	Background

Since 1984, Congress has designated 49 national heritage areas (NHAs) to recognize and assist efforts to protect, commemorate, and promote natural, cultural, historic, and recreational resources that form distinctive landscapes. The sizeable number of existing NHAs, along with proposals to study and designate new ones, fostered interest by some Members and Administrations in establishing a standardized process and criteria for designating NHAs. Further, some opponents of NHAs believe that they threaten private property rights, are burdensome, or present other problems and challenges, so Congress should oppose any efforts to designate new areas and/or to create a "system" of NHAs. The NPS provides technical and financial aid to NHAs, but these areas are not part of the National Park System. Designation

There is no comprehensive statute that establishes criteria for designating NHAs or provides standards for their funding and management. The particulars for establishment and management of a heritage area typically are provided in its enabling legislation. Administration

NHAs usually involve partnerships among the NPS, states, and local interests. In establishing heritage areas, Congress typically designates a management entity to coordinate the work of the partners. The management entity usually develops and implements a plan for managing the NHA, in collaboration with partners and other interested parties. Once the Secretary of the Interior approves a plan, it essentially becomes the blueprint for managing the heritage area and is implemented as funding and resources are available. NHAs might receive funding to prepare and implement their plans from a wide array of sources, including philanthropic organizations, endowments, individuals, businesses, and governments. Some Members and the Obama Administration have expressed interest in having heritage areas become financially self-sufficient. The NPS seeks to evaluate heritage areas before the expiration of the authorization for federal funds. The law required an evaluation of the "accomplishments" of the areas; an assessment of the management entity in achieving the purposes of the law designating the area and the goals and objectives of the management plan for the area; an analysis of the impact of investments in the area; and a review of the management structure, partnership arrangements, and funding for the area so as to identify components required for sustainability. The NPS is continuing to evaluate other heritage areas. 581 . For instance, in testimony on systemic NHA legislation ( H.R. 445 ) in the 113 th Congress , a National Park Service representative stated that the Department of the Interior has "long supported legislation to establish a National Heritage Area program within the National Park Service that standardizes timeframes and funding for designated national heritage areas and formally establishes criteria for establishing new heritage areas." Appropriations for heritage areas typically have been provided in the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations laws. NHAs can use funds for varied purposes including staffing, planning, and implementing projects. In recent years, Congress has provided direction to the NPS as to how the total appropriation should be allocated among NHAs. For FY2016, the total appropriation for heritage areas was $19.8 million.
Over more than 30 years, Congress has established 49 national heritage areas (NHAs) to commemorate, conserve, and promote areas that include important natural, scenic, historic, cultural, and recreational resources. NHAs are partnerships among the National Park Service (NPS), states, and local communities, in which the NPS supports state and local conservation through federal recognition, seed money, and technical assistance. NHAs are not part of the National Park System, in which lands are federally owned and managed. Rather, lands within heritage areas typically remain in state, local, or private ownership or a combination thereof. Heritage areas have been supported as protecting lands and traditions and promoting tourism and community revitalization, but opposed as potentially burdensome, costly, or leading to federal control over nonfederal lands.
There is no comprehensive statute that establishes criteria for designating NHAs or provides standards for their funding and management. Rather, particulars for each area are provided in its enabling legislation. Congress designates a management entity, usually nonfederal, to coordinate the work of the partners. This entity typically develops and implements a plan for managing the NHA, in collaboration with other parties. Once approved by the Secretary of the Interior, the management plan becomes the blueprint for managing the area.
NHAs might receive funding from a wide variety of sources. Congress typically determines federal funding for NHAs in annual appropriations laws for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. NHAs can use federal funds for many purposes, including staffing, planning, and projects. The FY2016 appropriation for the NPS for assistance to heritage areas was $19.8 million.
The Obama Administration has expressed interest in having NHAs become financially self-sufficient. Some appropriators and other Members have emphasized self-sufficiency for these areas as well. One role of the NPS is to evaluate heritage areas at least three years before the expiration of the authorization for federal funds. The NPS has completed evaluations of nine NHAs designated in 1996 and continues to evaluate others.
Each Congress typically considers bills to establish new heritage areas, study areas for possible heritage designation, and amend existing heritage areas. Bills with similar purposes are pending in the 114th Congress. Other 114th Congress measures seek to extend the authorizations for NHAs to receive financial assistance.
The sizeable number of existing NHAs and proposals in recent years to study and designate new ones has fostered legislation to establish a system of NHAs, and to provide criteria for their designation, standards for their management, and limits on federal funding support. In the 114th Congress, one such measure (H.R. 581) has been introduced. The Obama Administration has supported such systemic NHA legislation. Some opponents believe that NHAs present numerous problems and challenges and that Congress should oppose efforts to designate new areas and to create a system of NHAs.