recreation needs of a growing population are going to be met. This will take time, however, and while we are pondering the future, it would be most appropriate to do more with what is at hand.

Here is where the Bureau can help greatly. Of the many ways, let me cite just three. First, it can set up a system for classifying our land and water resources for recreation. In effect this would be recreation zoning, with the land classified according to the use it is best suited for. There is a lot of unnecessary argument between conservationists and recreation leaders, and part of the trouble is that many people have been talking a different language.

There is a job of land management to be done. Some areas should be managed to provide high density recreation. Others should be left in their primeval state. But which? A classification system by itself won't resolve all these problems, but it will furnish a common framework for tackling them.

Second, the Bureal can provide a clearing house. It is staggering to contemplate the scores of programs that are important to recreation. Unless such review is a full-time responsibility, it doesn't get done, and the many lessons and opportunities for dovetailing programs, get lost in the shuffle. By bringing together the facts, the Bureau can help the different agencies, and this in turn can help Congress in its consideration of new legislation.

In its report the Commission recommended that the Bureau review recreation developments connected with Federal lands and programs and that its written comments accompany plans of other agencies submitted to the Executive Office and to the Congress. This responsibility would strengthen the Bureau, and I would like to urge that the recommendation of the Commission also be adequately provided for in this legislation.

Third, the Bureau can stimulate State and local action. The spirit of H.R. 11165 is quite clear; by the kind of technical assistance and planning aid it proposes, the Bureau is to explore the ways it can best help, not dominate, the outdoor recreation programs of States and towns and counties.

The States will play the pivotal role. Several have already launched largescale park acquisition programs, and the enthusiasm is catching. The planning grants proposed in H.R. 11165 can accelerate this movement, and they can help make it more effective. In effect, they ask the State agency to think of all the recreation needs of the State. The planning grants should multiply the investment many times over in more outdoor recreation opportunities-and in the economies of proceeding in an orderly way rather than by sporadic, unplanned efforts.

The sliding scale feature of the proposed planning grants makes it possible to get off to a fast start. To insure a strong followup, Congress will undoubtedly find it essential in subsequent legislation to add matching grants for acquisition and development, as recommended by the Commission.

These grants-in-aid could have great leverage in stimulating new approaches. The really exciting opportunity is not simply to develop more parks and playgrounds, much as they are needed; it is to create an environment in which recreation is built in, as a regular part of everyday life. This is where seed money grants can go far. Can more hiking trails be provided over private land through maintenance grants? Could communities contract with highway departments for excess acquisition to provide cycle paths and walkways? There are many, many such ideas to be explored, and studies alone are inconclusive; some community has to take the initiative and try it out on the ground. Wherever there are such communities, a relatively small grant can reap great dividends, and for all of us.

In closing, let me again salute the purpose of this bill. The specific provisions are important, but more important yet is the direction that is being set. This bill may be a landmark-the beginning of a national effort to assure the wisest use of our resources for outdoor recreation-and it could have a profound effect on the quality of American life for generations to come.

THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON STATE PARKS, INC.,
Washington, D.C., July 3, 1962.

Hon. J. T. RUTHERFORD,

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. RUTHERFORD: On behalf of the officers and board of directors of the National Conference on State Parks I wish to go on record in favor of the enactment of H.R. 11165.

With the publication of the report of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, President Kennedy's message to Congress on conservation and the White House Conference on Conservation, the State park and outdoor recreation programs of the various States have been brought sharply into focus.

The creation of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation in the Department of the Interior provides the opportunity for encouraging and assisting the States in their efforts to meet growing demands for outdoor recreation.

Enactment of H.R. 11165 would, through financial assistance to States, provide the means of accomplishing necessary planning for well-rounded State park and outdoor recreation programs.

Sincerely,

DONALD B. ALEXANDER, Executive Secretary.

Hon. J. T. RUTHERFORD,

STATE OF IDAHO, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME,
Boise, Idaho, July 3, 1962.

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. RUTHERFORD: This letter refers to outdoor recreation bills now pending in Congress. Specifically I would like to discuss S. 3117 (H.R. 11165) and S. 3118 (H.R. 11172).

According to information received from William E. Towell, chairman of the Legislative Committee of the International Association of Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissioners, certain amendments are under consideration for these bills. In regard to S. 3117, the outdoor recreation planning bill involving a $50 million grant program, we concur that the State agency to be designated for approval of the planning program should be the State agency representing the major outdoor recreation interests. This would insure that the fish and game interests are represented in planning.

In connection with the S. 3118, the conservation fund for Land Acquisition Act, we feel that the boat use tax is not advisable. Presently, Idaho boat users pay a county tax as well as a statewide boat numbering fee. Additional boat tax would surely meet with considerable opposition.

We respectfully suggest that these amendments would eliminate the major objections to these bills and would, therefore, allow this important conservation program to move forward.

Sincerely,

ROBERT L. SALTER, Acting Director.

J. T. RUTHERFORD,

ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT,
Phoenix, Ariz., July 6, 1962.

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, New House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR REPRESENTATIVE RUTHERFORD: We would like this to be considered as our expression of interest by our Commission and Department in H.R. 11165 and S. 3117 to establish a $50 million grant program for the States for the preparation of outdoor recreation plans to be administered by the new Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. It is our understanding that a hearing on this legislation is scheduled before your committee for July 10.

In that recreational planning in some States is accomplished under more than one agency we would like to suggest that the bill be amended in some manner to permit more than one agency to participate should this become advisable. In Arizona the game and fish department has constructed many lakes and recreational facilities throughout the State where a large percentage of the visitors enjoy recreational pursuits other than hunting or fishing. Thus it would seem important that our agency should be qualified to participate in the proposed grant program.

Sincerely,

R. J. SMITH, Director.

Hon. J. T. RUTHERFORD,

CHARLESTON, W. VA., July 6, 1962.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Internal and Insular Affairs, House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.:

Strongly urge favorable consideration of H.R. 11165. This measure would enable West Virginia to undertake essential long-range planning for the development of its vast outdoor recreation potential. Of all the States east of the Mississippi River West Virginia has the greatest untapped reservoir of outdoor recreation resources and potential to serve the great population masses of the East.

A statewide master plan and official map procedures urgently needed to assist in reserving land most appropriate for recreation space and prevent costly delay in the acquisition program.

Approval of H.R. 11165 would make possible coordination with plans for flood prevention, traffic, and transportation plans, soil conservation, green belts, and plans for dual or multiple purpose projects.

Parks systems could be developed with continuous links through parkways, streambed reservations, and so forth, which would increase the scope of outdoor recreation activities and enhance residential amenity and land values. Passage of H.R. 11165 would encourage interest and a more uniform investment program in the various States in the development of outdoor recreation resources which is most essential if the physical, spiritual, cultural, recreational, and scientific benefits such resources provide are to be fully realized by a rapidly growing population with increasing leisure time. HULETT C. SMITH, Commissioner, West Virginia Department of Commerce.

THE STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN FORESTRY ASSOCIATION, SUBMITTED BY FRED E. HORNADAY, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT

The American Forestry Association recognizes recreation as one of the primary uses of forest land. The association believes that implementation of a national policy, one that would apply to all classifications of recreation resources, requires participation of all levels of government. We believe that each level of government has certain responsibilities, as follows:

1. The Federal Government should provide cooperative leadership in a comprehensive and constructive nationwide recreation effort.

2. The Federal Government should provide technical and financial assistance to State, county, and municipal governments.

3. Each State should be responsible for the acquisition, development, and administration of lands for State parks and recreation areas, and to that end, in accordance with its own master plan, should designate and acquire suitable lands.

4. Each State should provide guidance and assistance to its subdivisions in the planning, development, and administration of recreational areas for local

use.

5. States should work out interstate arrangements with assistance from the Federal Government wherever utilization of a recreation resource extends across State boundaries.

6. The States should encourage the public use of private lands by negotiating leases for hunting and fishing, or by securing easements to protect scenic and other values.

In view of the foregoing beliefs, we are pleased to endorse in principle the proposals contained in H.R. 11165. There are, however, certain features of the bill that seem to merit further study. For example:

1. Subsection (a) beginning at the top of page 3, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to "prepare and maintain a continuing inventory and evaluation of the outdoor recreation needs and resources of the United States." We are wondering how this inventory would affect the activities of other agencies. H.R. 11165 speaks only of "recreation needs." We think this section should spell out the intent of the bill and its relationship to multiple use. In most instances recreation can be and should be correlated with other uses of forest land.

2. In the middle of page 3, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to "sponsor and engage in research relating to outdoor recreation." This section could be interpreted to mean that primary responsibility for research in recreation would be centered in the new Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Other agencies, however, are already engaged in this work. Therefore, it is suggested that the Secretary be authorized to "cooperate in research," as well as to "sponsor and engage" in research.

In closing, we wish to note that H.R. 11165 is in effect the basic enabling legislation for the newly created Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Our association is pleased with the prompt manner in which this new agency is being organized. We urge the Congress to provide the new agency with the tools necessary for the conduct of its mission. Furthermore, we commend the Secretary of the Interior for his wisdom in selecting such a capable administrator to head up the new organization. We have a high regard for Dr. Edward C. Crafts.

STATEMENT OF ALFRED B. LAGASSE, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PARK EXECUTIVES, INC.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am here today representing the American Institute of Park Executives, a national professional service organization of our 3,500 park and recreation people, functioning at all levels of government. We are charged with the responsibility of providing outdoor recreation opportunities for our respective peoples. Frankly, the inadequacy of our present park and recreation areas and the pressures of future inadequacy of these areas for an expanding population have us disturbed. We know how important it is today to do everything possible to acquire and set aside land for the outdoor recreation enjoyment of our present generation and generations to come. If we are to meet these growing needs, all levels of government are forced to buy land. Our outdoor recreation programs-municipal, metropolitan, county, State, and National must be coordinated to best serve our peoples. Historically, most park land was donated by individual philanthropists and consisted of family property, usually large estates. These lands were accepted regardless of location and desirability. Open land was still available, which is no longer the case. Private philanthropic resources are drying up. Changes in the tax structure have dwindled private fortunes and huge estates. Land prices have skyrocketed. With private resources cut off and the growing price hikes of land, our dependence upon Government in providing these outdoor recreation resources has become necessary.

One hundred years of park development in the United States has broadened the movement from the first commons and plazas in the East to imposing park and parkway systems throughout the entire country; from the acquisition and design of one piece of property to whole systems of park and recreation areas; and from the planning of parks for one city to planning for metropolitan and regional areas coordinating these plans with the State and the Nation. These changes have taken place concurrently with our social development. People have moved from farm to city and out again, they have become exceptionally mobile, they have more money and more time. Life has become more complex. They are demanding a variety of outdoor recreation areas to satisfy their many interests. These interests involve different land uses-the neighborhood playground and the sports fields for active games; the community parks for tranquility and beatuty; the regional and State areas for camping, boating, fishing, and the like; and the national parks for interpretative experiences and educational recreation. Independently, planning has increased in recent years. An important part of Mission 66 has been the formulation of a comprehensive plan to round out the national park system. States have made, or brought up to date, plans for their State park systems. Major cities have produced metropolitan park and recreation master plans. All of this planning has and is being done because of the diminishing of potential outdoor recreation areas and the increased demand by our mobile population. This planning and development no longer rests with an individual community, but now, of necessity, depends upon the master planning and coordination of all of these programs by the cities, States, and the Nation. Because these programs inevitably overlap and concern the same areas in many instances there is a need for a comprehensive, coordinated master recreation plan for the Nation.

This bill No. 11165 provides for this coordination of programs and recreation land planning by Federal and State agencies, including the States' political

subdivisions. The ultimate goal of all of these agencies and Government authorities must be land acquisition, before these areas are preempted for other uses and still within reach in purchase price. We realize that this bill is not a bill to buy land, but that it does provide for systematic outdoor recreation resource planning. This planning will ultimately lead to acquisition and development according to coordinated plans at the various levels of Government, before these areas are, for all practical purposes, lost. We, therefore, support this bill and urge that you recommend its passage.

STATEMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA RECREATION COMMISSION, RALEIGH, N.C.

We wish to make the following statement in support of H.R. 11165 which is "to promote the coordination and development of effective Federal and State programs relating to outdoor recreation, and to provide financial assistance to the States for outdoor recreation planning, and for other purposes."

Governor of North Carolina, Terry Sanford, the North Carolina Recreation Commission, and the North Carolina Recreation Society give their endorsement to H.R. 11165, and wish to have this made a matter of the record for the hearing on this bill.

The following statements and comments are evidence as to North Carolina's position on H.R. 11165.

1. From Governor Terry Sanford:

"It is my wish, as Governor of North Carolina, to have our North Carolina Recreation Commission designated as the State agency through which the North Carolina attitude will be reflected and through which, if H.R. 11165 is approved, its provisions will be implemented. It is the delegated responsibility of the North Carolina Recreation Commission to establish liaison with all North Carolina agencies involved in one or more phases of recreation."

2. From North Carolina Recreation Commission, Charles S. Hubbard, chairman: Ralph J. Andrews, director:

"The North Carolina Recreation Commission was created by an act of our general assembly, March 19, 1945. A reprint of this act is attached for reference as to duties, responsibilities, and administrative structure. The North Carolina Recreation Commission is eager to respond to any questions concerning its policies, operation, and procedure.

"THE COMMISSION

"The North Carolina Recreation Commission is the focal point for recreation information, advisory and consultation service to the field of public, private, and commercial recreation in North Carolina. The commission has served in this capacity during the past 17 years.

"It is an 11-member, Governor-appointed, policymaking commission. It does not operate, regulate, control, nor police other agencies, groups, or interests. It does serve as the focal point and central resource for the field of recreation in North Carolina. The commission's lay board meets quarterly to review, evaluate, and consider the recreation needs of North Carolina.

"THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

"In addition to the commissioners, it has a 30-member, Governor-appointed recreation advisory committee. The committee members represent 30 recreation areas of greatest current recreation concern. This body meets annually to coordinate the work of these 30 key phases of recreation.

"INTERAGENCY RECREATION CONSULTANTS

"There is another group made up of more than 50 Federal agencies and organizations, along with the regional and State agencies, which are coordinated as the North Carolina Recreation Commission Interagency Recreation Consultants. This group meets annually on a voluntary basis. As a point of illustration of its work, the annual meeting, held May 1, 1962, initiated a project to study and record the statutory authority, policies, and administrative methods and techniques relating to their recreation interests in North Carolina. The North Carolina Recreation Commission, the individual members, and their agencies have many associations, by reason of specific recreation service cooperation, throughout the year.