>> there has been many, many cases of -- >> i asked my question. >> i'm sorry but there is a body of law associate with first amendment activities on the mall. let me give you a for instance. the chamber of the lincoln memorial is not available for

first amendment activities. so that's in statute, or in regulation. nor is the chamber of the jefferson, but the plaza is. in the case of the world war ii memorial, the entire memorial is open to first amendment activities. >> except in this case when the barricades were put up because of, well, i don't know, maybe we will really find out where that came from. last question, and i'm over time and i try not to do that. i really try to hear to that in my committee. i guess the obvious question is, is all of this decision that was made regarding restricting activity, was that your decision? >> yes, sir. it was. >> totally your decision? >> yes, sir. was. >> thank you. i want to recognize now mr. defazio. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, this is a photograph from the 95 shutdown.

that is the lincoln memorial, and the closure begins at the base of the steps. people were not allowed to go into the lincoln memorial. i would say that we have a lot more loose tools running around this country doing constructive things now than we did in 95. we ha have somewhat attacked the monument recently. so to say, gee, we should need any step there to protect these memorials is absurd. in this day mage. so i also have a letter here i would like to enter into the record from the national park ranger lodge of the fraternal order of police. and i'll quote just two things from this letter. without any country court findings are changes in the law despite what the gentleman on the other side said, we will carry on with his miserable thankless and perilous task denying public access to parks during the government shutdown. although our actions make sensational news stories and fodder for the pundits, they are supported by the president legal

guidance under laws we are sworn to enforce. you know, the park service rangers want to be working. and want to be admitting people to memorials and parks, and been guarding those people and the memorials and the parks against destructive activities. but because of the republican government shutdown they cannot do that. plain and simple. you can create something and then pretend you're outraged by the results which is what i'm hearing from the other side of the aisle. director jarvis, i do have a question. they seem to love our parks today but i haven't seen that love much recently since the republicans took over congress 2010. 2010 your total budget was 2,750,000,000. in 2013, 2,400,000,000, which would be less than the 2008 spending levels. since 2008, have you caught up on your capital backlog? >> no, sir.

our maintenance backlog now exceeds 11 billion. >> $11 billion maintenance backlog. given the reduction in spending and taking you back to 2008, have you had to cut back earlier this year, before the closure of? >> yes, sir. particularly with the sequestration, we had to cut back significantly on both program and ours. we are currently, for this last summer, 1000 less seasonals and we have 900 positions that are permanent, permanent positions that are unfilled. >> 1000 less seasonals, 900 less permanent and republicans are saying the sequestration which they created which is scheduled budget back to below 2008 year levels is politically motivated, the things you're doing there. is it politically motivated when you notice those people that they weren't going to be working this summer? >> no, sir.

there's no politics involved here. this is just our responsibility to take of the national parks with what resources we have. >> thank the gentleman. i would note further there are some other perverse impacts on our federal lands. wildlife refugees are closed and those on the other side of the aisle who day in and day out are there to defend the second amendment are not doing much to defend those who want to hunt on those lands during this hunting season. the losses that are being cost of there. they aren't doing anything by keeping the government close to help those in rural areas the want to work. i've got temper industry folks who have been noticed. that their contracts are going to be suspended. they are going to have a right to sue the government and get money back for suspending their contracts. unfortunately, we won't have those logs this winter to tide goes over to the spring in areas we can't get into the mountains in the wintertime. and yet that's because of the government shutdown.

they can't let them go forward because they have a fiduciary responsibility to monitor the timber sale. there have been instances where people countries where the were not supposed to be cut. timber theft. those things happen. the government needs to have officials there to monitor this. they can't do it under your shutdown. we are losing money. we are losing jobs. you pretend you care about rural america, he care about our parks which he slashed the budget for. this is absolutely the height of hypocrisy, the fact we are here today trying to figure out why the parks are closed because of the government shutdown and what bizarre things happened -- >> mr. chairman, i would like to make an inquiry for a point of personal privilege. >> the gentleman may make -- i think he is asking for a parliamentary inquiry so i've recognize him for that. >> when the gentleman says that you pretend that you care about the parks, are you speaking

about anybody on this dais so that i will know whether to ask the gentleman towards taken down or not? >> any member has the right to ask another members words to be taken down, but i think what this discussion is here, the gentleman was addressing it in a proper way that we address those sort of things in the third person, so i didn't intervene. >> i heard the second person, trachea. >> he obviously has strong feelings like members on both sides of the aisle have on that. >> i heard second person instead of third person. that is not proper. >> i did not your second person. the gentleman's time has expired. chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. mica. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think it's important that we conduct this oversight hearing in a joint fashion. i think of all the things that's happened, nobody favors the

shutdown, republicans or democrats. hours i believe that we are on the verge of a permanent shutdown of our government, which would be much worse when you spend so much money and incur so much indebtedness that we lose our financial credibility, our national security as a result of that. so this is a legitimate debate. there have been more than a dozen shutdowns. there have been -- i just heard today, i never realized this under carter we actually went beyond the debt limit. not that we want to follow that model. the problem here is that it appears that what took place by the park service was offensive to the american people, to the congress, and to just the concept of common sense, director jarvis. that's what this is about.

i think nothing has resonated more with the public than to see an open air monument such as the world war ii memorial, and close by the martin luther king memorial. it just seems that common sense did not prevail. you said you take full responsibility for that action, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> did you discuss this with the secretary of interior at any time? >> yes, i did. >> then you didn't discuss it with anyone in the white house, did you? >> in -- several times on the phone with the white house i presented with the secretary of my decision, but it was never the reverse. there was never any -- >> so you discuss with officials

in the white house your action, and you also discussed it with her. now, the common belief among even park service employees, and i quote one of them who -- this is the press account, october 3. it's a cheap way to deal with a situation an angry park service ranger in washington says that the harassment. we've been told to make life as difficult as we can. it's disgusting. this is the common belief of people who work for you. and he believes he was told to make this as difficult and as painful as possible. how would you respond to that? >> i have no idea where that information came from spent it's a park ranger quote. it's from -- >> that's hearsay. what i'm telling you is -- >> it may be hearsay -- >> i'm in communication with my invoice, the ones who are still on work. they do not believe that. so to say this is the voice of

the national park service employees, that's incorrect. >> okay, here is one. and i can tell you i'm in contact with my constituents as an elected representative and nothing has uphold the american people more than i've seen in my two decades of service than what you've done. to close and open air monument like the mr. chairman, or across the street, across the way where people could walk. granted, that was not in existence in 95. maybe you didn't have a precedent, but it was offensive to close a place where you could walk. usage job is to protect the monuments. how would the monuments not be protected if people walked of there? >> they are protected if -- >> the people are protected by the park police and the district police. and i'm told, and with evidence that there is almost as many to protect the people and --

>> that's incorrect. if i may correct the record here. the u.s. park police has been accepted from furlough. the u.s. park police are in new york, san francisco, and washington, d.c. they have responsibilities for the george washington memorial parkway, for traffic, for the regular commuting here everyday. >> i'm told in the district of columbia extraordinary measures are available to make certain of that, again that our monuments, the streets, with that horrible incident that took place. they were on the job protecting the people, but your job is to protect the monuments. somebody, we talked -- who did you talk to in the white house? >> i actually do not know who was on the phone. i do not. >> did they relate to you that you should continue to inflict pain and? >> they did not. >> and can you provide to the committee that information of

who you spoke to and win on this matter? >> we are retaining all of our records as requested by the committee chairman, and once we get out of the shutdown we will be providing this. >> we will subpoena them or give them one way or another. >> the gentleman's time has expired. i appreciate the director saying he will comply with our requests that we set on october 2 to the gentleman from american samoa, mr. faleomavaega. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i certainly want to welcome our witnesses for the test and they provided before a joint hearing this morning. mr. jarvis, i want to commend you for the distinction and the outstanding job that you've done, or is doing as the director of the national park service. with a track record of some 40 years of service to our nation and to the american people. i think should be recognized.

mr. jarvis, you mentioned that the park service takes in about 232 million visitors a day -- i mean a year come with some 700,000 people each day of the 401 national parks, and to operate on a budget that is one 15th of 1% of our national budget. am i correct in putting these before you? >> yes, sir. , that is correct. >> mr. jarvis, it's sad that i seem to see a become a political punching bag for this evening and it's really unfortunate. and i think what we're trying to do here is to get a real sense of the challenges and the problems that you're faced with as the director. when you're given notice that you need to shut down, you mentioned that the shutdown occurred on the first of october? >> that is correct. >> and how do you go about

shutting down an agency? i believe 70,000 federal workers work for the department of interior, and out of that some 60,000 have been furloughed? >> somewhere in that neighborhood, yes. >> and the park service is part of that? >> that's correct. >> and all of the responsibility that you bear, and i think it's been a common interest explain to this morning, the fact that a tremendous economic disaster has been created because of the shutdown, am i correct on that? >> we calculate that for every dollar invested in national parks system you get $10 back for the economy. >> and i am very interested in your statement icky sticky represent the national parks conservation association with the membership of some 800,000 of our fellow americans? >> that's correct spent what are some of those classic things that the association has been able to achieve, and you as a trustee of this association? >> well, as i said in my opening

statement, that national parks conservation association issue meekly focus on supporting the national parks since 1919. and we do that by providing information to the public, by providing information to our visitors, by involving ourselves on issues at the park level, by -- >> my time is short. let me go on. i like the quote your state and major as an observation on the hearing this morning. and i quote, the national park service is not to blame for the failure of congress to give our government open. and provide the resources needed to maintain our parks and keep them completely open. blending national parks employees for the abysmal results of such a failure on national leadership is unconscionable. can you share with -- can you

share that with this more? >> i think it' this thing is abt how the shutdown has worked out, okay? and as i said in my statement, doing shut down statement, doing shutdown plans is an easy 4401 unit system that extends beyond the internationals they find. but there isn't any question about why there was a shutdown. there is no appropriation. there is no continuing resolution. there is no money to pay employees, even if you employees that john has at his disposal today are not being paid. so we can debate about the world war ii memorial or grand canyon. the fact is 401 units of the national parks service are mostly closed. >> mr. jarvis, i'm sorry, my time is -- thank you. mr. jarvis, how much of an economic benefit, what has done to the economy of this country, the fact that with a national park has done in terms of just like mayor bryan, ms. eberly,

ms. simon, in terms of their responsibilities, how much of an economic impact because of the closure? >> well, at this moment, october which is a peak period for many of our gateway communities, the impact is enormous. they are not going to recover that. even if the federal employees are paid at the end of this, our concessionaires, our gateway communities, those hotels, restaurants will not recover his lost. so we've already begun to figure out how we can get some of these back open. as the mayor of tusayan indicator we have we opened the grand canyon, the rocky mountains, a park in utah. all of these, because, frankly, we shut these down on october 1 and immediately began to figure out how we can work to get those back open without violating the and a deficiency act. i think the evidence shows from claude more to the peaks of otter to the grand canyon, that

i've been working very hard with a very small staff. there are only nine of us left and the park service in the washington office, to get these parks back open so that we can get the $76 million per day that the national park service is contributing to the national economy. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman's time has expired. mr. bishop. >> mr. jarvis, usage at about 3000 exempt employee. i missed and those are all security personnel? >> there are -- i've got the numbers. >> the numbers are not important to are those security personal? >> not all of them, most of them. >> do you have the same number of security personnel for the mall before the shutdown? >> yes. >> is there a specific threat to the property or life of anything that is taking place on the mall that is different now than before the shutdown? >> our intelligence indicate that there has been an uptick in

activity and interest during the shutdown and attentional threats. >> can you give me a specific one? >> i cannot give the specifics. >> is putting their kids up an old practice after the interpreters and the maintenance service have left those particular areas of? >> no. >> if there is no greater threat, no specific threat and you actually put up barricades on those monuments, you have violated at a deficiency act. you have created a new obligation with no new threat. if there is not a specific threat, you have violated the other deficiency act. mr. speaker come with your permission i would like to yield the remainder of my time to mr. stewart. >> thank you. thank you, mr. bishop. i represent some the nation's greatest national parks. i represent the second district in utah. into the american people and particularly to some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, i would like to make what i think is a very obvious

point. it's entirely the point of this hearing. yeah, the government is in a partial shutdown and there are implications that come from the. the question to consider is this. in the midst of a crisis should the federal government choose to make things better, or should they choose to make things worse? should the administration seek to alleviate some of this inconvenience and some of the spain, or should they seek to exaggerate those? should the federal government be viewed as a friend to the people or as an enemy? and mr. jarvis, surely you must realize because of some of your actions many americans view not as an advocate buzz -- but as an adversary. i think we're in a political conflict right now and we will move on. we always do. we find a way to do this. six months on of the american people will move on with their lives. a year now -- a year from now or five years from now some of us will be forgotten but i think the lasting impression that most

americans will have will be of those veterans standing at the world war ii memorial and being denied access to that. and so, mr. jarvis, let me ask if i could, you are not here voluntarily, is that right? >> i volunteered to come after the shutdown. >> are you here because of the force of a subpoena? >> i am. >> okay. it would seem to be not voluntarily than. did you view your actions as defensible, then why didn't you volunteered to come and sit before this committee and answer questions? >> i did volunteer to, but not on this day. i don't have any staff to prepare. normally, i would have a staff that would work on developing custom spent you said before these were your decisions. i would imagine he would -- i would imagine you would need staff to explain to you. >> i didn't staff to prepare testimony because this committee requires testament be submitted

in advance. those staff are furloughed. >> would the gentleman suspend? >> yes. >> mr. chairman, a point of parliamentary clarification. >> parliamentary clarification is in cory, but the gentleman is recognized for that. >> when we subpoenaed the director, our staff that already made it clear, and i believe the director is aware that essential personnel under the act would include such personnel as necessary to respond to congress. that was the basis under which we subpoenaed him because waiting until afterwards simply met that he was unwilling to return such personnel as when necessary to prepare for today's hearing. and i just wanted to make that point, that was a dialogue in preparation to make the determination he could bring back on a daily basis such personnel as were necessary if he wanted to be better prepared for today's hearing.

>> that's my sting also. the gentleman from utah, mr. stewart, is recognized for the bows of his time. >> i think it emphasizes my point that if we considered these decisions and actions as being defensible, you would not be reluctant. i would think you would be anxious to come before the committee and to defend those decisions. in a few seconds i have left let me make this point if i could. my state has worked in agreement with secretary jewell to reopen for national parks in utah. and i'm wondering, director, do you support that decision to work in concert with state governors and others to open these parks? >> absolutely. >> would you support, expecting we may find yourselves in this situation again, maybe india, maybe in 20 years, but at some point when they find itself in a government shutdown again, would you support my efforts to have agreements in place that would immediately open up these parks with this part of the state so

we don't find ourselves in this situation against? >> we've talked about this in that we really have set a new bar here by entering into these agreements, very simple agreements frankly, with colorado, new york, south dakota, utah. and so we have sort of started the new point that if we go into a shutdown, we now have a template, fairly easy to do this. i want to mention two things the. we did set a standard and we worked it out with your government and the other governors. one is that the national park service would run these parks and that the states would take the national park service to operate them. it's a professional staff. they been doing this so we could open instantly using our employees. i would not support the states themselves taking over the national parks. by entering into an agreement like this and then it pays for the entire park operation, not

just cherry picking components of parks, absolutely i would support putting this into policy so that we can execute on it very quickly. >> thank you. >> the gentleman's time has expired. i would just note that there probably was a template after the 95-96 that probably should've been full. the chair recognizes the gently from the district of columbia, ms. norton. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i could not identify more with our witnesses on the effect of the shutdown on your local economies. and i think every red-blooded american would similarly identify with the outrage of the residents of your host city. the nation's capital, who in addition have seen the shutdown not only of our tourist economy as you have, but congress is

holding $6 billion, that's more than four states collect of local funds. not 1 penny of it federal funds. i think you, mr. chairman, and the republicans and democrats who voted with us to free the districts local funds. we are finally making some headway with the senate and the administration. mr. jarvis, sitting here in the district of columbia as a third generation washingtonian, i cannot bear to hear the employees of the parks service maligned, yeah, we have trouble with our civil servants, but i want to say for the record that how unfair i think it is for the republicans to shut down the government and then blame the national park service.

i thank you for the way in which you protect our monuments and the people who visit our monuments. some of us are still recalling when green paint was splattered on the lincoln memorial, even though there was no shutdown, because of the difficulty of guarding the memorials. in 2007, i remember there was a horrific incident, vandalism as well, on the vietnam memorial. is a true that there are about 2000 cases of vandalism every day on the memorials of our country throughout the united states? >> that's correct. >> i also can't bear the way in which our veterans have been made poster children by my republican friends, looking -- making them look as if they are

victims. my own paper, the "washington post," carries an article this morning about a coalition of 33 veteran organizations, the american legion, all of them. of course, they came to complain about the cut off of their own benefits. let me read you what they said. the executive director of the iraq and afghanistan veterans of america and put the country first and end the shutdown. that's veterans. that's how they talk. they go back for everybody who is victimized. here's another of the speakers. several speakers said they oppose measures that would restore funding the va but not to some other parts of the government. quote, fixing a little by little is not going to resolve this

problem for veterans. and that was the director of the veterans of foreign wars. in contrast to some demonstrations over the two-week shutdown, including a protest sunday, during which demonstrators pulled down barriers, tuesday's rally was peaceful and civil in tone. no members of congress delivered speeches. probably because they weren't invited. one veteran who held a sign blaming tea party activists for the shutdown was asked by organizers to stand outside of the moral -- the memorial ground. that's how veterans respond, when everybody is at risk. they go back as the army veteran who received the medal of honor yesterday from the president, went back to even get his dead comrades. i want to ask perhaps

mr. jarvis, perhaps the representative from the tourism industry, to explain something that really alarmed me your apparently it's mr. simon is said that the shutdown will have lasting effects on international visitation. now, of course, our international visits start here, but then they hear about all those wonderful sites, especially in the far west. and they don't want to go home without seeing them. now, my republican friends, this will blow over just like a default will blow over. could you tell me -- >> with the gently to ask -- >> with the gentlelady asked the question so we can get a response very, very quickly? >> would you tell me about lasting effects and perhaps what we might do to keep these effects from becoming more lasting? >> ms. simon, very quickly. >> we anticipate -- let me start by saying the national parks is

a huge part of what is promoted to international visitation through grand u.s.a., which is our federal marketing arm for tourism. so we know that the international visitors are coming here to see the parks. they come into the gateways. they also see the party generally on the first visits to win this debate will be lasting effects in terms of international visitation, particularly in the fall as they look toward next year's trips coming in october and november. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee, mr. duncan. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. a big part of the great smoky mountains national park is in my district. and without objection i would like to place a statement by the county mayor ed mitchell in the record. mayor mitchell has been a great leader in trying to find ways to open the park back up, and he's asked the park service to let the county operate the park, and have said they could do so just

as capably if allowed to do so. of course, they weren't allowed to do so and now unfortunately our state has come up with really more money that is necessary to open the park back up until sunday. there's a private community in the smokies called top of the world. two dozen schoolchildren are picked up each day to go to school on the school bus. they were picked up when the government, the morning the government shutdown, and then the park service closed the road so that the schoolchildren could not get back home on their school bus after school, which i thought was a very sad and needless thing to have done. i've said many times that you can never satisfy government appetite for money online. they always want more. along with more money than always want more staff. one thing this government slow down has shown is that the park

service is greatly overstepped across this nation. many thousands have visited though world war ii memorial and other monuments in spite of the barricades. hundreds of thousands can safely and comfortably visit the smokies and other national parks if the roads were not closed. these barricades and closures were obviously done to try to make the shutdown as unpopular as possible, as inconvenient as possible, and not because it was actually necessary. this is using the park service for political purposes. this is all shown as i said the park service is greatly overstepped. mr. ebell has in his statement a quote from a former secretary of interior who said the national park service has a long history of dramatizing budget issues by inconveniencing the public. i often choose the most dramatic type of action in order to get

their message across. it's unfortunate that the park service has allowed itself our cooperate in the political purposes such as this. and there's been some mention an earlier by several members that the republicans shut down the government. the republicans in the house voted four different times to keep the entire government open before anything was shut down. senator reid would not allow that to be taken up in the senate. at this time i yield the remainder of my time to mr. gohmert spin i think my friend very much. let me mention, director, could you call somebody earlier on hearsay. i'm going to something that is not hearsay. i was out there at the world war ii memorial on tuesday morning, because represented steven palazzo of mississippi e-mailed

that he had a bunch of world war ii veterans that were coming by bus and there were barricades that had been put up. i get out there, sure enough, and our barricades on the north entrance, south entrance and the entrance facing the road at barricades across an internet yellow tape woven in and out. they did not intend for anyone to cross that line, first amendment or not. so whoever was supposed to get the message out about first amendment protests did not. we went up and down the barricades. we talked to the park police. and by the way, on wednesday when i was out there, i asked a park ranger how many people normally are out here we were not in shutdown? she said, for. now, you can object to hearsay except it's not hearsay. it's not for the evidence of the statement of the facts asserted in the statement, but simply that the statement was meant. so you could see maybe it wasn't

for. but who ever the park ranger that said they were out there every day seemed to think it was for. and on thursday and friday, i get memory of those thursday of friday, i counted nine park service people out there to protect the world war ii memorial from our world war ii veterans. and i can tell you, if steven palazzo and i had not picked up the barricades, separated them after establishing with the park service who we were, those barricades were not going to be opened, and those world war ii veterans were not being allowed in. first amendment or otherwise. and that is not hearsay. i was there. and i watched with my own eyes. i heard with my own ears. i yield back. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from illinois is recognized.

>> turn your microphone. >> house republicans have those the government shutdown of the american people. and the testimony provided by some of the witnesses today highlights the local economic impact that this shutdown has on small towns and businesses that serve employees and visitors of our national parks. the national park service has estimated that the government shutdown will result in total economic losses of $76 million per day to local communities surrounding national parks. director jarvis, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> thank you. mayor bryan come in your testimony you stated that your town, and the small businesses there, estimate the loss of more than $1 million in revenue just

doing -- just during the first seven days of the shutdown, is that correct? >> yes, sir. it is. >> in fact, one estimate found that arizona would have the third largest economic impact of national foreclosures, amounting to almost $5 million a day. the current president of the national league of cities and an op-ed titled, and i quote, federal shutdown has dire impact on local government, which describe some of the practical impacts of the shutdown on residents and communities around the country. ms. lopez rogers wrote, the antics in washington are threatening to unravel the progress our cities have made over the last few months. and cause harms to the entire nation. it's a reckless approach to

governing, end of quote. she went on to say, and i quote again, that every day the government is shutdown is another day of economic uncertainty. we need to focus on what matters to our communities, our neighborhoods, and our residents. director jarvis, i've heard people indicate that somehow or another you did not provide the specificity that was necessary as he made some decisions. do you contend and are you concerned that, about the impact of shutdown on businesses and communities surrounding national parks? >> yes, sir. i'm very concerned about that. it was immediately upon the closure, we opened lines of communicate and with our concessionaires in particular. these are the private sector businesses that operate food, beverage and lodging within the

parks, the national hospitality association. i even conducted a conference call with the ceos and leaders of those organizations that first week surely began to convey our concern, to talk about what we could do for them after the shutdown is over, and what we could do in between. and as a result of those conversations, we really began to -- i mean come on wednesday of the first week, i contacted the people that were involved in 1995 and the agreement with the grand canyon to understand how that was negotiated. we even tracked down the former attorneys that negotiated that as well. so that we would have the information to build, you know, 20 years later new rules and regulations and all of that with a very small staff, how we could get these things back open so that we could reduce the impact to the tourism industry, which we rely upon. >> thank you very much. i commend you for your 40 years of service in the parks service.

and i have no further questions. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields pakistan. the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director jarvis, i'm just curious, the philosophy that you have as director of the park service. do you believe our rights come from our creator, or from our government and constitution? >> i believe they come from all of the above. >> well, check your constitution. it's a constitution that prohibits activities by the government, not give them the rights. the declaration of independence established what our founders believed, where a rights came from. but ms. eberly, what has happened to you is pretty outrageous. you've heard all of the insults thrown out today about the shutdown. and i'm curious, were you

notified before october 1, that tuesday, that you might be closed even though you'd been operating totally independent and you had saved the farm because of your efforts and your 32 years as director? when we get notified you were being shut down the? >> i had a phone call on my cell phone from the superintendent monday, late morning. and i returned it early afternoon but i was out of town. >> okay. and what we told him that conversation? >> we were told, or i was told that the farm was going to be part of the shutdown. and i said, but we've never been part of a shutdown and he said, well, it will be illegal for you to open the farm, and if you do, then you risk arrest. and only one employee, only one private employer will be allowed in to feed the animals. >> how many national park

service employees are actual farm each a? >> none. not since 1981 when we -- >> wait a minute. we've heard about the law being that in a shutdown you have to revert the minimum manpower, unless there is a specific threat. are you aware of any threats that were emanating from the plot more farm on september 30 or october 1? >> no. we are pretty low key. not like that but our next-door neighbor is this a a so that pretty much take it any threats that might come along. >> so you're not worried the cia is a threat to the farm a fairly? >> no. they are our best friends. >> i have read that maclean improve commerce has made a bunch of money to use the farm on october 1 in the evening for a gathering. was there any indications that the maclean chamber of commerce was a threat to your farm?

>> no. >> had there ever been a threat to your farm? chambers can be pretty rowdy. >> they can but this one is pretty okay. we belong speaks of what happened on tuesday? >> tuesday -- the employees came in as normal because we decided we were not going to do that, and we had, i asked for this decision in writing because we had received nothing in writing, and so the superintendent e-mailed me a statement about 3:30 on monday, and we appeal to that thinking that we could get it changed, thinking that this was sort of a boo-boo. and vent about 2:00 on tuesday we got a phone call saying no, absolutely no, and then park police showed up and made the

chamber members and all the people setting up for the event believe. >> on monday when you returned the call of the superintendent from the park service, did they say your park might be closed, to be on alert, or what today's a? >> they said if the government shutdown then we would be a part of the shutdown and that they had been, they had this plan in place since thursday. but that was the first notice we had received. >> all right. and so did you happen to notice how many park service police came out to run off the mclean chamber of commerce and put up the barricades? >> i wasn't there. >> okay. do you know where the barricades came from? >> they brought them. not the park police. the park maintenance crews brought him. >> the park maintenance crew brought them. have you ever had park maintenance crews out there

since you became an independent operated park or farm? >> oh, yeah. i mean, early on the parks -- the park remained as crews were helpful to me. >> early on being went? >> in 1981. >> but in the last 13 years had there ever been in a park maintenance people come out to your farm? >> to perform maintenance? >> to do anything spent i think a broken water line but that was probably about nine years ago may be. >> thank you. my time has expired but i would note for the chairman that the law was violated by the park service in sending police and maintenance personnel out to the park. >> to the extent this is being recorded as part of the record to the gentlelady from guam, ms. bordallo, is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i, too, would like to commend mr. jarvis and, for as long,

many, many years of service to national park service and to all of the witnesses here. mr. jarvis, the shutdown was the final hit to the national parks after years of cuts in your budget, and i think you mentioned this earlier in your testimony, and to your operations and construction accounts. can you speak about how the cuts in funding over the last several years have impacted your organization? >> in a number of ways they have impacted us. in terms of our facilities, we are in steady decline. most of the facilities and many of our classic national parks were built 50, 75 years ago. water systems, wastewater systems, roads and the like. so we now have an $11 billion maintenance backlog that is declining. we received less than half of what we would need in order to just maintain that. on the other side is our

arranger staff. those that provide interpretation, visitor protection has also been in decline. and so we are not capable of providing the level of visitor service that really the public expects and deserves. >> thank you. as the national park service gears up for its 100 years in 2016, what do they continued cuts mean to the future of the national park service? i'm sure it must be very impactful. >> a couple of things we are working on. one is to develop as many partnerships with states, with nonprofit organizations, the tourism associations to assist us in providing these places. we cannot do it alone. increasing our volunteer workforce, increasing philanthropy, leveraging what dollars that we have both appropriate and not appropriated such as rv dollars.

all of those, we're looking at as many opportunities as possible. there has been hearing in the senate on a variety of ways we can find additional funding for the national park service leading up to the sensitive. we're also working with the national tour association, and brand u.s.a. on a major marketing campaign for 2016. we feel that the national parks are an integral part of the american economy, as well as standing for really the best of this country, and we believe the centennial is a huge opportunity to remind all americans of the national parks, as well as draw tourism from around the world. >> thank you. director jarvis, it's commendable that you are thinking ahead and you are looking into all these possibilities to continue on. now, what is the impact with your employees? i mean, the overall morale and so forth of those still on duty of those that you furloughed?

>> this is extremely -- thank you for this question because it's extremely painful to the employees that are on for will. they want to work. they want to be back in the parks. they want to be greeting the american public. and along with the rest of the federal government. for the employees that are on duty, this is extreme the difficult. you know, our ranges, our u.s. park police, are accustomed to welcoming the public. we are i think the only federal agency that has enjoyment in its mandate. it is the part of our mission to provide these places so that the public can enjoy them unimpaired for future generations. and right now we are having to turn people away because of the shutdown and the lapse of appropriations. that is very, very difficult. i have instructed, in spite of what you're hearing here today, i've instructed my law enforcement folks to take a very low-key approach to enforcement at the park level, to not

confront, to stand back and just inform the american public that these places are closed. and as a consequence there have been very, very few citations across the country. it's mostly been a respectful reminder to the american public when they, with their disappointment, again extraordinary difficult and painful for us to have to deliver that message. and we hope that this will end very soon and we can -- >> and i do. with a few seconds i've left, mr. jarvis, the ones that are not furloughed feel sort of guilty with other colleagues that have to be furloughed, that they are still on and the others have been furloughed. so i can imagine it must be a more our problem as well in the agency. and i think you very much again for your service, and i yield back my time. >> the gentlelady yelled back. now go to the gentleman from colorado. but prior to that i'm going to ask unanimous consent so that it

be in the record for later discussion and we will have a copy of a given to the director. this is the donation agreement for the national park service and the state of oregon -- i'm sore, the state of arizona back in the '90s, and it detailed what the chairman said was a template. i might note that instead of $96,000 a day it was $17,000 a day. so after you get a copy i hope you can explain the inflation rate over this period of time. the gentleman from colorado. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. jarvis, this is painful for me because i do love and support and appreciate the national parks system. and to see what you've done really pains me, and to have had this conversation. i have been to over 200 units of the national park service. like i said, i love the parks. many of those visits with my wife and children.

and yet, when i was at the world war ii memorial, the second day of the slow down, and and i helped move the barricades because those world war ii veterans should not have been denied their access. it was so reprehensible. i've talked to one gentleman there who is in a wheelchair that i asked how old he was. he was 97 years old. and he had fought in the pacific theater in world war ii in guadalcanal, among other places. and yet he wasn't being allowed, he wasn't being allowed to touch or see the plaques where the fallen are memorialized. his buddies. my own father could never make it out there. he turned 93 before he died, but he was never in good enough health to go up there. and so it was wrong what you did. this decision of yours was not

good. it was not good for the american people, and it's not good for the parks system either. like i say, i appreciate the parks system and yet i believe you be searched -- you besmirched its reputation and you sound insulation get with congress. and in my opinion you have failed and you are a liability to the national park service. i do have a couple of questions i would like to ask you about. whose decision was it to try to shut down mount vernon? mount vernon is privately owned and operated. i know there's some parking off to the side that you have responsibility for. was that your decision also to try to shut down mount vernon? >> i think you're incorrect in that regard. we did not try to shut down mount vernon. we barricaded one parking lot that belongs to the national park service, and that was done in execution of the closure order for all 401 national parks. that parking lot is part of the

george washington memorial parkway. did not block the use of mount vernon spent well, people can't park there. i don't know how they can speed the are many parking lots at mount vernon. this is just one. >> was that your decision so? >> i was not involved in that decision directly, no, sir. >> i would like to ask about reimbursement to the states. my own state of colorado is one of the four or so states that have talked with national park service about paying for continuing the park service until the government slow down is over. will states like colorado be fully reimbursed for their expensive that they are incurring right now? >> not unless congress authorizes it. >> the document the chairman issa introduced into the record shows -- faces from 1995-96,

that the pattern was in the past that states would be reimbursed. if they are paying for things like salaries of park rangers, maintenance, law enforcement and so on, and then those people are -- then those people don't have to be reimbursed later by you because that would be -- i'm assuming they wouldn't get twice their salary. i assume they only get paid once. so when you get reimbursed, that's a windfall to you if you don't reimburse the states. >> well, here's the way it actually works. so, the states are depositing a set amount that we negotiate with the governors into the treasury. and as soon as we open the parks, we are charging against that account. so that account is a drawdown. now, if the shutdown ends before we expand all of that money,

whatever is remaining absolutely will be immediately returned to the states. but for the money that is charged against, i have no authority then to take federal dollars that once reimbursed by the -- when the shutdown ends, and give that to the states and less directly authorized by congress. which i would support by the way, but i don't have that authority just outright. >> so at this point in time you are not pledging to reimburse the states? >> no. we made it very clear in each of these agreements, and very clear in the agreement that was negotiated that there is no guarantee they will get this money back. it would only be if congress were to authorize it. >> i think you should have to be responsible for that. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back spend i might note for the record that in every case of shutdowns, all federal employees have been paid and these types of bets have been paid. so there's a high expectation. we now go to the gentleman from

virginia for his round of questions, mr. connolly. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you to the panel. ms. eberly, i've been to the claude moore for many times. thank you for the beautiful spot in our community. by the way, the land on which the claude moore colonial farm is located, is that federally owned or is that privately owned? >> federally owned. >> federally owned. >> formally a landfill. >> so could it be that director jarvis, lookin looking at the ae deficiency back in time to figure out covered and what isn't, looks at a place like claude moore, federally owned land, you manage it but it is federally owned, and gets a subsidy of $100,000 a year, apparently down to 92000 this year because of the sequestration, and down decision next you because of budget cuts, that he might have just included that in the sort of larger part

of the anti-deficiency act and thinks he might have to decide? could that be an explanation? >> i was told by the superintendent that it was entirely his decision. >> which superintendent? >> the parks wait superintende superintendent. >> the parkway superintendent. >> and he decided to leave open the memorial bridge and the george washington memorial parkway smack and from your point of view, you all this he didn't like the decision, none of us did, but it was also a matter of communicate in, explaining the rationale was not very consistent from your point of view. >> we've never gotten an explanation. >> okay. director jarvis, i'd like you to address that in the second, but you've got use at 401 national parks, corrects? >> that's correct. >> would claude moore and say the mount vernon parking lot be included in that number, or are

they because they're sort of hybrids, are they over and above the 401. >> no. they are components of that 401. the art literally hundreds and hundreds of similar situations as to the claude moore farm within those 401. >> and you are advised presumably by your ethics office or by your attorneys when you go about to organize for the shutdown in anticipation of the shutdown that you're going to have to make thousands of discrete decisions in a very collapsed timeframe. ..