NPCA would favor a fair settlement for the inhabitants and residents of Swain County.

This concludes our official statement. I would ask that our full statement be included in the record.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Thornton follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN F. THORNTON, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, NATIONAL PARKS AND CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION

Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. My name is John F. Thornton and I am a Legislative Representative for the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA).

NPCA is America's only private nonprofit citizen organization dedicated solely to protecting, preserving, and enhancing the U.S. National Park System. An association of "Citizens Protecting America's Parks," NPCA was founded in 1919, and today has more than 500,000 members.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss NPCA's opposition to S. 987, the "Swain County Settlement Act of 1995." We oppose this bill because the road which it proposes will cause serious environmental and aesthetic damage; the road would be too expensive, even if it could be built; and the road is no longer necessary.

As you know, this issue has remained unresolved for the past fifty-three years. In 1943, the United States Government and the Tennessee Valley Authority reached an agreement with the State of North Carolina and Swain County, North Carolina, to flood over 44,000 acres with the waters that created Fontana Lake. The agreement, among other things, called for the federal government to compensate Swain County for the flooded road (NC 228) and to build a replacement road, pending congressional appropriations.

Proponents of this bill will assure you that they only want the government to live up to its obligations, as outlined in the original agreement. I would contend that the federal government did live up to its obligations. They agreed to replace the road, pending congressional appropriations. Congress did not appropriate the funds. And as it became more and more obvious that the replacement road could not and should not be built, the government made attempts to settle the issue with Swain County.

As a matter of fact, it appeared that a settlement was at hand in 1988, when strong support on the Hill and within the Reagan Administration existed for a measure that would have resolved the outstanding disagreement. Unfortunately, the sponsor of S. 987, Senator Helms, for unknown reasons, blocked the measure even though county residents and commissioners were on record as supporting the settle

ment.

I think that it is worth noting, Mr. Chairman, that proponents of this bill fail to mention the very important congressional appropriations caveat contained in the original agreement. For the past fifty-three years, Congress has not appropriated the necessary funds to complete construction of the replacement road. And, for very good reason.

After careful study, the National Park Service (NPS) found that completing the north shore road would have a severely negative environmental impact to the surrounding lands and waters, and that the cost to replace the road would be tremendous. Estimates for completing the replacement road run from $125 to $200 million dollars.

The replacement road would have a devastating effect on the ecology of the area. It is known that underlying the surface of the proposed route is layers of the extremely acidic Anakeesta formation. This rock produces acids and heavy metals that are leached by rainfall into streams and would kill aquatic life. The pyretic nature of the Anakeesta formation makes the unavoidable environmental consequences of building the road unacceptable. The proposed route also transverses successive ridges in an area containing crumbling, faulted and unstable rock which would require extensive cuts and fills. The Herculean effort to build the road would cause a reduction of wildlife in this natural area.

We are not talking about "best guesses" in this situation. The 5.6 mile section of the replacement road that was built in the 1960's caused severe environmental harm. A National Park Service report (GSM DES/GMP, April 1979) states: "Because of the mountainous topography and unstable geological base, landslides were frequent, and cut and fill heights were extremely large." The construction of any road, even a dirt road, in this area would cut across numerous steep hillsides, causing severe erosion and siltation of streams.

The same NPS document, mentioned above, also says: "Moreover, the route traversed the Anakeesta formation, exposing iron pyrite which produces sulfuric acid leachate and heavy metal pollution as runoff." We experienced a similar situation with the building of the Newfound Gap road, whereby brook trout and other aquatic life were killed in a nearby stream. This is an experience that does not need to be repeated.

Mr. Chairman, another probable issue associated with the construction of this road is the additional introduction of exotic plant species into the park. Road construction would increase the spread of this silent-green-invasion by disturbing the ground and removing the existing vegetative cover to provide new territory for the exotics. After seeds of exotic species are carried into the park by construction vehicles, the invasion would be continued as private automobiles began using the new road. This highly visited park is already host to over 300 species of non-native plants which have altered the park's natural plant communities.

The area of the park where the road would intrude is proposed wilderness. Whatever one may think of the wilderness proposal, the fact is the area is being managed as wilderness. There is widespread support of this treatment and an expectation that it will continue.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that the only legitimate claim for the road is the need to provide access for families visiting the small cemeteries in the north shore area of the park. This area became inaccessible by car in 1943 when the TVA created Fontana Lake. However, the NPS has continued to provide cost free ferry service to and from the area, utilizing boats and a four wheel drive vehicle.

We believe that the existing NC 28, the south shore road, in most cases provides adequate service to Swain County residents. The driving distance from Bryson City to Fontana Dam would be 6 miles longer by the proposed north shore road vs. the currently-existing NC 28.

Mr. Chairman, NPCA would support a measure that would:

Reach financial settlement with Swain County and officially designate the 467,000 acres within the park as wilderness, as recommended in the 1982 NPS General Management Plan; and,

Mandate the NPS to continue to provide free transportation to the affected cemeteries.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, no one should seek to mar this most outstanding natural area and landscape in America, if not the world. The proposed road would irreparably damage the surrounding lush foliage and the clean running, healthy streams of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. You do not have to take my word for this you can contact any one of the 9 million visitors per year that seek refuge in this park, America's most visited national park.

This concludes NPCA's official statement on this issue. I will answer any questions that you may have.

Senator BURNS. Thank you very much.

I guess my first question is we start talking about these areasand may I tell you that I am not unfamiliar with Uncle Sam being a neighbor because in my home State of Montana we go through these problems almost on a daily basis.

Mr. Thornton, have you been to Yellowstone Park lately?
Mr. THORNTON. No, I have not.

Senator BURNS. I want to know if you would agree that it is being managed in a proper way up there one of these days. I want you to go up and take a look at it. We have got a serious problem up there.

I want to ask Mr. Snyder. I am told that there is-what-28 cemeteries up there. Is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. That is accurate.

Senator BURNS. You want to make all that area a wilderness area. Is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Senator BURNS. Would that include those cemeteries?

Mr. SNYDER. They would be included, but that does not mean that they would be inaccessible. In the wilderness bill that we had before the Senate earlier in 1987, access was written into the bill

and it was provided by Congress that access would be provided, and we actually had sections in the bill to continue the type of access that is now provided, the boat across Fontana and the vehicular access along the old roads. We believe that should be done.

Senator BURNS. Tell me about these cemeteries because I am unaware. Are they maintained as cemeteries? Does somebody take care of them?

Mr. SNYDER. Some of them are maintained by organizations like Mrs. Vance's. Some of them are not maintained. In walking through the woods off the trails, often you will come on cemeteries of two graves, three graves, four graves. The descendants of those people have left them and there are no visible signs of maintenance. The graves that are maintained are in cemeteries which are comparatively large, which have 50 to 100 graves in them.

Senator BURNS. It just seems to me if you designate-I suppose you designate this wilderness. Would we have to take the tombstones away?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. There are many wilderness areas that have grave sites and tombstones in them. That would be outrageous to even suggest that.

Senator BURNS. Okay.

Mr. KIRBY. If I could give an example, Mr. Chairman, that is close to home, in 1975 this Congress designated most of Shenandoah National Park as wilderness, about an hour's drive from where we are sitting right now. Similarly there, there were places that were once inhabited with farms and structures where nature has now restored the area to its primal glory. And Congress felt that those areas qualified as wilderness and in fact designated most of Shenandoah National Park as wilderness. So, there is ample precedence for what we have here.

Senator BURNS. In this 400,000 and some odd acres, how many roads are included in that area?

Mr. KIRBY. The National Park Service excluded the roads when it made the wilderness recommendation.

Senator BURNS. In other words, this is 400,000 and some odd acres of wilderness area.

Mr. KIRBY. That is correct. I would be happy to submit for the record, Mr. Chairman, the recommendation of the National Park Service that is contained in their management plan adopted in 1982. Would I be able to do that, Mr. Chairman? Because this might also address some of the concerns Mr. Taylor raised about the nature of the wilderness recommendation.

Senator BURNS. Well, I am just wondering. In that 400,000 and some odd acres, that is park land now. Right?

Mr. KIRBY. Yes, sir.

Senator BURNS. And there are no roads in that area.

Mr. KIRBY. That is correct.

Senator BURNS. I am going to turn the series of questioning now over to Congressman Taylor. Nice to see you over here, Charlie. Thank you for coming today.

I do not have a dog in this fight. I usually take the recommendations of what the State delegation wants.

Mr. KIRBY. To clarify this point, sir, could I submit the map for the record just to make clear that the Park Service recommenda

tion is of the roadless areas in the park? Often there is confusion. about whether the wilderness recommendations include the tower and the top of Clingman's Dove or the road across the park or Cades Cove.

Senator BURNS. Yes, it does not make any difference. You can submit that for the record.

Mr. KIRBY. Fine, I will do that, sir.

Senator BURNS. Congressman Taylor.

Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you, Senator. I will start with Mr. Snyder. Mr. Snyder, your organization recently on a national basis recommended that no trees be cut in the national forests. Do you support that position? The Sierra Club took a formal position nationally announced on that.

Mr. SNYDER. Personally, I do not. I am an owner of timberland, as you are, and have income from harvesting trees, and I think it can be done responsibly and in an environmentally proper way.

Mr. TAYLOR. So, you would say that position was sort of extreme that you would not support.

Mr. SNYDER. I do not support it personally, but the club did. That is a national club and that is there position.

Mr. TAYLOR. I appreciate it. I agree with you. We can harvest timber in the forests and it can be done. Although the club does not believe it can be done on a national basis, I agree with you it

can.

You mentioned the park would be desecrated with this road. Does the Cades Cove road and the settlement in the park desecrate the park?

Mr. SNYDER. No, it does not. That road was there when the park was established. It has been there for all the time and is used by the park as a demonstration area demonstrating the pioneer ways

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, it is a heritage center, but it was an old gravel road. It has been upgraded considerably, and that is the Tennessee side of the heritage.

The question I would have to you, are you aware that a great portion of the road we are proposing would be built along the old State road that was there before the park was formed?

Mr. SNYDER. I am aware that that claim has been made, but I have walked through there and there are almost no vestiges of the old road. So, it is not accurate to say that there are segments of the old road that can be used with the exception of a little piece between Eagle Creek and Fontana Dam. There the road would have to be completely rebuilt. The curves are too tight for modern automobiles, and the grades up and down are too steep. It would not be suitable for being converted without major reconstruction.

Mr. TAYLOR. We might have a disagreement on "major," but the Park Service now uses some of the road itself as a gravel road, small parts of it, and we have looked at the topo maps and so forth. The plan that might be used, a good portion of the 20 miles to be built would be involved in that. So, if you have got a road on one side that was there before the park, we ought not use it because it would desecrate the park, but it is all right to use the one on the other side because that is not desecrating even though it is in the same park.

What about the Clingman's Dome facility up there? Does that desecrate the park?

Mr. SNYDER. No, it does not.

Mr. TAYLOR. It is a major tourist-people-automobiles in there all the time.

Mr. SNYDER. That is right.

Mr. TAYLOR. Built after the park was put in place. I mean the park was there and it was built.

So, you can build in that part of the park. It will not desecrate up there, but it would desecrate down the other end.

Mr. SNYDER. It might be a different story if that road were proposed now for the first time. We are talking about a place where there are now no roads.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, let me ask you this. Does the Blue Ridge Parkway desecrate the Appalachian Mountains? Now, that is several hundred miles of road.

Mr. SNYDER. Of course, it does not in one sense, but it opens up a great deal of land that very easily should have not been opened. Mr. TAYLOR. So, you would not support the Blue Ridge Parkway today if it were being constructed. If it had not been built, you would say do not build it.

Mr. SNYDER. Well, I would support it, but I might not support it exactly where it is. As you recall, there have been proposals from time to time for extensions of the Blue Ridge Parkway and we have opposed those. Sometimes we have opposed them absolutely, and sometimes we have opposed them only if they are placed on other locations.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, they put it along the top of the mountain coming all the down the Appalachian chain. It is not right on the top. It is down off.

I would bet your organization would oppose it if it were not built today, but it might be a desecration, it may not be.

What it does do-and it was picked this year, by the way, Senator, as one of the four all-American roads which means that it gets money and glory and a lot of other things.

What it also does, it gives access to the American people. And this is mostly built in national forest lands. There might be some in the Shenandoah Park that is in it. I do not recall, but mostly it is Government lands, but it gives people access to it, people that could not climb to the top of the Appalachian Mountains get to go to the facilities there, the camping facilities, commercial facilities. There are hotels along it and other things.

The entrance to Catalooche, that area up through Cataloocheare you familiar? Does that desecrate the park?

Mr. SNYDER. No, it does not. But there was a threat to the park by the Catalooche entrance road, and Congress has seen fit not to make an entrance into Catalooche

Mr. TAYLOR. But they did not change the road or anything. They just did not say this is going to be an entrance into it.

Mr. SNYDER. They did not build a road which would have crossed the territory that should not have had a road. And Catalooche is the Cades Cove of the North Carolina side of the park.