25 



it. They want to use it. And there are some Httle frictions, but I 

 think, in fact, this thing will go over very well. 



Mr. Shadegg. Quite frankly, in the West, it is more than little 

 frictions. In the West, it is substantial friction. And I think, you 

 know, we can deal with that. We need not have a divide in America 

 where people who have these lands and are using them in some 

 way now resent the other people who just want to make sure that 

 they don't get ruined. Yes, sir? Mr. Eubanks. 



Mr. Eubanks. Congressman Shadegg, I concur with you com- 

 pletely. In fact, I would like to address a situation in your State. 

 At this moment, you have places like Patagonia and Fort Huachuca 

 and Ramsey Canyon that attract large numbers of wildlife viewers. 

 But as you well know, many of these sites are at carrying capacity. 



We need to create more outdoor opportunities, and the question 

 is whether we do that through public lands — buy more public 

 lands, or do we entice private landowners into this business? I 

 think you know which side I would prefer. I like the private sector 

 solution side. But we must have the resources to enable those peo- 

 ple to enter this business. 



I see "Teaming with Wildlife" as doing that. It provides us with 

 a funding source which these states can utilize to work with these 

 people. Tourism allows people to remain on the land. 



Mr. Shadegg. I will tell you some of the best projects are 

 projects where various wildlife groups — the Nature Conservancy — 

 have gone out and purchased things ahead of the government and 

 have created preserves and protected lands. And I don't think any- 

 body resents that. The problem is when it is taken from them with- 

 out compensation and when there isn't a fair payment for it. 



And, I mean, some of us are trying to improve the National Park 

 System by making sure that it doesn't get overburdened and that 

 we allocate those resources appropriately. But there is a divide in 

 this country between the Northeast and the West, and I don't think 

 that is good for the Nation on this. And I think this is a way of 

 trying to straighten that out. Yes, sir? 



Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Shadegg, I am from New Jersey, and 

 people there are very concerned about open space, not only in our 

 State, but also in the rest of the country. And they travel around 

 this country. One of the benefits of this program, as the Inter- 

 national sees it, is to flatten the playing field because the formula 

 is based both upon the size of the State and also the number of 

 people. 



So, therefore, your State would get a pretty good amount of 

 money here that would, in fact, be able to keep the land in private 

 ownership in some cases and at the same time protect the habitat, 

 and at the same time provide for the recreational use. This is a 

 win-win situation as far as that is concerned. We also deal with 

 these land-use problems also — competition. 



And one of the issues is if you have a critter that lands on your 

 property and it is particularly affected and it needs that piece of 

 property, how do you deal with it? Well, this is nonregulatory. This 

 is a partnership approach, and this is very popular both in the 

 East, and I hope it is popular in the West. 



Mr. Shadegg. Yes, sir? 



