we were prepared to support the increased grazing fees there which would have come from the act. Mr. YATES. Does that mean you are prepared to support increases in grazing fees now for BLM? Secretary HODEL. It is not in the cards at this moment, because we have the executive order which carries forward the existing formula. We are under a formula. We put a floor under that formula, which was to freeze the current level. If the formula dictates a higher rate, of course, then the rates will go up also. Mr. YATES. Does your answer mean that the Secretary of the Interior has no recommendation with respect to increasing grazing fees? Mr. REGULA. Will the chairman yield? Mr. YATES. No. That is the purpose of my question, as to whether or not he recommended the increase, and then the President or OMB squashed him, right? Secretary HODEL. No, I don't recall if they had recommended an increase in grazing fees. Mr. YATES. What is your feeling? Can I ask you directly? Secretary HODEL. I have not supported an increase in grazing fees. Mr. YATES. You have not? Secretary HODEL. Because at this point what we have before us is a record in which we have identified six options. We have not chosen among them. We felt that to do so at a time when it appeared Congress was getting very close to a complex compromise on this issue involving much more than just grazing fees, that for us to weigh in on the single question of grazing fees was counterproductive. Mr. YATES. Does that mean you will change the existing schedule of fees for your Fish and Wildlife refuges? Secretary HODEL. No, we are not proposing any change there that I am aware of. Mr. YATES. You get more out of fees there than you do in BLM. Secretary HODEL. First of all, those are productive and valuable lands. The Fish and Wildlife lands are the wetlands that have-Mr. YATES. All the committee wants to do is to recognize there are valuable lands in BLM as well that deserve higher fees. Do you propose not to do that? Secretary HODEL. I have no present plan to recommend increased fees for grazing. Mr. REGULA. Will the chairman yield? Mr. YATES. Mr. Regula. Mr. REGULA. Have you done any cost analysis to determine what you spend in providing water, fencing, fertilizing management, as opposed to what you receive in grazing fees? Secretary HODEL. And that is partly what has been behind much of the pressure, is that the costs of managing the grazing program just about doubled the receipts of the grazing program. Mr. REGULA. Like the lands I know would break even. Secretary HODEL. Part of the fact on that is that we have increased the amount of red tape, governmental detailed hands-on, day-to-day management of this. So it is kind of a boot-strap argument. We have increased our costs enormously by getting in there and managing and doing more and more, and then we turn around and say, "Golly, you guys aren't paying enough." One of the things we tried to do, and were prevented from doing so by a court decision here recently, was where we had good land managers, as contractors, grazers, we proposed to give them more flexibility in the management and measure the results, that the rivers-streams were kept clean and the land was properly used and not over-grazed, and the like. We were struck down; we were told we were mandated to do this hands-on detailed management. We have driven our own costs up in part. If we were a private land owner, we would not be doing what we are doing out there as a government. So it is kind of a two-edged sword. May I say that this cuts all through the Department of the Interior. We don't collect fees sufficient to pay for the national parks, and we are not proposing them. Mr. REGULA. You are addressing it in the parks, but not on grazing. Secretary HODEL. It is a 14-to-one ratio there for the parks-we are paying one part of the cost from fees, which clearly are so low that people, as you know, make voluntary contributions to the parks in substantial amounts. Mr. YATES. They don't for grazing, though, do they? Secretary HODEL. I have seen no voluntary contributions for grazing, Mr. Chairman. In fact, I have seen some numbers which would simply indicate the plight of the livestock industry today. If you raised the fee-even to the $1.35 floor which the administration put in the executive order, it disadvantages some of those who are still trying to graze and maintain their existence in hope of a future price raise. Mr. YATES. You are supposed to file a final report, aren't you, on grazing fees under the law? Secretary HODEL. Yes. Mr. YATES. When are you going to do that? Secretary HODEL. This spring is my understanding. That is working through the system. We also have, I think, an annual report which we file, and that will be filed. Mr. YATES. Will it have recommendations? Secretary HODEL. I don't know yet. I think it is supposed to have a recommendation. I don't know how we are going to reach a recommendation in the current circumstances. STATUE OF LIBERTY AND ELLIS ISLAND Mr. YATES. All right. Let's turn to the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island, which is of great concern to this committee, as it is to all Americans. The symbol of the Statue of Liberty invokes the memory of the position-the place of Ellis Island in the history of this country and has tremendous importance. The situation we have now is kind of like a volcano that has been peaceful for decades, and all of a sudden the top blows off, like Mount St. Helens did. I reviewed the hearings of this committee since 1979 or 1980, when in 1979 I think the subject was brought up, it was about the condition of the Statue, and, of course, we knew the condition of Ellis Island had fallen in a state of tremendous disrepair. And the Park Service told us along about that time that they were going to try to raise the money from outside sources. I think that was about 1980 or 1981, and that began. As I reviewed our hearings since that time, we were concerned with the question as to whether or not we would have to put appropriations into our bill each year for the reconstruction of the Statue; certainly, we put money in for the reconstruction of the sea wall at Ellis Island, and that was done. We took for granted that the Park Service, the Department of the Interior, the Commission and the Foundation that had been organized for the rehabilitation were getting along very well, and all of a sudden came the headlines, was it last week or two weeks ago now? I am sure you remember the date. Secretary HODEL. Sometime in the last two weeks, within the last week. Yes, I think it was last Thursday. Mr. YATES. Right. Why did it happen? Why did it have to happen? I saw you on television, and you said there was a conflict of interest. Do I misquote you, or do I quote you correctly? Secretary HODEL. May I respond? Mr. YATES. Sure. Don't let me put words into your mouth on this one. Secretary HODEL. First let me say from an overview standpoint that having been through now two monument activities and looked at a little bit of the history of this agency, monuments are not without their controversy because they are important to people, and they are symbolic. As we all know, there is a line about 25 percent of the way up the Washington monument because it got stymied, and there was an argument over how to finish that. And I was involved in what is now the most popular monument in Washington, D.C., in the construction and approval of the Vietnam Memorial, which was extremely controversial, as you may recall. The Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island has been a remarkably successful effort. The Statue is wrapped around the heart strings of America, and the good news, Mr. Chairman, is as the smoke clears from last week, Mr. Iacocca has agreed to continue as Chairman of the Foundation, which has all the money and has raised the money. He will, therefore, be visible and active in the collection of the remaining $35 million or so necessary, he will have a large say as Chairman of the Foundation in what the Foundation agrees to write checks for, and he will be the visible party from the private sector at the celebrations on July 4th. Through this whole thing last week, there was an undercurrent of implication that I was somehow trying to keep him from playing that role. I was not and never did suggest that. Mr. YATES. No, no, I didn't get that impression at all. The impression I got was that there had been some kind of a confrontation between you and Lee Iacocca, the nature of which never did come out, but what came out was your explanation as to why he left, because he said he certainly didn't want to leave as a member of the Commission. Secretary HODEL. He made that plain, didn't he? Mr. YATES. He made that very plain. Secretary HODEL. He made that plain to me on various occasions prior to that. Mr. YATES. You had asked him to leave? Secretary HODEL. I felt it was important-let me describe what happened. Mr. YATES. Good. STATUE OF LIBERTY-ELLIS ISLAND CENTENNIAL COMMISSION CHARTER Secretary HODEL. The Commission was appointed under his chairmanship to oversee and advise the Secretary and the Park Service on the activities, not only of fundraising, but of the celebration and of the restoration of the Statue of Liberty and of Ellis Island. The Commission had a charter, and I signed it as Acting Secretary. Mr. YATES. The charter may go into the record at this point. We have a copy of it here, with your signature on it. The charter follows:] CHARTER STATUE OF LIBERTY-ELLIS ISLAND CENTENNIAL COMMISSION " 1. The official designation of the committee is the Statue of LibertyEllis Island Centennial Commission. 2. The purpose of the Commission shall be to serve as the primary citizen To effectuate these purposes, the Commission may form itself into committees, Meetings of all committees, as well as meetings of the Commission shall be subject to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act as are appropriate under the circumstances. 3. The life of the Commission is expected to extend through 1992, the centennial of the beginning of Ellis Island's service as an immigration station. In view of the goals and purpose of the Commission, the period of its life will be reviewed prior to December 31, 1992, to determine whether or not legislative or further administrative extension is appropriate. The Commission will be reviewed biennially and will terminate at that time unless renewed in accordance with Section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, P.L. 92-463. 4. The Commission will report to the Secretary of the Department of the Interior. 5. The National Park Service will provide necessary support for the Commission. |