| Willing Seller - A Myth
September 27, 2003 By Mr. Charles (Chuck) Cushman Executive Director, American Land Rights Association Testimony Before the Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands - United States House of Representatives, Hearing on Land Acquisition and Maintenance in the National Parks "John Jones is a willing seller. He didn't want to sell and held out as long as he could. First the [National] Park Service came in and purchased the homes, farms and timberlands of his neighbors who did want to sell. There will always be some. Then the agency began to search out those families who were in some kind of financial distress such as from a death, divorce, loss of job and other reason. "Jones watched as his community was checkerboarded by the [National] Park Service. He remembered being told when the park was created that he would not be forced out. But now the agency was targeting local businesses and the county itself. Many small businesses were purchased and put out of business. The [National] Park Service purchased the holdings of several large timberland companies. Smaller timber owners began to sell as they saw that the logging infrastructure might eventually not be there. The mill eventually had to close because it could not get enough wood. Like nature, economic ecosystem of a community is very fragile. "As more timberland was purchased, more homes and farms began to disappear. Many residents wanted to hold out but with fewer jobs in the county, the value of their homes and property began to go down. As the [National] Park Service purchased them, they lay empty for months or even years because the agency said they did not have the funds to clear them out. They became havens for vandals and drug houses. "The Nature Conservancy and other land trusts began to circle like buzzards. They would buy from financially distressed landowners, then turn the land over to the Federal government. Time after time this happened -- quietly, secretly and silently they helped undercut the community. "As properties were taken off the tax rolls, the schools and county services began to suffer. Several closed making longer trips to school necessary for families. The school district didn't have the money for the necessary busses. Roads began to close. As the [National] Park Service purchased large areas, the agency put up chains across the roads. Some of these roads had been used for years by neighbors as access points to the river or to go camping, woodcutting or berry picking. Usually we knew another way, but over time, all access was closed off. "Churches, clubs and other community services began to close. The library was in trouble. The hours were cut for it and other county services. There had been several markets in town and three gas stations. There is only one of each now and it looks like the store will close. That means an 80-mile drive to Millersville for groceries. Over time, other essential services and stores began to disappear. "When the park was created they promised tourism. I don't know where it is. We gave up a lot of good jobs for this park and the tourists don't come. Several motels and restaurants were built in anticipation of the visitors. All but one restaurant is closed, and it cut its hours back. We have two motels still open but they are struggling. We have a very nice ski area but a [National] Park Service trail runs through it. The agency has harassed the owners so often that they're close to giving up. They can't get any kind of commitment from the Park Service as to a final trail location so they can't invest in modernizing and expanding the ski area. There sure are a lot of people in town who would benefit if the ski area was allowed to meet its potential. We thought the [National] Park Service supported recreation. Now it seems the opposite is true. We heard from people out West that the [National] Park Service and the environmental groups were becoming anti-recreation. It couldn't be true, we said. It looks like we were wrong. They seem to be against skiing and snowmobiles. It doesn't make sense. "The county had no choice but to raise our taxes. The tax base for the county shrunk almost daily. We had one local bank and several bank branches. Now there is only one branch open as part of the market, but it may go away too. The banks have not made loans in our town for several years now because the future is unstable. They won't make loans to loggers, equipment suppliers, or small businessmen because of threat from the Feds. No new houses have been built in some time. The theater closed and the cable television company is considering shutting down. It feels like a ghost town. "Some of my neighbors are determined to stay and suffer the consequences and severe hardships of living within a now nearly all Federal enclave. I love my town. I was born and raised here, went away to college and came back. It looks like that even though I stood up to those Federal land acquisition agents, there will soon be nothing left to stand up for. I never thought I'd be a willing seller. But I am now." http://www.landrights.org/ubbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=8&t=000037 |