On the recordApril 12, 1994
I totally understand. What I am saying to the Senator, it would take the designation away from this park if in a certain number of years all the inholdings had not been bought. And I am just suggesting to the Senator, since he is willing to do it to this park in California, what if I got up and offered an amendment on a park in Utah? I think the Senator might object. So I am just suggesting to the Senator that when you move an amendment like this on a bill that is definitely concentrated on this park, no other park, not a park in Utah, I understand, I still think it is important for us to note that there are other inholdings all across the country, including one in Utah and in California and other places. If it is good for one park, one might reach the conclusion that it might be the Senator's intention to move for other parks if, in fact, he thinks it is good for this park. I know he is not singling out the desert. I know that. I know he has been most helpful in helping us get to this point. So I just wanted to say as someone with a lot of experience, fortunately, for me, in representing national parks and seeing them come together.
Source
govinfo.gov




