundaries for the unit were the nearest roads which parallel Village Creek. I drove around these roads, completely encircling Village Creek and mapping out locations of all houses. All dead-end spur roads leading into the unit were driven or hiked. Whenever homes were located near the creek, they were excluded by zigzagging the unit boundary. Working farms were also excluded. Village Creek is the spine of the Sandyland-Ponds Unit. Land bordering thic stream is one of the wilder areas of the Big Thicket, even though it lies between two towns, Kountze, and Silsbee. This land is owned almost entirely by large timber companies. In the 32 mile section of Village Creek, included in Sandyland-Ponds Unit, only four points have permanent dwellings near the creek: 1. The McNeely Pond area. 2. The Beech: Creek junction 3. State Highway 327 4. The Silsbee suburbs These four areas account for the indentations in the unit where homes located PAGENO="0284" 278 near the creek were mapped out. In all cases, these homes were on a higher elevation than the creek floodplain, their location does not harm the ecological integrity of the unit. WILDERNESS RECREATION AND THE SANDYLAND-PONDS UNIT The Sandyland-Ponds Unit, in combination with Turkey Creek Unit, affords the only long, dry, year-round backpack trail in the Big Thicket National Preserve, 48 miles of streambank, high-bluff hiking. Village Creek would provide the best smooth stream canoeing between East Texas and Florida, 33 miles under a closed canopy forest. The main purpose of Sandyland-Ponds Unit and all other units and stream corridors in Big Thicket National Preserve, is preservation of ecology; wilderness recreation is a secondary benefit. The National Park Service is best qualified as a combined preservation and wilderness recreation agency. Such a valuable area as the Big Thicket should be acquired by the federal government and placed under this agency. DESTRUCTION IN THE SANDYLAND-PONDS UNIT Up to the present time, destruction in this unit has been slight. The arid sandyland plant association which is spotted throughout this unit, is not conducive to agriculture nor development. Most of the arid sandy- land has seen attempts at pine plantations. Such efforts are at best only partially successful; pine won't grow well in the loose sand. The slash pine plantings that have taken hold can be burnt off. The beech-magnolia forest on thewest side of Village Creek, south of State Highway 327 appears to be in jeopardy of resort development. The adjacent PAGENO="0285" 279 area across the road, outside the unit, is already being cut. Quick action is needed to preserve this magnificent woodland in the unit. The most destructive cutting in the unit occurred during the fall of 1973 from Champion Paper Company. They cut several hundred acres southwest of Devil's Pocket Acid Bog. This area was mostly mixed pine--shortleaf, long- leaf and loblolly. The trees were about 40 years old and had formed a climax pine-hardwood forest. Cutting did not take place in the bog itself because of the standing water. The cut area should still be kept in the unit as a buffer for the bog, which contains rare insect-eating plants. The lumbered area will regain its former quality within 30 years. The longleaf savannahs on the eastern side of the unit near Sandhill Pond have been lumbered some. Cutting here has been spotty and selective. In summary, destruction in the Sandyland-Ponds Unit has been slight and does not warrant eliminating any section. The danger of future cutting is great. DIAGRAM OF SANDYLAND-PONDS UNIT I have prepared an 8~ inch by 14 inch pictorial leaflet, entitled "Sandyland- Ponds Unit; 16,000 Acres." This leaflet is attached to my testimony for the Senate record. It includes a map of the unit, eight photographs and a brief ecological description and recreation projection. Billy W. Hallmon PAGENO="0286" 280 SANDYI AND-PONDS UNIT 16,OCC'i~CRES DV!,IUT VErITAT1OTi ~iG THICKET &iotor.iCtt CPOSSR000S - -. Grcs~ ~nd [(mr~;r -~--~ (mu ~ 5andyiand C BTCC ~ L. ii PAGENO="0287" PAGENO="0288"