U.S. Congress Urged to Buy National Park "Inholdings"

***********************************************

WORLDWIDE FOREST/BIODIVERSITY CAMPAIGN NEWS

***********************************************

Forest Networking a Project of forests.org

8/25/99

OVERVIEW & COMMENTARY BY EE

Large contiguous areas of intact forest ecosystems are required to

maintain diversity and functionality. National Parks in the United

States, though defined more on "monumentalism" than on ecological

worth, are nonetheless the United States' last best chance to save

representative intact landscapes composed of native species and

community diversity. The following article highlights one obstacle to

better biodiversity conservation in National Parks--that of

"inholdings"--parcels of land within park boundaries that are

privately owned. Many of these lands may develop commercially. There

is potential for inappropriate and polluting land uses within and

adjacent to U.S. National Parks. Any habitat conversion there could

fragment and diminish ecological systems. The National Park Trust

reports that for a relatively small amount of money, some $70 million,

the connectedness and quality of interior areas of National Parks

could be maintained and improved.

g.b.

*******************************

RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:

Title: Park Groups Asks Congress to buy `inholdings' for public good

National Parks vs. private land

Source: MSNBC, http://www.msnbc.com/news/ENVIRONMENT_Front.asp

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Date: August 25, 1999

Byline: Miguel Llanos

Mojave National preserve includes dunes among its 1.6 million acres.

The National Park Trust wants to see 86,000 acres of privately owned

land with the preserve bought for the public good.

AUG. 25 - A park preservation group on Wednesday claimed that some

200,000 acres of privately held land within the nation's park system

are in "imminent" danger of being developed or resold. The National

Park Trust listed 20 "high priority" sites covering 110,000 acres

and urged Congress to come up with the estimated $70 million it would

take to buy them for the public good.

The danger that this land could be sold for development, bulldozing,

clear cutting or for other destructive purposes constitutes the single

greatest threat to the system of national and state parks," Trust

President Paul Pritchard said in a statement released with the report

on the 83rd birthday of the National Park Service.

The Trust claimed that even though purchases of private lands have

increased in recent years, so too have the number of acres of private

land in public parks. In the last decade, it added, private property

within America's parks rose by 1.6 million acres - a 35 percent

increase.

Some six million acres within the 84 million acres of the national

park system are privately owned, and Pritchard claimed that "on any

given day 200,000 acres are under an immediate threat."

PLEA TO CONGRESS

"... private citizens should demand action at all levels of

government," Pritchard added, noting that Congress has been slow to

approve purchases even though it has more than $5 billion available

through a Land and Water Conservation Fund.

The 1965 fund allows some $900 million a year to go towards

acquisitions.

Still, Congress has been reluctant to come up with money for land

purchases. The report said that in 1998 only $23 million was provided

for national park land acquisition, a tenth of what the National Park

Service had sought.

This summer the House and Senate approved about half of the $295

million the Interior Department had sought for its "land legacy"

purchases, including funds earmarked to buy private land in and

adjacent to federal parks.

RESPONSE FROM CONGRESS

A staffer on the Republican-run House subcommittee for national parks

took exception to the report on several fronts, noting first that the

Clinton administration only in the last few years has asked for

acquisition funds.

As for the threat to parks, the source asked, "What's imminent? Who

knows what that means." In most cases, he wagered, "nothing's going

on" with the property.

The source also noted that inholdings are often property that was

there before a park was created or expanded and in those cases "it's

not fair to turn around and point the finger at private property."

PRIORITIES BIG AND SMALL

In its report, the Trust claimed the threat to parks from the

development of private land within park boundaries -- known as

"inholdings" -- is growing significantly because the value of these

lands in many cases has skyrocketed.

Logging, energy exploration, mining and subdivisions were cited as

examples of what's planned for many of the inholdings. The National

Park Service has also identified development of inholdings as a threat

to the system.

The Trust report cited 110,000 acres of privately owned property in

and adjacent to 20 parks, valued at more than $70 million, as being at

greatest risk of being developed or re-sold for commercial purposes.

The Trust's "top targets" list (see end of story) ranges from 9 acres

within the Cape Cod National Seashore in Massachusetts to 86,426 acres

in California's Mojave Desert.

NONPROFIT BUYBACKS

While pressuring Congress remains a major strategy, the Trust and

other groups are also raising money to buy back land themselves for

the public good.

Through donations, the Trust recently bought 10,000 acres of tallgrass

prairie in Kansas, and will own the land while the National Park

Service operates it as a park.

In another example, the nonprofit Wildlands Conservancy recently began

negotiations to buy 430,000 acres parceled out checkerboard-fashion in

and around Joshua Tree National Park and the Mojave National

Preserve, both in California.

But even here final approval will depend on $36 million coming from

the federal government. So far, the Senate has agreed to come up with

only $15 million and the House none at all.

National Park Trust's Top 20 Targets

The Trust identified these areas as their top 20 "high priorities" and

estimated their purchase prices. In all, they encompass 110,000 acres

and $70 million would be needed to buy them for the National Parks

System.

* Everglades National Park (Fla.): 17,321 acres, $20 million

* Gettysburg National Military Park (Penn.): 99 acres, $5.7 million

* Saguaro National Park (Ariz.): 250 acres, $2.8 million

* Mojave National Preserve (Calif.): 86,426 acres, $7.1 million

* Apostle Island National Lakeshore (Wisc.): 54 acres, $250,000

* Wrangell-St. Ellis National Park (Alaska): 1,000 acres, $1.7 million

* Weir Farm National Historic Site (Conn.): 13 acres, $2.5 million

* Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area (Ohio) 243 acres, $2.5

million

* Blue Ridge PArkway (N.C. and Virginia): 40 acres, $225,000

* Anteltam National Battlefield (Maryland): 315 acres, $2 million

* North Cascades Complex (Wash.): 225 acres, $1 million

* Golden Spike National Historic Site (Utah): 532 acres, $400,000

* Olympic National Park (Wash.): 204 acres, $2.5 million

* Stones River National Battlefield (Tenn.): 112 acres, $4.3 million

* Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historic Park (Maryland):: 722

acres, $800,000

* Cape Cod National Seashore (Mass.): 9 acres, $2.8 million

* Keweensaw National Historic Park (Mich.): 11 acres, $2.4 million

* Hawaii Volcanoes National Park (Hawaii): 1,950 acres, $3.5 million

* Fredericksburg and Spotylvania National Military Park (Virg.): 557

acres, $6.3 million

* Pecos National Historic Park (New Mexico): 375 acres, $1.8 million

###RELAYED TEXT ENDS###

This document is a PHOTOCOPY for educational, personal and non-

commercial use only. Recipients should seek permission from the

source for reprinting. All efforts are made to provide accurate,

timely pieces; though ultimate responsibility for verifying all

information rests with the reader. Check out our Gaia's Forest

Conservation Archives & Portal at URL= http://forests.org/

Networked by forests.org, gbarry@forests.org