scheduled following these field hearings. However, I would like to make these brief summary remarks.

On March 2, I introduced in the House, H.R. 13550, establishing a permanent Glen Canyon National Recreation Area of 391,000 acres and a Canyon Country National Conservation Area of 2.2 million acres. The bill also authorized construction of a road from Glen Canyon City to Bullfrog Basin.

However, after conducting an on-the-spot investigation of the area during the Congressional Easter recess my fourth investigation in the past 18 monthsI concluded that the boundaries of the recreation area were too restrictive, and that the Park Service needed more of the surrounding land to properly administer and protect the scenic beauty of Lake Powell.

Therefore, on May 18, I introduced an amended bill, H.R. 15073, establishing a Glen Canyon National Recreation Area of 1,151,118 acres, and a Canyon Country National Conservation Area of 2,804,000 acres. The boundaries of the two areas in the amended bill are shown on the map on display here.

The matter of boundaries is one on which reasonable men can compromise, and I will continue to cooperate in attempting to achieve a compromise in the best interests of the State of Utah and in the interest of the federal agencies involved.

However, the real issue here, as I see it, is one of proper access within the southern part of our State both for our own citizens and for the many tourists who come here to marvel at the spectacular beauties of this canyon country.

As a lawyer practicing in Utah for 20 years, and as a member of the Utah State Senate for eight years, I have always felt that we must have away to get across the southern part of our State.

A good example of the isolation and lack of access is the number of miles it would take to drive over existing roads from where we are sitting, Kanab, to where the subcommittee visited yesterday on the field trip, Bullfrog Basin.

This is a distance of about 110 miles as the crow flies. But to drive from Kanab to Bullfrog Basin over existing improved roads, the distance is 434 miles. Yet both Kanab and Bullfrog Basin are located in Kane County, and the county government at Kanab has the responsibility for law enforcement at Bullfrog Basin. Mr. Chairman, I am for both preservation and enjoyment, but I am not for one at the expense of the other. A road from Glen Canyon City to Bullfrog Basin, as authorized in my bill, would not only provide the fundamental access which is needed for the southern part of our State, but would open up an area of spectacular scenery for all to see and enjoy.

I am very apprehensive that unless this road is actually authorized by the legislation we are considering here, it will not be authorized for decades, if ever, for the simple reason that those who oppose the road, who represent what in my opinion are a minority of Utah residents, will use the two-year study period provided by the Senate bill to lobby in Congressional districts throughout the U.S. and kill any chance of Congressional authorization.

There are many more arguments which I could present on behalf of authorizing the road, but I will not go into them here since we have many witnesses to be heard.

However, let me briefly outline the other main provisions of my bill, in addition to the language authorizing a road corridor.

H.R. 15073, my amended bill, would create a permanent national recreation area of 1,151,118 acres to be administered by the National Park Service. This compares to the present recreation area of 1,196,500 acres administered by the Park Service under executive withdrawal, and a recreation area of 1,285,310 acres approved by the Senate in S. 27.

In addition, my bill proposes creation of a 2,804,000 acre Canyon Country and National Conservation Area under the administration of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. This would include a major portion of the Escalante River drainage, the Henry Mountains, and a large area south of Canyonlands National Park. The conservation area designation would give the BLM the authority, tools and funds it needs in managing this area of unique and significant value. The importance of such designation is that it indicates Congressional and national interest, direction, and commitment for a significant area having multiple resource opportunities and need for protection of scenic and aesthetic values. It is conceivable that the conservation area could accommodate, within its boundary, extremes of use varying from intensive power site development to zones of wilderness use.

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing from the witnesses here today. I hope that the evidence which is presented will assist the subcommittee in reaching a final decision on this legislation.

Mr. LLOYD. In the interests of the conservation of time, I will make this summary statement only.

First, Mr. Chairman, representatives of Senator Moss and Congressman McKay, our colleague, who is prevented by an injury from being here today, will be introduced and I would like to also introduce at this point in the record the statement of Senator Wallace F. Bennett of Utah.

Mr. TAYLOR. In the absence of objection, his statement will be included in the record at the appropriate place.

(Senator Bennett's statement appears at p. 39.)

Mr. LLOYD. I received a telegram from Senator Bennett last night which reads as follows:

Sorry I cannot be with you today in the field hearings on the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. I would just like to take this opportunity to reiterate my strong support of your bill; felt it would protect Utah's interest to a much greater extent than the Senate-passed Moss bill. Appreciate your including my statement in the hearing record.. Please extend my greetings to my many friends from Kanab.

Mr. Chairman, may I express for myself and for the people of Utah our profound thanks and appreciation to you personally and to the members of the subcommittee for spending this long weekend recess on this field study in the interests of the people of Utah and the country and for this hearing on the legislation to establish the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area in the States of Utah and Arizona. The issues involve decisions of permanent impact upon our citizens. Therefore, I urged these field hearings upon the subcommittee for two reasons. First, to afford the members this personal opportunity of on-the-spot examination of this spectacular scenic area of the American Southwest, and second, to extend the opportunity to be heard and place on the record the testimony of those citizens who live here and have strong feelings and who would not otherwise be able to travel to Washington, D.C., to be heard.

Mr. Chairman, my bill, H.R. 15073, differs from the Senate-passed bill of Senator Moss in three principal particulars, and I hope the subcommittee will be able today to focus on these three points, major points of difference.

(1) The boundaries of the recreation area established by the two bills are essentially identical with the exception that my bill does not include the approximately 110,000 acres of what may be called the Upper Escalante River extension. In addition, may I call the subcommittee's attention to the fact that there is strong exception to the inclusion of an area in the northeastern portion known as the Orange Cliffs, which overlooks Canyonland National Park. Unfortunately, I have not had the opportunity to visit this area, nor has the subcommittee. I suggest particular evaluation of the grazing and mineral potential of that area for possible exclusion from the boundaries of the bill; (2) I propose a conservation area in addition to the recreation area for intensified multiple use administration under the Bureau of Land Management; and

(3) Which I consider to be the overriding issue in my judgment, is the authorization of road construction of the Escalante River as contrasted with the Senate bill, which authorizes the 2-year study. Under the language of my bill a corridor is granted to the State of Utah for the construction of a scenic road from Glen Canyon City to the Bull

frog Marina. The alternative put forward by the Sierra Club and allied conservation organizations, as given expression in the Moss bill, authorizes only a study. The alternative route favored would be a 150-mile detour up the Hole-in-the-Rock Trail across the Burr Trail and thehn south to the Utah Marina area. With the acknowledged opposition to the span across the Escalante River which I would recommend to be constructed several miles south of Stevens Arch, the authorization of a study only is obviously a license to kill the road. If we fail to achieve actual authorization in this legislation it might be our last chance to achieve proper access across the southern portion of our State in this century and we will be depriving all of our citizens except those with the time and ability to walk, of the opportunity of looking upon some of America's most spectacularly beautiful scenic views. The span across the river would still allow some 60 miles of backpacking for those engaged in this activity on the Escalante River area and the preservation of this area under my bill, in my judgment, would be given equal prominence.

Again, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the subcommittee, I thank you for coming to Utah and granting this opportunity for our people to speak for the record.

Mr. TAYLOR. Thank you, Representative Lloyd.

Are there any questions of this witness?

Our next witness, Congressman Gunn McKay, was unable to be here today. He has been out of action all week with a very painful back injury. He had hoped until the last minute that he would be able to make the trip but his doctor advised against it. He will be present at the Washington hearings which are scheduled for June 8 and will testify there.

He has submitted a statement which will be placed in the record at this point followed by the statement of Senator Bennett which was submitted by Mr. Lloyd.

(Representative McKay's statement follows:

STATEMENT OF HON. GUNN MCKAY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE

STATE OF UTAH

Mr. Chairman, I am disappointed at not being able to be with you today, for it is always a pleasure for me to welcome distinguished guests to Utah. I hope your visit will be enjoyable as well as informative. Certainly, you will be hearing from people who all have a deep affection for this land, regardless of their point of view on the issues which are the subject of this hearing.

I shall present my own position on the Glen Canyon Recreation area in detail when these hearings reconvene in Washington. I believe it appropriate at this time for me to mention only briefly what I believe the issues to be.

First, what should be the boundaries of the Recreation Area? Particularly, is it appropriate to include within it a substantial portion of the Escalante Drainage Area?

Second, is it appropriate to create a second, special administrative zone outside the Recreation Area boundaries?

Third, how should road development be treated within the recreation area? Specifically, does this committee have enough information, without requiring further study, to determine the need for and to designate the placement and administration of a road corridor from Bullfrog Basin to Glen Canyon City? And, finally, upon what principles should the new entities be administered? I know these are difficult problems, and cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of all. I am confident, however, that this committee will consider carefully all of the points of view presented, and that its report will represent a conscientious effort to protect and develop the land for this generation, and those to follow.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your coming and wish you success in your labors here.

(Senator Bennett's statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. WALLACE F. BENNETT, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF UTAH

Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this opportunity to testify in full support of H.R. 15073, Congressman Lloyd's bill to establish the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area in the States of Utah and Arizona and the Canyon Country National Conservation Area in the State of Utah.

I feel that this measure effectively resolves many of the objections raised by interested Utahns to the Senate-passed Glen Canyon Recreation Area Bill, S. 27. H.R. 15073 would establish permanent boundaries and give statutory authority and protection to the Glen Canyon Recreation Area which has been administered since 1958 by the National Park Service under an Executive Order. Under the relatively new concept of a National Conservation Area, the remainder of the area would be under the administration of the Bureau of Land Management. A long-range master plan could then be drawn up for the protection of outstanding scenic values and the development of recreation, grazing and mining under the multiple-use system. I understand this would not preclude the study of the Escalante Canyon as a potential wilderness area which the Senate Interior Committee added to S. 27 in executive session.

In addition, Congressman Lloyd's bill would authorize construction of a road from Glen Canyon City to Bullfrog Basin. When Senator Moss' earlier version of this legislation was before the Senate in 1970, he felt that the road problem had been handled with language in the Senate Interior Committee report. At the request of the Utah Highway Commission, I introduced an amendment authorizing construction of such a road. When Senator Moss reintroduced S. 27 in the 92nd Congress, he included a two-year study of proposed road alinements within and adjacent to the recreation area. I agree with Congressman Lloyd that this twoyear study would needlessly delay construction. It has already been under study for nine years by local, state and Federal Governments. I submit that it is time to authorize construction so that Utah can begin to reap some of the benefits of the tourist visits to Lake Powell. Although 90 per cent of the Lake is in Utah, Arizona gets 90 per cent of the tourist trade because there is no proper access to the Utah side of the Lake. A tourist must travel nearly 400 miles now to reach Bullfrog Basin from Page, Arizona. The scenic road called for in H.R. 15073 will reduce this distance to 60 miles. The State Highway Commission has assured me that they will build this road with full and complete consideration of all environmental factors. Transportation Secretary John Volpe has advised me that "if Federal aid is provided for the construction of this road, Section 4 (F) of the Department of Transportation Act would apply. If authorized, at the appropriate point in the planning of these projects, the Secretary would be required to consider-upon the advice of the State and the Federal Highway Administrations-whether there are any feasible and prudent alternatives and whether all planning has been accomplished to minimize harm to the National Park from the road construction and use."

I agree with a recent Deseret News editorial that if Utah is to secure Congressional passage of the Glen Canyon Recreation Area, the delegation must present a unified bill on which all factions can agree. Congressman Lloyd is seeking to harmonize his bill and the Senate version authored by Senator Moss. In turn, Senator Moss had indicated that he would go along with the road. The editorial goes on to suggest that both conservationists and area business interests would gain if the Escalante River arm of Lake Powell might be designated for motorless boating. The proposed road across the mouth of the Escalante would allow a boater to put his canoe in the water at that point, rather than drag it behind his power boat from the Bullfrog marina. This could add immeasurably to the quiet enjoyment of the Escalante.

The road would also be a boon to hikers in the 60-mile river stretch above the Lake. The only way they can now leave the area without a very stiff hike up out of the Canyon is to be picked up by boat at the mouth of the River. A road would permit easy egress by automobile.

Reports indicate that on Memorial Day, 1971, the recreation area was so inundated with visitors that parking space was nonexistent, and boatramps

were crowded well beyond capacity. Radio broadcasts were used to discourage people from coming. This illustrates the pressing need for more roads and more access to the Lake and other parts of the recreation area.

In 1970, 907,500 people visited Glen Canyon and enjoyed the numerous facilities offered by the recreation area. It is expected that over 11⁄2 million people will be visiting Glen Canyon Recreation Area annually by 1975.

The major features of the area are Lake Powell, with a surface area of 256 square miles extending 186 miles along the Colorado River and 71 miles along the San Juan River; the striking Glen Canyon walls; and the remarkable arches, bridges, coves and numerous wild areas. With these features and the opportunity for a variety of recreational uses, such as fishing, swimming, boating, water skiing, picknicking, and sightseeing, it is expected that Glen Canyon will be comparable to Lake Mead as a tourist attraction within a few years.

In conclusion, I feel the measure introduced by Congressman Lloyd will protect the area while at the same time will open it up so that everyone, not just a few hearty wilderness enthusiasts, will be able to see and enjoy this fabulous country.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAYLOR. The gentleman from Kansas.

Mr. SKUBITZ. Mr. Chairman, if I may. I think you that are here should know that we are familiar with Congressman Lloyd's viewpoints on this legislation. The first person that calls me each morning and the last that calls me each night is your Congressman and I am sure he does that with each and every member of this group.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAYLOR. The next witness, Mr. Kem C. Gardner, administrative assistant to Senator Frank Moss. Mr. Gardner will read Senator Moss' statement.

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK E. MOSS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF UTAH, AS PRESENTED BY KEM C. GARDNER

Mr. GARDNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Moss is sorry that he is unable personally to be in Kanab today to welcome you to Utah. He is with a Utah delegation in Honolulu this morning raising the flag over a memorial of the U.S.S. Utah; a memorial for which he has worked 8 years and in which are still entombed 54 bodies from the Pearl Harbor attack. He is sorry he cannot personally welcome to Utah the members of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee coming to these hearings, and a great many of his Utah friends here.

In the interest of time, I will read his statement in the record, beginning toward the end of the first page.

S. 27 would establish a Glen Canyon National Recreation Area of approximately 1,285,310 acres. The area follows in most respects the boundaries already set by the Department of the Interior administrative action, except that it adds two principal areas:

First, new lands are added to the recreation area to provide a buffer zone for the Maze area of Canyonlands National Park, which would allow the National Park Service to supervise and control the overlook area above the national park, and to develop appropriate campsites, hiking trails and other access to the west area of the park. Second, almost the full watershed of the Escalante River is added to the recreation area so that this superb but fragile region can be studied for possible inclusion in the wilderness system. Part of the Escalante drainage now is in the recreation area which was established admin