Mr. GALVIN. Yes, and I should point out that the overall financial commitment here by others is about 85 percent of the funding, I believe. The Park Service contribution, even though it is over the caps proposed in H.R. 3707, is the smaller end of the investment here. Private investment comprising about 58 percent of the total investment.

Mr. VENTO. I note that on the final conclusion of your statement you say there needs to be adoption of the plan by the city of Augusta, which has, to date, not happened, I guess.

Mr. GALVIN. That is right. And that does not indicate that there is not support for doing that. It is merely to indicate that as we developed H.R. 3707, the notion that came forward from the subcommittee was that there needs to be some kind of document that indicates local commitment to a project short of developing a general management plan. And so in developing this testimony, what we did was look at the requirements of the compact in H.R. 3707 and the proposals in this plan to develop this list.

Mr. VENTO. I think this is probably more than a feasibility study here, as far as I am concerned. Normally, if you go through a feasibility study, you have a range of options of things and then you have a compact as to who will do what. Then you have to discover or to discuss with the general management plan the specifics of how that would be carried out within the parameters or the limits of the proposed legislation.

So it is not law yet, and you can see when you do not have some sort of goals or ceilings you can easily wander around doing more or suggesting you will do less than might be ideal. I think it would be advantageous to have the city, even in legislation today, recognize that they have to sit down and there has to be some agreement if we are into a more expensive or a higher cost option. I think that is important to know before we start down that road. Mr. GALVIN. We agree, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. VENTO. Which is painful. I think the problem today is that this has gone on an ad hoc basis and before you know it, you are into something very expensive or you do not essentially have the resources protected that would be anticipated to be protected.

Well, thank you, Mr. Galvin, for your testimony. I want to invite the witnesses from Georgia, Mr. Thomas Heard Robertson, Chairman of the Augusta Canal-Authority, and Mr. Jonathan S. Lane. He is with Lane, Frenchman and Associates from Boston, MA.

And thank you for your patience, gentlemen. Your statements have by previous request been made a part of the record so you can feel free to summarize them, and I will try to peruse them and ask you a few questions when you have concluded your oral statements. PANEL CONSISTING OF THOMAS HEARD ROBERTSON, CHAIRMAN, AUGUSTA CANAL AUTHORITY; AND JONATHAN S. LANE, LANE, FRENCHMAN AND ASSOCIATES, BOSTON, MA Mr. VENTO. Mr. Robertson, please proceed.

STATEMENT OF THOMAS HEARD ROBERTSON Mr. ROBERTSON. Thank you for the opportunity of offering my views on H.R. 2949. As we mentioned, I am the chairman of the Augusta Canal Authority and I am a resident of the city of Au

gusta, and I believe I can speak for those citizens and for the authority.

Our canal dates from 1845 and promoted industrial development in the South which was very unusual in that agrarian economy. The canal is located on the fall line of the Savannah River and the system extends 9 miles on three different levels, from a very naturalistic area right into the heart of the inner city. It touches all segments of our populace, both rich and poor, both black and white. And as we have said, the canal is still used for its original purposes.

The Canal Authority was established in 1989 by act of the General Assembly of Georgia to preserve and do something with this national historic landmark system. The members of the authority are appointed by the mayor and city council of Augusta.

The adopted mission of this Canal Authority is to establish and to implement an overall plan for the preservation, development, and management of the canal as a public resource, and to this end we initiated the master planning process, which has recently been completed.

[EDITOR'S NOTE.-Master Plan (parts I and II) can be found in the committee's files.]

The plan is based on five essential concurrent elements; historic preservation of the built environment; conservation of the natural landscape; recreation within a park and greenway network; education and interpretation of both the history and the ecology of the site; and economic development, especially near the downtown.

In formulating this master plan, we have included an extensive public involvement process over the last 18 months or so, during which the National Park Service provided invaluable technical assistance. We had approximately 16 public meetings for input into the plan, ranging in size from workshops with several hundred participants, to focus groups and neighborhood gatherings of 20 or so people.

Interestingly enough, over 275 people attended the public presentation of the final plan, in spite of the fact it was held during the middle of the week and at 10 o'clock in the morning. This planning process has been the most inclusive and participatory ever held in our area, and that extensive public involvement is the primary reason that the master plan which has emerged, I believe, is as nearly as possible a consensus plan.

The planning process and early actions have been funded by a combination of State, Federal, local governments with private sector companies and individuals. The testimony includes an exhibit which is a copy of a rivers, trails and conservation assistance branch of the Park Service's project update. While the figures and breakdown of the moneys spent heretofore speak for themselves, I would like to point out that the private funding is the largest proportion of that funding so far.

Beyond these early action projects, some of which have already been completed, we anticipate the partners will continue to cooperate toward implementation of the plan, which we think will take a number of years to reach.

Both before and after the public presentation of the plan, public support for the project has been most gratifying. A few examples

include an environmental activist organization, the Savannah Waterways Forum, changed its initial position from one of being highly skeptical to acting as an advocate for the plan. A land developer, who initially vehemently opposed the formation of this plan has abandoned his opposition to it.

A nationally known drug company, G.D. Searle Co., underwrote a substantial wayside interpretive signage project as an initial action. A group of volunteers built for us a full-scale reply today of one of these Petersburg boats, 55-feet long, the boat of historic trade on the canal and the river basin. Almost all funded by the private sector.

The Georgia General Assembly has passed a resolution in favor of this project, as has the Columbia County Commission. The city of Augusta has a resolution pending before them right now. The Governor of Georgia has written the Secretary of the Interior giving his support and designation as a site under the proposed legislation. This emerging cooperative effort has the basic ingredients for success.

Designation of the canal area as a national heritage corridor will cement this partnership, will capitalize on the substantial momentum of the project, and will establish a showpiece pilot project for the heritage partnership concept. Therefore, I ask you to continue in partnership with us and in Augusta and designate the Augusta Canal as a national heritage corridor.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Robertson follows:]

AUGUSTA CANAL AUTHORITY

Canal Constructed 1845. Canal Enlarged 1875. Authority Established 1989

to establish the Augusta Canal National Heritage Corridor, and for other purposes

June 28, 1994

Thank you for the opportunity of offering my views on H.R. 2949, a bill to establish the Augusta Canal National Heritage Corridor in the State of Georgia and for other purposes. I speak as the chairman of the Augusta Canal Authority and as a resident of the City of Augusta. I believe that my remarks are representative of the collective opinions of the local citizenry.

I recommend your approval of H.R. 2949, establishing the Augusta Canal and related environs as a National Heritage Area.

The canal dates from 1845, when visionary Augusta citizens, led by Henry H. Cumming, promoted industrial development, an unusual occurrence for the time in the mostly agrarian South. Located on the Fall Line of the Savannah River, the canal system extends about nine miles on three levels, from a natural setting into the heart of the

Trust Company Bank Building 801 Broad Street #507 Augusta, Georgia 30901-1225⚫ (706) 722-1071 • Fax (706) 722-0867

inner city, touching all segments of our populace, both rich and poor, both black and white. The canal is still used for its original purposes and continues to be owned and operated by the City of Augusta, its original builder.

The Augusta Canal Authority was established in 1989 by the Georgia State Legislature to preserve and enhance this National Historic Landmark Canal System as a catalyst for renewed vitality in the region. The members of the authority are appointed by the Mayor and City Council of Augusta. The adopted mission of the Augusta Canal Authority is to establish and implement an overall plan for the preservation, development, and management of the Augusta Canal as a public resource. To this end, we initiated a master planning process, which has recently been completed. The master plan has assessed the integrity of the historic and natural resources and has generally explored and established the feasibility of the project. The plan also delineates a tightly defined boundary, presents project goals, recommends a management entity, identifies the initial partners, and describes the roles of the State of Georgia, local governments, and other

Formulating the master plan has included an extensive public involvement process,

over an 18 month period, during which the National Park Service provided invaluable