I have signed a lease on approximately 13 acres of beach frontage which is all recorded in the Camden County Courthouse.

I don't know where Mr. Hartzog got his figures about buying this island for $10.5 million, but according to my figures he is certainly way short. And I just will have to oppose any legislation to condemn anybody's private property for a national seashore.

Mr. TAYLOR. How many acres do you say you own, Mr. Davis? Mr. Davis. I originally bought 542 acres of highland, 50 acres of marsh.

Mr. TAYLOR. Have you subdivided all of it into lots?

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. Approximately two-thirds. All of the land west of the main road which runs north and south on Cumberland Island. East of the main road on Cumberland Island I have leased to a number of businessmen, 2 years ago in July of 1970.

Mr. TAYLOR. In your subdivision, do you have any kind of building restrictions or zoning or any protection?

Mr. DAVIS. Very few. One is no housetrailers. The second is my own personal restriction. I sell to no one unless I approve of him myself. Mr. TAYLOR. No what?

Mr. DAVIS. I don't sell to anyone that I don't approve of myself. Mr. TAYLOR. Once a man buys it he can resell it as he sees fit? Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Would you locate your property on the map or tell us about where it is?

Mr. DAVIS. It is one half mile north of Grayfield if you would like me to point it out?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes, please.

Mr. DAVIS. Right in here.

Mr. TAYLOR. There is no connection between your property and Mr. Foster's?

Mr. DAVIS. No sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Are you associated or is it just that you are friends that you choose to sit together as witnesses?

Mr. FOSTER. We are both nervous, sir. We just thought we might give each other moral support.

Mr. TAYLOR. You are both somewhat opposed to the proposal but your positions are 100 percent different, I would say.

Mr. FOSTER. Yes sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. You want to conserve and preserve yours more than the Park Service and he wants to divide his and sell it off in lots. So you go in two opposite directions.

Mr. DAVIS. That is correct and I have mine for sale.

Mr. TAYLOR. Now, Mr. Foster, you have 630 acres of high land and 700 acres of marshland. Is this all in one tract?

Mr. FOSTER. Yes sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Locate it, please, on the map.

In the main it is that which is shown in pink?

Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sort of a salmon color.

Mr. TAYLOR. Right in the center of the proposal.

Now, you state you are willing to give it to the Park Service or to an organization if they will agree to a conservation easement that is satisfactory to you?

Mr. FOSTER. Yes sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Just what do you want your easement to contain?

Mr. FOSTER. The easement-I could spotlight points out of it but basically it say you cannot build any buildings, you cannot change the topography, you cannot mine. No billboards, no commercial development, in other words, you can't do anything that would upset the ecological balance, no dune buggies, no motorcycles.

Mr. TAYLOR. Hasn't the Park Service agreed to all of that?

Mr. FOSTER. No sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. I though the testimony yesterday was just about roads, no dune buggies, no motorcycles, no commercial vehicles or private cars either.

Mr. FOSTER. Well, unfortunately, sir, over the past 16 months the Park Service on several occasions has told me that they will do things but the record doesn't indicate that they aways did it.

Mr. TAYLOR. What provisions do you wish to place in the easement that the Park Service has disagreed with? Now, you state that you all were ready, you thought, to enter into an agreement and when you got ready to sign it the Park Service raised another objection and required that more concessions be granted. What is your basic difference?

Mr. FOSTER. Well, in a nutshell, sir, our problem is that the director of the Park Service wants the whole thing and he does not want anything in this seashore park that he doesn't have absolute control over; and my giving a conservation easement to another organization such as a Nature Conservancy would mean that he doesn't have that obsolute autocratic control.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, if he is going to preserve it in line with your wishes, why wouldn't you want him to have it under his control?

Mr. FOSTER. I believe that if there is a third party involved, we will be sure that it is preserved the way I want it. I am not convinced that a unilateral agreement with the Park Service will do that.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, you can see that a division of ownership and responsibility with regard to a tract right in the middle of the park would create problems and confusion.

Mr. FOSTER. I thought we had worked out plans with the Park Service where that would not be the case.

Mr. TAYLOR. Why do you think another organization would administer the area better than the Park Service?

Mr. FOSTER. I think judging from the Park Service's past record on administering places such as Assateague Island that an organization such as the Audubon Society or the Nature Conservancy would do a much better job, sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Why do you say Assateague Island is a national shame? Mr. FOSTER. Because Assateague Island, which once was a place for migrating birds to nest in winter, is now totally overrun with dune buggies, campers, people spending the night. It is hardly more than a publicly owned Coney Island.

Mr. TAYLOR. Part of our problem there, first, you have a State park which brings a lot of people in and the Federal Government acquired the National Park area by the State park, but we have been slow, the Congress and the administration have been slow in approving development money, so there has been very little development and people have crowded in there. I have been over there on weekends myself and I have been concerned but the automobile-dune buggy situation accord

ing to the request of the Park Service and the plan that they submit to us couldn't take place on Cumberland because they wouldn't be permitted to come on except for the owners of property.

Mr. FOSTER. That is my point, sir. That is what they say now but an administrative decision 10 years from now could let them on.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, that is possible, but the Park Service is in the business of preserving beautiful spots of the country just as much as developing and using them and I think more and more the emphasis is being shifted toward preserving.

Mr. FOSTER. Then, if this is the case, I would think they would have no objection to our giving our land-don't forget, I don't want to retain title to it. I want to give title to The Nature Conservancy. Then at the death of our children, The Nature Conservancy, if they did not want to administer it and they felt the Park Service truly was going to do their goals were the same, they would have the privilege of transferring.

Mr. TAYLOR. Does your tract of land cross the entire island?
Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Cuts the island in two?

Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. TAYLOR. Naturally they may have to build some trails across there.

Mr. FOSTER. We made provisions-I went through this with Mr. Kauffman, their chief of planning. We worked out bicycle trails, horseback trails, service-vehicle roads, pedestrian traffic up and down the beach. We even worked out attractive nature trails where, like the Marsh Island over here on the left, we could have nature trails and interpretation areas there. I believe The Nature Conservancy can do a better job and this would in no way interfere with the operation of a seashore park.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, frankly, I think that your objective and the objective of the Park Service are almost the same.

Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sir. If we do it my way, though. I know doggone well it is going to be done and kept that way. If we

Mr. TAYLOR. But you can see what a problem they would have if they have a little section right in the middle that cuts the park in two with somebody else having control over it.

Mr. FOSTER. Well, to answer that point, sir, I proposed a committee that would administer it, that would be comprised of the resident Park Service director, a Park Service ecologist, a Nature Conservancy ecologist and the local Nature Conservancy man. So they would have a hand in the administration.

Mr. TAYLOR. I commend you on your desire to see that your land is used and preserved according to the plan you have in mind. The gentleman from Alaska.

Mr. BEGICH. No questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. RUPPE. Thank you. Mr. Foster, what is the value you would estimate to be of the land you propose to give to a conservation group? Mr. FOSTER. Well, lots were sold-and Mr. Davis' land-at roughly $15,000 an acre and I took 630 acres and came up with over $9 million.

82-773-72-7

Mr. RUPPE. Is your land being commercially used or developed or has there been any proposal made for developments?

Mr. FOSTER. No, sir. We have kept it as a wildlife area.

Mr. RUPPE. Strictly as an unused area. And you feel so strongly about the future use of the property that you would prefer to give it to a conservation group with certain easements attached rather than to sell it out for cash to the Park Service, no matter what the Park Service figure might be.

Mr. FOSTER. I feel that stongly and I would hope I might have some taxpayer benefit that would partly offset the fact that we didn't get cash.

Mr. RUPPE. Are there many other owners in the island area that have kept their lands undivided and undeveloped in similar fashion as you?

Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sir. I think almost all of the others have. Robert has the only commercial development of any size. There have been lots sold out of a few of the other tracts recently but nothing on a large scale.

Mr. RUPPE. And your contacts with the Park Service would indicate that the Park Service is not anxious to make any type of an agreement with you that would in any way limit their use or direction of use of the land even though in exchange you may donate outright your portion of the land on the island?

Mr. FOSTER. That is absolutely correct, sir.

Mr. RUPPE. Mr. Davis seems to have a somewhat different view of the matter. I gather, Mr. Davis, that you are opposed to any condemnation of private property for park purposes?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. When you have had your home where you were born and raised taken away from you and the Government never used it. it makes you feel pretty bad.

Mr. RUPPE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Kansas.

Mr. SEBELIUS. I have no questions.

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Foster, we are now in the process of writing this legislation. Now, if the legislation were to provide for preservation of the area along with the public use of it so as to assure its protection, would you then be convinced that the Park Service would administer it properly?

Mr. FOSTER. That is a bit of a loaded question, sir. I believe doing it my way would be a much safer way of doing it.

Mr. TAYLOR. Now, I believe you mentioned consulting your attorney but in any event, if you would prepare a draft of what you think would be a suitable amendment to place in the bill, assuring the preservation of not only your property but the entire area, we would be glad to consider it.

Mr. FOSTER. I have already submitted that. It is attached to my remarks.

Mr. TAYLOR. We will study it.

What is the essence of it? Don't read it. It is long. But

Mr. FOSTER. It says that no interest shall be acquired without the consent of the owner for a period of 2 years from the date of enactment of the act. In the event that the owners of the preserve shall

have committed the preserve to a wildlife refuge which will maintain the ecological balance as it exists at the present to the creation of an irrevocable conservation easement in favor of the National Park Foundation, The Nature Conservancy, or some other conservation organization approved by the Secretary, such easement would be applicable to all of the land.

Mr. TAYLOR. Now, what I had in mind was not to think in terms of conveying it to some other organization but just to place language in the bill which would assure preservation of the entire area in the hands and under the administration of the National Park Service.

Mr. FOSTER. I made that proposal to the National Park Foundation, to give them the easement, which as I say is really the cat watching the canary. They wouldn't even go for that.

Mr. TAYLOR. I suggest you may give some study to an amendment of that type and we will be glad to receive it from you.

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, sir. I will.

Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you for your testimony.

Mr. William W. Griffin, Georgia Conservancy.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. GRIFFIN, GEORGIA CONSERVANCY

Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I appear before you today representing the Georgia Conservancy, Inc., a citizens organization of over 5,000 Georgians dedicated to the wise use of our natural and historical resources. This organization, though not quite 5 years old, has made quite an impact in Georgia and has been recognized as a voice for stable but concerned citizens seeking environmental protection for society through logical and reasonable approaches. We try not to be shrill.

I am pleased to have been chairman of the Coastal Areas Committee of the Georgia Conservancy at the time legislation was first introduced in the Congress of the United States for the establishment of the Cumberland Island National Seashore. The conservancy had been vigorous in its advocacy of seashore status for a long time prior to the introduction of this legislation.

Let me say at the outset since I know we have had a busy week, hard week, my remarks will be brief and I trust they will be to the point. First, we wholeheartedly support legislation establishing a national park or seashore for Cumberland Island. As a subtropical coastal island with unparalleled natural and historical endowments it certainly should be available for all citizens of the United States to sample. It is a great national resource. The Georgia Conservancy wants Cumberland to be under the custody and control of the National Park Service first and foremost. We urge you to report favorably on legislation giving the people of this Nation this park.

Now, with respect to the particular bill before the House of Representatives, we have several points which we believe represent the consensus of Georgia conservationists.

We believe that one of the most important elements in making a visit to Cumberland Island is unique and memorable experience is the quality of a great natural environment touched lightly and not despoiled by the hand of man. Let me parenthetically insert that I think we should all be grateful to the great Carnegie and Candler families