Elizabeth Horan Dec. 5, 2016

Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument

Abstract On August 24, 2016, President Obama established the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument in Maine. The President was using his executive authority granted by the Antiquities Act, 54 U.S.C. § 320301. The original owners of the property had been trying for years to donate the land to the federal government in order to create a National Park. They had been in communication with Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar since 2011 and provided seemingly ample evidence that this would have the approval of most Maine residents. While National Parks can be approved by Congress, a Special Resources Study must be approved and none were forthcoming. Over time support appeared to dwindle and Interior Secretary Salazar decided to not go forward on any plans for a requesting a resource study for a new National Park in Maine. While locals of East Millinocket vocally opposed the government controlling the land in the region, Mainers throughout the state still urged the President to create a new National Monument. My goal is to present the backstory of a controversial decision the President made in his last year in office and surprisingly, how difficult it is to follow the story.

Article In the last months of his final year in office, President Barack Obama has been ensuring that his legacy as an environmental leader remains intact. One of the ways he has done this is by declaring a National Monument in the North Woods of Maine. On August 24, 2016, the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument was established through Presidential Proclamation 9476 (81 FR 59121, 2016). In order to fully understand how this new monument came to be, we must go back to 1906 during Theodore Roosevelt’s administration. The American Antiquities Act of 1906 was passed in order to protect areas that contained “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” (54 U.S.C. § 320301, pg. 147). Over the years, 145 monuments have been created using the authority granted under the Antiquities Act. Many of those designations generated controversy within Congress and among local citizens. The case of Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument is no exception. In 2001, Roxanne Quimby, a co-founder of Burt’s Bees, bought her “first parcel of land” in Millinocket, in the northern woods of Maine (Weaver, 2016). It wasn’t until 2011, a year after being appointed to the National Park Foundation Board of Directors, that she announced that she was willing to donate 70,000 acres of her land for the creation of a National Park. In papers obtained from the National Park Service, she began to correspond with Secretary of the Interior Kenneth Salazar that year in the hope that she could start the process of establishing a national park. As stated in the follow-up letter from the Director of the National Park Service, Jonathan Jarvis, “Congress must pass legislation authorizing a Special Resource Study” and it seemed Congress was unwilling to discuss this course of action (NPS, 2011, pg. 4). Secretary Salazar and Director Jarvis traveled to Maine in August of 2011 to join Senator Susan Collins in highlighting “the economic benefits behind outdoor recreation and emphasize the importance of continued investment in conservation of parks and other public lands” (NPS, 2011, pg. 24). The end of their trip included a stopover in Millinocket to visit with the locals and other interested parties to discuss the potential National Park. While there were voices of both support and opposition, it seemed that locals were interested in at least conducting a feasibility study of the area. While the Secretary of the Interior may authorize a reconnaissance study, the important one is the study that only Congress may authorize. So while the people may have been willing, the same could not be said of the legislature. If there is a record of someone attempting to get Congress to authorize a special resource study in the Maine north woods, I have not been able to find it. In February 2012, during a US Senate meeting of the Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, Secretary Salazar was given an update by Senator Collins on the local attitudes of the national park proposal. While the meeting that Salazar attended seemed to show local support for the idea, in the few months since, the opposition apparently regained its footing. The town residents ended up voting against a feasibility study and many businesses in the area were against the proposal. Senator Collins then questions Secretary Salazar, “I am hoping that you will assure me that NPS…will not be looking into funding a reconnaissance study for this region” (Appropriations Committee, 2012, pg. 32). The Secretary is quick to agree that no reconnaissance study is being planned and that there are other projects in the works that do have local support that should take precedence. In the next few years, little seemed to be happening, at least at the governmental level. Local associations and clubs announced either their support or opposition, signs were appearing along roadways to show the opinions of the local people, meanwhile Elliotsville Plantation, Inc., a private foundation established by Roxanne Quimby, continued to purchase more land. By this time the Department of the Interior had a new Secretary, Sally Jewell, and Roxanne Quimby’s son, Lucas St. Clair had taken over the duties of National Park advocate. It soon became apparent that the idea of a National Park was not gaining any ground so a new plan for a National Monument began to form. One of the deciding factors behind this transition was that a national monument may have fewer land use restrictions such as hunting and snowmobile trails, than a national park. Since a National Park could only be formed through an act of Congress, as long as the opposition had their Senator’s ear it was easily delayed. However, the President could establish a National Monument without anyone else’s approval and this caused events to start moving more rapidly on both sides of the argument. Right after Elliotsville Plantation Inc., announced that they were considering the idea of creating a National Monument, both Senators from Maine, Susan Collins and Angus King, as well as Congressman Poliquin sent a letter to President Obama in November of 2015, urging him to refrain from using his executive powers. They argued that while it is the right of a landowner to donate their property to the US government if they wish, “Mainers have a long and proud history of private land ownership, independence, and local control, and do not take lightly any forced action by the federal government to increase its footprint in our state” (Collins, 2015). While this sounds a bit like the locals just don’t want Big Government in their lives, Collins et al. were quick to point out other reasons for their opposition to the proposal. While 60% of Mainers supported the idea of a National Park, 70% of the residents in the Katahdin region were opposed and many feared that jobs would be lost rather than gained. This was particularly important since the biggest industry in the area was logging and “other forest products industries” (Collins, 2015). I should mention that even though this letter was written to discourage the president, they did include ways in which concerns could be met and fears could be assuaged. Continued use of the area for recreation was highly desired, as well as employing the local businesses in forest management such as timber harvesting. It is unclear what President Obama’s thoughts were at the time but considering we were now entering 2016, it appears he was seriously considering the proposal regardless of the letters of opposition he received. In May, NPS Director Jarvis and Senator King traveled to East Millinocket to meet with local residents again to discover if there had been any change in views to the park/monument proposal. On the National Park Service website there is an article about this meeting which states, “At least three-quarters of the near capacity audience in the Collins Center appeared to favor establishment of a national monument” (Olson, 2016). The author continues with a figure of 200 attendees from out of town who arrived via bus and another 1000 that came independently in order to offer their support. No number is given for the attendees who were residents of East Millinocket or the surrounding towns. However, Chris Facchini, a reporter for WLBZ News wrote in his report that, “The majority of people who filled into a room at the Kathadin Region Higher Education Center in East Millinocket Monday afternoon for a hearing with National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis, spoke out against a national monument” (2016). This seemed to be the theme anytime I attempted to gather information about the local opinion. Finally in June of 2016, other members of Congress began to take notice. The House Committee on Natural Resources held a field hearing in East Millinocket calling it “Elevating Local Voices and Promoting Transparency for a Potential Monument Designation in Maine” (Bishop, 2016). It was obvious from the memorandum sent out regarding the hearing that this was not going to be impartial. While several previously mentioned arguments against the National Monument were mentioned it also stated, “The potential designation would represent an abuse of the Antiquities Act” (Bishop, 2016). Mainers may have been against a National Monument but this seemed to recall other disputes regarding the powers afforded to the President via the Antiquities Act. Since the creation of the Antiquities Act, Congress has attempted to limit or even abolish the authority of the President to establish national monuments, most have not been passed. In the field hearing memo all but one name on the list of invited speakers was against the creation of a national monument in Maine’s north woods. The one name which was for the proposal was Lucas St. Clair, Roxanne Quimby’s son. It must be noted though that in an interview with him he says he “wasn’t formally invited until after the witness list became public. At that point he decided not to go…” (Cangro, 2016). The next month, 52 Maine state and local elected officials sent a letter to President Obama encouraging him to create a national monument in the north woods. “Today more than 60% of Maine voters support the idea” of creating new public lands, and recognize that doing so “will also help our economy…that has been hard-hit by the decline of the forest products industry” (Baldacci, 2016). While I do not know if this was the final piece of the puzzle for the President, one month later Elliotsville Plantation, Inc. transferred 87,000 acres of land to the federal government and the property became known as Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument. In his Proclamation, President Obama went to great efforts to inform the people why this land was becoming a National Monument. Since the Antiquities Act mentions objects of historic interest, he mentions that the area, particularly the Penobscot River, had long been used by the Native people for transportation, sustenance and trade. “Researchers believe that much of the archeological record…remains to be discovered” (81 FR 59121, 2016). Famous people in history have also traveled upon these lands listing Henry David Thoreau, John James Audubon and yes, even Theodore Roosevelt. In a possible effort to appease the locals, Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument will still allow for public snowmobile use and hunting in certain specified areas. “Katahdin Woods and Waters is an exceptional example of the rich and storied Maine Woods, enhanced by its location in a larger protected landscape, and thus would be a valuable addition to the Nation’s natural, historical, and cultural heritage conserved and enjoyed in the National Park System” (81 FR 59121, 2016). Bibliography

American Antiquities Act of 1906, 54 U.S.C. § 320301

Baldacci, Joe et al. (2016). RE: National Monument in the Katahdin Region of Maine. National Resources Council of Maine. Retrieved Nov. 29, 2016 from www.nrcm.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/08/SupportNMltrfromMEelectedtoPresObama.pdf

Bishop, Rob (2016, May 27). Field Hearing on “Elevating Local Voices and Promoting Transparency for a Potential Monument Designation in Maine.” House Committee on Natural Resources. Retrieved November 5, 2016 from http://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=400497

Cangro, Jaclyn (2016, June 1). Lucas St. Clair: National Monument can help economy. FoxBangor.com - Bangor, Maine WVII ABC 7 and WFVX Fox 22. Retrieved Nov. 29, 2016 from http://www.foxbangor.com/news/item/14970-lucas-st-clair-national-monument-can-help-economy

Collins, Susan; King, Angus; and Poliquin, Bruce (2015, November 23). Collins, King, Poliquin Send Letter to President on Possible National Monument Designation in Maine North Woods. Angus King, U.S. Senator for Maine. Retrieved Nov. 28, 2016 from http://www.king.senate.gov/newsroom/press- releases/collins-king-poliquin-send-letter-to-president-on-possible-national-monument-designation-in- maine-north-woods

US Senate Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations (2012). Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2013. Congressional Hearings. Washington, DC: US Government Publishing Office.

Facchini, Chris (2016, May 16). National Park Service director gets an earful in East Millinocket. WCSH 6 NBC Portland. Retrieved Nov. 28, 2016 from http://www.wcsh6.com/news/local/national-park-service- directors-gets-an-earful-in-east-millinocket/197545307

National Park Service (2011). Maine Woods Proposed National Park – Correspondence from Ms. Quimby. Retrieved Nov. 14, 2016 from https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/foia/upload/12- 290_Young_Quimby_Responsives_ForWeb.pdf

Natural Resources Council of Maine (2016). National Monument Timeline. Retrieved November 22, 2016 from http://www.nrcm.org/projects-hot-issues/woods-wildlife-and-wilderness/katahdin-woods-and- waters-national-monument/national-monument-timeline/

Office of the Press Secretary (2016, August 24). Fact Sheet: President Obama Designates National Monument in Maine’s North Woods in Honor of the Centennial of the National Park Service. The White House. Retrieved November 22, 2016 from https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press- office/2016/08/24/fact-sheet-president-obama-designates-national-monument-maines-north Olson, Jeffrey (2016, May 17). National Park Service Director Hears Views on Proposed Monument. National Park Service. Retrieved November 22, 2016 from http://www.nps.gov/orgs/1207/05-17- 2016b.htm

Perez-Pena, Richard (2016, August 25). Obama Designates National Monument in Maine, to Dismay of Some. The New York Times. Retrieved November 22, 2016 from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/25/us/obama-maine-katahdin-woods-and-waters.html

Proclamation No. 9476, 81 FR 59121 (Aug. 24, 2016)

Sambides Jr., Nick (2016, August 23). A Timeline of Roxanne Quimby’s Quest for a National Park. Bangor Daily News, Outdoors. Retrieved November 22, 2016 from http://bangordailynews.com/2016/08/23/outdoors/a-timeline-of-roxanne-quimbys-quest-for-a- national-park/

Vincent, Carol Hardy (2015). National Monuments and the Antiquities Act (CRS Report No. R41330). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved November 22, 2016 from https://www.crsreports.com/download?hash=1494aef79e7aad30bf86583df8d4957ce385f5397605e848 0ac5502a34951441

Weaver, Jacqueline (2016, November 22). Quimby talks about land gift: Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument. Mount Desert Islander. Retrieved Nov. 26, 2016 from http://www.mdislander.com/maine-news/quimby-talks-land-gift-katahdin-woods-waters-national- monument

Timeline

2001 2015

Roxanne Quimby purchases her first plot of Elliotsville Plantation, Inc. exploring idea of land in Maine’s North woods National Monument instead of National Park/Recreation Area 2009 Letter to POTUS from US Senators Collins Kenneth Salazar sworn in as Secretary of the and King, and Congressman Poliquin Department of the Interior denouncing National Monument Proposal

2010 2016

Roxanne Quimby elected to National Park May: NPS Director Jarvis and Senator King Foundation Board of Directors meet with local residents in Millinocket

2011 June: Congressional Field Hearing with Roxanne Quimby announces that she wants House Committee on Natural Resources to donate 70,000 acres for a new National July: 52 elected officials from the state and Park local levels in Maine send a letter to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and President Obama encouraging him to use his Director of the Park Service Jon Jarvis hold authority to designate a new national public meeting in Millinocket monument

2012 August 12: Elliotsville Plantation, Inc. transfers 87,000 acres of land to the United Senate Subcommittee of the Committee on States of America Appropriations Hearing with Secretary Salazar August 24: Presidential Proclamation 9476 establishing Katahdin Woods and Waters 2013 National Monument

Sally Jewell sworn in as Secretary of the Interior

2003-2014

Elliotsville Plantation, Inc. (Roxanne Quimby’s foundation) purchases 14 parcels of land for total ownership in the region of 89,261 acres 11/22/2016 Obama Designates National Monument in Maine, to Dismay of Some ­ The New York Times

http://nyti.ms/2bAhOwk

U.S. Obama Designates National Monument in Maine, to Dismay of Some

By RICHARD PÉREZ­PEÑA AUG. 24, 2016 President Obama turned a vast stretch of Maine woods into the nation’s newest federal parkland on Wednesday, siding with conservationists who want the wild lands protected, over residents and officials who oppose intrusion from Washington and restrictions on use of the land.

Mr. Obama designated more than 87,500 acres of rugged terrain, donated by a founder of the Burt’s Bees product line, as the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument, administered by the National Park Service, a day before the service’s 100th anniversary. It became by far the largest region of federal parkland in Maine, surpassing the 48,900­acre Acadia National Park on the coast.

It takes an act of Congress to create a national park, but under a 1906 federal law, the Antiquities Act, a president can act unilaterally to establish a national monument, a power that Mr. Obama has used to build a major part of his environmental legacy. He has created two dozen national monuments, more than any previous president, ranging from small sites like the Stonewall Inn, a gay rights landmark in Manhattan, to more than 300,000 acres in the mountains east of Los Angeles.

The designations prevent new mining and drilling operations, and sometimes curtail logging, grazing, road­building, hunting and recreation — limits that in some rural areas, particularly in the West, are bitterly resented by residents and business people who say their regions’ economies depend on use of the land. Advocates say

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/25/us/obama­maine­katahdin­woods­and­waters.html?_r=0 1/3 11/22/2016 Obama Designates National Monument in Maine, to Dismay of Some ­ The New York Times

the monuments can actually generate economic activity and jobs, through tourism and recreation.

Roxanne Quimby, a founder of Burt’s Bees, had been buying property in northeastern Maine for years and accelerated her purchases after selling the company in 2007. But she stoked the anger of Maine residents by closing off the land to hunting and snowmobiling. When she announced plans to turn it into a national park, the idea ran into fierce opposition.

Her son, Lucas St. Clair, took over the campaign, allowing hunters and snowmobilers to return to part of the area. He and Obama administration officials pledged that the land would remain open to recreation if it was given to the government. The family donated $20 million for park development and maintenance, and pledged another $20 million. After it became clear that Congress would not approve a national park, conservation groups lobbied the administration for a national monument designation.

Mr. St. Clair won over some former opponents, but resistance has remained strong. In a struggling region that has long relied on shrinking timber­related businesses, many residents fear that a national monument could eventually mean new air pollution controls on wood and paper mills in the surrounding areas.

Subscribe to the Times “It’s sad that rich, out­of­state liberals can team up with President Obama to force a national monument on rural Mainers who do not want it,” Gov. Paul LePage, a Republican, said in a statement. Earlier this year, the state Legislature passed and Mr. LePage signed a bill opposing the federal takeover.

The president’s action drew sharply differing statements from the state’s United States senators, who joined forces last year to express concern about the idea.

Senator Angus King, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, said that commitments from the administration persuaded him that “the benefits of the designation will far outweigh any detriment.” He said the monument could coexist

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/25/us/obama­maine­katahdin­woods­and­waters.html?_r=0 2/3 11/22/2016 Obama Designates National Monument in Maine, to Dismay of Some ­ The New York Times

with the wood and paper industry, “and will provide much­needed diversity to the region’s economy.”

But Senator Susan Collins, a Republican, said Mr. Obama should not have acted on his own, “given the objection lodged by the Maine Legislature, the lack of consensus among Mainers who live in the area, and the absence of congressional approval.”

The new national monument, carved by wild rivers and mountain ridges, is home to a wide range of animals, including moose, bobcats, bald eagles, salmon and Canada lynx.

“As we see visitation grow, with people from around the country and around the world, it will settle in that this truly is a special landscape and the economic benefits can be realized,” Mr. St. Clair said. “This isn’t the only monument that has been criticized, and our governor isn’t the only governor who has criticized a monument. From the Grand Tetons to the Everglades, it’s a theme in the creation of these parks. But I think time will help heal these divisions.”

Katharine Q. Seelye contributed reporting.

A version of this article appears in print on August 25, 2016, on page A9 of the New York edition with the headline: Obama Turns 87,500 Acres of Maine Into Parkland.

© 2016 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/25/us/obama­maine­katahdin­woods­and­waters.html?_r=0 3/3

59121

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 81, No. 167

Monday, August 29, 2016

Title 3— Proclamation 9476 of August 24, 2016

The President Establishment of the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation In north central Maine lies an area of the North Woods known in recent years as the Katahdin Woods and Waters Recreation Area (Katahdin Woods and Waters), approximately 87,500 acres within a larger landscape already conserved by public and private efforts starting a century ago. Katahdin Woods and Waters contains a significant piece of this extraordinary natural and cultural landscape: the mountains, woods, and waters east of Baxter State Park (home of Mount Katahdin, the northern terminus of the Appa- lachian Trail), where the East Branch of the Penobscot River and its tribu- taries, including the Wassataquoik Stream and the Seboeis River, run freely. Since the glaciers retreated 12,000 years ago, these waterways and associated resources—the scenery, geology, flora and fauna, night skies, and more— have attracted people to this area. Native Americans still cherish these resources. Lumberjacks, river drivers, and timber owners have earned their livings here. Artists, authors, scientists, conservationists, recreationists, and others have drawn knowledge and inspiration from this landscape. Katahdin Woods and Waters contains objects of significant scientific and historic interest. For some 11,000 years, Native peoples have inhabited the area, depending on its waterways and woods for sustenance. They traveled during the year from the upper reaches of the East Branch of the Penobscot River and its tributaries to coastal destinations like Frenchman and Penobscot Bays. Native peoples have traditionally used the rivers as a vast transportation network, seasonally searching for food, furs, medicines, and many other resources. Based on the results of archeological research performed in nearby areas, researchers believe that much of the archeological record of this long Native American presence in Katahdin Woods and Waters remains to be discovered, creating significant opportunity for scientific investigation. What is known is that the Wabanaki people, in particular the Penobscot Indian Nation, consider the Penobscot River (including the East Branch watershed) a centerpiece of their culture and spiritual values. The first documented Euro-American exploration of the Katahdin region dates to a 1793 survey commissioned by the Commonwealth of Massachu- setts. After Maine achieved statehood in 1820, Major Joseph Treat, guided by John Neptune of the Penobscot Tribe, produced the first detailed maps of the region. The Maine Boundary Commission authorized a survey of the new State in 1825, for which surveyor Joseph C. Norris, Sr., and his son established the ‘‘Monument Line,’’ which runs through Katahdin Woods and Waters and serves as the State’s east-west baseline from which township boundaries are drawn. By the early 19th century until the late 20th century, logging was a way of life throughout the area, as exemplified by the history of logging along the Wassataquoik Stream. To access the upstream forests, a tote road was built on the Wassataquoik’s north bank around 1841; traces of the old road can still be seen in places. The earliest loggers felled enormous white pines and then ‘‘drove’’ them down the tumultuous stream. Beginning in the 1880s, after the choice pines were gone, the loggers switched to spruce Proclamation No. 9476, 81 FR 59121 (August 24, 2016)

Synopsis:

Proclamation 9476, POTUS declared Katahdin Woods and Waters Recreation Area to henceforth be designated as Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument. In order for a location to be declared a National Monument it must contain “objects of significant scientific and historic interest.” POTUS regales us with the history of the area, including geological, sociological, and biological. Specific names of famous explorers, writers and Presidents who visited the area are given to explain the significance of the region to national history.

This is the official statement of the POTUS establishing federal land as a National Monument. For several years, the owners of the property had been in discussion with the Secretary of the Interior to donate their land to the federal government with the provision that it be turned into a National Park. Efforts were repeatedly rebuffed until the President decided to use his executive authority to make it happen. Not only does this document establish a National Monument but it tells the story of the land and the people of Maine.

Comments:

The Federal Register is the official source to learn of proposed regulations and executive orders. While I was able to learn about Proclamation 9476 on Whitehouse.gov, the Federal Register not only tells me that this is a new executive order, but also describes why the area should be protected. The whitehouse.gov article is more like a press release than explaining a new regulation that has been put into action. If anyone decided to research the establishment of Katahdin Woods and Waters Recreation Area, this is the first resource I would point to for background information.

One area that puzzled me was that this is stated as a Proclamation rather than an Executive Order. In fact, if you go to whitehouse.gov to Executive Orders you won’t find this. The authority to make this proclamation comes from the US CODE, Title 54, Section 320301 which states that the President may declare any land owned or controlled by the Federal Government to be National Monuments (147). It even states that if this land is owned privately it may be relinquished to the Federal Government. All of this originally comes from the American Antiquities Act of 1906 in order to preserve archaeological sites. Page 147 TITLE 54—NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AND RELATED PROGRAMS § 320301

HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES care and management of the object, may be re- linquished to the Federal Government and the Revised Section Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Secretary may accept the relinquishment of the parcel on behalf of the Federal Government. 320104 ...... 16 U.S.C. 465. Aug. 21, 1935, ch. 593, § 5, 49 Stat. 668. (d) LIMITATION ON EXTENSION OR ESTABLISH- MENT OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN WYOMING.—No § 320105. Criminal penalties extension or establishment of national monu- ments in Wyoming may be undertaken except by Criminal penalties for a violation of a regula- express authorization of Congress. tion authorized by this chapter are provided by section 1866 of title 18. (Pub. L. 113–287, § 3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3259.) (Pub. L. 113–287, § 3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3259.) HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES

HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES Revised Section Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large)

Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) 320301(a) 16 U.S.C. 431. June 8, 1906, ch. 3060, § 2, 34 Section through Stat. 225. (c). 320105 ...... no source. 320301(d) ..... 16 U.S.C. 431a. Sept. 14, 1950, ch. 950, § 1 (proviso relating to na- The section is added for informational purposes. tional monuments), 64 Stat. 849. § 320106. Limitation on obligation or expenditure of appropriated amounts In subsection (c), the word ‘‘parcel’’ is substituted for ‘‘tract’’ for consistency in this section. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, In subsection (d), the word ‘‘further’’ is omitted as no funds appropriated or otherwise made avail- obsolete. able to the Secretary to carry out subsection (f) NATIONAL MONUMENTS ESTABLISHED UNDER or (g) of section 320102 of this title may be obli- PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION gated or expended— (1) unless the appropriation of the funds has Ackia Battleground National Monument, Mississippi [see section 450r of Title 16, Conservation].—Proc. been specifically authorized by law enacted on No. 2307, Oct. 25, 1938, 53 Stat. 2494. or after October 30, 1992; or Admiralty Island National Monument, Alaska [Monu- (2) in excess of the amount prescribed by law ment established within Tongass National Forest by enacted on or after October 30, 1992. Pub. L. 96–487, title V, § 503(b), Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. (Pub. L. 113–287, § 3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3259.) 2399; Pub. L. 104–123, Apr. 1, 1996, 110 Stat. 879; Pub. L. 105–60, Oct. 10, 1997, 111 Stat. 1269].—Proc. No. HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES 4611, Dec. 1, 1978, 93 Stat. 1446. African Burial Ground National Monument, New York.—Proc. No. 7984, Feb. 27, 2006, 71 F.R. 10793. Revised Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large) Section Agua Fria National Monument, Arizona.—Proc. No. 320106 ...... 16 U.S.C. 466(a). Aug. 21, 1935, ch. 593, § 6(a), 7263, Jan. 11, 2000, 65 F.R. 2817. 49 Stat. 668; Pub. L. Andrew Johnson National Monument, Tennessee 102–575, title XL, § 4023, [Monument redesignated Andrew Johnson National Oct. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 4768. Historical Site, see section 450o of Title 16, Con- servation].—Proc. No. 2554, Apr. 27, 1942, 56 Stat. The words ‘‘Except as provided in subsection (b) of 1955. this section’’ are omitted as obsolete. Aniakchak National Monument, Alaska [Monument CHAPTER 3203—MONUMENTS, RUINS, SITES, established as unit of National Park System, see AND OBJECTS OF ANTIQUITY section 410hh(1) of Title 16, Conservation].—Proc. No. 4612, Dec. 1, 1978, 93 Stat. 1448. Sec. Arches National Monument, Utah [Monument abol- 320301. National monuments. ished and funds made available to Arches National 320302. Permits. Park, see section 272 of Title 16, Conservation].— 320303. Regulations. Proc. No. 1875, Apr. 12, 1929, 46 Stat. 2988; Proc. No. 2312, Nov. 25, 1938, 53 Stat. 2504; Proc. No. 3360, July § 320301. National monuments 22, 1960, 74 Stat. C79; Proc. No. 3887, Jan. 20, 1969, 83 Stat. 920. (a) PRESIDENTIAL DECLARATION.—The Presi- Aztec Ruins National Monument, New Mexico.—Proc. dent may, in the President’s discretion, declare No. 1650, Jan. 24, 1923, 42 Stat. 2295; Proc. No. 1840, by public proclamation historic landmarks, his- July 2, 1928, 45 Stat. 2954; Proc. No. 1928, Dec. 19, toric and prehistoric structures, and other ob- 1930, 46 Stat. 3040; Proc. No. 2787, May 27, 1948, 62 jects of historic or scientific interest that are Stat. 1513; Pub. L. 100–559, title VI, §§ 601–604, Oct. 28, situated on land owned or controlled by the Fed- 1988, 102 Stat. 2800. eral Government to be national monuments. Badlands National Monument, South Dakota [Monu- ment redesignated Badlands National Park, see sec- (b) RESERVATION OF LAND.—The President may tion 441e–1 of Title 16, Conservation].—Proc. No. reserve parcels of land as a part of the national 2320, Jan. 25, 1939, 53 Stat. 2521. monuments. The limits of the parcels shall be Bandelier National Monument, New Mexico.—Proc. confined to the smallest area compatible with No. 1322, Feb. 11, 1916, 39 Stat. 1764; Proc. No. 1991, the proper care and management of the objects Feb. 25, 1932, 47 Stat. 2503; Proc. No. 3388, Jan. 9, 1961, to be protected. 75 Stat. 1014; Proc. No. 3539, May 27, 1963, 77 Stat. (c) RELINQUISHMENT TO FEDERAL GOVERN- 1006; Pub. L. 94–578, title III, § 309, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2736; Pub. L. 105–85, div. C, title XXXI, § 3164, MENT.—When an object is situated on a parcel Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 2050; Pub. L. 105–376, Nov. 12, covered by a bona fide unperfected claim or held 1998, 112 Stat. 3388. in private ownership, the parcel, or so much of Becharof National Monument, Alaska.—Proc. No. 4613, the parcel as may be necessary for the proper Dec. 1, 1978, 93 Stat. 1450. American Antiquities Act of 1906, 54 U.S.C. § 320301

Synopsis:

The first part of the Act states, anyone who tries to excavate or destroy in any way an historic site that is “on lands owned or controlled by” the US Government will be fined or imprisoned. The second section authorizes the President of the United States “to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” as a National Monument, as long as it is on government owned or controlled land. If the land is privately owned, the property “may be relinquished to the Government” and be accepted by the Secretary of the Interior. The portion that is often debated is that the National Monument must be “confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” Many people who are opposed to the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument quote this portion because they believe that the monument is larger than is really necessary. Lastly, the only entities that may authorize excavation and/or examination of objects of antiquity in the National Monument are the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture and War as long as said uses are for the benefit of a museum, university or other scientific institution.

Comments:

While the Antiquities Act is referred to time and again, notably whenever a new National Monument is established, it has technically been altered. If you look it up in the US Code it is 16 USC § 431-433 however, that section is listed as repealed and can now be found at 54 USC § 320301-320303. The wording has changed as well, but the meaning is still the same. Several times Congress has tried to limit this Act and/or the President’s reach but so far there has only been one that became law, a prohibition on the further establishment of National Monuments in Wyoming unless Congress, not the President, has made the designation. The only real limitation to just reading the Antiquities Act in either the original or more modern form is that we do not see the intention behind the Law. Some people think it should only apply to archaeological finds while others say we should use it to preserve biological history or the historical use regardless of whether there is a human/civilization element involved. Since many times in the history of National Monuments, they eventually became National Parks, it can be argued that the President has noticed an area that could potentially be lost and doesn’t want to waste time with all the paperwork if Congress gets involved. On the other hand, a National Monument has less restriction on its use like, hunting and snowmobiling, than National Parks do and is a major point of contention, particularly for the Katahdin National Monument. Committee on Natural Resources Rob Bishop, Chairman Hearing Memorandum

May 27, 2016

To: All Committee on Natural Resources Members

From: Majority Committee Staff – Erica Rhoad, Terry Camp, and Aniela Butler Subcommittee on Federal Lands (x6-7736)

Hearing: Oversight field hearing on “Elevating Local Voices and Promoting Transparency for a Potential Monument Designation in Maine.”

The Committee on Natural Resources will hold an oversight field hearing to hear testimony on “Elevating Local Voices and Promoting Transparency for a Potential Monument Designation in Maine” on Wednesday, June 1, at 2:00 p.m. in the East Millinocket Town Office located at 53 Main Street, East Millinocket, Maine 04430. The hearing will focus on the proposed Maine North Woods National Monument and its implications on Maine’s Katahdin region.

Policy Overview

• Like many monument designations before it, a new National Monument in Maine (referred to as the “Maine North Woods”) would disrupt several existing uses important to local citizens and communities including hunting, snowmobiling, forest management and road and trail access to recreation.

• Unlike most monument designations, the land in question is 87,500 acres of private, forested land that would have to be donated to the Secretary of the Interior and then designated as a National Monument by the President.

• The potential designation would represent an abuse of the Antiquities Act; no Congressional legislation designating the area exists; no imminent threat endangers the preservation of the site; and there is a great deal of local opposition.

• Despite recent public forums conducted by the National Park Service, many local residents still feel their questions and concerns are not being adequately addressed by the Obama Administration.

Invited Witnesses

Mr. Bob Meyers Executive Director Maine Snowmobile Association Augusta, Maine

1 Bishop, Rob (2016, May 27). Field Hearing on “Elevating Local Voices and Promoting Transparency for a Potential Monument Designation in Maine.” House Committee on Natural Resources. Retrieved November 5, 2016 from naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=400497

Synopsis:

Memorandum sent out to members of the House Committee on Natural Resources regarding a hearing with the local community that eventually took place June 1, 2016 in East Millinocket, Maine. (There is a video of the hearing but I’m not really sure how to include that here.) The memo gives some background regarding the Antiquities Act and how previous Presidents have used it to establish or enlarge National Monuments. The Committee seems to oppose the use of the Act to create National Monuments in general but with the one in Maine in particular, they object to the acreage of land and that “No legislation has been introduced to designate the Maine Woods National Monument or Park in either the House of Representatives or the Senate” (pg.3). Several bills had previously been introduced to limit the President’s authority regarding monument designations but none have passed.

The memo continues with explaining what the Maine North Woods proposal is and how it came about. Previously, when public forums of the proposal were held, many of the locals were opposed to the National Monument despite the National Park Services Director noting that the land was “worthy of a designation” (pg. 5). The memo concludes with what kind of work would go into establishing and maintaining a National Monument of this size as well as the restrictions to the community.

Comments:

I tried to find something more official about this Hearing or other Natural Resources Committee Meetings that were specifically about the proposed National Monument. I was repeatedly sent to the Committee’s website where I found this memo and a video of the hearing. At the very bottom is a note: “Documents will be uploaded to this site when available. Please check back here regularly.” I would think we would have the statements given by the invited witnesses mentioned in the memorandum or some kind of follow-up. However, given how soon after this meeting that the President announced the establishment of the National Monument (August 2016), I suppose it was put on the back burner. The main thing I noticed about this memorandum is that this is from the House Committee on Natural Resources and specifically states that “The hearing will focus on the proposed Maine North Woods National Monument and its implications on Maine’s Katahdin region” (pg.1) however, it is obviously written with a negative view of the proposal rather than what I believe should be impartial. When looking at the list of invited witnesses, it seems to be loaded with people who oppose this proposal with the exception of the Lucas St. Clair, the son of the owner of the property in question. I find this document very interesting because it makes me question who we have serving on the House and/or Senate Committees and if they have any ulterior motives in being on said committee.

*Update: I found transcripts for 3 of the speakers at this event : MR. DAVID TRAHAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR , SPORTSMAN`S ALLIANCE OF MAINE) http://congressional.proquest.com/congressional/docview/t39.d40.06012803.d73? accountid=14784 PAUL SANNICANDRO (COUNCILMAN , MILLINOCKET TOWN COUNCIL) http://congressional.proquest.com/congressional/docview/t39.d40.06012703.d73? accountid=14784 BOB MEYERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR , MAINE SNOWMOBILE ASSOCIATION) http://congressional.proquest.com/congressional/docview/t39.d40.06012603.d73?accountid=14784

I know from reading an interview with Lucas St. Clair, Roxanne Quimby’s son, that while he was listed as a witness, he was not invited to the hearing and so did not attend. /`x?Z;?g‚‚‚

,?\‚49V:g‚4?

(?9g‚4?

.~‚N?9grFVr‚|OpN‚9p‚rN?‚`|^?g‚`B"‚9

.9O\?‚

3V?9p?‚9<

8`v‚|OVV‚H\=‚!‚V?rr?gp‚rN9r‚?}bg?pp‚rN?‚N`d?p‚`B‚.9P\?‚g?pR=?\rp‚Dk`Z‚?x?m~‚b`grR`\‚`B‚rN?‚ pr9r? ‚9p‚|?YV‚9p‚rN?‚erPrP`\‚pPM\9rvg?p‚I`Z‚ ‚pvbb`mr?gp‚|N`‚vgM?‚rN?‚29rP`\9V‚39gU‚ 4?mxP

-?rr?gq‚`B‚pvbb`gt‚<`Z?‚J`[‚V`<9V‚?gp‚`B‚bg?p?gy9rP`\‚Ml`vbp‚ 4vbb`ir?ip‚P\

Synopsis:

This is a collection of communications largely between the Secretary of the Interior and Roxanne Quimby, the owner of the property which was being proposed as a National Park. I was able to access this correspondence in the NPS FOIA Reading Room under Frequently Requested Documents. The collection starts off with a letter from Ms. Quimby to the Secretary of the Interior in 2011 regarding a proposal to gift her land to the National Park Service in the hope that it will be turned into a National Park. Another letter is included, this one from the Town of Millinocket Town Manager requesting some answers from the DOI Secretary about how this proposal would affect the State of Maine and it’s taxpayers and some general questions about Ms. Quimby’s stake in this venture. Both letters were responded to by the NPS Director and in both instances report that Congress has the ultimate responsibility in determining if the property can be made into a National Park. A third letter came from a Representative in the Maine State legislature urging DOI to start a feasibility study of the land in question. This time the Associate Director responded, again stating that Congress is responsible for initiating a feasibility study. All of these letters are in response to a visit from the Secretary of the Interior to Maine in August 2011. Included are some internal emails coordinating the Secretary’s visit, including his planned schedule and who he will be meeting with.

Comments:

I think this source is a bit confusing since the letters and emails are not scanned in chronologically. You need to start at the end of the entire document and work your way up in order to get a sense of how everything proceeded. However, overall it is very interesting to see the thought processes of the DOI and NPS employees as they figure out how to respond to people and other internal communication that the public would not normally be privy to. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRON- MENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPRO- PRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 2012

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met at 9:35 a.m., in room SD–124, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jack Reed (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Reed, Leahy, Tim Johnson, Tester, Landrieu, Murkowski, Alexander, Cochran, Collins, and Hoeven. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

STATEMENT OF HON. KEN SALAZAR, SECRETARY ACCOMPANIED BY: DAVID J. HAYES, DEPUTY SECRETARY PAMELA K. HAZE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET, FINANCE, PERFORMANCE, AND ACQUISITION

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED Senator REED. Let me call the hearing to order and on behalf of the members of the subcommittee I’d like to welcome the Secretary of the Interior. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for taking time to be with us this morning and to talk about the fiscal year 2013 budget for the Department of the Interior. I would also like to take a moment to thank you for all the time that you spent in our States during the past year visiting our shared priorities. I very much appreciated your trip to Rhode Is- land last summer and your support to create the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Historic Park. I am also grateful for your participation, you and your staff, along with Senator Murkowski, for our very interesting and in- formative trip to Alaska. And I would also like to thank Senator Murkowski not only for her gracious hospitality in Alaska, but for her extraordinary efforts last year on a bipartisan basis to bring forward an Interior bill which I think was a good one. Thank you very much, Senator Murkowski, for your great work and for the work of your staff. Mr. Secretary, I also want to thank you for your intense interest in all these issues and for your accessibility and collaboration with (1) US Senate Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations (2012). Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2013. Congressional Hearings. Washington, DC: US Government Publishing Office.

Synopsis:

Meeting of the Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations with the Secretary of the Interior, Kenneth Salazar. Most of this meeting is about various programs within the Department of the Interior and reporting their status. Senator Collins (R-Maine) takes a moment to inform Secretary Salazar of an update to the Maine North Woods National Park Proposal and that since his visit to the state the year before, certain groups have dropped their support and the Town of East Millinocket (the location of the contested land) passed a vote overwhelmingly opposing a feasibility study. She asks the Secretary what plans he intends to make in the future regarding this proposal. The Secretary denies that there are any further plans.

Comments: (SuDoc Y 4.AP 6/2)

I included this meeting because as far as I can tell, most of the work behind getting the land turned into Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument was not done through Congress. There were meetings with the Department of the Interior, Maine Legislature and the public and obviously some kind of meetings with the President which I have yet to find. I think this document also shows how some of these subcommittees work. Notice that the only Senator that spoke about the Maine North Woods Proposal was from Maine and opposed the idea. We do not hear from anyone else who may think this idea is good. To an outsider it reads like a bully telling someone that they better not be thinking about doing something while the Secretary sounds very placating and basically tells the bully, of course not.