New England National Scenic Trail Designation Act

Floor Speech

NEW ENGLAND NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL DESIGNATION ACT -- (House of Representatives - January 29, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I am not quite sure how long my voice will hold out, so I will probably be fairly short.

I just want to commend the chairman of the full committee, Chairman Rahall, and the chairman of the subcommittee, Chairman Grijalva, and thank them for all of their great work in bringing this bill to the floor.

The New England Scenic Trail Designation Act is a product of almost a decade of cooperation between the Massachusetts delegation and the Connecticut delegation, and both delegations have changed over that period of time, the National Park Service, the Appalachian Mountain Club, the Connecticut Forest and Park Association and a lot of local communities and individuals.

The bill designates major portions of an older, voluntary Metacomet-Monadnock-Mattabesett trail system as a national scenic trail. Now, I have hiked every mile of the old voluntary system through Massachusetts; and while some segments are very well protected, other sections have suffered serious encroachment. National scenic trail designation will provide an opportunity for long-term preservation for future generations.

Currently, the MMM trail system is administered by local nonprofit organizations: the Connecticut Forest and Park Association in Connecticut and the Appalachian Mountain Club through its Berkshire Chapter in Massachusetts. The Connecticut Forest and Park Association in fact is a private nonprofit organization which contracts with the State of Connecticut to run the trail systems in all of their public parks, so it is a very reputable organization which has been there for a long time and has a huge number of volunteers who work on it, and it works closely with the State of Connecticut. I want to recognize and thank the many volunteers and staff of these organizations who have worked diligently to help develop this initiative. Because of their effort, every Member through whose district this trail system passes supports this legislation.

In the case of Massachusetts, the Appalachian Mountain Club has over time been sort of a sponsor for the trail within Massachusetts, the old voluntary trail, not only this trail but other trails within Massachusetts. In Massachusetts, the land passes through at least four substantial State parks or State forests so that much of the land is already publicly owned by the State of Massachusetts, but there are connections between those publicly owned pieces of land and there are visitor centers and park facilities and so on at a rather convenient distance for hiking purposes, for day hikes or overnight camp-type hikes along the way.

Now, I understand that some Members have expressed concerns that this bill will infringe upon landowner rights and allow the National Park Service to seize lands through eminent domain. Well, the Federal Government does not own any land anywhere in the area that the trail is intended to go, following the old voluntary trail, and then some additional territory that has to be worked out by the Connecticut Forest and Parks Association in order to reach the Long Island Sound. There is no expectation of there being any Federal land there. It was never intended there would be federally owned land. Whatever protection of the land would be held by the Park Association or on behalf of the State of Connecticut. And in Massachusetts, the same thing is basically true.

No one wants to establish Federal ownership of a corridor. In recognition of that, in the legislation we added the language: ``The United States shall not acquire for the trail any land or interest in land without the consent of the owner.''

Yet the argument keeps coming back that that doesn't protect people. Well, maybe the language of the motion to recommit will satisfy that. I think it is completely redundant with what is already there and certainly in total keeping with the intent not to have any Federal ownership of land in that area.

The blueprint for the management of the trail specifically states that all existing landowner uses and rights, including hunting, fishing, timber management and other recreational activities, will continue to be at the discretion of the landowners.

Throughout the process, protection of private property has been of the utmost concern, and I believe we can accommodate the concerns of all landowners and continue to provide a scenic, protected path for public use as the New England National Scenic Trail. There is wide support for this designation. I would submit for the Record a March 25, 2007, Boston Globe editorial and a letter of support from the Massachusetts Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Ian Bowles.
[From the Boston Globe, March 25, 2007]

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I guess I thought that the problem was that the devil was the Federal Government here and that we wanted to make certain that there was no way for them to issue eminent domain, and the language of this bill, in relation to this trail, is quite clear on that point. In fact, it would appear that now we're trying to solve a problem which isn't there, which just is an order of magnitude somewhere farther away in concept, that somehow the local communities or the State is going to issue eminent domain and then pass the land to the Federal Government in some sort of manner. That really surprises me as there is nothing in the intent of this anywhere along the way to do such a thing.

I think we have solved the problem as much as it needs to be solved with the language which is in the bill, that there can be no Federal acquisition of land here. Nobody wants Federal acquisition of land. There might well be community acquisition of a corridor somewhere along the way over time, but there is to be no Federal ownership of any of that land.

I hope the matter will be opposed and we will not adopt this amendment. This is finding a solution where there is no problem.

Source