cities, towns and communities many miles away from the actual lake. All additional fees which are imposed on resorts and docks, must be passed on to the customers and we do not feel that they, the taxpayers providing the funds for these impoundments shold be required to pay and pay and pay, just to have access to and the use of these reservoirs which they were led to believe they were going to have when the money was appropriated to create them. Concerning the costs of administration, we have information, which we believe is reliable, that indicates that the power revenue estimate, used in justifying building these impoundments, has been exceeded many, many times. Your committee can require the Southwest Power Administration to reveal these comparative figures and if power revenue has so greatly exceeded expectations, would it not be entirely right and proper that some of these funds be credited to recreation facilities and administration? We sincerely implore, for our own organization and the 26,000 signers of these petitions, that your committee thoroughly consider these matters and submit, with a favorable report, legislation that will prohibit the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from enforcing the "Golden Eagle" access program or any changes in rules or regulations that may have been proposed, introduced, announced or directed since January 1, 1967, until such time as the Congress of the United States shall have investigated the entire recreation policy on Federal impoundments and enacted legislation clarifying and directing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as to the specific wishes of the Congress. Respectfully submitted for your consideration and support, we are, CENTRAL CROSSING ASSOCIATION OF TABLE ROCK LAKE, Mr. EDWARDS. Any questions? Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to compliment Mr. McIlrath for a very fine statement. He brought us some information that I personally received about some of the fee processes that have been followed in his area. I certainly hope the testimony he has presented will provide to the entire committee strong additional argument for expediting action on this legislation. Thank you. Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Hammerschmidt. Mr. HAMMERSCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to add my compli ments. Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Clausen. Mr. CLAUSEN. In light of the fact that we have a number of witnesses, I do not think I will ask any questions. I do want to say that he presented a very good statement. Mr. DENNEY. Mr. Chairman. Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Denney. Mr. DENNEY. Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that the bill covers two points that he covered in his testimony with reference to gasoline facilities and charge for guides. I think the Secretary of the Army could do it even if this bill was passed. Mr. MCILRATH. In that respect, I respectfully request that this committee endeavor to inquire and to determine whether or not the Secretary of the Army is also going to voluntarily defer the imposition of these additional fees and charges for resorts, pending the outcome of this study by the Congress. Mr. DENNY. In the interest of longevity, I would like the record to show that this committee should consider whether or not we should establish definite authority to the Secretary of the Army, because according to page 2 of our bill, line 4, the Secretary of the Army determines in his discretion what are minimal facilities. And I think we are opening a Pandora's box here. If we are trying to give these people some relief, we had better lay down some guidelines. Mr. EDWARDS. The Chair thinks that both suggestions are well taken; and unless there is objection from the committee, we will instruct the legal counsel for the committee to make inquiry of the Corps of Engineers position with reference to guidelines for fees. Is that agreeable to the committee? It will be so ordered. (The following statement was submitted by the Corps of Engineers:) Hon. ROBERT E. JONES, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, Chairman, Subcommittee on Flood Control, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: During the hearings of the Committee on Flood Control of the House Committee on Public Works held on 7 November with respect to H.R. 11236 and similar bills, it was requested that the Corps of Engineers furnish supplemental information with respect to the statement of Mr. McIlrath who testified, in part, in opposition to fees imposed at Corps projects for commercial operations on Federal land adjacent to resorts. H.R. 11236 proposes the elimination of entrance and admission fees at Corps of Engineers projects; and the prohibition of fees for any private facilities such as boat moorings, duck blinds, ski jump floats, a swimming and diving platforms or rafts or similar facilities located on Federal land at Corps of Engineers' projects. Mr. McIlrath is the owner and operator of a motel-type resort located on private lands adjacent to the Table Rock Reservoir project. In connection with this operation, he has been permitted to provide boats and some other limited services on Federal land for the convenience of bona fide overnight guests. Since this permit was issued he has paid the Federal Government fair value for the utilization of Government lands for commercial purposes with respect to the provision of boats to his guests. This item has not been questioned. In connection with this operation, however, other related commercial operations have been added, such as the sale of bait, the servicing of motors, the operation of vending machines and the provision of guide services, without adjustment in the payment to the Federal Government. Mr. McIlrath referred to measures being taken by the Corps of Engineers to correct this inadvertence by the imposition of fees for the added services. The practice of charging for commercial operations on Government lands by adjacent resort owners is not a new policy. It has been in effect for many years. It was designed to facilitate the provision of services related to recreation for the use by the general public at water resource projects administered by the Department of the Army. The permitted activities have been limited in scope to avoid competition with concessionaires whom the Department of the Army has encouraged to provide service-type public recreational facilities for which they pay rental fees to the Federal Government. The principle of imposing a charge for the conduct of commercial operations by private parties on Government land is a sound one, and is in keeping with the requirement for payment for private use of Government land. On the basis of our discussion with Mr. McIlrath and others we have decided that a review of the problem for the purpose of determining whether any adjustment should be made in the amount and type of charges would be beneficial. This problem is not of national scope, being generally limited to projects in Missouri and some other southwestern states. We will defer the initiation of charges for the additional items pending completion of our review, which will include a discussion of the problem with the affected resort owners. It is our belief that any problems concerning charges for commercial operations on reservoir should be handled administratively and I believe they can be handled successfully in this manner. I trust that the foregoing information is satisfactory for your purposes. Sincerely, JAMES B. MEANOR, Jr., Dr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce as the second gentleman that has traveled over 1,200 miles in order to be here, Mr. Rex McNatt. He and his family have been longtime friends and patients of mine. He is a member of this Central Crossing Association of Table Rock Lake and lives on the lake and has interested himself in the beginning on this problem, and it gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce him to you and to the other distinguished members of this committee. Mr. McNatt. STATEMENT OF REX MCNATT ON BEHALF OF CENTRAL CROSSING ASSOCIATION OF TABLE ROCK LAKE Mr. McNATT. Thank you, Dr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I am Rex McNatt of Shell Knob, Mo. I was born and reared in the Ozarks, near Aurora, Mo. During the past 8 years I have owned and operated a business in Shell Knob, Mo. on Table Rock Lake. I feel honored at having been selected as one of our delegation to appear before this committee. Ours is a modest community, consisting of small businesses, resorts, retired people, and the natives of the Ozarks. Only by the combined efforts of these people and our friends in surrounding towns were we able to appear before you today. Our Ozark hills of southern Missouri and northern Arkansas are a picture of natural beauty, but developing our area and building our economy is a slow, costly process. Our economy has been and still is below the national level. Some proof of this is recent passage by the Congress of the OZARKA program, which you are familiar with and needs no explanation. Our people of southern Missouri and northern Arkansas are deeply troubled and concerned about assessment of fees and lack of set rules and regulations in this area, under control of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Evidence of this concern is substantiated by 28,000 or more signatures on petitions protesting these fees and lack of set rules and regulations; letters of protest addressed to our Senators and Congressmen and the chairman of the House Public Works Committee; and letters and copies of letters from the chambers of commerce, boards of realtors, civic organizations and private businesses, from surrounding cities and towns, which represent hundreds of thousands of people. (I have brought these letters and copies of the letters personally to this committee.) Due to lack of time it is not possible to read all of these protest letters, but they will be left for the records and your consideration, with the committee chairman. I would, however, like to mention the following cities and towns asking to go on record protesting these fees and lack of specific regulations: Chambers of Commerce-Springfield, Aurora, Neosho, Reed Springs, Cape Fair, Galena and Branson, all of Missouri and Rogers, Ark. Organizations Ozark Playground Association, Joplin, Mo., and Board of Realtors, Springfield, Mo. The following have advised by telephone that their letters are in the mail direct to Chairman Fallon: Berryville, Harrison, and Eureka Springs, Ark., Kimberling City and Monette, Mo. There will no doubt be many more. All of these letters have expressed deep concern and protests in regard to the fees being imposed on lakes controlled by the Corps of Engineers. As evidence I would like to read the following: Paragraph 6 from Ozark Playgrounds Association, Joplin, Missouri.-Contacts with some retirees planning to move to our area, indicate they are taking a second look because of the increased costs and the effect on their fixed incomes. Also, they are considering the uncertainty of the stability of regulations under control of the corps, and what may happen in the future. Paragraph 5, Springfield, Missouri, Chamber of Commerce.-Springfield, Missouri is fortunate in the fact we are in the hub of a vast recreation area and benefit directly and indirectly by easy access to many of our large impoundments within each driving distance. We feel we would be doing a grave injustice, to not only our own membership, but the numerous other communities here in Southwest Missouri who rely too heavily on the influx of tourists for their livelihood, if we did not submit to you our formal letter of protest and opposition to the fees and restrictions to be imposed upon private developers on or near Federal Reservoirs by the Corps of Engineers. It is our feeling that the imposition of such fees would be a detriment to the continued economic growth of our recreation industry. Paragraph 5, Aurora, Missouri, Chamber of Commerce.-If there is not something done to alleviate this situation it is going to be necessary for the government to pump more millions of dollars into the Ozarks Region than was previously contemplated, when the same result could be accomplished much more economically by giving us temporary relief, at least from these many and devious fees in regard to our lakes and reservoirs. The young people, the future leaders of our communities, are leaving the hill country and surrounding small towns. They are seeking employment in larger cities where they can earn higher wages and there is a promise of a better future. All the taxes we can afford to pay need to be used to build better roads, schools, hospitals, medical clinics, and most of all, industries to employ our people, who find it necessary to work for wages to make a living. There seems to be a great difference in accessed tax valuation of Stone County, Mo., and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. I call your attention to the attached copy of application and charges of $38.88 per year, assessed by the Army Corps of Engineers on a boat dock and walkway, in approximately 500 square feet of water, valuation $500, owned by retired Riley Vance, Shell Knob, Mo., in comparison to the attached tax receipt in the amount of $62.92 (including personal property taxes) from the tax collector of Stone County, Mo., on a $12,000 retirement home and boat dock on a lake front lot 75 feet by 300 feet. Is it any wonder that Mr. Vance now has his property listed for sale? Gentlemen, it would be hard to realize what could happen to our lake areas if fees, taxes and regulations remain out of control as they are now. During the past year the rules have been changed frequently by the Corps of Engineers. What can we expect in the future? A Federal tax on all boats and motors, operating on our federally controlled lakes? A Federal ski fee or swimming permit? A fee to pass over the land owned by the Government from our property line to the water? (Land we were given the right to use without charges when the lake went into operation in 1959 but which we had no legal rights against trespassers.) What resort owner or private landowner, under the present conditions, would have the desire to improve or build to his present facilities? No prospective buyer in his right mind would care to invest money in lakefront land or a lake resort business where "Slot Machine" fees or $10 for this and $10 for that could be and is being put into effect with 10 to 30 days notice. What does the Corps of Engineers promise our area for this great amount of money they expect to collect from these fees? Beautification of our lakes and shoreline? Better roads, schools, and hospitals? A better standard of living for our people? Certainly not. The first information we received was they needed the money due to higher administrative costs. Were not these higher administrative costs brought about by the hiring of rangers to collect and enforce the "Golden Eagle" fee at our parks and public boat docks? Were not these costs far more than collected? Our latest information as to the disposition of fees recently imposed on our resort owners, individually owned docks of our retired people and lakefront property owners, is that it is to go into the general fund, of the U.S. Treasury. It seems that the people of our area, who have invested millions of dollars in lakefront property have been led into an ambush by the Army Corps of Engineers. In 1959, and up until this year a boat dock or floating facility could be had by submitting plans and specifications and obtaining a permit for same, free of charge. Why, if fees are legal and were to be assessed, did the Corps of Engineers wait until the lake areas were well developed before invoking them? Gentlemen, we fully realize that many problems of great importance come before you each day. We deeply regret that ours is one of the many. We are a law-abiding people. We have never advocated violence or threats of violence in this matter of unfair policies, and we have no intention of doing so. We know the meaning of working hard for a livelihood and for what is just and right. Under the present circumstances, we feel we are being denied the right of free enterprise and a chance to build our tourist industry and economy to at least equal that of the national level. We respectfully request on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of people we were sent here to represent that our protest be given your full and just consideration. Thank you. Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. McNatt, on behalf of the subcommittee. Are there any questions of this witness? Mr. McNATT. I would like to have these letters from the chambers of commerce and cities filed. Mr. EDWARDS. Without objection, it is so ordered. |