Bill Overview
Title: Canterbury Shaker Village National Heritage Area Study Authorization Act
Description: This bill directs the Department of the Interior to conduct a study to assess the suitability and feasibility of designating the boundaries of the Canterbury Shaker Village National Historic Landmark located in Merrimack County, New Hampshire, as a National Heritage Area, to be known as the Canterbury Shaker Village National Heritage Area.
Sponsors: Sen. Hassan, Margaret Wood [D-NH]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals interested in U.S. historical and cultural heritage
Estimated Size: 1400000
- The bill concerns the Canterbury Shaker Village, a historic site that attracts visitors interested in Shaker culture, history, and architecture.
- Designation as a National Heritage Area typically involves federal support to preserve and promote historical and cultural sites, which may increase tourism and educational opportunities.
- Local communities in Merrimack County, New Hampshire, particularly those economically tied to tourism or Shaker cultural preservation, are most likely to be directly impacted.
- Historians, educators, and cultural heritage professionals throughout the U.S. may find increased opportunities for research and collaboration as a result of the study and potential designation.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy primarily resides in or has interests in Merrimack County, New Hampshire, but may include individuals nationwide with an interest in Shaker culture and U.S. historical heritage.
- The impact on self-reported wellbeing is likely limited to those directly involved in tourism or historical preservation, with the broader population seeing little change in daily life.
- Given the budgetary constraints, the effects on individuals within the American target population will likely be modest and gradual, with cultural and economic benefits being more pronounced among locals and interested professionals.
- People not directly connected to the Canterbury Shaker Village or its cultural significance are unlikely to perceive significant changes in their wellbeing due to the study.
Simulated Interviews
Local business owner (Concord, NH)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any initiatives to boost local tourism could help my business.
- I'd like to see more visitors in the area, which helps local shops and restaurants like mine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired history professor (Manchester, NH)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The heritage area designation could open up more opportunities for educational events and preservation projects.
- It seems like a great way to preserve and educate others about Shaker history.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Tourist guide (Boston, MA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More heritage designations usually mean increased tourism, which is great for my business.
- I’d love to introduce more people to the Shaker culture if there's more interest generated.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cultural heritage professional (Portland, ME)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This designation would be a win for cultural and historical preservation in the area.
- It's exciting to think about the collaborative projects that might happen.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Museum curator (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Shaker Villages are an important part of heritage; more exposure is always good.
- This could enhance collaborative efforts among institutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farmer (Boscawen, NH)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how this will affect my farming, but more tourists might mean more sales during events.
- As long as it doesn't disrupt the land, I'm fine with it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
University student (Durham, NH)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I would love more resources and attention on Shaker studies.
- This is a great opportunity for research and field experiences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired engineer (Merrimack, NH)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad to see initiatives to preserve local heritage.
- This could bring more visitors and vitality to our community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Teacher (Concord, NH)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More educational resources and events at Shaker Village would greatly benefit the students.
- It's a chance to bring history closer to young people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Travel writer (Salem, NH)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such a designation can bring renewed interest in sites like these, great for articles and features.
- I'm always looking for unique angles to cover, so this is exciting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000 (Low: $400000, High: $600000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The focus of this bill is on conducting a feasibility study, not on making immediate changes to the site or infrastructure.
- The potential long-term impact depends on whether the site is designated as a National Heritage Area, which is not guaranteed by this bill.
- The scope of the study may influence future policy decisions and funding allocations.