Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2021, House hearing transcript (February 6, 2020), GovInfo CHRG-116hhrg43677, PDF
Summary
The printed record of hearings before the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies of the House Committee on Appropriations on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2021, One Hundred Sixteenth Congress, Second Session. Betty McCollum of Minnesota chairs the subcommittee; the front matter lists its members and staff. This volume is Part 7, Testimony of Interested Individuals and Organizations, and its contents list begins with Americans for the Arts, February 6, 2020. The volume collects testimony submitted by organizations on the subcommittee's appropriations.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
Full text shows the first 300 of 869 pages; the complete document is the PDF above.
INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2021
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND
RELATED AGENCIES
BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota, Chair
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
DEREK KILMER, Washington MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
JOSÉ E. SERRANO, New York CHRIS STEWART, Utah
MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
NOTE: Under committee rules, Mrs. Lowey, as chairwoman of the full committee, and Ms. Granger, as ranking
minority member of the full committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.
RITA CULP, DONNA SHAHBAZ, JOCELYN HUNN, PETER KIEFHABER,
KUSAI MERCHANT, JANET ERICKSON, and TYLER COE
Subcommittee Staff
PART 7
Testimony of Interested Individuals and Organizations
Page
Americans for the Arts, February 6, 2020 ......................... 1
Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee,
February 11, 2020 ................................................................. 281
American Indian and Alaska Native Public Witness
Day 2, February 12, 2020 .................................................... 527
Members’ Day Hearing, March 10, 2020 ............................. 779
(
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
cer on DSK126QN23PROD with HEARING
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
43–677 WASHINGTON : 2021
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
NITA M. LOWEY, New York, Chairwoman
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio KAY GRANGER, Texas
PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky
JOSÉ E. SERRANO, New York ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
ROSA L. DELAURO, Connecticut MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California KEN CALVERT, California
SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR., Georgia TOM COLE, Oklahoma
BARBARA LEE, California MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota TOM GRAVES, Georgia
TIM RYAN, Ohio STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
DEREK KILMER, Washington MARTHA ROBY, Alabama
MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
GRACE MENG, New York CHRIS STEWART, Utah
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi
KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
PETE AGUILAR, California JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
LOIS FRANKEL, Florida JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois WILL HURD, Texas
BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
NORMA J. TORRES, California
CHARLIE CRIST, Florida
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
ED CASE, Hawaii
SHALANDA YOUNG, Clerk and Staff Director
(II)
ith HEARING
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRON-
MENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPRO-
PRIATIONS FOR 2021
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND
ORGANIZATIONS
AMERICANS FOR THE ARTS
WITNESS
BEN FOLDS, AMERICANS FOR THE ARTS
Ms. MCCOLLUM [presiding]. Good morning. Welcome to the first
day of two public witness hearing being held here for non-tribal
government programs under the jurisdiction of the Interior, Envi-
ronment Appropriations Subcommittee. And I am pleased to be
joined by the former chair of this committee, still a great member,
Congressman Michael Simpson of Idaho, as well as our vice chair,
Congresswoman Chellie Pingree of Maine.
Now, you might have noticed there was a little commotion before
I put down the gavel. We were out in the hall really quick. So I
would like you all to give a warm welcome to a visiting delegation
of the Parliament of Georgia. We appreciate your interest in our
legislative process, and we hope you find our hearing instructive
because it is very important to this committee that we support our
public lands, our arts, and things that make America so very spe-
cial. Yes, please.
[Applause.]
Everybody was being so, so quiet and so polite. I didn’t want to
put anybody on the spot, but thank you for welcoming our guests.
Last year when I became chair of this subcommittee, I brought
back the important tradition of public witness days for non-tribal
programs, and I am pleased today that for this hearing, more than
40 witnesses composed of a diverse range of partners, including
public nonprofit organizations, State and local governments, will
have an opportunity to testify before this subcommittee. Today we
will hear about numerous topics related to the jurisdiction of this
subcommittee, including the arts and the humanities, environment,
public lands, and wildlife. I am eager to learn more about each of
your priorities, and I look forward to our discussions that we have
on these issues because I believe it will help all of us on this com-
mittee be more informed while we begin to develop the 2021 appro-
priations bill.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
(1)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
2
Before I turn to Mr. Simpson, I would like to cover a few hearing
logistics, however. We will call each panel of witnesses to the table
one at a time, and, as you can see, our first panel, gold stars, right
here. Each witness will have 5 minutes to present their testimony,
and we will be using a time tracker to track the time. As I pointed
out, we have 40 witnesses, so we want to be respectful of
everybody’s time. So when the light turns yellow, you have 1
minute remaining, and we would like you to please conclude your
remarks. When the light blinks red, I will lightly gavel. [Laughter.]
It is a light gavel. It is not a heavy one, and ask you to please
conclude your remarks so the next witness can begin.
Now, each witness needs to know we have their written state-
ments, and I have been reading through them, so everything will
be in the record. So don’t feel pressure or rushed to get everything
covered orally in your 5 minutes. After we hear the testimony of
each witness on the panel, members will have an opportunity to
ask questions, so get ready. We ask really good questions.
And I would like to remind those who are joining us in the hear-
ing room that the committee rules prohibit the use of cameras and
audio equipment during the hearing by individuals without House-
issued press credentials. After this morning’s hearing concludes, we
will adjourn and reconvene at 1:00 this afternoon for the hearing.
So at this time, I am honored and very happy to yield to my dear
friend, my dear friend, Mr. Simpson from Idaho.
Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for call-
ing this important hearing to get input from the public on a wide
array of programs under this subcommittee’s jurisdiction. Mr. Joyce
and I, along with other members of the subcommittee, look forward
to working with you in the days and weeks ahead to do what we
can to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs and to make
the difficult, but necessary, choices among competing priorities.
Like the chair, I would like to take a minute to extend a warm
welcome to all of our witnesses and to the delegation from the Par-
liament of Georgia, who are sitting in the audience. Since we have
a full day ahead of us, I am happy to yield back, and I look forward
to the testimony.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. There will be a portion of the testi-
mony where I will have to step out and attend another hearing, but
the vice chair, who has many other arts titles here at the U.S. Con-
gress, will be ably ready to assist in taking remaining testimony.
So with that, we have our first panel: Mr. Ben Folds, Ms. Pam
Breaux, Ms. Beth Kane, and Stephanie——
Ms. ERIACHO. Eriacho.
Ms. MCCOLLUM [continuing]. Eriacho. Beautiful name. In the in-
terest of time, I am just going to let you introduce your arts organi-
zations so we have more time for questions. Mr. Folds?
Mr. FOLDS. Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, thank you
for the opportunity to testify on behalf of Americans for the Arts
and the NEA, something that is very important to me. I was here
speaking to your committee 1 year ago, and I wish more people
could see this side of D.C. It is really nice to see you all working
together on something that is important to everybody, and it gave
me some fuel to go back out and do it again for 1 year, something
that I do as advocacy for arts.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
3
I have submitted written testimony for the record that presents
arguments we know are effective in making the case for the Na-
tional Endowment for the Arts. I state that I am asking for at least
$170 million for the National Endowment for the Arts for the 2021
Fiscal Year. You all know this, but it is worth noting for the public
watching that this request just brings us to the 1994 levels of in-
vestment for the NEA. That is not a big ask for something that is
very important.
I began my career as a rock and roll recording artist 30 years
ago, making albums and touring every corner of the U.S. It is kind
of like I am on constant campaigning. I just talk to people. I am
everywhere and talk to everybody. For the past 15 years, a big part
of my career has been performing with symphony orchestras in cit-
ies big and small. I just got back from performing two nights with
the Minnesota Symphony. I performed with the Utah symphony in
Salt Lake in April. I do that regularly. Tacoma Symphony Orches-
tra in November. I have done them all.
One of my greatest experiences was Cleveland’s Contemporary
Youth Orchestra, and that is a total NEA success story. That is
wonderful. It is 100 kids, all walks of life, and they are fantastic.
They play all original music. I did five seasons of primetime NBC
music television. I am about to embark on a TV series for Fred
Rogers Productions composing songs with children. I am the artis-
tic adviser to the National Symphony Orchestra at the Kennedy
Center where my mission is to bring younger audiences to experi-
ence the symphony, an important part of our culture. It means a
lot to me.
At my own gigs, I tell each audience that the symphony orches-
tra is the artistic symbol for civilization, which I believe is very
true. You are seeing 50, 60, 100 people on stage working together.
The rhetoric that we use every day—in concert, in harmony. Those
are all symbols of the symphony orchestra, and the symbols mat-
ters to me. That is what we take with our flag.
I am a cold-hearted capitalist you should know——
[Laughter.]
Mr. FOLDS [continuing]. Who is grateful for the competitive envi-
ronment in which I succeeded because it pushed me creatively, and
it pushed me personally. So I come to you as an artist, an arts ad-
vocate, but also a small business owner because in rock music, the
band runs out of gas and you are done. Zero-zero.
A small business owner knows the difference between spending
and investing. If you spend too much you fail. The NEA is to me,
is a great investment. It is felt most profoundly in rural areas
where an NEA dollar results in $9 in matching funds from the pri-
vate sector. That is the kind of investment that satisfies the cold-
hearted capitalist in myself.
But the invaluable, irreplaceable service that the NEA offers
most has to do with access to the arts. That is the important part
to me is the access and the access for everyone. It is hard to do
it any other way. It is not as much about supporting the arts,
which is important, but it is about finding ways for the arts to sup-
port and help us. It is putting the arts to work, and you see that
every day if you tour as much as I do.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
4
For profound examples of this, I don’t have to draw from my pro-
fessional career. I live in a small Hudson Valley River town. It is
as small as a postage stamp. It is just a few blocks wide and deep.
We have a very diverse population that you will ever see. It seems
like a Kentucky rural countryside. It is sitting right next to Brook-
lyn. It is all together. But sadly, despite the proximity, there is not
a lot of mingling. Different blocks, different stores, different
churches despite all our best intentions.
Just last December, I attended a fun little concert. It involved
children, and it involved local professional performers, musicians,
and dances. It was just so cool. I don’t normally like stuff like this,
but it was awesome. Kids from all the neighborhoods got together,
sung together. The parents mingled. Everyone had a good time,
and it is the first time I saw everyone together. I looked at the pro-
gram, ‘‘Made possible by a grant from the National Endowment for
the Arts,’’ and they nailed it. They nail it all the time. And the peo-
ple in the community made it work all the way to whatever level
this has to come down from. We have a lot of arts, a lot of arts
money in the Hudson, but I have never seen it bring people to-
gether like that.
I think I am out of time, so I am just going to say that $170 mil-
lion is not 50 cents a year per person. It is not quite 50 cents. Over
my lifetime, I have seen it increase at $1 per capita. Thanks for
your time.
[The statement of Mr. Folds follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
5
y
AMERICANS
...,.ARTS
Ben Folds, Artists Committee Member
Americans for the Arts
Testimony Before the U.S. House of Representatives
Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee
February 6, 2020
Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today in support of federal funding for the National
Endowment for the Arts (NEA) at no less than $170 million for FY 2021, a $7.75 million
increase over FY 2020 funding.
Americans for the Arts is the leading nonprofit organization for advancing the arts and arts
education in America. We have more than 60 years of service and are dedicated to representing
and serving the more than 4,500 local arts agencies in every state. Together we work to ensure
that every American has access to the tnmsfonnative power of the arts. I appreciate the
opportunity to provide public comment on the budget request for the NEA.
While we have yet to receive the Trump administration's FY 202 l budget request, I was deeply
troubled by the Administration's short-sightedness for the proposed FY 2018, FY 2019, and FY
2020 budgets calling for the elimination of the NEA. I commend the bipartisan work from
this committee, and Congress, in rejecting those requests, and I know that I speak for the arts
community in expressing our deep appreciation to Congress in appropriating an additional
$7.25 million in funds for the NEA in FY 2020 over FY 2019-the largest increase the NEA
has seen in the past six years and the highest level of fonding the agency hu had in the past
decade.
Today, I want to highlight the vita! impact this funding has on rural communities. In rural states,
arts and cultural production contributed $67.5 billion to the economies of states in which 30
percent or more of the population lives in rural areas and employed 628,500 workers. The value
added to my home states of North Carolina and Tennessee, which have the largest rural arts
economies, exceeded $14 billion in each of those states. In South Carolina, Alabama, Kentucky,
Oklahoma and Iowa, the value added exceeded $4 billion in each state. 1
Additionally, the arts are a tourism draw for rural communities, as they attract visitors who come
for the arts and spend money while in town. According to Arts & Economic Prosperity 5,
audiences at arts events in rural communities (population <50,000) are more likely to come from
outside the county than audiences in large urban areas (population> l million)--35 percent of
rural arts attendees are nonlocal versus 32 percent of urban arts attendees. Furthermore, nonlocal
attendees at rural arts events not only spend more than their local counterparts ($47. 79 vs.
1 National Endowment for the Arts, ht1,is<www.arls,J:.<F 'sites:ddau 1Cfik,. Hricf2RuralStatesAc,oess WithMap.r,df.
1 of31 Pa g P
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 10 here 43677P7.001
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
6
$20.38), they also spend slightly more than nonlocal attendees at urban arts events ($47.79 vs.
$47.06). 2
Similarly, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, in rural communities the number of
innovative or design-integrated businesses-those that use design services or trademark and
copyright-protected branding-rises proportionately in the presence of performing arts
organizations. Specifically, the probability that a business will be a substantive innovator, rises
from 60 percent in rural counties with no performing arts organization to 85 percent for rural
counties that have four or more organizations. It is also important to note that:
• Rural counties that are home to performing arts organizations experienced population
growth three times higher than rural counties that lack performing arts institutions.
• Rural counties that house performing arts organizations provide residents with higher
incomes (up to $6,000 higher) than are reported in rural counties that lack performing arts
organizations.
• Two out of three rural businesses report that arts and entertainment are important for
attracting and retaining workers.
• Rural counties that have design-driven businesses recovered more quickly from the
recession, showing more growth in weekly earnings over a four-year period (2010 to
2014). 3
I'd like to bring to the subcommittee's attention another issue that is very close to the work that I
do with symphony orchestras across the country and that is engaging and expanding new
audiences. Just last week, the National Endowment for the Arts, in partnership with the U.S.
Census Bureau, released the full results from the nation's largest, most representative survey of
adult participation in the arts called Survev ofPublic Participation in the Arts (SPPA).4 This
study recorded the different ways that American adults (age 18 and older) engaged in the arts in
2017, where that engagement took place, and why adults participated in these activities. The
survey report also tracked demographic characteristics of those who participated and
respondents' perceptions of the availability of the arts in their communities.
Here are some of the key findings:
• 74 percent or 175 million adults used electronic media to access artistic content,
• 57 percent or 138 million adults read books, novels, poems, and plays that were not required
for work or school.
• 54.3 percent or 128 million adults attended artistic, creative, or cultural activities with live
music performance being the most frequent activity.
• 53.7 percent or 128 million adults created or performed their own art with singing as the
most popular form of artistic expression.
• 17 percent or 41 million adults learned an art form informally or took arts classes.
2
Americans for the Arts, https://www.americansforthearts.org/by-program/reports-and-data/research-studies-
publications/arts-economic-prosperity-5.
3
National Endowment for the Arts, https://www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/Rural%20Arts%201 J-17.pdf.
4
National Endowment for the Arts, https://www .arts.gov/news/2020/national-endowment-arts-releases-
latest-survey-public-participation-arts
2of31Page
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 11 here 43677P7.002
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
7
Other participation findings are:
• Among adults who participated in the performing arts----either as creators or performers--62
percent did so to spend time with family and friends. And those adults who created visual
artworks reported doing so primarily because they felt "creative or creatively inspired."
• More than half of adults who attended artistic, creative, or cultural activities did so more than
twice a year.
• Among adults who sang, made music, danced, or acted, 63 percent did so in the home, while
40 percent did so in a place of worship.
In sum, the arts are part of the fabric of our lives and our communities. The arts engage our
communities, expand audiences and educational opportunities, foster economic investment, spur
job-related growth, are essential to rural communities, and provide for the preservation of our
heritage.
Thank you for your consideration and support of at least $170 million for the NEA in the FY
2021 budget, and, as always, we stand ready to assist and remain focused on getting the
Endowments fully funded again in the coming months.
3of31Page
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 12 here 43677P7.003
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
8
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Wonderful. Please.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF STATE ARTS AGENCIES
WITNESS
PAMELA (PAM) BREAUX, PRESIDENT AND CEO, NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
OF STATE ARTS AGENCIES
Ms. BREAUX. Good morning.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Good morning.
Ms. BREAUX. Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce,
and members of the committee, today, Members Pingree and Simp-
son, thank you for your invitation to deliver this testimony today
regarding Federal appropriations for the National Endowment for
the Arts. My name is Pam Breaux, and I serve as president and
CEO of the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, or NASAA,
the organization that represents and serves the Nation’s 56 State
and jurisdictional arts agencies. And today I am here to thank the
committee, to thank the members for their tremendous support of
the Arts Endowment, and urge the committee to consider funding
it at $170 million in Fiscal Year 2021.
In the recent funding bill passed by Congress, this subcommittee
supported an increase in funding for the Agency. The States and
NASAA are extremely grateful for this. We recognize that com-
mittee members worked together in a bipartisan manner to support
the Endowment and its important contributions to our country.
Through its highly-effective Federal/State partnership, the Endow-
ment contributes 40 percent of its programmatic funds to State, ju-
risdictional, and regional arts agencies each year. That resulting
$49 million Fiscal Year 2019 helped to empower States and regions
to address their priorities.
Unique among Federal agencies, the Endowment funds State
plans. These plans are developed by State arts agencies in response
to citizens, communities, arts organizations, legislators, and gov-
ernors. That makes the Federal/State arts investment incredibly
responsive and relevant to citizens. The report accompanying the
last appropriations act affirmed Congress’ support for this impor-
tant partnership and its corresponding 40 percent allocation, and
we thank the committee for this acknowledgement.
State arts agencies use their share of Endowment funds com-
bined with funds from State legislators to support about 22,000
grants to arts and civic organizations and schools in more than
4,500 communities. Twenty-two percent of the grant awards go to
non-metropolitan areas, supporting programs that benefit rural
America, and 26 percent of State grant dollars go to arts education,
fostering student success in and out of school. Congress’ continued
support of the 40 percent formula is essential to State arts agen-
cies, boosting their ability to ensure that the arts benefit all com-
munities regardless of wealth or geography.
In response to an increased demand for arts programming for
older Americans, for example, the Minnesota State Arts Board re-
cently provided training for teaching artists to learn how to design
and implement high-quality arts education programs specifically
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
9
for older adults. With the total number of older adults in in Min-
nesota expected to double between 2010 and 2030, creative aging
programming is a key strategy for fostering positive aging and
healthier lives. And the State Arts Board Programs will ensure
that Minnesota artists are trained to provide these vital services.
In an additional example, the Ohio Arts Council demonstrates its
commitment to all the people of the State by successfully fulfilling
its Fund Every County Initiative. Now all 88 counties in the State
have received arts funding in response to their needs. Should Con-
gress support an increase for the Arts Endowment, State arts agen-
cies will be in a position to expand their meaningful work to help
communities thrive as fulfilling and productive places to live, con-
duct business, visit, and raise families.
NASAA and state arts agencies also applaud the Arts Endow-
ment’s many services to the country, including its leadership in de-
veloping noteworthy programs for communities, military personnel,
veterans, students, and so many others. We proudly partner with
the Endowment and work collaboratively with them to benefit all
communities across the country because together we can accom-
plish what neither side can achieve alone.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today.
We look forward at NASAA to continuing to work productively with
this committee, and we stand ready to serve as a resource to you.
Thanks.
[The statement of Ms. Breaux follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
10
National Assembly of State Arts Agencies
KNOWLEDGE * REPRESENTATION *' COMMUNITY
Pam Breaux
President and Chief Executive Officer
National Assembly of State Arts Agencies
Prepared Testimony
To tbe Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies
U.S. House of Representatives
February 6, 2020
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce and members of the Committee, thank you for the
invitation to deliver this testimony regarding federal appropriations for the National Endowment for
the Arts in FY 2021. My name is Pam Breaux, and I serve as President and Chief Executive Officer
of the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies (NASAA), the organization that represents and
serves the nation's 56 state and jurisdictional arts agencies. Today, I am here to thank the members
for their tremendous support of the National Endowment for the Arts and urge the Committee to
consider funding it at $170 million in FY 2021.
In the recent funding bill passed by Congress, this Subcommittee supported an increase in funding
for the agency. The states and NASAA are extremely grateful for this; we recognize that committee
members worked together in a bipartisan manner to support the Arts Endowment and its important
contributions to our nation.
As you look to the next budget, NASAA hopes you will once again consider increasing funding for
the National Endowment for the Arts, which continues to make a substantial impact in communities
throughout the United States. Through its highly effective federal-state partnership, the Arts
Endowment distributes 40% of its programmatic funds to state, jurisdictional and regional arts
agencies each year. The resulting $49 million in FY 2019, helped to empower states and regions to
address their unique priorities, and served far more constituents than federal funds alone could
reach. Unique among federal agencies, the Endowment funds state plans; these plans are developed
by state arts agencies in response to citizens, communities, arts organizations, legislatures and
governors. This makes the federal-state arts investment incredibly responsive and relevant to
citizens in every state and jurisdiction. The report accompanying last year's Consolidated
Appropriations Act affirmed Congress's support for this important partnership and its
corresponding 40% allocation. We sincerely thank the Committee for this acknowledgement.
State arts agencies use their share of NEA funds, combined with funds from state legislatures, to
support approximately 22,000 grants to arts organizations, civic organizations and schools in more
than 4,500 communities across the United States. Twenty-two percent of state arts agency grant
awards go to non-metropolitan areas, supporting programs that strengthen the civic and economic
sustainability of rural America. Twenty-six percent of state arts agency grant dollars go to arts
education, fostering student success in and out of school and building the critical thinking, creativity
and communications skills needed to meet the demands of today's competitive work force.
1200 18TH ST NW, SUITE 1100 *
WASHINGTON, DC 20036 *
202-347-6352 * FAX, 202-737-0526
NASAA@NASAA-ARTS.ORG *
WWW.NASAA-ARTS.ORG
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 19 here 43677P7.004
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
11
National Assembly of State Arts Agencies
KNOWLEDGE * REPRESENTATION * COMMUNITY
Congress's continued support of the 40% formula is essential to state arts agencies, boosting their
ability to ensure that the arts benefit all communities, regardless of wealth or geography. In
response to an increased demand for arts programming for older Americans, for example, the
Minnesota State Arts Board recently provided training for teaching artists to learn about models and
best practices to design and implement high-quality arts education programs for older adults. With
the total number of older adults in Minnesota expected to double between 2010 and 2030, creative
aging programming is a key strategy for fostering positive aging and healthier lives, and the state arts
board's program will ensure that Minnesota artists are trained to provide these vital services. In an
additional example, the Ohio Arts Council demonstrates its commitment to all the people of the
state by successfully fulfilling its "Fund Every County" initiative; now, all eighty-eight counties in the
state have received arts funding in response to their needs. Should Congress support an increase for
the National Endowment for the Arts, state arts agencies will be in a position to expand their
meaningful work to help communities thrive as fulfilling and productive places to live, conduct
business, visit and raise families.
NASAA and states also applaud the Arts Endowment's many services to the country, including its
leadership in developing noteworthy programs for communities, military personnel, veterans,
students, and many others. NASAA and state arts agencies proudly partner with the Endowment
and work collaboratively and in solidarity to benefit all communities. Together we accomplish what
neither side can achieve alone.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. NASAA sincerely appreciates
Congress's strong bipartisan support for the National Endowment for the Arts and federal funding
for the arts. We look forward to continuing to work productively with this Committee, and we
stand ready to serve as a resource to you.
Sincerely,
Pam Breaux
President and Chief Executive Officer
National Assembly of State Arts Agencies
1200 18TH ST NW, SUITE 1100 *
WASHINGTON, DC 20036 *
202-347-6352 * FAX: 202-737-0526
NASAA@NASAA-ARTS.ORG *
WWW.NASAA-ARTS.ORG
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 20 here 43677P7.005
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
12
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES AND
THE STATE HUMANITIES COUNCILS
WITNESS
BETH KANE, GRANTEE, NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMAN-
ITIES AND THE STATE HUMANITIES COUNCILS
Ms. KANE. Madam Chair and member of the subcommittee,
thank you for this opportunity to present testimony on behalf of
the State Humanities Councils, the state affiliates of the National
Endowment for the Humanities. My name is Beth Kane, and I am
director of the Norway Memorial Library in Norway, Maine.
My institution has received no fewer than 24 grants from the
Maine Humanities Council. I am here to request $170 million for
the National Endowment for the Humanities for Fiscal Year 2021,
and $54 million for the Federal/State Partnership, which provides
allocations by formula to the 56 humanities councils. Because this
request is so important, I would like to tell you what the State Hu-
manities Council support has done for Norway and other rural
communities across our country.
Norway, Maine is a town of about 5,000 people in southern Ox-
ford County between Little Androscoggin River and the western
foothills of the Mahoosuc Range of the White Mountains. The Nor-
way Memorial Library has a staff of six and serves over 40,000
visitors a year. Our most recent annual report records program at-
tendance of 6,301. As in so many towns across rural America, the
library in Norway is an anchor cultural and educational institution
and plays a central role in the life of the community.
The Maine Humanities Council has been our valued partner for
more than 30 years. Through grant funding and program partner-
ships, the Council has helped to shape how we understand our
work and clarify our vision for the kinds of intellectual and cultural
opportunities we offer. In partnership with the Maine Humanities
Council, the library has been home to popular book discussion pro-
grams for the general public and for low literacy adults, who may
have never dreamed they would be part of a book group.
Other offerings include lectures, theatrical presentations, and
community discussions programs. To give just one example, in
2013, the library was awarded a Bridging Cultures Muslim Jour-
neys Bookshelf by the American Library Association and the NEH.
We turn to the Maine Humanities Council for financial support for
cultural programming, including speakers, musicians, a film
screening, and scholars to help lead book discussions.
This year, several Norway organizations will come together to
plan events for the State’s bicentennial. The library and Norway
Historical Society will seek Council support for programs as part
of this series.
Time and again we have seen hunger for this kind of program-
ming, and it is no small thing when a discussion series on race and
justice in America brings in 89 people over five discussions, or 52
people attend a talk by an Iranian immigrant sharing his family’s
story of building a life in Maine. These experiences have lasting
impact on the life of the community.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
13
Maine Humanities Council programs and grants enable people in
my town to access cultural and lifelong learning opportunities that
the library simply could not provide on its own. The work of our
State Humanities Council levels the playing field so that my small-
town library can offer experiences equal and intellectual depths
and breadth to those found in America’s biggest cities. I am very
proud that the Norway Memorial Library is a valuable resource for
the people of my community, but I am not here today because my
library is special. I am here because libraries serving communities
like mine are partnering with their state humanities councils in
every corner of America.
What I have described in Norway is a microcosm of the impact
State humanities council support has had on individuals and neigh-
bors across our country. The councils make humanities programs
possible in places where a small grant of several hundred to a few
thousand dollars can make an enormous difference. The councils,
along with the NEH, are now looking ahead to the 250th anniver-
sary of our Declaration of Independence, an event that offers Amer-
icans the opportunity to renew our understanding of our founding
principles, explore how they have been both challenged and rein-
forced, give voice to marginalized stories in communities, and deep-
en understanding of our collective history and the pillars of democ-
racy. The State humanities councils can help make the next 5
years a time when we rededicate ourselves to strengthening civics
education and reinvigorating our ability to work through dif-
ferences.
My written testimony describes a wide range of programs made
possible by State humanities councils in communities large and
small, in every corner of this Nation where residents are talking
with each other about issues that matter. The State councils are
well positioned to effectively put to use the $54 million we are re-
questing through Federal/State partnerships.
Thank you for this opportunity you have given me to testify, for
the support you have provided over the years, and for the impor-
tant work of the State humanities councils and the National En-
dowment for the Humanities.
[The statement of Ms. Kane follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
14
Testimony on behalf of the Federation of State Humanities Councils
Prepared for the House Appropriations Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies by Beth Kane, Director, Norway Memorial Library in Norway, Maine, Addressing the
National Endowment for the Humanities, February 6, 2020.
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee, I thank you for the opportunity to present
testimony on behalf of the state humanities councils, the state affiliates of the National
Endowment for the Humanities. My name is Beth Kane, and I am the Director of the Norway
Memorial Library in Norway, Maine. My institution has received no fewer than 24 grants from
the Maine Humanities Council over the past 34 years. I am here to request $170 million for the
National Endowment for the Humanities for FY 2021 and $54 million for the Federal/State
Partnership, which provides allocations, by formula, to the 56 state humanities councils. To
demonstrate why this request is so important, I would like to tell you what my library has been
able to do for the Norway community with humanities council support and describe the impact
that state humanities council support has had in rural communities all across the country.
Norway, Maine is a small town of around 5,000 inhabitants, situated in southern Oxford County
between the Little Androscoggin River and the western foothills of the Maboosuc Range of the
White Mountains. The Norway Memorial Library has a staff of six and serves more than 40,000
visitors a year. Our most recent annual report records program attendance of 6,301. As in so
many towns across rural America, the library in Norway is an anchor cultural and educational
institution and plays a central role in the life of the community.
The Maine Humanities Council has been our valued partner in serving the people of Norway for
more than 30 years. Whether through grant funding or program partnerships, the council has
helped to shape how we understand our work and to elevate and clarify our vision for the kinds
of intellectual and cultural opportunities we can make available to our community every year. In
partnership with the Maine Humanities Council, the library has been home to popular book
discussion programs - groups for the general public and groups specially designed for low-
literacy adults, people who never dreamed they'd be part of a book group. Other regular
offerings include public lectures, theatrical presentations, and community discussion programs.
To give just one example, in 2013 the library was awarded a Bridging Cultures: Muslim
Journeys Book Shelf by the American Library Association and the NEH. We turned to the Maine
Humanities Council for financial support for cultural programming, including speakers,
musicians, a film screening, and scholars to lead book discussions. In 2020 several Norway
organizations will come together to plan events related to the state's bicentennial. The library
and the Norway Historical Society will seek council support for programs as part of this series.
Time and again we have seen that in Norway there is a hunger for this kind of programming. It is
no small thing when a discussion series on Race and Justice in America brings in 89 people to
the library over five discussions, or 52 people attend a talk by an Iranian immigrant sharing his
story of moving with his family and building a life in Maine. These are experiences that have a
lasting impact on the life of the community. Maine Humanities Council programs and grants
make it possible for people in my town to access cultural and lifelong learning opportunities that
the library simply couldn't provide on its own. The work of our state humanities council levels
the playing field so that my small-town library can offer experiences equal in intellectual depth
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 26 here 43677P7.006
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
15
and breadth to those found in America's biggest cities. I am incredibly proud that the Norway
Memorial Library has become such a valuable resource for the people ofmy community.
But I am not here today because my library is special. On the contrary, I'm here because libraries
like mine serving communities like mine are working in partnership with their state humanities
councils in every comer of America. What I have described in Norway can be seen as a
microcosm of the impact state humanities council support has had upon individuals and
neighborhoods across the country. The councils are the local face of the humanities, supporting
the programs that address the issues of greatest concern to their communities, helping them
explore their history and culture, and sharing the stories of our many diverse populations. The
councils make humanities programs possible in places where a small grant of several hundred to
a few thousand dollars can make an enormous difference in the life of a community. The largest
grant my library has received from the Maine Humanities Council during my tenure is $1,000.
As organizations charged with serving their entire state, the councils have worked hard to stretch
resources to meet local needs and support and collaborate with local businesses, cultural
organizations, schools, libraries, museums, and many other groups seeking to better the lives of
community residents. Their volunteer board members give careful attention to how they
disseminate their federal funds to achieve the greatest possible impact. Fortunately, councils are
also expert at using those federal funds to attract other funding. On average over the past few
years, councils have leveraged $4.00 at the local level for every federal dollar granted.
In addition to serving these local needs, the councils, along with the National Endowment for the
Humanities, are looking ahead to the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, an
event that offers Americans the opportunity to renew our understanding of our founding
principles, to explore the ways those principles have been both challenged and reinforced, and to
give voice to the stories and communities that have been hidden or marginalized. It is an
anniversary that calls us to deepen the understanding among adults, children, and teens of our
collective history and the structures that sustain our democratic society. The state humanities
councils can help make the next five years a time when we rededicate ourselves to strengthening
civics education and reinvigorating our ability to work through differences.
Previous experience in commemorating landmark events ensures that councils are skilled at
grounding anniversaries in reliable history and drawing on that history to inform discussions of
current circumstances. Humanities New York began early to prepare for a full and substantive
examination of the 100th anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment, the evolution of the role of
women in the years since that pivotal event, and the ongoing struggle for women's equality. In
2016 and 2017 the council awarded more than $450,000 in grants to organizations for
Centennial-themed programs, especially those connecting contemporary concerns to the legacy
of women's suffrage, and produced five two-minute videos on suffrage history.
The state humanities councils are uniquely positioned to play a strong role in making national
commemorations meaningful because of their strong ties to the local communities where the
effort must begin, prompting opportunities for neighbors to talk with neighbors. Further, the
councils have a track record of collaborating with diverse partners to broaden impact and extend
resources well beyond the initial investment. In my remarks today, I will describe some of the
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 27 here 43677P7.007
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
16
ways councils use the humanities to bring people together, to educate, to increase understanding,
and to help address some of the most difficult issues we face as communities and as a society.
From the beginning, state humanities councils have been dedicated to ensuring that rural
communities have access to public humanities programs. I have already talked about the impact
of these programs on my small Maine community, but there are many other ways that councils
partner with communities like mine. The long-standing Museum on Main Street program, for
example, is a partnership with the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service
specifically designed to serve small rural communities. Through this program, Smithsonian
exhibits are refabricated as lightweight, portable traveling exhibits, suitable for display in small
settings such as local libraries, museums, and community centers. Participating councils select
six communities of less than 20,000 in their states to host the exhibit. The very structure of the
program guarantees local involvement, as councils and scholars work with a planning group in
each community to develop a variety of humanities programs around the theme of the exhibit.
Bringing the resources of the Smithsonian to small rural towns prompts excitement, but it also
triggers a variety of programs and conversations that allow for serious exploration of the exhibit
topics. The New Jersey Council for the Humanities has deepened the impact of their tour of the
"Water Ways" exhibit by creating a series of hour-long public discussions in every county in the
state, focusing on reflections about the ways water matters to New Jerseyans. The Idaho
Humanities Council is using their tour of "Crossroads: Change in Rural America" to look at the
challenges and opportunities rural residents see in the changes taking place in their communities.
For more than a decade, councils have supported and promoted activities for returning veterans,
as well as veterans of earlier wars. In 2014 the Maine Humanities Council developed a Veterans
Book Group, as one of several projects created under the NEH Standing Together initiative,
which was adopted by a dozen other councils. Illinois Humanities' Talking Service program uses
literature from Homer to Hemingway to allow veterans to reflect on their own experiences. The
Minnesota Humanities Center's Veterans' Voices program gives veterans an opportunity to
speak through plays, discussions, and literature.
The Minnesota Humanities Center also educates Minnesotans about the history and culture of the
state's indigenous people through such programs as the award-winning traveling exhibit, "Why
Treaties Matter: Self Government in the Dakota and Ojibwe Nations,'' and the Bdote Memory
Map, a resource for teaching about the Dakota people's relationship to the people of Minnesota.
Virginia Humanities' Virginia Indian Programs offers opportunities for Virginians and visitors to
learn about the culture and history of the state's Indian people and communities. Among their
resources is the Virginia Indian Archive, a collection of images, documents, and audiovisual
resources documenting Virginia Indian history since colonial times.
In recent years, many councils have realized that the humanities have a special role to play in
addressing some of the most challenging and divisive issues we face as a society and have
created community conversations, which provide facilitated discussions, in a neutral setting, of
topics important to individual communities and states.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 28 here 43677P7.008
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
17
Few issues are more troubling or more difficult to address than the devastating opioid crisis,
which has affected areas throughout the country. Because their state had been one of the hardest
hit, Ohio Humanities was compelled to take action to help residents understand this terrible
epidemic. They awarded a grant to support Not Far From Me: Stories of Opioids and Ohio, an
anthology of first-person accounts of addicts, their families, and others impacted by opioids. The
anthology provided the text for discussion sessions the council supported in 11 Ohio
communities, allowing participants the opportunity to share their own stories and to learn how
other individuals and organizations were confronting the crisis. '
The many issues related to water and its impact on cultures and communities have been of
increasing public interest and in some cases concern. Water has been the source of both intense
conflict and healing tranquility. It has also been a source of serious health risks, as was
demonstrated so starkly in Flint, Michigan. With that terrible episode in their state's recent
history all too fresh in their minds, Michigan Humanities chose as the book for their annual
Great Michigan Read program What the Eyes Don 't See, which will serve as the text for
statewide discussions, many of them including the book's author, Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha. The
discussions will take place in libraries, schools, and other settings, providing an opportunity for
participants to discuss the origins and implications of this unthinkable occurrence.
Technology is a ubiquitous and necessary part of our contemporary lives, but many fear that its
implications are inadequately understood. Humanities Washington intends to look at some of
these implications through their Think & Drink program, "Is the Internet Making us Miserable?"
Presented in partnership with the University of Washington iSchool, conversations taking place
at several locations in the state will explore what the research says about how the use of
technology affects our mental state and the way we focus, socialize, and experience emotion.
Another concern councils hear from their constituents is that we are an increasingly divided
nation, not just politically but across barriers ofrace, education, income, ethnicity, and even
location. Among the many programs councils have developed to allow discussion across
divides is a year-long initiative launched by Illinois Humanities called "The City and the
Country: Common Ground in the Prairie State." Noting that the rural-urban dynamic has
influenced public policy in the state throughout its 200-year history, the council set out to
explore the question, "To what extent can rural and urban Illinoisans find common ground on
issues that affect both the country and the city?" The conversations alternated between rural and
urban settings, featuring in each location a discussion based in humanities texts and led by three
panelists who could comment on the themes of the text from a rural perspective and three from
an urban perspective. The aim is for all participants to emerge from the discussions with a better
understanding of each other's viewpoints.
The small sampling of council programs I have described represent hundreds of programs in
communities large and small in every corner of this nation where residents are talking with each
other-sometimes across what initially seemed to be insurmountable differences-about issues
that matter. The state councils are well positioned to effectively put to use the $54 million we are
requesting through the Federal/State Partnership. Thank you for the opportunity you have given
me to testify and for the support you have provided over the years for the important work of the
state humanities councils and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 29 here 43677P7.009
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
18
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. This panel, and I know we have an-
other speaker, but I set it up going in this direction. So we have
heard from the Assembly of State Arts Agencies. We have heard
from Americans from the Arts, and we have heard from the Endow-
ment for the Humanities. And now we are going to hear from a
very, very special American, one who not only shared her story, but
her uncle’s story, and how the arts and the humanities make it
possible for us to say thank you for your service. Please introduce
yourself for the record.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
JEFFERSON COMMUNITY COLLEGE
WITNESS
STEPHANIE ERIACHO, STUDENT VETERAN, JEFFERSON COMMUNITY
COLLEGE
Ms. ERIACHO. My name is Stephanie Eriacho, and I am a student
at Jefferson Community College in Watertown, New York. Good
morning. Thank you to the subcommittee for inviting me today to
testify today. I am pleased to testify in support of the National En-
dowment for Humanities on behalf of the National Humanities Al-
liance.
As I said, I am a student at Jefferson Community College, home
to Fort Drum. I am a retired Navy veteran and aircraft mechanic
by trade. I deployed 12 times, including a 7-month deployment to
Iraq, and a 13-month deployment to Afghanistan.
In 2018, the College offered a class for combat veterans called
Dialogues of Honor and Sacrifice. The class made possible by a Na-
tional Endowment for the Humanities grant was intended to teach
the history, literature, and art of the Civil, Vietnam, and Iraq
Wars. I was drawn to this course because I wanted to better under-
stand my uncle’s experience. He is an Army veteran who had been
twice during the Vietnam War, and was awarded two Purple
Hearts.
I remember my uncle as being intimidating, quiet, and a scary
man who wanted nothing to do with me. We hadn’t spoken more
than two full sentences to one another by the time I left to join the
Navy in 1996. Nonetheless, I visited my uncle every chance I could
during my time in the Navy, but nothing was as special as the vis-
its after I experienced real combat deployments. Now, seeing me as
a fellow combat veteran, he let down his guard. He smiled,
laughed, and even joked around. My uncle was now able to talk,
even just a little bit, about his experience in Vietnam. Knowing I
could relate, he let me see his guilt and pain that he had been har-
boring for years: guilty for wanting to be proud of wearing his
Army uniform even being spat on when he stepped off the plane;
guilty for being able to come back home to his family unlike so
many brothers who lost their lives in front of him.
It was not until another tour in Afghanistan that I grew more
like my uncle. When I returned, I began to self-medicate with alco-
hol, or I was working out 6 times a week for about 2 hours a day
to the point of exhaustion. My relationship with my husband, my
children, and my family were severely strained. My children, espe-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
19
cially my oldest, were afraid when I got angry. I could not wrap
my head around why I felt lost, alone, and misunderstood. It was
in the midst of these challenges that I had the opportunity to take
the Dialogues of Honor and Sacrifice course, and while I hoped the
focus on the Vietnam War would help me understand more about
my uncle, I didn’t realize how it would affect me. How it would
help me as well.
The course began 2 weeks before JCC’s 2018 fall semester with
a week-long trip that took both professors and students to Gettys-
burg, Arlington National Cemetery, and Washington, D.C. We
learned the history of the sites and bonded quickly. Although we
were strangers, we were interested in one another, taking turns,
talking and listening. Sometimes no words needed to be spoken,
only the presence of a fellow combat soldier who understood.
Fall semester began with the trip still fresh in our minds, and
we dove straight into the history of all three wars. We studied con-
trasts and similarities between the three wars, but to our amaze-
ment, we realized that these soldiers were not so different from us.
Experiences in Vietnam, the battle, and the firefights in Iraq were
also similar. As veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, we could relate
to stories from a Civil War. This camaraderie across conflicts was
amazing. It was a special bond that most could never fathom.
Our focus shifted to poetry, literature, music, and art as we read,
Here, Bullet, a book of short poems. Our task was to create our
own poem, intimidating at first, but became a touching, lasting ex-
perience, a liberating sense of freedom to open your heart and pour
every brutal emotion onto paper so that readers can experience the
reality. When we moved to The Things They Carried by Tim
O’Brien, it became everyone’s favorite because every student car-
ried something special in their combat war zone. We related to one
another across different branches of military, different theaters of
war, and even drastically different duties while at war.
Moving towards the last 2 weeks of the week, we entered the
world of art. Each student was given a blank masquerade mask to
decorate it as we saw ourselves. The introspection and self-evalua-
tion produced every raw emotion I have ever felt as they flooded
onto my mask. The syllabus surely did not reflect therapy or libera-
tion as a goal, but it helped me face my past with the realization
that none of us are alone in the battle of normalcy. The curriculum
allowed everyone to engage and challenge one another. They forced
everyone to try different perspectives and even think differently
than they normally may.
During the last week of the course, we had the privilege of
speaking with two Vietnam veterans. My initial drive for pursuing
this program was upon me, trying to understand my uncle, hoping
to learn how to bond with him. I learned horrific details from these
Vietnam veterans, but ones I wanted to hear, ones I knew would
help me relate to my uncle. But I also began to realize that search-
ing for a better understanding about my uncle was not as impos-
sible as I thought.
Our lives and experience paralleled each other at each times; oc-
casionally, even mirrored one another. My experiences were less
gruesome and less drastic, but in the end, he and I carried the
same demon from war. We are kept awake at night for the same
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
20
reasons. Through a combination of course and therapy, my night
terrors have lessened dramatically. Anxiety attacks are almost
gone. I still avoid big crowds, but I have learned to work through
my fears. My relationship with my family, both immediate and ex-
tended, have improved and are no longer strained. For the first
time in my life, I have been at peace with myself and no longer
self-medicate to drown out the noises in my head.
I am so grateful for the opportunity I had to take this course and
appreciate the support the subcommittee has offered NEH in re-
cent years, making programs like this possible. To ensure that
more veterans and all Americans can benefit from humanities as
I did, I ask that you fund the NEH at $170 million for the Fiscal
Year of 2021. Thank you for your time.
[The statement of Ms. Eriacho follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
21
Stephanie Eriacho
Student, Jefferson Community College
Good morning. Thank you to the sub-<:ommittee for inviting me to testify today.lam
pleased to testify in support of the National Endowment for the Humanities on behalf of the
National Humanities Alliance.
I am a student at Jefferson Community College in Watertown, NY•-home to Fort Drum.
I am a retired Navy Veteran, an aircraft mechanic by trade. I have been deployed twelve times
including a seven-month deployment to Iraq and a thirteen-month deployment to Afghanistan.
Last year, the college offered a class tailored for military combat Veterans called Dialogues of
Honor and Sacrifice. The class was made possible by a National Endowment for Humanities
grant. This program was intended to not only teach about the history and literature of three
different eras of war, but to also look at art, poetry, music and short stories from each war.
I needed a three-credit history class to fulfill my basic requirements for my but
this subject was so interesting to me because I wanted to better understand my Uncle's
experience. He is an Army Veteran who had been shot on two different occasions during the
Vietnam War and was awarded a Purple Heart medal for each occurrence. As a child I remember
my uncle as being intimidating, quiet and a scary man who wanted nothing to do with an
eleven-year-old kid, blood relative or not. We hadn't spoken more than two full sentences to one
another by the time I left to join the Navy in 1996. I visited my uncle every chance I could
during my time in the Navy, but nothing was as special as the last few visits after I had
experienced real combat deployments. Now, seeing me as a fellow combat veteran, he let down
his guard. He smiled, he laughed and even joked around. My uncle was now able to talk, even if
just a little bit, about his experience in Vietnam. Many years had passed but I could see his
memories were still raw when he mustered the strength to talk about it. Knowing I could relate,
and maybe understand, he let me see the guilty pain he had been harboring for years. Guilty for
wanting to be proud his Army uniform even after being spat on and disrespected
when he stepped off the plane. Guilty for being able to come back home to his family, unlike so
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 37 here 43677P7.010
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
22
many brothers who lost their lives in front of him. During that time, I could only slightly,
superficially, relate to the severity of horrors he faced during the Vietnam war, but I could begin
to understand.
It would take another deployment to Afghanistan, this time as a civilian contractor, this
time for thirteen months to realize that my uncle and myself were not so different. When I
returned from Afghanistan and started my new life as a civilian, it was only then when I started
to self-medicate with alcohol. IfI wasn't drinking alcohol, I was working out six times a week
for about two hours a day. I worked out to the point where I was exhausted and sleeping
throughout the night became easier. My relationship with my husband, children, and family were
severely strained. My children, especially my oldest, were afraid of me when I got angry.
could not wrap my head around why I felt the way I did, lost, alone, and misunderstood.
When I learned about the The Dialogues of Honor and Sacrifice course in 2018 I hoped it
would help me understand more about my uncle but did not realize how it would help me as
well. The course began two weeks before Jefferson Community College's 2018 fall semester
with a weeklong trip that took both professors and students to Gettysburg, Arlington National
Cemetery and Washington D.C. for guided tours. We learned in great detail the history of every
site we visited and during that trip we bonded quickly, forming a strong cohesive unit. Although
we were strangers, we entrusted in one another taking turns talking and listening. Not talking
over one another, not "one upping" the last but combat soldier to combat soldier. Sometimes no
words needed to be spoken, only the presence of a fellow combat soldier who understood. Deep
conversations told and heard in complete silence with just looks, body language and reactions.
Like a secret language no one else could understand but we were all fluent.
We were required to keep a daily journal throughout the trip. Quickly this went from a
task to a very helpful tool, one that I still use today. Being able to recount the D .C. trip and to
analyze our personal experiences in relation to the class curriculum is just one great outcome of
the journal. There was a strong sense of brother and sisterhood amongst us all and new friends
made by the end of the trip.
When we returned, fall semester began immediately, the trip still fresh in our minds. We
dove straight into the history of the Civil, Vietnam, and Iraq wars. We studied contrasts between
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 38 here 43677P7.011
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
23
the three wars but much more so we studied the similarities. To our amazement, we realized that
these soldiers were not so different from us. Experiences in Vietnam, the battle and firefights in
Iraq were all so similar. Being veterans ofiraq and Afghanistan, we could relate to stories from a
Civil War soldier. We could understand the struggles of Vietnam soldiers. This camaraderie
across decades, across conflicts was amazing. It's a special bond most could never fathom or
even hope to understand, and we were blessed with it, right from the start with so much more to
come.
We also dove into related literature, poetry, music, movies and art. While exploring
literature and poetry we read Here Bullet, a book compiled of short poems. One of our exercises
was to create our own poem, this was intimidating at first, but became an amazing, touching and
lasting experience. There is something liberating about pouring all your emotions onto a page
and arranging it so that it rhymes, makes sense and the reader can understand. It goes so far as to
be labeled as therapeutic and calming. Eventually we moved onto the book, The Things They
Carried by Tim O'Brien. It became everyone's favorite because every student carried something
special in their combat war zone. We could all relate to one another across different branches of
the military, different theaters of war and even drastically different duties while at war. Moving
towards the last week of the course we entered the world of art, the most exciting part for me and
one that I had been looking forward to since the beginning. Every student was given a blank
mask, the objective was to decorate it as we saw ourselves. That became the most powerful
outlet I have ever experienced. The introspection and self-evaluation produced every raw
emotion I had ever felt, and they poured onto my mask. It was evident in other student's art, their
reaction and the energy they put into this project that they had a similar experience with this.
The syllabus surely did not reflect therapy or liberation as a goal, but the class really
delivered. It has helped me face my past and realize that none of us are alone in the battle of
normalcy. There are so many things that I loved about this class. We, as veterans, were able to
lend our expertise and explain in depth military structures, rank, conduct, c_ourtesies, etc. The
curriculum allowed everyone to engage and like any good military leader (in this case it was
every single student) we challenged one another often over many subjects in the class. This
forced everyone to try different perspectives and think differently than they normally may.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 39 here 43677P7.012
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
24
During the last week of the course, we had the privilege of speaking with two Vietnam
Veterans. My initial drive for pursuing this program was upon me, trying to understand my
uncle, hoping to learn how to bond with him. I learned horrific details from these Vietnam
Veterans but ones I wanted to hear; ones I knew would help me relate to my uncle. After reading
my journal I began to realize that searching for a better understanding about my u~cle was not
going to be impossible as I had originally thought. He and I were not so different but very much
alike. Our lives and experiences paralleled each other at times and occasionally even mirrored
each other. My experiences maybe were less gruesome and Jess drastic, I feel they could never
compare to his, but in the end he and I carry the same demon from war, we are kept awake at
night for the same reasons. But through a combination of the course and therapy, my night
terrors have lessened dramatically, anxiety attacks are almost gone, I still do not like big crowds,
but I have learned to work through my fears. My relationships with my family both immediate
and extended have improved and is no longer strained. For the first time in my life, I have been
at peace with myself and I no loqger self-medicate to drown out the noises in my head.
I am so grateful for the opportunity I had to take this course and appreciate the support this
sub-committee has offered the NEH in recent years, making programs like this one possible. To
ensure that more veterans, and all Americans can benefit from humanities as I did, I ask that you
fund the NEH at $170 million for Fiscal Year FY 2020.
Thank you for your time.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 40 here 43677P7.013
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
25
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, and the Mask Program is something
that I have seen that we have worked with other arts organiza-
tions, Americans for the Arts. So thank you so much for your testi-
mony. Ms. Pingree, do you have a question for the panelists?
Ms. PINGREE. So many, but I have a feeling you want me to keep
it short.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. I can tap you lightly. [Laughter.]
Ms. PINGREE. Okay. Well, first, Madam Chair, thank you. This
is a wonderful panel. I know it is going to be a great morning of
panelists, but this is really a great, as you said, sort of transition
between looking at the big picture. And thank you so much for
sharing your personal story. That is just really profound. I don’t
think any of us could say it better about how the arts can impact
an individual, a family, and obviously the community. You took the
course, that is really great, and I really appreciate you sharing so
much with us.
And to all of you, thank you. Of course, we are great fans of
Americans for the Arts, and really appreciate all that they do in—
in the national perspective on all of this. And for you to make this
part of your career, it is really beneficial. We love the state associa-
tions for the arts, and it is important to us. And, Beth, thank you
so much for coming from the State of Maine. I am honored to have
you here. And, of course, if you lived in the State of Maine, there
is only 1.3 million people, and we joke we are just a small town
with very long roads. [Laughter.]
And, of course, Beth and I hadn’t seen each for a very long time,
and then we realized that were closely connected by her husband.
And that is just how it is in Maine. You know everyone one way
or the other. And thank you for the great work. I really appreciated
the fact that you brought it home to all of us that in every small
rural town, there isn’t sufficient funds. There aren’t sufficient
funds to support the kinds of works that the NEA and the NEH
do. And I don’t think people realize how profound that is, the num-
ber of people who would come in to hear the experience of an Ira-
nian immigrant or to come in and talk about race, and, you know,
many challenges that are faced in every single community. And you
all really brought that out about how the arts can bring us all to-
gether.
So I am obviously making a statement, not asking a question,
but just quickly because I won’t have as much time as I would like.
But is there more that you could do? I mean, I hope we can fund
at $170 million, and based on all your testimony, we should be
doing this at $170 billion, I don’t know. You know, it should be
twice that, right? [Laughter.]
Mr. SIMPSON. I don’t know about all that. [Laughter.]
Ms. PINGREE. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Okay, but, as you said, I think
less than 50 cents a person. I think this is a contribution we would
all make seeing the work that you did. But just quickly share with
us, what could you do if you had a little more money, and why is
it so important in a community like Norway because I am assum-
ing you wouldn’t find these funds in the communities’ budget.
Ms. KANE. We would not. We have great support in our commu-
nity, but a lot of it is not necessarily financial support. We could
always do more. We try to keep in the back pocket availability and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
26
openness to programs that come our way. We are always keeping
our eyes and ears open. We can’t do everything on a shoestring. We
have very generous authors and professionals in Maine who come
to libraries, but money always helps. What we find is the cultural
aspect, discussing a book is one thing, but when you can actually
bring in speakers or musicians, or take the food, or hear more in
depth, it grows and expands that experience for everyone in the
community. That frequently takes money that we don’t necessarily
have.
Ms. PINGREE. Well, thank you. I would love to ask you all a ques-
tion, but I know I will get in trouble. But thank you so much. You
really gave great testimony this morning. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Simpson.
Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you all for
being here to testify. This is an area that I think is very important,
and I think it is bipartisan between Republicans and Democrats.
Several years ago I said, I guess about 4 or 5 years ago, we had
one of the directors for the NEA out in Idaho. In fact, I think I
have had the last four out to Idaho. Last summer we had Mary
Anne Carter and toured the State for a few days and stopped at
local arts councils and everything. I said, you know what we need
to do is find a plan where we can project 5 years ahead where we
would like to double the investment in the arts and humanities,
and put that one a glide path somehow as they did in 1994 when
they said they wanted to NIH funding over a 5-year period, and
they did it.
When you look at our total budget of stuff, $170 million is not
all that much money. But they do incredible work in communities
all across this country, and it has been, as I said, my pleasure to
have the directors of both the National Endowment for the Arts
and Humanities out to the State. In fact, I had the director for the
National Endowment for the Humanities bring to Boise one day
when I was there about 10 or 12 people who had gotten grants,
that the State had given grants to. And we sat around the table,
and they each talked about what they were doing and why they
were doing it, and so forth. It is fascinating stuff, but it is very im-
portant.
Pam, you mentioned 40 percent of the $170 million, if you got
that, goes to the States. Is that true? Is that the same in the Hu-
manities? What is the split between State and——
Ms. KANE. I haven’t done the percentage. That sounds about
right. Yes, thank you. Yeah, this is my homework.
Mr. SIMPSON. Is that the right split?
Ms. BREAUX. Yeah, it is about the same. They parallel. To my
humanities? Yeah, they are parallel.
Mr. SIMPSON. Is that the right split?
Ms. BREAUX. It is. I think it is an important split. Forty percent
is meaningful and goes a long way to match State dollars for im-
portant programming, and it is also meaningful that the National
Endowment for the Arts retains 60 percent of its funding at the na-
tional level because it allows arts organizations across the country
to compete in a national pool. And those who are able to do that
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
27
find incredible leverage within that to go out and raise other re-
sources for programming.
Mr. SIMPSON. And I think it is probably true for most of us is
that, you know, I am not worried about the arts in New York, or
the arts in Washington, or the arts in Los Angeles. I am worried
about the arts in Salmon, Idaho.
Ms. BREAUX. Right.
Mr. SIMPSON. And how do we make sure that we can continue
to support the arts communities in rural America——
Ms. BREAUX. Right.
Mr. SIMPSON [continuing]. That don’t have access to a lot of these
things? So it has been fantastic what they have been doing. I hope
they continue it. I have always questioned whether 60/40 was the
right split or whatever, and I don’t know what it is, but I know
that my wife is on the Idaho Falls Arts Council, and there is one
person they do have to satisfy in this world. [Laughter.]
And so I do whatever I can.
Ms. BREAUX. One additional note on the importance of the in-
vestment on the Federal side, on the 60 percent side, is it allows
both the Endowments, I think, to invest in new work that then can
have a major ripple effect. And a prime example of that would be
both Endowments’ investments in arts and humanities and mili-
tary, right?
Mr. SIMPSON. Yeah.
Ms. BREAUX. It is both the Endowments that began those pilots
that have led to so much important work now going on across the
country in arts and humanities to benefit members of the military.
And that had to be tested and created someplace, and it is the
leadership shown at both Endowments that enable that to happen.
So that is another important part of a strong investment on the
Federal side, that leadership and what they——
Mr. SIMPSON. You talked about the authors, and the Idaho Hu-
manities Council brings out authors and does a lecture in north
Idaho and southeast Idaho, and southwestern Idaho, and they have
been fascinating. And ever since I started going to those when I
can, when I get out of here and go to them, it has cost me a lot
of money. Then I support the humanities, and last year, we had
Douglas Brinkley that wrote ‘‘Moonshot,’’ and listening to him talk
about it all is just fantastic. So anyway, Stephanie, thank you for
your testimony. We appreciate it very much.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. As I mentioned, I have another committee that
I am going to be going to later, and it is the one that oversees the
defense money. And we are having the Department of Defense, now
that the humanities and the arts have proven ways in which to
help our service men and women heal, recover, be resilient, be
strong, they are stepping up to the plate in order to free up more
dollars for more opportunities to work with our communities at
large. And when you help a veteran, you help their family, and I
say that as a daughter of a veteran, so.
But, Mr. Folds, I want to know, when you mentioned working on
this project with the Rogers Foundation, with kids, my kids had an
artist in residence, and the ‘‘Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich’’
song has not left my head since you mentioned that. [Laughter.]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
28
So will you help me think about something else today and just
kind of tell me where you are going to go? What are some of the
goals and aspirations, because I think it is really important to get
into schools and for kids to understand music is language, music
is math.
Mr. FOLDS. Exactly, yeah.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Music is transformative.
Mr. FOLDS. Yeah. I mean, the angle of the show that I am doing
with the Rogers Foundation is music as communication first and
foremost. I mean, the human brain works that way. You know, if
a little kid says, I want to go home, it is like, okay, we have got
to a song. You do that 3 times. [Laughter.]
Mr. SIMPSON. We begin to think that doing is an art is great. It
is hijacking something that we already do in communication, and
if you can teach a kid that and not intimidate them too badly at
the beginning about are you going to be a musician, are you going
to be proficient at it or not. When you learn art as, you know,
painting, the first thing you do when you are a little kid is you do
something that is an original piece that came out of you. When you
do music, not so much. You know, you are usually learning dead
German music, you know?
And I think it is really important to do both, but this show is
an attempt to, and it has been really successful so far in the pilots
that we have done. The kids have all kinds of ideas. Behind we will
have a student group of musicians that are a little bit older so they
can see that you could get good.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Yeah.
Mr. FOLDS. Plus I give them the riff. So if the kid has said, I
want to go home, I am like, okay, harp plays this, you play this,
and now say what you just said. And they say it, and they sing it,
and they come up with new ideas. So I think it is good because it
is not for kids who are going to grow and be musicians. It is for
kids to grow up and have an idea of how to speak publicly, how
to organize their lives, how to connect abstract and critical think-
ing together. And I am inspired by it.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Well, I want to thank the first panel for setting
the table literally up here for what we are going to hear the rest
of the morning and this afternoon. Thank you very much. Thank
you, Stephanie.
Ms. ERIACHO. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. It is always a good sign when people are still
talking after a panel has left, but I want to be respectful of every-
one’s time. So I am going to, because we are already a little behind,
we are not going to introduce everybody twice. I am just going to
let you folks take it. You sat in order, and introduce yourself and
your organization because we want to have time for questions. So,
please.
Ms. ONLEY. Is it on?
Ms. MCCOLLUM. The little red light is on.
Ms. ONLEY. Okay.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
29
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
WITNESS
KAMERAN ONLEY, DIRECTOR OF U.S. GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, THE
NATURE CONSERVANCY
Ms. ONLEY. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here.
It is hard to follow that last panel. That was pretty moving and
very exhilarating. On a personal note, I will start with I am
Kameran Onley. I am the director for U.S. policy and government
relations at the Nature Conservancy. And on a personal note, as
I was sitting there listening to your last panelist, I was thinking
of my daughter who is 12, and she is literally going through a test
right now on the American Revolution and the Declaration of Inde-
pendence. And it has just been so fun for me to tell her that I am
coming up here to talk to you, really exercising democracy. I wish
she could be with me here today, but she is taking a science test
also. [Laughter.]
But just thank you. It is really timely for me.
So Chairwoman McCollum, Congressman Simpson, and members
of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit our rec-
ommendations, the Nature Conservancy’s recommendations, for
Fiscal Year 2021. The Nature Conservancy is an international or-
ganization. We are in all 50 States, but also around the world,
working to protect ecologically important lands, waters for people
and nature. Building on the themes that you heard from our last
panel, you know, the nature really unites people. We see that
across the country. It brings people together to work on issues they
care deeply about in their community. It also heals people. We
have seen more and more science where we have seen veterans use
our rivers, use our parks, use our nature to really heal after some
very traumatic events.
We would like to thank you all on the committee for the work
that we do over the years with policy initiatives on the ground.
Chairwoman McCollum, you have been just a champion for the
Land and Water Conservation Fund. We cannot thank you enough
for that, increasing the funding for the conservation not just for
your home State, but for projects around the country, nationwide.
I also wanted to recognize Ranking Member Joyce has continued
support for the Great Lakes Initiative. It has been great.
Each one of you have done work with us, the Nature Conser-
vancy, in your home States, but also nationwide. We cannot thank
you enough. We have a lot of it in our submitted testimonies. I
can’t highlight it all, so I apologize for that. We have to be brief.
Those are just two examples of where we have worked with you.
As we enter the Fiscal Year 2021 budget cycle and likely another
challenging fiscal environment, the Conservancy wishes to thank
all of you for the 2020 programs and the support there. Our budget
recommendations that we submitted to you in full reflect a bal-
anced approach from the funding levels that we have seen in prior
years.
The Fiscal Year 2020 spending package dedicated $495 million
dollars to the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Thank you. This
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
30
is a fund that has seen strong bipartisan support, again, bringing
people together, and the Conservancy appreciates Congress’ com-
mitment to the funding of important projects on the ground and
the recreational project that that program delivers across the coun-
try.
The Conservancy this year is supporting $900 million full fund-
ing for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. We are looking for-
ward to that, but also looking forward to working with all of you
to see a permanent funding fix for that program.
We strongly support funding for habitat and wildlife conservation
investments, like the Cooperative Endangered Species Fund and
the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program. These and other in-
vestments are essential to ensuring that we take strategic actions
to prevent species from being listed as threatened or endangered.
Notably, the Conservancy requests continued investment in ongo-
ing efforts to restore and conserve sagebrush habitat and the great-
er sage-grouse across Federal, State, tribal, and private lands.
These resources are needed to implement on-the-ground projects
and monitor habitat treatments, address fire, invasive grasses, and
facilitate the partnerships and the science needed that for effective
conservation. We also urge the subcommittee to continue its sup-
port for programs that focus on specific geographic areas. I men-
tioned the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, but the EPA’s pro-
grams and the Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, Long Island Sound,
Gulf of Mexico programs, all of those contribute to protecting habi-
tat, water quality on a large landscape scale. These programs have
a proven record of supporting the States’ voluntary restoration ef-
forts, and the Conservancy urges the committee to continue to sup-
port strong Fiscal Year 2020 funding for these programs.
I will close by thanking all of you for the continued work to ad-
dress wildfire funding. Congress took major steps to stabilize the
Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service as well as the Depart-
ment of Interior’s budgets with the 2018 fire fix. However, the fire
fix will only be fully successful without substantial reinvestment
and the programs that help those forests be resilient. Strategic,
proactive hazardous fuel and restoration treatments have proven to
be safe and cost effective in reducing risks, and leaving forests a
more natural condition resilient to those wildfires.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to be here and to submit
the Nature Conservancy’s recommendations for Fiscal Year 2021.
[The statement of Ms. Onley follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
31
4245 N. Fairfax Drive Tel (703) 841-5300
Suite 100 Fax (703) 841-7400
Arlington, VA 22203 www .nature.org
Statement of Kamernn Onley, Director of U.S. Government Relations
The Nature Conservancy
Fiscal Year 2021 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations
Snbeommittee
United States Honse of Representatives Committee on Appropriations
January 29, 2020
Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit recommendations for fiscal year (FY) 2021 appropriations. The Nature
Conservancy is an international, nonprofit conservation organization working around the world
to protect ecologically important lands and waters for nature and people. Our mission is to
conserve the lands and waters upon which all life depends.
As we enter the FY202 l budget cycle and another year of a challenging fiscal environment, the
Conservancy wishes to thank this Subcommittee for the final FY2020 funding levels for
conservation programs. Our budget recommendations this year reflect a balanced approach with
funding levels consistent with FY2019 and FY2020 funding levels. Of note, we wish to work
with this Subcommittee and the authorizing Committees on identifying a permanent funding
solution for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). We strongly support the emphasis
on funding for sage grouse conservation and urge Congress to continue support for ongoing sage
grouse conservation efforts. We also support funding practical, innovative climate solutions to
create an energy future that is cleaner and more secure and gives consumers more energy
choices. Investing in nature brings strong returns for our security, economy, communities and
families. We thank the Committee for its previous work on the wildfire suppression funding fix,
but to fully succeed in this effort, we encourage the Committee to increase investments in forest
resilience efforts that protect communities, reduce costs and improve habitats and forests. The
Conservancy is focused on supporting programs and investments that ensure economic and
environmental benefits are enhanced today and made sustainable for tomorrow.
Land and Water Conservation Fund. The FY2020 spending package dedicated $495 million
in discretionary appropriations for LWCF. The fund has strong bipartisan support, and the
Conservancy appreciates Congress' commitment to funding important on-the-ground
conservation and recreation projects across the country. The Conservancy supports full funding
for LWCF at $900 million in discretionary appropriations for FY202 l and looks forward to
working with Congress to find a permanent funding solution. Additionally, the Conservancy
supports $150 million for the Forest Legacy Program that is funded through LWCF.
Endangered Species. The Conservancy supports continuing funding of at least $60 million for
the Cooperative Endangered Species Fund. This funding provides critical matching grants to
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 57 here 43677P7.014
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
32
states and territories for conservation and species recovery efforts on non-federal lands. Further,
we request your continuing support for Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) funding, specifically
HCP Land Acquisition Grants. The demand for HCP Land Acquisition Grants has significantly
outpaced available resources in recent years.
State and Tribal Wildlife Grants. The Conservancy supports continuing the FY2020 funding
level of $67 .5 million for this program. Strong federal investments are essential to ensure
strategic actions are undertaken by state, tribal and federal agencies, as well as the conservation
community, to protect wildlife populations and their habitats and to prevent species from being
listed as threatened or endangered.
Wildlife Conservation Programs. The wildlife conservation programs conducted by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) continue a long and successful tradition of supporting
collaborative conservation in the United States and internationally. We urge the Committee to
continue funding established and successful programs, such as the North American Wetlands
Conservation Act, Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund, Migratory Bird Joint
Ventures, FWS Migratory Bird Management Program and FWS Coastal Program, at no less than
FY2020 funding levels. We support, at a minimum, sustained funding for the Partners for Fish
and Wildlife Program and the Cooperative Landscape Conservation and Adaptive Science
Programs. The latter will help support the Department of the Interior (DOI) in addressing large-
scale conservation challenges across all ownerships, supporting collaborative problem-solving
for some of our nation's most challenging conservation issues. We also request strong funding
for the National Fish Habitat Initiative.
International Programs. The international conservation programs appropriated annually within
the DOI are relatively small but are effective and widely respected. They encompass the FWS
Multinational Species Conservation Funds, FWS Wildlife Without Borders regional and global
programs and National Park Service's International Program. We are requesting modest
increases over FY2020 funding levels for these programs.
National Wildlife Refuge System, The Conservancy supports stronger funding for the Refuge
System's operations and maintenance accounts. Found in every U.S. state and territory, national
wildlife refuges conserve a diversity of America's·environmentally sensitive and economically
vital ecosystems, including oceans, coasts, wetlands, deserts, tundra, prairie and forests. The
Conservancy requests $586 million for FY2021. This represents the funding necessary to
maintain management capabilities for the Refuge System.
Reinvestments in Forests Following the "Fire Fix": Congress took major steps toward
stabilizing the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Forest Service budget with the 2018 "fire
fix." However, the fire fix will not be fully successful without substantial reinvestments in
programs that would increase forest resilience. Strategic, proactive hazardous fuels and
restoration treatments have proven safer and more cost-effective in reducing risks and leaving
forests in a more natural condition resilient to wildfires. The Conservancy recommends investing
in the USDA Forest Service's Hazardous Fuels Program at $600 million and DOI's Fuels
Management Program at $250 million, in addition to repeating the Committee's FY2012
instructions for allocating funds to priority landscapes in both wildland urban interface and
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 58 here 43677P7.015
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
33
wildland settings. Additionally, we support fully funding the Collaborative Forest Landscape
Restoration Program at $80 million to allow for new projects, funding vegetation and watershed
management at $210 million, dedicating $30 million for a new ecological reforestation initiative
and maintaining the Legacy Roads and Trails Program at $50 million.
Research and Joint Fire Science. The USDA Forest Service's Forest and Rangeland Research
Program offers the scientific basis for policies that improve the health and quality of urban and
rural communities. This program is vital for the long-term health and utility of our American
forests and rivers. The Conservancy requests funding the program at $315 million. We ask to
also include $8 million for each of the USDA Forest Service and DOI Joint Fire Science
Programs, which have had great success in supporting practical science that reduces fire risk and
enhances economic, ecological and social outcomes nationwide.
Sage Grouse Conservation. The Conservancy requests continued investment in ongoing efforts
to restore and conserve sagebrush habitat and the greater sage grouse across federal, state, tribal
and private lands. These resources are needed to implement on-the-ground projects and monitor
habitat treatments, address rangeland fire and noxious and invasive grasses that enable and
worsen fires, fund suppression and restoration efforts and facilitate the partnership and science
necessary for effective conservation. To do this, appropriated sagebrush resources should
specifically support the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) five-year integrated program of
work, which holistically identifies landscapes with the highest likelihood for conservation and
restoration. Congress should consider asking for an annual report from BLM on acres treated in
priority areas for conservation and restoration in the sagebrush biome.
Importantly, we also ask for the Subcommittee's continued support as this process moves
forward to ensure that the final spending bill for FY2021 does not contain the language in Sec.
116 of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 that bars FWS from proposing a
rule to list the sage grouse under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This language undercuts
good faith conservation efforts by removing the critical backstop of a listing, should conditions
on the ground warrant such a step. The BLM is facing perhaps the single most challenging effort
in its history in conserving key sagebrush habitat, addressing identified threats to sage grouse
and promoting sustainable economic development across some 165 million acres in coordination
with state and local managers and private landowners in hopes of avoiding the need to list the
sage grouse in the future.
BLM Land Management and Renewable Energy Development. The Conservancy supports
smart planning and management of public lands through Rapid Ecoregional Assessments,
Resource Management Planning, Regional Mitigation Planning, Landscape Conservation
Cooperatives and the Assessment, Inventory and Monitoring Strategy. Many BLM programs
contribute to these cross-cutting initiatives including the National Landscape Conservation
System ($44 million), the Resource Management Planning Program ($67 million) and the
consolidated Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat Management budget line ($130.8 million).
Additionally, the Conservancy supports continued funding for BLM's renewable energy
development program at no less than the FY2020 level of$29 million. Collectively, these efforts
will help BLM manage its lands efficiently and effectively for energy development, species and
habitat conservation, recreation and other uses to maximize the public benefit from these lands.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 59 here 43677P7.016
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
34
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Geographic Programs. EPA's geographic
programs, including the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound,
Long Island Sound and Gulf of Mexico programs, make a significant contribution to protecting
habitat and water quality in the large landscapes where they work. These programs have a proven
record of supporting the states' voluntary restoration efforts, and the Conservancy urges the
Committee to continue the strong FY2020 funding for these programs.
Colorado River Basin Recovery Programs. The Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish
Recovery Program and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program take a balanced
approach to recovering four endangered fish species in the Colorado River basin. The Upper
Colorado and San Juan recovery programs are highly successful collaborative conservation
partnerships involving the states of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and Wyoming in addition to
Indian tribes, federal agencies and water, power and environmental interests. These programs
provide critically important ESA compliance for more than 2,450 federal, tribal, state and private
water projects across the upper Colorado River basin. Through these efforts, water use and
development have continued in growing Western communities in full compliance with the ESA,
state water and wildlife law and interstate compacts. Implementation of the ESA has been greatly
streamlined for federal agencies, tribes and water users. The Conservancy supports robust
funding at FWS for the Colorado River basin recovery programs, including recovery funds for
both the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and San Juan River Basin
Recovery Implementation Program, as well as fish hatchery needs associated with the recovery
plans.
National Streamflow Network. The National StreamflowNetwork provides continuous
streamflow information at over 8,200 locations across the country and is managed within the
U.S. Geological Survey's Groundwater and Streamflow Information Program. Water managers,
scientists and other decisions makers, including within the Conservancy, rely on data from the
National Streamflow Network to plan for floods, droughts and other extreme events; design
infrastructure, including the operation of federal reservoirs; facilitate energy generation; protect
aquatic species and restore habitat; and manage federal lands. The Conservancy supports funding
in FY2021 to fully implement the National Streamflow Network.
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program. Subtitle C of Title V of the Water
Resources Reform and Development Act of2014 provides authority for low-cost credit that can
leverage private investment for water infrastructure. The criteria include whether a project
protects against extreme weather events or helps maintain the environment. The Conservancy
appreciates the strong funding the Committee allocated to the Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Program in FY2020 and urges continued support for it.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit The Nature Conservancy's recommendations for the
FY202 I Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill.
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 60 here 43677P7.017
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
35
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
AMERICAN HIKING SOCIETY
WITNESS
KATHRYN VAN WAES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN HIKING SO-
CIETY
Ms. VAN WAES. Thank you. I am Kate Van Waes, executive di-
rector of American Hiking Society. Chair McCollum and members
of the subcommittee, on behalf of American Hiking Society and the
Trails Move People Coalition, I thank the committee for the oppor-
tunity to provide testimony today on the vital importance of ade-
quately funding our Nation’s trails and public lands to ensure ac-
cess for all.
This is about more than preserving precious ecological and cul-
tural treasures. Children’s outside playtime is shrinking, and the
gap between the diversity of our Nation and the diversity of those
spending time outdoors is widening, resulting in measurable det-
riment to mental and physical health and development. We cannot
afford to push trail funding to the sidelines.
American Hiking Society is the only national nonprofit organiza-
tion dedicated to empowering all, and I stress all, to enjoy, share,
and preserve the hiking experience. We envision a world where ev-
eryone feels welcome in the hiking community and has permanent
access to meaningful hiking. Our efforts ensure funding for hiking
trails, the preservation of natural areas, and expansion of access to
and inclusion in outdoor recreation. American Hiking Society has
mobilized over 558,000 trail volunteers to construct and maintain
41,000 miles of trails on Federal and State public lands at a value
of over $108 million in labor.
I am also testifying today on behalf of the newly-formed Trails
Move People Coalition. The member organizations of the Coalition
represent millions of Americans who spend their time, money, and
energy to get out on trails for recreation and volunteer activities.
I thank the subcommittee for in recent years leading congressional
efforts to provide incremental increases in funding that benefit
trails and the hiking community, and I encourage continued
progress, and know I am speaking to friends today. I will highlight
a few of these funding priorities today with the full list of rec-
ommendations provided in my written statement.
We are grateful to the subcommittee for providing increased
funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund in Fiscal Year
2020. Like the Nature Conservancy, we are urging full funding at
$900 million. The LWCF protects and makes accessible much of
our Nation’s trails, public lands, parks, and open spaces. One great
example is the Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership Program.
This innovative program has made real progress in expanding ac-
cess to outdoor spaces for urban communities, especially urban
communities of color, whose access to and inclusion in outdoor
recreation have been disproportionately negatively impacted by ge-
ography, socioeconomic status, and other factors. Along with full
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
36
LWCF funding, passage of the Outdoors for All Act will help pro-
grams, like Outdoor Recreation Legacy, thrive.
Hiking, simply walking along a trail, be it urban or wild, poses
the fewest participation barriers of almost any outdoor activity. But
it requires trails, paved and unpaved, and trails don’t build and
maintain themselves. That requires human labor and Federal fund-
ing. Specifically, for the Forest Service, which is responsible for
over 80 percent of all federally-managed trails in the U.S., we rec-
ommend funding the capital improvement and maintenance trails
budget at $100 million, which will allow the completion of annual
maintenance needs and begin addressing the huge trail mainte-
nance backlog.
For the Bureau of Land Management, we urge the creation of a
trail specific line item in their budget. The BLM manages over
13,000 miles of trails, traversing a rich diversity of landscapes for
hikers, anglers, hunters, and other outdoor enthusiasts. Unlike
other Federal land managers, though, BLM does not have an indi-
vidual funding line item for trails, resulting in inconsistent funding
levels and a lack of clarity on allocations. For the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, we recommend funding for refuge visitor services
at just over $74 million. National wildlife refuges provide incredible
opportunities for outdoor recreation on 11 national scenic and his-
toric trails and 44 national recreation trails, supporting more than
37,000 jobs.
In conclusion, the nearly 1 million square miles that comprise
U.S. public lands are our most treasured natural, historic, and cul-
tural resource. Whether you are a hiker enjoying the abundance of
American trails, which span over 4 times the total length of inter-
state highways, whether you are a member of the indigenous popu-
lations for whom these lands are their ancestral homes, or one of
the 145 million outdoor recreation users, our public lands are of in-
calculable value to hundreds of millions of Americans. As we all
strive together to protect these lands and trails and make them ac-
cessible and welcoming to all communities for generations to come,
Congress must do its part to ensure adequate funding. I thank the
committee for holding this public witness day and providing me
with the opportunity to give this testimony.
[The statement of Ms. Van Waes follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
37
United States House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations,
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Non-Tribal Public Witness Days
Testimony of:
Kathryn Van Waes, PhD., Executive Director
American Hiking Society
February 6, 2020
Introduction
Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the American
Hiking Society and the Trails Move People Coalition, I thank the Committee for the opportunity to provide
testimony today on the importance of adequately funding our nation's trails and public lands to ensure
access for all.
Founded in 1976, American Hiking Society is the only national nonprofit organization dedicated to
empowering all to enjoy, share, and preserve the hiking experience. We envision a world where everyone
feels welcome in the American hiking community and has permanent access to meaningful hiking, including
urban, frontcountry, and backcounlry opportunities. American Hiking Society works with Congress and
federal agencies and empowers the millions-strong hiking community to shape public policy and legislation.
Our efforts ensure funding for hiking trails, the preservation of natural areas, and expansion of access to
and inclusion in outdoor recreation.
I'm also testifying today on behalf of the Trails Move People Coalition. The member organizations of the
new Trails Move People Coalition represent millions of Americans who spend their time, money and energy
to get out on trails for fun and to volunteer. The Coalition strives lo elevate the prioritization of trails by
developing funding and research resources so that everyone, irrespective of geography, mode of
recreation, socio-economic status or experience, will have access to more and better trail opportunities and
in tum more fulfilling personal experiences outside.
Importance of Trail Funding for Public Land Access
Trails are the gateway lo fishing, hunting, wildlife viewing, camping, climbing, and more. A failure to
maintain and manage our nation's trails limits access for all communities, stymies economic growth, and
reduces opportunities for healthy outdoor recreation.
Access to open spaces for recreation has been shown by many studies to improve physical and mental
health and to increase quality of llfe. 1 Additionally, outdoor access is crucial for children, impacting their
physical and mental development, socialization skills, and a lifelong appreciation of nature. 2
Trails bring those health benefits to all by providing individuals of diverse backgrounds access to our public
lands for all types of outdoor recreation.
Newly-released data from the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA} calculated
that outdoor recreation generated $778 billion in economic activity in 2017, surpassing other sectors such
'American Hiking Society, Health Benefits of Hiking, htti:>t;)!amw[canhtk~~heatth-benel4:of:hLl<.im( (laal ,,;sillld 1/27/2020).
See e/so Harvard Medical School, Exercising to Relax, Up:!at!ld July 13, 2018, httos l/www.health harvard.odulstavrnu-naa!th)'isxerc,sin1Ho-
r~r.
2 Harvard Health Publiahing, 6 reasons chi/dron need to play outside, May 22, 2018, htlj/s !/w,iw health,harvard edu(l;jQ;jlforeasons-children-
nee<l-to-DiaV:QUISlde-2018052213880.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 67 here 43677P7.018
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
38
as agriculture, petroleum and coal. Outdoor recreation makes up 2.2% percent of U.S. GDP, supports 5.2
million jobs and is growing faster than the economy as a whole. 3
We already know that outdoor recreation has a massive positive impact on our nation's economy and that
much of that impact is generated via trails. According to the Outdoor Industry Association, trail-centered
activities directly generate over $594 billion4 and nearly 3.5 million jobs5 annually. On federally-managed
land, outdoor recreation contributes more than $64.6 billion to the national economy and supports more
than 623,000 jobs annually. 6
Most people would be surprised to learn that citizen volunteers and nonprofit trail organizations perform a
large share of the maintenance on our nation's trails, in partnership with government agencies and with the
support of private donations. Since our founding in 1976, American Hiking Society has mobilized 558,708
trail volunteers to construct and maintain 41, 146 miles of trails on federal and state public lands at a value
of over $108 million in labor.7 This ongoing public •sweat equity" investment has led to an increased
recognition of the importance of adequate federal funding for our public lands and trails in order to maintain
quality visitor experiences.
It is the trails community's collective belief that Congress must restore to our federal land management
agencies proper appropriated funding levels, reversing the cuts made over the past few decades. We
believe that restored and adequate funding is not only desperately needed but fully warranted. We
expressly thank this subcommittee in recent years for leading congressional efforts to provide incremental
increases in funding that benefits trails and the hiking community.
We encourage the Committee to adopt the following funding requests so the federal government can
continue to benefit from private contributions and volunteer labor as well as provide inexpensive, healthy
outdoor recreation options for your constituents and all Americans.
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCFJ Funding
Recommendation: Full funding at $900 million
Full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) at $900 million is a must to ensure that our
nation's trails, public lands, parks, and open spaces remain protected and accessible for generations to
come. 8 We are grateful to the Subcommittee for providing increased funding of LWCF in FY20 and hope to
see a further increase this year. The LWCF has funded nearly 1,000 trail projects and thousands of other
projects ranging from National Parks and Forests and Wildlife Refuges, to community parks and ball fields
in all 50 states. LWCF funded the completion of the Appalachian Trail, major segments of the Pacific Crest
Trail, and sections of at least ten other scenic and historic trails, totaling over 50 different projects. In the
Chair's state of Minnesota, LWCF has funded 54 trail projects to the tune of $3.5 million. In the Ranking
Member's state of Ohio, 29 trail projects have been funded at over $3 million.
3 Bureau of Economic Analysis, Outdoor Recreation, https://www.bea.gov/dala/special-topics/outdoor-recrealion (last visited January, 24 2020).
4 OUTDOOR INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, OUTDOOR RECREATION ECONOMY 18 (2017), available al https://ou!doorindustry.org/wp-
contenVuploads/2017/04/0IA RecEconomy FINAL Single.odf. Trail centered activities generated $594,311,835,880 from retail spending,
salaries, and federal and state t8l<es.
5 Id. Trail centered activities create 3,476,845 jobs.
6 OUTDOOR INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, OUTDOOR RECREATION ECONOMY 15 (2017), available at https://ou!doorindustry.orq/wp-
contenVuploads/2017104/0IA RecEconomy FINAL Single.pdf; 'Forest Service Makes it Easier for Visitors to Enjoy National Forests and
Grasslands.' U.S. Forest Service, https://www.fs.fed.us/news/releasesfforest-service-makes-it-easier-visitors-enioy-national-forests-and-
grasslands.
7 American Hiking Society, hllps:1/americanhiking.orgl (last visited Jan. 24, 2020).
6 American Hiking Society also supports passage of the LWCF Full Funding Act (H.R. 3195) to provide full and dedicated funding for LWCF.
We express our appreciation to the Chair and five additional members of the subcommittee who have co-sponsored this legislation.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 68 here 43677P7.019
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
39
The LWCF and the Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership Program (OLRP) have made progress in
expanding access to outdoor spaces for urban communities. Continued support of the OLRP program
through appropriations funding, and congressional passage of the Outdoors for All Act (H.R. 4512), is
needed to ensure that our nation's natural spaces are available and accessible to urban hikers, especially
urban communities of color whose access to and inclusion in outdoor recreation have been
disproportionately negatively impacted by geography, socio-economic status, and other factors.
Trail Maintenance
Our public lands face a nearly $21.5 billion maintenance backlog. When annual maintenance needs go
unaddressed, long-term problems arise, seriously hampering the public's access to outdoor recreation.
Closed trails, out-of-service restrooms, campgrounds in poor conditions, and impassable roads are only a
few of the barriers that hikers face. In turn, local economies that rely on trail recreation suffer. As of 2018,
193,138 miles of trails on federal lands had an estimated $886 million maintenance backlog. In order to
both address the deferred maintenance backlog and keep pace with annual maintenance needs, additional
funding for our nations trails is critical.
Forest Service
Recommendation: Fund Capital Improvement and Maintenance, Trails budget at $100M
The Capital Improvement and Maintenance, Trails line item in the Forest Service budget funds
construction, reconstruction and maintenance of trails, including by non-profit partners through co-operative
agreements. National Forest trails benefit everyone and receive increasing public use each year.
Collectively, the National Forests provide 157,000 miles of trails for activities ranging from hiking, biking,
horseback riding, off-highway vehicle usage, groomed winter trails for cross-country skiing and
snowmobiling, and access points for "river trails." Yet this trail system is increasingly stressed, and
maintenance cannot keep pace with the growing demand due to inadequate funding. The lack of
maintenance threatens public access to National Forests and could endanger the public safety if funding
does not keep pace with public visitation. Funding at $100 million will allow the completion of annual
maintenance needs and begin addressing the trail maintenance backlog.
Bureau of Land Management
Recommendation: Creation ofTrails Line Item in BLM Budget
The BLM manages 13,468 miles of trails over 245 million acres -more than any other federal land
management agency. Most of the country's SLM-managed public land is located in 12 Western States,
including Alaska, and contains a diversity of landscapes that often provide the public less structured but
nonetheless diverse recreational opportunities. BLM recreation resources and visitor services support
strong local economies. More than 120 urban centers and thousands of rural towns (comprising 64 million
people) are located within 25 miles of BLM lands.
However, unlike other federal land managers, BLM does not have an individual funding line item for trails.
This results is inconsistent funding for trail maintenance and construction year-to-year and a lack of clarity
on how trail funding will be allocated. A trails line item in the BLM budget (including at least $1 OM for
National Scenic and Historic Trails) will address the fragmented funding allocations across sub activity
accounts and create consistent funding for trails.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 69 here 43677P7.020
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
40
Recommendation: Fund National Conservation Lands at $84M
National Conservation Lands comprise 35 million acres of some of our most treasured winding rivers,
mountain vistas, national monuments, wilderness areas, and trails. The National Conservation Lands line
item provides funding to enhance recreational access, conserve the Nation's heritage, and manage these
nationally recognized resources for current and future generations. Funding at $84M will help ensure that
some of our most treasured BLM resources are preserved, maintained, and accessible for all types of
recreational, cultural, and scientific usage.
National Park SeNice
National Parks, and the world-class experiences their 18,844 miles of trails provide, are one of the most
unifying forces in America. Well-maintained trails improve the quality of visitor experiences and enhance
visitor safety.
Recommendation: Funding for the Rivers, Trails, & Conservation Assistance (RTCA) program at $13.478M
The RTCA program brings the expertise of over a century of land management to the greater recreation
community. When a community asks for assistance with a project, National Park Service staff provide free
critical tools for success, on-location facilitation, and planning expertise, which draw from project
experiences across the country and adapt best practices to a community's specific needs. Funding at
$13.4 78M will ensure these trail planning services are made available to communities in all regions of the
nation, including recreation programs for youth.
Recommendation: Funding for Park Service Operations for the National Trails System maintained at a
minimum of$17.014 M
The NPS has administrative responsibility for 23 National Scenic and Historic Trails established by
Congress. Adequate funding is essential for keeping these popular trails accessible. The request will help
the work of trail organization partners of the Park Service to build, maintain, and interpret these trails.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Recommendation: Funding for Refuge Visitor Services at least $74.227M
Refuge Visitor Services provides funding for trail maintenance across FWS-managed land. Located in
every U.S. state and territory, and within an hour's drive of nearly every major U.S. city, National Wildlife
Refuges provide incredible opportunities for outdoor recreation, including hiking, hunting, fishing, birding,
boating and nature photography across 2,500 miles of trails. More than 37,000 jobs are reliant on refuges.
Funding at a level of $74.227M will provide for trail maintenance across the land and water trails, refuges,
wetlands, and hatcheries, including eleven National Scenic and Historic Trails and forty-four National
Recreation Trails.
Conclusion
The nearly 1,000,000 square miles that comprise U.S. public lands are our most treasured natural, historic,
and cultural resource. Whether you're a hiker enjoying the 193,500 miles of trail, a member of the
indigenous populations for whom these lands are their ancestral homes, or one of the 145 million outdoor
recreation users, our public lands are of incalculable value to hundreds of millions of Americans. As we all
strive together to protect these lands and trails and make them accessible and welcoming to all
communities for generations to come, Congress must do its part to ensure adequate funding.
I thank the Committee for holding this public witness day and providing me with the opportunity to provide
this testimony.
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 70 here 43677P7.021
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
41
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
CONTINENTAL DIVIDE TRAIL COALITION
WITNESS
AMANDA WHEELOCK, POLICY AND COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER,
CONTINENTAL DIVIDE TRAIL COALITION
Ms. WHEELOCK. Chair McCollum and members of the sub-
committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf
of the Continental Divide Trail Coalition, a nonprofit organization
with the mission to complete, promote, and protect the Continental
Divide National Scenic Trail. My name is Amanda Wheelock, and
I am the policy and communications manager for the Coalition.
For those who haven’t had the fortune of visiting the Continental
Divide Trail, usually known simply as the CDT, travels 3,100 miles
along the spine of the Rocky Mountains, connecting the vibrant
Tonahutu of the southern New Mexican desert to the equally bril-
liant yellow larches of Glacier National Park in northern Montana,
as well as countless natural historical and cultural treasures in be-
tween, including several hundred miles in the 2nd District of
Idaho.
The Continental Divide Trail Coalition and our members greatly
appreciate your previous support for the CDT and the entire Na-
tional Trail System through appropriations to our land manage-
ment agency partners to build and maintain these trails, and re-
spectfully request that you continue and increase the support as
detailed in our written testimony. We are also grateful for your ef-
forts to increase appropriations for the Land and Water Conserva-
tion Fund, often referred to as America’s best conservation program
and the subject of my testimony today.
Statistics abound on the myriad successes of LWCF, but I myself
prefer stories to statistics. So let’s imagine ourselves on the CDT
for a, moment walking just a few miles outside of Steamboat
Springs, Colorado on a warm summer’s day. As we walk, shim-
mering Aspen Groves and golden rangeland stretch beyond the ho-
rizon in front of us as does the black pavement of the highway we
are walking on. An 18-wheeler whizzes by just 5 or 6 feet away,
followed by a long line of cars stuck behind it, cursing and wishing
they could get up to Rabbit Ears Pass even quicker than they are
now. Here in northern Colorado, due to a lack of public land, the
CDT is forced to follow along the shoulder of Highways 14 and 40
for almost 15 miles, tempting no one but the most determined of
through-hikers to experience this particularly dangerous section of
this National Scenic Trail.
Despite more than 4 decades of work by dedicated Land Manage-
ment agency staff, nonprofit partners, volunteers, and members of
trail site communities, the Continental Divide Trail remains incom-
plete due to gaps just like this one in public land ownership along
its corridor. Without LWCF funding, there is no realistic way to ac-
quire the lands necessary to create a continuous corridor for the
trail, leaving what should be a world-class recreational resource
with no path to completion. That is why the Continental Divide
Trail Coalition respectfully requests $900 million for the Land and
Water Conservation Fund in Fiscal Year 2021, because we believe
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
42
that resources like the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail de-
serve the protection via LWCF that they were promised.
And we are not alone in this belief. A full 98 percent of small
business owners along the CDT support Congress providing dedi-
cated full funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and
just last year, more than 200 of those business owners along the
trail went a step further, signing open letters urging their senators
and representatives to provide LWCF with full permanent funding.
Residents of Steamboat Springs, which became an official CDT
gateway community in 2018, want dearly to see their section of
trail moved off of the highway and made footing of a National Sce-
nic Trail.
The Yampa Valley Community Foundation has provided funding
to CDTC to support our work to close the gap. Big Agnes, a multi-
million-dollar and much beloved gear company borne out Steam-
boat Springs, rallied their entire staff of more than a 120 people
to relay all 750 miles of the CDT in Colorado to raise awareness
of the trail and the need for its completion. And many local resi-
dents stand willing and ready to volunteer to build the new trail
section. Steamboat Springs resident, Kathleen Lynch, perhaps cap-
tured their spirit best when she said, ‘‘It is so much more than a
trail to the people who live here. It feels so much a part of what
defines us as a community that protecting it is inherent to what
we believe in.’’
The Land and Water Conservation Fund is vital to communities
like Steamboat Springs all across the United States, to their econo-
mies, to their health, and to their identities. We hope to see you
invest in these communities and in our public lands by fully fund-
ing LWCF in Fiscal Year 2021. Thank you for your time today and
for your consideration of these important requests.
[The statement of Ms. Wheelock follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
43
CONTINENTAL DIVIDE
TRAIL COALITION
Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies provided by Amanda Wheelock, Policy &
Communications Manager, on behalf of the Continental Divide Trail Coalition
February 6, 2020
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the Continental Divide Trail Coalition,
a non-profit organization with the mission to complete, promote, and protect the Continental
Divide National Scenic Trail (CDT). We greatly appreciate your support in the FY 2020 Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill for the CDT and the entire National Trails
System through your increased investments in and attention to specific needs of the 30 national
trails administered by the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Land
Management. We also appreciate your continuing efforts to increase appropriations for the Land
and Water Conservation Fund and thank you for supporting LWCF investments in trails.
LWCF is often referred to as America's best conservation program. It's no wonder why, with
projects funded in every county in the country 1 and a long, long list of internationally-renowned
parks and local treasures protected in perpetuity. When the LWCF was created, your predecessors
in Congress called for $900 million offederal oil and gas leasing revenues to be dedicated annually
to the fund. Yet almost every year since, Congress has broken that promise, diverting much of this
funding to other uses. Imagine what we could have protected together with the $22 billion diverted
from L WCF over the past 55 years: 2 recreation opportunities in local, regional, and national parks;
wildlife habitat and pristine headwaters; and trail networks spanning from remote forests to
downtown bike paths. Places, for example, like the Continental Divide Trail.
Administered by the U.S. Forest Service, the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail traverses
five states as it wends its way from Canada to Mexico along the spine of the Rocky Mountains. It
connects the Sky Islands of southern New Mexico to 14,000' peaks in Colorado to the Greater
Yellowstone Ecosystem, one of two remaining intact ecosystems in the lower 48. It connects
people living along its 3,100-mile corridor around the protection of a shared resource, and it
connects people from all over the world around their love of the trail. And when it is finally
completed, it will connect an unbroken corridor of more than 2 million acres of public land for
wildlife to safely traverse along their migration routes.
Originally designated by Congress more than 40 years ago, the CDT is just one example of the
broken promise of LW CF. Despite qecades of work by dedicated federal land management agency
personnel, non-profit partners, volunteers, and residents of trailside communities, the CDT remains
incomplete due to gaps in protected public land ownership along its corridor. Without L WCF
funding, there is no realistic way to fund the willing sales necessary to create a protected public
corridor, leaving what should be a world-class recreational resource with no path to completion.
1
Department of Interior, LWCF, ~ -
, LWCF Coalition, Fund LWCF, h ps·lj ~dlwcf.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 76 here 43677P7.022
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
44
That is why the Continental Divide Trail Coalition respectfully requests $900 million for the
Land and Water Conservation Fund in FY 2021 - because we believe that resources like the
CDT deserve the protection via L WCF that they were promised. But I hope you don't just take my
word for it. 98% of small business owners along the CDT support Congress providing dedicated,
full funding for LWCF. 3 And last year, more than 200 business owners along the trail signed open
letters urging their Senators and Representatives to provide LWCF with full, permanent funding.
That's because protecting public land isn't just good for our health, ecosystems, and wildlife -
though it is indeed good for all those things - but also because it's a sound investment.
Between 2012-2017, the five CDT states all saw their outdoor recreation economies outpace their
states' overall GDP by a factor of at least 1.5. 4 In Wyoming, outdoor recreation GDP increased
by 15% over this period, while the state's overall GDP actually decreased. This growth is critical
for business owners and their employees in rural Western communities. When we surveyed small
business owners in 32 towns along the CDT last fall, 88% of them reported economic growth in
their community over the last five years that was specifically due to use of the trail. 5 And this isn't
isolated to those we think of as working in the "outdoor" industry, for while some of those surveyed
own hotels or gear shops, others are graphic designers, healthcare providers, and even barbers.
These people live in communities like Steamboat Springs, CO, and Silver City, NM. While on the
surface, these towns can feel worlds apart - one a world-famous ski town in the snowy Colorado
mountains, the other situated where forest turns to desert in southern New Mexico, named for the
metals that sustained it for so long - they are connected by the thread of the Continental Divide
Trail, and have more in common than you might think. Both are mid-sized communities with
vibrant downtowns. Both are on the path of establishing themselves as year-round destinations and
fantastic places to live due to their access to public lands. And both await access to new public
land so that their local sections of the CDT can be routed off of dangerous roads.
Just outside of Steamboat Springs, the CDT travels for 15 miles along the shoulder of Highways
14 and 40, high-speed roads heavily trafficked by tourists, truckers, and oil and gas producers
heading to and from the bustling North Park basin. What could be a spectacular trail through aspen
forests and historic rangeland is instead a dangerous highway road walk, tempting no one but the
most determined of thru-hikers to experience this section of the CDT. Residents of Steamboat
Springs, which became a CDT Gateway Community in 2018, want dearly to see this section of the
CDT completed. The Yampa Valley Community Foundation has provided funding to CDTC to
support our work to close this gap. Big Agnes, a gear company based in Steamboat, rallied their
staff to relay all 750 miles of the CDT in Colorado to raise awareness of the trail and the need for
its completion. And just this month, when we called on our members and partners to provide
feedback on CDTC's qraft strategic plan, multiple people asked that we make the completion of
the trail at Muddy Pass an even higher priority for our organization (a tough request to incorporate,
as it is already our highest priority for acquisition along the entire length of the trail).
3
Continental Divide Trail Coalition, Small Business Survey: Fall 2019, https://continentaldividetrail.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/11/Small-Business-Survey-WEB.pdf
4
Headwaters Economics, The Outdoor Recreation Economy by State, https://headwaterseconomics.org/economic-
development/trends-performance/outdoor-recreation-economy-by-state/
5
Continental Divide Trail Coalition, Small Business Survey: Fall 2019, https://continentaldividetrail.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/11/Small-Business-Survey-WEB.pdf
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 77 here 43677P7.023
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
45
Steamboat Springs resident Kathleen Lynch perhaps said it best:
"It's so much more than a trail to the people who live here. It feels so much a part of what
defines us as a community here that protecting it is inherent to what we believe in. "
BLM and U.S. Forest Service staff are supportive, as is the Colorado State Land Board
(construction of the CDT in this area would also open up thousands of acres of state land to public
access). Potential routes and willing sellers have been identified. The community has made it clear
that they want to see this project completed, and many local residents stand willing and ready to
volunteer to build the trail. All that is required is funding, which is why we respectfully request
$2.8 million of L WCF funding in FY 2021 for the BLM to acquire land that will help move
the CDT off of the highway and onto a protected corridor fitting of this National Scenic Trail
More than 1,300 miles south along the CDT lies Silver City, which became the first official CDT
Gateway Community in 2014. This town of 10,000 is home to a diverse mix of people, a bustling
arts scene, and a fast-growing trail network. It's home to Richard and Carol Martin, who have
maintained almost 30 miles of the CDT for more than a decade. And it's home to Martyn Pearson,
co-owner of the Gila Hike and Bike, a knowledge and gear hub for tourists and locals alike. Martyn
is a powerful champion for the CDT, and has spoken to why he wants to see L WCF fully funded:
"The Land and Water Conservation Fund is vital to protecting New Mexico's public lands
and outdoor recreation opportunities, and those places in turn have a huge impact on our
local businesses and tourism economy. It isn't a political issue to me whether or not
outdoor access should be a priority- it just is. "
Silver City has benefited from LWCF investment before. In 2016, 605 acres along Upper Bear
Creek were added to the Gila National Forest, protecting a mile of the CDT and opening up access
to more than eight miles of the creek. In a letter of support for the project, Michael Morones, who
was Mayor of Silver City at the time, wrote, "the Continental Divide Trail is an important
economic resource for our area, and protecting land along the trail is crucial to our well-being."
However, there is more work to be done. Currently, the CDT passes directly through Silver City
in the midst of a 19-mile road walk. Lack of access to a small section of private land has kept the
trail from being rerouted around town, off of the road, and onto public land in the area. Knowing
that the CDT is vital to the town's renaissance as an outdoor recreation destination, residents have
advocated for completion of this local section for almost two decades, and the town has already
begun to invest in things like the construction of the Silver Spur Trail, which will connect the
future CDT route to downtown. But their dollars and hopes rest on funding for the project.
The residents of Steamboat Springs, Silver City, and countless towns like them these are the
people who are negatively impacted when LWCF isn't fully funded.
Funding for Annual Operations
LWCF is a critical program, but it's not the only resource we need to protect and maintain our
nation's trails. Funding for the National Trails System enables public-private partnerships that
benefit all Americans, as these trails are constructed and maintained in large part each year by
volunteers. Since the founding of the Continental Divide Trail Coalition in 2012, for example,
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 78 here 43677P7.024
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
46
CDTC and other government partners working on the CDT have directly received approximately
$2.6 million in federal funding appropriated for the trail. Those organizations have turned $2.6
million into more than 300,000 volunteer hours valued at $7,277,566, and an additional $2,158,697
of private funding. That's a 256% return on federal funding in value added to our public lands.
Like the CDT, many trails in our National Trails System remain incomplete, and increased funding
is necessary to help close these gaps, in large part by funding the construction and maintenance of
new sections of trails. As we see our land management agency partners struggle year after year to
adequately manage our lands and trails with fewer and fewer staff, we firmly believe that Congress
must restore proper appropriated funding that has been cut over the decades, which our agency
partners desperately need. However, in recognizing the political realities of the day, we hope to
provide realistic recommendations that, at minimum, maintain current funding. As such, the
Continental Divide Trail Coalition respectfully requests the following to serve as annual
operations funding for each of the 30 National Scenic and Historic Trails in FY 2021:
• U.S. Forest Service: $100 million for trails construction and maintenance (CMTL) with
$9.886 million of it as a separate budgetary item specifically for the administration of 6
national trails- including $2 million for the CDT- and $1.3 million to manage parts of 16
trails administered by the NPS or BLM
• National Park Service: $16.426 million for administration of23 trails and for coordination
of the long-distance trails program by the Washington office. Construction and
Maintenance: $686,041 for the Ice Age Trail, $75,000 for the Arizona Trail, and $200,000
each for the Pacific Crest and Pacific Northwest Trails
• Bureau of Land Management: $2.812 million to administer three trails and for coordination
of the National Trails program and $7.14 million to manage portions of 13 trails
administered by the Park Service or the Forest Service and for operating five National
Historic Trail interpretive centers. Construction: $1 million for the Iditarod Trail.
Maintenance: $300,000 for the Iditarod Trail, $100,000 for the Arizona Trail, and $300,000
for the Pacific Crest Trail
Dedicated funding for these trails helps ensure that Congress' desire to create and maintain quality
visitor experiences is met, and that these long-distance trails which span multiple administrative
units and agencies are appropriately managed, with funding distributed across units and agencies
based on trail administration and management responsibilities. This funding is necessary to support
agency staff, partners, and volunteers alike in building and maintaining these crown jewels of our
nation's trails. In 2019, for example, dedicated CDT funding was used to construct and maintain
four miles of trail in New Mexico's Carson National Forest, officially opening more than 100 miles
of CDT built over the last decade in partnership between the U.S. Forest Service, CDTC, and New
Mexico Volunteers for the Outdoors. It was also used to enable CDTC volunteers to control erosion
along the CDT in highly-trafficked areas of Yellowstone National Park, mitigate wildfire damage
outside of Lincoln, MT, and train more than 30 new volunteers who collectively adopted over 200
miles of the CDT that they will maintain on behalf of the U.S. Forest Service and CDTC.
Your continued investment in the CDT and all of our National Trails System will ensure that these
innovative public-private partnerships continue to provide value for tra.ilside communities,
recreationists, volunteers, land management agencies, and the American public. Thank you for
your time today, and for your consideration of these important requests.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 79 here 43677P7.025
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
47
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
PARTNERSHIP FOR THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM
WITNESS
KATHY DECOSTER, ADVOCACY & POLICY COORDINATOR, PARTNER-
SHIP FOR THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM
Ms. DECOSTER. Good morning. My name is Kathy DeCoster, and
thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am testifying this
morning on behalf of the Partnership of the National Trail System,
but I wanted to echo what Kameran and others earlier have said
about our appreciation for the time you put into these public wit-
ness days. It is probably underappreciated or certainly unknown
maybe outside these walls, but we are very grateful that you are
listening to the American people for many days. I am just glad I
am on the early panel. [Laughter.]
I am testifying today for the Partnership, which represents the
30 congressionally-designated national historic and scenic trails
that make up the National Trail System. I brought a couple of
maps to look at while we are talking because you may know about
the one or two trails that are in your district or your State, but you
may not know that there is at least one national trail in each of
the 50 States. Altogether, they are a significant public land re-
source for the American people worthy of investment.
The 19 national historic trails help tell our uniquely American
story from colonial exploration, to the forced relocation of Native
Americans, to the civil rights struggle, and so much more. And the
11 National Scenic Trails, like Amanda just discussed, along the
Continental Divide Trail, provide millions of Americans with access
to the outdoors over thousands of miles close to home and in re-
mote wilderness areas.
Here are some quick statistics to keep in mind. These 30 trails
connect with 84 national parks, 89 national forests, 70 national
wildlife refuges, over 100 BLM public land areas, and 179 national
wilderness areas. The individual national trails and their sup-
porting groups have engaged 129 trail towns mostly in rural areas
at the local level, and they run near or through 100 major urban
areas. So the system is really something we are working to expand
and appreciate the support you all have given. Your ongoing com-
mitment in the past and last year’s appropriations bill has made
an enormous difference to this system and to the successful work
of trail groups and trail administrators on the ground.
It is also worth noting that in 2019, the Federal funds invested
in the trails leveraged over $13 million in private funding and 1
million volunteer hours that are valued at almost $26 million. So
you can be assured that every dollar you appropriate is stretched
much farther on the ground, and the Partnership is committed to
expanding this leveraging power of the national trails. This impres-
sive system of trails is not yet complete, however, as Amanda
talked about so effectively. In order to ensure that the national
trails serve the American people most effectively, we are requesting
investments in Fiscal Year 2021 for operations, construction, and
maintenance for all 30 trails in the Park Service, the Forest Serv-
ice, and the Bureau of Land Management, and full funding at $900
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
48
million for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, with over $38
million of that allocated for the parks. I mean, for the trails. My
old job just surfaced. Sorry.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. As you say, everything connects.
Ms. DECOSTER. Everything connects. [Laughter.]
These funds are critical to ensuring that the integrity of the
trails that make up the National Trail System is supported and en-
hanced now and into the future.
My written testimony includes specific funding requests for the
varied needs within the Agency’s operations, construction, and
maintenance categories for all 30 trails, and we are happy to dig
in later as you put your bill together on those. We also want to ex-
tend our gratitude, as others have, for your continued robust in-
vestments in the Land and Water Conservation Fund and the an-
nual allocations to specific national trails.
We call for full funding for LWCF in Fiscal Year 2021 so that
the entire $900 million that is deposited into the LWCF account
every year can be allocated by Congress by this subcommittee to
the conservation and recreation programs for which that funding is
intended. We understand that within your current budget alloca-
tions this is very challenging as well as your need to meet all the
other programs, as has been testified to and will continue to be
today. So that said, we were very heartened to see a final LWCF
appropriation in Fiscal Year 2020 that was the highest in 17 years.
We really appreciate that.
LWCF funding for the national trails is critical. There continued
to be identified needs for land acquisitions along several national
trails, totaling almost $40 million in Fiscal Year 2021, and the spe-
cifics are highlighted in our written testimony. Full funding of
LCWF and the allocation of some of those funds to specific trails
will give trail managers the tools they need to protect important
trail resources and ensure that the National Trail System can meet
the needs of the American people.
Thank you again for allowing us to testify today, and we look for-
ward to working with you as you put your bill together.
[The statement of Ms. DeCoster follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
49
St. Suite 2E • Madison, WI 53703
tel. {608) 249-7870 • www.pnts.org • fax (608) 335-8224
February 6, 2020
KATHY DECOSTER, ADVOCACY & POLICY DIRECTOR
STATEMENT TO THE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT & RELATED AGENCIES
Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce and members of the subcommittee:
'!be Partnership for the National Trails System is grateful for the opportunity to provide testimony today. We
urge your continued support in the FY 2021 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies appropriations bill for
investments in America's National Trails System and for attention to speeifie needs of the 30 national trails
administered by the National Park Service, the US Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management
This Subcommittee's continued support for the various needs of the National Trails System in the FY 2020 bill is
most appreciated and builds on efforts over the past 25 years to support trails that make up the system. We also
appreciate your continuing efforts to increase appropriations for the Land and Water Conservation Fund as
we work towards full funding and thank yon for supporting LWCF investments in the trails.
The National Trails System is a bold experiment in public/private collaboration for public benefit. While most of
the trail making is done by tens of thousands of citizen stewards increased funding is needed to close gaps in these
trails. To continue the progress that you have fostered witb an increased investment in tbe National Trails
System, the Partnership requests that you provide annual operations funding f.!!!: ~!!!!I!! ~O national scenic
!!.!!!l. historic trails for Fiscal Year 2021 through these appropriations:
• National Park Service: $17,014 million for administration of 23 trails and for coordination of the
long-distance trails program by the Washington office. Construction and Maintenance: $686,041 for
the Ice Age Trail, $2, 791,829 for the Appalachian Trail, $75,000 for the Arizona Trail, and $200,000
each for the Pacific Crest and Pacific Northwest Trails.
• USDA Forest Service: $100 million for trails construction and maintenance (CMTL) with $9.8116
million of it to administer 6 trails and $1.3 million to manage parts of 16 trails administered by the
NPS or BLM. $510,000 for Iditarod Trail construction and maintenance. ·
• Bureau of Land Management: $2.812 million to administer three trails and for coordination of the
National Trails program and $7.14 million to manage portions of 13 trails administered by the Park
Service or the Forest Service and for operating five National Historic Trail interpretive centers.
Construction: $1 million for the Iditarod Trail. Maintenance: $300,000 for the Iditarod Trail,
$100,000 for the Arizona Trail, and $300,000 for the Pacific Crest Trail.
We ask you to appropriate $900 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fnnd and allocate $38.354
million of it to these agencies to purchase properties that protect five national scenic and five national historic
trails:
• Bureau of Land Management: $5.695 million
• US Fish and Wildlife Service: $5.419 million
• US Forest Service: $16.74 million
• National Park Service: $10.5 million
National Park Service
The $17.014 million we request for Park Service operations includes increases for some of the trails to continue
the progress and new initiatives made possible by the additional funding Congress provided last year and several
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 85 here 43677P7.026
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
50
years ago. An increase of $82,500 for the Old Spanish Trail will enable the Pwk Service to continue working
with the Old Spanish Trail Association to increase volunteer participation in signing, interpreting, and educating
the public about the trail. The Park Service will be better able to collaborate with the Bureau of Land
Management in administering the trail and to consult with other agencies to protect the cultural and natural
resources along it from destruction by energy projects. An increase of $203,000 for El Camino Real de Ios
Tejas will enable the Park Service to better support work to increase interpretive signage along the trail and
public understanding of the trail, its cultural and historic resources and how to protect them.
We request an increase of $315,000 to expand Park Service efforts to protect cultural landscapes at more than
200 sites along the Santa Fe Trail, to develop GIS mapping, and to fund public educational and community
outreach programs of the Santa Fe Trail Association in preparation for the 200th Anniversary of the Trail. An
increase of $139,400 for the Oregon and California Trails will enable the Park Service to better support the
work Oregon-California Trails Association volunteers to develop digital and social media to connect with youth
in the cities along these trails providing information about their many layers of history and to better protect the
historical and cultural .heritage sites and landscapes along them from destruction by energy development in the
West. Congress doubled the length of the Trail of Tears in 2009, but provided no additional funding to manage
the additional trail. An increase of $150,000 to $645,000 will provide for management of this additional trail and
more support for the work of Trail of Tears Association volunteers.
We request an increase of $172,000 to $300,000 for the New England Trail to strengthen the outreach and
community engagement of the Connecticut Forests & Parks Association and the Appalachian Mountain Club
along the trail and support trail relocations and reconstruction work of these organizations' volunteers.
We request an increase of $100,000 to $640,000 for the Ala Kahakai Trail to enable the Park Service to work
with E Mau Na Ala Hele and the Ala Kahakai Trail Association to care for resources and with the University of
Hawaii to conduct archaeological and cultural landscape studies along this trail. We also request increases of
$400,000 for the Captain John Smith Chesapeake Trail, $123,000 for the Overmountain Victory Trail, and
$122,000 for the Washington-Rochambeau Trail
The $2 million we request for the 4,600-mile North Country Trail will enable the Park Service to provide
greater support for the regional GIS mapping, trail building, trail management, and training of volunteers led by
the North CountrY Trail Association. The $1.05 million we request for the Ice Age Trail includes a $207,000
increase to build partner and citizen capacity for building new and maintaining existing trail, protecting the
natural and cultural resources on the lands purchased for the trail, and to provide the Park Service with a planner
to accelerate planning of the land protection corridor for the trail.
Construction and Maintenance: We request that you provide $686,041 for the Ice Age Trail to build 17 miles
of new trail and several !railhead parking lots and repair damage from catastrophic floods; $75,000 for
maintenance of the National Park Service segments of the Arizona Trail; and $200,000 each for trail
construction on National Park Service segments of the Pacific Crest and Pacific Northwest Trails. For the
Appalachian Trail we request $1.0177 million for Cyclic Maintenance; $1.417 million for Repair Rehab: and
$357,129 for Public Land Corps to support youth corps crews.
USDA - Forest Service
We ask you to appropriate $100 million for trails construction and maintenance (CMTL) to begin to address
the considerable maintenance backlog on the trails in the National Forest System. Within this appropriation we
request that you provide $9.886 million ~ l! separate budgetary item specifically for the Arizona, Continental
Divide, Florida, Pacific Crest, and Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trails and the Nez Perce National
Historic Trail within the over-all appropriation for Capital Improvements and Maintenance for Trails.
Recognizing the on-the-ground management responsibility the Forest Service has for 1024 miles of the
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 86 here 43677P7.027
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
51
Appalachian Trail, more than 650 miles of the North Country Trail, and sections of the lee Age, Anza, Caminos
Real de Tierra Adentro and de Tejas, Lewis & Clark, California, lditarod, Mormon Pioneer, Old Spanish, Oregon,
Overrnountain Victory, Pony Express, Trail of Tears and Santa Fe Trails, we ask you to appropriate $1.3 million
specifically for these trails.
We ask that you provide direction to the Forest Service to specifically allocate the funding appropriated for the
administered and managed national scenic and historic trails directly to those trails.
The Partnership's request of $9.886 million includes $1.5 million to enable the Forest Service and Florida Trail
Association to continue trail maintenance, to control invasive species, do ecosystem restoration, and otherwise
manage 4,625 acres of new Florida Trail land. This request also includes $2.5 million for the Pacific Crest
Trail, $2 million for the Continental Divide Trail, $1 million for the Pacific Northwest Trail, $926,000 for the
Nez Perce Trail, and $1.45 million for the Arizona Trail. The additional funds requested will enable the Forest
Service to develop Comprehensive Management Plans for the latter three trails and will support rehabilitation of
existing trail and construction of new trail along all these trails and support the youth engagement work being
done by the partner trail associations. We also request $510,000 of additional funding for construction and for
maintenance of sections of the Iditarod Trail in the Chugach National Forest.
Burean of Land Management
Although considerably more money is needed to fully administer the National Conservation Lands System and
protect its resources, we request that you appropriate $84 million in base funding for the System. We ask that
you appropriate as new permanent base funding $250,000 for National Trails System Program
Coordination, $1 million for the lditarod Trail, $230,000 for El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro Trail,
$1.332 million for the Old Spanish Trail, and $4 million for the Bureau to manage 4,645 miles of thirteen other
national scenic and historic trails. We request $1 million to construct new sections of the lditarod Trail and to
maintain these trails: Iditarod Trail - $300,000, Arizona Trail - $100,000, and Pacific Crest Trail - $300,000.
We also request $3.14 million to operate five historic trails interpretive centers.
To promote greater management transparency and accountability for the National Trails and the whole National
Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), we urge you to request expenditure and accomplishment reports for
each of the NLCS Units for FYl9, FY20, and FY21 and to direct the Bureau to include unit-level allocations
within major sub-activities for each of the scenic and historic trails, and wild and scenic rivers -- as the Bureau
has done for the national monuments, wilderness, and conservation areas -- within a new activity account for the
National Landscape Conservation System in FY21. The Bureau's lack of a unified budget account for National
Trails prevents the agency from efficiently planning, implementing, reporting, and taking advantage of cost-
saving and leveraging partnerships and volunteer contributions for every activity related to these national
resources.
Land and Water Conservation Fund
The Partnership strongly supports full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund at the authorized
$900 million for the component federal and state programs funded under LWCF. Within this amount we request
that you appropriate $38.354 million to acquire 43 parcels along l O national scenic and historic trails:
Bnreau of Land Management: $5.695 million 11,845 acres
Continental Divide National Scenic Trail (CO) - $2.8 M to acquire land around the Muddy Pass area
to facilitate relocation of the trail off a busy highway.
Nez Peree National Historic Trail (ID) - $2.295 million to protect riparian ecosystems and migratory corridors
with habitat for sage grouse, pronghorn antelope, and elk, and historic and cultural resources.
Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail (OR) - $600,000 for trail and resource protection within the Cascade
Siskiyou National Monument in Southern Oregon.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 87 here 43677P7.028
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
52
US Fish and Wildlife Service: $5.419 million I 1,790 acres
California National Historic Trail (ID): $1.57 million to protect the largest breeding concentration of Sandhill
Cranes and a haven for other waterfowl near Grays Lake NWR from agricultural development;
Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail (VA) $3 million to preserve and provide access to
sites of historic encounters between John Smith and indigenous peoples and protect major eagle and migratory
bird stopover habitat in the Rappahannock River and James River NWRs.
Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (WA) $849,000 to preserve a wealth of unique ecosystems and
enhance ecosystem connectivity between State-protected lands and the Steigerwald NWR.
US Forest Service: $16.74 million i 16,000 acres
Appalachian National Scenic Trail (NC, TN, VA, VT) $5.45 million for four national forests in four states to
protect miles of several trout streams, relocate trail segments, preserve trail viewsheds, and provide habitat for
rare birds and ecological connectivity and watershed protection near or adjacent to the Appalachian Trail. One
parcel in NC is also within the viewshed of the Overmonntain Victory National Historic Trail.
Arizona National Scenic Trail (AZ) $200,000 for an easement in Little Casa Blanca Canyon closing a gap in the
trail and removing it from a dangerous road.
Florida National Scenic Trail (FL) $90,000 to fill trail gaps and provide connectivity between protected areas
along the Withlacoochee River and adjacent to Suwannee River State Park;
Lolo National Forest (MT)• $6 million for 7,500 acres (Phase II) of the Lolo Trails Landmark project that
protects existing portions of both the Lewis and Clark and Nez Perce National Historic Trails. Phase I of this
project was the #3 national priority for the USFS in FY 2020;
Shasta-Trinity National Forest (CA) - $5 million for Phase III of the Trinity Divide project {5,600 acres) which
includes or is adjacent to portions of the Pacific Crest Trail in northern California. Previous LWCF
appropriations over three years ensured the completion of the first two phases of Trinity Divide in 2019.
National Park Service: $10.5 million i 1,420 acres
Ice Age National Scenic Trail (WI) $3.5 million to help acquire three parcels totaling 400 acres within the Cross
Plains Unit of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve in Dane County.
Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail (VA) $4 million to purchase I 000 acres.
Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route National Historic Trail (NY) $3 million for preservation of a
Revolutionary War-era supply depot site and cemetery._
We also request that you continue allocating LWCF funds for "recreation access" in the four land management
agencies, with report language encouraging them to use those funds to close gaps in the National Trails System.
Private Sector Support for the National Trails System
Public-spirited partnerships between private citizens and public agencies have been a hallmark of the
National Trails System since its inception. These partnerships create the enduring strength of the Trails System
and the trail communities that sustain it by combining the local, grass-roots energy and responsiveness of
volunteers with the responsible continuity of public agencies. They also provide private financial support for
public projects, often resulting in a greater than equal match of funds.
The private trail organizations' commitment to the success of these trail-sustaining partnerships grows even as
Congress' support for the trails has grown. In 2019 the trail organizations coordinated and guided 23,964
volunteers who contributed 1,010,962 hours of documented labor valued at $25,708,751 to help sustain the
national scenic and historic trails. The organizations also raised private sector contributions of $13,259,246 for
the trails.
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 88 here 43677P7.029
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
53
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Well, thank you, and thank you very much for
helping me make the case, along with all the colleagues on this
committee, that we need a bigger baseline budget. And thank you
for the acknowledgement for what this committee did for all
LCWF. But we need your help in getting a bigger topline number
altogether, and many of the programs that you pointed out, you
also want to see an increase in, and that is some of the lines in
Forest, and BLM, and Park. So altogether, it just puts more pres-
sure on the dollars.
And I appreciate also the singling out of some of the trails and
some of the connections that you want to do, but as of right now,
we are not able to specify anything but putting things in the
topline number due to constraints with not having full agreement
with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that that we can
specify certain trails or certain projects. I would like to see us do
some of that where we can get something completed and done, and
move on to the next one, but that is the discussion that will con-
tinue to take place on this side of the Capitol, but also has to take
place on the other side of the Capitol to do that.
So thank you. I just want to thank you for helping me make the
case where we need to work with a bigger allocation, and for also
recognizing not only the testimony that you heard today, but what
we will hear from our tribal brothers and sisters who also work on
many of the projects that you are working on together. So I can’t
thank you enough. I don’t have a question for you because you got
everything laid out for me to take when I go in and make my argu-
ment. So thank you from the top of my heart for helping me make
the case that our subcommittee needs a larger allocation, period.
And we all want to work together for finding that permanent fund-
ing solution for LWCF because that will help this committee in
being able to move forward on those joint projects that you so all
eloquently put out. Ms. Pingree?
Ms. PINGREE. No, I didn’t really have anything. I appreciate your
helping people to understand just beyond this room that it is the
big number that governs everything else. So thanks for everyone’s
hard work and doing all that we can. I get to work with almost all
of you, except the Continental Divide, which is way too far away.
[Laughter.]
But anyway, it is a wonderful part of the trail system, and
thanks for providing this map. It is really impressive to see what
all of them are. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. And I know, having worked on environmental
policy for many, many years, Peter, we like you. But I just want
to cherish this moment of all the women sitting here at the table
on both sides. [Laughter.]
Thank you very much. Thank you.
[Applause.]
Ms. DECOSTER. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. So as I pointed out—thank you to the third
panel—we have colleagues coming in and out. We have full testi-
mony in front of us, and they will be joining back again shortly.
I figured out a way to kind of get us back on time, and that is not
to do the double introductions. So, Ms. White, I am going to let you
lead it off and give us the full background of who you are sup-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
54
porting, and go right into your testimony. And we will start it will
start the timer when you go into your testimony, not for intro-
ducing yourself. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
WITNESS
KASEY WHITE, DIRECTOR FOR GEOSCIENCE POLICY, GEOLOGICAL
SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Ms. WHITE. Okay, wonderful. Thank you so much, Chairwoman
McCollum. My name is Kasey White, and I am pleased to testify
today in support of the U.S. Geological Survey, on behalf of the Ge-
ological Society of America. GSA is a scientific society with more
than 20,000 members from Academia industry, and government in
more than 100 countries. GSA applauds the work of the sub-
committee to increase the USGS budget in Fiscal Year 2020. Thank
you for supporting the Survey and ensuring its ability to continue
to serve the Nation through its research and partnerships.
GSA or urges Congress to build on these investments and pro-
vide USGS with $1.35 billion in Fiscal Year 2021. This increase
will allow the USGS to implement new initiatives created by recent
legislation, sustain base funding for critical research and moni-
toring, and update and maintain its facilities.
The USGS is one of the Nation’s premier science agencies with
the distinctive capacity to engage interdisciplinary teams of experts
to gather data, conduct research, and develop integrated decision
support tools about our earth. In addition to underpinning the
science activities and decisions of the Department of the Interior,
USGS research is used by communities and businesses Across the
Nation to make informed decisions regarding land use planning,
emergency response, natural resource management, engineering,
and education.
The recent passage of several pieces of legislation illustrates the
bipartisan congressional support for the Agency. Last year, the
John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation Management and Recreation Act
established a national volcano early warning and monitoring sys-
tem at the USGS, and reauthorize the USGS’ National Cooperative
Geologic Mapping Program. The previous year, the enactment of
the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program Reauthoriza-
tion Act of 2018 reauthorized and expanded this important pro-
gram, including adding our earthquake early warning capabilities.
GSA recommends adequate funding to implement these laws.
USGS research addresses many of society’s greatest challenges.
For example, natural hazards are a major cause of fatalities and
economic losses. NOAA found that in 2019, the United States saw
14 weather and climate events with losses exceeding $1 billion,
which included floods, severe storms, tropical cyclones, and
wildfires. USGS data is utilized by decision makers in many sectors
to mitigate the effects of these natural disasters. For example, the
aviation sector relies upon USGS volcano monitoring to create safe
flight routes. NOAA depends on data from the USGS to issue flood,
drought, and tsunami warnings.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
55
USGS is a key partner in obtaining measurements necessary to
predict severe space weather events, which can have drastic im-
pacts on the electric power grid, satellite communications, and
navigation systems as highlighted in the March 2019 executive
order coordinating national resilience to electromagnetic pulses.
GSA urges investment in the USGS hazards programs as an im-
proved scientific understanding of these events will reduce future
losses by informing effective planning and mitigation.
In addition to conducting research on long-term patterns of cli-
mate change, USGS connects science to local communities. Climate
adaptation science centers provide scientific information necessary
to anticipate, monitor, and adapt to the effects of climate change
at regional and local levels. These centers work with communities
to make smart, cost-effective decisions on issues as diverse as pro-
tecting cultural resources to planning for wildfires. GSA appre-
ciates the expansion of this important program and Fiscal Year
2020.
As the U.S. increases its use of renewable energy, there is a vital
need to understand the abundance and distribution of critical min-
eral resources both within the U.S. and globally. This goal will re-
quire expanded collection and analysis of geological, geochemical,
and geophysical data. Earth MRIs are an important part of this ef-
fort, and GSA appreciates congressional support for this program.
The Landsat Satellite Program has amassed the largest archive
of remotely-sensed data in the world, a tremendously important re-
source for everything from natural resource planning, land use
planning, and assessing water resources, the impacts of natural
disasters, and global agriculture. GSA supports interagency efforts
to ensure the continuation of this vital monitoring program.
All of these endeavors are supported by the core systems
sciences, facilities, and science support. These programs and serv-
ices, such as geologic mapping and data preservation, provide crit-
ical information and infrastructure that form the foundation of
USGS research.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today for the
support of the U.S. Geological Survey. I would be happy to answer
any questions.
[The statement of Ms. White follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
56
THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY GSA Testimony
OF AMERICA®
Testimony of the
Geological Society of America
Kasey White
Director for Geoscience Policy
Regarding the
U.S. Geological Survey
FY 2021 Budget
to the
United States House of Representatives
Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Summary
The Geological Society of America (GSA) recommends that Congress provide $1.35 billion for
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Fiscal Year 2021. We thank Congress for the
investments made in FY 2020 and encourage a path of sustainable growth moving forward. As
one of our Nation's key science agencies, the USGS plays a vital role in understanding and
documenting mineral and energy resources that underpin economic growth; researching and
monitoring potential natural hazards that threaten U.S. and international security; informing
communities about the impacts of a changing climate; and determining and assessing water
quality and availability. Approximately two thirds of the USGS budget is allocated for researeh
and development. In addition to supporting the science activities and decisions of the Department
of the Interior, this research is used by communities across the nation to make informed
decisions in land-use planning, emergency response, natural resource management, engineering,
and education. GSA believes that it is important to grow the USGS budget, given the importance
of its many activities that protect lives and property, contribute to national security, and enhance
the quality oflife.
Founded in 1888, The Geological Society ofAmerica (GSA) is a scientific society with more than
20,000 members from academia, government. and industry in more than JOO countries. Through
its meetings, publications, and programs, GSA enhances the professional growth members
and promotes the geosciences in the service of humankind and stewardship Earth. GSA
encourages cooperative research among earth, nume1arv. and social scientists, fosters
public dialogue on geoscience issues, and supports of earth-science education.
SCIENCE• STEWARDSHIP • SERVICE
3300 Penrose Place, P,O, Box 9140, Boulder, Colorodo 80301-9140 USA • Tel 303.357.1000, fax 303.357.1070 •
\fL..WW .qeOJ.Qfiety,org
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 97 here 43677P7.030
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
57
The Geological Society of America (GSA) appreciates the increase to the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) budget in FY 2020 and thanks the Committee for recognizing the importance of
the work of the agency to protect lives, property, and national security. GSA urges Congress to
build on these investments and provide USGS $1.35 billion in Fiscal Year 2021. This increase
will allow the USGS to implement new initiatives, maintain the base funding for critical research
and monitoring, and update and maintain its facilities. GSA appreciates the Committee's efforts
to ensure that any changes to the organizational structure of USGS support rather than hinder the
ability of the USGS to serve the nation with its research.
U.S. Geological Survey Contributions to National Security, Health, and Welfare
The USGS is one of the nation's premier science agencies, with a distinctive capacity to engage
truly interdisciplinary teams of experts to gather data, conduct research, and develop integrated
decision support tools. Approximately two thirds of the USGS budget is allocated for research
and development. In addition to underpinning the science activities and decisions of the
Department of the Interior, this research is used by communities and businesses across the nation
to make informed decisions regarding land use planning, emergency response, natural resource
management, engineering, and education.
As noted in the Preamble to its Endorsement of American Meteorological Society's Freedom of
Scientific Expression statement, GSA "strongly believes that science and society benefit greatly
from careful and ample technical peer review of scientific findings, and subsequent
communication of scientific results must be permitted freely and without concern by the scientist
for censorship, intimidation, or political interference." GSA encourages Congress to ensure that
USGS follows these principles and others outlined in the Department of the Interior's Integrity of
Scientific and Scholarly Activities policies.
USGS research addresses many of society's greatest challenges for national security, health, and
welfare. Several are highlighted below.
• Natural hazards are a major cause of fatalities and economic losses. NOAA found that in
2019, the United States saw 14 weather and climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1
billion each, which included floods, severe storms, tropical cyclones and wildfires. An
improved scientific understanding of geologic hazards will reduce future losses by informing
effective planning and mitigation.
Decision makers in many sectors rely upon USGS data to respond to natural disasters. For
example, USGS volcano monitoring provides key data to enable decisions on aviation safety.
NOAA depends on data from the USGS to issue flood, drought, and tsunami warnings.
USGS is a key partner in obtaining data necessary to predict severe space weather events,
which affect the electric power grid, satellite communications, and navigation systems. The
March 2019 Executive Order, Coordinating National Resilience to Electromagnetic Pulses,
highlights these research needs.
The recent enactment of several bills illustrates the bipartisan, bicameral support of hazards
research and GSA recommends adequate funding to implement these bills. Last year, a lands
package included a hazards and mapping title that establish a National Volcano Early
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 98 here 43677P7.031
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
58
Warning and Monitoring System at the USGS and reauthorize the USGS' National
Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program. The previous year, the enactment of the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2018 indicates the support of
Congress and the Administration for enabling advance warning of impending hazards, such
as the Earthquake Early Warning System.
GSA urges Congress to support efforts for USGS to modernize and upgrade its natural
hazards monitoring and warning systems, including additional 3-D elevation mapping and
earthquake early warning systems, while maintaining fundamental research and monitoring.
• There is a vital need to understand the abundance and distribution of critical mineral
resources, as well as the geologic processes that form them, both within the United States and
globally. This goal will require expanded collection and analysis of geological, geochemical,
and geophysical data.
GSA supports increases in minerals science, research, information, data collection and
analysis that will allow for more economic and environmental management and utilization of
minerals. In addition, GSA supports increases in funding for research to better understand
domestic sources of energy, including conventional and unconventional oil and gas and
renewables. GSA appreciates congressional support for the new EarthMRl program, which
will provide new resources and leverage current data to accelerate geological and
geophysical mapping, identify critical mineral sites for further scientific review, among
safety, security, scientific, and industrial uses.
• Improved fundamental understanding of the quantity, quality, distribution, and use of water
resources through monitoring and research by the USGS is necessary to ensure adequate and
safe water resources for the health and welfare of society. Improved representation of
geological, biological, and ecological systems-including underlying physical and chemical
processes and their interactions--is needed. In addition to maintaining current monitoring
capabilities, new hydrologic data are required to improve the reliability and reduce the
uncertainty of scientific analyses that support water resources management and policy
decisions.
• USGS research on climate impacts is used by local polieymakers and resource managers to
make sound decisions based on the best possible science. In addition to fundamental, long-
term climate change research, the USGS provides scientific information necessary to
anticipate, monitor, and adapt to the effects of climate change at regional and local levels,
allowing communities to make smart, cost-effective decisions. For example, the Alaska
Climate Adaptation Science Center (CASC) has conducted research on the relationship
between wildfire and other ecological disturbances, such as drought, which will help resource
managers plan for and adapt to the evolving threat that fire poses to humans, infrastructure,
and ecosystems. Across the country, the Southeast CASC is working with local stakeholders
to protect cultural resources in the face of a changing climate.
• The Landsat satellites have amassed the largest archive of remotely sensed land data in the
world, a tremendously important resource for natural resource exploration, land use planning,
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 99 here 43677P7.032
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
59
and assessing water resources, the impacts of natural disasters, and global agriculture
production. GSA supports interagency efforts for future support of Landsat. The recent
National Academy of Sciences' Earth Science and Applications from Space (ESAS) Decadal
Survey report notes,
"Earth science and applications are a key part of the nation's information infrastructure,
warranting a U.S. program of Earth observations from space that is robust, resilient, and
appropriately balanced."
Activities from hazard monitoring to mineral forecasts are supported by Core System Sciences,
Facilities, and Science Support. These programs and services, such as geologic mapping and data
preservation, provide critical information, data, and infrastructure that underpin the research of
the USGS. GSA appreciates the committee's recent investments in Facilities to address many
deferred maintenance issues.
Knowledge of the earth sciences is essential to scientific literacy and to meeting the
environmental and resource challenges of the twenty-first century. GSA is very concerned that
cuts in Earth science funding will cause students and young professionals to leave the field,
potentially leading to a lost generation of professionals in areas that are already facing worker
shortages. Investments in these areas could lead to job growth, as demand for these professionals
now and in the future is assessed to be high. Strong investments in geoscience research are
needed to prepare citizens for these job opportunities.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony about the U.S. Geological Survey. For
additional information or to learn more about the Geological Society of America - including
GSA Position Statements on climate change, water resources, mineral and energy resources,
natural hazards, and public investment in Earth science research - please visit
www.geosociety.org or contact GSA's Director for Geoscience Policy Kasey White at
kwhite@geosociety.org.
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 100 here 43677P7.033
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
60
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Make sure the mike is on.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
3DEP COALITION
WITNESS
JOHN M. PALATIELLO, 3DEP COALITION
Mr. PALATIELLO. Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is John
Palatiello, and I am pleased to be here today on behalf of the 3DEP
Coalition. I am also the government affairs consultant to the Na-
tional Society of Professional Surveyors, and the founder and presi-
dent of USGO, the informal coalition of leading geospatial firms.
The 3DEP Coalition includes more than 40 organizations. If I
may, I would like to insert into the record a list of these organiza-
tions that support the 3DEP program.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. We will do that. Just make sure that you leave
that at the end of the presentation.
Mr. PALATIELLO. I will do. Thank you. Thank you very much. As
the subcommittee is aware, 3DEP is the USGS program that is sat-
isfying the growing demand for consistent, high-quality topographic
data across the country, primarily through the collection of ele-
vation data with LIDAR. There are more than 600 applications
that benefit from this data. They support economic growth, respon-
sible environmental protection and resource development, infra-
structure improvement, and many more.
USGS’ own assessment of this program shows that it generates
about $13 billion in annual benefits and has a benefit cost ratio of
4.7 to 1, so it is an extraordinary investment of our tax dollars.
And I would say that it provides the underpinning to a number of
the programs that you will hear about in the course of the public
witnesses here today.
Since 2015, over 200 Federal, State, local, and nongovernmental
partners have collaborated in support of 3DEP. I have a map here
that my colleague is showing that where now about 67 percent of
the Nation is completed with this data for the first time over. The
optimal funding for this program is at $146 million a year. At that
level, the country can be mapped in 7 years and then go on another
repeat cycle. So at our current funding level, we are at about 67
percent.
I would like to draw your attention to two things with regard to
this map. One, Madam chair, I think jumps out at you is there is
unfortunately a big white space in the middle of the country other
than perhaps the Twin Cities. And so is a tremendous need for pre-
cision agriculture for stormwater management, for a variety of ap-
plications in agricultural America. The other point that I think is
very important to draw attention to is the fact that the other major
unmapped part of the country is the public lands west, and there
is a critical need whether you are talking about wildfire mapping,
rural broadband development, rural infrastructure. We would hope
that the subcommittee could fund this program not only through
USGS, but through the other agencies. It is the landowners, the
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
61
Forest Service, BLM, that have an inherent interest in having this
data for good management.
As I mentioned in the beginning of my statement, 3DEP has sup-
ported numerous programs, applications, and activities. I would
hasten to add, Mr. Joyce, that in my written statement, I talk
about some great work that an Ohio firm is doing on the 3DEP pro-
gram, and that is being replicated by the other firms that are in-
volved as well. But when we talk about hazard mitigation, energy
resource development, wildlife and habitat management, flood
plain mapping, flood risk management, agriculture, precision farm-
ing, natural resource, conservation, invasive species mapping and
mitigation infrastructure, transportation, climate change moni-
toring, all of these are activities where the 3DEP data becomes
good baseline data for all of them.
So we would urge the full funding of the program at its optimum
level of a $146 million. We understand the constraints on you.
Whether we do this solely within USGS or through the other agen-
cies, as I mentioned, there is a critical need to finish the country
and provide that data and the benefits that I mentioned. Thank
you very much for the opportunity to be with you this morning.
[The statement of Mr. Palatiello follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
62
Statement of John M. Palatiello
On behalf oftbe 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) Coalition
Before the House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee
on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Madam Chair, members of the subcommittee, I am John Palatiello and I am honored to appear before you
today on behalf of the 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) Coalition. I serve as Government Affairs Consultant to
the National Society of Professional Surveyors (NSPS), the national professional society of individual
licensed surveyors, and Founder and President ofU .S. GEO, an informal coalition ofleading geospatial firms.
The 3DEP Coalition is comprised of representatives of a broad cross section of stakeholders, including over
40 organizations from surveying, mapping and geospatial; real estate; home building; flood management;
emergency response; environmental; science; mining; insurance; telecom; agriculture; and infrastructure.
The 3DEP Coalition enthusiastically supports the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 3DEP, or 3-dimentional
elevation program.
3DEP
3DEP is satisfying the growing demand for consistent, high-quality topographic data and a wide range of
other three-dimensional representations of the Nation's natural and constructed features, primarily through
elevation data collected with Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR). Among the applications that benefit
from 3DEP data are flood risk management; infrastructure; landslides & other hazards; water resources;
aviation safety; telecom; homeland security; emergency response; precision agriculture; energy: pipeline
safety: and other areas.
Indeed, USGS has identified more than 600 applications that benefit from such enhanced elevation data and
the list is growing every day. 3DEP promotes economic growth, facilitates responsible environmental
protection and resource development and management, assists with infrastructure improvement, and
generally enhances the quality of life of all Americans. The USGS, with involvement from the private sector
and other stakeholders, conducted a National Enhanced Elevation Assessment (NEEA) to determine and
document the need for national elevation data within government and private markets. The results indicated
that enhanced elevation data have the potential to generate $13 billion in annual benefits, at a benefit:cost
ratio of 4.7 to I.
Congress provided an innovative mechanism for cooperative activities in elevation data when it enacted the
Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act, in the MAP-21 Act, Public Law 112-141. It included section
l 00220, which can be utilized to pool funding from Federal, state and local government entities for elevation
data. USGS was specifically named in that provision.
USGS Public-Private Partnership
3DEP stands out as a best practices model for coordination, inter-agency and inter-governmental cooperation,
and a strong definition of government and private sector roles and responsibilities in a public-private
partnership. There is significant capacity and capability in the private sector to support the program and
USGS currently has contract vehicles in place to efficiently implement the program. The USGS manages a
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 106 here 43677P7.034
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
63
series of Geospatial Products and Services Contracts (GPSC) with ten main contractors, which include six
large businesses and four small businesses, to perform a variety of surveying, mapping and geospatial
services. These Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) contracts are competitively awarded under the
"Brooks Act" (40 USC 1101 et. seq. and part 36.6 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), 48 CFR
36.6) and task orders are negotiated directly with selected firms to provide contract services. The primary
data currently procured via the GPSC contracts is for the 3DEP program. This features LiDAR data in the
conterminous United States and interferometric synthetic aperture radar (IFSAR) in Alaska.
3DEP has been acquiring three-dimensional information across the United States using light detection and
ranging (LiDAR) technology - an airborne laser-based remote sensing technology that collects billions of
LiDAR returns while flying- and making results available to the public. Since 2015, over 200 federal, state,
local and non-government partners have collaborated to support over 1.5 million square miles of 3DEP
acquisition across the nation, and 3DEP data is now available or in-work for nearly 67% of the nation. The
3DEP BAA provides an opportunity for continued collaboration across the nation so that government at all
levels, the private sector, and citizens may have access to and derive the benefits of3D elevation data.
Funding Status
Optimally, USGS views this program to be funded at $146 million annually. 3DEP has been a recent success
as the trend for certain budgets for other civilian agency programs have been reduced. In FY 2013, this
Subcommittee helped 3DEP to achieve $20 million in data collection efforts. By FY 2018, data collection
efforts reached $120 million, thanks in large part to the continued support of this Subcommittee as well as to
additional funding provided from other Federal agencies outside of this Subcommittee's jurisdiction,
particularly FEMA. It is our understanding that USGS received nearly $40 million in FY 2019 for all 3DEP-
related activities. The recently enacted funding agreement for FY 2020 included an additional:
"$7,722,000 for the Alaska mapping initiative and the following increases: $5,000,000 for
the 30 Elevation program (3DEP) to accelerate achievement of I 00 percent coverage of the
Great Lakes region; $2,000,000 for the US Topo program to procure product-on-demand
updates; and $3,000,000 to produce digital suiface models using unclassified satellite optical
data for the U.S. and territories not mapped with LiDAR in 2021 . .... $10,598,000, the budget
request, for the critical minerals Earth Mapping Resources Initiative, (Earth MRI)."
We deeply appreciate the leadership of this Subcommittee to achieve those levels. We also want to highlight
that the single agency within Interior to contribute to 3DEP from its budget is USGS. However, public land
states in the West are largely not mapped to the 3DEP standard. Given that elevation data, including a focus
on slope and topographic data are vital to wildfire mapping, rural broadband deployment and other forms of
rural infrastructure, then this Subcommittee should also encourage other Interior agencies such as the Bureau
of Land Management, as well as the Forest Service in USDA, to participate and contribute in, or increase its
level in 3DEP.
Added Benefits
The feedback we've received from 3DEP stakeholders has been overwhelming. Let me share a sampling.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 107 here 43677P7.035
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
64
First, 3DEP is a model of efficiency due to its well-designed, consistent approach from data acquisition
through development of deliverables and derivative products. As you may know, GAO has been critical of
some Federal agency geospatial activities for the lack of coordination and inattentiveness to duplication.
USGS has implemented a strategy and governance framework that efficiently engages partners and
stakeholders. This is a model for the concept to "map it once, use it many times".
USGS has done an excellent job making the source data and derivative products readily available to the
public via its website and other means, which is an accomplishment in and of itself (compared to most other
Federal agencies). 3DEP data are used regularly by many entities (including software manufacturers that
include ready access to the data via links within the software) which many believe makes the ROI even
greater than USGS first projected and results in a "bang for the buck" from this program.
The contracting strategy implemented by USGS is exemplary. A premium is placed on quality,
qualifications, competence, and performance, yet USGS staff is assuring that prices paid to contactors are
negotiated to be fair and reasonable to the government, as the law and regulations require. 3DEP has
particularly been a lifeline to the success of numerous small businesses, both at the prime and subcontractor
levels. Small businesses have reported that larger business prime contractors have been very accommodating
to include small business subcontractors on their team and provided them with plentiful work.
3DEP is in high demand to meet many needs and applications. I recently had a conversation with the
Secretary of Planning in a Governor's Cabinet and I asked, "ls there any geospatial data you don't have for
your state that you would like to have?" and without hesitation he said, "LiDAR".
Moreover, 3DEP is meeting needs that were not evident, or did not receive significant attention when the
NEEA study was done that are now in the forefront. For example, to meet the need for critical minerals, as
outlined in the President's Executive Order, and included in the ~arth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth
MRI), for use in the production of a wide range of products in modern society, has never been greater.
Today's consumer demand for personal high-tech devices, applications of alternative energy solutions,
national defense and many more essential needs, make the demand for critical minerals central to the U.S.
economy a significant concern. Locating these minerals to reduce our risk of reliance on imported minerals,
particularly from less-than-friendly nations, is dependent on 21st century tools such as LiDAR from 3DEP.
Wildfires have been increasingly devastating in some parts of the country, especially in the West. 3DEP,
through the USGS partnership with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), enabled, for
example, the contracting with Woolpert, a USGS contractor, to collect, process, and deliver roughly 9,500
square miles ofLiDAR data across Southern California immediately following the wildfrres that raged across
the region in 2018. Similar USGS contracting with other firms have occurred as well.
This data was collected to enable wildfire risk mapping assessment and planning, identify fuel load reduction
programs and escalate the emergency assessment of post-fire debris flow hazards. 3DEP data provided the
necessary LiDAR information about the forest canopy and vegetation structure, which is used to map wildfire
fuel like trees and clusters of trees that are more likely to burn and escalate a wildfire.
Wildfire risk mapping and planning assessment requires analysis of a LiDAR dataset in order to determine
the vegetation, fuel load, and potential structures that are in danger for future events. From analysis of the
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 108 here 43677P7.036
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
65
LiDAR data, fuel-load reduction programs are developed to lessen the material that contributes to the
propagation of a wildfire. One way to decrease the fuel load is to reduce the understmy that grows beneath
the forest canopy. By identifying, creating, and maintaining fire breaks, a wildfire can be mitigated, slowed,
or even redirected. By strategically decreasing these fuels from targeted areas, like near homes and
businesses, the likelihood that the wildfrre will destroy those structures is considerably lessened. Wildfrres
also spark other potentially devastating natural disasters. FEMA reports that wildfires dramatically alter the
terrain and greatly increase the risk of flooding from heavy rains and mudflows. Post-wildfire LiDAR data
collection helps develop predictive models of flood and mudflow hazards that result from steep terrain that
has been stripped of vegetation. When the vegetation, whose root network holds the dirt together, is burned
off it can tum into mudslides. Li DAR data supports the fundamental science of how flows initiate, how they
grow and evolve, and where they go. Statistical debris flow models, generated by LiDAR data, illustrate the
likelihood and rainfall intensity thresholds of a region.
Across much of the western United States, invasive vegetative species are a threat to native plants, wildlife,
and public safety. For example, Cheatgrass displaces native grasses and shrubs, initiates nutrient loss,
reduces agriculture productivity and, most imperatively, leads to a higher risk of frre and perpetuates
potentially larger and more frequent fires. LiDAR data from 3DEP is vital before, during, and after wildfrres,
supporting prevention, mitigation and analysis. Following the LiDAR data acquisition, surveyors and remote
sensing scientists have worked to create a highly useful data set that is utilized to map Cheatgrass infestations.
Utilizing LiDAR, imagery, ground truth surveys, and remote sensing data analytics areas of Cheatgrass are
detected and defined. The resultant data help mitigate the spread of the invasive species across the state using
a highly focused and efficient approach.
Conclusion
As mentioned in the beginning of my statement, 3DEP has supported numerous programs, applications and
activities. The benefits from this enhanced elevation data include those mentioned previously, as well as
water supply and quality management, rangeland management, wildfire management, geologic resource
assessment and hazard mitigation, energy resource development, wildlife and habitat management,
floodplain mapping and flood-risk management, agriculture and precision farming, natural resource
conservation, invasive species mapping and mitigation, infrastructure, transportation, and many, many
others. In fact USGS is conducting a follow-on to the NEEA study to document those recent, new,and
emerging applications and benefits.
In conclusion, we respectfully urge the Subcommittee to work with other relevant subcommittees to fully
fund this important program to meet the extraordinary demand for current, accurate elevation data for the
nation. Our request and recommendation to the Subcommittee is to appropriate funds for the 3DEP program
at its optimal annual level of $146 million among all participating agencies.
Thank you for the opportunity to share our views and we look forward to working with the subcommittee to
continue the work to build on past success and further improve the Interior Department's surveying, mapping
and geospatial activities including the collection, management and dissemination of enhanced elevation data
through the USGS 3DEP.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 109 here 43677P7.037
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
66
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
GEOMAGNETISM
WITNESS
DAVID JONAS BARDIN, GEOMAGNETISM
Mr. BARDIN. Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, Mr. Simp-
son, Vice Chair Pingree, Mrs. Watson Coleman, I am David Jonas
Bardin, and I appreciate your again holding this public hearing
and again letting me testify.
This subcommittee was the leader on the USGS Geomagnetism
Program that had such success in the minibus that was signed into
law on December 20th, and I am going to give you all the credit
in the world. You identified issues. You identified the issue of what
happens when the Air Force withdraws a stipend. You dug into the
facts. Your staff went and found out with the Air Force on the one
hand, but also with USGS stuff, which they don’t tell you in the
way the green book, the budget justifications are done nowadays.
So you have to dig them out on why three observatories might have
been closed down, which really had to do with deferred mainte-
nance issues that I want to raise.
And you fully funded the Administration’s request for the $1.7
million for 1 more years’ worth of the magnetotelluric survey in
order to try to do what the President’s executive order of March
last year calls for, completion in 4 years. So I give you credit. I give
you hosanna, and I hope, Madam Chair, that you and your staff
again will dig in on some of the issues I want to raise.
Today I just want to talk thematically. I am not asking. You
raised the appropriation for the USGS Geomagnetism Program,
Congress did, to $4 million, which is almost all of the $4.1 million
that the House voted for. Your Senate colleagues came around to
your advice and your insights, for which I give them credit, but I
give you the most credit and thanks.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. They didn’t bring any money with it.
Mr. BARDIN. The $4 million the minibus appropriates is almost
the entire $4.1 million that the House did. The Senate would have
had a somewhat lower number. One of the differences was on the
magnetotelluric survey that you fully funded the Administration’s
request. They initially didn’t, but then finally in the minibus, they
did.
There are a couple of things I would like you to look into, and,
as I say, this is thematic testimony. After we see the Administra-
tion’s actual proposal next week, I probably will supplement it. At
the very least, I will give you a table which shows you year by year
what has been requested and what has been appropriated. And I
can’t fill in the bottom line now because I don’t know it yet. But
basically, the history flat, flat, flat until the sequester, and then
down, and only last year. Thanks to this subcommittee and the
minibus did it go up to the $4 million. I think it should be higher.
I would like you to look into at least two questions. One is the
$1.7 million for the magnetotelluric survey. This is a new under-
taking for USGS and the Geomagnetism Program. They have never
done it before. They are working hard to figure out how to do the
details, and I hope that you want on a tactful staff level will follow
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
67
what are the issues at the moment. None of that money has been
obligated. Now, it is not remarkable since it was appropriated on
December 20th, and none of it has been obligated. But we are not
going to feel good about it if that isn’t corrected and cured by the
end of the Fiscal Year. And I think it is a question of finding what
are the roadblocks for the money and what needs to be done there.
The second area I would like you to take a look into is deferred
maintenance. There is a problem for some of the observatories on
deferred maintenance. The formula which works very well for
much of the Interior Department doesn’t really apply very much to
geomagnetic observatories. They are not catering to visitors like
national parks. They don’t have large numbers of staff people. So
to the extent that priorities are set based on health and safety of
staff, health and safety of businesses, they really don’t apply to a
facility wherever it is located. And I think we need some reconsid-
eration. Perhaps the Administration will come up with something
on its own, but if not, perhaps either in report language or even
more, once you get the facts, that would be helpful.
The Geomagnetism program staff does an excellent job of keep-
ing track of the deferred maintenance issues, the accumulating bal-
ance. They have the facts. So if you ask them the questions, they
can produce the answers, and I trust they will produce truthful an-
swers. But they are not being volunteered because that is not the
way it is normally run.
I am supposed to stop now, so I will stop.
[The statement of Mr. Bardin follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
68
USGS Geomagnetism Program for 2/6/2020 public hearing
House Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Public Witness Hearing (non-tribal programs)
February 6, 2020, 10:00 AM USGS Panel
2007 Rayburn House Office Building (Formerly B-308)
Thematic Testimony of David Jonas Bardin on USGS Geomagnetism Program
Chair McCollum and Ranking Member Joyce,
Thank you for letting me testify orally, as an individual. Following your lead, 1 a Minibus 2
preserved the Geomagnetism Program under the Natural Hazards mission, enlarging it to
complete a geophysical, earth-conductivity reconnaissance survey ("MT Survey") of the
contignous United States (CONUS) - in accord with Executive Order 13865 (ofMarch 20.19).
The Appropriators explained: "The recommendation includes ... $4,000,000 for
Geomagnetism including $1,726,000 for the magnetotelluric survey as well as funding to
maintain operation of all observatories." 3
• USGS has been working to earry out that reeent law.
• My testimony today focuses, thematically, on USGS's post-Minibus responsibilities:
• How will USGS describe all aspects of its Geomagnetism Program?
• How soon will USGS carry out new responsibilities for MT Survey ofCONUS?
• Should USGS expand geomagnetic observatories and variometer stations and operations?
• Supplemental written testimony may address specifics of the forthcoming FY 202 I Request.
Enhancing descriptions of Geomagnetism Program activities and observatories.
USGS should enrich its useful Geomagnetism web site to update activities and outputs (sec
. USGS could well add to that web site:
1 See House Report 116/100 (June 3, 2019), pp. 45, 47,191: hnp,·//wwwrooacell!i aov/cooi(CssionaJ-
r,:port/l l6th-congress/house-reportflOO/l [PDF pp. 45, 47, 191 of247].
2 PublicLaw No. 116-94, approved December 20, 2019; H.R. 1865 • Further Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2020 (116th Cong.).
3 Division D of the Joint Explanatory Statement (posted at htti,t·/ docs house aovlbillsthiswcck/
20191216/BILLS 116HRI865SA-JES DI ISION-D,pdfl. whieh also includes following table:
nM"
tN•t•i,
►t••
111..011 P1111li1 1 'l
,, .. \ t••
t1ll
o h...
1'1••1 ,111
o••·••t
~.. 1.u1 11 . . . ,,.
l.J•~..,.,, •.,.1,,oro
~•lo•• M;i:••~1
~~••l~\,w •u,,n11
,1.-.1 ,.,. ....... ,~ 11,,t-•~
1-o••t••t•••
~•ut.1 'lll•"1M i..u,o ~.-. ••H•"~''"
by David Jonas Bardin prepared l /26/2020 Page! of4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 115 here 43677P7.038
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
69
USGS Geomagnetism Program for 2/6/2020 public hearing
A. USGS ground-based, geomagnetic data are:
- used by the National Geospatial Agency to calculate the
World Magnetic Model (WMM), on which all forms of
navigation rely;
- used by NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center for real-
time monitoring of geomagnetic disturbances (GMDs);
- used by Air Force to calculate atmospheric expansion, for
tracking low-orbiting satellites;
- used by the oil and gas industry for directional drilling; and
-used to calibrate (validate) non-USGS facilities.
B. USGS collects geomagnetic field data at all 14 ~".
observatories (see map)- six in CONUS (in Virginia,
Mississippi, Colorado, Arizona, California, and Washington),
as well as at variometer stations - three in CONUS (in
Minnesota, Montana, and New Mexico), but does not yet
report locations of variometer stations. 4
USGS now collects geoelectric field data at'only one of its observatories (in Colorado).
(Hopefully, USGS will come to collect such data at more venues.)
Dr. Jeffrey J. Love's USGS staff profile includes information not yet in the Geomagnetic
Program's own website. See https://www.usgs.gov/staff-profiles/jeffrey-i-love.
New responsibilities for MT Survey of CONUS
USGS has not yet obligated any of the FY 2020 $1. 726 million toward completion of an MT
Survey. MT survey field work requires equipment, trained field crews, planning, organization.
4 USGS describes its 14 geomagnetic observatories at https ·//www.usgs gov/natural-hazards/
geoma.goetisrn/science/observatories?(l!-science center objects-O#qt-science center omects. It does not
yet describe its variometer stations or report their total number.
- Ground-based monitoring of geomagnetic field variation (for frequencies less than l Hz) is typically
accomplished with a fluxgate magnetometer or "variometer." For many applications, raw variometer data
are sufficient, but for other applications, "observatory"-standard data are required, whereby the drifting
variometer response is minimized through temperature stabilization and, otherwise, corrected in data
processing with application of auxiliary calibration measurements. Magnetic observatories are more
expensive and labor-intensive to operate than variometer stations, and their geographic distribution is
relatively sparse; variometer stations are less expensive to operate and their deployments are sometimes
geographically dense.
- USGS magnetic observatories are operated with a 99%+ temporal continuity, for decades of time, and
data from each observatory are promptly made openly available to the user community in near-real-time.
- Variometer stations in the United States are typically operated on a campaign basis by universities for
specific research projects, often funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). These variometer operations are not usually intended to
provide long-term, continuous, real-time data service; for this reason, variometer data are not commonly
used in operational space-weather projects, such as those supported by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Air Force (USAF).
by David Jonas Bardin prepared 1/26/2020 Page2 of4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 116 here 43677P7.039
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
70
USGS Geomagnetism Program for 2/6/2020 public hearing
• EO 13865 gave the Secretary of the Interior four years to complete the CONUS MT Survey. 5
• FY 2020 budget request and Minibus appropriation were in line with that four year schedule.
• Will USGS ever expend that entire $1. 726 million on the MT Survey? How much in FY 2020?
• How much will USGS actually need in FY 2021 and each subsequent year?
• Multi-year planning is in order at least through FY 2023.
• Moreover, as electric power researchers, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation
(NERC), Electric Power Research Institute (EPRl), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC), and possibly others, study and use MT Survey data, there may well be reasons to
repeat or intensify some of the reconnaissance surveying.
• Prudence dictates that MT Survey funding be part of Geomagnetism Program's recurring base.
Observatories and variometer stations in CONUS; gap summary; deferred maintenance
National priorities for maintaining and expanding ground-based geomagnetic monitoring are
established by the National Space Weather Strategy and Action Plan (NSWSAP, 2019), and the
Executive Order for Coordinating National Resilience to Electromagnetic Pulses (EO 13865,
March 2019). These specify that the Department of the Interior (DOI), and, by proxy, the USGS,
will ensure baseline observation capabilities (NSWSAP, Action 2.1 ). The USGS Geomagnetism
Program magnetic observatory network has been identified as being of"critical" importance in
assessments of geophysical monitoring systems. Please note:
• Observatories such as Tucson and Guam have unresolved deferred maintenance issues.
• From an electric grid standpoint, of six observatories in CONUS only 2 are in the Eastern
Interconnection area where most Americans live and work; and none is in the Texas
Interconnection area.
5 Last year I testified that "the magnetotelluric (MT) Survey begun by the [NSF] as part of its EarthScope
program( ... ended in FY2018) ... included geophysical mapping that uses an Earth imaging technique
known as the MT method- overseen by Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) and
executed by Oregon State University (OSU). They were charged with mapping three-dimensional (3-D)
geological structure of CONUS; specifically variation in electrical properties of crust and mantle.
EarthScope data obtained by OSU were quickly put in the public domain for use without restriction. But
there are no data for all or part of 14 southern tier states." Written Testimony dated February 26, 2019.
I explained: "NSF's funding purposes were entirely for geological mapping and related benefits, but
others discovered early in this decade that MT data obtained proved of critical importance to evaluating
and mitigating space weather risk to electric power transmission grids. Recent studies suggest these data
have similar importance for protecting critical infrastructure from EMP.
"There has been broad uptake of these MT data by space weather researchers in USGS Geomagnetism,
other government agencies, academic institutions and industrial laboratories.
"NSF's now-ended program (plus USGS mapping of Peninsular Florida and small areas elsewhere)
supported completion of MT Survey for nearly 2".3 ofCONUS. Researchers found large regional
variations in ground conductivity with some extremely high geomagnetic hazard concentrations (for
example in Minnesota and Maine), to which electric utilities can respond (for example, American
Transmission Company and Central Maine Power Company).
"Research into impact of regional variations in ground conductivity seen over the 2".3 of CONUS for
which there are MT data indicate that critical infrastructure (such as power grids) in areas still without
MT data are just as likely to face high risk from space weather and EMP as the rest ofCONUS."
by David Jonas Bardin prepared 1/26/2020 Page 3 of4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 117 here 43677P7.040
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
71
USGS Geomagnetism Program for 2/6/2020 public hearing
• Advisers to the electric power-grid industry (for example) depend upon observatories to supply
regional data which are not currently available otherwise and are needed to protect critical
infrastructure in both coastal and inland locations.
• USGS has only a sparse network of six observatory magnetometer stations in CONUS.
(Through its Global Seismic Network, USGS also operates three variometer stations in
CONUS which are being integrated into Geomagnetism Program operations.)
• Comparison of storm-time magnetometer time series demonstrates that the CONUS
observatory network is too sparse - the difference between Fredericksburg, Vrrginia
observatory time series and those from the closest "nearby" station - in Ottawa, Canada ( over
800 km away) - can be as much as 100%.
• The Nation needs additional operational magnetometer stations, especially across CONUS, so
that geomagnetic and geoelectric hazards can be accurately evaluated and monitored.
• USGS magnetometer operations could be expanded with establishment and operation of a
combination of magnetic observatories and variometer stations that are operated at high USGS
standards and on an essentially permanent basis.
The Nation needs more direct measuring of geoelectric field amplitudes and orientations, which
are often estimated instead based on geomagnetic field data and assumed relationships.
• Yet it is geoelectric fields that actually drive geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) which
can impact electric power grids and pipelines; and it is geoelectric field orientations (i.e.,
whether parallel to metal facilities, which act as antennas) that determine actual impacts.
• Geoelectric fields are rarely at right angles (orthogonal) to magnetic fields ( as some assume).
• Geomagnetic field data alone may inaccurately estimate geoelectric fields and GICs.
Expansion of ground-based magnetometer ( and geoelectric field measurement) monitoring
operations seems desirable and would benefit projects of importance for the economy and
National security, such as assessing space weather conditions and monitoring magnetic storms,
mapping of hazardous geoelectric hazards, enabling directional drilling for oil and gas, and
performing aeromagnetic surveys for.mineral exploration and geophysical investigation.
• Data from such new CONUS magnetometer stations would substantially improve real-time
maps of storm-time geoelectric fields across CONUS (NSWSAP Task 2.5), a collaborative
project between the NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) and the USGS
Geomagnetism Program. (Priority might go to monitoring in areas that statistical analysis
shows can experience high storm-time hazard. USGS found such as areas in the Northern
Midwest and the Eastern United States some being of concern for electricity supplies to
some very large cities.)
• Data from such new CONUS stations will contribute to hazard vulnerability evaluation
projects ofNERC that are mandated by FERC.
Respectfully submitted, David Jonas Bardin [davidbardin@aol.com] 6
6 Retired member of Arent Fox LLP submitting as individual citizen on my own behalf.
by David Jonas Bardin prepared 1/26/2020 Page4of4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 118 here 43677P7.041
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
72
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. We mentioned with the other panel,
you know, their succinct way in which they outlined how we need-
ed to have more funding. And I appreciate the way this panel, and,
you, sir, in particular, Mr. Bardin, pointed out that the House had
money for some of the projects that we’re talking about today. But
when Mr. Joyce and I went to conference with the Senate, when
we left conference, we had $1.3 billion less than what we left the
House with. So it is a challenge. And that is why these hearings
today are so important to hear your priorities, to give us some
questions to be asking the administration, discussions for us to
have amongst ourselves, so that with the dollars that we have, we
put forth the most robust budget that that meets the needs of the
people here.
I just want to take an observation because we are talking about
earth. And in the testimony about earth science and the studying
of earth science, most high schools don’t even have an earth science
class anymore. They might have a climate studies class in which
they are talking about climate trends, but that is different and
needs to be incorporated into a more robust earth science class. So
I was the only girl in my earth science class——
[Laughter.]
And it is something that I have found very useful for me just as
taking a biology class or other things like that, because it is the
planet we live on. So thank you. As a social studies teacher, I want
to thank you for shouting out for earth science because that is
where social science and physical science meet each other and
other things. So thank you for pointing that out. And I am going
to talk to my education colleagues and do some lobbying.
Ms. WHITE. Terrific. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. So, Mr. Joyce, thank you for joining us, and I
didn’t have a question, I had a comment, and so I will turn it over
to you and see if there is a question or comment you have.
Mr. JOYCE. None at this time, but thank you very much for the
recognition, and I thank Mr. Simpson for helping me out here.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I am good.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Okay.
Ms. PINGREE. Can I ask a question?
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Yes. Ms. Pingree.
Ms. PINGREE. Sorry. I will go home and do a little homework.
Thank you all for the important work you do. It is obviously under
recognized most of the time, but I will do a little homework. But
will you just tell me what 3DEP means?
Mr. PALATIELLO. It is 3-Dimension Elevation Program.
Ms. PINGREE. Oh, okay. So——
Mr. PALATIELLO. It is the topographic mapping of the country. It
is primarily collected through LIDAR, which is a process where a
sensor is mounted in the fuselage an airplane. As it goes along a
flight path, it is sending thousands of lasers to the ground, and
measuring the time it takes for that laser to leave the airplane, hit
the ground, and come back and register with the sensor. And by
doing thousands of pulses a second, it goes along and all of a sud-
den the mountains rise and the valleys fall. And that is how mod-
ern topographic mapping is done. So this is a program to do with
current topographic mapping of the entire Nation.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
73
Ms. PINGREE. So, what is the range of an airplane? Like is it——
Mr. PALATIELLO. The size of the swath?
Ms. PINGREE. Yeah.
Mr. PALATIELLO. That depends on the altitude of the aircraft,
and that will relate to what the scale and resolution of the map-
ping is that is guys hired.
So the lower it is, the broader the swath, and the higher resolu-
tion the data is. The higher the altitude is, the more narrow the
swath and the less accurate or larger scale the mapping will be. So
what this program does is it did create sort of a common denomi-
nator for the accuracy. All the stakeholders were brought together.
A study was done and looked at both what was a reasonable budg-
et and what was a scale of mapping that would meet the greatest
number of needs. And that is the standard in 3DEP.
Ms. PINGREE. So last question. So the topographic maps that we
currently have, we have them, but you are doing like the next sort
of digital electronic——
Mr. PALATIELLO. Yes. So you remember the pink and green topo-
graphic maps with the contours. This is the next generation. This
is the replacement to that, which produces the benefit of being both
digital data so it can be used to plot it and manipulate it, and also
it can be printed.
Ms. PINGREE. Perfect. Thanks so much.
Mr. PALATIELLO. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. I am just going to add on because I think one
of the things that you can 3DEP that we can’t do with some of the
better precision satellites that we have where we can move and po-
sition faster, is now we have a full complement. And I think this
is very exciting that if we need to look at something, what is hap-
pening with a flood plain in a large swath area, we are getting bet-
ter satellite image to do that. But you can do something that they
can’t do, and that is, and I know the reason why Minnesota is not
mapped is because of our trees.
Ms. PINGREE. Yes——
Ms. MCCOLLUM. No, the reason why they are not mapped is be-
cause of our trees, because the satellites can’t do what you can do.
And if you would explain a little more about what LiDAR can do
that the satellites can’t do. And this is why they complement each
other and it is so exciting. My trees don’t get in the way. That is
not why I am not mapped.
Mr. PALATIELLO. Well, there are a lot of trees in Maine as well,
and you can see Maine is a further along. [Laughter.]
So LiDAR does——
Ms. MCCOLLUM. All right, guys. I have the gavel. [Laughter.]
Minnesota wins.
Mr. PALATIELLO. What LiDAR does is the technology enables the
collection of what I described before about the timing and the dis-
tance from the sensor to the ground and back. You can do that to
the treetop, or you can do it to the bare earth, and that way you
can penetrate those tree canopies.
When we used to do mapping with old conventional aerial pho-
tography, in Maine, for example, and Minnesota, particularly the
northern tier States in the country, particularly those where you
had deciduous trees, you could only fly aerial photography mapping
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
74
during a time of the year where there is snow. Think about this
in Maine. No snow on the ground. The sun is high enough where
you don’t have long shadows. You can only do it around noon time,
I mean, a couple of hours midday, and no leaves on the tree. What
is that? That is 3 days in March in Maine? [Laughter.]
I mean, in all seriousness, that was the challenge with conven-
tional aerial photography and photogrammetry. You no longer have
those constraints with LiDAR. The other benefit of LiDAR is be-
cause you can measure that tree canopy, this is an extraordinary
tool in measuring, monitoring, verifying, and validate the effects of
climate change. You can measure the biomass, and if we had a pro-
gram where were doing the country every year, we can go back
year by year and saying, well, we are losing 3 percent of our bio-
mass in the country. And we don’t have that data now, so we can’t
define the effects or measure the effects as precisely as we would
like, but the technology is there.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. So we have two tools in the toolbox. When we
can combine them now, we can get amazing, amazing in-depth and
real-time imagery. So it just means we have to be more creative on
how we finance both of these types of mapping to go forward be-
cause they are both critically important. Mr. Simpson.
Mr. SIMPSON. No, I don’t have any questions. I feel like what I
have learned here just in the last few minutes is that we have a
lot more forestry programs in Minnesota. [Laughter.]
Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Good morning, Mr. Stewart. Did you have a
question for the panel?
Mr. STEWART. No. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Mr. JOYCE. Madam Chair.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Yes?
Mr. JOYCE. I think there is somebody at the table who is cele-
brating today, if I am not mistaken.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Really?
Mr. JOYCE. There might be a birthday?
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you. [Laughter.]
Ms. MCCOLLUM. I respect you so much, Bonnie, I will not lead
‘‘Happy Birthday’’ in a song. [Laughter.]
I would drive all our witnesses who are ready to approach the
table out of the room. I was asked to sing softly many times in
grade school.
So, Ranking Member Joyce, what we have been doing to stay on
time is we have been having the panels introduce themselves.
Mr. JOYCE. That is great.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. And not counting their introduction time
against their testimony time. And we have found that, as you come
down in the panelists, right, you don’t want to be the one that is
running 15 minutes, now it is 20, now it is a half an hour behind.
So I want to thank the panels for doing that.
I will probably be leaving during this panel, so after the intro-
ductions, Mr. Joyce, Ms. Pingree will be taking the gavel.
Mr. JOYCE. I am used to ladies being in charge on this com-
mittee. [Laughter.]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
75
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. So please start.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
THE CORPS NETWORK
WITNESS
MARY ELLEN SPRENKEL, PRESIDENT AND CEO, THE CORPS NETWORK
Ms. SPRENKEL. Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce,
members of the subcommittee, my name is Mary Ellen Sprenkel,
and I am the president and CEO of the Corps Network. On behalf
of the Corps Network, our 131 member corps, and the 25,000 di-
verse Corps members they annually engage, thank you for the op-
portunity to testify before the subcommittee about utilizing service
and conservation corps to complete priority projects with the Na-
tional Park Service and related public land management agencies.
Based on the model and philosophy of the Civilian Conservation
Corps of the 1930s, today’s corps are locally-based nonprofit organi-
zations that engage young people between the ages of 16 and 30,
and recently returned veterans up to age 35, in service projects
that address conservation, recreation, disaster response, and com-
munity needs. Through a term of service that could last several
months to 1 year, corps participants or corps members gain work
experience and develop in-demand skills.
Corps members are compensated with a stipend or living allow-
ance, and often receive an educational award or scholarship upon
completing their term of service. Additionally, corps provide partici-
pants with educational programming, mentoring, access to career
and personal counseling, and supportive services. Like the Civilian
Conservation Corps, today’s corps work with the land management
agencies to maintain and improve our natural resources and recre-
ation infrastructure. Last year alone, corps built, improved, or
maintained more than 13,000 miles of multiuse trail and water-
ways, restored 1.4 million acres of wild wildlife and fish habitat,
cleared almost 67,000 acres of invasive species, removed 19,000
acres of hazardous fuel, increased access to and utilization of near-
ly 8,000 recreational facilities, responded to 223 wildfires and other
natural disasters, preserved 336 historic structures, and planted al-
most 1.1 million trees. Further, they leveraged an additional
107,000 volunteers who completed 537,000 service hours valuing
more than $13 million.
In addition to traditional natural resource work, many corps par-
ticipate in projects to preserve America’s historic and cultural re-
sources. Six years ago, the Corps Network partnered with the His-
toric Trust for Historic Preservation to develop the Hope Crew
Model, and under this model traditional corps crews work side by
side with a historic preservation expert to refurbish and maintain
historic structures and facilities. Several hundred projects have
been completed in the years since. Through these projects, corps
members not only develop a sense of connection to our country’s
history, but learn marketable job skills.
Regardless of the type of project, land managers find corps to be
cost effective and capable of producing high-quality work. The Na-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
76
tional Park Service commissioned an independent study by Booz
Allen Hamilton, which found that corps can save up to 87 percent
on certain maintenance projects. In addition, in regular surveys,
virtually all Federal partners report being highly satisfied with the
project work and say they would work with a corps again.
With over $19 billion in deferred maintenance on Federal lands,
we need to harness America’s growing enthusiasm for the great
outdoors and engage more people in service and volunteerism on
public lands. One obvious strategy is to engage and bring to scale
the existing network of corps to start tackling a variety of deferred
maintenance projects already identified by the Restore Our Parks
Project, which we will hear more about in a moment.
The National Park Service relies on several funding streams to
engage corps in this work. Therefore, we respectfully request that
you support funding increases that directly address deferred main-
tenance needs within the National Park System. Specifically, we
request strong funding levels for the repair and rehabilitation, cy-
clic maintenance, and line item construction accounts. In addition,
we also request robust funding for similar accounts of other land
management agencies under your jurisdiction, including the U.S.
Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
Corps have long been cost-effective partners of Federal land man-
agement agencies, and have been working to generate excitement
and new ways to engage youth and veterans in outdoor service,
while helping to accomplish much-needed project work. The time
has come to seriously consider corps as an essential part of any
plan to tackle deferred maintenance and usher in future stewards
and champions of our natural treasures.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I welcome any
questions.
[The statement of Ms. Sprenkel follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
77
~
The www.eorpsnetwork.org
CorpsNetwork
Strengthening America through
service and conservation
Testimony of Mary Ellen Sprenkel, President & CEO of The Corps Network
Interior Appropriations Subcommittee on FY21 Interior & US Forest Service Appropriutions
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee,
My name is Mary Ellen Sprenkel and I am President and CEO of The Corps Network. On behalf
of The Corps Network, our 131 member Corps, and the 25,000 Corpsmembers they annually
engage, thank you for the opportunity to testify before the subcommittee about utilizing Service
and Conservation Corps to complete priority projects of the National Park Service and related
public land management agencies.
Corps are locally-based non-profit organizations that engage young adults (generally ages 16 - 30)
and veterans ( up to age 35) in service projects that address recreation, conservation, disaster
response, and community needs. Through a term of service that could last from a few months to a
year, Corps participants or "Corpsmembers" - gain work experience and develop in-demand
skills. Corpsmembers are compensated with a stipend or living allowance and often receive an
education award or scholarship upon completing their service. Additionally, Corps provide
participants educational programming, mentoring, and access to career and personal counseling.
Corps History and Background
As far back as the 1930s, Conservation Corps have been helping the federal land management
agencies complete important and necessary projects in a high quality and cost-effective manner.
The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) enrolled approximately 3 million young men from 1933-
1942; built more than 125,000 miles of roads, 47,000 bridges, 318,000 dams, and 3,000 fire towers;
planted nearly 3 billion trees; and developed more than 3 million acres for public use in 854 state
and 94 national parks. The CCC was disbanded in 1942.
Today's 21st Century Conservation Service Corps continue to work with land management
agencies to maintain and improve our natural resource and recreation infrastructure.
Last year alone, Corps engaged over 25,000 youth and veterans in conservation-related service in
all 50 states and DC, Puerto Rico, and American Samoa. For example, in FYl9 Corps built,
improved, or maintained 13,317 miles of multi-use trails and waterways; restored l .4 million acres
of wildlife and fish habitat; cleared 66,929 acres of invasive species; removed 19,405 acres of
hazardous fuels; increased access to and utilization of 7,914 recreational facilities; responded to
223 wildfires and other natural disasters; preserved 336 historic structures, and planted almost 1.1
million trees. Further, they leveraged an additional 107,000 volunteers who completed 537,879
service hours valuing over $13.6 million dollars. 1
The Process of Public Private Partnerships
In 1993, Congress passed the Public Lands Corps Act (PLCA) to provide the Departments of
Agriculture (USDA) and Interior (DOI) with the authority to utilize contracts and cooperative
agreements to engage Corps on conservation and infrastructure projects on public lands. The vast
1 Value ofVohmteer Time, Independent Sector, ht1ps://independentsector.org/value-of-volunteer~time~2018/
#CorpsWork j 1275 :"iW, Suiie 1050 I Washington, DC 20005 I p: 202. 737.6272 I
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 132 here 43677P7.042
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
78
www.corpsnetwork.org
Strengthening America through
service and conservation
majority of project work is done through cooperative agreements and as required by law, all Public
Lands Corps (PLC) projects must have a "long-term public benefit."
Congress recently updated the PLCA with the John S. McCain III 21st Century Conservation
Service Corps Act (21CSC Act), which passed in 2019 as part of the John D. Dingell, Jr.
Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act.
This update also established a Resource Assistants Program (RAP), through which the DOI and
the USDA can engage diverse Corpsmembers, who are in college or have graduated from college,
in individual placement or intern positions to assist with more technical projects and needs. RAP
members are eligible for direct hire by DOI and USDA.
Land managers find Corps to be cost-effective and capable of producing high quality work. The
NPS commissioned an independent study by Booz-Allen-Hamilton which found that Corps can
save up to 87 percent on certain maintenance projects2 • In addition, in regular surveys, virtually all
federal project partners (99.6 percent) report being highly satisfied with the project work and say
they would work with Corps again.
Expanding the Role of Corps to Meet Public Land Management & Workforce Goals
When Congress established the Public Land Corps, they found three things: l) that a lot of labor
intensive work was needed to restore our public facilities and natural resources; 2) that partnering
with Corps had proven such work could get done in a cost effective and efficient manner; and 3)
that using Corps to enhance and maintain our natural and cultural resources came with tremendous
benefits to the young men and women who carried out the work
With over $19 billion in deferred maintenance on federal lands, we need to harness America's
growing enthusiasm for the great outdoors and engage more people in service and volunteerism
on public lands. One obvious strategy is to engage and bring to scale the existing network of Corps
to start tackling a variety of deferred maintenance categories 3 already identified by the Restore
Our Parks project. This includes $462 million in trail projects, $612 million needed in landscape
projects including cultural, natural, and recreation spaces; $32 million in park boundary projects
like signage and fencing; and $31 million in trail bridge work. Those are just a few project
categories from the National Park System's backlog and well within the capacity of our existing
network of Conservation Corps programs.
During a term of service, Corpsmembers gain important skills in communications, problem
solving, and time management, while also gaining industry-recognized credentials in areas
including chainsaw operation, wildfire response (also known as earning their Red Card), and
wilderness first aid. Corpsmembers are put on a career pathway and gain a broad set of work-based
experiences that prepare them for public or private sector employment, or future entrepreneurial
endeavors.
2
Conservation Corps Project Analysis, Fall 2012, Booz Allen Hamilton commissioned via NPS, https://corpsnetwork.org/wp-
content/up!oads/20!2/07/NPS-PFMD-Conservation-Corps-Project-Analysis-FINALv2.pdf
3
National Park Deferred Maintenance Needs, A data visualization from The Pew Charitable Trusts,
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-ana!ysis/data-visualizations/20!8/national-park-deferred-maintenance-needs
#CorpsWork #21CSC 11275 K St. NW, Suite 1050 I Washington, DC 20005 Ip: 202.737.62721 f: 202.737.6277
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 133 here 43677P7.043
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
79
www.corpsnetwork.org
Strerigthening America through
service and conservation
Historic Preservation
In addition to traditional natural resource work, many Corps participate in projects to preserve
America's historic and cultural resources. One recent example of expanded use of Corps by the
NPS to complete needed maintenance is in the field of historic preservation. Six years ago, TCN
partnered with the National Trust for Historic Preservation to form HOPE (Hands on Preservation
Experience) Crew, consisting of a traditional Corps crew alongside a historic preservation craft
expert to teach and train the crew. Several hundred projects have been completed in the years since.
Corpsmembers have worked on projects at such sites as Grand Teton National Park, Sagamore
Hill National Historic Site, Gateway National Recreation Area, and many others. Through these
projects, Corpsmembers not only develop a sense of connection to our country's history but learn
marketable job skills.
More recently, to build a career track in traditional preservation craft, TCN members have
partnered with the NPS Historic Preservation Training Center (HPTC) to place young people in
apprentice-level preservation work on needed deferred preservation maintenance projects in the
parks. Program participants complete an intensive two-week basic training in historic preservation
fundamentals and introductory craft construction skills. Those skills are put to work using tools
and materials common in the preservation of older buildings and structures over the next five to
six months following their training.
FY21 Appropriations Reqnest
With the passage of the 21st Century Conservation Service Corps (21CSC) as part of the Natural
Resources Management Act of 2019, Congress recognized the need to increase the utilization of
Corps to address backlogged conservation, recreation, forestry, and infrastructure projects on our
public lands.
The National Park Service relies on several funding streams to engage Corps in this work.
Therefore, we respectfully request that you support funding increases that directly address
deferred maintenance needs within the Operation of the National Park System (ONPS) and
Construction accounts in FY21. Specifically, we request strong funding levels for the Repair
and Rehabilitation, Cyclic Maintenance and Line Item Construction acconnts. ,
In addition, we also request robust funding increases to similar accounts of other land management
agencies under your jurisdiction including the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management,
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
These specific accounts are the main funding sources for Corps partnerships.
Corps also partner with both DOI and USFS to address wildfire remediation needs, and more
specifically to help with hazardous fuels and invasive species reduction, which is a major need to
prevent larger and more deadly fires. We appreciate the committee's bipartisan efforts the three
previous fiscal years to ensure these accounts remain intact, despite Administration budget
proposals to cut many of these important programs.
#CorpsWork #21CSC 11275 K St. NW, Suite 1050 I Washington, DC 200051 p: 202.737.6272 If: 202.737.6277
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 134 here 43677P7.044
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
80
~ Th
~ CorpsNetwork www.corpsnetwork.org
Strengthening America through
service and conservation
Closing Remarks
Corps have long been cost-effective partners offederal land management agencies and have been
working to generate excitement and new ways to engage youth and veterans in outdoor service
while helping to accomplish much-needed project work. The time has come to seriously consider
Corps as an essential part of any plan to tackle deferred maintenance and usher in future stewards
and champions of our national treasures.
Thank you again for the chance to provide testimony. We hope the Committee will help us
continue to take advantage of every opportunity to promote 21st Century Conservation Service
Corps as a preferred and capable solution to meet the challenges facing our parks and public lands.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
'-flt,~ Elt.w. J)~w
Mary Ellen Sprenkel
President & CEO
#CorpsWork #21CSC 11275 K St. NW, Suite 1050 I Washington, DC 200051 p: 202.737.6272 I f: 202.737.6277
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 135 here 43677P7.045
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
81
Ms. PINGREE [presiding]. Thank you. Ms. Brengel.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
KRISTEN BRENGEL, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT AF-
FAIRS, NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION
Ms. BRENGEL. Yes. Thank you so much for having me. My name
is Kristen Brengle. I am the vice chair of government affairs for the
National Parks Conservation Association. I want to thank Ranking
Member Joyce and members of the subcommittee for giving us the
opportunity to testify today. We are grateful for the work that all
of you do on behalf of the national parks. In fact, this committee
is full of park champions that we are thrilled about. Ranking Mem-
ber Joyce, I want to thank you in particular for your work on the
Great Lakes, pollution, invasive species, all of the issues up there.
It has been great working with you and your staff.
We truly appreciate all the subcommittee does for parks given
scarce funding. As the chair pointed out earlier, the overall budget
is tough to work with. In particular, we want to thank you for the
land and water conservation funding last year. It was particularly
impressive.
So I am here to share some concerns that we have about the cur-
rent state of our national parks and our worries about the staff
who protect them. We are hearing and seeing the following. Morale
is low. This is due to weakening policies, a looming reorganization,
and a lack of leadership. In fact, as some of you may know, 10 of
the 16 senior park service positions that oversee critical depart-
ments, including operations, interpretation, visitor, and resource
protection, and even the acting National Park Service director, are
either vacant or without a permanent leader. Second, many parks
are suffering unrepaired damage, as my colleague pointed out to
the right, and the effects of climate change. The other issue and,
Ms. Pingree, you know this very well, some of our popular parks
are completely overcrowded, including Acadia, which I was just
there. Beautiful. [Laughter.]
And this can lead to resource harm. The other issue is conserva-
tion, is taking a backseat to development outside of their borders.
This is due to rampant drilling and mining, proposals which this
committee is very well aware of. And specifically we thank you for
Chaco, for the language on Chaco Cultural.
In the last 3 years, NPCA has documented 112 administrative
actions that erode protections for waterways, wildlife, visitor expe-
riences, air quality, and quality of life for staff. The consequences
of these actions could be felt for generations. We appreciate the
committee’s willingness to consider some of these issues as you de-
liberate the bill.
To dive specifically into the National Parks Service budget, park
operations and deferred maintenance are our highest funding prior-
ities. One of the largest challenges facing park superintendents is
operating budgets insufficient to prevent the reduction of per-
sonnel. One superintendent recently reported uncontrollable fixed
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
82
costs of more than 5 percent. This will no doubt result in fewer
staff. One area where the staff shortage becomes a major issue is
with the huge influx of visitors to many popular parks. With inad-
equate staff, national parks are getting crushed.
Joshua Tree, for example, no longer has an off season. There are
just tons of people there through the year. In 2018, there were 1.6
million more visitors than a decade prior, similar to Zion and other
parks in Utah. That 125 percent increase in visitation was coupled
by a 31 percent erosion of base staffing levels. As an example, a
Joshua Tree ranger was making sure cars weren’t parking on the
side of the road, crushing vegetation. When asked the range what
his job actually was, he said he was on the trail crew. Because he
was dealing with so many visitors, he couldn’t work on the trail.
This means less maintenance. The lack of operations funding has
a ripple effect.
Now getting to the deferred maintenance backlog, it is one of our
highest priorities, and my colleague at Pew next to me is going to
testify in greater detail on this important issue. But one example
to point out is Great Sand Dunes. Some of the pressing projects are
very connected to visitors. The visitor center roof, re-roofing of the
comfort stations, and rehabilitation of campgrounds, these are just
some of the thousands of examples that there are cross the park
system. We are working on other funding sources, including the bill
that Mr. Kilmer is leading, the Restore Our Parks and Public
Lands Act. We are thankful for that bill, and we appreciate all the
co-sponsors here. We hope that it gets signed into law this year,
but we still need this committee to focus on deferred maintenance
and routine maintenance as we look at the budget.
I should note a huge thanks for the Centennial Challenge fund-
ing, which also helps with the maintenance backlog and great pro-
grams; National Heritage Area funding, which is also a wonderful
program; Endangered Species Act funding, and, course, the EPA’s
geographic programs in last year’s bill.
As I mentioned earlier, we are alarmed by the impacts of climate
change. We must ensure the Park Service has the resources and
guidance they need to monitor climate change impacts to the parks,
and utilize the best available science to help parks adapt to climate
change. We can reduce repair costs if parks have the funds they
need to be resilient from the start. On another topic, we appreciate
your oversight on the Interior Department’s reorganization. We are
concerned not just about the BLM move, but the potential for a
larger initiative to harm management and stewardship of our
parks. We don’t want the reorganization to undermine the Park
Service’s conservation-driven work or the morale of Park staff. We
commend the oversight and the report language on this. We are
also happy that you were able to secure statutory reprogramming
language, which ensures greater oversight of the administration,
and reaffirms the role and powers of the appropriators. This time
last year, our parks were recovering from a shutdown made worse
by the Administration’s use of fees to keep parks open to harm. So
we are grateful for your work on the issue and hope we can identify
more opportunities for your engagement. Thank you so much.
[The statement of Ms. Brengel follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
83
Statement of Kristen Brengel,
Senior Vice President of Government Affairs, National Parks Conservation Association
Before the Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Chainnan McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify on behalf of National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA). Founded in
1919, NPCA is the leading national, independent voice for protecting and enhancing America's
National Park System for present and future generations. We appreciate the opportunity to provide
our views regarding the National Park Service (NPS) FY2 I budget and funding and related issues
facing our national parks this year.
We recognize that the subcommittee's allocation has been limited, so in this context NPCA and our
partners in the National Parks Second Century Action Coalition commend and appreciate the efforts
you have made to increase NPS funding over the last seven years. These funds have supported
staffing to protect and interpret resources, steward our parks and ensure a quality visiting experience.
Our parks are unfortunately struggling to meet their mission, so we ask you to do your hest to build
on this support in FY2 J.
As members of the committee know, investing in our national parks does not just preserve our
cultural and natural heritage, but is also a wise investment. National parks deliver robust economic
returns, with $10 in economic benefits for every dollar invested in the NPS. In 2018, visitors spent
more than $20 billion in gateway communities. The contribution of this spending to the national
economy was 329,000 jobs and $40.1 billion in economic output The national economy is stimulate<
when the businesses and employees that benefit from visitor spending in tum purchase goods and
services from others.
Top three FY21 Priorities: NPCA requests increased funding for the National Park Service with a
focus on these accounts:
l. NPS Operations: Increase the account by $94 million above FY20 to $2.671 billion to
address staffmg challenges and other operational needs.
2. Construction: Restore this account to $439 million, a $50 million increase over FY20, which
would help address repair projects within the deferred maintenance backlog.
3. National Park Partnerships: Increase the Centennial Challenge by $8 million over FY20 to
$23 million, to leverage nonfederal dollars to improve the visiting experience in parks across
the country.
The Interior 302(b) allocation: We regret that the subcommittee's allocation has heen significantly
limited by the Budget Control Act of20 I l, and we know that this year the cap adjustment is
relatively modest, so will limit your ability to invest in the many priorities under your jurisdiction.
We hope that the expiration of this problematic law will allow the Interior subcommittee to receive
the funds it needs in the years ahead to bolster our parks; we will do our best to convey to
congressional leadership and the full committee the importance of a more substantial allocation for
this subcommittee.
Operation of the National Park System: We recognize the increases you have provided for park
operations over the years but we are dismayed that more is needed and operating our national parks
will continue to he a struggle for superintendents without a more robust investment in FY2 l and the
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 143 here 43677P7.046
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
84
years ahead. As this subcommittee recognized in its FY20 bill, staffing remains one of the largest
challenges facing park superintendents who are struggling to operate their parks at flat or modestly
increased budgets that are insufficient to prevent the erosion of personnel. Between 2011 and 2018,
park visitation increased by 11 % but staffing was reduced by 11 %; we expect finalized 2019 staffing
numbers to be lower.
The 3% increase for park operations in FY20 will be helpful, and we know that a more sustained
investment is needed, in part because of the significant impact of inflation and uncontrollable fixed
costs. For example, one superintendent reported to us that while they were not yet sure of what their
base budget would ultimately be in FY20, they must adjust for a 3.1 % salary increase and 2.5%
benefits increase, which is fantastic for employees but is among the challenging fixed costs when
base budgets do not get significant increases.
We also respectfully request broad investments in park operations to address the many operating
needs beyond maintenance. While the maintenance backlog is one of our highest funding priorities,
we do not want a focus on the backlog to cause other needed work to fall further behind.
Interpretation and education need updating, while cultural resource experts, wildlife biologists, law
enforcement and other personnel needs continue to lag. We appreciate that appropriators were able to
increase park operations by $94 million in FY 16, so we ask for this same increase next fiscal year.
Construction/ deferred maintenance backlog: NPCA requests a $50 million increase for this
account in FY2 l, which is the average increase appropriators provided over the last five fiscal years.
We appreciate the years of investment in the park service deferred maintenance backlog through both
the repair and rehabilitation subaccount within Operations and the construction account. Recent
investments in line-item construction projects are helping meet needs at the Arlington Memorial
Bridge and the potable water system at the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. Funding in FY20 will
address safety and stability issues at the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island, preserve the Carver
Museum at the Tuskegee Institute National Historical Site, improve the visitor center at Curecanti
National Recreation Area, and much more. Projects in need of funding in FY21 include repairing the
Cape Hatteras Lighthouse at Cape Hatteras National Seashore, replacing obsolete employee housing
at Pipe Spring National Monument, and replacing obsolete trailers with multiplex housing at
Yellowstone National Park.
For your information, we are also urging the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development
subcommittee to fund the Nationally Significant Federal Lands and Tribal Projects Program at the
fully authorized $100 million. The program funds large transportation infrastructure projects for
parks and other federal lands, and tribal lands. Half of the nearly $12 billion NPS backlog is
comprised of transportation projects.
Centennial Challenge: We commend this subcommittee for its continued support for this important
program that provides federal funds to match private and philanthropic funds for projects to improve
the visitor experience. Oftentimes, the federal investment leverages more than a one-to-one match in
private dollars. Recent signature projects include addressing deferred maintenance at the historic
Hammond-Cranz farm in Cuyahoga Valley National Park and supporting Native American
recreational programming at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. Many more philanthropic
opportunities await, so we hope the subcommittee can increase funding for this successful program
that enjoys strong bipartisan support.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 144 here 43677P7.047
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
85
While our request for FY2 l is focused on these accounts, there are many more areas of park funding
that concern us.
The 2018-2019 government shutdown and fee dollars: We were grateful that members of this
subcommittee and its Senate counterparts were among many members of Congress who were deeply
concerned about keeping parks open during the most recent shutdown. The shutdown was extremely
damaging for national parks, their visitors, partner groups, park staff and businesses. It was made
worse than recent shutdowns not only because of its extended duration, but also because of the
administration's decision to use fee dollars to keep some parks open. This approach proved to be
irresponsible, reckless, and illegal. Parks experienced vandalism, looting, damage to fragile natural
resources, threats to wildlife and visitor safety and much more. We hope the Government
Accountability Office finding that the Department of the Interior (DOI) acted illegally with this
approach will prevent this from happening again. However, there is no indication the administration
will respect the finding, so we urge this subcommittee to provide the oversight necessary to prevent
this misuse of fees. As you know, the shutdown was not the only instance of the administration
inappropriately using fee accounts as its slush fund. The appropriations process is an appropriate
opportunity to exercise this needed oversight, so we ask you to consider bill language clarifying the
Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act.
Endangered Species Act (ESA) funding: National parks provide habitat for over 600 threatened
and endangered species listed under ESA. Park managers work with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) to ensure these species are on the path to recovery. Unfortunately, ESA programs
have been inadequately funded for years, leading to delays in listing and insufficient investments in
species recovery. We appreciate the committee's efforts to increase FY20 funding for the suite of
ESA programs within USFWS, including recovery initiatives, listing, and planning and consultation,
and were disappointed to see the final bill did not match the House numbers. We urge the committee
to continue to make significant investments in the protection and recovery of our most vulnerable
species, including fish, wildlife and plants in our national parks.
Ensuring watershed health: The health and long-term protection of our national parks is also
contingent on continuing strong investments in critical watershed protection and restoration
programs. NPCA strongly supports Environmental Protection Agency and USFWS programs that
restore watersheds essential to the wetlands, rivers, streams, and bays that flow in and around our
parks. We applaud the committee for its past commitment and urge its continued support for the
efforts of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the Chesapeake Bay Program, Delaware River
Restoration Program and the South Florida Program.
National Heritage Areas (NHAs): NPCA commends the $1.6 million funding increase the FY20
budget provided for the NHA program. The increase covered the costs associated with standing up
the six new NHAs designated by Congress with passage of the John S. Dingell Conservation Act in
March 2019. Looking to the FY2 l budget, NPCA requests the funding level for the NHA program be
set at $32 million, which will allow these highly effective public-private partnerships to adequately
serve the needs of their constituents and partners.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF): Development within park lands remains a
significant threat, so we commend this subcommittee's increase for the federal LWCF program in
FY20. This will protect critical land parcels at Cumberland Island National Seashore, Petersburg
National Battlefield, Theodore Roosevelt National Park and other treasured places. We hope the
committee can at a minimum maintain this level of funding in FY2 l.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 145 here 43677P7.048
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
86
Dedicated maintenance backlog and LWCF funding: We continue to urge Congress to recognize
that a more realistic long-term solution is needed to address the maintenance backlog. We
respectfully ask members of this subcommittee to build on their work to address this challenge by
urging leadership to bring to the floor the Restore Our Parks and Public Lands Act (H.R. 1225). We
fully support this bill being brought to the floor along with the Land and Water Conservation Fund
Permanent Funding Act, H.R. 3195. Both are needed to better protect and preserve our parks and
provide visitors with inspiring experiences.
The sonthern border wall and border enforcement: We are alarmed by the construction of the
border wall, which threatens communities and wildlife across the southern border region. New border
wall is currently under construction at Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Arizona using
funding from the Department of Defense drug interdiction funding. The damage to the natural and
cultural landscape at Organ Pipe is already significant and could well be irreversible. We were
deeply disappointed the FY20 bill did nothing to stop this construction or mitigate the damage and
that Congress failed to prevent similar projects from moving forward at public lands across the
border region. We urge the FY2 I appropriations process put a stop to this damaging construction
project. NPCA is also concerned the administration will transfer funding from park operations to
border enforcement efforts, further depleting needed funds from parks around the system without
congressional guidance or direction.
Reprogramming language and DOI reorganization: NPCA remains concerned with the
administration's initiative to reorganize DOI and we commend the committee's attention to this
issue. We do not want reorganization to undermine NPS' conservation-driven work or the morale of
NPS personnel, so your continuing oversight is appreciated. We were very grateful that the FY20 bill
did not provide any funding increases though disappointed that the continuation of prior year funding
has allowed the Bureau ofLand Management (BLM) to continue moving staff west. This action
threatens to gut the agency, undermine staff morale, reduce staff expertise and lead to more leasing
and other decisions on BLM lands that impact resource protection in adjacent parks. We commend
the inclusion ofreprogramming language in the final FY2 l bill and the report language directing
monthly updates. We hope this will reduce the potential harm of the reorganization and ask that you
share information gleaned through these reports with the public, as a major challenge with the
reorganization has been the administration's lack of transparency.
Policy riders and amendments: We continue to oppose environmentally damaging riders on
appropriations bills so we were grateful the final FY20 bill was largely free of these riders.
However, we are disappointed that legacy riders were included in the FY20 bill that undermine
efforts to address climate change. We ask that the FY2 l bill be free of new riders and remove these
harmful legacy riders.
In conclusion: We recognize the subcommittee's constrained allocation, and thus commend the
recent funding increases for NPS and commitment to our parks' conservation and preservation
mission. We respectfully request the best funding level possible for NPS in FY21 to help the agency
recover from underfunding. Further, we appreciate your work to prevent environmentally-damaging
policy riders. We also appreciate your oversight over the administration's use of fees and its
reorganization and hope that the FY2 I bill can continue this oversight.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 146 here 43677P7.049
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
87
Ms. PINGREE. Rebecca, tell me how to say your last name.
Ms. KNUFFKE. Knuffke.
Ms. PINGREE. Knuffke. Thank you so much.
Ms. KNUFFKE. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
RESTORE AMERICA’S PARKS, THE PEW CHARITABLE
TRUSTS
WITNESS
REBECCA KNUFFKE, OFFICER, RESTORE AMERICA’S PARKS, THE PEW
CHARITABLE TRUSTS
Ms. KNUFFKE. So good morning, Ranking Member Joyce and
members of the subcommittee. I am Rebecca Knuffke, officer at the
Pew Charitable Trust Restore America’s Parks Campaign. And
thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
The Pew Charitable Trusts applies a rigorous analytical ap-
proach to improve public policy, inform the public, and invigorate
civic life. The Restore America’s Parks Campaign seeks to conserve
the national assets of the National Park System by providing com-
monsense long-term solutions to its multibillion dollar repair back-
log. The National Park Service is responsible for managing and
maintaining more than 400 nationally-significant sites in all 50
States and several territories. These park units document the re-
markable people, heritage, and the places that comprise the ongo-
ing story of America.
Unfortunately, our 100-plus year old National Park Service has
an aging infrastructure that is deteriorating. Compounding this
challenge are visitation pressures on park resources. The National
Park Service recorded over 318 million visits in 2018 and years of
inadequate funding for maintenance needs.
The Park Service is not able to keep up with the pace of repairs
for assets that include over 5,000 miles of paved roads, nearly
1,500 bridges, 18,000 miles of trails, more than 28,000 buildings,
including historic structures, employee housing, over 2,000 sewage
systems, and other facilities, such as battlefields, campgrounds, in-
terpretive facilities, and monuments and memorials. As a result,
the Agency must triage repair needs, and it has a backlog of de-
ferred maintenance that is estimated to be $11.9 billion based on
2018 data.
Drawing down a maintenance backlog that has accrued over dec-
ades requires a combined approach, one that includes robust an-
nual appropriations funding, dedicated funding, and policy reforms
to leverage technology and increased efficiencies. Adequate discre-
tionary investment is essential for NPS to keep up with the main-
tenance needs, over three-quarters of which are priority projects.
Pew commends the subcommittee for providing increases for NPS
deferred maintenance in recent years, and we respectfully urge you
to build on the support in Fiscal Year 2021 as there still is a sub-
stantial gap between NPS discretionary funding and what the
Agency needs to address its priority projects repairs.
Specifically, within the operation of the National Park System
and construction appropriations, Pew urges the subcommittee to
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
88
maximize allocations for repair and rehab, cyclic maintenance, and
line item construction accounts. These accounts provide the bulk of
the necessary funding for the Park Service to undertake mainte-
nance that will keep our national parks accessible to the public and
safe. Funding for planning and adequate staffing capacity, as
Kristen mentioned, are also critical to the execution of repair and
maintenance needs, and we ask that these accounts be funded as
robustly as possible.
Further, we urge the allocation of $4 million for employee hous-
ing to help expedite correcting the dilapidated state of ranger hous-
ing. According to NPS, deferred maintenance for employee housing
totaled more than $186 million in Fiscal Year 2018, yet the Agency
received only $2.2 million that year for the housing improvement
program. Another important program that my colleagues have also
mentioned, the Centennial Challenge program, which matches Fed-
eral dollars with private donations and directs the monies towards
priority deferred maintenance projects and other park programs.
This has the potential to leverage even more funding, and by rais-
ing the annual appropriations from $20 million to $30 million, Fed-
eral dollars could encourage more partner and private donations,
facilitating the repair of even more park infrastructure.
Dedicated funding is also an important way to draw down the
backlog, and the Restore Our Parks and Public Lands Act, and
thanks again to Representative Kilmer for his leadership on this
bill, and also Congressman Bishop here in the House, and the com-
panion Restore Our Parks Act sponsored by Senators Portman,
Warner, Alexander, and King in the Senate, would direct over $6
billion of Federal agency energy development revenue to tackle
park repairs over a 5-year period. This dedicated funding source
would provide consistent, reliable funding to enable NPS to better
plan for complicated large-scale project repairs. If enacted, this bi-
partisan, widely-supported legislation, endorsed by over three-quar-
ters of the House, half of the Senate, the Administration, and 82
percent of the American public, would provide NPS the resources
to help tackle its highest priority repairs. The intent of the legisla-
tion is not to supplant annual appropriations, however, which are
needed to ensure that NPS can do current maintenance work need-
ed to prevent the repairs from escalating and becoming more ex-
pensive over time.
In conclusion, fixing our parks has overwhelming support from
Congress and the American public. To be successful, NPS needs ro-
bust annual appropriations and dedicated funding, and we appre-
ciate the discretionary increases in park maintenance accounts
over the past several years, and encourage the subcommittee to
continue to build on that investment. Thank you for your consider-
ation of Pew’s request and for your continued support of our na-
tional parks. And, Chairwoman McCollum, I will just add that it
comes to me through my family. My stepmother was a Park Service
superintendent at Voyageurs National Park in your beautiful
State. So thank you again.
[The statement of Ms. Knuffke follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
89
THE
21.iO~ M.Hket S~re-at, 5,Jl!(: 17lk/ ?t5.;'c75.901;;0 Pno-1~
PEW
CHAlfffABL£ Tl:WST.$
Phil;idelph1•. PA 1910:l-lO/t
't{'J"I t: Sttt"~t NW, '10th Floor
/1:} :,I!, 493'f fo.
;?ll? S5l 2000 Ph~ne
Wash:nt1ton, DC 20004 202 S~2 2299 r,11x
Statement of Rebecca Knuftke, Officer, Restore America's Parks, The Pew Charitable
Trusts to the Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Chairman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to testify on behalf of The Pew Charitable Trusts' Restore America's Parks initiative.
The Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew) applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy,
inform the public, and invigorate civic life. The Restore America's Parks campaign seeks to conserve
the natural and cultural assets of the National Park System by providing common sense, long-term
solutions to its multi-billion dollar repair backlog.
Qvcmcw; o th Naaonal Pack Savtc pair ack o,i - Oyemc
The National Park Service (NPS) is responsible for managing and maintll.ining more than 400
nationally significant sites in all 50 states and several territorie~. These park units document the
remarkable people, heritage, and the places that comprise the ongoing story of America.
Unfortunately, our 100-plus year old NPS has aging infoistructurc that is deteriorating.
Compounding this challenge are visitation pressures on park resources-NPS recorded over 318
million visits in 2018-and years of inadequate funding for maintenance needs. The Park Service is
not able to keep up ,vith the pace of rep:a.iri for assets that include: over 5,000 miles of paved roads;
nearly 1,500 bridges; 18,000 miles of trails; more than 28,000 buildings including historic structures
and employee housing; over 2,000 se~ systems; and other facilities such as battlefields,
campgrounds, interpretive facilities, aod monuments and memorials. As a result, the agency must
triage repair needs and it has a backlog of deferred maintenance that is estimated at $11.9 billion
(based on FY2018 data).
Drawing down a maintenance backlog that has accrued over decades requires a combined
approac~nc that includes robust annual appropriations funding, dedicated funding, and policy
reforms to leverage technology and increase efficiencies.
~
Adequate discretionary invc~tment is essential for NPS to keep up with maintenance needs, over
three-quarters of which are priority projects. Pew commends the Subcommittee for providing
increases for NPS deferred maintenance in recent years. We respectfully urge you to build on this
support in FY2021, as there is still a substantial gap between NPS discretionary funding and what it
needs to address its priority repair projects.
Specifically, within the Operation of the National Park System (ONPS) and Construction
appropriations, Pew urges the Subcommittee to maximize allocations for the Repair and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 154 here 43677P7.050
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
90
Rehabilitation, Cyclic Maintenance and Line Item Construction accounts. These accounts provide
the bulk of the necessary funding for the Park Service to undertake maintenance that will keep our
national parks accessible to the public and safe. Funding for planning and adequate staff capacity are
also critical to the execution of repair and maintenance projects. We ask that these accounts be
funded as robustly as possible.
Further, we urge an allocation of $4 million for employee housing to help expedite correcting the
dilapidated state of ranger housing. According to NPS, deferred maintenance for employee housing
totaled more than $186 million in fiscal year 2018, yet the agency received only $2.2 million that year
for its Housing Improvement Program.
Another important program, the Centennial Challenge, which matches federal dollars with private
donations and directs the monies toward priority deferred maintenance projects and other park
programs, has the potential to leverage even more funding. By raising the annual appropriations
from $20 million to $30 million, federal dollars could encourage more partner and private donations,
facilitating the repair of even more park infrastructure.
Dedicated Funding Legislation --Restore Our Parks Act
The Restore Our Parks and Public Lands Act (H.R. 1225), sponsored by Reps. Bishop and Kilmer
in the House, and the companion Restore Our Parks Act sponsored by Sens. Portman, Warner,
Alexander, and King in the Senate (S. 500), would direct over six billion dollars of federal energy
development revenue to tackle park repairs over a five-year period. This dedicated source of
funding would provide consistent, reliable funding to enable NPS to better plan for complicated,
large-scale repair projects. If enacted, this bipartisan, widely-support,ed legislation-endorsed by
over ¾ of the House, ½ the Senate, the Administration, and 82% of the public-would provide
NPS the resources to help tackle its highest priority repairs. The intent of the legislation is not to
supplant annual appropriations, however, which are needed to ensure NPS can do current
maintenance work needed to prevent repairs from escalating and becoming more expensive over
time.
Conclusion
Fixing our parks has overwhelming support from Congress and the American public. To be
successful, NPS needs robust annual appropriations and dedicated funding. We appreciate the
discretionary increases in park maintenance accounts over the past several years and encourage the
Subcommittee to continue to build on that investment.
Thank you for your consideration of Pew's requests and for your continued support of our national
parks.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 155 here 43677P7.051
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
91
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
WITNESS
TOM CASSIDY, VICE PRESIDENT FOR GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND
POLICY, NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Mr. CASSIDY. Okay. Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce,
and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity to
present the National Trust testimony. My name is Tom Cassidy. I
am the vice president of government relations. The National Trust
is a privately-funded nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949. We
work to save America’s historic places to enrich our future. And
this is the line I have been practicing, and it is the best line I have
ever delivered in this room. [Laughter.]
Thank you for creating and enacting last year’s bill. It was the
most preservation-friendly appropriations bill in the history of the
republic, both for its historic funding levels and also for policy di-
rections throughout the report. Thank you. We are confident that
this subcommittee will continue its robust support for funding for
programs within your jurisdiction. My written testimony includes
recommendations on a variety of reports, as did our best-selling re-
port from last year now in production for this year.
Let’s start with the third successive year of record funding for
the Historic Preservation Fund. Last year’s level of $118.6 million
represents a 46 percent increase from Fiscal Year 2017 levels. HBF
funding supports fundamental preservation activities provided by
State and tribal preservation officers, including survey, nomination
of properties to the National Register, and project reviews required
for historic tax credit projects. Among many highlights within the
competitive grants programs, we would like to emphasize the com-
mittee’s $15-and-a-half million appropriation for the successful Af-
rican-American Civil Rights Program and the new $2-and-a-half
million program to preserve and highlight sites and stories associ-
ated with securing civil rights for all Americans, including women,
American Latino, Native American, and LGBTQ Americans. This
subcommittee made that happen. Thank you. And this really prom-
ises to be a lasting legacy to recognize the sights and stories that
tell our fullest and most inclusive history. And, of course, our na-
tional stories also benefit from your strong commitment to in-
creased funding for Save America’s Treasures.
In terms of National Park Service and the operation of the Park
System, a small, but important, increase last year within resource
stewardship was $1 million for the African-American Civil Rights
Reconstruction Era and other networks. We urge an increase for
these programs this year, including language that would make
some of these funds available for grants to network sites. We have
had a lot of discussion about in NPS deferred maintenance, so I
will try to shorten this area. But this committee has been a cham-
pion of tackling this program, and of the $12 billion DM backlog,
47 percent of that is attributed to historic assets.
We have for years really focused on the repair and rehab and the
cyclical maintenance programs. Marginal increases in these ac-
counts are spread out throughout the system. They form the basis
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
92
to fund core network projects and crew projects, so we would just
really emphasize sustained investment in these. They are not high
profile. Cyclical maintenance is not like a line item construction
project, but it has broad-based impact throughout the system. And
we also strongly support the creation of a reliable dedicated fund-
ing source. Thank you, Mr. Kilmer, for your sponsorship of that,
and Mr. Bishop. And everybody here is a co-sponsor, so thank you
for that.
In terms of the Park Service cultural programs, thank you for
your attention to the Agency’s proposed revisions of procedures for
listing projects on the National Register, and language calling for
the agency to withdraw its proposed rule and consult with stake-
holders. We are monitoring the situation closely, but remain con-
cerned with the direction the Service may take. I would also like
to address the Bureau of Land Management, specifically, the Cul-
tural Resources Program. Not as many people realize that BLM
oversees the largest, most diverse, and scientifically-important col-
lection of historic and cultural resources on our Nation’s public
lands. We appreciate the committee’s commitment to ongoing over-
sight of the Department’s reorganization. Please sustain that over-
sight. The Trust and many other organizations continue to be con-
cerned with the impact of the reorganization and loss of staff with-
in the Cultural Resources Division.
You directed funding last year of $1-and-a-half million within the
BLM cultural resources account for something called the National
Cultural Resources Information Management System. But basi-
cally, as we learned from our USGS friends earlier, if you don’t
map it, you can’t save it. And this program is an innovative part-
nership between BLM and state historic preservation officers to
support predictive modeling and data analysis to enhance planning
for large cross-jurisdictional projects. It is a significant and too
often overlooked preservation success story, and we would rec-
ommend once again providing specific funding for that above en-
acted.
And my time is over, so thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Cassidy follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
93
Statement of the National Trust for Historic Preservation
Tom Cassidy, Vice President for Government Relations and Policy
Fiseal Year 2021 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Committee on Appropriations, United States House of Representatives
February 6, 2020
Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate this
opportunity to present the National Trust for Historic Preservation's recommendations for
Fiscal Year 2021 appropriations. My name is Tom Cassidy and I am the Vice President of
Government Relations and Policy. The National Trust is a privately funded nonprofit
organization chartered by Congress in 1949. We work to save America's historic places to enrich
our future.
Thank you for the FY 2020 Interior Appropriations bill •· it was the most preservation friendly
appropriations bill in the history of the Republic. We look forward to continuing our work with
this Subcommittee as you address the ongoing needs for investments to sustain our nation's rich
heritage of cultural and historic resources that also generate lasting economic and civic vitality
for communities throughout the nation.
National Park Service: Historic Preservation Fund. The Historic Preservation Fund
(HPF) is the principal source of funding to implement the nation's preservation programs. The
National Trust is enormously appreciative of the historic funding levels the Committee has
provided in recent years, including the FY 2020 level of $118.66 million, a 46% increase from FY
2017 levels. HPF funding supports fundamental preservation activities such as survey,
nomination of properties to the National Register of Historic Places, public education, and
project reviews required for federal Historic Tax Credit (HTC) projects. Among many highlights,
we would like to emphasize the Committee's $15.5 million appropriation for the successful
African American Civil Rights grants program and the new $2.5 million program to preserve
and highlight sites and stories associated with securing civil rights for All Americans, including
women, American Latino, Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and LGBTQ
Americans. And, of course, increased funding for Save America's Treasures.
We request that Congress provide a total FY 2021 HPF appropriation of $150 million. Within
that funding we recommend:
• $61 million for State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs);
.
• $22 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs);
$20 million for competitive grants to preserve the sites and stories of efforts to advance
African American Civil Rights;
• $8 million for the newly established competitive grants program to preserve the sites and
stories associated with securing civil rights for All Americans, including women, American
Latino, Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and LGBTQ Americans;
• $10 million for grants to Historically Black Colleges and Universities to preserve and
rehabilitate historic buildings;
• $18 million for Save America's Treasures grants;
• $10 million for Paul Brulm Historic Revitalization grants;
• $1 million for competitive grants for the survey and nomination of properties associated
with communities currently underrepresented on the National Register of Historic Places
and National Historic Landmarks.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 161 here 43677P7.052
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
94
We also recommend the Committee encourage the NPS to work with states and tribes to
improve what has become a burdensome apportionment process1so that SHPOs and THPOs can
more readily and efficiently access funding Congress has allocateiJ. for their work.
National Park Service: Operation of the National Park System. The NPS is responsible
for 419 units of the National Park System ranging from the battlefields where our ancestors
fought and died to recent additions like the Birmingham Civil Rights National Monument and
the Reconstruction Era National Monument. Over the past 25 years, more than 50 new parks
have been added to the park system, many of which preserve historic places and themes that
have been underrepresented within the system. We encourage the Committee to provide
funding above the $2.576 billion from FY 2020 to maintain stewardship of historic and cultural
resources and prevent reductions in visitor services at a time when our national parks are more
popular than ever. Within this funding, we recommend robust fuµding for Resource
Stewardship, including $1 million for the National Underground jffiilroad Network to Freedom,
$2 million for the African American Civil Rights Network, and $2 million for the Reconstruction
Era National Historic Network. We recommend the Committee make some of these funds
available for grants to Network sites.
National Park Service: Deferred Maintenance. The NPS is responsible for maintaining a
system comprised of more than 84 million acres that tells the stones of remarkable people and
events in our country's history. Unfortunately, after over 100 years of operation and inconsistent
public funding, the National Park System faces a deferred maintenance backlog estimated at
nearly $12 billion, of which 47% is attributed to historic assets. Deferred maintenance in our
national parks puts historic and cultural sites at risk of permanent damage or loss, and in the
absence of funding, the condition of these assets will continue to deteriorate and become more
expensive to repair and preserve in the future. I
!
• Construetion. We recommend sustained robust funding of ai: least $283 million for Line
Item Construction projects that address the deferred maintenance for the NPS' highest
priority non-transportation assets with project costs greater than $1 million.
• Repair and Rehabilitation; Cyclic Maintenance. We are enormously appreciative of
the Committee's commitment to enhancing these accounts with significant investments since
FY 2016. We recommend an increase to $150 million for Repair and Rehabilitation, an
increase of $14 million above FY 2020 enacted and $166 million for Cyclic Maintenance, an
increase of $12.4 million above FY 2020 enacted.
• Dedicated Funding for Deferred Maintenance: We strongly support the creation of a
reliable, dedicated federal funding source distinct from annual appropriations to address the
deferred maintenance backlog, as provided in the bipartisan Restore Our Parks and Public
Lands Act (H.R. 1225) introduced in the House and the Senate'.s Restore Our Parks Act (S.
500 ). We are grateful for the introduction of H.R. 1225 by Repi;esentatives Kilmer and
Bishop, and the co-sponsorship of 39 members of the Appropriations committee.
• Leasing Historic Structures in National Parks. We appi;eciate the Committee's strong
support of expanded use of historic leasing authorities by the NPS. Leasing is a well-
established tool that can bring non-federal resources to the reh,abilitation and use of under-
utilized or abandoned buildings within the parks. However, the, NPS has been slow to
advance a successful national leasing program. We would like fo work with the Committee to
address this ongoing lost opportunity to bring more abandoned buildings to public use.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 162 here 43677P7.053
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
95
• Volunteerism: As part of our commitment to assist the NPS with reducing its maintenance
backlog, the National Trust launched the HOPE (Hands-On Preservation Experience) Crew
initiative in 2014. The program has trained over 750 young people and veterans and engaged
3,700 volunteers at over 175 projects nationwide, helping to support more than $18 million in
preservation work. This work has included projects at Martin Luther King, Jr. National
Historical Park, Little Big Horn Battlefield National Monument, and Golden Gate National
Recreation Area. Projects like these help to reduce the maintenance backlog while providing
job skills and education for the next generation of stewards of America's historic sites.
National Park Service: Cultural Programs. Within its cultural programs, the NPS
manages the National Register of Historic Places, certifies federal HTC projects, coordinates
federal archaeology programs, and provides funding through the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act Grants, Japanese American Confinement Sites Grants, and
American Battlefield Protection Program Assistance Grants. The National Trust recommends
$32.627 million in FY 2021, an increase of $1.5 million from FY 2020. We greatly appreciate the
increase Congress provided in FY 2020 for grant programs and for grants administration,
recognizing the need for additional staffing to effectively administer these programs. A further
modest increase in this account will enhance modernization of the National Register and
support sustained demands to review and approve federal HTC projects.
National Park Service: International Park Affairs, Office oflnternational Affairs.
The National Trust recommends $2 million for the Office of International Affairs to ensure
engagement in the World Heritage Program and support the dozens of communities and sites
across the country seeking nomination to the World Heritage List. This office is responsible for
selecting sites for the World Heritage Tentative List and shepherding them through the detailed
nomination process. Examples of pending sites include Hopewell Ceremonial Earthworks
(Ohio) and Civil Rights Movement Sites (Alabama,Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi). We
appreciate the Committee's rejection of last year's budget proposal to shift the Southwest Border
Resource Protection Program into the Office of International Affairs, which would have
drastically reduced overall program funding.
National Park Service: National Heritage Areas. We recommend $32 million for the
Heritage Partnership Program and National Heritage Areas (NHAs). This funding supports
commissions and grants to the 55 individual NHAs, as well as administrative support for
coordination, guidance, assistance, and training.
Bureau of Land Management: Cultural Resources Management. The BLM oversees
the largest, most diverse and scientifically important collection of historic and cultural resources
on our nation's public lands, as well as the museum collections and dsta associated with them.
We appreciate the Committee's commitment to ongoing oversight of the Department's
reorganization. The National Trust and many other organizations are profoundly concerned
with the impact of the reorganization and loss of staff within the Cultural Resourees Division.
The cultural resources program also supports Section 106 review of land-use proposals, Section
110 inventory and protection of cultural resources, compliance with the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act, and consultation with Tribes and Alaska Native Governments.
Moving forward, we are very appreciative of last year's dedicated increase of $1.5 million for the
agency to enhance its National Cultural Resources Information Management System (NCRIMS).
This collaboration with state historic preservation offices is one of the nation's most innovative
programs to support predictive modeling and data analysis to enhanee planning for large-scale,
cross-jurisdictional land-use projects. It is a significant and too-often overlooked preservation
success story, and we recommend once again providing specific funding of $1.5 million above
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 163 here 43677P7.054
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
96
enacted.
Bureau of Land Management: National Landscape Conservation System. The BLM's
National Landscape Conservation System (National Conservation Lands) includes 36 million
acres of congressionally and presidentially designated lands, including National Monuments,
National Conservation Areas, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, National Scenic and Historic
Trails, and Wild and Scenic Rivers. In 2019, new congressional designations added
approximately 1.25 million acres to our National Conservation Lands. We encourage the
Committee to provide $49.5 million to the base program for the National Landscape
Conservation System, an increase of $5.681 million above the FY 2020 enacted level. An
increase in funding will allow for greater inventory and monitoririg of cultural resources in this
growing system, prevent damage to the resources found in these iireas, ensure proper
management, and provide for a quality visitor experience. We also support at least level funding
for wilderness and national monument management on Oregon apd California Grant Lands.
Department-Wide: Land and Water Conservation Fund. The National Trust supports
robust funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), and we encourage the
Committee to continue increasing LWCF toward its authorized level of $900 million. Many of
the nation's most significant historic and cultural places have been permanently protected
through LWCF investments, including Martin Luther King Jr. National Historical Park, Canyons
of the Ancients National Monument, and Dayton Aviation National Historical Park. Recent
LWCF funding will benefit historic parks including Lewis and Clark National Historical Park
and El Malpais National Monument. In total, more than $550 million has been invested to
acquire historic sites and 137,000 acres in 162 NPS units. Within LWCF funding, we encourage
the Committee to provide $20 million for the American Battlefield Protection Program.
Independent Agencies: National Endowment for the Arts and National
Endowment for the Humanities. We urge the Committee to provide $170 million each for
the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and National Endowment for the Humanities
(NEH). NEA and NEH funding is critical to communities around the country. It has also
supported efforts by the National Trust's Historic Sites and others to tell a fuller American story
and engage visitors with history in compelling ways. For example, support from the NEA has
created programs like Art and Shadows at the Shadows-on-the-T~che in Louisiana, which put
regionally-based artists in residence at the site, resulting in progriµnming that attracted new
audiences and brought people from around the country to the town's downtown commercial
district. NEH support has brought teachers from around the country to learn about history in
the places that it was made and to carry those experiences back to.their classrooms, including
exploring the Constitution at James Madison's Montpelier and discovering the rich, but largely
unknown, African American history in the President's neighborhood at Decatur House.
Independent Agencies: Advisory Council on Historic Pre~ervation. We recommend
$7.878 million for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), an increase of
$500,000 over enacted. The increase would enhance the ACHP's performance of its essential
roles in ensuring that the nation's historic and cultural resources are protected while also
advancing timely delivery of major infrastructure projects and improving consultation with
Indian Tribes. The increase would also support the ACHPs efforts ~o promote enhanced
mapping and digitization of cultural resources. ;
I
Thank you for considering our testimony. I would be pleased to ariswer any questions you may
have.
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 164 here 43677P7.055
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
97
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you very much for your presentation and
your thoughtful words, and thank you to everybody here. Of course,
we greatly appreciate the work that all of you do. It is vitally im-
portant in States like mine, but everywhere across the country. Mr.
Kilmer, do you have any questions or thoughts?
Mr. KILMER. I had a couple. Is that all right?
Ms. PINGREE. Go for it, yeah.
Mr. KILMER. First, for the Corps Network, it is not a question.
I just want to take a moment to say thank you for the amazing
work you do. Thanks for the amazing work you do. In our neck of
the woods, Jay Satz from the Northwest Youth Corps, does out-
standing work, innovative work. We are really lucky to have him.
And it is really, I think, a great example of the work that happens
in our local communities by the Corps Network. So I can make it
a question by just saying don’t you agree——
[Laughter.]
So let the record show she said yes. I do also want to express
gratitude for your references to the maintenance backlog within
our Park System. This subcommittee and our chair, I think, has
worked very hard to ensure that the Agency has sufficient funding,
but we know that there is an $11 billion, with a ‘‘B,’’ maintenance
backlog. And to your point, the Restore Our Parks and Public
Lands Act is targeted at addressing that. NPCA, Pew, have been
terrific partners in this. We have got 330 co-sponsors at this point,
and I think that is a testament to your organizations collectively
for making the case. I guess my question is, so what else should
we be doing?
Ms. BRENGEL. We need to get it to the floor as quickly as pos-
sible.
Ms. KNUFFKE. We need to get it to the floor. And I will just add
that there are 39 appropriators on the bill as co-sponsors on the
dedicated funding bill, so that is impressive.
Ms. BRENGEL. Yeah. I don’t know if you read in the E&E news-
letter this morning, Mr. McConnell also talked about bringing it to
the Senate floor, so it would be really great if we could move it in
both chambers this year. So we did so much work.
Mr. KILMER. Yeah.
Ms. BRENGEL. It is time to move it.
Mr. KILMER. Yeah, let’s get it done. Thank you. Thanks. I yield
back.
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you very much. Mr. Joyce? No? Mr. Stew-
art? Again, we greatly appreciate your support helping to make the
case for the things that I think this committee knows are really im-
portant, and I feel confident Mr. Kilmer will get the bill to the
floor. Laughter.]
With his great power and wisdom. Thank you, and thanks so
much for the work that all of you do.
Mr. KILMER. Thank you.
Ms. PINGREE. The next panel will come up. You guys are so quick
and efficient, getting right up there. So we are excited to have our
next panel. Thank you, Mr. Kolton.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
98
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
ALASKA WILDERNESS ACTION
WITNESS
ADAM KOLTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA WILDERNESS ACTION
Mr. KOLTON. Thank you. Thanks for having me. My name is
Adam Kolton. I am the executive director of Alaska Wilderness
League, which is the only national organization devoted exclusively
to the production of Alaska’s national treasures, for which the Inte-
rior Department plays such a critical role in stewarding for the
benefit of all Americans here, because there are two of our national
treasures in Alaska that are at grave risk, the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge and the Tongass National Forest.
As we speak, the Administration is rushing to hold the first-ever
oil and gas lease sale in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and
in the process, we believe it is sidestepping environmental laws,
sidelining scientists, skipping required consultation with indige-
nous people. This process jeopardizes the very values to which
President Eisenhower originally set aside this area, endangering
not only iconic wildlife, such as threatened polar bears, but the way
of life the Gwich’in people and their 15 villages.
Beyond that, and perhaps most notable for members of the sub-
committee, the Interior Department has also completely abandoned
its commitment and the legislative requirement of the 2017 Tax
Act that arctic refuge lease sales generate $2.2 billion in revenue,
half of which for the Federal Treasury. Thanks to this sub-
committee and the good work of the chair, last year’s bill attempted
to direct the Bureau of Land Management to set minimum lease
sale bids to meet the required revenues of the Tax Act, and it was
retained on the House floor in a strong bipartisan fashion.
But unfortunately, it wasn’t included in the final bill, and, as a
result, the BLM could in the coming months hold a lease sale that
auctions off this cherished landscape at fire sale prices, setting up
a future scenario in which Congress will need to appropriate even
more money to buy back leases from oil companies that will bid low
and attempt to sell back high. Last year in response to the sub-
committee’s actions, we heard drilling proponents argue against
any requirement to meet the promised revenue targets. This begs
the question, were the highly-touted revenue and oil bonanza pro-
duction simply a ruse to catch a ride on the budget reconciliation
train? Why are some now so fearful and opposed to language that
simply enforces what Congress already passed? Might they be wor-
ried that major banks, like Goldman Sachs, who are unwilling to
finance arctic refuge oil and gas development?
Alaska’s senior center acknowledged that the goal here is simply
to get leases out in the hands of oil companies because then, ‘‘it is
tougher to throw roadblocks in place.’’ The Administration’s intent
here is clear: get leases sold no matter the cost or, in this case,
whatever the taxpayer rip-off may be. Considering this, it is not
surprising that the Administration is barreling toward a lease sale
in ways that not only disregard the fiscal consequences, but also
the impact to the resources on the ground.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
99
Take the issue of polar bears. Climate change and disappearing
sea ice is causing bears to come on shore more frequently in search
of food and to build their winter maternity dens. Yet the Interior
Department has developed no meaningful restrictions on seismic
exploration to prevent the killing of polar bears. If all that weren’t
troubling enough, Politico has reported the Administration has si-
lenced scientists and pressured others in pursuit of advancing leas-
ing as quickly as possible. Given the reckless manner which the In-
terior Department is seeking to hand over this national treasure to
oil companies and its disregard for the requirements of the Tax
Act, including its own revenue assumptions, we ask you to again
include language in the underlying bill that forces the Administra-
tion to meet its promises and its legal responsibilities.
We similarly ask the subcommittee’s help to rein in the Adminis-
tration as it seeks to exempt the entire 17 million acre Tongass Na-
tional Forest from roadless protections. You know, we heard the
President talk about planting a trillion trees. These are 800-year
old trees. This is America’s rain forest, and there are enormous
subsidies that are still intact for the Tongass. It makes no sense
to, on the one hand, talk about planting trees to sequester carbon,
and the other, subsidize the destruction of our most iconic cher-
ished American rainforests.
The Alaska Wilderness League strongly supported Representa-
tive Blumenauer’s amendment, successful amendment, to last
year’s bill to end taxpayer subsidies for road building activity in
the Tongass. And, you know, even now, the Forest Service timber
program is costing taxpayers about $30 million per year for a loss
of approximately $600 million over the last 20 years. We urge you
to include the Blumenauer language which passed the House with
a bipartisan 243–188 vote in this year’s underlying bill. Doing so
would protect U.S. taxpayers, southeast Alaska’s vibrant outdoor
economy, hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation interests, as well
as wildlife and our climate.
Thank you for the opportunity to testimony and share our views.
[The statement of Mr. Kolton follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
100
Adam Kolton Public Witness Testimony
Alaska Wilderness League
Submitted to the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Subcommittee
Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives
Regarding FY 2021 Funding related to driUing in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
January 29, 2020
Madame Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for having me. My name is Adam Kolton and I am the Executive Director of Alaska
Wilderness League, the only national organization that is devoted exclusively to the conservation
of Alaska's treasured landscapes. With more than 100,000 members and supporters across the
country, Alaska Wilderness League exists to help give a voice to those who care about Alaska's
public lands and waters, which we collectively own and for which the federal agencies are
entrusted to manage for the benefit of all Americans. This testimony will address funding needs
related to the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) budget and the
U.S. Forest Service (USFS) budget.
I'm here today because we urgently need your help to ensure that the administration follows the
law, honors congressional intent and protects the vital interests of taxpayers when it comes to
two of our national treasures in Alaska that are at grave risk, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
and the Tongass National Forest.
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
As we speak, the Trump administration is putting the touches on a rushed plan to hold
the first ever oil and gas lease in the Arctic Refuge. To date, we have seen an environmental
review process that sidesteps environmental laws, sidelines scientists and skips
consultation with indigenous people. This process jeopardizes the very values for which this area
was set aside to protect, endangering not only iconic wildlife such as the threatened Southern
Beaufort Sea polar bear population, but the way of life for the Gwich' in people and their 15
villages. Beyond that, and perhaps most notable for the members of this subcommittee, the
Interior Department has also completely abandoned its commitment and the legislative
requirement of the 2017 Tax Act that Arctic Refuge lease sales generate $2.2 billion dollars in
revenue, half of which going to the federal treasury. This was literally the only offset for more
than $1.5 trillion in tax cuts contained in that legislation.
Thank you, Madame Chair, and members of the subcommittee for addressing this ,m,.,..,,r1r,mt
concern in the FY2020 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill by simply requiring the
Bureau of Land Management to set minimum lease sale bids sufficient to meet its promised and
statutory revenue obligations (Section 118). While this language was retained by the House in a
strong bipartisan fashion it was regrettably not included in the final bill.
As a result, the BLM could, in the coming months, hold a lease sale that auctions off this
cherished landscape at fire sale prices, blowing an even larger hole in the deficit and setting up a
1
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 173 here 43677P7.056
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
101
future scenario in which even more precious taxpayer resources may be needed to buy back
leases from oil companies that will bid low and attempt to sell back high.
Of course, this can still be avoided if the agency fulfills its responsibility to set minimum lease
sale bids tied to the enacted revenue targets in the Tax Act. What would those bids need to be set
at? According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, an independent, nonpartisan voice working to
ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly and that government operates within its means,
for the BLM to generate the projected revenue, assuming it offers and receives bids on 800,000
acres from two lease sales, oil company bids would need to average $2,250 per acre. This is one
hundred times the average bid per acre for Alaska's North Slope on the thousands of square
miles adjacent to the coastal plain. Arctic Refuge drilling proponents, who have long argued
about the enormous oil potential of this area and its "deficit reducing" potential, now seem to be
running fast and furious from these audacious claims.
Even Congressman Don Young, speaking on the floor during the debate on HR 3055, suggested
that "the first sale may not make [the revenue target]." Senator Lisa Murkowski, the driving
force pushing for Arctic Refuge development in the Senate, referred to minimum lease sale bids
as "something that's designed to kill exploration in ANWR" to E&E News, signaling clearly that
revenue promises made during the tax bill process were never serious. i
Why are some fearful and opposed to language that simply enforces what Congress already
passed in 2017? Perhaps they're concerned about the implications ofBP's Alaska asset sell-off
and what it says about broad oil industry interest. Maybe they're worried that more than $2.5
trillion worth of investors and more than a dozen major national and international banks
including Goldman Sachs have signaled an unwillingness to finance Arctic Refuge oil and gas
development. Or perhaps they never really believed nor cared if this would be the kind of oil
revenue bonanza that they've been touting all these years. What appears to matter more is simply
to hold a lease sale whatever the cost, or in this case, the taxpayer rip-off may be.
Indeed, Alaska's senior Senator Lisa Murkowski, in a moment of candor, acknowledged that,
"They [officials within the Trump Interior Department] are working fairly and aggressively to
put in place, to lay the groundwork for what comes next ... because once you get those leases out
into the hands of those who can then move forward, it's tougher to throw the roadblocks in
place."
In light of this, it may not be surprising that the administration is barreling toward a lease sale in
ways that not only disregard the fiscal consequences but also the impact to the resources on the
ground. Take for example the issue of the Southern Beaufort Sea polar bear population. Climate
change and disappearing sea ice is causing these bears to come onshore more frequently in
search food and to build their winter maternity dens. Scientists warn that proposed seismic
exploration in the Arctic Refuge-with its convoys of 90,000 pound trucks, tractors and
bulldozers that would roll over extensive areas of fragile tundra 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,
for months, and two 160-person worker "camps" that would be dragged across the landscape-
poses an unacceptable risk to these denning bears and their cubs. Yet the Interior Department has
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 174 here 43677P7.057
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
102
developed no credible plan or meaningful restrictions on seismic exploration to prevent killing
polar bears.
Of course, Arctic Refuge drilling is not just bad news for bears. The Interior Department has also
glossed over potential impacts to the awe-inspiring Porcupine caribou herd, even as new science
was released last month documenting how existing North Slope oil development has displaced
caribou from preferred calving areas.
If similar displacement occurs in the Arctic Refuge, the consequences could be catastrophic for
the 8,000 Gwich'in Athabaskan people of Alaska and Canada who have depended on the caribou
for thousands of generations. The Gwich'in have been unified in their opposition to drilling and
fully expected the Interior Department to consult with them as required in by the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act. That request was denied.
If all that weren't troubling enough, Politico reported that the administration has silenced
scientists and pressured others in pursuit of advancing leasing as quickly as possible:
"According to interviews with more than a dozen current andformer employees at the
Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau ofLand Management in Alaska, that speed has
come at a significant cost to the reliability and comprehensiveness ofthe overall
environmental review. ";1
Furthermore, leaked documents have shown that the work of career scientists has been altered or
disregarded to underplay the potential impact of oil and gas development on the coastal plain.
Given the reckless manner at which the Interior Department is seeking to hand over this national
treasure to oil companies and its disregard for the requirements of the Tax Act, including its own
revenue assumptions, we ask you to again include language in the underlying bill that forces the
administration to meet its promises and legal responsibilities.
Tongass National Forest
We similarly ask for the subcommittee's help to rein in the administration as it seeks to exempt
the entire 17 million-acre Tongass National Forest from the federal Roadless Rule. The Forest
Service had originally been considering options to modify the Roadless Rule as it applies to
"America's Rainforest," but President Trump specifically directed the agency-over its
objection-to exempt every single area from this nearly 20-year-old, widely supported and
successful policy.
As a result, an already costly, money-losing timber program in the Tongass could fleece
taxpayers even more. Alaska Wilderness League, joined by many other businesses and
organizations, strongly supported Representative Earl Blumenauer's (D-OR) successful
amendment (#136) to last year's bill to end taxpayer subsidies for roadbuilding activity in the
Tongass National Forest. Even now, the Forest Service's Tongass timber program costs
taxpayers approximately $30 million per year for a loss of approximately $600 million over the
last 20 years~incredible, especially when you consider that the Forest Service desperately needs
that money for its $68 million maintenance backlog on national forest roads in Alaska.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 175 here 43677P7.058
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
103
The good news is that the economy of Southeast Alaska has become less reliant on industrial
scale old-growth clearcutting and instead depends increasingly on commercial fishing, tourism
and other aspects of the outdoor recreation economy-businesseslthat depend on a healthy forest.
Additionally, according to a Center for American Progress analysis:
"Any climate change solution will require healthy natural carbon sinks, especially in
places such as the Tongass where forests are especially good at capturing
carbon ... Removal ofroadless protections [I'ongass National Forest] threatens a carbon
sink that already stores more than 400 million metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent and sequesters an additional 3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent annually, equivalent to taking more than 637,000 cars offthe road each
year. Hm
It makes no sense to tum back the clock and have the federal government continue to subsidize
the destruction of 800-year-old trees in ways that exacerbate climate change, threaten Alaska's
outdoor economy, and imperil fish and wildlife.
We urge the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Subcommittee to include the
Blumenauer language, which passed the House with a bipartisan v,ote of243-188, in this year's
underlying bill. Doing so would protect U.S. taxpayers, Southeast Alaska's vibrant outdoor
economy, hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation interests, as well as wildlife and our climate.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify and share the views on behalf of our members and
supporters.
'https:ljwww.eenews.net/eedaily/stories/1060381265/
n https:ljwww.politico.com/interactives/2019/trump-science-alaska-drilling-rush/
"'https:ljwww.americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2019/11/20/477495/trumps-energy-policies-put-alaska-
climate-crosshairs/
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 176 here 43677P7.059
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
104
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you very much. Mr. Stretton.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT (POGO)
WITNESS
TIM STRETTON, POLICY ANALYST, PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVER-
SIGHT (POGO)
Mr. STRETTON. Thank you, Congresswoman Pingree, and Rank-
ing Member Joyce, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you
for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Tim Stretton, and
I am a policy analyst at the Project on Government Oversight, or
POGO. POGO is a nonpartisan, independent watchdog that inves-
tigates and exposes waste, corruption, abuse of power, and when
the government fails to serve the public. For decades, POGO has
shed the light on the need for the Federal Government to ensure
oil and natural gas industries are paying their fair share for the
publicly-owned onshore and offshore resources they extract and
profit from.
POGO has recommendations to provide more accountability and
transparency for oil and gas royalty policy at the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management. We urge the subcommittee to prohibit the
use of funds to approve leases where the bureau retroactively low-
ered its valuations without public notice, and requires that no pub-
lic funds be spent on approving delayed value leases that were not
evaluated by a neutral third party.
The Bureau administers offshore drilling rights and periodically
holds auctions in which bidders obtained leases for the underlying
oil and gas deposits under specific tracts of land. These resources
are owned by the taxpayer, so the Bureau is legally required to en-
sure that taxpayers receive fair market value, in part, by collecting
royalties on the sale for oil and gas produced from these lands. But
the Bureau’s royalty release procedures often leave tens of billions
of dollars in the pockets of the extractive industry rather than
being returned to taxpayers.
In a recent report, the Government Accountability Office identi-
fied two additional procedures the Interior Department has en-
gaged in for decades that may not have resulted in a full fair mar-
ket return. The GAO’s analysis closely tracks with the findings of
POGO’s 2018 report, ‘‘Drilling Down Big Oil’s Bidding.’’ And the
nonpartisan organization, Taxpayers for Common Sense, has re-
ported similar problems at the Department’s Bureau of Land Man-
agement through its increased use of awarding of noncompetitive
leases.
The Bureau sets royalty rates for offshore oil and gas and can
reduce or waive royalty payments in an attempt to increase produc-
tion. But as the Bureau itself has found, the practice often means
taxpayers lose out on the fair return they are owed. The GAO
found that leases that had been awarded between 1996 and 2000
resulted in about $18 billion—that is billion with a ‘‘B’’—in fore-
gone royalties through 2018. When it auctions off tracts of land,
the Bureau is supposed to reject bids that are below the estimated
value of the land. Instead, however, the GAO found that when a
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
105
bid comes in lower than the Bureau’s own valuation, the Bureau
often retroactively lowers its initial value and then accepts the bid.
The GAO estimated that between March 2000 and June 2018, the
Bureau could have collected $567 million in addition auction rev-
enue if it had not engaged in this practice so consistently.
The Bureau does not disclose when it awards drilling rights
based on reduced valuations, and because of this, the practice of
lowering valuations has resulted in the loss of hundreds of millions
of dollars in public revenue. This committee has a vested interest
in ensuring that the Bureau is held accountable. To provide that
accountability, we urge the subcommittee to prohibit the use of
funds to approve leases when the Bureau retroactively lowers its
valuation without public notice.
The GAO’s report also highlighted problems with how the Bu-
reau considers the present value and the delayed value of a tract
of sea floor, which may have resulted, again, in $873 million in
foregone revenue from March 2000 to June 2018. Again, that is
money that should have gone to the American taxpayer. If a bid
is lower than the present value, but higher than the delayed value,
the Bureau can accept it, but the Bureau has been projecting de-
layed values to be lower than they should be, allowing it to accept
lower bids.
The GAO found that the Bureau’s unrealistically large forecast
of depreciation have increasingly been the deciding factor in accept-
ing lower bids, and, as a result, the government is unnecessarily
passing up hundreds of millions of dollars in potential revenue.
GAO recommended that an independent third party should exam-
ine whether the Interior Department’s use of delayed values deliver
fair market value and whether it should stop using these lower
valuations. POGO believes that such an independent examination
would bring about greater accountability to the bid valuation proc-
ess. We recommend that this subcommittee require no funds be
spent on approving a delayed value lease that was not evaluated
by a third party.
Again, POGO has prepared recommendations to provide more ac-
countability and transparency for oil and gas policy at the Bureau,
which we would be happy to provide to the subcommittee. Thank
you for the opportunity, again, to testify today, and I am happy to
answer any questions you may have.
[The statement of Mr. Stretton follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
106
PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT
Testimony of Tim Stretton, Policy Analyst
Project On Government Oversight
before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies
on "Increasing Accountability and Transparency for Oil and Gas Royalty Policy"
.February 6, 2020
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you
for the oppottunity to testify on the need to increase accountability and transparency for oil and
gas royalty policy at the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. I
am Tim Stretton, policy analyst at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO). POGO is a
nonpartisan independent watchdog that investigates and exposes waste, corruption, abuse of
power. and when the government fails to serve the public or silences those who report
\vrongdoing. We champion reforms to achieve a more effective, ethical, and accountable federal
government that safeguards constitutional principles. For decades, POGO has shed the light on
the need for the federal government to ensure the oil and natural gas industries are paying their
fair share for the publicly owned resources they extract and profit from. 1
Offshore drilling and the lease of publicly owned tracts of seafloor together constitute a
significant revenue stream for the federal govemmen~ bringing in nearly $90 billion between
2006 and 2018. 2 The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management administers offshore drilling rights
and periodically holds auctions in which successful bidders obtain leases for tracts of the seafloor
and rights to explore and drill for the underlying oil or gas deposits. These resources are owned
by the taxpayer, so the bureau is legally required to ensure that taxpayers receive "fair market
value•~ for the resources extracted by private industry, in part by collecting royalties on the sale
of oil and gas produced from leases. 3
But the bureau's so-called "royalty relief" procedures often result in forgone royalty payments
worth tens of billions of dollars. In a September 20 l 9 report, the Gcvemment Accountability
Office (GAO) also identified two additional procedures the Interior Department has engaged in
for decades that may not have resulted in a full fair market value return for oil and gas leases:
retroactively lowering its valuations of tracts of seafloor in order to accept bids that would be
1 See, for exmrple: "lnvestia;ative Sorio1: Drill in, Down,'' Project Ot1 Ooverumeot Oveni,iht, 2011-2019.
MWSf~wv,~.Qti/torip••cotloction,,/drilli11i:down:'; Gtrtti,i,g Royaltia Rigltl: R11ce11t Rtc0ff/l11t111fdatiorufor
!1'1pro-riff1 the Ftrdlral Oil d- Ga, Royalty Syrtu,, I 10• Co1'1g. 95 (March 11, 2008) (testimo11.y of Dmielle Brian,
Executive Director, Project 0. Govc:Mlment Ovol"li&ht), h\tp.'!:/'...,ww.iovinfo.i_o',_'/contentJ)k~/Cf-lR(J-
l!Qhlu:d. f i l t ' . t i . . ! m ! ~ ; POGO Std, "Taxpayers Could Loso $53 Billion From Oil
Lcue1," Project 0a Govomtunt Oveniaht, May 21, 2001 . http~: -'wW\\:·.poa_o.ora_:"ll_n~l~i\i:o_:'}:-◊08,'.Q:'l_'llil;q)l\_}'er:.
cou Id- lo~c-53•bi llion-from~oi !-lease$.,
1 O~vem~~nt A--;;~ll~~biiify OfflCe, Offihor• Oil a1'd Gas: OpportunW•• Exist to Better EJUwrt a Fair Rttllnt on
Fe~ral R•sowrcn, GA0...19-j3 l (Septetnbor 2019), I. 1w.cs;):,ic,l\,-wtUQ,go1r,a~s~t1,? J.Q. 7{)):!)§2,vJf
1 43 U.S.C. § 134-4 (2019). ):it:tp11;~,}'!'"'~"!'!'-law.come\L~du/1,1scqdo.'texti4,3,'l344
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 183 here 43677P7.060
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
107
unacceptable under the bureau's stated procedures; and accepting lower bids because it
unreasonably detennined the tracts might be worth less in the future. 4
Royalty Relief and Billions in Foregone Royalties
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management sets royalty rates for offshore oil and gas based on
market conditions. The bureau also has several options to reduce or waive royalty payments in an
attempt to increase production. But, as the bureau itself has found, its practices often mean
taxpayers lose out on the fair return they're owed. 5 For example, from 1996 to 2000, the Interior
Department leased tracts on which it did not collect royalties on the initial volume of oil or gas
produced. As a result, the GAO found that companies tended to submit higher bids for those
tracts, amounting to an estimated $2 billion in public revenue the department would not have
collected based on the pre-1996 royalty rate. But $2 billion pales in comparison to what the
government could have taken in through royalties. The GAO found that the leases that had been
awarded between 1996 and 2000 with a guarantee of no royalties on initial volumes of
production resulted in about $18 billion in foregone royalties through 2018.6
Lowered Tract Valuations Behind Closed Doors
When it auctions off tracts of seafloor, the bureau is supposed to reject bids that are lower than
its own estimated value of the tracts' worth. Instead, the GAO found, when a bid comes in lower
than the bureau's own valuation, rather than rejecting the bid, the bureau often lowers its initial
valuation •~o justify accepting bids it otherwise would reject," and then accepts the bid on the
basis of the altered valuation.7
This would be rational if the government thought that rejecting bids would result in tracts not
being sold, leading to forgone revenue, similar to a landlord not collecting rent on a vacant
apartment building, but that's not the case. Rather, when the bureau rejected bids that were too
low, industry would often submit higher bids for the same tracts in subsequent auctions, resulting
in higher bid revenue for the government.8 As the GAO noted, by resubmitting bids at higher
amounts, companies signaled that they viewed certain tracts as more valuable than their initial
bids had indicated. In other words, industry often purposely submits lowball bids, and the
majority of the time, the government accepts them. But that doesn't give the taxpayer a fair
return as the law requires.
The GAO found the bureau's practice of lowering its valuations ''is nearly systematic" in cases
where it had originally estimated that tracts were worth up to twice as much as the amount bid. 9
The GAO estimated that from March 2000 to June 2018, the bureau could have collected $567
4
GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 42 {see note 2].
5 Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Recommended Discount Rates and Policies REgarding Special Case
Royalty Relieffor Oil and Gas Projects in Shallow Water (November 2019), 14.
https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/documents/oil-gas-energy/energy-
economics/SW SCRR Discount Rate Paper.pdf
6
GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 1S [see note 2].
7
GAO, Opportunities &ist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on J.ederal Resources, 27 [see note 2].
8
GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 28 [see note 2].
9
GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 34 [see note 2].
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 184 here 43677P7.061
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
108
million in additional auction revenue if it had not lowered its valuations. 10 That's $567 million
the government could have collected on land owned by the American people. In short, the
extractive industry made the profit instead of taxpayers, with the government's permission.
As POGO has previously noted, the bureau does not disclose when it awards drilling rights based
on reduced valuations, and revising valuations is not part of the bureau's published procedures. 11
Because the practice oflowering valuations has resulted in the loss of hundreds of millions of
dollars in public revenue-which will likely continue-this subcommittee has a vested interest in
ensuring that the bureau makes public its revised valuations. Congress and taxpayers should
know when and why the government adjusts its valuations to match industry's before accepting a
lower bid on a tract that it previously stated was worth more. In order to provide more
accountability and transparency, this subcommittee should prohibit the use of funds to approve
leases where the bureau retroactively lowered its valuations without public notice. 12
Forecasts of "Unreasonably" High Depreciation
The GAO's report also highlighted problems with how the bureau considers two key measures of
the worth of a tract of seafloor: the present value and the delayed value. The GAO found the
bureau's broad calculations and use of delayed valuation may have resulted in more than $873
million in forgone additional bid revenue from March 2000 to June 2018. 13
The present value is supposed to reflect the tract's value at the time of the auction, and the
delayed value should show what it would be worth if it were offered at the next auction.
Calculating the delayed value is meant to help the bureau determine the cost of delaying the
auction of a lease. If a bid is lower than the present value but higher than the delayed value, the
bureau can accept it. But, the GAO found, the bureau has been projecting delayed values to be
lower than they should be, leading the bureau to accept lower bids.
Until August 20 l 7, the bureau held auctions once a year and typically forecasted a median loss
of23% of value by the next auction. Although the bureau has since held auctions about every six
months, its predicted decline in value has grown to a median of about 27%. 14 Because the
frequency of auctions has doubled, it's surprising that the bureau's predicated cost of delay has
increased and not decreased. As the GAO noted, with oil prices generally forecasted to rise, the
value of oil and gas resources would be expected to increase over tim~. not decrease.
The GAO found that the bureau's "unreasonably large forecasts of depreciation have
increasingly been the deciding factor in decisions to accept bids." By lowering a tract's predicted
10 GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 39 [see note 2].
11
David S. Hilzenrath, "Report: Interior Gives Oil Companies Discounts on DriJling Rights," Project On
Government Oversight, November 4, 2019. https://www.pogo.org/analysis/2019/l l/report-interior-gives-oil-
companles-discounts-on-drilling-rights/
12
Note: For fiscal year 2020, the Trump administration requested $193.4 million forBOEM, an increase of8% from
fiscal year 2019. Laura B. Comay, Congressional Research Service, Offshore Energy Agency Appropriations,
FY2020, IF11405 (January 10, 2020), 1. https://crsr.eports,congress.gov~uct/pdf/IF/IFl 1405
13
GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 32 [see note 2].
14
GAO, Opportunities F.xist to Bette1· Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 31 [see note 2].
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 185 here 43677P7.062
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
109
future value, the government is unnecessarily passing up hundreds of millions of dollars in
potential revenue. According to the GAO, had the bureau rejected 205 bids that it accepted on
the basis of delayed values, "it might have subsequently collected more than $873 million in
additional bid revenue for these tracts." 15
The GAO's analysis tracks with the findings of POGO's 2018 report Drilling Down: Big Oil's
Bidding. POGO reported:
When the Bureau considered bids placed in the August 2017 auction, it determined that
the [present value] for one tract was $17 million and that the delayed value of the tract
was $6.9 million. In other words, BOEM estimated that, over several months, an
unusually valuable tract would lose more than half its value. On that basis, the BOEM
accepted a bid of$12.I million, much Jess than it said the drilling rights were worth at
that time.
..• In fact, by the govermnent' s own account, rejecting bids and offering the tracts again
later "has consistently resulted in higher average returns in subsequent lease sales for the
same tracts, even when those tracts not receiving subsequent bids were included in the
calculation of the average returns."
In the GulfofMexico from 1984 through 2017, BOEM has stated, the Bureau "rejected
total high bids of $638 million, but when the blocks were reoffered, they drew subsequent
high bids of $1.8 billion, for a total net gain of $1.2 billion, or an increase of 187
percent." 16
Conclusion and Recommendations
In its response to the GAO's report, the Interior Department stated that it did "not concur with
how its bid valuation process is characterized." Nor did it agree with the recommendation of
having ~'an independent third party" examine whether its use of delayed valuations delivers fair
market value and whether it should stop using those lower valuations. 17 POGO believes such an
independent examination would bring greater accountability to the bid valuation process. We
recommend that this subcommittee require that no funds be spent on approving a delayed-value
lease that was not evaluated by a third party.
POGO has prepared report language' to provide more accountability and transparency for oil and
gas royalty policy at the bureau, which we are happy to provide to the subcommittee. As
mentioned above, the language wou)d require the bureau to disclose accepted bids when it
retroactively lowers the initial valuation, and would require that a third party examine the
bureau's delayed valuation system.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony. I am happy to answer any questions.
15
GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 32 [see note 2].
16 David S. Hitzenrath, "Drilling Down: Big Oil's Bidding.'' Project On Government Oversight, February 22, 2018.
https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2018/02/drilling-down-big-oils-bidding/
17
GAO, Opportunities Exist to Better Ensure a Fair Return on Federal Resources, 66 [see note 2].
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 186 here 43677P7.063
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
110
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you very much. Mr. Messmer.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
OCEANA
WITNESS
MICHAEL MESSMER, OCEAN ADVOCATE, OCEANA
Mr. MESSMER. Good morning. Thank you, Congresswoman Pin-
gree, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the subcommittee
for this opportunity. I am Mike Messmer, an ocean advocate at
Oceana, the largest international advocacy organization devoted
solely to oceans conservation. I am here to speak in opposition to
expanded offshore oil and gas drilling, particularly to the Trump
Administration’s 2019–2024 5-year program for offshore oil and gas
leasing that the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management is currently developing.
Oceana thanks the committee and members for including provi-
sions in the Fiscal Year 2020 Interior, Environment appropriations
bill to restrict funding for offshore oil and gas leasing in the Atlan-
tic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, and Eastern Gulf of Mexico. There is long-
standing precedent for this as Congress for nearly 3 decades heed-
ed concerns from the communities it represents and restricted
spending on offshore Federal oil and gas leasing and drilling activi-
ties via the appropriations process.
We urge the committee to include these offshore drilling mora-
toria again as you craft the Fiscal Year 2021 base bill. We also en-
courage committee leaders to work with the Senate to include these
provisions in any final package.
The 5-year program governs when and where BOEM can offer
offshore drilling leases to the oil and gas industry. In January
2018, the Trump Administration released its 2019–2024 draft pro-
posed program. As it stands, this proposal would radically expand
future oil and gas leasing to the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic
Oceans as well as off Florida’s Gulf Coast. The draft plan proposes
opening the vast majority of the outer continental shelf. Rein-
stating offshore drilling moratoria through the appropriations proc-
ess would prevent BOEM from leasing specific areas that Congress
wishes to protect from future offshore drilling. Without moratoria
provisions, Congress relinquishes its power to influence the future
of offshore drilling to the executive branch.
Offshore drilling threatens the continued prosperity of coastal
communities and States whose economies are directly tied to clean
oil-free shores and waters. As of today, opposition and concern over
offshore drilling activities has been expressed by every East and
West Coast governor, more than 380 municipalities, over 2,300
State, local, and Federal elected officials, Democrats and Repub-
licans alike, and alliances representing over 56,000 businesses and
more than 500 fishing families. In addition to permanently altering
the landscape of many towns up and down the East and West
Coasts, offshore drilling is a dirty investment with long-term impli-
cations for the environment and the safety of workers.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
111
Large-scale catastrophies, such as BP’s Deepwater Horizon in
2010, highlight how a single accident can cause enormous and last-
ing consequences. The Deepwater Horizon tragedy killed 11 rig
workers, spilled more than 200 million gallons of oil, fouled thou-
sands of miles of coastline, endangered public health, and killed
thousands of birds, dolphins, and fish. Seaside communities on the
Gulf are still recovering physically and economically from the esti-
mated $36.9 billion in damage caused by the Deepwater Horizon
spill.
Offshore oil development is dirty across the board beyond cata-
strophic spills that make headlines. At least 6,500 oil spills oc-
curred in U.S. waters between 2007 and 2017; further, are typically
far larger than what is reported. During that same time period,
hundreds of workers were injured every year, and, on average, a
fire or explosion erupted on offshore rigs every 3 days on the outer
continental shelf.
Offshore oil and gas exploration activities, such as high-intensity
geophysical seismic surveys, pose dangers to marine life before
commercial drilling even begins. Noise from these dynamite-like
blasts is so loud that it can disturb, injure, or even kill animals
across the entire marine ecosystem from the smallest zooplankton
to the largest whales. The North Atlantic right whale, one of the
most endangered marine mammal species in the world, is a par-
ticular concern. Experts say seismic air gun blasting for oil and gas
exploration may well represent a tipping point for the survival of
this critically-endangered whale.
We urge the subcommittee and committee to restrict any funding
in the Fiscal Year 2021 Interior, Environment appropriations bill
for the purpose of conducting any new offshore oil and gas leasing
and related activities. Threats to coastal economies, marine wild-
life, and your own constituents are simply too great to risk expand-
ing the footprint of offshore drilling. Thank you again for the op-
portunity to testify today.
[The statement of Mr. Messmer follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
112
Testimony of Michael Messmer
Ocean Advocate, Oceana
before the
House Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Good morning. Thank you, Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the
Subcommittee for the opportunity to testify as a public witness. My name is Michael Messmer
and I am the Ocean Advocate on Oceana's Offshore Drilling Campaign. Oceana is the largest
international advocacy organization devoted solely to ocean conservation. I am here to speak in
opposition to expanded offshore oil and gas drilling, and specifically in opposition to the 2019-
2024 five-year program for offshore oil and gas leasing that the Department of the Interior's
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is currently developing.
Oceana thanks the Committee and Members for including provisions in the FY2020 Interior-
Environment Appropriations bill to restrict funding for offshore oil and gas leasing in the
Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, and eastern Gulf of Mexico. Blocking funding for such leasing
activities would effectively ensure a one-year moratorium on offshore drilling for those areas.
There is longstanding precedent for this, as Congress - for nearly three decades - heeded
concerns from the communities it represents and restricted spending on offshore federal oil and
gas leasing and drilling activities via the appropriations process. We ask the Committee to make
it a priority to include these offshore drilling moratoria again as you craft the FY202 I bill, and
that the House insist upon the retention of such restrictions in any negotiations with the Senate.
The five-year program governs when and where BOEM can offer offshore drilling leases to the
oil and gas industry. In January 2018, the Trump administration released its 2019-2024 Draft
Proposed Program. As it stands, this proposal would radically expand future oil and gas leasing
to the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic Oceans, as well as off Florida's Gulf Coast. The draft plan
proposes the largest number of potential offshore leases ever offered by any president - 4 7 lease
sales - and proposes opening more than 90 percent of the acreage of the entire Outer Continental
Shelf.
Reinstating offshore drilling moratoria through the appropriations process would prevent BOEM
from leasing specific areas that Congress wishes to protect from future offshore drilling. Without
moratoria provisions, Congress relinquishes its power to influence the future of offshore drilling
to the executive branch.
Offshore drilling threatens the continued prosperity of coastal communities and states whose
economies are directly tied to clean, oil-free shorelines and waters. The administration's proposal
to expand oil and gas activities to nearly all federal ocean waters poses a real threat to every
business and industry that relies on a healthy marine environment to thrive. Oceana found that
tourism, fishing, and recreation - all major drivers of coastal economies in the Atlantic,
Pacific, and eastern Gulf of Mexico support over 2.6 million American Jobs and generate roughly
$180 billion in GDP each year. If fisheries are properly managed and coastlines are continuously
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 193 here 43677P7.064
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
113
protected, these jobs can be sustained for generations to come. This stands in stark contrast to
offshore drilling for oil and gas, which produces finite resources. When the oil and gas run out,
so will the jobs. Coastal communities want a reliable source of revenue - not more dirty drilling
and dangerous seismic airgun blasting for oil and gas. In fact, as of today, opposition and
concern over offshore drilling activities has been expressed by:
• Every East and West Coast governor;
• More than 380 municipalities;
• Over 2,300 local, state, and federal elected officials, including Democrats and
Republicans;
• Alliances representing over 50,000 businesses and more than 500,000 fishing families;
• The Department of Defense, the Air Force, NASA, and the Florida Defense Support Task
Force;
• The fishery management councils for New England, the South Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic,
and Pacific regions; and
• Numerous commercial and recreational fishing interests such as Southeastern Fisheries
Association, Snook and Gamefish Foundation, Fisheries Survival Fund, Southern Shrimp
Alliance, North Atlantic Marine Alliance, Billfish Foundation, and International Game
Fish Association. 1
Proponents of offshore drilling often fail to mention that developing oil and gas in new areas
would require construction and development along much of the coast. Adding large-scale
refineries, platforms, offshore and onshore pipelines, and other support infrastructure would
drastically transform the character of coastal towns. Heavy industrialization of many coastlines is
also likely to harm nearby resources and ecosystems.
In addition to permanently altering the landscape of many towns up and down the East and West
Coasts, offshore drilling is a dirty investment with long-term consequences for the environment.
Efforts to pursue offshore oil have consistently resulted in spills that are incredibly toxic to living
organisms, both physically and biochemically. 2 Large-scale catastrophes such as BP's
Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2010, highlight how a single accident can cause enormous and
lasting consequences. The Deepwater Horizon tragedy killed 11 rig workers, spilled more than
200 million gallons of oil, fouled thousands of miles of coastline, endangered public health, and
killed thousands of birds, dolphins, and fish. 3 Seaside communities on the Gulf are still
1
Oceana, Grassroots Opposition to Offshore Drilling and Exploration in the Atlantic and
Eastern Gulf ofMexico, http://usa.oceana.org/climate-and-energy/grassroots-opposition-
offshore-drilling-and-exploration-atlantic-ocean-and (last visited Feb. 20, 2019); see also
Oceana, Opposition to New Offshore Drilling in the Pacific Ocean, http://usa.oceana.org/pacific-
drilling (last visited Feb. 20, 2019).
2
NOAA, Office of Response and Restoration, The Toxicity of Oil: What's the Big Deal? (Aug.
27, 2012), https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/about/media/toxicity-oi I-whats-big-deal.html.
3
National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, Deep
Water, The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore drilling, (January 2011),
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-OlLCOMMISSION/pdf/GPO-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 194 here 43677P7.065
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
114
recovering, physically and economically, from the estimated $36.9 billion in damages caused by
the Deepwater Horizon spill. 4
Offshore oil development is dirty across the board, beyond the catastrophic spills that make
headlines. Smaller spills happen on a routine basis during day-to-day rig operations, as well as
during exploration, production, and transportation. 5 At least 6,500 oil spills occurred in U.S.
waters between 2007 and 2017, and a recent study found that spills are typically far larger than
what is reported. 6 During that same time period, hundreds of workers were irtjured every year
and on average, a fire or explosion erupted on offshore rigs every three days on the Outer
Continental Shelf. 7 Expanding offshore drilling to new frontiers when the industry remains dirty
and dangerous is both ill-advised and out of touch with the needs and wishes of those who
inhabit the coast.
Offshore oil and gas exploration activities such as high-intensity geophysical seismic surveys,
pose dangers to marine life before commercial drilling even begins. In November 20 J8, the
federal government issued Incidental Harassment Authorizations for private companies to harm
marine mammals during seismic surveys for oil and gas in a stretch of the Atlantic from Cape
May, New Jersey to Cape Canaveral, Florida. BOEM is currently working on the second stage of
this process, the finalization and issuance of Geological and Geophysical permits that will allow
these companies' vessels to begin seismic airgun blasting.
Noise from these dynamite-like blasts is so loud that it can disturb, injure, or even kill animals
across the entire marine ecosystem from the smallest zooplankton to the largest whales. 8 The
OILCOMMISS!ON.pdf and Haney, J.C., Geiger, H.J., and Short. J. W. (2014). Bird mortality
from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Inter-Research Marine Ecology Progress Series, 513.
4
Lawrence. C. Smith et al., Analysis o.f Environmental and Economic Damages from British
Petroleum's Deepwater Horizon oil spill, 14 Alhany L. Rev. 563, 563-85 (2011).
5
Cheryl McMahon Anderson et al., BOEM, Update 1ifOccurrence Rates.for Offshore Oil
Spills (2012), available at
·/, ssess
ii Ii
6
Oceana. Dirty Drilling: Trump Administration Proposals Weaken Key Safety Protections and
Radically Expand Offshore Drilling. (2019), available:
. . .
7
Oceana. Dirty Drilling: Trump Administration ProposaLY Weaken Key Safety Protections and
Radically Expand Ojfthore Drilling. (2019), available:
. . ff: -~
8
McCauley RD, Day RD, Swadling KM, et al. (2017) Widely used marine seismic survey air
gun operations negatively impact zooplankton. Nature Ecology & Evolution l: 0 I95. doi:
I0.1038/s41559-017-0195; Farmer NA, Baker K, Zeddies DO, et al. (2018) Population
consequences of disturbance by offshore oil and gas activity for endangered sperm whales
(Physeter macrocephalus). Biological Conservation 227: 189-204. doi:
IO. IO l 6/j.biocon.2018.09.006; Castellote M, Clark CW and Lammers MO (2012) Acoustic and
behavioural changes by fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) in response to shipping and airgun
noise. Biological Conservation 147: I 15-122. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.201 l.12.021; Cerchio S,
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 195 here 43677P7.066
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
115
North Atlantic right whale - one of the most endangered marine mammal species in the world
- is a particular concern as its only known calving grounds are located in coastal and offshore
waters from the Carolinas through northern Florida. Experts say seismic airgun blasting for oil
and gas exploration may well represent a tipping point for the survival of this critically
endangered whale. 9
Threatening our oceans with harmful exploration and drilling would be a short-sighted and
permanent mistake. Given the Trump administration's proposal to expand offshore drilling to
nearly all federal waters, it is time for Congress restore the precedent of enacting appropriations
moratoria to protect our oceans and coastal communities once again.
We ask the Committee to restrict any funding provided to the Department of Interior in the
FY2021 Interior-Environment Appropriations bill to prohibit the Department from conducting
any oil and gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities for any areas excluded from the 2017-
2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program. The threats to coastal economies,
marine wildlife, and your own constituents are simply too great to risk expanding the footprint of
offshore drilling. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today.
Strindberg S, Collins T, Bennett C and Rosenbaum H (2014) Seismic Surveys Negatively Affect
Humpback Whale Singing Activity offNorthem Angola. PLoS ONE 9: e86464. doi:
l0.1371/joumal.pone.0086464; de Soto NA, Delorme N, Atkins J, et al. (2013) Anthropogenic
noise causes body malformations and delays development in marine larvae. Scientific Reports 3
doi: 10.l038/srep0283l; McCauley RD, Fewtrell J and Popper AN (2003) High intensity
anthropogenic sound damages fish ears. The journal of the acoustical society of America 113:
638---642.
9 Oceana. Seismic Airgun Blasting Could Be the Tipping Point for North Atlantic Right Whales
https://usa.oceana.org/sites/default/files/17335/narw_ and_seismic_factsheet_final_ 3.25.19_-
- with_sources.pdf
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 196 here 43677P7.067
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
116
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you all very much for your testimony and
for the critical work that your organizations are doing. I just want
to make a couple of comments, particularly, well, to each one of
you. But thank you to POGO for the work that you have done on
the report, researching this. And I think particularly in light of the
last panel where, funding for land and water conservation, the Kil-
mer bill that is proposed, so much of it depends on how much we
receive on these leases. So the idea that there would be any mecha-
nism that would reduce the amount that we receive, and also that
there is no transparency, is really unthinkable. So thank you for
bringing to light, and I hope we can do some work on that in the
next bill.
Certainly we are all concerned about the Administration’s pro-
posals in Alaska, and even as far as Maine, I hear from my con-
stituents about this all the time because I do think we think of
these as national treasures. In terms of the logging rights, as you
mentioned, the President just said we are going to plant 1 million
trees, and we don’t need to cut down trees in areas where we
should be protecting them. And obviously there are appropriate
places for forestry harvesting. My State is one of them. But there
are places in public lands where we shouldn’t be doing that.
And I am particularly disturbed about the leasing of oil and gas
opportunities, particularly when we are not paid the full value. But
even more importantly, I think as solar, and wind, and renewable
resources become even more affordable, the fact that we are not in-
vesting in that, yet we are encouraging and supporting and sub-
sidizing oil and gas leases, is ridiculous at this moment in time
when we have bigger concerns to think about.
I just heard someone give a talk that said 5 years ago in 1 per-
cent of the world, solar and wind was more financially feasible
than oil and gas. Five years later, today, in two-thirds of the world,
it is more cost-effective to invest in solar and wind. So the very
idea that we are supporting that is unthinkable. It also makes a
lot of those resources subprime, and so over time, the reason the
value is going down is because it is increasingly less valuable. The
reason these companies want, you know, a cheaper, no expense to
their bid is because they know in the future there is not going to
be much support for it. So it is just bad policy all the way.
And, of course, being from an ocean State where we have so
many concerns about the future of the ocean, and I think you know
our entire delegation, our tripartisan delegation, and our governor,
our State legislature are just furious at the idea that the Adminis-
tration would suggest that we should drill. It would be a huge chal-
lenge to our fishing industry, it would be a disaster to our tourism
industry, two very important industries to our State. And it doesn’t
make any sense, and we are much more interested in offshore wind
and solar projects, and that is where our money should be.
So obviously I didn’t ask you guys any questions, but I just want-
ed to rant there for a minute and really support the work that you
are doing. And I am so grateful for you helping us to make that
case. Mr. Joyce.
Mr. JOYCE. I certainly appreciate all of you coming today and the
information that you have provided all of us. I don’t have any fur-
ther questions. Thank you.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
117
Mr. KILMER. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you each for the
work you do. Mr. Messmer, last week I was in Grays Harbor Coun-
ty, Washington out on the coast meeting with folks who work in
the fishing industry. And obviously it has been a challenging time.
And the concern about offshore drilling is real, you know. It is per-
ceived in our region by Democrats, Republicans, you name it, as a
real threat to those livelihoods, to our maritime industry, to com-
mercial fishing, sport fishing, tourism. We have a $50 billion mari-
time economy, almost 200,000 jobs supported by it just in Wash-
ington State alone, and it is incompatible with oil and gas develop-
ment.
You spoke about hoping to see in the bill restriction of funds to
be used for offshore drilling. Any other direction either to this com-
mittee or to Congress to protect the coastal communities that are
really put at risk?
Mr. MESSMER. Thank you. I think at this time what we would
really like to see is the restoration of these funding restrictions to
the bill. They had a 30-year. This is nothing new. They are some-
thing out of the legacy of Congress. This is something that Con-
gress had done in response to the will of its constituents and be-
cause of the interest of members as well for almost 30 years from
1982 to 2008. And so we very much think that this is returning,
restoring these provisions to the bill as you did last year. Unfortu-
nately, we didn’t make it through the Senate and on to the White
House. But, you know, obviously regardless, we keep pushing on
that front as well as protecting the North Atlantic from seismic. I
know there was language that Mr. Cunningham offered last year,
which was amended to the bill. And we obviously support that lan-
guage as well.
Mr. KILMER. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. MESSMER. Thank you.
Ms. PINGREE. I want to just add, I meant to say that. But thank
you so much for the data and the support around limiting seismic
drilling exploration. Obviously the right whale is a huge topic in
the Gulf of Maine, and we are concerned about every threat to the
right whales, and so thank you for making that case.
Thank you to the panel. We appreciate all your work, and we ap-
preciate your being here today. And we will look forward to our
last, but certainly not least, panel of the morning.
Okay. Well, thank you for being so prompt, and we will go ahead
and begin this panel. Thank you, Ms. Kraska.
Ms. KRASKA. Kraska.
Ms. PINGREE. Kraska, yes.
Ms. KRASKA. Mm-hmm.
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you. Please go ahead.
Ms. KRASKA. Exactly how it sounds. Thank you so much. I appre-
ciate it.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
ASPCA
WITNESS
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
KATIE KRASKA, SENIOR MANAGER OF FEDERAL LEGISLATION, ASPCA
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
118
Ms. KRASKA. Good morning, Vice Chair Pingree, Ranking Mem-
ber Joyce, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify on the non-lethal and sustainable manage-
ment of our Nation’s wild horses and burros under the care of the
BLM. My name is Katie Kraska, and I am the senior manager of
Federal legislation for the American Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals.
Wild horses and burros are a key segment of the equine popu-
lation at the ASPCA is working hard to protect. We appreciate the
subcommittee’s continued commitment to non-lethal management,
most recently extending these protections to herds on U.S. Forest
Service lands in Fiscal Year 2020. Recognizing the American
public’s overwhelming opposition to horse slaughter and killing for
population control, Congress has, since the late 1980s, prohibited
lethal management of our wild herds, and we urge that this con-
tinue in Fiscal Year 2021.
But wild horses and burros need more than these protections to
thrive for generations to come. That is why I am here today to
speak in support of a new humane path forward for the Wild Horse
and Burro Program. If there is one thing that everyone on all sides
of this highly-polarized issue can agree on, it is that the status quo
is not working. This program is in desperate need of a change, and
know that ASPCA does not agree with the BLM’s current view that
the 31 million acres of land allotted for wild horses and burros can
only support 27,000 equines. We know that achieving a sustainable
program requires a stable population over time.
The current strategy of moving horses off range and into holding
facilities is not capable of achieving this goal because it does noth-
ing to address population growth. We end up with more horses on
range, more horses off range, and a shrinking budget to use on ac-
tive management. Last year, off-range holding costs devoured 67
percent of the program’s annual budget. Despite the negativity and
polarization that has plagued this issue for decades, we want to
focus on solutions.
For the first time, and in large part due to the subcommittee’s
leadership, we have an opportunity to slowly but surely steer this
program on to a sustainable and humane course. The ASPCA,
along with other humane and wild horse advocacy groups, recog-
nize that the BLM’s Wild Horse and Burro Program needed not
only an overhaul, but direction on how to accomplish it. Our goal
was a paradigm shift away from removals and towards on-range
management achieved with proven, safe, and humane fertility con-
trol. That is why we developed a comprehensive science-driven,
non-lethal management plan that will achieve this goal within 1
decade.
Wild horse and burrow management has vexed administration
after administration, Congress after Congress, which is why it is a
privilege to be able to thank the vice chair, the ranking members
of the subcommittee, and their staff for their hard work and un-
precedented action in the Fiscal Year 2020 Interior appropriations
bill. In the end, this committee allocated an additional $21 million
for a new management plan. It takes courage and expertise to rec-
ognize the need for action.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
119
This was a truly bipartisan effort, and we applaud the sub-
committee’s directive to BLM to ensure that effective and humane
fertility control is adopted as the central pillar of its management
program, and to strictly adhere to its comprehensive animal wel-
fare program to ensure that horses and burros on and off range are
always handled humanely. With the support of a wide variety of
stakeholders, we are carving a humane path forward for these
iconic animals of which Americans can be proud.
Assuming that the BLM meets Congress’ requirements, we urge
the committee to continue to increase funding for BLM’s Wild
Horse and Burro Program in Fiscal Year 2021. We look forward to
seeing BLM’s forthcoming report outlining how it intends to use
the additional $21 million in funds, which we hope will convey
their clear commitment to a humane path forward. We also support
the subcommittee’s commitment to oversight and understand that
Agency input and communication are critical to the lasting success
of these efforts.
From a humane and scientific standpoint, the most cost-effective
way to rebalance this program is to dedicate maximum funding up
front, but correct implementation, especially of fertility control, is
key. Ultimately, the American public wants to see wild, free-roam-
ing horses and burros managed with their well-being in mind. We
thank the committee for taking action to achieve this and for con-
sidering funding and programmatic needs for the Wild Horse and
Burro Program in Fiscal Year 2020. I welcome your questions.
[The statement of Ms. Kraska follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
120
PUBLIC WITNESS TESTIMONY
House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Fiscal Year 2021
Submitted by: Katie Kraska, Senior Manager of Federal Legislation
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
January 29, 2020
Good morning Chairwoman McCo!lum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the
subcommittee. My name is Katie Kraska and I am the Senior Manager of Federal Legislation for
the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), a national non-profit
organization dedicated to animal protection. I greatly appreciate this opportunity to testify before
the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies about
the non-lethal and sustainable management of our nation's wild horses and burros under the care
of the Bureau of Land Management, and am here to speak in support of a humane, new path
forward for the Wild Horse and Burro Program (WHBP).
Founded in 1866, the ASPCA is the oldest animal welfare organization in North America and
serves as the nation's leading voice for animals. From our very inception, when founder Henry
Bergh fought to improve the treatment of carriage horses, we have worked to protect horses from
cruelty as their roles have changed in society, from our primary form of transportation to revered
athletes, work partners, and pets. In our early days, we focused on equine veterinary care,
inventing the first operating table and ambulance for horses. More recently, in 2017, we
established a dedicated Equine Welfare department working to increase support and
opportunities to find homes for horses, improve safety net resources for horse owners in need,
and increase legal protections and support for law enforcement to effectively respond to equine
cruelty.
Wild horses and burros are a key segment of this population. These icons of the American West
are among the few animals specifically protected under their own federal law, which was enacted
in 1971. Critical to achieving our goal of good welfare for all equines is the permanent end of the
slaughter of American horses, both domestic and wild. The American public overwhelmingly
opposes this practice, which is unavoidably inhumane, creates huge and unnecessary challenges
for rescue work, and instills fear in the equine community. Recognizing this, Congress has
repeatedly passed measures through the appropriations process to prohibit the slaughter of horses
on American soil. Wild horses and burros have been protected from lethal management since the
late J980' s and there have been no horse slaughter facilities operating in the U.S. due to
Congressional action since 2007. We greatly appreciate this subcommittee's inclusion of the
prohibition against slaughter each and most recently, the extension of these Pf<)te<ct1<ms to
herds on U.S. Forest Service lands the FY 2020 Interior Appropriations bill.
However, wild horses and burros need more than these protections to thrive for generations to
come. They also need proactive, humane, sustainable management. And this is s01ne1:hir1g that,
overall, the BLM has failed to provide. As of March l, 2019, the BLM estimates that there are
88,090 wild horses and burros on BLM public lands, and this figure increases by approximately
15%-20% per year. Though the ASPCA does not agree that 31.6 million acres of land allotted for
wild horses and burros can only support 27,000 individuals, we know that achieving a
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 207 here 43677P7.068
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
121
sustainable WHBP requires a stable population over time. Unfortunately, the current strategies
implemented by the agency are not capable of achieving this goal and have instead led to
exponential population growth. Rather than controlling population growth through humane
fertility control vaccines, the BLM has focused almost exclusively on removing horses and
burros from their home range and moving them into expensive, off-range holding facilities. This
has resulted in a growing on-range population, as herd growth accelerates after removals, 1 and a
growing off-range population, which is steadily devouring a larger and larger portion of the
WHBP budget. Over time, the Program has dug a deeper and deeper hole, with a majority of
BLM' s programmatic funds being spent on off-range holding, rather than active on-range
management.
Despite the negativity and polarization that has plagued this issue for decades, we want to focus
on solutions. For the first time, and in large part due to this subcommittee's leadership, we have
an opportunity to slowly but surely steer this program back onto a sustainable and humane
course. Without a humane solution, lawmakers may resort, even if reluctantly, to inhumane
proposals. That is why we developed a comprehensive, science driven, non-lethal management
plan that will get the program on track within a decade. This is an incredibly polarizing topic that
has vexed administration after administration, Congress after Congress. That is why it is a
privilege to be able to thank the Chair, the Ranking Member, members of the subcommittee, and
their staff for taking unprecedented action in the FY 2020 Interior Appropriations bill. Though
we have only just begun the course correction of this program, it takes courage and expertise to
recognize the need for action, and to direct BLM to make the necessary changes. For the first
time in a long time, we are carving a humane path forward for these iconic animals, of which
Americans can be proud.
The ASPCA, along with other humane groups, recognized that the BLM's Wild Horse and Burro
Program not only needed an overhaul, but needed direction on how to accomplish it. Our goal
was to shift the long-held reliance on round ups and removals to on-range management achieved
via safe and humane fertility control, a move that will, if faithfully implemented, effectively end
the costly off-range program and the need for large-scale removals. Decades of research has
demonstrated that on-range management with fertility control is not only possible, it is the
fiscally responsible choice. Making a major course correction will take time, and temporary
measures like some targeted removals in highly impacted areas will be needed to enable fertility
control tools to take effect. Our proposal contains four interdependent strategies that must be
implemented simultaneously to have a meaningful effect: I) immediate and robust application of
proven safe and humane fertility control to manage the on-range population; 2) shifting horses
currently in off-range BLM corrals to humane, cost-effective pasture facilities; 3) increasing wild
horse and burro adoptions; and 4) removals of horses from densely populated herd management
areas to reduce the population that must be managed on-range, the need for which will decrease
over time as the program rebalances towards on-range management, with strict adherence to the
BLM's Comprehensive Animal Welfare Program. 2 Our plan will not succeed if the agency fails
1 National Research Council. "Using Science to Improve the BLM Wild Horse and Burro Program: A Way
Forward," 2013. Washington. DC: The National Academies Press, https:/ldoi.org/lO, l 72261135 l L
2
Bureau of Land Management, Comprehensive Animal Welfare Program for Wild Horse and Burro Gathers. !M
2015-151, Accessed July 12, 2019. https:llwww.blm.gov/policylim-2015-15!
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 208 here 43677P7.069
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
122
Outside Witness Testimony: ASPCA
FY2020 Senate Interior Appropriations-Page 3 of 4
to implement any single one of those strategies. The plan envisions that BLM will shift towards
primarily using the fertility control strategy to sustainably manage the population in perpetuity.
Fertility control is a demonstrably effective strategy to manage wild equids. Starting in 1990, the
GAO began urging BLM to implement fertility control for wild equids, which is less expensive
than removing horses from the range and paying for lifetime care in off-range facilities. The
efficacy of fertility control has been confirmed through multiple studies, agency reports, and
congressional reports. 3 Despite the strong body of supportive evidence, in FY 2018, BLM
administered only 702 fertility control treatments. 4 However-, since we have come forward with
this proposal, we have been encouraged by recent BLM statements that fertility control is a
critical component of any successful program and that such a program is possible with additional
funding. We are also encouraged to see the agency pursue research to find longer lasting
vaccines, such as the oocyte growth factor vaccine study in Nevada. 5 We are cautiously
optimistic that BLM is finally embracing the use of effective fertility control tools as the best
way to manage wild equids.
Regardless of the efficacy of any fertility control tool, it cannot work if it is not used. In
developing our plan, we worked with experts in the field-population ecologists, economists,
and wildlife managers-to reach a better understanding of how much it will cost and how long it
will take to achieve a program where the wild equid population is controlled almost exclusively
through fertility control, removals are few and far between, and the number of horses and burros
adopted out mirrors the small number removed from the range. These experts built a scientific
model that has allowed us to understand what effect various management scenarios would have
on the total population now and in the future. This is how we reached the tiers of our proposal,
through scientific analysis and strict adherence to the parameters of what can happen in reality.
The math is relatively simple. The BLM' s capacity to treat a number of animals in a given year
is approximately 25,000, given that approximately 5,000 are reachable by ground darting and
20,000 can be gathered. Fertility control can only stabilize the population if the vast majority of
the animals receive the vaccine - upwards of 80%. We are optimistic that this capacity can
increase with additional contractors, and also about new exciting research that helicopter gathers
may not be the only way to coax horses into corrals. 6 But it is critical to achieving a balanced
population that the agency initiate an on-range focus now.
For the first time in the FY 2020 appropriations cycle, both the U.S. House and Senate Interior
Appropriations bills included dedicated funding and clear language directing BLM to implement
3
See e.g. 1992-1995 BLM Report; 1998 FWS rule; 2003 BLM Report to Congress; 2006 U.S. House of
Representatives Report urging BLM to move forward with fertility control, citing USGS study showing $7.7m in
savings; 2008 BLM Report to Congress confirming efficacy of fertility control and citing NPS successes; 2009
BLM instruction memorandum, "for each animal that would have been maintained at long term holding for the
remainder of its life after capture, the total cost savings is about $13,000"; 2011 BLM EA on McCullough Peaks
herd stating that liquid PZP is 95% effective.
4
"Program Data." U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. April 27, 2018.
https://www.blm.gov/prograrns/wild-horse-and-burro/about-the-program/program-data
5
Bureau of Land Management, Nevada State Office. 2020. "Oocyte Growth Factor Vaccine Study."
https:l/eplanning.blm.govlepl-front-
office/eplanning/planAndProjectSite.do?methodNarne=renderDefaultPlanOrProjectSite&projectid=l502949
6
McDonald, Sue & Torcivia, Catherine. 2020. "Preliminary Proof of the Concept of Wild (Feral) Horses Following
Light Aircraft into a Trap." Animals. {10)1.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 209 here 43677P7.070
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
123
Outside Witness Testimony: ASPCA
FY2020 Senate Interior Appropriations -Page 4 of4
a comprehensive, on-range management program that embraces the four principles of our
proposal. It is also to our knowledge the first Congressional directive for the BLM to adhere to
its Comprehensive Animal Welfare Program to ensure that horses and burros on and off range
are handled humanely. The final bill allocated an additional $21 million for a humane,
sustainable management program that prioritizes effective implementation of fertility control.
This was a truly bipartisan effort and we applaud the subcommittee's directive to BLM to ensure
that effective and humane fertility control is adopted as the central pillar of its management
program. We also support the subcommittee's commitment to keep a close eye on the agency's
planning and implementation of this proposal through continued oversight. IfBLM complies
with Congress's requirements for a humane management program, we strongly urge the
committee to continue to increase funding for BLM's Wild Horse and Burro Management
Program in FY 2021. From a scientific perspective, the most cost-effective way to manage this
program in perpetuity is to dedicate more funding up front. The faster we act, the easier it will be
to rebalance the program. However, we understand that oversight and agency buy-in are critical
to the lasting success of these efforts and appreciate the Committee's consideration of such
factors. We look forward to seeing BLM's forthcoming report on how it intends to use the
additional $21 million in funds, which we hope will convey their clear commitment to our
proposal.
Thank you for your work on this issue thus far, and for considering this testimony regarding
funding and programmatic needs for the Wild Horse and Burro Program in FY 2021.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 210 here 43677P7.071
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
124
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you very much. Ms. Marienfeld?
Ms. MARIENFELD. Marienfeld, yes.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE
WITNESS
KYA MARIENFELD, WILDLANDS ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN UTAH WIL-
DERNESS ALLIANCE
Ms. MARIENFELD. I represent the Southern Utah Wilderness Alli-
ance, a nonprofit dedicated to the preservation of the outstanding
wilderness at the heart of the Colorado Plateau. We thank you for
providing the opportunity to present our views on the subcommit-
tee’s support for the Bureau of Land Management’s financial in-
volvement in the State of Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative,
a partnership that has resulted in tens of millions of Federal tax-
payer dollars spent on the destruction of native ecosystems
throughout public lands and Utah. Specifically, we are concerned
that the subcommittee’s explicit support for this partnership
greenlights BLM spending on large-scale removal of native vegeta-
tion risks diverting limited agency monies away from critical staff-
ing needs, and results in irreparable damage to Utah Public Lands.
Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative, which I will refer to as
the Initiative, is founded and coordinated by the Utah State De-
partment of Natural Resources. The Initiative is a coalition of pub-
lic and private entities created to fund and promote vegetation and
habitat projects in Utah. The money pooling function of the initia-
tive has undoubtedly produced a continual increase in vegetation
removal on BLM managed public lands in our State.
In the report accompanying the appropriations bill for 2020, this
subcommittee highlighted its concern over ongoing drought in the
western United States, and overtly endorsed BLM’s continued
funding of the Initiative to, as the subcommittee stated, ‘‘develop
water resources to benefit the public, wildlife, endangered species,
permits use, and other users.’’ But vegetation removal projects,
called vegetation treatments or habitat restoration, take many
forms. Often the initiative invests in projects that employ heavy
machinery and extensive surface disturbance.
One prevalent method is mastication where a machine known as
a bull hog is used to mulch vegetation, turning entire forests of live
trees into thousands of acres of wood chips and stumps. Chaining
utilizes a large anchor chain dragged between two enormous bull-
dozers to rip live trees out of the ground, roots and all. These chain
masticators and other heavy equipment destroy the fragile living
soil crust that is the backbone of the Colorado Plateau ecosystem,
and is our main defense against future drought and desertification.
While preventing drought and fire and protecting watersheds are
laudable goals for BLM, science tells us that the large-scale dis-
turbance resulting from these projects can actually make these
problems worse. BLM is spending millions of dollars a year on
projects with no proven track record of success and with no real
plan to develop the science necessary to increase those odds in the
future. Furthermore, the Initiative’s funding regime has created a
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
125
tail-wagging-the-dog situation as this pool of money has grown, so
has the size and scale of vegetation removal projects proposed by
BLM, regardless of science and research that recommends other-
wise.
Since 2006, BLM has contributed over $80 million in funding to
support initiative projects in Utah. It is exceptionally difficult for
the public to follow the trail of financing from congressional appro-
priation to BLM funding of initiative projects. We are concerned
that discretionary agency monies are being moved away from other
needs, such as filling critical BLM field office staffing vacancies
and positions ranging from law enforcement officers to biologists,
and is instead being transferred to a money pooling coalition con-
trolled by the State of Utah. Rather than protecting water re-
sources, this taxpayer money is being used to fund the removal of
native trees and shrubs, which results in a degraded ecosystem on
public lands. Our concern over a lack of transparency is heightened
when considering the revolving door between leadership at the De-
partment of Interior and the State of Utah.
We are not advocating that truly degraded ecosystems can never
benefit from human help, but rather that the subcommittee should
not continue to effectively grant BLM blanket approval to fund
large-scale vegetation removal projects through this initiative part-
nership. We believe that additional appropriations oversight is nec-
essary to ensure that BLM’s funding pipeline for so-called water-
shed restoration projects is transparent, and that projects are
grounded in high-quality science and monitoring, and that discre-
tionary BLM funds are not being diverted from necessary staffing
and resource needs toward Initiative projects.
We encourage the subcommittee to take a hard look at its en-
dorsement of this partnership. Issues of accountability, both
through BLM’s funding process as well as when public funds are
in the Initiative’s hands, and the Initiative’s continual promotion of
projects that benefit economic interests at the detriment of all
other resource values. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Marienfeld follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
126
Written Testimony of Kya Marienfeld
Wildlands Attorney
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance
Before the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Introduction
Chairwoman McCollurn, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the Subcommittee, I
represent the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), a Utah-based non-profit organization
with over 15,000 members, dedicated to the preservation of the outstanding wilderness at the
heart of the Colorado Plateau and the management of these lands in their natural state for the
benefit of all Americans. SUWA and our members thank you for providing the opportunity to
present our views on the Subcommittee's support for the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM)
financial involvement in Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (WRl}-a partnership that has
resulted in tens of millions of federal taxpayer dollars wasted on the destruction of native
ecosystems throughout public lands in Utah.
While we fully agree with the Subcommittee's concern about the ongoing and worsening
drought affecting the western United States, we do not support the Subcommittee's endorsement
ofBLM's financial partnership with the State of Utah through WRl. 1 The Subcommittee's
support for BLM's continued engagement with WR! effectively green-lights the agency to
commit millions of dollars each year towards native vegetation removal projects that often do not
align with the Subcommittee's stated desire to protect western water resources.
SUWA submits this testimony in order to encourage the Subcommittee to take a closer
look at BLM's multimillion-dollar funding ofWRI projects, specifically those projects involving
large-scale mechanical vegetation removal of pinyon pine, juniper, and sagebrush--done at the
expense of native ecosystems, wildlife habitat, and the climate resiliency ofBLM-managed
public lands. In addition to concerns over the destruction of native ecosystems through WRl-
funded projects, we also believe that BLM's continued financial commitment to WRI raises
issues of transparency and accountability in agency spending, undermines the persistent claim
that BLM is underfunded and cannot properly staff its field offices, and highlights potential
conflicts of interest between the State of Utah and the Department of the Interior.
Vegetation Manipulation and wru Funding
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (WRl)-founded and coordinated by the Utah
Department of Natural Resources-is a coalition of public and private entities created to fund
and promote vegetation and habitat projects across federal, state, and private lands in Utah. The
WRI coalition includes, in part, BLM, the Forest Service, the Utah Division of Wildlife
Resources, public land grazing permittees, and hunting advocacy organizations such as
1
H.R. Rep. No. 116-100, at 14 (2019).
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 217 here 43677P7.072
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
127
Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, the Mule Deer Foundation, and the Safari Club.2 Since 2006,
WRI has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars toward vegetation manipulation projects on
over one million acres of public, state, and private lands throughout Utah. The money-pooling
function ofWRI has inarguably produced a continual increase in vegetation removal on BLM-
managed public lands in Utah-from the vast, mountain-ringed wildlands of the Great Basin to
the redrock of the Colorado Plateau, including in Wilderness Study Areas and other wilderness-
quality lands. While many of the projects funded through WRI are beneficial-such as the
removal of invasive species or the restoration of river systems-WRI's bullish funding of
landscape-scale, mechanical vegetation removal is resulting in irreparable damage to native
pinyon pine, juniper, and sagebrush ecosystems.
In the Report accompanying the Department of Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies' Appropriations Bill for 2020, the Subcommittee highlighted its concern over ongoing
drought in the western United States. 4 In doing so, the Subcommittee overtly endorsed BLM's
continued funding ofWRI ''to develop water resources to benefit the public, wildlife, endangered
species, permittees, and other users," and encouraged BLM to "continue to work with the State
and other interested entities to identify and pursue the highest priority projects."5
But what form do the projects that WRI funds to "develop water resources to benefit the
public" actually take? An attempt to find these answers in WRI's public-facing materials falls
quite short of specifics and instead turns up glossy fact sheets extolling the program's "protection
and rehabilitation of vital habitats for wildlife," how WRI funds help "reduce the risk of
catastrophic wildfires," and how WRI works to "increase forage for sustainable agriculture." 6 All
of these goals, it seems, can be accomplished through the very same means: by systematically
removing large swaths of native vegetation, most often pinyon pine, juniper, and sagebrush.
Vegetation removal projects---called "vegetation treatments" or "habitat restoration" by
BLM and WRI-take many forms. Sometimes the preferred method is prescribed burning or
hand-thinning. More commonly, however, WRI invests in projects that employ heavy machinery
and extensive surface disturbance. One prevalent method is "mastication," where a machine
known as a bullhog masticator is attached to an excavator and is used to mulch vegetation from
branch tips to roots, turning entire forests of live trees into thousands of acres of woodchips and
stumps. "Chaining," a particularly heavy-handed approach, utilizes a large anchor chain dragged
between two enormous bulldozers to rip live trees out of the ground, roots and all. Bulldozers
travel back and forth with anchor chains that can weigh more than 20,000 pounds, uprooting
hundreds of trees and any other vegetation in its wake with every pass. These chains destroy the
fragile living soil crust that is the backbone of the Colorado Plateau ecosystem. Because of
public outcry over chaining's particularly devastating impacts, BLM significantly scaled back on
2
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative, Restoring Watersheds Through Partnerships, 3 (2019) available at
https://watershed.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/20 I 9-WRI-Fact-Sheet-Page-1-4.pdf
3
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative, Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative By the Numbers, l (2019)
available at https://watershed.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/20!9/l l/WRl-by-the-nurnbers-lnfographic-Final-med-
res.pdf
4
H.R. Rep., supra note 1.
s Id.
6
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative, supra note 2.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 218 here 43677P7.073
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
128
the practice in the 1990s, but in the last decade we've seen its re-emergence as a favored method
of"treatment" throughout Utah.
Proponents oflarge-scale mechanical vegetation removal argue that although not
aesthetically-pleasing, these projects are necessary for restoring a natural ecosystem-that they
benefit wildlife like deer, elk, and other ungulates, and that they help prevent wildfires and
rejuvenate watershed health. However, the problems with these treatments aren't merely
aesthetic, and the best available science shows that, more often than not, large-scale mechanical
vegetation removal has either non-significant (at best) or detrimental (at worst) effects on metrics
like wildlife, fire prevention, and watersheds.
According to an extensive 2019 review of all existing scientific literature on mechanical
vegetation removal, these projects have just one in three odds of improving forage for ungulates. 7
Two-thirds of the time, mechanically removing vegetation has either a non-significant or
negative effect on forage for these species. 8 Regarding fire prevention, "recent studies suggest
that climate has a greater influence on fire activity than fine fuels and biomass," and surface
disturbances associated with mechanical vegetation removal may actually facilitate the
expansion of cheatgrass and other invasive species that lead to increased fires. 9 According to the
report, "there is little research supporting the contention that removing pinyon and juniper
reduces fire." 10
Mechanical vegetation removal projects also disturb soils, which frequently leads to an
increase in erosion and desertification. This is especially true in southern Utah, where
ecosystems rely on biological soil crusts as an integral component of soil stability. In existing
scientific literature, only 4% to 7% of treatments resulted in a decrease in runoff and erosion,
with most research concluding that ''treatments do not reliably increase water yield on a
watershed scale, although water availability may increase in local areas." 11
All told, BLM is spending millions of dollars a year on projects with no proven track
record of success and with no real game plan to develop the science necessary to increase those
odds. While preventing drought and fire and protecting watersheds are laudable goals for BLM,
science tells us that the large-scale disturbance of Utah wildlands resulting from WRl-funded
vegetation removal can actually make these problems worse. Furthermore, WRl's funding regime
has created a tail-wagging-the-dog situation-as the pool ofWRI money has grown, so has the
size and scale of vegetation removal projects proposed by BLM.
7
Alison Jones, lead ed., Do mechanical vegetation treatments ofpinyon-juniper and sagebrush communities work?
A review of the literature, 25-27 (2019) available at
https://staticl .sguarespace.com/static/57c5f6aa579fb31d71581457/t/5c746d0a9140b757cca49418/ 155113397833 7/2
019 MechVegTrt LitReview.pdf
'Id.
9
Id. at 5.
to Id.
11
Id. at 6.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 219 here 43677P7.074
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
129
Since 2006, BLM has contributed over $80 million dollars in funding to support WRI
projects. 12 In 2019 alone, BLM contributed over $10 million dollars to WRI. 13 Looking at
treatments listed by acreage, it appears that only a small percentage ofBLM funding to WRI
actually directly benefitted watersheds and riparian resources. 14 This subverts the
Subcommittee's intent in encouraging the partnership between BLM and WRI for protecting
water resources.
Despite making these "big picture" numbers available to the public, it is exceptionally
difficult to follow the trail of financing from congressional appropriation to BLM funding of
large-scale vegetation removal projects through WRI. Because of this, SUWA is concerned that
discretionary agency monies are being moved away from other needs-such as filling critical
staffing vacancies throughout Utah BLM field offices in positions ranging from law enforcement
officers to biologists and archaeologists-and is instead being transferred to a money-pooling
coalition largely controlled by the State of Utah. Rather than protecting water resources, this
taxpayer money is being used to fund the removal of native vegetation, which results in a
degraded ecosystem where the only consistent beneficiaries are grazing interests. The concern
over a lack of transparency in regard to BLM appropriations is heightened when considering the
15
recent revolving door between leadership at the Department of Interior and the State of Utah.
We are not advocating that truly degraded ecosystems can never benefit from human
help, but rather that the Subcommittee should not continue to effectively grant BLM blanket
approval to fund large-scale, heavy-handed, and destructive vegetation removal projects through
the WRI partnership. We believe that additional appropriations oversight is necessary to ensure
that BLM's funding pipeline for "vegetation treatment" or "habitat restoration" projects is
transparent, that projects are grounded in high-quality science and monitoring, and that
discretionary BLM funds are not being diverted from necessary staffing and resource needs
towards WRI. As was made clear in the 2019 scientific report, "[a ]s changing climatic conditions
make predicting the results and risks of mechanical treatments even more uncertain, public land
managers should aim for more transparency in the decision process to explain the expectations
for a project and the science guiding the planning effort." 16
Conclusion
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding the Subcommittee's support
for BLM's financial involvement in WRI. We encourage the Subcommittee to take a hard look at
its endorsement of this partnership, issues of accountability both through BLM's funding process
as well as when public funds are in WRI's hands, and WRI's continual promotion of projects
that benefit small economic interests at the detriment of all other resource values.
12
Press Release, BLM Utah Announces Five-Year Agreement with the Utah Department of Natural Resources as a
Part of Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (Dec. 31, 2019) available at https://www.blm.gov/press-rekease/blm-
utah-announces-five-year-agreement-wri-dnr
"Id.
14 Id.
15
"Herbert picks a top national BLM official and fonner Stewart aide to lead Utah Department of Natural
Resources," Salt Lake Tribune (April 29, 2019), available at
https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2019/04/29/herbert-picks-top/
16
Jones, supra note 7, at 7.
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 220 here 43677P7.075
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
130
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you very much. Mr. Simpson. You are well-
miked today. [Laughter.]
Mr. SIMPSON. Stereo right here.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
PUBLIC LANDS FOUNDATION
WITNESS
DON SIMPSON, VICE PRESIDENT, PUBLIC LANDS FOUNDATION
Mr. SIMPSON. Well, thank you for the opportunity to testify
today. My name is Don Simpson. I am the vice president of an or-
ganization called the Public Lands Foundation, PLF. We are a na-
tional nonprofit organization. We are nearly all retired employees
of the Bureau of Land Management and have a large body of expe-
rience, expertise, and knowledge of public land management. I am
here today to present our program priorities for the 2021 budget
for BLM.
The first program area is balanced energy development. I think
we have had a little discussion already. We believe the sub-
committee should support the environmentally-responsible and bal-
anced development of all energy resources. This includes oil, gas,
coal, solar, wind, and geothermal. It also includes the associated
pipeline and transmission infrastructure. It is critically important
that sufficient funds are provided to not only support the leasing
and permitting activities, but also the land use planning, the re-
source assessments, the NEPA reviews, the program management,
and the inspection and enforcement activities.
Sage-grouse habitat is the second issue that we have. As the
West has become urbanized over the last 100 years, large areas of
sagebrush have been impacted, resulting in significant sage-grouse
population declines. The PLF recommends increased funding for
the BLM to coordinate activities on public lands with State agen-
cies, stakeholders, and partners to improve and restore habitat
that has been damaged by wildfire, weed invasions, and develop-
ment. Conserving and restoring habitat for sage-grouse will also
enhance populations for elk, mule deer, golden eagles, and hun-
dreds of sagebrush-dependent species.
Wild horses and burros, number three. So I am going to tag on
to what Ms. Kraska was talking about. The overpopulation of wild
horses and burros on the range is now nearly 4 times its targeted
management level, and it is past a critical point, and it is doing
irreparable harm to the land, the vegetation, the wildlife, and the
animals themselves. The PLF has been working as a partner with
a broad coalition of diverse stakeholders that are seeking a solution
to the problem. The only viable approach for resolution is the im-
plementation of a consistently funded multiyear strategy that en-
tails aggressive removals, broadscale annual application of fertility
control, novel efforts to increase adoption, such as BLM’s recent in-
centive program, and pasturing of unadopted animals. We rec-
ommend that the committee, at a minimum, retain the 2020 fund-
ing levels for the Wild Horse and Burro Program, with increases
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
131
and long-term funding to implement the BLM’s soon-to-be-pre-
sented plan.
Recreation is the fourth area I would like to discuss. For those
of you that have visited the West recently, it is growing very rap-
idly. It is placing a significant demand on the public lands for
recreation opportunities. In Fiscal Year 2018, the public lands pro-
vided 68 million recreation visits with an economic output of nearly
$7 billion to the western States’ economies. We recommend that
this subcommittee increase funding for recreation, wildlife, fish-
eries, land restoration, and the Land and Water Conservation
Fund. These funds will allow BLM to maintain and add recreation
opportunities, secure easements for access to landlocked public
lands, and restore degraded lands to improve wildlife and fisheries
habitat.
Fifth is an emerging and important program area, wildlife migra-
tion corridors. BLM has been working for several years now with
the State wildlife agencies to identify wildlife migration corridors
for species such as mule, deer elk, and pronghorn antelope. Fund-
ing should be provided to continue and expand this effort. These
are very small amounts of public lands, but they are crucial for the
species to get to and from their winter and summer habitats. Our
sixth and final issue I would like to highlight is the functional
elimination of the BLM headquarters. As you are aware, the Sec-
retary of Interior announced the movement of the BLM head-
quarters of employees from Washington, D.C. to 11 western States.
That was done last summer. So the director, assistant directors,
and a few immediate staff are going to be located in Grand Junc-
tion, Colorado. The other staff will be scattered throughout other
western locations. The PLF opposed this proposal as it will func-
tionally eliminate the Agency’s headquarters. The result will be the
largest Federal land managing agency with no seat at the table in
Washington, D.C. as policy procedures and budgets are developed.
We strongly believe the BLM headquarters should be located in
Washington, D.C. We recommend that funding be eliminated for
the continuation of this action in Fiscal Year 2021, and that signifi-
cant congressional oversight occur by both House and Senate Ap-
propriations and authorizing committees during Fiscal Year 2020.
Thank you for the opportunity to share PLF’s priorities.
[The statement of Mr. Simpson follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
132
TESTIMONY OF DONALD A. SIMPSON
VICE PRESlDENT, PUBLIC LANDS FOUNDATION
THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT AND RELATED AGENCIES;
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS;
ATTENTION: PUBLIC WITNESS TESTIMONY
FISCAL YEAR 2021 BUDGET- BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
February 6, 2020
We thank you for this opportunity to pFesent the Subcommittee with the Public land
Foundation's {PLF) views regarding the Bureau of Land Management's (SLM} budget for FY
2021. As a national, non-profit organization with more than 600 members, comprised
principally of retired SLM employees, the PLF has a unique body of experience, expertise and
knowledge of public land management. As retirees, we believe we offer an objective and non-
partisan view of what is currently happening on the public lands managed by the SLM. The PLF
supports the SLM and its programs, but we are independent in our views and requests. We
strive to improve the effectiveness of the SLM by 1) encouraging professionalism of its
employees, 2) increasing the public's understanding of and support for the multiple-use
management of the public lands, and 3} promoting scientific management of lands
administered by the SLM.
SLM Overview
The SLM manages the most diverse landscapes in the Nation's portfolio. The agency manages
approximately 245 million acres of land and 700 million acres of mineral estate from the north
slope of Alaska to Jupiter Inlet in Florida. These lands are habitat for thousands of species of
plants and animals, provide clean water, scenic beauty, and solitude. Many of these lands are
of Tribal significance and include cultural and historic resources. They also provide the Nation
with wealth from its many resources including oil and gas, coal, renewable energy, non-energy
minerals, all types of recreation, forage for livestock, and timber. According to the BLM's A
Sound Investment for America 2019 report, during FY 2018 these lands generated $105 billion
in economic output and supported 471,000 jobs.
These lands are vital to the many rural communities throughout the West that are intermixed
with these lands and whose citizens work and recreate on the lands. These uses and values can
only be achieved when there is some balance between energy development and other
programs, such as wildlife, livestock grazing, forest management, and recreation to provide for
the diversity of uses and maintenance of healthy, resilient landscapes.
Budget Overview
The PLF recognizes and appreciates the difficult decisions that must be made by the Congress
and the Administration to allocate scarce dollars to programs that generate the best economic
and social returns to the American taxpayers. The President's Fiscal Year 2021 Budget proposal,
having not yet been released, leaves us not knowing the Administration's priorities for the
upcoming year for the SLM. The PLF believes the budget should prioritize programs that
provide for healthy, resilient landscapes; the conservation of species dependent on the diverse
1 I
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 227 here 43677P7.076
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
133
habitat the BLM manages; economic benefits to the Nation and to the rural communities
dependent on the SLM-managed public lands; all forms of energy and associated transmission;
and the safety of communities these lands surround and the public that lives nearby.
Program areas of importance to the PLF
1. Balanced Energy Development. We believe the Subcommittee should support the
sustainable and balanced development of both traditional and renewable energy resources,
including solar, wind, and geothermal energy resources on the public lands along with the
associated infrastructure {pipeline and transmission). The PLF specifically acknowledges the
BLM for the recent approval of the Desert Quartzite solar project in California and release of
the Final EIS for the Gemini solar project in Nevada. The BLM, however, needs to more
aggressively move forward with the expansion of renewable energy designated leasing areas
and competitive leasing for additional solar and wind energy development projects. Energy and
infrastructure development on the public lands is part of the multiple-use mandate for the BLM
under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and also supports economic
growth, energy independence, jobs in our rural communities, and generates revenues for
federal and state treasuries and local economies.
It is critically important that sufficient funds are provided to not only support the leasing and
permitting activities for environmentally responsible energy development, but also for land use
planning, resource assessments, NEPA reviews, program management, and inspection and
compliance activities. This will assure that development is complying with laws, regulations and
lease terms. The development of energy resources and associated infrastructure on the public
lands affects other resources and must be balanced as to time and scale of development.
Funding for other high value programs can help mitigate and offset some of the effects of
energy development. An example would be funding to support the implementation of
conservation practices for sage grouse under the west-wide habitat management plans that are
potentially affected by energy and infrastructure development. It is also important that the
BLM revisit the compensatory mitigation policy for development activities on the public lands
(IM 2019-018, issued December 6, 2018) that limits the use of offsite mitigation tools to help
reduce the landscape-level impacts from this development.
The BLM released a Final EIS for leasing in the 1002 Area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
(ANWR) in September 2019, and is expected to issue a Decision and conduct an oil and gas
lease sale this year. The PLF requests that the 2021 budget provide sufficient funds to ensure
environmental review, monitoring, and inspections of exploration and development.
2. Sage Grouse Habitat. As the West has become urbanized over the last 100 years, large areas
of sagebrush have been impacted resulting in significant sage grouse population declines.
Although it is a state-managed species that depends on the sagebrush-steppe habitat to
survive, BLM manages large areas of the habitat across the Western states and must be in lock
step with management strategies of the western states. The PLF recommends increased
funding for the BLM to coordinate activities on public lands with state agencies, stakeholders
2JPage
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 228 here 43677P7.077
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
134
and partners to improve and restore habitat that has been damaged by wildfire, weed
invasions, and development. Conserving and restoring habitat for sage grouse will also enhance
populations of elk, mule deer, golden eagles and hundreds of sagebrush dependent species.
Healthy sagebrush habitats also maintain vibrant ranching communities dependent on these
habitats and a thriving outdoor recreation economy.
There are many landscape initiatives throughout the west that deal with large scale habitat
improvement. Funding has been nearly eliminated for these efforts over the past few years.
The PLF recommends reviving the funding for these healthy lands partnerships. These
landscape scale initiatives are a bargain for the public because the local and state partners
participate and match funding. For example, the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative
(WLCI) provided for a leverage of $6 for every one Federal dollar appropriated. Over a ten-year
period from 2007 to 2017 the WLCI protected 93,000 acres of sagebrush habitat through
easements and forage reserves and almost 100,000 acres were revegetated or treated to
eliminate invasive species or rejuvenate decadent vegetation.
3. Wild Horse and Burros. The overpopulation of wild horses and burros on the range, now
nearly four times target management levels, is past the critical point and is doing irreparable
harm to the land, vegetation, wildlife, and horses and burros themselves. The PLF has been
working as a partner with a broad coalition of diverse stakeholders that are seeking a solution
to the problem. The only viable approach for resolution is the implementation of a consistently
funded multi-year strategy that entails aggressive removals, broad scale annual application of
fertility control, novel efforts to increase adoptions such as BLM' s recent incentive program,
and pasturing of unadopted animals. The Committee has requested a plan based on this
approach be submitted by BLM. Absent the submission of this plan we recommend that the
Committee at a minimum retain the 2020 funding level for the wild horse and burro program
and if the plan is submitted, increase funding levels to begin implementation. This approach to
management is supported by national animal welfare organizations, wildlife organizations, land
conservation groups, livestockmen and is in step with management approaches identified by
Congressman Stewart's Wild Horse and Burro Roundtable. It is imperative that the Federal
funding not be reduced, and that the aggressive program of removals, fertility control,
adoptions and pasturing of animals that has been initiated be increased. Any backtracking on
these efforts endorsed by the stakeholders will stop the forward momentum to begin lowering
the populations commensurate with the appropriate management level.
4. Recreation. The western states populations are increasing at a very rapid pace. This is
placing a significant demand on the public lands for recreation opportunities. This includes
anything from hiking, to biking, to hunting, to driving OHVs and everything in between. In FY
2018 the public lands provided 68 million recreation visits with an economic output of nearly $7
billion to the western state's economies. We recommend that the Subcommittee increase
subactivity funding for recreation, wildlife, fisheries, and land restoration along with the Land
and Water Conservation Fund, which was recently reauthorized by Congress. This will allow
BLM to maintain and add recreation opportunities, secure easements for access to landlocked
public lands, and restore degraded lands to improve wildlife and fisheries habitat.
3IPage
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 229 here 43677P7.078
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
135
5. Wildlife Migration Corridors. The BLM has been working with State Wildlife agencies to
identify wildlife migration corridors for species such as mule deer, elk, and pronghorn antelope.
Funding should be provided to continue and expand this effort. These are very small amounts
of public land but are very crucial for these species to travel between their winter and summer
habitats.
6. Headquarters Functional Elimination. The Secretary of the Interior announced the
movement of the BLM Headquarters employees from Washington, D.C. to 11 different western
locations last summer. The Director, Assistant Directors, and a few immediate staff are to be
located in Grand Junction, Colorado. All other staff will be scattered throughout the west. The
PLF opposed this proposal as it will functionally eliminate the agency's headquarters. The
result will be the largest Federal land management agency with no seat at the table in
Washington, D.C. as policy, procedures, and budgets are developed. We strongly believe the
BLM Headquarters, with only 3 percent of the BLM total workforce, should be located in the
Washington, D.C. area so that it can continue to provide budget, policy and oversight support
to the Department, Administration, Congress, Office of Management and Budget, and other
closely aligned Federal agencies.
At this point the move is beginning. Employees have received their directed reassignment
letters and the vast majority have .or will leave the agency -- a huge brain drain. Nearly 75% of
the Washington Office leadership positions are currently vacant as a result of this move. These
positions include several Assistant Directors, Deputy Assistant Directors, Division Chiefs, Deputy
Division Chiefs and Branch Chiefs. In addition, the BLM Budget Officer position is currently
vacant as is the Chief of Staff position. We have heard numerous reports of chaos in the
organization with the large number of vacancies and that both BLM field office staffs and
external stakeholders are having difficulties contacting Headquarters resource program leaders
and staffs. There appears to be no Continuity of Operations Plan in place as significant
numbers of experienced staff have left. For example, there is uncertainty as to where and how
to forward official records among the numerous office locations. We recommend that funding
be eliminated for the continuation of this action in FY 2021 and that significant Congressional
oversight occur by both House and Senate Appropriations and Authorizing Committees during
FY 2020.
We appreciate the hard choices that this Subcommittee has before it. The Nation faces many
challenges, all of which require funding. The public lands managed by the BLM and other public
lands are a good investment that can provide positive returns to the Treasury as well as many
amenities that contribute to the wellbeing of the American people. These lands are the
lifeblood of many communities and provide economic development in commodities, recreation,
cultural identity, and many other benefits.
Thank you for the opportunity to share the PLF's priorities for the BLM FY 2021 Budget.
-END-
4JPage
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 230 here 43677P7.079
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
136
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you so much. Mr. Ogsbury.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
WESTERN GOVERNOR’S ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
JIM OGSBURY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WESTERN GOVERNORS’ ASSO-
CIATION
Mr. OGSBURY. Thank you. Vice Chair Pingree, Ranking Member
Joyce, my name is Jim Ogsbury. I am the executive director of the
Western Governors Association, a bipartisan organization rep-
resenting the governors of the 22 westernmost States and terri-
tories. It is my profound honor to appear before you, particularly
because of the disproportionate influence of the Interior appropria-
tions bill on the economies, and environments, and quality of life
in the great American West.
Western governors have few priorities that are higher than that
of strengthening the State-Federal relationship. As the chief execu-
tives of co-sovereign governments, they aspire to work shoulder to
shoulder with the Federal agencies as authentic partners in the de-
velopment and execution of policy that affects our shared constitu-
encies. States are not stakeholders, although they are too fre-
quently treated as such by Federal authorities. They are sovereigns
governed by men and women whose knowledge of their States’
unique environments and economies and cultures should be inte-
grated into Federal policymaking. Federal consultation with States
that is substantive, meaningful, and ongoing, and it occurs at the
very earliest stages of a policy’s ideation and throughout its execu-
tion will result in policy that is more informed, durable, and defen-
sible.
This subcommittee in particular has consistently recognized the
value of State engagement, directing that resource agencies within
your jurisdiction utilize State science and data and analysis to in-
form Federal decision making. Western governors urge you to in-
clude such language in the report to accompany the Fiscal Year
2021 appropriations bill. The governors understand that you oper-
ate under severe fiscal constraints. Within those constraints, they
respectfully urge your consideration of their priorities, which are
outlined in detail in the written testimony that WGA has sub-
mitted for the record. With respect to the conservation of the
West’s unparalleled natural resources, those priorities include
funding to support the shared stewardship memorandum of under-
standing executed by western governors with the Department of
Agriculture, and additional funding to advance State-supported
projects and programs promoting voluntary mitigation corridors
and habitat conservation.
Western governors appreciate the subcommittee’s historic sup-
port of the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Program. PILT funding does
not represent a gift to western States. Rather, it helps compensate
western jurisdictions for the disproportionate measure of non-
taxable Federal lands within the region. WGA encourages you to
continue full funding of PILT in the Secure Rural Schools Program
in the coming Fiscal Year.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
137
I commend your attention to my written testimony for a discus-
sion of other gubernatorial priorities, including protection of State
authority over our water and groundwater, funding to address the
maintenance backlog at national parks, efforts to combat invasive
species, and funding to help States comply with their obligations
under the Clean Water Act. In the meantime, thank you again for
the opportunity to testify. Western governors appreciate the enor-
mity of your responsibilities, and urge that you regard them as
partners and resources as you establish funding priorities for the
Nation. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Ogsbury follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
138
Written Testimony of James D. Ogsbury, Executive Director
Western Governors' Association
Submitted to the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Fiscal Year 2021 Appropriations
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee,
the Western Governors' Association (WGA) appreciates the opportunity to provide written
testimony on the appropriations and activities of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). WGA is an independent organization representing the
Governors of 19 western states and 3 U.S. territories in the Pacific. The Association is an
instrument of the Governors for bipartisan policy development, information-sharing and
collective action on issues of critical importance to the western United States.
The agencies within the Subcommittee's jurisdiction wield significant influence over vast
areas of the American West. Ninety-four percent ofall federal lands are in the western states,
and the federal government owns over 46 percent of the land within active WGA states. The
work of this Subcommittee is of vital importance to Western Governors, as it affects public lands
management and federal agency interaction with other levels of government and the public.
There is a natural tension between state and federal governments that is embedded in the
fabric of the U.S. Constitution. These sovereign governments must have a close and productive
working relationship to promote efficiency and maximize returns on taxpayer investments.
Improving the partnership between states and the federal government is central to the mission of
WGA and is reflected in WGA Policy Resolution 2020-01, Strengthening the State-Federal
Relationship.
In last year's House committee report accompanying the Interior, Environment, and
Related Agencies Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 appropriations bill (H.Rpt. 116-100), the federal
agencies funded by the Interior bill were directed to provide appropriate feedback on tribal input
received by agencies through meaningful consultation in their decision-making processes.
Similar direction to federal agencies for government-to-government consultation with states,
which is required pursuant to Executive Order 13132, Federalism, would improve the co-
sovereign relationship between states and the federal government.
WGA continues to create opportunities for a more productive state-federal relationship.
For example, Governors are proud of the 2018 Shared Stewardship Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between WGA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The
MOU has allowed Western Governors and USDA to collaboratively engage on several cross-
boundary, cross-jurisdictional concerns, including post-wildfire interagency coordination,
cheatgrass infestations, and vegetation management in utility corridors. This has also led to
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 236 here 43677P7.080
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
139
positive engagement between individual states and the agency: USDA has now executed Shared
Stewardship agreements with 12 states, 8 of which are within the WGA footprint. These
agreements provide states a useful tool to discuss land management priorities with USDA and
coordinate on priority management projects across a broad range of needs, from wildfire
mitigation to habitat improvement to watershed protection.
Responsible land management can only occur when federal, state and local stakeholders
collaborate to improve the health and resilience of our lands. Likewise, proactive fish and
wildlife conservation is most effective when leveraging the cooperative efforts of state and
federal officials across multiple disciplines. To this end, WGA is working with a variety of
federal partners, including FWS, BLM, the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, and
stakeholder and private landowner groups to promote collaboration on a wide range of
conservation and habitat improvement activities.
States possess primary authority to manage most fish and wildlife within their borders,
and they receive economic benefits associated with healthy species and ecosystems. At the same
time, species listings can dramatically affect the efforts of western states to promote economic
development, accommodate population growth, and maintain and expand infrastructure.
Western Governors believe that states should be full partners in the implementation of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Act is premised on a strong state-federal partnership:
section 6(a) of the ESA states that "[i]n carrying out the program authorized by the Act, the
Secretary shall cooperate to the maximum extent practicable with the States." WGA submits
that such cooperation should involve meaningful opportunities for states to comment, participate,
or undertake proactive measures before the federal government takes action under the ESA.
The FY20 Senate Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations committee
report (S.Rpt. 116-123) directed federal land managers to use state fish and wildlife data to
inform land use, land planning and related natural resource decisions and encouraged federal
agencies to coordinate with WGA on collaborative conservation efforts benefiting wildlife and
habitat. Western Governors are deeply' appreciative of this commitment to promote a positive
relationship between the states and the federal government with the use of data while respecting
the limitations of state data privacy laws. Federal managers need data-driven science, mapping
and analyses to effectively manage wildlife species and habitat and, in many cases, states
generate the best available wildlife science. Western Governors encourage continued
coordination between federal and state agencies on data collection to avoid spending scarce
resources on duplicative collection efforts and appreciate the Subcommittee's efforts to
encourage further state-federal collaboration.
Fish and wildlife migration corridors and habitat are necessary to maintain healthy
populations of species in the West. Western Governors request additional funding for federal
agencies to advance state-supported programs and projects promoting voluntary migration
corridor and habitat conservation. Governors note that any federal efforts to identify, regulate or
conserve wildlife migration corridors through administrative or legislative action must involve
coordination and consultation with states and should advance collaborative, locally driven
initiatives to conserve key wildlife corridors and habitat. '
Testimony of James D. Ogsbury Page2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 237 here 43677P7.081
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
140
WGA applauds the full funding for the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program
administered by DOI for FY20 and recommends the enactment of a permanent and stable
funding mechanism for the program. PILT funding does not represent a gift to local
jurisdictions; rather it provides important compensation for the disproportionate measure of non-
taxable federal lands in.the.West. Similarly, payments under the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act (SRS) compensate communities whose timber industries
have been negatively affected by actions and acquisitions of the federal government. Western
Governors request that you continue to appropriate full funding annually for both PIL T anr SRS
in the future.
Western Governors continue to be concerned about the number of wild horses and burros
on BLM lands. This number is presently estimated to be more than triple the current
Appropriate Management Level (AML). Overpopulation can degrade rangeland, negatively
affecting wildlife and domestic livestock, as well as the habitat of threatened and endangered
species. WGA supports a process to establish, monitor and adjust AMLs for wild horses and
burros that is transparent to stakeholders, supported by scientific information (including state
data), and amenable to adaptation with new information and environmental and social change.
WGA remains concerned about the spread of invasive mussels in the West and has
highlighted this issue through the Western Governors' Biosecurity and Invasive Species
Initiative. Of particular worry are invasive quagga and zebra mussels, which continue to be a
major threat to western water resources. To combat this threat, Western Governors request that
the BLM; FWS and NPS be provided with the resources necessary to implement mandatory
inspection of all high-risk watercraft and decontamination of watercraft infested with quagga and
zebra mussels leaving waterbodies under their jurisdiction. Outside the jurisdiction of the
Subcommittee but relevant to this matter, Western Governors support legislation that would
clarify federal authority to conduct inspection and decontamination procedures and manage
invasive species on lands and waters under their jurisdiction.
Western Governors applaud NPS for its efforts to preserve iconic landscapes, habitats
and cultural resources. WGA is concerned, however, about the significant maintenance backlog
affecting National Parks. WGA appreciates the Subcommittee's efforts to address this matter in
the FY20 funding cycle and encourages adequate funding in FY21 to support ongoing NPS
operations and address critical infrastructure needs.
Data for water management and drought response planning is critical to western states.
Western Governors request adequate funding levels for the Groundwater and Streamflow
Information Program administered by the U.S. Geological Survey. The data generated by the
program is integral to water supply management decisions of states, utilities, reservoir operators
and farmers. It is also essential for risk management, disaster mitigation, and drought and flood
forecasting throughout the West.
Infrastructure management is another crucial element of drought response, and federal
investments in our nation's aging water and wastewater facilities are essential to our nation's
continued economic prosperity and environmentai protection. EPA'S Clean Water and Drinking'
Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs) provide necessary support for communities to maintain and
Testimony of James D. Ogsbury Page3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 238 here 43677P7.082
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
141
enhance their water infrastructure. Western Governors' Policy Resolution 2018-12, Water
Quality in the West, encourages adequate funding for SRFs. Western Governors similarly
support the funding of federal programs that promote non-federal water infrastructure
investment, such as the Water Infrastructure Finance Innovation Act program. This important
program provides flexible long-term, low-cost supplemental credit assistance for projects of
national and regional significance.
States have exclusive authority over the allocation and administration of rights to
groundwater located within their borders and are primarily responsible for protecting, managing,
and otherwise controlling the resource. The regulatory reach of the federal government was not
intended to, and should not, be applied to the management and control of groundwater resources.
WGA encourages Congress to include express and unambiguous language protecting states'
authority over groundwater resources in any water-related legislation, as well as clear direction
to administrative agencies to respect such authority. WGA appreciates the language included by
the Subcommittee in prior Appropriations Acts addressing existing statutory authorities for
groundwater protection. Federal agencies should work within existing state authorities to
address their groundwater-related needs and concerns. We urge you to ensure that federal efforts
involving groundwater recognize and respect state primacy and comply with all statutory
authorities.
States also possess delegated authority from EPA to manage air quality within their
borders. Congress and EPA should recognize state authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and
accord states sufficient flexibility to create air quality and emissions programs tailored to
individual state needs, industries and economies. State CAA programs require financial support
from Congress, yet funding has declined since the CAA's enactment. In addition, given the
unique character of the West and the region's attainment challenges, funding should be
appropriated for EPA to assist western states in research on background, interstate and
transported ozone. This is especially critical as more frequent and intense wildfires are steadily
reducing the West's gains in air quality improvement. Smoke from wildfires causes exceedances
under National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate matter and ozone, negatively
affecting public health, safety and transportation. Prescribed fire can reduce these effects but is
currently underused in many areas due to concerns about how it may affect compliance with
CAA State Implementation Plans.
Western Governors and federal land management agencies deal with a complex web of
interrelated natural resource issues. It is an enormous challenge to judiciously balance
competing needs in this environment, and Western Governors appreciate the difficulty of the
decisions this Subcommittee must make. The foregoing recommendations are offered in a spirit
of cooperation and respect, and WGA is prepared to assist you in discharging these critical and
challenging responsibilities.
Testimony of James D. Ogsbury Page4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 239 here 43677P7.083
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
142
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank
you to all of you for the great work that you are doing. Ms. Kraska,
I know that is an intractable problem, and I appreciate the hard
work that your organization is doing. Ms. Marienfeld, I am coming
from an eastern State so unaware of some of the things that hap-
pen in western States. And, I will certainly get up to speed and
learn a little more about this.
But I guess I am not completely clear what the original purpose
is of deforesting and this vegetation, I forgot what you termed
them as. But anyway, what is the stated purpose of doing that?
Ms. MARIENFELD. It varies from project to project. Oftentimes
you get sort of a catch-all where it is wildlife restoration, habitat,
sage grouse protection is one, watershed protection. Grazing is
really heavily involved in these projects as well. It is never a stated
benefit more often than not these days, but it is often an auxiliary
benefit of the treatments when they happen. And then more re-
cently, you are seeing fire prevention as a stated reason for doing
these treatments in the West as well.
Ms. PINGREE. So when you deforest land, does prairie grass or
something grow up there so it become grazing land?
Ms. MARIENFELD. In the West, more often than not, it has to be
really heavily impacted, heavily treated in order for that to happen.
There are a lot of factors that go into perennial grasses or forbs
coming back. You will see land management agencies that seed
there. They often seed non-native species that are good for cattle
forage as part of these projects. But it is really dependent on
whether in climate conditions, whether or not the treatments are
successful at the end of the day, which is why you do see, according
to the best science and the research that is out there right now,
that the treatments really are unsuccessful by most metrics a lot
of time, if they are in those very heavily surfaced disturbing man-
ners. The big mechanic treatments that we are talking about here.
It depends on the weather. If you get rain, maybe it will work,
but if you don’t, which is far more common these days, they are un-
successful, and you have to go back and do basically the same thing
about 10 years later.
Ms. PINGREE. Well, thank you. I am sure I will be interested to
learn more about that.
Ms. MARIENFELD. Yes, thank you.
Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Simpson, I, too, am very concerned about this
relocation and the reorganization of the Bureau of Labor Manage-
ment. I also sat on Agriculture Appropriations, we have been very
discouraged to watch the relocation of ERS and NIFA, and can see
that that has just had disastrous consequences, a lot of senior staff
was lost in the process, so a lot of the experience and brain trust
there, and didn’t seem to be a lot of consultation.
So I am just curious. From your perspective, the Administration
maintained that it conducted extensive consultation with Bureau
employees, especially senior employees, before implementing this
breakup. Can you tell us what you are hearing from members of
your organization regarding that claim?
Mr. SIMPSON. Sure. So we have about 600 members, and they are
scattered throughout the country, so they are near a BLM office
somewhere in the West. We do a lot of work with them, public
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
143
lands appreciation days, that kind of stuff, so we are in daily con-
tact pretty much with our BLM offices. And I have to say when
that was announced last summer, none of the BLM people that we
had talked to knew this was coming. They read about it the same
time we did.
Ms. PINGREE. Yeah, that is very discouraging, and, again, we
have lots of concerns about this, and hopefully, in my opinion, the
committee can exercise more oversight on this process. Thank you,
too, Mr. Ogsbury. I appreciate your representation of the western
State governors. Mr. Joyce.
Mr. JOYCE. Thank you all for being here. I can appreciate the
problems that you certainly have. It is something that we have
studied, and the combination of the animals and the land and try-
ing to find where we have that perfect match. I know the answers
aren’t easy, but we will continue to work with you to try to address
those concerns. Thank you for coming.
Ms. PINGREE. Thank you to this panel. This concludes the morn-
ing hearing, and we stand adjourned until the afternoon hearing
begins at 1:00 p.m. Thanks again very much for your testimony.
VOICE. Thank you.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
144
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
AFTERNOON SESSION
NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY
WITNESS
DAVID O’NEILL, CHIEF CONSERVATION OFFICER AND SENIOR ADVI-
SOR TO THE CEO, NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Good afternoon, and welcome to our second pub-
lic witness hearing covering non-tribal programs under the jurisdic-
tion of the Interior, Environment, and Other Related Agencies sub-
committee. This morning we heard from advocates from the arts
and from the humanities discuss issues related to land and water
conservation funding, energy, science, and conservation programs.
This afternoon we are going to be focusing on issues related to en-
dangered species conservation, public lands, and critical environ-
mental programs for our Nation. We will be hearing from the re-
maining 21 witnesses.
Before I begin, I am going to go over a couple of logistics here
for the hearing. We are trying to stay on time. So my colleagues
are in and out of the room. We have a gentlepersons agreement to
help each other, but we also have, as you see in front of me, a big
fat book with everybody’s testimony. And Jocelyn can tell you, I
have a lot of things highlighted, so I have looked at things before,
and I am frantically taking notes during the hearing. So I want you
to know that that you are being listened to and paid attention to.
What we are going to do, and the first panel is at the table, we
are going to call the panels up one at a time. Everybody is going
to get 5 minutes to present their testimony. We are going to use
a timer to track the progress. When the light turns yellow, the
color of this highlighter, witnesses will have 1 minute remaining to
conclude their remarks. When the light blinks red, I will lightly
tap—I won’t use the big end of the gavel—but I will let you know
that it is time for the next witness to start. And that is so all wit-
nesses can have an opportunity to be heard without getting too de-
layed.
Having said that, we do have votes scheduled some time between
1:20 and 1:30 we feel, so when we call votes, please make sure that
we are going to be taking a brief recess and come back as soon as
we can, and we will pick up where we left off. So I would ask peo-
ple to stay close. There are places to get coffee and some things
around here on this floor. So take your rest break and grab what
you need, but stay close because we will start as soon as a member
is back.
I would like to remind those in the hearing room of the com-
mittee rules, however. We prohibit the use of cameras and audio
equipment during the hearing by individuals without House-issued
press credentials. So, Mr. Joyce, has told me to get started so we
don’t delay. And what we did this morning to save a little extra
time is we had people introduce themselves, and we found it really
kept things moving a little faster. So maybe the second panel
would like to get in before votes get started.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00144 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
145
So, Mr. O’Neill, your introduction will not count against your
time, so please introduce yourself and then we will start your time.
Mr. O’NEILL. Great. Thanks so much for the opportunity. I much
appreciate it. My name is David O’Neill. I represent the National
Audubon Society and our 1.7 million members across the country
as its chief conservation officer and senior advisor to the CEO.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. And you can start your testimony.
Mr. O’NEILL. Sure. I am here to discuss an ongoing crisis of bird
survival, what the crisis signals for communities, and steps the
committee can take to reverse the alarming trend.
Since 1970, we have lost 3 billion of America’s birds, and two-
thirds of our remaining birds are now at risk of extinction due to
climate change. The birds we have lost are not just threatened and
endangered species, but common birds in communities and back
yards across the country. The bird declines we are seeing and pre-
dicting are due to human activity: loss of habitat, greenhouse gas
emissions, on and on. This is the fifth alarm and a five-alarm fire
that is crystal clear to the 48 million birders across the country.
But birders aren’t the only ones who should care about these
staggering figures. Birds are important indicator species. They are
indeed the canary in the coal mine, meaning that severe declines
in bird health tell us about future threats facing people and com-
munities. With the Administration implementing rollbacks to bed-
rock environmental laws, increasing Federal conservation invest-
ments is a critical backstop. The bipartisan projects and programs
under your jurisdiction provide tangible, scientifically-based solu-
tions to recover our bird populations as well as to provide cleaner
air and cleaner water. The National Audubon Society is proposing
Fiscal Year 2021 funding priorities to address critical threats fac-
ing birds and to start to reverse these declines. I thank this com-
mittee for its work to consistently expand and enhance conserva-
tion funding. The recovery of birds require it.
Our recent ‘‘State of the Birds’’ study that documented the 3 bil-
lion bird loss also found one area for hope: waterfowl. Waterfowl
are the one bird guild that not only did not experience declines. In
fact, it increased by 56 percent, in large part due to investments
to wetlands conservation work through the North American Wet-
lands Conservation Act, or NAWCA. And I thank the committee for
continuing to prioritize this investment. Conservation works, and
we urge funding for this program at $50 million.
The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act Grants Pro-
gram is one of the best opportunities to build on NAWCA’s success
for the billions of migratory birds that pass through our backyards
to breed and winter outside our borders. The program is an innova-
tive, cost-effective approach to bird conservation, supporting
projects that benefit birds and their habitats, research and moni-
toring, law enforcement, and education programs in Canada, the
U.S., Latin America, and the Caribbean. It is important to reau-
thorize the Act and to fully fund the program at $6.5 million, and
we would like to work with you and others to see how we could ex-
pand that program in the future.
The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative present provides a re-
gional success story that not only restores habitat, but allows the
community to take part in education and stewardship of restora-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
146
tion programs over a long period of time. The newest GLRI action
plan prioritizes, among other things, the restoration of wetlands
that attract and restore to sustain breeding marsh bird popu-
lations. Increasing the investment in GLRI can help advance these
important goals for birds. Investments at the ecosystem scale, like
the Great Lakes program, are critical to protecting the full spec-
trum of habitat needs for birds. We urge the creation of a similar
program for the Mississippi or Upper Mississippi River Basin, and
we had be thrilled with the opportunity to work with you, Rep-
resentative McCollum, on that to make that a reality. There are
dozens of successful programs moving forward across the country,
all of which require full and sustained Federal funding. We are
standing at a crossroads. Now is the time to fully invest in con-
servation programs at a scale necessary to address the crisis and
to ensure a sustainable path forward for birds and communities
now and into the future.
Thank you very much for your time and your attention.
[The statement of Mr. O’Neill follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
147
~udubon
Statement of David O'Neill
Chief Conservation Officer
National Audubon Society
to the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Non-Tribal Public Witness Days on Fiscal Year 2021 Appropriations
February 6, 2020
Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to speak today representing the National Audubon Society. My name is David
O'Neill and I am Audubon's Chief Conservation Officer, here today to discuss federal
appropriations related to birds, conservation, and habitat protection. I am responsible for creating
and advancing our conservation vision, developing strategies and using science-based
accountability tools to achieve our vision of a world in which people and wildlife thrive. On
behalf of the entire Audubon organization, thank you for taking this time for public stakeholder
input before making critical appropriations decisions.
Audubon's mission is to protect birds and the places they need, today and tomorrow. Audubon
represents more than I. 7 million members and has 462 affiliated chapters, 22 state offices, and
41 nature centers across the country. Audubon is our country's oldest bird advocacy organization
and one of the oldest conservation groups in the US.
For 115 years, Audubon has been fighting to protect birds and the ecosystems they need to
survive. Today, those habitats are increasingly vulnerable. In the past 50 years, we've lost 3
billion birds and, just last year, we identified 389 bird species that are on the brink of extinction
due to climate change. Without action, that number will only increase and the impacts will be
exacerbated for birds and people alike.
Thankfully, over the past year, Congress has made progress on changing the narrative
surrounding climate change. More than ever before, Americans across the country and Members
of Congress across both aisles agree that climate change poses a serious threat to the American
way of life. But recognizing the threat is not enough. Congress must take immediate and
concrete steps to address the impacts of climate change, which are already being seen across the
country, including flooding in the Nebraska plains, sea level rise coastal communities,
and extreme weather and precipitation events.
Federal investments in conservation and natural infrastructure will help birds and communities
throughout the nation address these 21st century challenges. Federal funding is critical to
1
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 251 here 43677P7.084
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00147 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
148
Audubon's conservation strategy and we thank Congress and this subcommittee for continued
investment in our cherished landscapes, rejecting three years of administration budget proposals
that would devastate the protections and places that both birds and people need. We look forward
to strong, continued federal investment in protecting wildlife and the environment.
Audubon's conservation strategy focuses on protecting the habitats and resources birds need to
survive. We focus 5 strategic conservation priorities: protecting and restoring our coasts,
enhancing the habitat and productivity of our working lands, protecting freshwater resources,
creating bird-friendly communities, and promoting proactive solutions to the climate crisis. And,
we work with international partners throughout the hemisphere to conserve key bird habitats and
create a full lifecycle of stewardship essential for saving migratory species.
To reach these conservation goals, Audubon encourages federal spending that supports the
following components relevant to this Subcommittee:
I. Focusing on improving natural infrastructure;
2. Enhancing and protecting the places and habitats birds need now and into the future; and
3. Conserving water resources for people and birds, particularly in the arid west.
Related to these three foundational components, the National AuduboJ Society urges support for
the following programs within the Department of Interior:
• The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act, including full funding at $6.5 million;
• State and Tribal Wildlife Grants;
• The North American Wetlands Conservation Act;
• The Land and Water Conservation Fund, including full funding at $900 million;
• The National Wildlife Refuge System;
• The Delaware River Basin at $12 million;
• WaterSMART Grants;
• Sage grouse conservation; and
• The Migratory Bird Program National Nongame Bird Plans at $1.5 million.
In addition, the National Audubon Society urges full funding for the following programs within
the Environmental Protection Agency:
• Geographic programs focused on restoration and conservation for the Long Island Sound,
Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico, San Francisco Bay, Puget Sound, South
Florida, and Lake Champlain; and
• The National Estuary Program.
Prioritizing full funding for these critical programs will ensure birds have the habitat and
resources they need to thrive, now and into the future. We urge Congress to reject any cuts or
policy riders, past or future, that would harm birds or contribute to climate change and instead
deliver a budget that protects and strengthens our environment and the ecosystems birds and
humans rely on. By doing so, we will create a better future for birds and people.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 252 here 43677P7.085
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
149
Thank you, Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and the full subcommittee once
again for hearing my testimony today.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 253 here 43677P7.086
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00149 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
150
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY
WITNESS
STEVE HOLMER, VICE PRESIDENT OF POLICY, AMERICAN BIRD CON-
SERVANCY
Mr. HOLMER. Thanks very much for this opportunity to testify.
I am Steve Holmer, vice president of policy for American Bird Con-
servancy, and we work to conserve birds in their habitats through-
out the Americas. We are going to be talking today about a package
of funding requests from a large coalition of groups, and this in-
cludes the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act at $6.5
million, Migratory Bird Joint Ventures at $19.9 million, State and
Tribal Wildlife Grants at $70 million, North America Wetlands
Conservation Act at $50 million, ‘‘State of the Birds’’ activities at
$5 million, and then an overall $10 million increase for invasive
species eradication monitoring control. And we appreciate language
about the greater sage-grouse and the need to advance its con-
servation.
And I just want to take a moment to thank the committee be-
cause there were some very significant increases in last year’s bill
for this package of programs. This committee recommended over
$20 million in increases. The final bill included about $10 million,
so this was an important step in the right direction. But based on
what we know about the $3 billion bird report and the ‘‘State of
the Birds,’’ there needs to be quite a lot more done. And I am not
sure if you have received a copy of the 2019 ‘‘State of the Birds’’
report, but I just thought I would share that with you and others
on the committee if you would like to see this, because it does high-
light the science study showing the 2.9 billion birds gone, but it
also shows that through State wildlife grants and through the mi-
gratory bird joint ventures, we are also seeing a lot of successes.
We are seeing things getting done on the ground that can really
make a difference.
In your region where we have the Upper Mississippi and Great
Lakes Joint Venture, the Kirtland’s warbler is being delisted
through concerted conservation action. And so it shows that when
we focus our efforts, we can bring these birds back. Of course, wet-
land conservation is another big success story where we managed
to bring back waterfowl in large part through NAWCA. The joint
venture in your region has guided a number of NAWCA projects in
Minnesota, and one of the reasons we are interested in supporting
this package is for the simple reason that all these programs work
very closely together. So I feel like we are making good progress
and appreciate the support of the committee on these issues.
In light of the billion birds report, there is an indication, though,
that we need to think about doing even more. This is kind of a be-
ginning as kind of how we are seeing that. And we also need to
maintain the regulatory framework that makes sure that endan-
gered species and public lands are protected. And at this point with
rulemakings happening on the National Environmental Policy Act,
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00150 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
151
Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, on sage-
grouse plans, on Forest Service, NEPA, we are concerned that the
safety net for wildlife and public lands is now at risk. And so we
appreciate the committee weighing in against these changes. I
don’t believe the public supports these deregulatory efforts, and it
is really unfortunate that at a time when we are in a crisis where
we are seeing, you know, significant losses, that there are policies
that could end up actually making the situation worse. So it is
really important that we address it on both the funding side and
on the policy side.
This committee included some really strong language in the re-
port last year about reducing bird collisions. We thought that was
very helpful because about 1 billion birds a year are lost to bird
collisions. There was also language about the Tongass National
Forest, actually an amendment to protect that forest. And forest
carbon is very important as part of the strategy to address climate
change, and we would love to see that language be included again
in this year’s appropriations bill, and perhaps be expanded to in-
clude the Pacific Northwest, where we have old growth forests that
have very high carbon stores that are also essential for threatened
species, such as the marbled murrelet. And, in fact, the relation-
ship between murrelet habitat and high carbon force is nearly 100
percent, so by conserving that bird, we are helping on climate
change as well as clean water for the region.
So I appreciate all the good work of the committee, and I had be
happy to answer any questions.
[The statement of Mr. Holmer follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
152
r b,uk
I,,AMERICAN BIRD
(
. CONSERVANCY
January 29, 2020
Dear Interior Appropriations Committee Representatives:
Thank you for this opportunity to testify. I am Steve Holmer, Vice President of Policy for
American Bird Conservancy. On behalf of American Bird Conservancy, please consider the
following recommendations for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service bird conservation funding and
policy priorities for FY 2021. These include:
Increasing the Migratory Bird Joint Ventures to $:19.9 million, Neotropical Migratory Bird
Conservation Act to $6.5 million, State and Tribal Wildlife Grants to $70 million, North
American Wetlands Conservation Act to $50 million, State of the Birds Activities for
Critically Endangered Hawaiian Birds to $5 million, and a $:10 million increase for DOI
Invasive Species Control.
We wish to thank members of this Subcommittee, and the 116th Congress for increases in the
FY 2020 spending agreement in support of this package of effective bird and habitat
conservation programs. We now ask the Interior Subcommittee to build on this progress, and
to support further increases of these programs to the levels recommended above.
These increases are necessary because we know that birds are in severe decline across
America and that more conservation work needs to be done. A groundbreaking study
released last fall has scientifically documented a Bird Crisis: that we now have three billion
fewer birds in the U.S. than just fifty years ago, a devastating 29 percent population decline.
Common birds are becoming uncommon, and once relatively-abundant species are now at-
risk of becoming endangered.
The success of restoring waterfowl populations and the North American Wetlands
Conservation Act, show that there is a path forward. With concerted effort and smart
investments we can reverse bird declines, protect essential habitat, and leave a legacy of
abundant wildlife for future generations of Americans.
Migratory Bird Joint Ventures: Partnerships that Deliver Bird Conservation
American Bird Conservancy partners with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State wildlife
agencies, and other conservation groups to staff, manage and support the Migratory Bird
Joint Ventures. Our staff analyzed the budget of each Joint Venture, and have found that a
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 260 here 43677P7.087
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
153
number of them do not yet meet a minimal level of staffing and funding to carry out their
mission.
That necessary amount is approximately $15.67 million, which combined with the
administrative overhead taken from the program, would come very close to the $16.1 million
allocated by this Subcommittee in the FY 2020 bill. However, this amount is not enough to
meet the needs of declining migratory bird populations, and to address the Bird Crisis. The
Association of Joint Ventures Management Boards has determined that $19.9 million, a $5.3
million increase, is what's really needed to meet this challenge.
Please Increase Funding for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act to $6.5 Million
Since 2002, the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (NMBCA) has functioned as a
matching grant program to fund projects that conserve neotropical migratory birds--those
that breed in or migrate through the United States and Canada and spend the non-breeding
season in Latin America and the Caribbean. NMBCA has helped conserve 400 species,
representing more than 4 billion birds, including some of the most endangered birds in North
America. All NMBCA grant requests must be matched with non-federal funds at least 3 to 1,
and to date, the match has been 4 to 1. Please support increasing NMBCA to $6.S million.
Please Increase Funding for State and Tribal Wildlife Grants to $70 Million
State and Tribal Wildlife Grants fund is the nation's core program for preventing wildlife from
becoming endangered, and supports a wide variety of wildlife-related projects by state fish
and wildlife agencies throughout the United States. We respectfully request the Committee
allocate $70 million for FY2021.
Please Increase Funding for the North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) to
$50 Million
NAWCA provides funding for conservation projects for the benefit of wetland-associated
migratory birds in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. In existence since 1989, NAWCA
has preserved over 30 million acres of wetlands by leveraging $1.6 billion in federal funds
with more than $3.3 billion in partner contributions. We respectfully request the Committee
prioritize FY2021 funding for NAWCA at $50 million.
Please Increase State of the Birds Activities for Critically Endangered Birds to $5 Million
We greatly appreciate the funding provided in the FY 2019 spending agreement for State of
the Birds Activities dedicated to arresting the bird extinction crisis in Hawaii. More than 90
Hawaiian bird species have become extinct, and nine listed Hawaiian bird species are
currently in decline. This prompted the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to provide $2.5 million
in annual State of the Birds Activities funding since 2009. This amount has since been
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 261 here 43677P7.088
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
154
increased to $3,250,000. We respectfully request $5 million per year to fully fund ESA
recovery funding for Hawaiian birds.
Please Increase Funding for Invasive Species Early Detection and Response by $10 Million
Early Detection and Rapid Response (including Eradication) survey for, report, and verify the
presence of a non-native species before the founding population becomes established or
spreads so widely that eradication is no longer feasible. Rapid Response is then employed to
eradicate the founding population of a non-native species from a specific location. We
recommend increasing funding for Early Detection and Rapid Response by $10 million.
In addition, American Bird Conservancy urges you to please consider support for the
following additional priorities:
Preventing Bird Collisions with Windows
The FY 2020 House Interior report included language encouraging federal agencies to reduce
bird collisions with the buildings they manage. We support this House-approved building
collisions report language, and urge addition of the following in the FY 2021 bill:
All agencies under the jurisdiction of this Act are directed to consider bird-safe
building design and materials for the structures they manage, build, or retrofit. In
addition, agencies are directed to take low cost or no cost action, such as identifying
proplem windows and buildings that routinely cause collision, turning off interior
lights in those buildings at night, and applying films or other adhesives to glass
windows in those buildings to reduce bird collisions.
ESA Recovery: Condors, Falcons, and Eiders
$3,500,000 for recovery of Northern Aplomado Falcon, California Condor, and Stellar's Eider.
ESA Recovery: Florida Grasshopper Sparrow
$100,000 for recovery of the Grasshopper Sparrow, which is at risk of extinction.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The FY 2020 House Interior Committee Report included thoughtful language upholding a
strong Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In light of the recent Bird Crisis study finding massive
declines of bird populations, it is essential that our environmental laws be maintained and
enforced. Please support inclusion of this language.
Endangered Species and Old Growth Forest Habitat Protection
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 262 here 43677P7.089
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00154 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
155
The House FY 2020 report included language supporting Marbled Murrelet and Greater Sage-
Grouse conservation. The FY 2020 House Interior bill included protections against offshore
drilling (Sec. 438, 439, 442, 443), transfer of border lands (Sec. 427), and road building on the
Tongass National Forest (Sec. 441). Please include these provisions in the base FY 2021 bill.
We also recommend that similar language be included to protect old-growth forests in the
Pacific Northwest which provide critical habitat for the threatened Marbled Murrelet and
Northern Spotted Owl.
Greater Sage-Grouse Endangered Species Act Exemption
The FY 2020 House Interior bill omitted a harmful policy rider undermining the Endangered
Species Act and hindering conservation of the Greater Sage-Grouse, whose population is
rapidly declining across its range. Please support sage grouse conservation by omitting any
provisions preventing ESA protection for an at-risk species.
Lead Poisoning of Eagles, California Condors, and Other Birds of Prey
We appreciate the FY 2020 House bill language preventing regulation of toxic ammunition
and lead sinkers that kill millions of birds each year including our nation's symbol the Bald
Eagle, as well as Golden Eagles, and the endangered California Condor. Please include this
provision to support the use of non-toxic hunting and fishing materials.
Please let me know if I can ever be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Steve Holmer
Vice President of Policy
American Bird Conservancy
202888 7490
sholmer@abcbirds.org
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 263 here 43677P7.090
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00155 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
156
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUARIUMS
WITNESS
DAN ASHE, PRESIDENT AND CEO, ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUAR-
IUMS
Mr. ASHE. Good afternoon, Ms. McCollum, Mr. Kilmer. My name
is Dan Ashe. I am the president and CEO of the Association of Zoos
And Aquariums and the former director of the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service. It is a pleasure to be back in front of you and
a privilege, a privilege because of the importance of the work that
you do to wildlife conservation, and a pleasure because I neither
have to present nor defend an agency budget today. [Laughter.]
The Association of Zoos and Aquariums, or the AZA, is the
world’s leading zoological professional association. In order to be a
member, a facility like Como Park Zoo and Conservancy or North-
west Trek must meet our exacting accreditation standards, the
world’s gold standard for a modern aquarium or zoo. And our vision
for a modern aquarium or zoo is of a purposeful place. Yes, fun and
educational where visitors come and create memories that last life-
times, but most importantly, where a visit helps to conserve wild-
life and save animals from extinction.
Our 238 member facilities spent a collective $231 million on field
conservation in 2018, positioning them as among the world’s big-
gest conservation investors, and that number will likely occur ap-
proach one-quarter billion dollars in 2019, and it will continue
growing. It is not a phase or a fad. It is who they are. And we are
passionate partners of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Na-
tional Park Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and their State,
local, and tribal counterparts. We support their work to conserve
and recover species, like the California condor, manatee, black-foot-
ed ferret, sea turtles, hellbender, American burying beetle, red
wolf, rhinoceros, and dozens and dozens more.
Your support for the Endangered Species Recovery Challenge
Grants is inspiring this partnership, and I hope you will expand
funding for this program and insert report language encouraging
the Service to grow its partnership with accredited zoos and aquar-
iums. Our members are ready and willing.
We are building exciting new partnerships with the Interior De-
partment agencies, and I will just quickly mention three. Since
2017, we have built a zoo park partnership and this past year
signed a memorandum of understanding with the Park Service call-
ing for 25 new partnerships over the next 5 years. The Yosemite
National Park-San Francisco Zoo Partnership is a perfect example.
They just released their 1,000th endangered California red-legged
frog in an effort covering four valley floor habitats where intro-
duced bullfrogs had eaten up literally the native populations. Park
and zoo staff collect frogs and tadpoles, which are then reared at
the zoo until they are ready for re-introduction around age 2.
Through efforts like this, we are helping national parks and na-
tional wildlife refuges conserve species like sea turtles, corals, griz-
zly bear, and bison, and linking AZA’s 200 million annual guests
with their national parks and other public lands, and connecting
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
157
urban America with wildlife and the outdoor. Again, with the en-
couragement of report language and a few dollars perhaps for Na-
tional Park Service natural resource manage and refuge operations
in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, we will grow momentum and
excitement about this partnership.
AZA’s signature conservation program is Saving Animals From
Extinction, or SAFE, and it is driving cooperative conservation of
species from elephants to sharks to monarchs. Wildlife trafficking
is a major cause of decline in many SAFE species, and through
AZA’s Wildlife Trafficking Alliance, we are working with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service on an innovative pilot confiscations net-
work to help rescue and care for animals that are victimized by il-
legal trade. And finally, we are developing a strategy to manage
AZA’s entire polar bear population to support relevant conservation
science. And this is going to help the Service and others answer
key questions about the effects of climate change on managed wild
bears, and also engage millions and millions of visitors.
So, Ms. McCollum and subcommittee members, AZA’s members
are already exceptional partners of the Fish and Wildlife Service,
the National Park Service, the U.S. Geological Survey, and others.
They are anxious to do more nationally and internationally to con-
serve wildlife and save animals from extinction. Your encourage-
ment through funding and report language will inspire ever more
cooperation and innovation. And I want to thank you for your time
and attention and everything that you do, and I am happy to an-
swer any questions if there are any.
[The statement of Mr. Ashe follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
158
Dan Ashe
President and CEO
Association of Zoos and Aquariums
February 6, 2020
Thank you Chairwoman McCollum and Ranking Member Joyce for the opportunity to testify
before the Subcommittee about the priorities of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums for
Fiscal Year 2021. Specifically, I support Recovery Challenge Grants and the Multinational
Species Conservation Funds, administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National
Environmental Education Act (NEEA) programs at the Environmental Protection Agency, and
sufficient funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service to carry out its work, including to support the
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
My name is Dan Ashe, and I am the President and CEO of the Association of Zoos and
Aquariums (AZA). Founded in 1924, the AZA is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to
ensuring that our 238 member zoos, aquariums, nature centers, and science centers represent the
very best in animal care and welfare, conservation, education, science, and guest experience. In
2018, AZA's accredited member facilities welcomed nearly 200 million visitors (more than all
U.S. professional sports combined), generated more than $22 billion in economic activity, and
supported more than 208,000 jobs across the country. They contributed $231 million in direct
support for field conservation in 130 countries benefiting 863 species and subspecies, of which
24 I are listed under the ESA.
At the heart of AZA is its mandatory accreditation requirement, which assures that only those
zoos and aquariums that meet the highest standards can become members. The rigorous,
independent, objective, and exhaustive AZA accreditation process includes self-evaluation, on-
site inspection, and peer review. Our standards are publicly available and are continuously
evolving and improving as we learn more about the needs of the animals in our care. Once
earned, AZA accreditation confers best-in-class status, an important message for local, state, and
federal government and the visiting public.
AZA and its members are leaders, partners, and participants in species conservation. We work in
concert with Congress, the federal agencies, conservation organizations, state governments, the
private sector, and the general public to conserve our wildlife heritage. AZA's Wildlife
Trafficking Alliance is a coalition of private companies, non-profit organizations, and AZA-
accredited zoos and aquariums working closely with U.S. government agencies to combat
wildlife trafficking worldwide. AZA and its member facilities have long-standing partnerships
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Our collaborative
efforts have focused on:
• Engaging in endangered species recovery and reintroduction;
Supporting conservation domestically and internationally through multinational species
conservation funds and state wildlife grants; and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 269 here 43677P7.091
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
159
Collaborating on partnership opportunities involving national parks and wildlife refuges,
migratory birds, freshwater and saltwater fisheries, national marine sanctuaries, illegal
wildlife trade, amphibians, and invasive species.
Today I am testifying in support of the following key programs funded through the annual
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill.
Endangered Species Recovery and Recovery Challenge Grants
First, I express my gratitude for the Subcommittee's continued support for increasing funding for
endangered species through the Recovery account and working with our partners at the Fish and
Wildlife Service to create the ESA Recovery Challenge Grant program in fiscal year 2018. This
program recognizes the critically important role of nonprofit partners to the Service's endangered
species recovery efforts and it is a mechanism, through merit-based matching grants, to provide
funding in a more commensurate manner to support and enhance these efforts. Recovery
Challenge Grants are limited to nonprofit organizations implementing the highest priority
recovery actions identified in recovery plans, such as for genetically sound breeding, rearing, and
reintroduction programs.
I urge you to continue to provide robust funding for endangered species recovery and prioritize
longstanding recovery efforts in which existing resources and partner expertise can be most
effectively leveraged. Specifically, I am requesting an increase for Endangered Species Act
Recovery actions generally to $118 million and an increase in funding for the Recovery
Challenge Grant program to $10 million in FY2021. This funding will power recovery
partnerships and inspire their work to better recover critically endangered species.
Multinational Species Conservation Funds
Next, I support the inclusion of$18 million for the Multinational Species Conservation Funds
(MSCF) administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service. These programs support public-private
partnerships that conserve wild tigers, Asian and African elephants, rhinos, great apes,
freshwater turtles, tortoises, and marine turtles in their native habitats. Through the MSCF
programs, the United States supplements the efforts of developing countries that are struggling to
balance the needs of their human populations and endemic wildlife. These programs help to
sustain wildlife populations, address threats such as poaching and illegal trade, reduce human-
wildlife conflict, and protect essential habitat. By working with local communities, they also
improve people's livelihoods, contribute to local and regional stability, and support U.S. security
interests in impoverished regions. The Fish and Wildlife Service is seen as a global conservation
leader in large part due to its commitment to international conservation efforts. This federal
program supports AZA-accredited facilities in their field conservation efforts and partnerships
with the Service.
Endangered Species Act
AZA and its members take wildlife conservation very seriously and wholeheartedly support the
ESA, which has prevented hundreds of listed species from going extinct. The ESA, which is a
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 270 here 43677P7.092
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
160
globally recognized model for species preservation, is working. It has prevented the extinction
of99% of the species it protects since its inception in 1973. However, we know that the
challenges facing our planet in the 21st century are as complex as they are urgent. Scientists
estimate that the total number of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish has declined by
more than 50% since 1970, and many believe that we are living amidst the planet's sixth mass
extinction. Climate change threatens to accelerate this crisis. Without critical intervention
today, we are facing the very real possibility of losing some of our planet's most magnificent
creatures such as lions, cheetahs, elephants, gorillas, sea turtles, and sharks.
AZA-accredited facilities have a unique opportunity and responsibility to help others understand
this crisis. It is our obligation - to these animals and to all life on earth -- to take bold action now
to protect our planet's biodiversity. One achievement that has gone unnoticed by most people is
that zoos and aquariums have played a significant role in bringing over 25 species, including
California condor, Florida manatee, and black-footed ferret, back from the brink of extinction.
Although we have made significant progress in saving endangered species, this work is far from
done. Species protection and conservation requires long-term commitment by all ofus. It is
through the ongoing work related to species recovery plans that we will conserve these species
for future generations. The AZA and its members fully support the ESA, and I encourage you to
assure that the agencies responsible for carrying out the mandates of the Act receive the
necessary funding and human resource capacity to succeed.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Budget
Much of the important conservation work at AZA-accredited facilities depends on a robust and
fully staffed Fish and Wildlife Service. Acknowledging the budget challenges facing Congress
and the agencies, I encourage you to assure that the Fish and Wildlife Service has sufficient
resources to employ qualified professionals, particularly for the programs handling permits,
which support AZA's science-based conservation breeding and wildlife education programs that
require animals to be moved in an efficient, timely manner: International Affairs (Management
and Scientific Authorities), Endangered Species, Law Enforcement, and Migratory Birds. In
particular, AZA is keenly interested in expanding our critical work in support of treating and
placing live confiscated wildlife seized at the ports/borders and on scientific and conservation
research on polar bears in AZA facilities. The success of these important initiatives depends on
the effective assistance of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Environmental Education Grants
Finally, l urge the Subcommittee to include $IO million for National Environmental Education
Act programs. This relatively small investment in communities yields an impressive return.
Since 1990 the NEEA has served as a highly effective tool for improving student performance in
science and math, protecting public health, and helping build 2 ! st century skills by promoting
job training and innovation.
NEEA-supported education programs at AZA-accredited institutions provide essential learning
opportunities in formal and informal settings. In the last IO years, accredited zoos and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 271 here 43677P7.093
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
161
aquariums trained more than 400,000 teachers, supporting science curricula with effective
teaching materials and hands-on opportunities. School field trips at AZA member facilities
annually connect more than twelve million students with the natural world.
Chairwoman McCollum, I know that you and your colleagues on the Subcommittee know that
species conservation is a team sport. Certainly, my former employees and forever-friends at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are the core of that team, and I implore you to continue your
strong support for them and their work. State and tribal organizations are also key players. But
I'm here today to remind you that ALA-accredited facilities are unsung and long-standing
partners that have made possible conservation successes for species like California condor,
manatee, Mexican wolf, sea turtles, and less charismatic species like hellbender and American
burying beetle. We bring talent and treasure to the table. We tell the story to millions of visitors.
We are engaging and inspiring the minds of new generations of conservationists. You have the
opportunity to encourage and amplify that with the small investments that we speak about in this
testimony.
Thank you for your time and attention today. AZA and its members look forward to working
with this Subcommittee and Congress to assure that as a nation we are devoting the necessary
resources to conserve wildlife at home and globally.
Thank you.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 272 here 43677P7.094
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
162
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. I am going to put this in a general
format, and then those of you who feel comfortable, speak to it. So
we worked very hard to get riders. Authorizers need to do their job.
Our bill, we were very successful. We still have a little ways to go.
Report language is a way in which we try to monitor what is the
cost of inaction or what can be the benefit of action, getting that
agencies and outside groups. So the report language that we put
in is a useful tool for us when we are making our decisions, as well
as it is a useful tool for the authorizers when we are having con-
versations on things.
So, for example, lead poisoning has been brought up. What is the
cost of lead poisoning? What is the cost of having a rider like that
in there? How much money are we spending? What other things
are we doing? What is the cost of inactivity when we don’t get
ahead of an invasive species, you know? Dutch elm took place. Peo-
ple probably weren’t talking too much about birds back then. Cli-
mate change wasn’t the issue it was then. But since then we have
seen you know, what is happening with the beetle that is attacking
our pine, with what is going on with Asian ash borer, urban and
rural areas, and in forestry areas, and then the effects of climate
change on top of that.
So there is a cost, whether it is forest health or bird population,
of not doing anything. What is the cost of when we see insecticides
and things like that, you know, keeping it in or out of the water?
How is it affecting frog populations? What happens to the bird pop-
ulation that eats the frogs? So we are trying to get a holistic ap-
proach and try to take a scientific approach to things like doing
that. So I appreciate the acknowledgement of the report language
we are putting in there because inactivity has consequences on our
budget, and activity can have positive, sometimes negative, con-
sequences on our budget.
So if I could just maybe ask you to kind of speak to invasive spe-
cies because we are trying to do more with that in the committee,
about how our organizations can work with the scientific commu-
nity. If you have got some ideas of how Mr. Joyce and I, and Mr.
Kilmer is here. He cares a lot about the birds. I was in his district.
You have got seabirds. I don’t have that, so you have got it all. So
maybe just take a take 1 minute or 2 a piece, and just kind of tell
me, you know, if there are some ideas on how we can get the
invasive species part of this right, ideas on that.
Mr. HOLMAN. Sure. I will be happy to jump in there. Sage-grouse
are in severe decline across the range, and cheatgrass, an invasive
grass, is a major factor. And, in fact, I have had Forest Service
Agency people tell me that if we don’t deal with the cheatgrass
problem, there is really no way to bring back enough sagebrush
habitat to conserve the grass. So there is one example where we
could do more on cheatgrass.
In Hawaii, mosquitoes and the spread of avian malaria and other
diseases are a huge problem. These are non-native insects in Ha-
waii, and now there are efforts to eliminate these mosquitoes in
Hawaii. And this is really crucial because we are seeing a lot of
birds go extinct in Hawaii because of the avian malaria and other
diseases. So there are two examples where, you know, dealing with
invasives is really critical.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
163
And then the last is the monitoring, the fast attack. You know,
when we think about the brown tree snake, for example, if that
were to get to Hawaii, it would be disastrous. So there needs to be
this ongoing effort to monitor and keep things out, and then when
they are in, attack them immediately.
Mr. ASHE. Two things, Ms. McCollum. I can’t resist the tempta-
tion to speak about California condor and lead poisoning. And so
the key in that case is to stop the source of lead poisoning. Every
California condor that is in the wild in California has to be taken
back into captivity and put through lead chelation. And if that
didn’t happen, and it is AZA’s members, like Los Angeles Zoo and
San Diego Zoo and Santa Barbara Zoo, that are doing that work.
And if that didn’t happen, then that recovery of that population
would collapse automatically. So we have to eliminate the source
of the problems and have the courage to do that, and non-toxic al-
ternatives are available.
With invasives you have to act quickly. And so right now, we are
helping deal with a coral reef crisis off of Florida. There is an
invasive disease that is wiping out 25 of the 40 coral species along
the entire Florida Reef tract, over 300 miles of coral reef. America’s
largest coral reef is being decimated by an invasive unknown as yet
disease. And so what is required is to get in ahead of that, rescue
the coral, pull them into refugia so that we can have the hope of
restoring that reef once we find out what is going on. And so the
key thing for the Federal agencies and their State counterparts is
to act quickly in the face of species invasion.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. So, Mr. O’Neill, birds eat fish. Fish live in coral.
We will you close it. [Laughter.]
Mr. O’NEILL. Yeah, I think one of the things that we are finding,
particularly on our seabird work, which is interesting maybe to Mr.
Kilmer, is that you are starting to see a mix of species moving into
areas where seabirds really rely on fish in order to survive. There
are out on the water maybe 70, 80 percent of their life cycle. They
are getting fish now that are too large for their beaks to be able
to feed. They are no longer productive, and that is a big shift be-
cause of climate change. The warming of some of these oceans are
creating different movements of fish. As a result, the sea birds
aren’t able to eat fish that are the size that can create productivity
when they move to their breeding grounds.
So that is an important shift, but the importance of the actions
that can be taken are around really thinking about managing the
small forage fish that are in these river systems and that move out
into the oceans. Protecting forage fish is really important to saving
sea birds, and sea birds have declined some 70 percent over the
last 40 years. So that is an invasive species that is moving as a
result in part of ocean temperatures and warming.
And I want to pick up on Dan’s point about, you know, some-
thing along the lines of the pesticide issue for birds., and Steve and
I were talking about this earlier. It is a major issue for our board
and our members. But pesticides we are more and more concerned
about in terms of their impact on birds, and that is an issue that
we want to explore further. I think some scientific research relative
to the impact of pesticides on birds and the health of birds would
be very valuable to really draw that link, that scientific link, be-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
164
tween pesticide use and the loss of bird species throughout the
Americas.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. Mr. Joyce.
Mr. JOYCE. Have you found any birds that like to prey on Asian
carp? [Laughter.]
Mr. O’NEILL. Not yet.
Mr. JOYCE. Thank you all for being here.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Kilmer.
Mr. KILMER. None. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you very much. Thank you. And if the
second panel would come up, please.
I think we are going to be fine. We are finding out that we are
seeing a yellow light. This morning we saw yellow light, but you
are not seeing a yellow light right now. So we will give you an indi-
cation kind of where the minute comes without being too disrup-
tive.
So as the first panel did, if you would introduce yourself, and
then we will start the clock then.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE
WITNESS
JACOB MALCOM, DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR CONSERVATION IN-
NOVATION, DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE
Mr. MALCOM. Good afternoon. I am Jacob Malcom. I am the di-
rector of the Center for Conservation Innovation at Defenders of
Wildlife. Defenders has 1.8 million members and supporters, and
we are dedicated to the conservation of wild animals and their
habitats in their natural communities. Thank you, Madam Chair-
woman, Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee for
the opportunity to speak with you today.
The science that has been marshaled in recent years shows with
unrivaled clarity that this is a pivotal time for wildlife and for hu-
manity. You are likely familiar with last year’s report. ‘‘The Global
Assessment on the Status of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services,’’
found that 1 in 8 species on the planet, or about 1 million species,
are at risk of extinction. That is tens to hundreds of times faster
than the background rate of extinction, and ultimately we are the
cause of this loss.
We have altered over 75 percent of terrestrial environments and
two-thirds of marine environments. When you combine that loss
with ongoing threats, like invasive species, climate change, the
damage that we have done to nature is almost unimaginable. And
the consequences of that are not just borne by nature, but also by
humanity. Half a trillion dollars of crops are at risk of loss because
of pollinator loss, which is a really big deal. Ecosystem services
from fisheries to water filtration and beyond are all at grave risk
of loss because of the damage to natural systems.
But despite the darkness of these results, we also have good rea-
son for hope because we know that we have solutions. We know we
can make a difference when we act. We have reduced the risk of
extinction for plants and animals by some 22, almost 30 percent by
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
165
investing in conservation. In the U.S. this is because of laws going
back over a century for conservation starting with the Lacey Act
in 1900, and because of our stewardship of our Federal public lands
and public and private lands across the country.
Defenders has a number of priorities that we have laid out in our
written testimony, but here I wanted to focus for a moment on the
key law for addressing the extinction crisis that we are facing now,
the Endangered Species Act. The ESA is the epitome of success.
Over 95 percent of listed species are still with us today, and hun-
dreds of those are on the path to recovery. This record of success
is even more stunning when you consider that species have re-
ceived less than 25 percent of what scientists say is needed to re-
cover them. You can imagine what we would be able to do if we
invested fully in the Endangered Species Act. This point may have
been most clearly made last fall in the Journal of Science when
1,800 scientists endorsed greater ESA funding as a key strategy for
responding to the extinction crisis.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the lead agency for recov-
ering most listed species, but its endangered species budget needs
nearly double the current funding, or about $486 million a year, for
the Agency to carry out the missions Congress intended. For exam-
ple, the backlogged Listing Program needs to increase nearly three-
fold to $51 million dollars a year so that the Agency can determine
if species need protection. The Recovery Program funding needs to
nearly double to almost $197 million a year. That would allow the
Service to complete almost 400, actually over 400, recovery plans
that are needed, and thousands of recovery actions that are already
planned and just need to be taken action on.
The Consultation and Planning Program needs an almost 50 per-
cent increase to $130 million, which would allow, among other
things, the application of new technologies that really massively in-
crease the efficiency of consultations. And the Cooperative Endan-
gered Species Conservation Fund, which empowers States and pri-
vate landowners to take conservation action, needs at least $100
million a year.
Across these programs and others detailed in our written testi-
mony, we have laid out a path to address the extinction crisis that
looms before us. You and your constituents depend on nature and
the ecosystem services it provides. Fundamentally, laws like the
ESA will be little more than lip service to wildlife if they are not
funded fully and carried out. So thank you for the funding in-
creases last year. Defenders and all of the wildlife and their habi-
tats certainly appreciate it. Now we need leaders to use their au-
thorities, the power of the purse, to further our commitment to halt
the extinction crisis and reverse the fortunes of nature. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Malcom follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
166
FY 2021 Testimony of Jacob Malcom, Ph.D.
Director, Center for Conservation Innovation, Defenders of Wildlife
House Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Madam Chairman, Ranking Member and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony. I am Jacob Malcom, Director of the Center for Conservation
Innovation at Defenders of Wildlife. Founded in 1947, Defenders has more than 1.8 million
members and supporters and is dedicated to the conservation of wild animals and plants in their
natural communities.
The science marshalled in recent months and years shows with unrivaled clarity that this is a pivotal
time for that wildlife and ultimately, humanity. You are familiar with last year's global
assessment on the status of biodiversity and ecosystem which found that 1 in 8 on
Earth - about 1 million species are facing extinction. We are causing the loss of species tens to
hundreds of times faster than the background extinction rate. This loss of species is driven by the
fact that we have altered over 75% of terrestrial environments and 66% of marine environments.
Combined with ongoing thteats as diverse as climate change and invasive species, the damage we
have done and are doing to nature is almost unimaginable. The consequences are as dire for
humanity as they are for wildlife. As one example, half a trillion dollars of crops per year are at risk
from pollinator loss. Ecosystem services, from fisheries to water filtration and beyond, are al1 at
grave risk because of the damage to natural systems.
In the face of these thteats, the U.S. is fortunate to have solutions-from the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) to a strong public lands system-that can work, but only if we fund them. Defenders
appreciates the increases for key wildlife programs provided in the final FY 2020 omnibus
appropriations bill. But years of severely inadequate funding and the scale of the catastrophe facing
the planet's wildlife mean significantly more funding is needed in every area.
In addition, Defenders remains opposed to the administration's various efforts to rec,rgitru:ie the
Department of the Interior and to restructure or relocate some of its agencies and programs. These
efforts seem more focused on undermining agency transparency and dismantling programs that
conserve the lands, water and wildlife under the Department's jurisdiction rather than to achieve any
efficiencies or real improvements in management. We urge you to continue to reject these proposals,
or in the case of the Bureau of Land Management relocation that is underway, to do as much
as possible to mitigate the impacts and to maintain continuity.
We were very grateful that the FY 2020 House bill did not retain the longstanding prohibition on
protecting the sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act, but we were extremely disappointed
that the fmal omnibus bill once again reinstated the rider. We urge the Subcommittee to ensure
removal of the rider in the final FY 2021 bill once and for al1. Sage-grouse continue to decline in
every state where they occur. Tbe U.S. Fish and \'17ildlife Service must have all tools available to
conserve this increasingly imperiled bird, and the rider is a conspicuous political interference with
the integrity of the scientific process that is the foundation of the Endangered Species Act.
Fish and Wildlifr Service
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is our nation's premier wildlife conservation agency.
\'v'hile we appreciate the increases provided in the f•Y 2020 bill, the agency needs significantly greater
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 284 here 43677P7.095
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
167
Testimony of Defenders of Wildlife
Page 2 of 4
increases to support recovery of threatened and endangered species; protection of migratory birds
and fish, species of global conservation concern and other trust species; and prevention of both
domestic and international wildlife crimes.
Ecological Services - Last year, a coalition of more than 200 organizations sent a letter to Congress
requesting a significant infusion of funds into the Ecological Services program to begin to address
the extinction crisis, a total of $486 million, $220 million more than the current level:
• Listing: Several years ago, FWS developed a broadly supported workplan to allow for timely
listing decisions on 350 species. Because of funding decreases, FWS now has a backlog of
22 species with delayed listing decisions as well as 74 species in the workplan for a total
current listing backlog of 96 species. For FWS to meet these and other obligations under
the listing budget, a total of $51 million is needed annually, an increase of $30.7 million over
the FY 2020 level. Species due for decisions include the Pacific marten, Eastern Black Rail,
island marble butterfly, and Black-capped Petrel.
• Recovery: Currently, more than 400 listed species lack final recovery plans and another 500
plans will need to be updated in the next five years. Moreover, hundreds of listed species
receive less than $1,000 per year for recovery with many receiving no FWS funding at all.
Congress should provide a minimum of $50,000 per year per species for recovery to ensure
no species slips through the cracks. For FWS to meet these and other obligations under the
recovery budget, a total of atleast $196.7 million is needed annually, an increase of $93.7
million. We very much appreciate the direction included in FY 2020 report language for
FWS to establish extinction prevention programs for critically endangered species and we
urge the Subcommittee to press for the establishment of these programs.
• Planning and Consultation: FWS conducts ESA Section 7 consultations on more than
10,000 federal actions each year so that projects can move forward while minimizing harm to
listed species. The requirements of pesticide consultations in particular are large and essential
to protecting species. To meet planning and consultation needs and to work with non-
federal stakeholders to develop Habitat Conservation Plans, $130 million is needed annually,
an increase of $21 million over the FY 2020 level. In addition, we are grateful for the
direction included in the FY 2020 report for FWS to enhance the Integrated Planning and
Conservation System and to plan development of a system for compliance monitoring. We
urge continued oversight of these efforts.
• Conservation and Restoration: At least $8 million per year from FY 2021 to FY 2026 is
needed for the Candidate Conservation element of Conservation and Restoration to assist
with early conservation action on the current 14 candidate species.
• Wolf Livestock Loss Demonstration Program: Defenders urges continued funding at no
less than $1 million for this program that assists livestock owners co-existing with wolves.
National Wildlife Refuge System - Our National Wildlife Refuge System is the largest network of
public lands and water in the nation dedicated to wildlife conservation, unique in that it is one of the
few places on the planet where wildlife comes first. While we appreciate the FY 2020 level of $502.4
million for Refuge System Operations and Maintenance (O&M), a $14.2 million increase, it has
taken ten years to simply return O&M funding to just below the high-water FY 2010 level of $503.2
million. Defenders recommends $586 million for O&M for FY 2020, an increase of $83.6 million.
The Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement, a coalition of 23 hunting, fishing, conservation
and scientific organizations estimates at least $900 million is needed annually for O&M.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 285 here 43677P7.096
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
168
Testimony of Defenders of Wildlife
Page 3 of4
Migratory Bird Management - Research published last year' showed that North America has lost
about 3 billion birds since the 1970s, and the only groups to not suffer severe declines were
waterbirds that have received substantial funding over the decades. Given that the Trump
administration has eliminated long-standing protections for migratory birds against incidental take,
funding for conservation is more important than ever. Defenders recommends a return to no less
than the FY 2010 level of $54.5 million, an increase of $7 million over the FY 2020 level, to support
crucial survey and monitoring programs and for building resilience of bird species and their habitats.
Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) -We are extremely grateful that the FY 2020 bill continues
appropriated funding to support inspectors at ports of entry currently without personnel and we
urge it be maintained. Defenders supports $85 for million for FY 2021, an increase of $2.9 million
over the FY 2019 level, to help OLE continue to address the crisis in the illegal global wildlife trade.
International Affairs - Defenders supports $21 million for FY 2021, an increase of $2.2 million,
crucial in continuing to combat illegal wildlife trade and to build capacity in range countries.
Cooperative Landscape Conservation and Science Support - We thank the Subcommittee for again
restoring funding for these two programs which the administration had zeroed out in its FY 2020
request. We recommend increases over current levels, returning to the requests made in the last
Obama administration budget for FY 2017 for $17.8 million (an increase of $5.3 million) and $20.6
million (an increase of $3.3 million) respectively. With these increases, FWS can continue to work to
address complex challenges such as climate change across large landscapes and otherwise address
scientific questions key to conservation of trust species.
Key grant programs - Defenders supports: $100 million for the Cooperative Endangered Species
Fund, an increase of $45.5 million; $6.5 million for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Fund, an increase
of $1.6 million; $18 million for the Multinational Species Conservation Fund, an increase of $3
million; and $70 million for State and Tribal Wildlife Grants, an increase of $2.4 million.
U.S Forest Service and Bureau ofLand Management
The U.S. Forest Service (FS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are essential to the
conservation of wildlife and habitat in the U.S. In its FY 2020 budget the administration proposed,
and lawmakers wisely rejected, consolidation of nine National Forest System budget line items into a
single budget line item. Defenders remains concerned that such a consolidation, given this
administration's narrow focus on timber production, could be devastating to wildlife habitat and
watersheds. Further, efforts to restructure the FS Research and Development program must retain
tbe essential interdisciplinary functions of the agency's research arm. Under any scenario, Congress
must reaffirm meaningful performance metrics for wildlife habitat, watersheds, and forest resiliency
on FS lands. In addition, Defenders is extremely concerned about the impact of the BLM relocation
on the agency's ability to sustainably manage its wildlife, land and waters given the disruption and
loss of institutional expertise. We ask the Subcommittee to maintain sttict oversight and to take all
possible steps to ensure continuity and expeditious restoration of affected programs in the new
location. Further, Defenders requests that BLM be prohibited from using any funds for seismic
exploration, oil and gas drilling and other development activities within one mile of polar be~r
maternal denning habitat in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in FY 2021.
• Rosenberg KV, Dokter AM, Blancher PJ, Sauer JR, Smith AC, Smith PA, Stanton JC, Panjabi A, Helft L, Parr M,
Marra PP. 2019. Decline of the North American avifauna. Science 366:120-124. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaw1313.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 286 here 43677P7.097
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00168 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
169
Testimony of Defenders of Wildlife
Page4of4
BLM Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat Management - Defenders supports a total of $200.8 million, an
increase of $14.3 million over the FY 2020 level. Within this amount, we ask the Subcommittee to
maintain specific funding for Threatened and Endangered Species Management and provide a level
of $23.6 million for the program, an increase of $2 million over the FY 2020 level to support the
conservation of the 430 listed species and numerous candidate species found on BLM lands.
BLM Renewable Energy-Defenders supports no less than $29.1 million, the same as the FY 2020
level, to continue facilitating renewable energy development on public lands while avoiding areas
with natural resource conflicts, including habitat for sensitive wildlife species.
BLM Resource Managi;ment Planning Assessment and Monitoring - Defenders urges $69.4 million,
an increase of $2.3 million over the FY 2020 level of $63.1 million, to support crucial data collection
and monitoring of ecological conditions and trends on the landscape as well as continued
development of the Enterprise GIS. We also appreciate the direction in the report for the agency to
move forward with a refined range mapping pilot project for threatened and endangered species on
BLM lands and ask the Subcommittee to monitor and ensure the progress of this effort.
FS Wildlife and Fisheries Habitat Management - We support restoring funding to at least the FY
2010 level of$143 million, $5 million over the FY 2020 level, to carry out critical conservation and
recovery activities for the nearly 470 threatened and endangered species and 3,100 sensitive species
that depend on FS lands, and to help address the loss of biologists that has occurred in recent years.
FS Land Management Planning, Assessment and Monitoring - Defenders supports maintaining
funding at no less than the FY 2017 level of $182.9 million, $2.9 million over the FY 2020 level.
Outdated forest plans lack effective habitat conservation and restoration strategies.
FS Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program - Defenders supports a total of $80
million, as authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill.
FS Forest and Rangeland Research CfS R&D) - We urge a return to the FY 2010 level of $245
million, $17 million over FY 2020, which included $30.5 million for Wildlife and Fish R&D.
Adequate funding for this program is crucial in providing relevant tools and information to support
sustainable management of both federal and non-federal forest lands.
U.S. Geological Survey
National and Regional Climate Science Centers - We are extremely grateful that the final omnibus
bill rejected the administration's proposal to "realign centers" and also provided a significant $13
million increase together with direction to develop the Midwest Climate Adaptation Science Center,
a total of $38.3 million. We urge continued funding at no less than this amount to support scientific
needs in planning for climate change adaptation and building resiliency of ecosystems.
Ecosystems - We thank the Subcommittee for rejecting the administration's effort to restructure
this activity, including its proposed elimination of the Cooperative Research Units. Defenders urges
funding at no less than the FY 2017 request of $173. 9 million, $3.4 million above FY 2020, to help
support development of crucial scientific information for sound management of our nati{m's
biological resources.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 287 here 43677P7.098
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00169 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
170
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you very much.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE
WITNESS
KATE WALL, SENIOR LEGISLATIVE MANAGER, INTERNATIONAL FUND
FOR ANIMAL WELFARE
Ms. WALL. Hi. Thanks. Can you hear me? Bear with me. I have
a very scratchy voice.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Why don’t we make sure you have a glass of
water handy in case you need it?
Ms. WALL. Thank you. That is kind. I won’t wait on that, though.
My name is Kate Wall. I am here on behalf of the International
Fund for Animal Welfare. I am the senior legislative manager in
our United States office. The International Fund for Animal Wel-
fare—thank you—or IFAW, has offices in 15 countries around the
world and works in more than 40 countries globally. And we want
to thank the chairwoman, and Ranking Member Joyce, and mem-
bers of the subcommittee for the opportunity to testify here today.
IFAW is very grateful for the subcommittee’s championship of
strong conservation funding in the current Fiscal Year. And as a
member of the International Conservation Caucus, we also thank
both the chair and ranking member for your conservation leader-
ship both on this committee and elsewhere.
So I am going to deviate a little bit from my prepared remarks
today because, Chairwoman McCollum, you asked about the cost of
doing nothing during the last panel. And I wanted to start these
remarks by saying that the Intergovernmental Platform on Climate
Change put forward a report last year that said that the total
value of global ecosystem services is roughly equivalent to global
GDP. That is huge. So the cost of doing nothing to protect our eco-
system services may be as much as allowing global GDP to trickle
down the drain.
All right. I just wanted to see that in your minds before I get
started on my formal remarks because I think that sometimes
when we talk about wildlife and ecosystems, we think about these
as something that we need to think about in the future, not some-
thing that we should worry about today. We need to worry about
our bottom lines of today. We all do this. I do this in my own think-
ing when I am thinking about my budget at home. But the reality
is that we may be squandering huge resources that we do not have
the wherewithal to put back into our coffers if we don’t act today
to protect wildlife and protect ecosystems here in the United States
and globally.
So we have heard just by turning on the news about some really
pretty serious and grim challenges that face us around the world.
We hear about sea level rise. We hear about warming oceans. We
hear about biodiversity loss. If you aren’t scared, then you aren’t
paying attention. But I don’t want to focus on our fear today be-
cause fear can paralyze us, and the reality is that those of you sit-
ting across the table from us here today have the power as leaders
in this country to really make some transformative changes and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00170 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
171
make a better world for us, and I want to inspire you to act in that
way. So put the fear aside, and let’s talk about some things that
you can do with the power of your purse.
We continue as the United States to be a global leader, and the
actions that we take here at home matter on the global stage. Some
of the things that we can do internationally include funding the
International Affairs Program within the Fish and Wildlife Service,
which is tasked with coordinating domestic and international ef-
forts to conserve species and restore wildlife and wild lands. These
are programs that look not just at iconic species, which we will talk
about next, but species that we may not have heard of, transbound-
ary species, ecosystems, and they really have a power to create
change in wide swathes of the world with very, very little. Also, be-
cause of language that you justifiably put in the Fiscal Year 2020
appropriations report language, are tasked with ensuring the high-
est level of integrity and professionalism among partner organiza-
tions. And so we asked for further funding to ensure that they have
the resources that they need to carry out those very important of-
fices.
With regard to iconic species like those protected by the multi-
national species conservation funds, species like tigers, rhinos, Afri-
can and Asian elephants, great apes marine and freshwater turtles
and tortoises, these species continue to face threats from poaching,
from trafficking, and from climate change. And while there was a
significant increase in funding in the last Fiscal Year, for which
again, we are very grateful, these threats have not gone away, and
we need more preventative funds now so that we don’t risk further
cure funding required later that will be much more costly to tax-
payers and species writ large.
And finally, on the international stage, the Office of Law En-
forcement within the Fish and Wildlife Service is tasked with a
huge amount of inspection of wildlife and wildlife products that
come across our borders. They have attaches around the world.
And we face yet another global pandemic, which appears to have
been caused by wildlife interactions, we see those as all the more
important offices that need to be carried out with additional fund-
ing.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you here
today.
[The statement of Ms. Wall follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00171 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
172
Testimony of Kate Wall
Senior Legislative Manager, International Fund for Animal Welfare
Before the House Committee on Appropriations,
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
February 6, 2020
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee: Thank
you for the opportunity to offer testimony on the FY2 I Interior, Environment and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act. The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IF AW) has 15 offices
globally and works in more than 40 countries around the world. IFAW takes a holistic approach
to innovating solutions for tough conservation challenges like conflicts between humans and
wildlife, and illegal wildlife trafficking. Recognizing the unbreakable link between animals and
human wellbeing, we support and empower communities to coexist with and value native
wildlife and help those communities develop tools to protect their wild heritage. IF AW is
grateful for this Subcommittee's championship of strong conservation funding for the current
fiscal year (FY20), and requests your continued support for these programs in FY2 I.
Specifically, we request the $19.5 million for the Multinational Species Conservation Funds, $5
million for information technology upgrades within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
$23 million for the International Affairs program within FWS, $85 million for the FWS
Department Office of Law Enforcement, and $500 million for the Endangered Species Act
across five programs. IF AW also requests the Subcommittee deny support for any projects that
seek to circumvent the ESA or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Finally, we urge the
Subcommittee to prioritize infrastructure projects that are sustainable and resilient.
This last year has brought ever more disturbing news about the state of our natural world.
Twenty-nineteen was the second hottest year on record; 1 in May, the Intergovernmental Science-
Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) released a report warning that
one million species are at risk of extinction due to human activities2; changing climate conditions
wreaked havoc on Australia in the form of catastrophic wildfires; we saw the fourth consecutive
above-normal Atlantic hurricane season----0nly the second such on record 3-which caused an
estimated $22 billion in damage in the U.S. alone;4 and our ocean temperatures rose at record-
setting levels. 5 Trafficking in wildlife and wildlife parts remained the fourth most lucrative
criminal enterprise worldwide with an estimated annual revenue of as much as $20 billion-add
in illegal logging and fishing, and that number skyrockets to $ I trillion or more6•
Given the grim challenges we face, IFAW respectfully asks this Subcommittee to exert its
leadership and help to reverse these shocking trends. Fortunately, many of the programs that are
best able to address our natural crises fall within the Subcommittee's jurisdiction, and U.S.
action remains a key driver in convincing nations around the globe to invest in protecting
imperiled wildlife.
No NEPA or ESA Waivers: IFAW urges this Subcommittee to consider the health of wildlife
and the environment in all of its actions. At a minimum, no federally-supported construction
projects, including disaster remediation projects, should be exempted from such fundamental
laws as the ESA and NEPA. NEPA and ESA analyses protect against substantial social,
environmental, and economic harm. These reviews allow construction projects to move forward
while ensuring full disclosure of potentially harmful outcomes, informed decision-making,
effective design, and risk mitigation. There has been a distressing trend toward exempting
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 294 here 43677P7.099
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00172 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
173
projects from NEPA, ESA, or other environmental reviews and we urge the Subcommittee to
reverse this trend by denying funding for any plan that does not include a commitment to
bedrock conservation laws and environmental reviews.
Infrastructure: As Congress moves to address our aging infrastructure, we have an unparalleled
opportunity to invest in environmental safeguards and conservation innovations that will ensure
American wellbeing and security, and create jobs and prosperity for the citizens of today and for
many future generations. IFAW urges this Subcommittee to review any infrastructure plans
within your jurisdiction through the lens of wildlife conservation and environmental
sustainability. We advocate prioritizing funding for projects that: rely on sustainable or natural
materials to increase infrastructure resiliency and longevity; reintroduce or preserve native flora;
create resilient and sustainable water and waste management systems, particularly through
implementing natural alternatives to traditional water and wastewater management systems like
wetlands, dune restoration, and natural vegetation buffers. Over time, these modalities can
increase resilience while saving scarce taxpayer dollars. A single acre of wetlands can hold up to
1.5 million gallons of rain or melting snow. For less than $300,000, it's possible to construct an
artificial wetland that can intercept 3.25 million gallons of stormwater otherwise destined for the
sewer.
We also urge the Subcommittee to prioritize funding for infrastructure projects that reduce
wildlife conflict using wildlife corridors and crossings. Every year in the U.S. there are an
estimated 1-2 million collisions that occur between motorists and large animals. 7 These
collisions result in 200 human deaths and more than 26,000 injuries, at a cost to Americans of
more than $8 billion annually. 8 A 2011 study by the insurance industry estimated that over $1
billion dollars per year is spent on property damage due to wildlife vehicle collisions while the
total annual cost to American taxpayers is nearly $8.4 billion. 9 In addition, walls, fences, roads,
and dams impede migratory routes, cut off food and water supplies, and otherwise disrupt
important wildlife habitats. We can and must improve safety and safeguard biodiversity and
ecosystem health by creating and protecting habitat connectivity, wildlife corridors, and
crossings for wildlife.
US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE PRIORITY PROGRAMS
Endangered Species Act: The Endangered Species Act, remains our nation's most important
conservation law, and has been successful in protecting 99% of listed species from becoming
extinct. Saving species from ei.tinction is about more than just preserving iconic wildlife for
generations to come. We are also protecting integral parts of the ecosystem that provides the air
we breathe, the water we drink, the parks we enjoy, and the medicine we need. The Endangered
Species Act protects wildlife within the United States, and species around the globe by requiring
agencies to ensure that federally supported international activities protect species survival and
preserve important habitat and by generally prohibiting the import oflisted species.
While the ESA remains popular among Americans regardless of political party, with an approval
rating of around 90%, it continues to face attacks through spending riders, authorizing
legislation, and administrative action. IFAW thanks this Subcommittee for its efforts to fend off
appropriations riders in past bills, and asks that any riders aimed at undermining the ESA-
including legacy riders-be excluded from the FY2 l Act.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 295 here 43677P7.100
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00173 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
174
We also thank the subcommittee for including strong ESA funding in its FY20 bill, which was,
unfortunately, not retained in the final spending package. There remains a backlog of species
awaiting consideration for protections under the Act, as well as listed species in need of
additional resources to promote recovery. As species face ever-mounting pressures from climate
change, habitat loss, and other factors, funding for the ESA has not kept pace with the need.
IFAW requests $500 million across the following five programs to make up for lost ground and
put species on the path to recovery:
Recovery Program: $205 million
Planning and Consultation Programs: $132 million
Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: $100 million
Listing Program: $53 million
Conservation and Restoration Program: $10 million
FWS Information Technology Improvement
Currently, FWS is operating with outmoded information technology (IT) systems. Outdated
websites mislead the public, provide inaccurate information, and can lead to legal liability for
agencies. Reduced access to information online also contributes to inefficiencies and can cause
duplication of staff time.
Upgrading FWS IT systems will increase openness and transparency; provide improved access to
digital assets that should be in the public domain, including photos and videos; improve staff
efficiency in responding to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests; and increase public
access to documents and information that should be publicly available. Similar information that
is requested via FOIA three times is required to be posted, so improving public access to such
information will reduce duplicate FOIA requests, saving staff time and resources. IFAW
therefore requests that $5 million be appropriated to improve FWS IT systems, including
staffing, in FY2 l.
FWS International Affairs: The FWS International Affairs (IA) program is tasked with
coordinating domestic and international efforts to protect and restore wildlife and ecosystems.
By overseeing domestic conservation laws and international conservation treaties, including the
Convention in International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the IA program has become a
keystone of U.S. leadership on the international stage. Importantly, the IA program supports
transboundary regional projects as well as those that focus on target species, promoting habitat
conservation and restoration in areas where wildlife is most at risk from habitat loss. The IA
program is now responsible for implementing important safeguards this subcommittee included
in the FY20 spending bill to ensure partner groups comply with the highest level of integrity and
professionalism. With additional resources, the IA team will be better able to implement these
responsibilities, and to get necessary funding to qualifying projects promptly and efficiently.
IFAW requests $23 million for this important program in FY21.
Multinational Species Conservation Fund (MSCF): IFAW is part of a diverse coalition of
groups, including animal welfare, environmental, sporting, and industry organizations, that
support the MSCF. These funds protect tigers, rhinos, African and Asian elephants, great apes,
and marine and freshwater turtles and tortoises, all of which are in constant danger from illegal
poaching and wildlife trafficking, habitat destruction, climate change, and other pressures. Wild
members of these species may live outside our borders, but these iconic animals remain
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 296 here 43677P7.101
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00174 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
175
important to the American people. None ofus wants this to be the generation to preside over the
extinction of elephants or tigers in the wild. MSCF programs have helped to sustain wildlife
populations by funding groundbreaking projects that combat poaching, reduce human-wildlife
conflict and protect the vital habitat of priority species. By promoting community engagement
and combatting trafficking, the MSCF programs also promote the rule oflaw abroad and
contribute to our domestic security. These programs are highly efficient, with low administrative
costs ensuring that more than 95% of appropriated funds were distributed through grants in
FYI 7. The MSCF received an increase in FY20, but pressures on these species continue to
increase around the globe. IFAW requests that $19.5 million be appropriated for the MSCF for
FY21.
Office of Law Enforcement: The Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) within the FWS is on the
front lines of wildlife crime, inspecting wildlife shipments, conducting investigations, and
enforcing federal wildlife laws to protect fish, wildlife, plants, and ecosystems. The OLE
combats poaching and wildlife trafficking, breaking up international criminal rings that not only
harm wildlife, but may also engage in other illicit activities. Among other things, the small but
mighty force at OLE sends experienced FWS attaches to strategic regions where they combat
wildlife trafficking by supporting and advising foreign partners. The US remains one of the
world's largest illegal markets for wildlife and wildlife products. And, as the world confronts a
novel coronavirus with suspected origins in wildlife, the OLE's inspection and enforcement
responsibilities take on even greater import. This program is critical both to domestic and
international conservation efforts and to national health and security. IFAW requests $85 million
in FY21 for OLE.
In closing, thank you for the opportunity to share IFAW' s funding priorities to promote
conservation in the FY2021 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
Wildlife and their habitats are more than our national heritage; they are essential to human health
and welfare, and to domestic and international security. We appreciate the continued leadership
of this Subcommittee on conservation efforts globally and within the United States. With your
support, we can reverse the tide of extinction and promote a better future for generations of
wildlife lovers and Americans yet to come. Thank you.
1
https://www.noaa.gov/news/2019-was-2nd-hottest-year-on-record-for-earth-say-noaa-nasa
2
lPBES, Global Assessment on Biodiversity and &osystem Services: Summary for Policymakers. 2019. Available
at https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/inline/files/ipbes_global_assessment_report_summary_for_policymakers.pdf
3
NOAA, Active 2019 Atlantic Hurricane Season Comes to an End: Stretch of consecutive above-normal seasons
continues. Available at https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/active-2019-atlantic-hurricane-season-comes-to-
end?utm_source=Social%20Media&utrn_ medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=AtlanticHurricanSeason_20191126
4
https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/accuweathers-2019-total-storm-damage-estimate-is-22-
billion/604569
5
Cheng, L., and Coauthors, 2020: Record-setting ocean warmth continued in 2019. Adv. Atmos. Sci.,
37(2),137-142, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-020-9283-7.
6
http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/482771571323560234/WBGReportlOl 7Digital.pdf
7
Huijser, M.P., P. McGowen, J. Fuller, A. Hardy, A. Kociolek, A.P. Clevenger, D. Smith and R. Ament. 2008.
Wildlife-vehicle collision reduction study. Report to Congress. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Washington D.C., USA.
8
Id.
9
Putting a Dent in the Cost of Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions, Defenders of Wildlife Blog, September 20, 2011,
https://defendersblog.org/2011/09/putting-a-dent-in-the-cost-of-wildlife-vehicle-collisions/
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 297 here 43677P7.102
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00175 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
176
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
LEGISLATIVE AND FEDERAL BUDGET COMMITTEE
WITNESS
TIM SCHAEFFER, CHAIR, ASSOCIATION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AGEN-
CIES, LEGISLATIVE AND FEDERAL BUDGET COMMITTEE
Mr. SCHAEFFER. Hi. My name is Tim Schaeffer. I am the execu-
tive director of the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. And
like Minnesota and Ohio, we are both a Great Lake State and a
Mississippi River watershed State. People don’t often think about
the fact that the Ohio starts right there in Pittsburgh. And I am
here today on behalf of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agen-
cies. I am the current chair of the Legislative Federal Budget Com-
mittee for the Association.
Should I start again?
Ms. MCCOLLUM. We are good.
Mr. SCHAEFFER. Okay. Good. Thank you. Generally, the Associa-
tion supports no less than Fiscal Year 2020 funding levels for the
various budget line items under your purview. However, increasing
funding for the Division of Fish and Aquatic Conservation of the
Fish and Wildlife Service is important to ensure sufficient capacity
and expertise is readily available to work in partnership with the
States on various projects and issues. At least maintaining Fiscal
Year 2020 funding levels for the National Fish Hatchery operations
and functions and budget line items is critical, and we request the
same for mass marketing initiatives.
Additional funding to address the National Fish Hatchery sys-
tems deferred maintenance is also necessary to continue species
restoration and conservation efforts. We support the National Fish
Habitat Action Plan at $7.2 million, and to continue Fiscal Year
2020 funding levels for conservation activities in the Delaware
River Basin, Klamath Basin, Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, and
the Everglades.
The spread of the associated costs of aquatic invasive species are
exploding—we have been talking about that already today—and we
recommend increasing funding for AIS prevention in the FAC. This
should be part of a comprehensive approach across relevant Fed-
eral agencies and the programs that provide resources to States to
prevent and control AIS. We request Congress to restore funding
for State aquatic nuisance species management plan implementa-
tion to $4.4 million dollars, without compromising ANS programs.
And we support the continuation of a $25 million annual appro-
priation to implement the National Asian Carp Management and
Control Plan in the Mississippi River and it is tributaries. I would
really emphasize if we get it right in the tributaries, that helps to
prevent the spread to the Great Lakes.
The State and Tribal Wildlife grants program is the only Federal
program available to States to leverage non-Federal funds to con-
serve over 12,000 State species of greatest conservation need to
prevent them from becoming threatened or endangered through
voluntary proactive and State-led conservation efforts. It is a lot
cheaper to keep something off the Endangered Species List, and we
like to say we want to keep common species common.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00176 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
177
The Association recommends the program be funded at $90 mil-
lion and Fiscal Year 2021. To truly address these challenges, we
ask Congress to enact the Recovering America’s Wildlife Act, H.R.
3742, which would provide States and their conservation partners
with dependable resources and a modern enhancement in how we
fund the full array of diverse fish and wildlife conservation for cur-
rent and future generations.
The Fish and Wildlife Service and States share management ju-
risdiction for migratory birds. This represents one of the most suc-
cessful State/Federal Cooperative Partnerships for over 80 years.
Unfortunately, the Migratory Bird Conservation Program is chron-
ically underfunded. More funding is needed to retain sufficient
staff, fill key vacancies to work in cooperation with the States on
co-management issues, and support science to inform decision mak-
ing. The Association supports funding the program at Fiscal Year
2010 levels, and the Migratory Joint Bird Ventures at $19.9 million
to accomplish shared responsibilities and priorities.
Thank you for providing much-needed funding for the USGS Co-
operative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Program in Fiscal Year
2020, and we strongly support maintaining the funding in Fiscal
Year 2021. Further, we support additional funding for the science
centers. In Pennsylvania, we recently learned that the Northern
Appalachian Research Lab and Wellsboro, Pennsylvania may close
this year because of decreased funding. That lab provides critical
data, research, and information to our agency on how we manage
freshwater mussels for the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commis-
sion, but we manage all fish, reptiles, and amphibians in the Com-
monwealth. They also have supplied really critical research and
data to us on the filtration roles of mussels, how they are con-
nected to eels, and how that would help with Chesapeake Bay res-
toration efforts. The cleaner the water is leaving the Susquehanna
River, the better it is for the Bay, and mussels play a role in that.
We get a lot of great data on that from that USGS facility in
Wellsboro.
We also support additional funding for the National Wildlife
Health Center to deal with chronic wasting disease. We support no
less than Fiscal Year 2020 funding levels for other budget line
items within USGS ecosystems. However, it is imperative the Con-
gress provide additional resources to all relevant Federal agencies
to coordinate to coordinate with the States on challenges related to
CWD. We respectfully request that the subcommittee refer to the
Association’s testimony on CWD provided on October 17th, 2019 for
additional CWD-related needs.
Thank you for upholding the commitments to wildfire borrowing.
We support the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service budgets at no less
than Fiscal Year 2020 levels, and respectfully request an additional
$3 million to this program. So with that point, I would be happy
to answer any questions.
[The statement of Mr. Schaeffer follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00177 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
178
1100 First Street, NE, Suite 825
ASSOCIATION of
FISH & WILDLIFE Fax: 202-350-9869
Ell'.l>il: info@lishwildlife.org
AGENCIES
Testimony by Mr. Tim Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat
Commission, on Behalf of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
FY202l House Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee
January 29, 2020
Thank you for the opportunity to submit recommendations for Fiscal Year 2021 (FY2t)
Congressional appropriations. The Association offish and Wildlife Agencies' (AFWA) mission,
since our founding in 1902, is to protect state fish and wildlife agency (states) authority to
conserve and manage the fish and wildlife within their borders, and all 50 states are members.
We strive to facilitate cooperation between state and federal agencies, conservation NGOs, and
private landowners to conserve our nation's fish, wildlife, and their habitats.
We express our deep appreciation for the increased FY20 funding levels for many of the
programs that benefit fish, wildlife, and their habitats and for providing resources for our federal
agency partners. We look forward to working with you as we enter another challenging budget
cycle and fiscal environment to enact funding levels consistent with FY20, and in some cases
higher. Fish and wildlife conservation programs need funding today to preclude more costly
federal endeavors tomorrow. We will not succeed by balancing the federal budget on the backs
of conservation. A continuation of this policy will prove only to be costlier in the long-term.
Further, we support and endorse appropriations recommendations that are submitted by regional
associations of fish and wildlife agencies, and we respectfully request Congress also refer to
AFWA's testimony on Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) provided on October 17, 2019.
UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (FWS)
Fish and Aquatic Conservation (FAC) - We support no less than FY20 funding levels and
recommend increasing funding for FAC to ensure sufficient capacity and expertise is readily
available across the nation to work in partnership with the states. Additionally, of priority is the
National Fish Hatchery Operations that supports the Aquatic Animal Drug Approval Partnership
(AADAP), Fish Health Centers, Fish Technology Centers, Fish Hatcheries, Fish Passage, the
National Fish Habitat Partnership, Wild Fish Health Survey, and Mass Marking program all of
which meet needs of states, tribes, and the federal government. The need for FDA-approved
drugs for use in aquaculture and fisheries management continues to be a national challenge, and
AADAP provides the "cornerstone" of partnership efforts. AFWA recommends at least
maintaining FY2020 funding levels for these FAC programs including National Fish Hatchery
Operations and functions, the Aquatic Animal Drug Approval Partnership, Pacific Salmon
Treaty, and we request no less than FY20 funds for the mass marking initiative in the Pacific
Northwest and the Great Lakes region, of which $4.5 million is for the Great Lakes region.
AFWA is concerned that the FWS is not fully utilizing its AADAP line item appropriations and
in a timely manner. Current spending is not sufficient to meet the intent of the program or the
needs of state and private partners. Also, failure of equipment or structure at one of the National
Fish Hatchery System (NFHS) facilities could result in the loss of species that provide for
'"'"'w.fishwildlifo.org 1
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 304 here 43677P7.103
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00178 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
179
recreational opportunities, unique genetic strains of imperiled species, and multiple year classes
of species used for restoration efforts, and there are about $180 million in deferred maintenance
needs for the NFHS. We appreciate Congress's previous efforts to address deferred maintenance
needs for the NFHS), but more funds are needed to ensure NFHS operations and prevent
infrastructure failures. We support continuation of the FY20 report language on NFHS and
encourage Congress to incorporate NFHS needs in any infrastructure package considered.
Aquatic Habitat, Assessments, Restoration, and Species Conservation -- We support
continued funding at FY20 levels, including for the National Fish Habitat Action Plan at $7 .2
million to provide funding for coordination and restoration projects to the 20 approved fish
habitat partnerships across the country. Fish Passage needs far outweigh the resources for species
management and replacement of unsafe transportation infrastructure which also serve as an
aquatic connectivity barrier. We support funding Fish Passage at no less than FY20 levels and
strongly support incorporating additional fish passage funding into federal infrastructure plans.
Further, we support funding at no less than FY20 levels for conservation and restoration
activities in the Delaware River Basin, Klamath Basin, Chesapeake Bay, and Great Lakes.
Aquatic Invasive Species -- We request Congress restore funding for implementation of state
Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) management plans to $4.4 million, without compromising
other ANS programs. We support continuation of $25 million to implement the national Asian
carp management and control plan in the Mississippi River and tributaries as well as continuation
of the provisions in the FY20 report language. The spread and associated costs of controlling
AIS are exploding, and we recommend increased attention on a comprehensive approach across
all relevant federal agencies and assistance to the states to prevent and control the spread of AIS.
National Wildlife Refuge System -We support funding NWRS Operations and Maintenance
at no less than $510 million. We continue to support the use of trapping on refuges as a
management tool to provide much needed research on species of interest as well as to protect
federally endangered and threatened species, imperiled species, and their habitats.
Habitat Conservation - AFWA recommends maintaining funding at FY20 levels, including for
the Partners in Fish and Wildlife Program for voluntary conservation of wildlife migration
corridors and habitats to support implementation of Secretarial Order (SO) 3362.
State and Tribal Wildlife Grants -The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program is the only
federal program available to states to leverage non-federal funds to conserve over 12,000 state
Species of Greatest Conservation Need identified in State Wildlife Action Plans to prevent them
from becoming threatened or endangered. This investment in voluntary, proactive, and state-led
conservation is needed now to address the list of declining species and to preclude an increase in
federal expenditures in the future under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). AFWA recommends
$90 million for the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program in FY2 l, same as the FY2010
enacted level. To truly address these growing challenges, we ask Congress to enact the
Recovering America's Wildlife Act (H.R. 3742), which would provide states and their
conservation partners with the dependable resources to do proactive, non-regulatory fish and
wildlife conservation -- a modem enhancement in how we finance the full array of diverse fish
and wildlife conservation for current and future generations.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 305 here 43677P7.104
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00179 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
180
Partnership Grants- For FY21, AfWA recommends no less than $46 million for the North
American Wetlands Conservation Fund; $5 million for the Neotropical Migratory Bird
Conservation Fund; and $15 million for the Multinational Species Conservation Fund.
Ecological Services (ES) & Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (CESCF) -
The FWS needs additional resources in ES to address a growing workload and to increase FWS
recovery efforts for federally listed species. Insufficient funds to meet growing demands has
resulted in ongoing policy riders stemming from ESA tensions, some of which can be alleviated
with increased funding. We support no less than FY20 funding for ES, the Recovery Challenge
matching grants, and recommend further deployment across the country of the Southeast's
cooperative conservation model for implementing the ESA in partnership with the states. We
also recommend Congress provide robust funding for the CESCF, which includes a larger
proportion of funding that is not tied to the Land and Water Conservation Fund and much needed
flexibility for restoration activities.
Science Support (SS} - SS provides critical science coordination functions such as Species
Status Assessments, regional science initiatives to address threats to wildlife and habitats across
broad landscapes, integrated scientific efforts for species like wolverine, and support for work on
White-nose Syndrome, wildlife migration corridors, and more. We recommend increasing
funding for SS activities by at least $8 million to provide much needed resources for the FWS to
help address CWD and other emerging fish and wildlife diseases in cooperation with the states,
integrated science efforts for pollinators and monarch butterflies, and other shared species and
science priorities with the states.
Cooperative Landscape Conservation (CLC) - We support at least maintaining FY20 funding
levels for CLC to facilitate implementation of SO3362, fund important regional state-federal
partnerships, and continue cooperative conservation efforts supported by the states such as
monarch butterflies and the Southeast Conservation Adaptation Strategy.
Migratory Bird Conservation Program <MBCP) - The FWS and states share management
jurisdiction for migratory birds, and migratory bird conservation represents one of the most
successful state-federal cooperative partnerships for over 80 years, but the program suffers from
chronic under-funding of traditional functions and activities, making it particularly vulnerable to
unanticipated problems and single points of failure. The FWS has gone to great lengths to protect
the core functions, but more funding is needed to retain sufficient staff, fill key vacancies to
work in cooperation with the states on traditional co-management issues, and support science to
inform FWS decision-making. AFWA supports robust fuhding for the MBCP at FY2010 levels
with a total budget of$55 million, including full funding of the Migratory Bird Joint Ventures at
$19.9 million, allowing us to accomplish shared state and federal responsibilities and priorities.
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) - AfWA recommends $450 million for the
LWCF in FY21, and we support robust funding for the state-side programs of the LWCF because
numerous state agencies depend on the L WCF to support their state parks system. Many rural
communities rely on the state-side programs for playgrounds, sports courts, and other amenities.
We recommend no less than FY20 funding levels for the Forest Legacy Program in FY21.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 306 here 43677P7.105
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00180 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
181
UNITED STATES GEOLOGIAL SURVEY (USGS)
Ecosystems - Thank you for providing much-needed funding for the Cooperative Fish and
Wildlife Research Unit Program (CRU) in FY20. We strongly support this increase of $5.6
million for the CRU and respectfully request no less than this amount for FY2 l. The CRU
provides critically important scientific and technical support for state and federal fish and
wildlife managers through collaborative scientific projects that address the nation's most critical
fish and wildlife management needs and inform policy decisions. An additional $1 million would
enable USGS to fill all of the staff vacancies nationwide and establish new research units in IN,
KY, MI, and NV. AFWA supports the National Cooperators Coalition's testimony on CRUs.
Further, we support additional funding for the Science Centers and the National Wildlife Health
Center, which provide critical scientific support and coordination on CWD and financial support
to the Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study at the University of Georgia, which
provides essential diagnostic and veterinary support services to at least 42 states. We support no
less than FY20 funding levels for the Fisheries Program and the other programs and BLis within
the USGS such as the Integrated Taxonomic Information System, Biodiversity Information
Serving Our Nation, and the USGS database of Species of Greatest Conservation Need.
It is imperative that Congress provide additional resources to Ecosystems and other federal
agencies to coordinate with the states on research, management, surveillance, monitoring,
testing, disposal, best management practices, and other challenges related to CWD.
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGMENT (BLM)--AFWA supports additional resources to BLM
to manage wild horses and burros to reduce herd impacts on native fish and wildlife. We also
support increased funding for ongoing sage-grouse, sagebrush, wildfire, wildlife migration
corridors, threatened and endangered species conservation, and invasive species activities.
AFWA supports funding BLM BLis at no less than FY20 levels with a $5 million increase for
Rangeland Improvement and Bighorn sheep disease prevention and an additional $10 million for
Wildlife Habitat Management (1170) to combat invasive species. We also recommend Congress
reinitiate BLM's Cost-Share Challenge Grant Program under Wildlife Habitat Management at
$10 million to leverage current momentum and partnerships to accomplish more wildlife habitat
goals and mission objectives. Further, we do not support the redirection of funds from fish,
wildlife, and habitat accounts to pay for the management of wild horses and burros.
UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE (USFS)-Thank you for upholding commitments to
fund wildlife suppression costs and end wildfire-borrowing and for increasing funding to the
USFS in FY20. We look forward to working with you to shape future BLis that provide for
increased efficiencies while maintaining transparency and accountability for important BLis such
as Wildlife and Fisheries Management. We support funding the USFS BLis at no less than FY20
levels. However, the USFS Research and Development Program has vast scientific expertise
from which the states and other federal agencies greatly benefit, such as with wildlife disease
issues, for which we respectfully request an additional $3 million.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)-- Finally, we recommend
maintaining FY20 funding for all Geographic Programs, and we recommend that the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative funding be eligible for use on tributaries of the Great Lakes Region which
serve as a major conduit of invasive species introductions. AFWA recommends maintaining
FY20 funding levels for the National Estuaries Program and the Beach/Fish Safety Program.
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 307 here 43677P7.106
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00181 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
182
Mr. SCHAEFFER. I didn’t know if that buzz was for me or not, so.
[Laughter.]
Voice. The building is on fire.
Mr. SCHAEFFER. Okay.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. I have messages on my phone. There are 14
minutes left. Only four people have voted, so I think we have got
time for a quick round of questions. Mr. Joyce, do you want to kick
us off?
Mr. JOYCE. I don’t have any questions. I appreciate all of you
being here today and your input. I look forward to working with
you in the near future. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Kilmer.
Mr. KILMER. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you all for
your testimony. Mr. Malcom, I wanted to thank you in your written
testimony for calling out the important role played by the regional
climate centers in supporting efforts to combat climate change and
to adapt to the impacts of climate change. I am really grateful to
our chair and to this committee for protecting and growing funding
for the eight regional climate centers, including the Northwest Cli-
mate Center at the University of Washington.
I was hoping just in the brief time we have, just could you elabo-
rate a little bit on how the science that is produced at these centers
informs our efforts to respond to the threat of climate change?
Mr. MALCOM. Sorry. Give me just 1 second.
Mr. KILMER. That is all right.
Mr. MALCOM. The science is critical to being able to make in-
formed decisions. We are at a day and an age where we understand
how to do this. As some people have noted, the science is so ad-
vanced and our understanding is so advanced. We know how we
can make use of it and bring that information to the lawmakers to
be able to make decisions. I wish I had a very specific example, for
example, from the Northwest Climate Center that I could give to
you, but I don’t. There is this very tight, or there should be this
very tight relationship between science and policy that society fol-
lows, and climate centers are essential for carrying that out and
helping folks in different regions across the country understand the
consequences.
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. I appreciate the fact that when I
read through your testimony, you see how everything is inter-
connected, all three of you did. And the support and reasons why
supporting something at Fish and Wildlife is important to some-
thing, you know, with migratory birds, which whatever, because
quite often I know somebody can say, oh, I will cut this. And they
don’t realize what the impact it is going to be achieving the goal
that they really want to achieve. So I just wanted to compliment
your testimony because you are kind of doing the broad cloth on
how all the pieces fit together to make the quilt happen. So thank
you for kind of putting that together for us for the committee to
take a look at that.
And with that, we will be in recess until the call of the chair
after votes. Thank you.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00182 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
183
Mr. KILMER [presiding]. All right. I think we are up for our next
set of witnesses. Mr. Durkin, you have 5 minutes.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
THE FRIENDS OF RACHEL CARSON NATIONAL
WILDLIFE REFUGE
WITNESS
BILL DURKIN, PRESIDENT, THE FRIENDS OF RACHEL CARSON NA-
TIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
Mr. DURKIN. Good afternoon, Ms. Chairman, and goodbye.
[Laughter.]
And honorable members of the subcommittee. I am Bill Durkin,
president of the friends of Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge
in Maine. Thank you for accepting my request to testify today be-
fore the subcommittee. It is a true honor and privilege to represent
my friend’s group and to speak out for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, the National Wildlife Refuge System, our refuge, Rachel
Carson National Wildlife Refuge, and for full dedicated funding of
the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
The Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge is named in honor
of one of the Nation’s foremost and forward-thinking biologists.
After arriving in Maine in 1946 as an aquatic biologist for the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Rachel Carson became entranced with
Maine’s coastal habitats, leading her to write the international
bestseller, The Sea Around Us. This landmark study, in combina-
tion with other writings, The Edge of the Sea, and Silent Spring,
led Rachel Carson to become an advocate on behalf of this Nation’s
vast coastal habitats and wildlife that depends on it. Her legacy
lives on today at the refuge bears her name, and is dedicated to
the permanent protection of the salt marshes and estuaries of
southern Maine Coast.
The refuge was established in 1966 to preserve migratory bird
habitat, waterfowl migration along southern Maine’s Coastal estu-
aries. There are 11 refuge divisions and 12 municipalities pro-
tecting approximately 5,600 acres within an 14,800-acre acquisition
zone. I have been on the board of the Friends group since 1989.
The organization was founded in 1987. We are small group with a
history of communicating with our Maine congressional members,
who we are missing our representative right now, Chellie, for dec-
ades. In the past, we sent letters via U.S. mail, then anthrax forced
us to fax our letters. Then the electronic age made things very sim-
ple: email and PDFs.
The Friends play an important role in supporting the Rachel
Carson National Wildlife Refuge mission. We work to educate
Maine’s U.S. congressional and State legislation about the rel-
evance of the refuge wildlife habitat, its coastal resilience, tourism
benefits, and the use for future generations. We support refuge
staff by volunteering with trail maintenance, greenhouse activities,
administrative work, and visitors services. We engage the towns
and communities that surround the refuge through mailings, meet-
ings events, and a future conservation theme book group. We
fundraise and apply for grants so that we can assist with hiring
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00183 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
184
refuge interns, purchase equipment, and support research projects.
We support acquisition funding and refuse operation and engage in
environmental education and outreach programs.
National wildlife refuges protect habitat for a host of wildlife spe-
cies, while also offering storm surge protection, improving water
quality, supporting nurseries for commercially important fish and
shellfish, and providing recreation opportunities for local refugee
communities. Each one of you has a national wildlife refuge in your
home State and maybe even one close to your home.
I request, number one, an overall Fiscal Year 2021 funding level
of $586 million for the operations and maintenance budget of the
National Wildlife Refuge System managed by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. All the refugees are in dire need of staffing and
upkeep. Without increased funding for refuges, wildlife conserva-
tion and public recreation opportunities will be jeopardized. Every
dollar appropriated for the refuge system returns an average of
4.87 to local economies.
Number two, I request to appropriate $283 million for the wild-
life and habitat management projects within the O&M budget.
These monies will support restoration of salt marshes removal, con-
trolling invasive species, recovering species, continued fire manage-
ment programs, restoring cultivated land to its original habitat, im-
plementing climate change strategies of adaptation mitigation, and
engagement.
Number three, I request $41 million for refuge land acquisition
projects. In addition, the Land and Water Conservation Fund needs
to be permanently funded at the $900 amount annually. I have
been advocating for this for over 2 decades of Congress, and we fi-
nally have LWCF permanently authorized, but now to have the
amount permanently funded at $900. As you know, there is H.R.
3195, the Land And Water Conservation Fund for Permanent
Funding Act. It is pending, and we all need your continued sup-
port.
This year marks the 50th anniversary of Earth Day, and we
thank Rachel Carson for inspiring us all. I leave you with a quote
from Rachel’s book, A Sense of Wonder. ‘‘A child’s world is fresh,
and new, and beautiful, full of wonder and excitement.’’ Each of the
national wildlife refuges have a unique story and history behind
their name, but they basically all serve one purpose: protect wild-
life habitat. With that wonder and excitement, I thank you again
for the opportunity to present my testimony and support our na-
tional wildlife refuges.
[The statement of Mr. Durkin follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00184 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
185
Written Testimony of William G Durkin, President
Friends of Rachel Carson NWR
In Support of Funding for Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge, Maine
Land and Water Conservation Fund, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
House Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
The Honorable Betty McCollum, Chair
The Honorable David Joyce, Ranking Member
January 29, 2020
Ms. Chairman and Honorable Members of the Subcommittee, I am Bill Durkin, President
of The Friends of Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge in Biddeford, Maine. I have
been a member of the Friends of Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge since 1989 ,the
group was founded in 1987; we are a small group supporting the refuge in Southern
Maine. I have given numerous written statements over the years and we really appreciate
your support in the past. This year, our refuge is not requesting any appropriations
directly for Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge; this is a request for general FY2 l
general funding of the National Wildlife Refuge System of $586M. Within that budget ,
this year we ask to appropriate $283M for Wildlife and Habitat Management Projects.
There was great news last year with the reauthorization of the Land , Water and
Conservation Fund, but we need to have L WCF permanent and dedicated at $900M
annually. With that in mind, I request $41 M for Land Acquisition Projects. I thank you
all for your consideration.
The Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge is named in honor of one of the nation's
foremost and forward-thinking biologists. After arriving in Maine in l 946 as an aquatic
biologist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Rachel Carson became entranced with
Maine's coastal habitat, leading her to write the international best-seller The Sea Around
Us. This landmark study, in combination with her other writings, The &Jge ofthe
Sea and Silent Spring, led Rachel Carson to become an advocate on behalf of this
nation's vast coastal habitat and the wildlife that depends on it. Her legacy lives on today
at the refuge that bears her name and is dedicated to the permanent protection of the salt
marshes and estuaries of the southern Maine coast. The refuge was established in 1966 to
preserve migratory bird habitat and waterfowl migration along southern Maine's coastal
estuaries. There are 11 refuge divisions in 12 municipalities protecting approximately
5,690 acres within a 14,800 acre acquisition zone.
Consisting of meandering tidal creeks, coastal upland, sandy dunes, salt ponds, marsh,
and productive wetlands, the Rachel Carson NWR provides critical nesting and feeding
habitat for the threatened piping plover and a variety of migratory waterfowl, and serves
as a nursery for many shellfish and finfish. Located along the Atlantic flyway, the refuge
serves as an important stopover point for migratory birds. Previous years' appropriations
have allowed the USFWS to conserve several properties within the refuge. In 2019, the
refuge had approximately 280,000 visitors utilizing the established foot trails and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 316 here 43677P7.107
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00185 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
186
wildlife observation overlooks. Many have also kayaked and canoe up the tidal rivers and
streams along the refuge's coastline. The biodiversity of the refuge is due to it's location
where the sandy mid-Atlantic coast meets the rocky Maine coast and where the northern
and southern forest types converge. The majority of the state's population resides in
southern Maine within close proximity to refuge lands. The refuge has a very high
number of neighbors (abutters) which makes the available land for acquisition very high
in value and demand.
There is great news at Rachel Carson NWR with the acquisition of a 15 acre parcel with
buildings where we plan to create a refuge administration housing , a brand new visitor
center and possibly a Friends office space. This center will showcase the work of the
National Wildlife Refuges and the legacy of Rachel Carson. Support is needed to fully
develop the potential of this 15 acre site for conducting environmental education , nature
interpretation and public outreach events. The refuge welcomes close to 300,000 visitors
each year - with the opening of this new visitor contact facility scheduled for 2022, the
number of visitors to the refuge could easily double.
The Friends play an important role in supporting the Rachel Carson National Wildlife
Refuge mission. We work to educate Maine's U.S. Congressional and State legislature
about the importance of Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge to wildlife habitat,
coastal resilience, tourism, and future generations. We support Refuge staff by
volunteering with trail maintenance, greenhouse activities, administrative work, and
visitor services. We engage the towns and communities that surround the Refuge through
mailings, meetings, events, and a future conservation-themed book group. We fundraise
and apply for grants so that we can assist with hiring Refuge interns, purchase equipment,
or support research projects. We support acquisition funding and refuge operations and
engage in environmental education and outreach programs.
Salt Marsh Restoration at Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge is a critical and
ongoing project. Our East Coast salt marshes provide abundant services to our coastal
communities - protection from floods and storm surges, economic benefits from tourism
to local businesses, and support of commercial and recreational fisheries through natural
nurseries and production ofbaitfish. These salt marshes also provide habitat for both
abundant and rare wildlife species.
Unfortunately, as many of you know, our coastal salt marshes are threatened by increased
storm severity and sea level rise. We now also understand that past human alterations on
these marshes are making them more susceptible to degradation and collapse.
At Rachel Carson NWR, we have the privilege of protecting and managing over 3,800
acres of coastal marsh. But we're leveraging lessons learned through our research and
demonstration program to go beyond our boundaries. By spearheading collaborative
approaches with state and local officials, federal agencies, NGOs, universities and small
businesses, we are developing and implementing innovative salt marsh restoration
techniques. We share results throughout New England and the mid-Atlantic. The
innovations piloted here are becoming the backbone to new restoration efforts across the
region.
Bill Durkin 2
Friends of Rachel Carson NWR
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 317 here 43677P7.108
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00186 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
187
Time is tight though. Because of tide cycles, the next ten years are critical to increase the
resiliency of our coastal marshes and for saving the at-risk-species that rely on them.
We're working hard to do this as efficiently and as effectively as possible. But we need
continued support for the programs and funding opportunities that support this work
(FWS Refuges, NFWF, Coastal Wetland Resilience Fund, North America Wetland
Conservation Act (NAWCA), Land and Water Conservation Fund, North East Climate
Adaptation Science Center, NOAA NMFS Restoration Center, USGS ).
**** 1. We request an overall FY21 funding level of $586.M for the Operations and
Maintenance budget of the National Wildlife Refuge System, managed by the US Fish
and Wildlife Service. All of the refuges are in dire need of staffing and upkeep .
In our North Atlantic-Appalachian Region Refuge Division (Region 1), we have lost 70
Refuge positions in the last 10 years. Overall there is 5.6M visitors to the 75 Refuges in
Region 1, encompassing Maine to Virginia and west to Kentucky. Refuges provide
unparalleled opportunities to hunt, fish, watch wildlife and educate children about the
environment. Without increased funding for refuges, wildlife conservation and public
recreation opportunities will be jeopardized. This funding will help our Refuge System
and the communities near refuges. Every dollar appropriated to the Refuge System
returns an average of$4.87 to local economies. Wildlife refuges generate approximately
35,000 jobs and $2.5 billion in economic output each year. National Wildlife Refuges
provide the American public (and foreign visitors) with $33 billon dollars worth of clean
water and other environmental benefits (clean air and a cool climate as examples) ..
**** 2. We request to appropriate $283M for Wildlife and Habitat Management Projects
within the O & M budget. These monies will support restorations of salt marshes;
removal and controlling invasive species; recovering rare species; continue fire
management programs, restoring cultivated land to it's original habitat ; and much more
with the single goal of conserving and restoring the nation's fish and wildlife habitat.
**** 3. We request $41M for Land Acquisition Projects for the below Refuges:
$10 million for Everglades Headwaters NWR and Conservation Area (FL);
$6 million for Silvio 0. Conte NFWR (CT, NH, VT, MA);
$3 million for Cache River NWR (AR);
$2 million for Bear River Watershed Conservation Area (WY, ID, UT);
$2 million for Blackwater NWR (MD);
$2 millidn for Clarks River NWR (KY);
Bill Durkin 3
Friends of Rachel Carson NWR
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 318 here 43677P7.109
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00187 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
188
$8 million for Hakalau Forest NWR (HI); and
$8 million for the Dakota Grasslands Conservation Area (ND, SD)
In addition, The Land and Water Conservation Fund needs to be permanently funded at
the $900M amount annually. I have been advocating for this for over 2 decades to
Congress and we finally have LWCF permanently authorize but now need to have the
amount permanent at $900M. As you all are aware, HR 3195, the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Permanent Funding Act is pending and we need your continued
support with great conservation tool. It is hard to believe when Congress created LWCF
in 1964 that here in 2020 we would still be at protecting the funds that protect our lands
in all 50 states. Please make it Permanent.
"A child's world is fresh and new and beautiful, full of wonder and excitement." This
quote is from Rachel Carson's A Sense of Wonder (1965), again, whose name Rachel
Carson National Wildlife Refuge bears in southern coastal Maine. Each of our National
refuges has a unique story and history behind the name but they basically all serve one
purpose - Protect Wildlife Habitat. With that "wonder and excitement", I Thank you
again for the opportunity to present this testimony in support of Our National Wildlife
Refuges.
Bill Durkin 4
Friends of Rachel Carson NWR
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 319 here 43677P7.110
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00188 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
189
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. You stuck the landing. Mr. Hall.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
FRIENDS OF NISQUALLY NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
COMPLEX
WITNESS
JUSTIN HALL, BOARD PRESIDENT, FRIENDS OF NISQUALLY NA-
TIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE COMPLEX
Mr. HALL. Good afternoon, Representative Kilmer, Ranking
Member Joyce. It is on. The light is on. I just need to be louder.
I can do that. My name is Justin Hall. I am the current president
of the Friends of the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex,
and I appreciate the invitation to testify today on behalf of the
Friends.
So our Friends group was formed in 1999 to promote the con-
servation of the natural and cultural resources of the Refuge Com-
plex and engage in educational, charitable, scientific, and civic ac-
tivities that will increase public awareness and assist management
in accomplishing refuge goals. We provide just under $60,000 a
year to support programs at the refuge, with our primary focus
being the environmental education program.
The Nisqually Complex is blessed with three very unique places.
Billy Frank, Jr. Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge was established
in 1974. The creation was led by a grassroots citizens movement
to aid in the protection and enhancement of the Nisqually River
delta. In 2009, the refuge accomplished the largest estuary restora-
tion on the West Coast when 762 acres of deck habitat was con-
verted back to salt marsh and tidal estuary essential rearing
grounds for the threatened Puget Sound Chinook salmon. Billy
Frank Jr. Nisqually is an urban refuge located between the cities
of Olympia and Tacoma, just 1-hour-and-a-half from Seattle and 2
hours from Portland. The refuge receives over 220,000 visitors a
year, and over 10,000 students and teachers participate in the en-
vironmental education program.
The Black River Unit of Billy Frank, Jr. Nisqually protects a
unique freshwater flood plain that is also critical habitat for the
federally-threatened Oregon spotted frog. The Black River unit is
not open to the public at this time because of lack of funds to de-
velop and staff it for visitors. Grays Harbor National Wildlife Ref-
uge was established in 1988. The highlight of Grays Harbor is the
100,000 shorebirds that stop over during the spring migration. The
refuge is open to the public where visitors can view large flocks and
the 1-mile boardwalk extending into the salt marsh. Over 12,000
people visit annually, mostly in the spring. A partnership between
Grays Harbor National Wildlife Refuge, Grays Harbor Audubon So-
ciety, and the City of Hoquiam puts on the Grays Harbor Shorebird
and Nature Festival during the peak spring migration the last
weekend of April or the first weekend of May. The 3-day Festival
brings in more than 1,400 visitors.
The Grays Harbor Hoquiam Aberdeen area is economically de-
pressed, and one of the purposes of the annual festival is to in-
crease ecotourism and help the local communities. However, an an-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00189 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
190
nual festival only provides short-term benefits. Grays Harbor has
the potential to be a mainstay in the community and a destination
for visitors, if an interpretive center, prioritized by Congress, but
not funded, was supported for construction with an annual budget
for staffing, operations, and maintenance.
The biggest challenge at the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge
Complex is adequate funding for staff. Currently, seven permanent
employees manage over 11,000 acres of land with a Black River
unit 40 minutes from main office, and Grays Harbor Refuge 1-hour-
and-a-half away. The complex has one maintenance worker to
maintain the infrastructure and assist with habitat management,
yet a large amount of the time is spent commuting between these
worksites. I do believe the complex needs 15 staff members to
achieve at the full purpose of the refuges, not only to benefit fish
and wildlife, but also provide quality, safe outdoor opportunities for
the public. This is a common limitation for many other refuges.
Law enforcement is also a significant issue for our complex. Cur-
rently, we have one-quarter of a refuge law enforcement officer for
all three of our locations. The officer’s house is 2 hours away in
Sequim at the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge
Complex. Billy Frank, Jr. Nisqually is located directly off of Inter-
state 5, the major Corridor between Seattle and Portland. This
close proximity and easy exit and entrance onto the highway may
be the reason why there is higher crime at Billy Frank, Jr.
Nisqually, particularly car prowls. Trespassing in a closed area set
aside for wildlife and engaging in non-wildlife dependent activities
are also big problems despite miles of trails throughout the refuge.
For example, portrait photographers disturbing birds so their sub-
jects can sit in the grasslands, dog walking in the refuge, and fish-
ing and hunting in closed areas. A full-time law enforcement pres-
ence on the refuges is needed to curb abuses and to provide edu-
cation to those unaware of the rules and regulations, and the rea-
sons why they are in place. Additionally, a security surveillance
system for the parking lot would go a long way towards reducing
the problem with car prowls.
The education program at the Billy Frank, Jr. Nisqually is in-
credible and is a direction for the future focus of this urban refuge.
The refuge is a popular regional destination, especially on clear Pa-
cific Northwest days, and regularly exceed its visitation capacity
due current resource limitations. This is also true for the education
program which serves a remarkable 10,000 students each year, but
is facing growing demand from school districts and staff and teach-
ers. With additional staff, the program can be expanded to provide
environmental education outreach within the communities and
then follow-up visit to the refuge. We want to help create the next
generation of people who actively take care of our Nation’s lands.
As it is now, our Friends group and volunteers are picking up the
slack and smoothing out the inconsistencies in the funding to the
best of our ability. Whoever volunteers and outside staff are not a
sustainable model for our refuge system. We support the request
that the subcommittee allocate $586 million in funding for the Ref-
uge System Operations And Maintenance Fund for Fiscal Year
2021. This increase would greatly impact our refuge. The Nisqually
National Wildlife Refuge Complex would be better able to hire the
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00190 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
191
staff needed to have an adequate level of law enforcement, increase
our urban refuge outreach, control invasive species to benefit a di-
versity of fish and wildlife, restore critical habitat for Oregon spot-
ted frog, construct and operate the promised interpretive center at
Grays Harbor National Wildlife Refuge, provide additional wildlife-
dependent opportunities at Grays Harbor National Wildlife Refuge
in the back of our unit, and further build out our environment edu-
cation programs.
Our refuges are the face of public lands for many people in the
South Puget Sound Community as they are for communities across
the country. We need adequate funding to ensure that they stay
protected, accessible, and stewarded for the generations to come.
Thank you for your consideration.
[The statement of Mr. Hall follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00191 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
192
WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
CONCERNING FISCAL YEAR2021 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE
UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
FEBRUARY 6, 2020
SUBMITTED BY illSTIN S. HALL
PRESIDENT, FRIENDS OF NISQUALL Y NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE COMPLEX
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee:
This testimony is being submitted on behalf of the Friends ofNisqually National Wildlife Refuge
Complex in the State of Washington, which was formed in 1999 to support the Billy Frank Jr.
Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge, its associated Black River Unit, and the Grays Harbor National
Wildlife Refuge. We appreciate the opportunity to offer comments on the FY 2021 Interior
Appropriations bill. The Nisqually Complex is blessed with three very unique refuges:
Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge
Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge (Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR) was established
in 1974. Its creation was led by a grass roots citizen movement to aid in the protection and
enhancement of the Nisqually River Delta. It is currently 4,529 acres, though its approved boundary
is 7,415 acres. In 2009 the Refuge accomplished the largest estuary restoration on the West Coast
when 762 acres of diked habitat was converted back to salt marsh and tidal estuary, essential rearing
grounds for threatened Puget Sound Chinook sahnon. The Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR is an urban
refuge. Located between the cities of Olympia and Tacoma and just an hour and a half from Seattle
and two hours from Portland, the Refuge receives over 220,000 visitors a year and over l 0,000
students and teachers participate in the environmental education program.
Black River Unit
The Black River Unit of Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR protects a unique freshwater floodplain that
is also critical habitat for the federally-threatened Oregon Spotted Frog. The Refuge Complex
continues to acquire land within the 3,900 acre approved boundary and currently oversees 2,100
acres. Although the Unit hosts the largest breeding population of Oregon Spotted Frog in western
Washington, management is concentrated in three small areas, as the Complex lacks the resources to
increase monitoring, control invasive species, and expand habitat management along the 7-mile
stretch of river within the boundary. With future expansion and acquisition of private lands within
the approved boundary, and additional resources, the Refuge has the potential to not only enhance
habitat for a diversity of wildlife species but also provide wildlife-dependent opportunities for people
to engage in the outdoors.
Grays Harbor Wildlife Refuge
Grays Harbor National Wildlife Refuge (Grays Harbor NWR) was established by law in 1988 and
the first land was purchased in 1990. The highlight of the Grays Harbor NWR is the one hundred
thousand shorebirds that stopover during the spring migration. The Refuge is open to the public
where visitors can view large flocks from the one-mile boardwalk extending into the salt marsh. Over
12,000 people visit annually, mostly in the spring. A partnership between Grays Harbor NWR, Grays
Harbor Audubon Society, and the City of Hoquiam puts on the Grays Harbor Shorebird and Nature
Festival during the peak spring migration the last weekend of April or first weekend in May. The
three-day festival brings in more than 1,400 visitors. The Grays Harbor, Hoquiam, Aberdeen area is
economically depressed and one of the purposes oftbe annual Festival is to increase ecotourism and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 328 here 43677P7.111
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00192 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
193
help the local communities; however, an annual festival only provides short-term benefits. Grays
Harbor NWR has the potential to be a mainstay in the community and a destination for visitors if an
Interpretive Center, prioritized by Congress but not funded, was supported for construction with an
annual budget for staffing, operations, and maintenance. This would increase the Refuge's capacity
to be a contributing member of the community and provide a venue for long-term partnerships with
natural resource agencies (e.g., National Park Service, Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife),
organizations (Grays Harbor Audubon Society), and Native American Tribes to combine
environmental education and interpretive opportunities for the public.
Friends of Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Friends ofNisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex was formed in 1999 to promote the
conservation of the natural and cultural resources of these sites, and engage in educational,
charitable, scientific, and civic activities that will increase public awareness and assist management
in accomplishing Refuge goals. We provide just under $60,000 a year to support programs at the
Refuge, with our primary focus being the environmental education program.
The story of the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex and that of the entire Nisqually River
watershed is one of partnerships. The original Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge was formed out of
a community desire to see the Nisqually Watershed protected. That same desire led to the creation of
the Nisqually River Council, which is a coordinating council of23 federal, state, local, and tribal
governments along with motivated stakeholders that wm:ks to preserve, protect, and promote the
Nisqually Watershed. The Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex has been a member of the
Council since its founding in 1987.
The 2009 restoration of the Nisqually estuary is shining example of how this partnership has
benefited its members and the Nisqually Watershed as a whole. Plans for the restoration were
presented to the Nisqually River Council, the Nisqually Indian Tribe piloted the restoration
techniques on lands it had acquired in the estuary, and Nisqually River Council member agencies
were tapped to help with the funding of the project. The restoration project was supported by U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service funds and Ducks Unlimited contributions, as well as more than $5 million
in grants from donors including: Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration funds from all five South
Puget Sound watersheds; Salmon Recovery Funding Board funds from the Nisqually River Council;
Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program funds administered by Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife; National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. The Refuge Manager who oversaw the restoration, Jean Takekawa, said that the
project would not have_ been possible without the partnerships and community support formed
through the Nisqually River Council.
Perhaps unique in the National Refuge System is the partnership and coordination between the
Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex and the Nisqually Indian Tribe. The 1854 Treaty of
Medicine Creek was signed within the present day boundaries of the Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR.
In 2016, the Refuge was renamed to honor Nisqually fishing and tribal rights activist and visionary
leader Billy Frank Jr. Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR manages Tribal Lands located within the
estuary under a Cooperative Agreement in the same manner as they manage Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually
NWR lands. Whereas the Refuge monitors habitat and wildlife species, the Nisqually Indian Tribe
provides an essential ecological component by monitoring federally-threatened Chinook salmon and
steelhead fisheries within Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR. This collaborative effort within the
Nisqually River Delta is the ideal partnership for protecting one of the largest restored estuaries
remaining in Washington. ·
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 329 here 43677P7.112
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00193 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
194
Challenges at the Complex
The biggest challenge at the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex is adequate funding for
staff. Currently, 7 permanent employees manage over 11,000 acres oflands witb Black River Unit 40
minutes from tbe main office and Grays Harbor Refuge an hour and a half away. The Complex has
one maintenance worker to maintain the infrastructure and assist witb habitat management, yet a
large amount of time is spent commuting between work sites. Ideally, tbe Complex needs twice the
staff(lS) to achieve tbe full purposes oftbe Refuges, not only to benefit fish and wildlife, but also to
provide quality, safe outdoor opportunities for the public. This is a common limitation for many other
refuges.
Due to the lack of sufficient staffing, potential Oregon Spotted Frog habitat at the Black River Unit is
being overtaken by invasive species. In fact, invasive species are a problem at all tbree units. Law
enforcement is another significant issue at the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex.
Currently we have ¼ of a Refuge Law Enforcement Officer. The Officer is housed 2 hours away in
Sequim at the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually
NWR is located directly off Interstate 5, a major corridor between Seattle and Portland. This close
proximity and easy exit and entrance onto tbe highway may be the reason why tbere is higher crime
at Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR, particularly car prowls. Trespassing into closed areas set aside for
wildlife and engaging in non-wildlife dependent activities are also big problems despite miles of
trails throughout tbe refuges: for example, portrait photographers disturbing birds so their subjects
can sit in tbe grasslands, dogs on- and off-leash on confined boardwalks and in fields and wetlands,
and fishing and hunting in closed areas. A full time law enforcement presence on the refuges is
needed to curb abuses and to provide education to tbose unaware of the rules and regulations and tbe
reason why they are in place. Additionally, a security surveillance system for the parking lots would
go a long way towards reducing tbe problem with car prowls.
The overall level of service to tbe public is dramatically different between Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually
NWR and Grays Harbor NWR. Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR has the infrastructure (office, visitor
center, environmental education center, miles of trails, and maintenance shop) to host an active
visitor services and education program, over 100 refuge volunteers, interpretive programs, and an
annual watershed festival. Grays Harbor NWR, on the other hand, has a dedicated but small corps of
volunteers and one dedicated event, tbe Grays Harbor Shorebird Festival. Every day, we see what
can be accomplished if the infrastructure and staff are available to serve the public and the benefits to
surrounding communities. Grays Harbor NWR and, in the future, Black River Unit have so much
potential to be as popular a destination for visitors, including school groups if supported by
adequate public resources and appropriate staffing.
The education program at the Billy Frank Jr. Nisqual!y NWR is incredible and is the direction for the
future focus of this urban refuge. The Refuge is a popular regional destination, especially on clear (or
non-rainy) Pacific Northwest days, and regularly exceeds its visitation capacity due to current
resource limitations. This is also true for the education program, which serves a remarkable l 0,000
students each year, but continues to face growing demand from school districts and teachers. With
additional staff, the program can be expanded to provide environmental education outreach within
the communities and follow-up visits to the Refuge.
Currently, the environmental education staff is comprised of an Education Program Manager and two
AmeriCorps members. These positions are provided through a contract with a partner non-profit and
funded through a combination of station funds, Friends of Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge
Complex funds, and competitive grants. The Refuge Complex would like to move the program fully
in house, but the permanent staff position is not on the organizational chart and current annual
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 330 here 43677P7.113
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00194 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
195
budgets cannot accommodate the full position. Approval for adding the environmental education
staff to the Complex's organizational chart will provide the capacity to develop a more sustainable
outreach program and implement urban outreach goals. This in tum, allows Friends' funds to support
other refuge needs (e.g., visitor services, volunteers, maintenance of visitor facilities, etc.).
Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR is a priority urban refuge and is well poised to help fulfill the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Director's priorities: the Urban Wildlife Conservation Program, Engaging
in the Outdoors, and Youth Education. In 2016, the Complex submitted an Urban Refuge proposal in
hopes ofreceiving the additional base funding ($1,000,000) _to implement the new program. We were
not selected for the Urban Refuge funding; however, the proposal still serves as a guidance and plan
for future opportunities to reach out into urban communities such as the Department of Defense at
Joint Base Lewis McChord, the Nisqually Indian Tribe, our neighboring communities of Olympia
and Tacoma and our nearby major metropolitan areas of Seattle and Portland. Our location right off
Interstate 5 makes us an ideal destination to engage folks with the Refuge System and a great
jumping off point for education staff to head out into the community. We want to help create the next
generation of people who will actively take care of our nation's lands.
As it is now, our Friends group and volunteers are picking up the slack and smoothing out the
inconsistencies in the funding to the best of our ability. However, volunteers and outside staff are not
a sustainable model for our Refuge System.
National Funding and the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $900 million in Operations and
Maintenance Funding to be considered fully funded. At this level, all refuges would be fully staffed,
with adequate maintenance, biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and interpretation
programs. We ask that you work towards the overall goal of $900 million in annual funding. In
support of that goal we request that this subcommittee allocate $586 million in funding for the
Refuge System Operations and Maintenance fund for FY 2021.
This request of$586 million, an increase of$84 million over FY 2020 appropriations, would greatly
impact our refuge. The Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex would be better able to hire the
staff needed to:
o Have an adequate level of law enforcement
o Increase our Urban Refuge outreach
o Control invasive species to benefit a diversity of fish and wildlife
o Restore critical habitat for Oregon Spotted Frog
o Construct and operate the promised Interpretive Center at Grays Harbor NWR
o Provide additional wildlife-dependent opportunities at Grays Harbor NWR and Black
River Unit
o Further build out our environmental education programs
Our Refuges are the face of public lands for many people in the South Puget Sound community, as
they are for communities across the country. We need full funding to ensure that they stay protected,
accessible, and stewarded for the generations to come.
Thank you for your consideration.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 331 here 43677P7.114
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00195 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
196
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. Is it Brouwer?
Ms. BROUWER. Brouwer, yes.
Mr. KILMER. All right. Ms. Brouwer.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
CAROLINE BROUWER, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS,
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION
Ms. BROUWER. Good afternoon. My name is Carolyn Brouwer,
and I am the vice president of government affairs for the National
Wildlife Refuge Association. I very much appreciate the invitation
to testify today on behalf of the National Wildlife Refuge Associa-
tion and our members and supporters, particularly the friends
groups who do such amazing work on the ground. I am joined
today by Justin and Bill, and we are thrilled to have you into town.
The Refuge Association was started 45 years ago by retired ref-
uge staff who wanted to start a group to advocate on behalf of the
National Wildlife Refuge System. Today, the Refuge System con-
sists of 568 refuge units across 850 million acres, which is roughly
the size of India. Refuges are in all 50 states and in five marine
national monuments in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
Today, I want to talk with you today about what the Refuge Sys-
tem has been able to do with the recent increases. There was an
increase of $14 million in the budget this past year in 2020. With
the $2.9 million increase included in the budget for law enforce-
ment, the Refuge System has hired 43 new Federal wildlife officers.
Last year when I testified, I stated that 13 States have zero or one
officer. With these recent hires, this is no longer the case, and we
are anticipating law enforcement staffing to increase, especially in
the States that have been particularly neglected recently.
Another place that will receive more officers is border refuges.
For several years, the Fish and Wildlife Service has moved nearly
all of their officers on a rotating schedule down to the border for
21-day details. With these new hires, we expect detailees to be dis-
continued, which will allow these officers to stay at their home ref-
uge. With additional funding in the upcoming appropriations Bill,
the Refuge System is planning on hiring an additional 12 officers,
which will raise levels of staffing and law enforcement to a new re-
cent high. Current law enforcement funding is $41 million, and
goal is $70 million.
Another positive outcome in the Fiscal Year 2020 bill was addi-
tional funding on invasive species. The Fish and Wildlife Service is
facing serious impacts on nearly every wildlife refuge with 2.4 mil-
lion acres infested with invasive plants. I am sure all of you will
recognize names like phragmites, Kudzu, and salt cedar. There are
also 1,749 invasive animal populations, which includes everything
from mice and rats on the Pacific atolls and islands, to feral hogs,
quagga mussels, pythons, and Asian carp. To show the impact of
funding eradication efforts, one great example is nutria in the
Chesapeake Bay. Nutria are a rat species that are roughly 14
pounds on average, which is larger than my cat. There are ex-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00196 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
197
tremely destructive to wetland habitats. For several years, there
has been a substantial amount of money put towards eradicating
nutria in the Chesapeake Bay. There has been a lot of people, I
have a team of dogs, lots of money and focus. This is about the fifth
year with no nutria sightings, so perhaps this next year, nutria will
be considered eradicated in that area.
There has also been a new effort to create invasive species strike
teams. There was $2.5 million for this in the fiscal year 2020 bill,
which is enough for five new teams, bringing the number up to 12.
Their goals are early detection and rapid response. One species
that is a prime target for the strike teams are mice on Midway
atoll. These mice are literally eating the albatross alive as they sit
on their nests, and it is a gruesome sight. And I am told that at
dusk, you can see the ground moving there are so many mice there.
I want to thank you for your support of funding for the Refuge
system and for that overall $4 million dollar increase in the 2020
bill. The system needs another boost of funding this next year.
Funding is now $1 million lower than the height of funding in
2010, and fiscal year 2010 funding of $503 million, after calculating
for inflation, would be $598 million now. This means that the Ref-
uge System has had to absorb $94 million in cuts over the last 10
years. As a result, the system has lost one-seventh of its staff.
Acres needing prescribed burns are left untouched. Half of refuge
units are unstaffed.
Law enforcement funding, even with recent increases, is about 25
percent of full staffing. Many, many refuges have no visitor serv-
ices staff, which doesn’t sound like a big deal until you see the ref-
uges that do have these staffers, and you realize the value they add
to the community in terms of bringing school kids out to refuges
and teaching the community about nature in their own backyard.
Anyone who has visited the Prairie Wetlands Learning Center in
Fergus Falls, Minnesota knows the value of hands-on nature for
kids. This is what visitor services staff does. Just imagine if we
could replicate centers like that all over the country.
Refuges are currently funded at 59 cents an acre. Parks in com-
parison, and I agree we are talking about apples and oranges, but
parks are funded at $30 an acre. Our goal for over a decade now
has been to get refuge funding up to $900 million dollars, which
would still be barely a dollar per acre. We are asking your sub-
committee to include $586 million in the FY 2021 appropriations
bill.
Thank you very much, and I am happy to answer any questions
you may have.
[The statement of Ms. Brouwer follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00197 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
198
WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO THE U.S. HOUSE OF .REPRESENTATIVES
APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
CONCERNING FISCAL YEAR 2021 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE
UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
FEBRUARY 6, 2020
SUBMITTED BY CAROLINE G. BROUWER, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS FOR
THE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Members of the Subcommittee:
I appreciate the invitation to testify at Public Witness Day, and am pleased to submit testimony
on behalf of the National Wildlife Refuge Association. The Refuge Association and its coalition
of representatives from Refuge Friends organizations and concerned citizens thank you for your
support for the National Wildlife Refuge System, particularly for the $14 million funding
increase in FY2020. Thank you for the opportunity to offer comments on the FY202 I Interior
Appropriations bill, most importantly regarding funding for the Uperat1011s and
Maintenance Fund, which we respectfully request you fund at $586
AU ofthe programs included in this testimony add value both to wildlife conservation in all 50
states and to the economic activity in local communities. Trip-related spending by recreational
visits generated $3 .2 billion of economic output in local economies. Wildlife refuges are
economic engines for their communities, but by far, the biggest challenge facing the Refuge
System today is the completely inadequate budgets that fail to cover the cost of maintaining the
incredibly rich and diverse wildlife habitats that make up the Refuge System.
The funding gap that has arisen due to low budget allocations over the last decade has degraded
critical wildlife habitat and imperiled important species. Although the FY2020 appropriations
bill a much-needed $14 million to the budget, funding levels remain below the high of
$503 million in FY20 l 0, with the shortfall becoming more acute every year. We must change
this trajectory.
Overall, inadequate staffing levels of federal wildlife officers and inadequate levels of funding
for invasive species eradication are two areas that are in desperate need of increased funding.
Your FY2020 bill injected an additional $2.9 million for the law enforcement budget - spurring
an additional hire of 43 offieers. Additional funding in FY202 l would add to that hiring and
change the current statistic where fully one-third of states have only one or zero refuge law
enforcement officers. For invasive species, the Service has prioritized the creation of invasive
species strike teams, which are an efficient use of federal dollars, assigning invasive species
experts to regions and specialties, not individual refuges.
The Refuge System is currently responsible for 850 million acres of land and water. Of that total,
750 million acres are included in the 5 Marine National Monuments created by Presidents Bush
and Obama, yet very little additional funding has been provided to these water resources since
their initial creation in 2006.
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM -OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 338 here 43677P7.115
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00198 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
199
Page 2 of 4 - National Wildlife Refuge Association FY202 I Testimony
The Refuge Association chairs the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement (CARE), a 25-
year-old diverse coalition of23 sporting, conservation, and scientific organizations representing
more than 16 million Americans that support increased funding for the Refuge System. CARE
estimates the NWRS needs at least $900 million annually to manage its l 00 million land acres
and 750 million acres of marine national monuments. Yet the Refuge System is currently funded
at slightly more than half that amount - $502.4 million or 59¢ per acre per year - even with the
recent increase in funding. By comparison, the National Park Service is funded at $30 per acre
per year.
The Refuge System cannot fulfill its obligation to the American public, our wildlife, and 59
million annual visitors (in FY2019) without increases in maintenance and operation funds.
Even with the recent gains in the current fiscal year, overall funding for the Refuge System has
declined substantially over the last ten years. Funding in FY2010 was $503 million - $598
million in today's dollars with inflation and salary increases. This difference of$95 million has
forced the Service to cut back on programs and create efficiencies whenever possible -
efficiencies that are sometimes harmful or even dangerous. For example, many refuges have
been placed into complexes, where staff travel sometimes large distances to juggle duties on
multiple refuges. One year ago, one third of states had zero or one refuge law enforcement
officers for the entire state, but increased funding and new hiring is helping to alleviate this
shortfall. Several states have no visitor services or environmental education staff.
Even with these financial challenges, the Service has risen to the occasion and taken care of the
lands and waters entrusted to it. Staff work overtime and on weekends. Law enforcement staff
are pulled off their duty station to cover shifts on the southern border. Budget cuts have led to the
loss of nearly 500 positions since FYl l. Because most refuge lands and waters are highly
managed to provide optimal habitat conditions, this deterioration in staffing has had a dramatic
impact resulting in significant declines in habitat protection and management, hunting, fishing,
volunteerism and scientific research.
Current funding is nowhere near the at least $900 million needed for full funding. Our goal is to
reach that figure in the next four years, and funding the Refuge System Operations and
Maintenance Fund at $586 million is the first step to reaching that goal.
The number of annual Refuge System visitors jumped by 13 million over the last six years. More
people are looking to recreate on wildlife refuges, yet understaffed refuges struggle to provide
those opportunities. Reductions in visitor services can be extremely limiting for constituencies
who want to visit. Equally troubling is a 15% drop in the number of volunteers since FY201 l. At
a time when record numbers of Americans are retiring and have the capability and desire to give
back, the Service's ability to oversee their efforts has been curtailed. Volunteers provide an
additional 20% of work on our national wildlife refuges, yet they are being turned away when
the System needs them the most.
FY2020 increases in law enforcement funding has brought that budget up to $41 million,
allowing the hiring of a new class of 43 officers, for a total of260 officers. These officers will be
fully trained by the end of Fall 2020, allowing them to move down to border refuges in South
Texas and Arizona to relieve the officers sent to these refuges on sometimes up to a dozen 21-
day details. They will be stationed in states that currently have no officers, or bolster the law
enforcement presence at refuges that currently see law enforcement coverage of¼ time or less.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 339 here 43677P7.116
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00199 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
200
Page 3 of 4 - National Wildlife Refuge Association FY202 l Testimony
Another priority for the Refuge Association is combatting the spread of invasive species, both
plant and animal. Overall, the problem is vast. 2.4 million Refuge System acres are infested with
invasive plants, and current funding and capacity only allows treatment of 10% of those acres.
Similarly, the Refuge System has 1,749 invasive animal populations and currently controls 5.3%
of those. One refuge particularly in need of funding is the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee
National Wildlife Refuge in Florida, which is currently allocated $1.15 million from
appropriated and headquarters dollars, but needs $2 million per year to comply with the
Service's obligations under the management agreement with the State of Florida.
One method the Service is using to combat invasive species spread is the use of"strike teams",
currently numbering 12. There is a need for an additional 28 teams, at an annual cost of$454,000
per team, or $12.7 million. Starting in 2009, the Refuge System began spending $1 million per
year to eradicate invasive species, which has proven successful with eradication of several
species from various wildlife refuges. Additional funding of$3 million would fund 3 total
projects each year.
The examples with law enforcement and invasive species control are just two of the most critical
funding shortfalls. The Refuge System also faces a lack of wage-grade workers (mostly
maintenance staff), biologists, and visitor services specialists, and climate change is an ever-
present complication that makes planning difficult and time-consuming.
We cannot emphasize enough how important it is to the health of our nation's national wildlife
refuges that funding be increased, and increased substantially. The $14 million increase in
FY2020 was desperately needed, but in reality, that is the minimum amount needed just to keep
pace with inflation and fixed costs. The situation on the ground is critical. The Refuge System is
bare bones right now and increased growth in urban spaces and outdoor recreation, and the
impacts of climate change, place additional stress on the System. Every year, more and more
refuges are closed to the public, habitat degrades, and visitors are turned away.
The Refuge Association appreciates the Subcommittee's consideration of our request of
$586 million for FY2021 for National Wildlife Refuge System Operations and Maintenance.
STRATEGIC GROWTH - LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND (LWCF)
The Land and Water Conservation Fund is an essential tool for protecting the integrity of the
Refuge System and is the primary funding source for land and conservation easement acquisition
by federal land agencies. Some in Congress have argued that public lands like the Refuge System
can't manage what they have and thus, all land acquisition should end. We believe that land
acquisition in fee simple and as part of a targeted easement program will provide an important
mix of habitats that will increase the habitat value of the Refuge System.
The Refuge Association calls on Congress to fund LWCF at $900 million per year, with
$150 million provided in FY2021 to the USFWS.
COMMITMENT TO REFUGE COMMUNITIES- REFUGE FUND
The Refuge System uses net income derived from permits and timber harvests to make payments
to local communities to offset property tax revenue lost when the federally-acquired lands are
removed from local tax rolls. The System relies on Congressional appropriations to the Refuge
Fund to compensate for the shortfall between revenues and tax replacement obligations.
However, declining revenues and lack of appropriations have resulted in the Service paying less
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 340 here 43677P7.117
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00200 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
201
Page 4 of 4 - National Wildlife Refuge Association FY202 l Testimony
than 50% of its tax-offset obligations since 2001. Reduced funding threatens the partnerships that
are so important for successful conservation, and the negative impact on local communities is
felt even more starkly in difficult economic times.
We also ask that this Committee consider converting or rolling the Refuge Fund into the PILT
(Payment in Lieu of Taxes) program. Some refuge lands are included in PILT and others are
included in the Refuge Fund. One funding mechanism for all refuge lands makes sense and
would streamline the process of returning funds to local communities.
The Refuge Association requests $50 million for the Refuge Fund in FY2021.
PARTNERSHIPS - PARTNERS FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE PROGRAM (PARTNERS PROGRAM)
With 75% of all fish and wildlife species dependent upon private lands for their survival, the
Partners Program is one of the most powerful tools for protecting wildlife where it lives. By
building effective partnerships between public agencies and private landowners to conserve
America's expansive working landscapes, the Partners Program has implemented nearly 29,000
restoration projects in the past twenty-five years, restoring over one million acres of wetlands,
three million acres ofuplands, and 11,000 miles of streams. The Partners Program leverages
federal dollars, generating nearly $16 in economic return for every $1 appropriated for projects.
The Refuge Association and the landowner-led Partners for Conservation request $75
million for FY2021. Such a funding level would result in an additional $400 million worth of
conservation across the nation.
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE GRANT PROGRAMS
• The North American Wetlands Conservation Act delivers an average 3:1 match for all
federal standard and small grants, and has restored wetlands on wildlife refuges across the
nation. The Refuge Association supports funding at the proposed authorization level of$60
million, as passed in H.R. 925.
• State and Tribal Wildlife Grants provides funding to state wildlife agencies directed to
developing and implementing programs that benefit wildlife habitat for both hunted and non-
hunted species. This funding is critical for research, wildlife surveys, species restoration, and
habitat management on state lands, which all contribute to a system of healthy federal and
state lands. The states are essential partners to the Refuge System, and we support funding
for this program of $75 million.
• The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act program protects neotropical bird species
across the Americas. As vital as refuge lands are, wildlife conservation must also take place
on state and private lands, as well as in other countries, particularly for migratory species.
We support FY2021 funding at $6 million for the NMBCA and thank the subcommittee for
the increases this last fiscal year for all three of these programs.
We believe that with sound conservation policy, increased funding, and the power of more than
40,000 dedicated volunteers, the Refuge System can fulfill its mission to provide wildlife
dependent recreation for Americans and protect the habitat for more than 700 species of birds,
220 species of mammals, 250 reptile and amphibian species and more than 1,000 species offish.
We look forward to working with Congress to accomplish this goal and appreciate your
consideration of our requests. Please let me know if you have any questions.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 341 here 43677P7.118
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00201 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
202
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. Mr. Leinbach.
Mr. LEINBACH. Thank you. Am I allowed to give you pictures and
stuff?
Mr. KILMER. I think so, yeah. Sure.
Mr. LEINBACH. [Audio malfunction in hearing room.]
Mr. KILMER. Great. We love pictures. Thank you. I will pass
them down. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER
WITNESS
KEN LEINBACH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER
Mr. LEINBACH. Good afternoon. Ranking Member Joyce and Mr.
Kilmer, and anyone else who is listening in the room. It is a lovely
afternoon if you are a duck. I am the executive director of the
Urban Ecology Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and I am super
grateful for the opportunity to speak with you today. The purpose
of this testimony is to introduce the Interior and Environment Sub-
committee to a replicable nonprofit model for urban revitalization.
The Urban Ecology Center, the UEC, uses environmental edu-
cation as a tool to transform challenged urban parks and neighbor-
hoods, and our work is capturing the attention of cities across the
country. The UEC started as an experimental social invention
based on research that states, ‘‘If one has consistent access to na-
ture from an early age while having a mentor in your life who dem-
onstrates respectful behavior toward the land, that person is very
likely to grow up caring for and working for the environment.’’
That is the kind of person we need right now in the world.
Our mission then is quite simple: to connect people who live in
cities to nature and each other. The center began in the mid-90s
as a small group of teachers in a humble trailer in a high crime
park in one of the most densely populated neighborhoods in our
State. We started offering field trips to nearby schools, and quickly
discovered the what we are offering was needed. Nature-based
recreation and education is beneficial in every: intellectual, emo-
tional, social, spiritual, and physical. Our trailer became a hive of
community activities for adults and kids. Our success allowed us
to grow, and we now are in three beautiful green built and rehab
buildings that bustle with community activities on Milwaukee’s
southwest and east side.
While the center began as a strategy to improve ecological lit-
eracy of folks in a city, we discovered that when a UEC is placed
in an urban park, so much more happens. The park becomes safe.
Student academic achievement improves. New jobs are created.
Volunteerism explodes. And if done correctly, a significant influx of
community resources flow into the park and nearby surroundings.
The center has catalyzed over $45 million in direct investments in
and near the parks that we occupy. What once was blighted, even
dangerous, green spaces becomes a safe and green community
asset.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00202 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
203
Last year, we hosted over 220,000 visits by youth and adults at
our three branches in Milwaukee. Three thousand five hundred vol-
unteers helped us plant over 10,000 native trees and plants in the
70-plus acres that we now manage. We partner with 63 urban
schools providing 35,000 students with regular field trips. We reach
an incredibly diverse audience. All ages, racial, political, and eco-
nomic backgrounds come together at our centers. Both sides of the
aisle have supported us.
Today, cities all over the Nation are reaching out and showing
interest in replicating this model. To help facilitate, we published
this book, Urban Ecology, and created a training institute around
it. To date we have had over 50 people come through our training,
representing 19 different cities, Columbus, Atlanta, Rochester, and
Denver to name a few. We have had cities from different countries
as well.
Twenty years after our inception, the program is flourishing to
such a degree that it was suggested that it was important for you,
who are charged with governance of this Nation, to be aware of our
existence and the transferable impacts we are having. I am deeply
honored that you accepted our testimony to speak to you today and
have hopes that you and any listening might be able to assist us
in finding additional partnerships and funding opportunities to
help accelerate the spread of our important program. Worth noting,
we have worked with the U.S. Forest Service in creating a 40-acre
children’s forest, an arboretum out of remediated industrial land.
And we were also grateful to receive nearly $1 million dollars of
funding from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the first year
of its inception, to help remediate a tier-one tributary into Lake
Michigan. Thank you. Congratulations, by the way, on passing the
reauthorization bill for the GLRI just yesterday, I believe, right?
Well done.
Some of you may be in Milwaukee this July for the Democratic
National Convention. Come visit. We would love to show you
around. And if you happen to know of anybody looking for a unique
venue for their meeting or event, please contact us. We have really
cool facilities, these ultra-green facilities.
I know as you, Ranking Member Joyce, that the freshwater bod-
ies in our region aren’t merely Good Lakes, they are Great Lakes.
Accordingly, I don’t know if I am allowed, but I brought you each
a Petoskey stone, a polished fossilized ancient stone found only on
Lake Michigan, as a gift from the lake. I actually have enough that
folks in the room can have them as well. And there is no real value
to these except for the beauty, so I think it is okay for me to give
them. It is not like——
Mr. KILMER. People frequently throw rocks at us——
[Laughter.]
Mr. KILMER. So we are good. We are good. Thank you. Thank
you.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00203 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
204
Mr. LEINBACH. These are quite beautiful, so take one, pass it on.
Make sure you get one. You are doing the hard work. I would Tyler
to get one because he helped me out early, and then anybody else
in the room until they are gone. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify. I am more than happy to answer any questions you have
about our mission and our work.
[The statement of Mr. Leinbach follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00204 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
205
Category: Environment, Climate Change and Sciences
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
Ken Leinbach Urban Ecology Center
Executive Director 1500 E. Park Place
Urban Ecology Center Milwaukee Wisconsin 53211
Kleinbach@urbanecologycenter.org (414) 732 1659 (cell)
Good Afternoon. Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and distinguished Committee
members. My name is Ken Leinbach, the Executive Director of the Urban Ecology Center in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin. I'm grateful for the opportunity to be with you today.
The purpose of this testimony it to introduce the Interior & Environment Appropriations
Subcommittee to a successful 20-year experiment in Milwaukee, Wisconsin that is capturing
the attention of cities and urban landscapes across the country as a replicable non-profit
model. The Urban Ecology Center (UEC) uses environmental education as way to transform
challenged urban parks and neighborhoods. The Urban Ecology Center aligns with the goals
and mission of programs under the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency, the
U.S. Forest Service, and the Department of the Interior, (specifically the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service).
Most environmental issues are the result of many small actions adding up to bigger problems.
We need the common, everyday person to understand that their actions matter, and that every
action they make has an impact. In short, we need everyone to care about the environment,
not just a few.
Armed with this mindset 20 plus years ago a few of us discovered research that identified two
consistent commonalities in the early life of those who cared about the environment:
consistent access to the natural world and having a mentor or an interested adult or friend who
demonstrated respectful behavior toward the land and toward the environment as a whole. If
interested, the research is entitled "Significant life Experience" research and was first put forth
by Dr. Louise Chawla in a research review article dating back to 1998. Richard Louv popularized
and expanded on this research in his more recent book lost Child in the Woods.
The Urban Ecology Center emerged after an extensive national search for programs based on
this research resulted in no matches. The UEC is an experimental social invention that brings
kids and adults alike into contact with nearby nature while fostering mentorship and role
modeling. The experiment is working.
While our goal started out as a strategy to improve ecological literacy of folks in a city, when a
Center is placed in an urban park so much more happens! The parks become safer, student
academic achievement improves, new jobs are created, job training occurs, volunteerism
explodes, property values improve, and, if done correctly, a significant influx of community
resources and engagement happens. In total, over its 20 year existence, the Center has
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 349 here 43677P7.119
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00205 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
206
catalyzed over $45 million in direct investments in and near the parks that we occupy. It is a
unique way to stabilize urban neighborhoods, and now, 20 years later, cities all over the nation
and world are interested in replicating our model.
The mission of the Urban Ecology Center is quite simple. Connect people who live in cities to
nature and each other. The Center started with this mission in Milwaukee in the late 90's,
operating out of a humble trailer in a high crime park in one of the most densely populated
neighborhoods in the state of Wisconsin. We started as a small group of science teachers,
offering field trips to nearby schools. We discovered quickly that learning science can be a
passport to a different world. From the micro level changes in cells, to understanding our place
in the ecosystem, experiences that offer these "aha" moments change one's view of the world.
Traditional nature centers have done an excellent job of raising public awareness, preserving
green space, and introducing children to nature largely in suburban and rural areas. The Urban
Ecology Center builds on the success of this model by viewing green space as more than
recreational space or an educational laboratory but as an anchoring community hub around
which neighbors come together to build community and healthy neighborhoods. The Center's
model combines environmental education with community engagement through a wide range
of activities including hosting community events, field trips, lending outdoor equipment, and
welcoming volunteers to help with land stewardship and research projects.
The Urban Ecology Center's place-based strategy in urban areas reaches a diverse audience-all
ages, racial backgrounds, socioeconomic standings, political leanings and, perhaps most
importantly, people with a variety of perspectives and opinions on environmental issues. The
Center has been supported equally by all sides of the Wisconsin political spectrum.
The Center's continuum of educational and recreational programming helps urban children to
explore the natural world right in their own neighborhoods. From innovative urban habitat
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 350 here 43677P7.120
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00206 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
207
restoration to an efficient and effective approach to environmental education for all ages, the
Urban Ecology Center is a proven model for transforming communities by revitalizing urban
green space.
The Urban Ecology Center strives to create a community where all of our children can be
transformed by nature. Based in Milwaukee, the Center operates three environmental
education sites where there are more than 100,000 people living, and more than 40 schools
operating within a two-mile radius of each site. For our children, environment-based recreation
and education is beneficial in every major way -- intellectually, emotionally, socially, spiritually,
and physically. Entrance to the Urban Ecology Center is free and the Center is open nearly 365
days a year, providing youth with a safe, engaging environment in their out-of-school time.
Through the Center's innovative and engaging programming urban children are provided with
the opportunity to learn, explore and discover in green spaces right in their own
neighborhoods. Annually, the Center achieves the following:
• Over 225,000 visits by youth and adults learning and growing in natural spaces at our
three branches on Milwaukee's Southside, West Side and Eastside.
• Increased academic knowledge and skill by program participants.
• Increased ecological literacy and environmental ethic by program participants.
As a learning organization, the Urban Ecology Center values evaluation as an important tool for
both internal program improvement and accountability to the community. The Center is
interested in both the depth and breadth of program impact on participants and the
community. These measurement tools include quantitative and qualitative components to
ensure that outputs and short-term benchmarks are being met and to measure the progress
toward reaching long-term goals.
The Urban Ecology Center is actively engaged in building a city where urban children can
explore and be mentored in the natural world. The Center builds outdoor laboratories where
people of all ages can come together, building curiosity and respect for nature. To date,
measurable impacts include:
• 99% of teachers reported that the Center's school partnership, the Neighborhood
Environmental Education Project (NEEP) improved students' academic performance.
• The Center is directly responsible for the restoration of 70+ acres and have been the
catalyst for hundreds of acres of preserved and restored land along the Milwaukee River
Corridor and the Menomonee River.
• Crime is down 90% in Riverside Park since the introduction of the Urban Ecology Center.
The parks are used nearly 365 days of the year, creating a continuous community
presence.
• The Center partners with 60+ Ideal schools through the Neighborhood Environmental
Education Project with a 95% retention rate year after year.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 351 here 43677P7.121
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00207 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
208
• Over 3,400 volunteers contribute more than 24,750 hours annually.
On Earthday, 2018, the Center published the book Urban Ecology: A Natural way to Transform
Kids, Parks, Cities and the World while at the same time launching the Urban Ecology Center
Institute. The institute provides a training option for the many inquiries that the Center now
receives from cities across the nation and world. The Grange Insurance Audubon Center in
Columbus, Ohio was based on the Urban Ecology Center Model. Atlanta Georgia, Rochester
New York and Denver Colorado are all in the process of creating such Centers, while many
others have sent representatives to our workshops. On the international front Tiberius Israel,
Medellin Colombia, Monterey Mexico to name a few are engaged in our training program.
In addition to urban environmental education, urban land restoration has become a core
competency of the Center. We have worked with the US Forest Service in creating a 40 acre
"Children's Forest" or Arboretum out of old industrial land, as well as another 26 acre park on
the south side of Milwaukee from an old rail yard. The first was a $9 million environmental
remediation project and the second was part of a $25 million project. We were grateful to
receive nearly a million dollars of funding from the Great Lake Restoration Initiative the first
year of its inception to help remediate a mile of tier one waterways into the Great Lakes along
the Milwaukee River.
From all of this work our motto has become "heal the land and the land heals us", while our
tagline is "So much Life!" based on how much new life abounds in the parks that we occupy,
both human and natural. We offer this introduction to you today in hopes that you might assist
us in finding additional partnership and funding opportunities to help accelerate the growth of
similar centers across this beautiful country that.you oversee and perhaps even in your own
communities.
In closing, I invite each of you to tour and see first-hand the work of the UEC. I know some of
you will be in Milwaukee this July for the Democratic National Convention and would be happy
to host you at your convenience.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify. I'm more than happy to answer any questions you
may have about our mission and work.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert graphic folio 352 here 43677P7.122
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00208 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
209
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. This got
Oprah real quick. You get a rock, and you get a rock. [Laughter.]
Mr. Joyce, do you have any questions?
Mr. JOYCE. No. I thank you all for being here, and I appreciate
all the hard work you do. Hopefully we can all continue to work
together for a better planet.
Mr. KILMER. I would like to thank each of you for your testi-
mony. I have been trying to get David Joyce to come to the Demo-
cratic Convention for a long time now, so thank you. [Laughter.]
Mr. JOYCE. I got to go to Washington. That was nice.
Mr. KILMER. There you go. Yeah, that was nice. That was nice.
I actually did want to just make maybe a comment and a question
to Justin. Thank you for mentioning some extraordinary refuges in
our neck of the woods. The Billy Frank, Jr. Refuge is really incred-
ible, and is appropriately named after someone who was a real
champion for tribal justice and for environmental justice, and I
know that the work of that refuge is designed to sort of live up to
that mission. I am also really grateful that you mentioned Grays
Harbor and the Shorebird Festival. I would encourage anyone who
is watching on C–SPAN 8——
[Laughter.]
Mr. KILMER [continuing]. To come visit Grays Harbor Country,
and it really is an extraordinary refuge, the Shorebird Festival. So
I have got two daughters. My oldest daughter was quite young. She
was a total birder. She was very unusual. Most kids would read Dr.
Seuss, and she would read, like, a book on birds at night rather
than reading Dr. Seuss. She would be the yellow-breasted warbler,
you know, lives in shrubs and trees, and migrates in the fall, right?
It was a very unusual childhood for her. But I took her to the
Shorebird Festival, and it was so cool to see her just sort of connect
with nature. And the only connection I had seen prior to that was
Angry Birds was about as close as she got to connecting, and so I
appreciate you mentioning that.
I want to ask you in light of these unique assets, so if there was
additional base funding, talk about how that could build capacity
for connecting with communities, connecting with youth. You men-
tioned a couple of examples, but I just want to make sure we hear
the message loud and clear from you.
Mr. HALL. You bet. So most of education comes out of the Billy
Frank, Jr. Nisqually, and we actually have a partnership between
the Friends group, the refuge, some amount of their base funding,
and another nonprofit, the Nisqually River Foundation, that pro-
vides a staff member in order to do that. And then we have a cou-
ple AmeriCorps, one that works Grays Harbor and that works at
Billy Frank, Jr. As I said, we reached capacity. Our parking lots
are full. People are parking on the grass on those occasional sunny
days that we do get in the Pacific Northwest.
So the way to increase the outreach and the benefit of that ref-
uge is to get those education staff out into the schools, into the
community. We also work with the Nisqually Tribe with their Head
Start program, getting them out. And they learn about the refuge,
and what the missions are, and what we are trying to do, and then
they have capstone field trip into the refuge itself. And so really
working with Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and then Pierce County
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00209 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
210
Schools and Thurston County Schools and some Lewis County
Schools, we are really able to extend that out, and then those peo-
ple come back. The students come back with their parents, and,
you know, they learn what the refuge system is for, why they are
there, what the benefits are. And so really that is that next step.
And the Fish and Wildlife Service had an urban refuge contest,
a funding contest, which added $1 million to the base funding,
which we applied for. We still have that plan ready to go. We were
not successful. They only did one. It went on for 3 years. They did
two refuges one year and then one refuge the other 2 years, and
the one in our district was fortunate enough to get that. But we
have those plans ready to go. And so really to extend the impact
of the refuge into the community, it just requires that extra base
funding in order to fully support that education program.
Mr. KILMER. Terrific. I appreciate you mentioning that. And I
also just wanted to call out the staff at both of those refuges are
just really tremendous.
Mr. HALL. Absolutely amazing people to work with.
Mr. KILMER. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you all for your testimony.
Mr. LEINBACH. Can I offer a thought to this?
Mr. KILMER. Go on. Dive in.
Mr. LEINBACH. I was just thinking, I am curious. In our modeling
of an urban ecology center, it would be really great to partner with
the refuges and the parks that are on the outskirts. And the way
our model works is we actually have a fleet of buses that we own
that we are able to take kids to where we need to go, which is often
a stumbling block. So it would be lovely to talk to with you or any-
one else again in the room—I don’t know who is here—related to
that type of partnership. But the amount of money that it would
require to create those urban centers is actually not very signifi-
cant, so it would be interesting to talk to somebody about that. So
thanks.
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. Great. Thank you all for your testi-
mony. Let me invite up the next panel. Miles Keogh, the executive
director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. Dr.
Sumita Khatri. Did I get that close?
Dr. KHATRI. Yes.
Mr. KILMER. Okay. With the American Lung Association, and
Mandy Warner with the Environmental Defense Fund. Thank you.
Thank you. Welcome. Mr. Keogh, go ahead. Kick us off. You have
got 5 minutes.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN AIR AGENCIES
WITNESS
MILES KEOGH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
CLEAN AIR AGENCIES
Mr. KEOGH. Thank you so much. This is actually my second
rodeo doing this, and to repay your kindness for the last time that
I came, I have some written remarks, but I know you know I can
read, and I know you can read, so I am not going to read them.
I will speak a little bit extemporaneously, but I will kind of try to
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00210 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
211
make it worth your time as much as possible. Thank you so much,
again, to you and to the other members of the subcommittee for let-
ting me speak today.
You mentioned I am Miles Keogh. I run the National Association
of Clean Air Agencies, which convenes 155 of the State and local
air pollution and climate agencies across the country. And I am tes-
tifying today because those agencies, which have the primary re-
sponsibility under the Clean Air Act for protecting your constitu-
ents form air pollution. They get a lot of their funding through ap-
propriations that you all consider and authorize.
Those agencies which are coastal and heartland, urban and
rural, every stripe of politics, those agencies have received level
funding for a long time. In fact, they continue to receive today the
same level of funding that they received 15 years ago in 2004 dur-
ing the George W. Bush Administration.
NACAA’s ask for every State and local agency in every State of
the country, is for the House, for you all, to help appropriate an
additional $87 million this year to the State and local category
grants under Section 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act. That is a
15-year inflation adjustment, and I came in last year and asked for
a 14-year inflation adjustment. The needs are greater than that. In
2007, we asked the agencies what they needed, and, you know, it
is 15 years at the same level, and the numbers were more than
double what they were receiving. But adjusting for inflation would
go a long way.
So I remember from last year. I know what you are thinking.
Why should you all give any more money to the Clean Air Agencies
for this work, right? Obviously you can do it with level funding be-
cause you are doing it, and you have been doing it, so why would
we consider increasing the money? In fact, there are five ways in
which your districts would benefit from having these agencies get
an increase in the funding.
The first is that at the current level, there is an impediment to
business development. When the agencies are stretched as they are
over 15 years of operating with the same funding, it delays the
time that we can approve projects as being in line with the law.
It slows down how fast we can get permits out the door. It impedes
investment. It slows economic growth, and it slows job creation. So
this is a real thing. It is hard to tally what that number actually
is, but holding things steady over that time has had an effect.
Second, it shifts that spending to your States. There are not that
many sources of money in the world, so where the Federal money
doesn’t show up, it is citizens in your district that backfill the dif-
ference, and that a lot of what has happened. Third is that the
public demands more information and more effort than we needed
in previous years. We now find out about air quality in our weather
apps. There is greater Clean Air awareness thanks to wildfires.
There are some explosion and sensor data, and there is a bunch of
new pollutants, things like ethylene oxide and PFAS, and the like
that we just didn’t have the same understanding years ago as we
do know.
Fourth, if you have ambitions to comprehensively reduce green-
house gas emissions, those are going to involve State and local
agencies. If you want to do that in the future, the time to invest
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00211 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
212
in those agencies is now. And then finally, and by far most impor-
tantly, even though more people are protected from air pollution
today, we still have non-attainment areas, and we still have people
exposed to air toxics. There are still limits to the work that we
could be doing, and constraining the ability of air agencies to pro-
vide services to the public, it narrows that reach and limits the
protection we can provide your constituents.
We don’t know how many environmental justice programs we are
not doing. We don’t know how many communities we are not reach-
ing. And the fact is that while clean air is a huge success story,
it is still an unfinished story. More Americans still die from air pol-
lution than from car crashes or from gun violence, and about a
third of Americans still breath unhealthy air for about a third of
the year. So, again, the ask is for an addition $87 million to adjust
for 15 years of holding it steady on the paycheck.
I thank you for your time, and if you have questions, I am happy
to address them.
[The statement of Mr. Keogh follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00212 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
213
Testimony of Miles Keogh
Executive Director, National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NA CAA)
Before the Bouse Appropriations Committee
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Regarding the FY 2021 Budget for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 6, 2020
Good morning. l am Miles Keogh, Executive Director of the National Association of
Clean Air Agencies (NACAA). Thank you for this opportunity to on the FY 202 l budget
for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), particularly grants to state and
local air pollution control agencies under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act (CAA),
which are part of the State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program. NACAA urges
Congress to 1) increase federal grants to state and local air agencies by $87 million above FY
2020 levels, for a total of $315 million; 2) provide flexibility to these agencies to use any
additional grants to address the highest priority programs in their areas; and 3) retain grants for
monitoring fine particulate matter under the authority of Section I 03.
NACAA is the national, non-partisan, non-profit association of air pollution control
agencies in 40 states, including l l S local air agencies, the District of Columbia and four
territories. These agencies have the "primary responsibility" under the Clean Air Act for
implementing our nation's clean air programs. As such, they carry out an array of critical
activities intended to improve and maintain air quality and protect public health.
A good national air quality program is an essential investment in America. The sad fact is
more Americans die or get sick from air pollution than from almost any other environmental or
domestic problem facing our nation. Tens of thousands of people die prematurely each year in
this country and millions suffer serious health problems as a result of exposure to such air
pollutants as particulate matter, ozone and hundreds of toxic compounds. State and local air
pollution control agencies work tirelessly, and without sufficient resources, to address this threat
to public health by implementing the Clean Air Act.
The responsibilities facing these agencies have continued to grow while, unfortunately,
federal funding has lagged behind. Federal grants to state and local air quality agencies under
Sections I03 and l OS of the CAA were $228 million in FY 2020, which is the same amount
these agencies received over 15 years ago, in FY 2004. If the FY 2004 figure is adjusted for
inflation, level funding would translate to approximately $315 million in today's dollars an
$87-million difference. While the need for increases is far greater, NACAA's recommendation
for Section l 03 and !05 grants in FY 2021 is merely for level funding, adjusted for inflation - or
$315 million.
Additionally, NACAA recommends that state and local be provided with
flexibility to use the increased funds on the highest priority programs in their areas. Finally,
NACAA requests that grants for fine particulate matter monitoring remain under CAA Section
103 authority, where matching funds are not required, rather than being shifted to Section l05
authority, as the Administration has proposed in recent years.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 363 here 43677P7.123
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00213 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
214
State and local air quality agencies have made do with inadequate resources for many
years. While the Clean Air Act envisioned the federal government supporting up to 60 percent
of the cost of state and local air programs, the truth is it provides only 25 percent and in some
cases much less, while state and local agencies provide the remaining 75 percent. While we
understand Congress is not able to grant increases to fully meet the needs of our clean air
programs, even the modest increases we are requesting will help.
On a day-to-day basis, as part of their "core" programs, our agencies carry out a host of
essential resource-intensive activities, including monitoring, compiling emission inventories,
planning, conducting sophisticated modeling, permitting and inspecting sources and adopting
and enforcing regulations. These ongoing core programs are critical and they are only a part of
the picture. State and local air quality agencies are also called upon to address new and
emerging issues. Yet since FY 2004, when we were receiving the same dollar amount we do
now, our responsibilities have expanded, while the purchasing power of our grants has
diminished by more than 30 percent.
How would increased federal grants be spent? The list is long, but a few activities for
which additional funding is necessary include:
• reducing concentrations of fme particulates;
• improving small business compliance assistance;
• modernizing modeling and other estimation tools;
• improving emission inventories of air pollutants;
• increasing the frequency of inspections;
• improving monitoring, including adding locations and replacing outdated equipment;
• developing strategies to meet our health-based air quality standards;
• improving risk assessment capabilities; and
• improving communications with the public to protect their health.
All these activities are critical to our mission to reduce air pollution, maintain the many
improvements we have already made and continue to protect public health, as we have been
charged to do by the people of this country.
In conclusion, NA CAA urges Congress to 1) increase federal grants to state and local air
agencies in FY 2021 by $87 million above FY 2020 levels, for a total of $315 million; 2) provide
flexibility to state and local air agencies to use any additional grants to address the highest
priority programs in their areas; and 3) retain grants for monitoring fme particulate matter under
the authority of Section 103.
Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify today. I am happy to answer any
questions you have.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 364 here 43677P7.124
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00214 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
215
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. Dr. Khatri.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION
WITNESS
SUMITA KHATRI, M.D., M.S., VICE CHAIR–MISSION PROGRAMS; CHAIR
OF THE PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE, AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIA-
TION
Dr. KHATRI. Good afternoon. Hello, Ranking Member Joyce. I am
a Buckeye, too. Thanks. Mr. Kilmer and others in the room, thank
you for offering us the opportunity to testify in front of your sub-
committee. My name is Sumita Khatri. I am a board member of the
American Lung Association, and I am also a lung physician, and
also a member of the community. And it is in these realms that I
am here for you today. The mission of the American Lung Associa-
tion is to improve lung health and prevent lung disease, and how
that mixes in with air quality, so thank you for the segue prior.
So I am here to urge the subcommittee to increase its invest-
ments in the U.S. EPA air quality programs. It is the 50th anniver-
sary of the Clean Air Act, and there is opportunity to do even more
than has already been done. There is much more to be done be-
cause you can’t have too healthy air. In order for us to deliver on
our promise for the Clean Air Act, if we fund further, there are so
many things we can do.
For instance, build upon the EPA air quality management sys-
tem that is in already place which is keeping track of what air
quality is going on so that we can all be informed citizens. Two,
EPA’s grants to States and tribes to do what needs to be done indi-
vidually based on what the community needs after you have done
the research to figure out and have these partnerships. Three,
monitoring and enforcement. Unless we monitor, we don’t know
what we are needing to do next. And enforcement because we need
to be held accountable whatever the origin of those air quality
alerts are coming from. And then, of course, the EPA’s Climate
Protection Program because after decades of progress, we are see-
ing some backslide due to changes in climate, as you mentioned,
in the wildfires.
So my written comments outline more in detail what we are ask-
ing for specifically, but I would like to highlight how the EPA has
helped me be better at all three realms that I discussed earlier. I
live in Cleveland, and don’t talk about the river, okay? But Cleve-
land used to have worse air quality, but it has gotten a lot better.
And part of how we are being able to do that is through the State
implementation plans, looking at what the sources of air pollution
are. And not only is it industry, but it is also transportation.
So I have to mention a story. I do a lot of outreach. I just don’t
stay in my four walls as a clinician. I partner with air quality
agencies, and I have a really compelling story about the very
proactive bus fleet manager in a large public school system, who
decided that he wanted to be part of the solution. And so he ap-
plied for the diesel particulate filter funding grants, and he took
about 300 buses over 6 years and retrofitted them with diesel par-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00215 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
216
ticulate filters. And the air quality not just outside improved, but
inside. We actually rode those buses and did some air quality moni-
toring, and we saw that.
So about 10 years ago when my kids started going to school, you
will be sure to know that as I waved goodbye to them, I was actu-
ally making sure that the DPF was there. Like, what are you
doing, Mom? I am like, never mind, it is good for you. So that is
one thing that I know that we are doing well with these programs.
The second thing is that having publicly-available databases with
air quality metrics, like AQS Data Mart, that lets people who are
epidemiologists like me look and see whether there are associations
from a timing standpoint with asthma visits to the ED, or even
doing kind of studies looking at inflammation in their upper air-
ways, people with asthma who demonstrate that more. So having
this publicly-available data available allows for us to do this re-
search.
And then finally, as a clinician, I am able to have these conversa-
tions. They know what they are breathing, and it doesn’t feel good.
They are the canaries in the coal mine. And having conversations
around air quality index and what they can do, when they should
exercise, what they can do in their own environments to think how
to have a healthier lifestyle can be improved. Those are all impor-
tant.
So I already mentioned about how climate change, having these
extreme weather events, and not only are the people getting sicker
in these areas, but the people who are trying to deliver medical
care, they are experiencing challenges. So all of these things are
important that we talk about. So thank you very much. We appre-
ciate all of the progress that has been made through the EPA, but
I call on you to further fund the EPA, and we have all those details
available for you so that we as clinicians can do job well done, too.
Thank you very much.
[The statement of Dr. Khatri follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00216 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
217
Sumlta Khatri, MD, MS
Board Member, American Lung Association
American Lung Association
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Clean Air Program overall - $469 million
Climate Protection Program - $115.9 million
Federal Support for Air Quality Management - $171 million
Federal Vehicle Fuels Standards and Certifications Programs - $103.6 million
Categorical Grants: State and Local Air Quality Management - $310 million
Categorical Grants: Tribal Air Quality Management $14.5 million
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program $100 million
Categorical Grant: Radon - $8.1 million
EPA Radon Program - $3.3 million
Compliance Monitoring- $111.3 million
Enforcement - $268.1 million
New Wildfire Smoke Protection Program: $15 million
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Dr. Sumita Khatri and I am a board
member of the American Lung Association, where I serve as vice chair of mission
programs and chair of our public policy committee. I am also an associate professor of
medicine and an adult pulmonary and ICU physician. I'm pleased to present the American
Lung Association's appropriations recommendations for Fiscal Year 2021 for the Interior
and Environment subcommittee, and to urge the committee to reject all harmful policy
riders to appropriations legislation.
The mission of the American Lung Association is to save lives by improving lung health and
preventing lung disease. Our organization represents millions of Americans with lung
disease, including the more than 5 million children with asthma and more than 16 million
adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and more than 228,000 who will be
diagnosed this year with lung cancer
The American Lung Association recognizes that the Clean Air Act, which is celebrating its
50th anniversary this year, is one of the nation's premier public health laws, with a mission
of protecting human health and the environment. The programs that the U.S.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 371 here 43677P7.125
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00217 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
218
Environmental Protection Agency runs are critical to protect all Americans, including
those with lung disease, from harmful air pollution.
These programs are also highly cost-effective. An EPA study estimated that the benefits
of Clean Air Act protections outweigh the costs by a factor of 30 to 1. Air pollution
protections prevent a sweeping array of health harms, from asthma attacks to missed
days of work and school to heart attacks to premature deaths. These have an obvious
human cost, but also carry a heavy financial cost. According to a 2011 EPA estimate, in
2020, the Clean Air Act Amendments will prevent over 230,000 early deaths. This is
probably a conservative estimate because after this analysis was performed, EPA adopted
additional pollution control strategies to further clean a wide variety of air pollution
sources.
Thanks to the Clean Air Act, the nation has made enormous strides in reducing harmful
outdoor air pollution. However, that progress is at risk for two big reasons.
First, climate change is already undoing some of the progress we've made, with dire
consequences for lung health. Simply put, climate change is a public health emergency.
Wildfire smoke, extreme heat, increased levels of ozone pollution, disruption of medical
care due to extreme storms, and health hazards of disaster cleanup all put lungs at risk.
Second, despite the clear mandate of EPA to protect human health from air pollution and
the excellent return on investment that these protections have provided, numerous
proposals by the Trump Administration would weaken, delay or rescind clean air
protections. The current EPA leadership has repealed the Clean Power Plan's carbon
pollution standards for existing power plants, replacing them with a rule that could
actually be worse for health than doing nothing. The agency is attempting to gut carbon
pollution standards for new power plants, undermine standards that limit mercury and
other air toxics from power plants, roll back successful limits on greenhouse gasses from
vehicles, and censor the science that shows the health harms of air pollution and cherry-
pick benefit and cost data to support these rollbacks. Beyond the rollbacks, enforcement
of EPA's existing rules is down as well.
Despite these proposed rollbacks, the staff at EPA are still doing the lifesaving work of
helping protect human health from air pollution across the country. I call on this
subcommittee to support this critical work by beginning to reverse years of under-
investment in EPA's public health protections.
It is also critical that the FY21 appropriations bills are free of harmful policy riders that
would weaken EPA's ability to protect public health. These restrictions have no place in
appropriations legislation. Specifically, we call not only for no new riders, but also for the
removal of riders in previous Interior and Environment appropriations bills, including the
provision that circumvents science to encourage the use of biomass burning for
electricity.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 372 here 43677P7.126
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00218 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
219
I'd like to outline a few programs worthy of this subcommittee's continued and increased
investment:
EPA's Clean Air Program Area
EPA's work to protect people from the impacts of air pollution saves lives and improves health.
Anyone can suffer health harms from unsafe levels of air pollution, but some are at particular
risk, including people with asthma and other lung diseases; people with heart disease; babies and
children; pregnant women; older adults; people living in low-income communities; and people
who work or exercise outdoors. We request that the subcommittee provide $469 million overall
for EPA's Clean Air Program, which includes $341 mjllion for Environmental Programs and
Management and $128 million for Science and Technology.
Within EPA's clean air program, we request that the subcommittee provide $115.9 million for
the Climate Protection Program. Climate change is a public health emergency with dangerous
consequences for lungs. The Clean Air Act requires that EPA reduce greenhouse gas pollution
because of the danger it poses to human health. Continued investment in EPA's work to address
climate change is critical.
The American Lung Association also requests that the subcommittee provide $171 million for
Federal Support for Air Quality Management. This program helps states, tribes, and local air
pollution control agencies administer programs and standards to protect their communities from
unhealthy air pollution. States have the primary responsibility for developing clean air measures
necessary to meet federal standards, but they rely on support, training and assistance from EPA.
Another important program within EPA's clean air work is the Federal Vehicle Fuels Standards
and Certifications Programs, which we're requesting be fully funded at $103.6 million. This
funding is essential to improve testing and oversight of vehicles.
State. Local and Tribal Air Quality Management
States, local governments and Tribes need direct support from EPA to implement and enforce
lifesaving clean air protections. The American Lung Association requests that the subcommittee
provide $310 million for Categorical Grants: State and Local Air Quality Management and
$14.5 million for Categorical Grants: Tribal Air Quality Management. State, local and tribal air
pollution agencies are on the front lines of vital efforts to improve air quality and protect public
health, yet they are perennially underfunded. These agencies need more funding, not less, to
ensure proper protection of the public through implementation of the Clean Air Act.
Reducing Pollution from Vehicles
Another critical program for reducing dangerous vehicle pollution is the Diesel Emissions
Reduction Grant Program, for which we're requesting $100 million. Immense opportunities
remain to reduce diesel emissions through the DERA program: millions of old, dirty diesel
engines are in use today that pollute communities and threaten workers. The Subcommittee's
continued investments in this highly successful program have yielded up to $13 of public health
benefit for every $1 spent on diesel projects, according to a 2016 EPA report.
- -- .,..,
,..... - • ,. • - ~ • " - w, ·- • • • • .. ,. "' ; ~- • ~·,~
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 373 here 43677P7.127
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00219 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
220
In addition to the critical work that EPA does to reduce outdoor air pollution, I want to highlight
another pair of programs that protect lung health from a deadly indoor air pollutant: radon.
Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States, yet it remains an
underappreciated health risk. The State Indoor Radon Grant program and the EPA radon
program have helped to forge a cooperative approach among the federal government, states,
tribes, nonprofits, public health groups, and business and professional groups to inform people
and work to save lives for decades. States and tribes depend on the grant funds and on EPA's
technical assistance through the radon program to educate the public and reduce exposure to
this deadly carcinogen. In 2003, the National Academy of Sciences estimated that radon kills
21,000 people each year. We request that the subcommittee provide $8.1 million for the
Categorical Grant for Radon and $3.3 million for EPA's Radon Program, which includes $3.1
million for Environmental Program and Management and $158,000 for Science and Technology.
Monitoring and Enforcement
EPA's air quality standards mean nothing if they are not enforced. Continued investment in
EPA's monitoring and enforcement work is critical to keeping the cop on the beat when it comes
to protecting the public from dangerous air pollution. The American Lung Association requests
that the subcommittee provide at least $111.3 million for EPA's Compliance Monitoring and
$268.1 million for Enforcement. EPA must have the ability and funding needed to reduce non-
compliance, as well as enforce penalties for violations. EPA must also be prepared to respond to
civi I enforcement actions authorized by the Clean Air Act.
New Program Request
Wildfires are no longer a rare occurrence, making wildfire smoke an urgent and increasing threat
to health. EPA needs additional resources to protect the public from this source of dangerous air
pollution. The Lung Association requests a total of $15 million in funding to address these
impacts, including $5 million to establish Wildfire Smoke Health Centers in Collaboration with
US Forest Service Missoula Fire Sciences Laboratory; $7 million for targeted research on wildfire
smoke exposure and policy; and $3 million for EPA to coordinate interagency science,
management and communication strategies for addressing wildfires.
Conclusion
2020 marks the 50th anniversary of the Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Thanks to this subcommittee's investments in EPA's dean air work over the years, our nation has
made enormous progress in reducing air pollution that causes premature death and makes
people sick. However, more work remains to realize the promise of healthy air for all, and climate
change is already beginning to undo that progress. I call on you now to ensure that EPA has the
funding it needs to carry out the lifesaving day-to-day work of implementing and enforcing
protections under the Clean Air Act, and to ensure that your bill does not contain any harmful
policy riders that would undermine this work. Thank you for your work to ensure the promise of
the Clean Air Act: healthy air for all to breathe.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 374 here 43677P7.128
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00220 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
221
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. Ms. Warner.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
WITNESS
MANDY WARNER, SENIOR MANAGER, CLIMATE & AIR POLICY, ENVI-
RONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
Ms. WARNER. Thank you. Good afternoon. I want to thank Chair-
woman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Representative Kil-
mer, and other members of the subcommittee for the opportunity
to testify today. My name is Mandy Warner. I am a senior manager
for climate and air policy at Environmental Defense Fund. EDF is
an international and environmental advocacy organization with 2-
and-a-half million members nationwide. While there are numerous
priorities for EDF within Interior and Environment appropriations
that are critical to public health, my remarks today are specifically
focused on the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal related
to the mercury and air toxic standards for power plants.
EDF is respectfully asking the Interior, Environment Sub-
committee to include a provision to direct EPA to complete a report
that fully assesses this proposal’s impacts on Americans. Specifi-
cally, we recommend EPA complete an analysis of the impacts of
its MATS proposal that includes a comprehensive assessment of its
potential public health, economic, and environmental consequences.
That study must include an analysis of the costs and benefits of the
Administrator’s proposed revised supplemental finding, and of any
rescission, invalidation, or termination of MATS, as well as a study
of the actual cost to industry of complying with MATS since it has
been implemented. This analysis will better inform the public and
Congress of the issues at stake in the MATS proposal.
Remarkably, EPA proposed to find control of power plant mer-
cury in air toxics emissions is not appropriate without doing any
such study, and despite a massive record showing the grave harms
that these pollutants cause to society, including children and vul-
nerable populations.
As background, in 2011, EPA finalized standards to reduce mer-
cury and other toxic air pollution, including lead, chromium, ar-
senic, and soot from coal- and oil-fired power plants. Power plants
were the single-largest source of toxic mercury emissions in the
U.S. and emit over 80 hazardous air pollutants. These pollutants
are known to cause cancer, birth and reproductive impacts, res-
piratory and cardiovascular impacts, impaired brain develop in
children, and other harms to human health.
Leading up to the finalization of the standards, EPA assessed the
benefits and costs associated with implementing the rule, finding
up to 11,000 lives would be saved every year, along with avoiding
130,000 asthma attacks among children and other health harms.
This analysis demonstrates that the benefits outweigh the costs of
implementing the standards by a margin of 9 to 1. And subsequent
to finalization and implementation of MATS, many studies have
further quantified and monetized reductions of mercury, finding
that the benefits are indeed orders of magnitude higher than EPA
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00221 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
222
had estimated. And it is now also clear that EPA and industry
overestimated the cost of compliance with the standards.
The power sector is meeting MATS and has achieved an 85 per-
cent reduction in mercury, an 81 percent reduction in other metals,
and a 96 percent reduction in acid gases since 2010. Unfortunately,
in 2018, EPA proposed to reverse the Agency’s prior foundational
finding that MATS is appropriate and necessary, which could po-
tentially undermine these already-implemented and widely-sup-
ported standards. EPA presented no scientific evidence to suggest
it was not appropriate to regulate power plants’ hazardous air pol-
lution. EPA also declined to update its analysis of the cost and ben-
efits of the rule, and instead inappropriately relied on the 2011 reg-
ulatory impact analysis.
Numerous public commenters noted that the substantial peer-re-
viewed research documenting greater health effects of mercury and
analysis quantifying and monetizing benefits and reducing mercury
emissions were not considered in EPA’s 2018 proposal. This defi-
ciency was also noted by the EPA’s Science Advisory Board in a
draft report addressed to Administrator Wheeler in October 2019.
For example, as EPA admitted at the time, the Agency’s 2011 RIA
was only able to quantify and monetize a small subset of the subset
of the impacts of methyl mercury exposure. More recent studies
have shown that there are significant new analysis EPA could
draw from to assess the full array of benefits from implementing
the standards.
A comprehensive report from leading independent environmental
economists released in December 2019 also found that EPA’s ap-
proach greatly underestimated the public health benefits associated
with reducing mercury emissions, and that a new retrospective and
prospective benefit cost analysis could better represent the impacts
of the MATS rule. Furthermore, the public health and environ-
mental community is not alone in objecting to EPA’s harmful and
scientifically-unsupported proposal. EPA’s proposal has been widely
opposed, including by the power sector and labor leaders, who have
asked EPA to leave the standards in place and effective. Also the
House of Representatives has expressed bipartisan opposition to
the 2018 MATS proposal with the House Interior EPA funding for
Fiscal Year 2020 having included an amendment that would have
blocked the EPA from finalizing this proposal.
I want to thank you again for your consideration of the MATS
study proposal, and we look forward to working with the committee
on this important matter.
[The statement of Ms. Warner follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00222 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
223
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations,
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
FY2021
February 6, 2020
Mandy Warner
Senior Manager, Climate and Air Policy
Environmental Defense Fund
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and other members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Mandy Warner and I am Senior
Manager for Climate & Air Policy at Environmental Defense Fund. EDF is an international
environmental advocacy organization with 2.5 million members nationwide. While there are
numerous priorities for EDF within Interior & Environment Appropriations that are critical to
our public health, my remarks today are specifically focused on the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)'s proposal related to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for Power Plants
(MATS).
MATS Study Language
EDF respectfully asks the Interior-Environment Subcommittee to include a provision to direct
EPA to complete a report that fully assesses the proposal's impact on Americans.
Specifically, EPA should cornpl.etean analysis of the impacts of its proposal related to MATS
including a comprehensive assessment of the proposal's potential public health, economic, and
environmental consequences. That study must include an analysis I of the costs and benefits of
the Administrator's proposed revised supplemental finding and of any rescission, invalidation or
termination of MATS, as well as a study of the actual costs to the industry of compliance with
MA TS since implementation.
This analysis will better infom1 the public and Congress of the issues at stake in the MATS
proposal. Remarkably, EPA has proposed to find control of power plant mercury and air toxics
emissions is "not appropriate" without doing any such study- and despite a massive record
showing the grave harms that these pollutants cause to society - including children and other
vulnerable populations.
Background
In 2011, EPA finalized standards to reduce mercury and other toxic air pollution, including lead,
chromium, arsenic, and soot from coal- and oil-fired power plants. Power plants were the single
largest source of toxic mercury in the US, and emit over 80 hazardous air pollutants. These
1 Consistent with the requirements of 0MB Circular A-4.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 382 here 43677P7.129
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00223 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
224
pollutants are known to cause cancer, or birth or reproductive impacts, respiratory and'
cardiovascular impacts, impaired brain development in children, and other harms to human
health. Leading up to the finalization, EPA assessed the benefits and costs associated with
implementing its rule, finding up to 11,000 lives were saved every year, along with the
avoidance of 130,000 asthma attacks among children and other health harms. 2 The analysis
demonstrated that the benefits outweighe<l'the costs of implementing the standards by a margin
of 9-to-1. Subsequent to finalization and implementation of the rule, many studies have further
quantified and monetized reductions of mercury, finding that the benefits are orders of
magnitude higher than EPA estimated, and it is now also clear that EPA and industry
overestimated the cost of compliance with the standards. 3 The power sector is in compliance
with MATS and has achieved an 86% reduction in mercury, an 81% reduction in other metals,
and a 96% reduction in acid gases since 2010. 4
Unfortunately, in 2018, EPA proposed to reverse the agency's prior foundational finding that
MATS is "appropriate & necessary," which can potentially undermine these already-
implemented, widely supported standards. EPA presented no scientific evidence to suggest it was
not appropriate to regulate power plants' hazardous air pollution. EPA also declined to update its
analysis of the costs and benefits of the rule, and instead inappropriately relied on the 2011
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA). Numerous public commenters noted the substantial peer-
reviewed research documenting greater health effects of mercury and analysis quantifying and
monetizing benefits of reducing mercury emissions that were not considered in EPA's 2018
proposal. 5 This deficiency was noted by the Science Advisory Board in a draft report addressed
to Administrator Wheeler dated October 16, 2019. 6 For example, as EPA admitted at the time,
the agency's 2011 RIA was only able to quantify and monetize a small subset of a subset of the
impacts of methylmercury exposure; more recent studies have shown there is significant new
analysis EPA could draw from to assess the full array of benefits from implementation of the
standards. A comprehensive report from leading, independent economists released in December
2019 found that EPA's approach greatly underestimated the public health benefits associated
2
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From Coal and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam
Generating Units and Standards of Performance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired Electric Utility, Industrial Commercial
Institutional, and Small Industrial Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units, 77 Fed. Reg. 9304, at 9429
(Feb. 16, 2012).
3
See Comments of Environmental, Public Health, and Civil Rights Organizations, at 55-76 (Apr. 17, 2019), EPA-
HQOAR-2018-0794-1191, https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794-1191.
4
Proposed National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam
Generating Units-Reconsideration of Supplemental Finding and Residual Risk and Technology Review, 84 Fed.
Reg. 2670, at 2676 (Feb. 7, 2019).
5
Comments of Environmental, Public Health, and Civil Rights Organizations, at 55-76 (Apr. 17, 2019), EPA-HQOAR-
2018-0794-1191, https://www.regulatlons.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794-1191.
6
Science Advisory Board (SAB), Draft Report, Consideration of the Scientific and Technical Basis of EPA's Proposed
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for Power Plants Residual Risk and Technology Review and Cost Review, October
16, 2019.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 383 here 43677P7.130
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00224 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
225
with reducing mercury emissions and that a new "retrospective and prospective benefit-cost
analysis could better represent the impacts of the MATS rule." 7
The public health and environmental community is not alone in opposing EPA's harmful and
scientifically unsupported proposal. EPA' s proposal has been widely opposed, including by the
power sector and labor leaders, who have asked EPA to leave the standards "in place and
effective." 8 The House of Representatives has expressed bi-partisan opposition to the 2018
MATS proposal, with the House Interior-EPA funding bill for FY2020 including an amendment
that would have blocked EPA from finalizing its proposal that could undermine the standards.
Thank you again for your consideration of our MATS study proposal and we look forward to
working with the Committee to address this important matter.
7
External Environmental Economics Advisory Committee, Report on the Proposed Changes to the Federal Mercury
and Air Toxics Standards, at 2 (Dec. 2019), https://www.e-eeac.org/matsreport.
8
Edison Electric Institute et al., letter (July 10, 2018) available at:
http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/files/2018/08/JointTradesMAT5Letter_Final.pdf
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 384 here 43677P7.131
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00225 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
226
Ms. MCCOLLUM [presiding]. So I will just ask a quick question
of all three of you. We have things I looked at. I mean, some of this
is appropriations, making sure that there is the funding to do the
right analysis, the funding to do the right studies, the funding to
do the enforcement. That is kind of the place we are at. And the
amendments can come on the floor and be in order for some of the
things. But do you have anything moving through Energy and
Commerce in the authorizations committee that Mr. Joyce and I
should be looking at to see whether or not there is a funding at-
tachment to them and be aware of it?
Dr. KHATRI. I don’t know that we have anything formally going
through those committees. However, I think the clean energy sector
certainly helps with improving our air quality. And so any collabo-
rations we can make in that regard would be helpful. I think the
lens through which I came with representing ALA is the fact that
it is a broad issue, the air quality, and it doesn’t even affect only
those people with chronic lung diseases, but can develop it as well.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Right.
Dr. KHATRI. So I think knowledge is power is the key to this, and
giving the communities the empowerment to sort of partner and
change their environment, that is the lens through which I came.
So perhaps that didn’t come through as clearly.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. No, no, it did. I was just wondering if you had
any other, you know, we are not the only tool in the congressional
toolbox that you are looking at to bring these issues either to
awareness. You know, sometimes there is environmental justice
bills going through. There are other hearings happening. I was just
wondering if there was anything that I as a member should be
talking to some of my counterparts in either Energy and Commerce
or any of the other committees.
Dr. KHATRI. I can certainly get back to you on that.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. You could get back to us. That would be helpful.
Mr. KEOGH. We do not have anything attached to any other legis-
lation. Implementing the Clean Air Act is a pretty swim lane.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. I think so.
Mr. KEOGH. And the State and local agencies have these category
grants. So you are the dance partner that we come with.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. With the dance.
Mr. KEOGH. So that is where we are at.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. But for the grants, but for some of the other
things.
Mr. KEOGH. Yeah, I am not aware of any advocacy work that we
have in Energy and Commerce related to the mercury stuff that I
talked about, but I am happy to follow up with you as well about
that.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Okay.
Mr. KEOGH. Thank you for that question.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
Mr. KEOGH. Thank you for your time.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Absolutely. We have heard from the EPA clean
air panel. Now we are going to hear from the EPA clean water
panel. So if you would, and we won’t count it against your time.
Just take a moment and introduce yourself, and then go into your
testimony. We will go through. We found out that that kind of
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00226 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
227
saves time and gets people back on track. And you have waited
throughout a vote, so we appreciate it, and we look forward to
hearing your testimony. Please start.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW & POLICY CENTER
WITNESS
ANN MESNIKOFF, FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, ENVIRON-
MENTAL LAW & POLICY CENTER
Ms. MESNIKOFF. Thank you. Good afternoon. I am Anne
Mesnikoff. I am the Federal legislative director for the Environ-
mental Law and Policy Center. ELPC is based in the Great Lakes
region with offices in seven Midwest States and here in D.C. Thank
you, Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and Representative
Kilmer for the opportunity to testify today in support of the pop-
ular bipartisan Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. We greatly ap-
preciate the leadership of this committee that resulted in the pro-
gram receiving $320 million for this Fiscal Year.
The Great Lakes are a global gem and contain 21 percent of the
world’s fresh water. They supply 42 million people with safe drink-
ing water. The Great Lakes support a $7 billion annual fishing in-
dustry, and recreation draws millions of tourists, who boost the
economies of shoreline communities. In short, the Great Lakes are
where many millions live, work, and play.
I will make three points today. First, the Great Lakes Restora-
tion Initiative is vitally important and successful. It is a model
Federal program providing great benefits, and it is working well.
As the GLRI’s Third Action Plan notes, the GLRI has been a cata-
lyst for unprecedented Federal agency coordination, which has, in
turn, produced unprecedented results.
Congress’ recognition of the effectiveness of the program is re-
flected in the bipartisan support to reject the President’s proposed
budget cuts for this successful program, and instead restored fund-
ing for it for Fiscal Year 2018, 2019, and an increase in Fiscal Year
2020. Yesterday on the House floor, many members spoke to the
benefits of GLRI across the Great Lakes, and my written testimony
details a range of projects the program covers and highlights sev-
eral examples of successful projects documented by our partners,
Healing Our Waters Coalition. Importantly, GLRI projects bring to-
gether a broad array of partners to do the work to achieve GLRI’s
goals and create jobs. The program delivers significant regional
economic value.
Second, even as we applaud the success of GLRI, we need to rec-
ognize the new and evolving threats the Great Lakes face from cli-
mate change, the increases of harmful algal blooms, to this Admin-
istration’s attack on the Clean Water Act. These combined threats
mean we need to protect the Great Lakes more now than ever. Last
spring, ELPC issued a report authored by top climate experts from
Midwest universities, including the University of Minnesota and
Ohio State University. The report found that climate change is
causing significant and far-reaching impacts across the region.
Among the impacts particularly relevant to GLRI is the finding
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00227 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
228
that climate change is contributing to a more dramatic pattern of
fluctuating lake levels compared to historic patterns. Annual pre-
cipitation in the Lakes region has increased at a higher percentage
than the rest of the country, and more of this precipitation is occur-
ring in unusually large events.
The Lakes remain at dangerously high levels, bringing flooding,
impacting infrastructure and increased polluted runoff. We need to
recognize the role climate change is playing and will play across
the region with attention to resilience, protecting shorelines, wet-
lands restoration, other projects that GLRI supports. Changes in
precipitation patterns are also contributing to the growing chal-
lenge of algal blooms, which threaten public health, drinking
water, and treatment costs, and impact recreation and fishing.
In just the Maumee River Watershed, a priority watershed for
GLRI, the estimated number of animals in the region tripled over
the last 10 years. We used satellite imagery to count and measure
CAFOs in the Maumee Watershed to estimate the number of ani-
mals the amount of manure these facilities produce, and concluded
that in 2018 alone, CAFOs produced 3.5 million tons of manure,
fueling Lake Erie’s excess nutrient load. GLRI supports strategies
to reduce this harmful runoff, but even as these programs are im-
plemented, the number of animals and industrial farms is on the
rise.
Finally, the Lakes face new threats from critical rollbacks of
rules intended to protect clean water. The recently-announced Nav-
igable Waters Protection Act will leave rain-dependent streams and
a large percentage of wetlands unprotected. EPA’s own Science Ad-
visory Board’s draft letter was deeply critical of the analysis sup-
porting the final rule. This rollback, along with the proposed
changes to States’ authority under section 401 of the Clean Water
Act could also increase challenges to the Lakes.
And finally, third, I need to make amendment to my written tes-
timony because, again, as members spoke in support of GLRI yes-
terday, they also passed the GLRI Act of 2019. ELPC supports this
bill and the important goal of funding GLRI at $475 million. But
given the urgency of protecting the Lakes, we request that this
committee consider increasing funding for the program to that level
for fiscal year 2021. This increase would be both a downpayment
toward the implementation of the reauthorization and a recognition
of the challenges the Great Lakes face.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today in support
of GLRI.
[The statement of Ms. Mesnikoff follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00228 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
229
TESTIMONY OF ANN MESNIKOFF
FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT AL LAW & POLICY
CENTER
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED
AGENCIES
FEBRUARY 6, 2020 WASIDNGTQN D,c,
I am Ann Mesnikoff, the Federal Legislative Director for the Environmental Law & Policy
Center (ELPC), which is the Midwest's leading environmental legal advocacy and eco-business
innovation organization. ELPC has staff and offices in seven Midwest states and, here, in
Washington D.C. We have worked for many years to protect the Great Lakes and were very
engaged with many colleagues and public officials to establish the successful Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative (GLRI) before and then during the Obama administration.
Thank you Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce and members of this subcommittee for the
opportunity to testify today in support of the popular and bipartisan Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative. We greatly appreciate the leadership of this committee that resulted in the program
receiving $3 20 million for this fiscal year.
ELPC would like to make three points today:
Em, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is vitally important and successful. This is a model
federal program providing great benefits, and it is working well.
~ . the challenges to the Great Lakes are only increasing from climate change and the
increases in harmful algal blooms to the recently-issued new replacement for the 2015 Clean
Water rule, the administration's proposal to constrain slate authority under the section 401 of the
Clean Water Act, among other rollbacks. These combined threats mean we need to protect the
lakes more than ever before.
I.11.im,.while we look forward to Congress reauthorizing the program this year as provided in the
GLRI Act of 2019, we request that this committee consider increasing funding for the program to
$475 million for FY 2021. This increase would be both a down payment toward implementing the
reauthorization and a recognition of the challenges the Great Lakes face.,
The Great Lakes are a global gem and contain 21% of the planet's fresh water supply. 42 million
people rely on the Great Lakes for safe drinking water supplies. The Great Lakes provide a rich
aquatic habitat for many species. The Great Lakes support a $7 billion annual fishing industry,
and Great Lakes recreation draws millions of tourists who boost the economies of shoreline
communities. In short, the Great Lakes are where many millions live, work and play.
.f!m: As the third GLRf' s 3rd Action Plan notes, "the GLRI has been a catalyst for unprecedented
federal agency coordination, which has in tum produced unprecedented results." The program
supports shoreline and wetlands protection projects, keeping out invasive species, and reducing
harmful algae blooms. Congress' recognition of the effectiveness of the Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative is reflected in the bipartisan support to reject President Trump's proposed budget cuts
for this successful program, and, instead, restore the full authorized funding of $300 million for
FY 2018 and 2019 and an increase in funding for FY2020.
The Initiative funds and supports thousands of projects across the Great Lakes states to:
I
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 394 here 43677P7.132
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00229 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
230
• Improve water quality for safe drinking water supplies, fisheries and aquatic habitats.
• Protect shorelines and restore wetlands.
• Protect and restore native habitats and species.
• Help prevent and control invasive species.
• Clean up toxic sediments on lake bottoms.
• Reduce nutrient runoff that contributes to harmful algal blooms.
There are countless examples of GLRI projects that deliver multiple benefits to the Great Lakes,
from river and natural area restoration projects and reducing the threat of invasive species to
addressing and ultimately delisting of Areas of Concern. The Healing Our Waters Coalition
(HOW) documents projects like the Flute Reed Riverbank stabilization in Northern Minnesota
detailing how it keeps nutrients out of Lake Superior, improves flood plains and creates habitat for
fish and the Burnham Wildlife Corridor in Chicago, which restored natural areas with native
species and wildlife habitats and also helps slow down and filter water before it enters Lake
Michigan, reducing runoff into the lake. Importantly, these projects ~ring together a broad array of
partners to work together to achieve GLRI' s goals and create jobs. The GLRI Action Plan III
details the progress being made across the region to address Areas of Concern including now
delisted areas: Presque Isle Bay in Pennsylvania and Deer Lake and White Lake in Michigan.
Finally, in addition to the direct benefits of specific projects, GLRI has broad regional economic
benefits. A University of Michigan study found that the federal dolla,rs invested through GLRI
projects between 2010 and 2016 will produce $3.35 in additional economic activity for every dollar
invested in the Great Lakes region through 2036.
~ Even as we applaud the success of the GLRI, we need to repognize the new and evolving
threats to the Great Lakes. These threats include climate change, the growing threat of toxic algal
blooms, and rollbacks of several key protections for clean water that ,the administration is pursuing.
With respect to climate change, last spring, ELPC with Chicago Council on Global Affairs,
released An Assessment of the Impacts ofClimate Change on the Great Lakes. This report brought
together top climate experts from Midwest universities including the University of Minnesota and
Ohio State University to bring together the best science on the impacts and threats climate change
poses to the Great Lakes into one report.
The report found that climate change is causing significant and far-reaching impacts on the Great
Lakes and the Great Lakes region. Among the impacts particularly relevant to GLRI is the fmding
that climate change is contributing to a more dramatic pattern of fluctuating lake levels compared
to historical fluctuation patterns. Driving this in part is that annual precipitation in the Great Lakes
region has increased at a higher percentage than the rest of the country and more of this
precipitation is occurring in unusually large events. This past year has seen record high levels
bringing flooding, impacting infrastructure, and increased polluted runoff. These impacts
demonstrate the need to recognize the role climate change is and will: play across the region with
attention to resilience, protecting shorelines, wetlands restoration and other projects that GLRI
supports across the Great Lakes.
The report also noted that changes in precipitation patterns are not oJiy contributing to the
fluctuating water levels, they are contributing to the growing challenge of toxic algal blooms in
Lake Erie and across the Great Lakes and smaller regional lakes and ponds. These blooms threaten
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 395 here 43677P7.133
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00230 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
231
public health, drinking water and treatment costs and also impact recreation and fishing. In just
one watershed - the Maumee River watershed in Ohio which feeds into Lake Erie -- the estimated
number of animals in the region tripled over the last IO years. The Maumee is among the priority
watersheds included in the GLRI Action Plan III. Using satellite imagery to count and measure
CAFOs and to estimate the number of animals and amount of manure those facilities produce,
ELPC has concluded that in 2018 alone, CAFOs produced over 3.5 million tons of manure. Due to
this rapid increase in manure in the basin, it is likely that manure is responsible for 40% of
agricultural phosphorus in the watershed. Agricultural phosphorus, including phosphorus from
CAFOs, is the single largest source of western Lake Erie's excess phosphorus. The current GLRI
Action Plan provides strategies to reduce this harmful runoff, noting the GLRI has kept more than
one million pounds of phosphorous out of the lakes. GLRI and other programs are working to help
address this massive challenge of reducing nutrient pollution and the threat of toxic blooms - but
even as these programs are implemented the number of animals and industrial farms are on the rise.
Finally, the Great Lakes face new threats from critical rollbacks of rules intended to protect clean
water. Under the recently announced Navigable Waters Protection Rule more than two million
miles ofrain-dependent streams in the country are unprotected. In addition, an EPA preliminary
analysis of the proposed rule indicated it could exclude approximately 51 percent of the roughly
110 million acres of wetlands in the continental United States. EPA's own Science Advisory Board
issued a draft letter at the end of December noting the analysis supporting the rule was contrary to
science and not supported. This rollback along with the proposed changes to state's authority under
section 401 of the Clean Water Act could also increase the challenges the Great Lakes face.
Third: Last fall the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee passed HR 4031, the GLRI
Act of 2019. This bipartisan bill reauthorizes the program through 2026. ELPC supports this bill and
the important goal of funding GLRI at $475 million. But for the reasons noted in my testimony-
namely the climate impacts on the Lakes, including fluctuating water levels, changes in precipitation
patterns, toxic algal blooms, and impacts ofrollbacks of Clean Water Act protections as well as
ongoing needs to address the many other goals of the program, $475 million is warranted for
FY2021.
This Committee and the full House have consistently voted to appropriate $300 million for
the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and to reject the President's proposals to zero out or cut
90% of the program funding, For FY 2020 the funding is $320 million - an important increase to
the program. The GLRl is a successful program and a model for federal, state and local
cooperation. The Environmental Law & Policy respectfully requests you consider the urgency of
protecting the Great Lakes and consider supporting GLRl with $475 million.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 396 here 43677P7.134
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00231 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
232
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA, FLATHEAD LAKE
BIOLOGICAL STATION
WITNESS
ERIN K. SEXTON, SENIOR SCIENTIST, UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA,
FLATHEAD LAKE BIOLOGICAL STATION
Ms. SEXTON. So thanks in advance for your time today. Thanks,
Chairman McCollum, and Ranking Member Joyce, and Committee
Member Kilmer. This is a first for me. So my name is Erin Sexton,
and I am a senior scientist at the University of Montana Flathead
Biological Station. I am here today to discuss the important issue
of mine contamination from British Columbia flowing downriver
into Alaska, Washington, Montana, and Idaho.
I have spent the last 2 decades studying the impacts of large-
scale mining in transboundary rivers. I live and work with my fam-
ily just outside of Glacier National Park and live near two of these
big transboundary rivers, the Flathead and the Kootenai water-
shed. Both of these rivers have their headwaters in southeast Brit-
ish Columbia and are underlain by some of the world’s largest met-
allurgical coal deposits.
I am here today because there is a critical need for Federal fund-
ing to address the issue of B.C. mining impacts to our downstream
States.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. For the record, B.C. is British Columbia?
Ms. SEXTON. Yes, I am sorry. British Columbia. British Colum-
bia, Canada. This spending is an investment up front to ensure ac-
countability so that our communities in Washington, Idaho, Alaska,
and Montana do not pay the price for long-term damages from Ca-
nadian mines.
Mines in British Columbia leeching into western States creates
a unique problem for our State, tribal, and Federal Governments.
We are collectively outside of the decision-making process and ex-
cluded from environmental assessments and mining permits that
directly impact our rivers. In Montana and Idaho, mines owned by
Teck Coal in southeast B.C. are right now delivering mine waste
into our Kootenai River watershed, and they are already impacting
water quality and fish. In Washington State, Imperial Metals seeks
to build a giant copper mine in the headwaters of the Skagit River,
and in Alaska, there are more than 12 operating and proposed
mines that threaten some of our last remaining wild salmon rivers.
All four States share the common problem of British Columbia
mines jeopardizing downstream economies, water quality, fish, and
communities.
In years of working on transboundary mines and sorting through
the environmental process in British Columbia, I have learned that
we cannot trust their laws to protect our waters. In British Colum-
bia, the mining company leads every aspect of the EA, from data
collection, to assessment of impacts, to selecting the mitigation. In
short, letting a mining company write their own environmental as-
sessment is business as usual for British Columbia, but represents
a substantial downgrading of our own environmental laws.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00232 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
233
Fifteen years ago when I started sampling water quality down-
stream Teck’s Elk Valley mines in southeast B.C., I found signifi-
cantly elevated levels of selenium nitrates and other contaminants,
all well above healthy environmental thresholds. We saw evidence
from fishing outfitters of fish with missing gills and birds with two
beaks, common deformities resulting from selenium toxicity. Given
these impacts and clear increasing contaminant trends, I expected
to see a moratorium on new mines pending effective mitigations
and regulatory enforcement. Instead, with this data in hand, Brit-
ish Columbia permitted the expansion of four open coal mines in
the Elk Valley and Kootenai watershed. Rather than enforcing
water quality guidelines, they rewrote the management plan, in-
creasing water limits to accommodate rising contaminant levels.
Teck Coal’s mitigations have repeatedly failed, and we now have
decades of mine waste leeching into Montana and Idaho over 150
miles downriver from the mines. This year, USGS, USEPA, and the
Kootenai Tribe of Idaho are trying to cobble together funding to
verify those findings and expand their study.
In Fiscal Year 2019 and 2020 with funding from Interior appro-
priations, USGS took a first pass at baseline data at the Inter-
national Boundary of the States bordering British Columbia. They
did this by installing higher-grade gauges at the International
Boundary. To date, EPA has not received funding to address this
issue despite being a lead entity across all four States and pro-
viding a critical link to our States and tribes.
Data gathered with those initial dollars in Fiscal Year 2019 and
2020 shows the need for a substantial long-term funding invest-
ment to our interior agencies. A conservative estimate would be
$16 million over 5 years across Washington, Alaska, Montana, and
Idaho. This funding will allow us to lead our own science, establish
our own baseline, evaluate impacts, and proactively ensure protec-
tion and rehabilitation of these rivers. We can build a long-term
strategy, which can include assessment of damages and assignment
of accountability north of the border.
The call for resolution on this issue has been loud and clear. Last
year, eight U.S. senators from the four downstream States read a
joint letter to B.C. Premier Horgan demanding action. The letter
followed on a rising chorus from affected tribes expressing deep
concerns about impacts to travel, treaty rights, and lands. The re-
sponse from Premier Horgan was insufficient and notably lacked
any mention of financial assurances or accountability to down-
stream States.
A robust commitment to Federal-led science is imperative to U.S.
efforts to achieve meaningful and lasting resolution to this issue,
and ultimately to ensure that the cost of this contamination isn’t
paid by downstream communities of Idaho, Montana, Washington,
and Alaska. Thank you for your time today.
[The statement of Ms. Sexton follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00233 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
234
Testifying: Erin K. Sexton, Senior Scientist, University of Montana, Flathead Lake Biological
Station
Primary Focus of the Testimony: Environment with Public Health focus and/or Environment,
Climate Change and Science
Subject Description: Federal leadership is critical to mitigating Canadian mine contamination in
U.S. waters, by providing research funds to establish baselines, and evaluate damages to U.S.
property, water quality and fishery health.
I thank the Members for an opportunity to address this Committee on the need for more
scientific data and information to address threats to international watersheds shared with our
Canadian neighbors. As a researcher at the University of Montana, Flathead Lake Biological
Station, I have been studying mining impacts in our CA-US watersheds for over thirteen years.
Canadian mining ventures, operating in British Columbia (B.C.), are leaching toxic contaminants
into U.S. waters at levels that exceed U.S. EPA standards for protection of fish, water quality
and community health. Specifically, hazardous pollutants from large-scale coal mines in B.C. are
being transported into Montana and Idaho by way of the transboundary Kootenai River;
contaminants from legacy, operating and proposed hardrock mines threaten transboundary
salmon and water quality in Alaska; and proposed hardrock mining in B.C. headwaters
threatens freshwater and ocean resources in the Puget Sound region of Washington state. In all
downstream states, B.C. mine pollutants jeopardize U.S. economic, environmental and
community interests, including tribal lands, resources and rights. In short, Canada receives the
economic benefits while the U.S. downstream waters receive contaminated mine waste at the
expense of U.S. watersheds and communities.
I very much appreciate the steps already taken by this committee, including initial funding to
the federal family of agencies working to document the volume and types of contaminants
leaching into U.S. waters from B.C.'s mines (USGS FV19&20 Interior Appropriations funding,
"implementation of a baseline strategy for transboundary rivers"). This funding enabled a
critical first step in documenting mine contaminants leaching across the international
boundary. For example, data gathered with the initial funding confirmed that B.C. mining
contaminants are now exceeding U.S. EPA water quality standards at the international
boundary of B.C. and Montana in the Kootenai watershed. Based on these findings, it is clear
that a significant, multi-year investment is essential to enable federal agencies, working with
tribes and states, to accurately quantify damages, seek reimbursement for contamination, and
compel effective mitigation of impacts in these high-value watersheds that are integral to
Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Alaska.
With all due respect to our Canadian neighbors, B.C. 's mining regulations fall far short of U.S.
environmental standards. From project assessment to approval, monitoring to enforcement,
operations to clean-up, the provincial regulatory structure fails to meet U.S. criteria. As a
consequence, we are receiving mined water from B.C. that meets weaker environmental
standards than our current federal and state laws. In addition, because the mines are permitted
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 403 here 43677P7.135
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00234 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
235
in B.C., U.S. federal, state, and tribal governments are excluded from the decision-making
process. For example, in the headwaters of the Kootenai watershed in B.C. (an important
tributary of the Columbia River Basin), B.C. recently approved four large-scale mine expansions,
despite clear scientific evidence that contamination is over 100 times the threshold for
protecting fish and aquatic life. Contamination from those approved mines is now being
transported into Montana and Idaho. These are clearly international issues, covered under the
Boundary Waters Treaty between our two countries. Federal responsibility under this treaty
requires federal-to-federal engagement and U.S. involvement in Canadian mine assessment if
and when transboundary contaminants are anticipated. Already, U.S. research has revealed
severe impacts in the U.S., including to our water quality, our fisheries, and our wildlife. High
levels of selenium, one of the most troubling contaminants, is resulting in spinal and skeletal
deformities in fish and birds. This presents an immediate threat to the rural communities that
rely upon these resources for their economic futures. Only by scientifically documenting the
types and volume of contamination flowing into U.S. communities can we begin to hold
polluters accountable and implement restorative mitigations. And only by long-term funding for
that research can your committee protect these downstream state-side communities.
Our need for continued data collection and damage assessment has never been greater. Recent
data from the U.S. EPA, USGS and the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho show that concentrations of
selenium and nitrate from legacy and active open-pit coal mines in B.C. have been steadily
increasing for decades. While contaminant levels are highest immediately downstream from
the mines in southeast B.C., pollutant concentrations also exceed safe levels well into Montana
and Idaho. Specifically, the U.S. EPA, USGS and Kootenai Tribe of Idaho recently found selenium
more than 100 km downstream of the mines in the Kootenai River of Montana and Idaho.
Alarming new data show that selenium is nearly twice the U.S. EPA standard in certain fish, and
may threaten the endangered white sturgeon, which is one of the most sensitive species of fish
to selenium toxicity, and is a species of cultural significance to the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho.
Water quality models produced by Teck Resources predict that contaminant concentrations in
the Kootenai/ Elk headwater system will continue to increase for at least five more years, and
hoped-for stabilization will depend upon as-yet unproven technology. In fact, previous mine-
waste mitigation schemes have failed, resulting in additional fish-kill in downstream waters.
Despite these failures and the demonstrated contamination of U.S. waters, Canadian regulators
continue to assess and approve new mine ventures in the headwaters of U.S. states: Teck
Resources is expanding operations upstream of Montana and Idaho; Imperial Metals
(perpetrator of the largest environmental mining disaster in Canadian history, at Mount Polley)
is operating the Red Chris mine in the headwaters of the AK-B.C. Stikine River, and is currently
seeking to industrialize the headwaters of the Skagit River, upstream of Seattle. Furthermore,
B.C. has permitted or is considering permits for Teck, Sea bridge Gold, and others to operate
some of North America's largest open-pit gold mines near the Canadian headwaters of Alaska's
largest salmon-producing rivers, which are both culturally and economically significant. In all of
these cases, and despite known contamination, Canadian regulators continue to assess and
approve new ventures in the absence of scientifically validated plans to contain toxins. The
threat is not hypothetical.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 404 here 43677P7.136
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00235 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
236
In Montana, Idaho, Washington and Alaska, we face very concerning un~nowns. Conservative
estimates suggest that even were the B.C. transboundary mines to be shuttered today, the
pollutants would continue to leach into surface waters for many centuries to come. And
trendlines suggest the toxicity of these contaminants will continue to increase for generations -
which is why we seek immediate and long-term funding for monitoring in these transboundary
watersheds. These issues can be quantified and addressed, through federal leadership and
funding. With a multi-year commitment for critical data collection across Montana, Idaho,
Washington and Alaska, we can address important data gaps with respect to the complete suite
of potential contaminants, the quantities of pollutants that are being released, and how long
those toxins will persist in our rivers, fish, wildlife and communities. This data, collected by U.S
federal agencies will enable them to work with tribal and state governments to evaluate mining
impacts, seek compensation where applicable and determine what and where restorative
mitigation is necessary.
In 2018, in response to increasing concerns from tribes and members of Congress about this
issue, the U.S. EPA convened a federal interagency working group, "tasked with identifying the
gaps and limitations within the Memoranda of Understanding between British Columbia and
Alaska, Washington, Idaho and Montana, relating to British Columbia mining within United
States-British Columbia transboundary watersheds."
FY20 Report language from this committee states that: "U.S.- British Columbia Transboundary
Watersheds. The Committees direct the Agency to continue and expand its work coordinating
with Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies to monitor and reduce transboundary hazardous
contaminants in the Kootenai watershed. The Agency is directed to coordinate with the
Department of State, U.S. Geological Survey, and other partners to submit a report to the
Committees within 60 days of enactment on any remaining data gaps to address transboundary
watershed contamination in the Kootenai with Canada. The Agency is also directed to release to
the Committees, within 180 days of enactment, any data gap analysis relating to potential
impacts to water quality and/or aquatic resources related to hard rock copper and gold mining
projects in British Columbia for transboundary rivers."
While we greatly appreciate these steps toward inter-agency cooperation and reporting, we
also realize these initial measures must be complemented by continued investment in long-
term data collection and agency collaboration. In Alaska and Washington state, where legacy,
operating, and proposed B.C. mines endanger critical salmon habitat that sustains the region's
multi-billion-dollar fisheries economy and traditional and customary ways of life, the primary
need is for fundamental baseline scientific data collection, and long-term monitoring. In
Montana and Idaho, where contamination from active B.C. mines already impacts important
natural and cultural resources, the need for data collection is combined with a need for a full
damages assessment and mitigation plan. The direct economic and social costs to U.S. citizens
must be quantified if we are to negotiate appropriate solutions with B.C. and Canadian
leadership.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 405 here 43677P7.137
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00236 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
237
The initial FY19 and FY20 appropriations of $1,500,000, granted by this Committee, enabled
USGS to initiate first-phase baseline data collection to better understand current conditions in
U.S. rivers threatened by B.C. mining. Unfortunately, in the Kootenai River of MT and ID,
preliminary data show contamination concentrations holding steady (in exceedance) all the way
through Montana and into Idaho. This surprising and important information was discovered
only because the USGS, U.S. EPA, and Kootenai Tribe of Idaho cobbled together existing funds
for an independent and thorough analysis. Follow-up studies will further refine our
understanding, and will help downstream states articulate specific damages when negotiating
solutions with B.C. In Montana, it is too late to collect "baseline" data, as B.C. mining has been
ongoing for more than a century in our headwaters. In Washington and Alaska, however, we
have an opportunity to identify baseline "natural" conditions, so that changes caused by
proposed B.C. mines can be quantified and properly attributed. The time is now to adequately
fund this needed baseline data collection, before B.C. and Canada continue to permit additional
mines in this region--absent this critical information.
The call for resolution to this contamination of U.S. waters and communities has been loud and
clear, and from the highest offices. Last year, eight U.S. Senators from the four affected
downstream states penned a joint letter to B.C. Premier John Horgan, demanding action to
remedy the international water dispute. Similarly, affected Native American tribes have written
multiple letters to the U.S. Department of State and U.S. EPA expressing deep concerns about
impacts to tribal treaty lands and requesting increased federal engagement to address the risks
associated with legacy mining damages, on-going contamination, and future leaching from B.C.
mines into U.S waters.
Transparent, objective science, led by the US EPA, USGS and USFWS is critical to document the
impacts from mines, and inform the U.S. approach to this problem. Currently, there is
insufficient data to inform both a short and long-term strategy, which may include assessment
of damages and assignment of accountability north of the border. Scoping of work to be done
by the US EPA and USGS suggest that $16 million/year over a minimum of five years is needed
to confidently evaluate the current impacts and future risks, based on current pollutant trends,
across all four states. A robust commitment to federal-led science is imperative to the U.S.
efforts to achieve meaningful and lasting resolution to this issue, and ultimately to ensure that
the cost of this contamination isn't paid by downstream communities in Idaho, Montana,
Washington and Alaska.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 406 here 43677P7.138
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00237 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
238
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
ENVIRONMENT AMERICA
WITNESS
JOHN RUMPLER, SENIOR DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT AMERICA
Mr. RUMPLER. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Ranking Member
Joyce, Representative Kilmer. My name is John Rumpler, and I am
a senior attorney and clean water program director for Environ-
ment America. Madam Chair, if I can indulge for just a moment,
I just want to recall of all the elected officials that I have ever had
the privilege to hear speak on the importance of clean water, when
you when I shared a stage in March of 2014, 200-plus people on
a hearing on the Clean Water Rule in St. Paul, you were the one
who better than anyone captured what clean water means for
America, for our ecosystem, and our citizens. And I remember it to
this day.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
Mr. RUMPLER. I am here to testify in support of dramatic in-
creases that are urgently needed in the Clean Water State Revolv-
ing Fund and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. As a na-
tional organization working to protect the places we love and pro-
mote core environmental values, Environment America believes
that we have to fund the water infrastructure that our environ-
ment deserves and our health demands. And as a citizen-based net-
work of State groups in 29 States, we know the public agrees.
Now, Congress nearly 50 years ago when we passed the Clean
Water Act made a promise to the Nation that our waters would be
safe for swimming. Yet here we are all these years later, and we
still have billions of gallons of sewage overflows and runoff pollu-
tion plaguing Lake Erie, plaguing the rivers, including the Mis-
sissippi River in Minnesota, plaguing Puget Sound. Just to under-
score, last summer in our report, ‘‘Safe for Swimming,’’ my re-
searchers found widespread fecal bacteria contamination in beaches
across America. And, in fact, health experts estimate there are 57
million instances of Americans getting sick each year from swim-
ming in our waters: gastroenteritis, skin rashes, ear infections, et
cetera. This is clearly not what we meant when we said let’s make
our waters safe for swimming right here in Congress with the
Clean Water Act.
Moreover, these problems are likely to get worse with climate
change exacerbating storms and flooding. To give you one recent
example, a sewage facility that was flooded in Nebraska has been
releasing over a 1 million gallons of sewage every day since last
spring because it has been knocked out of capacity. In addition to
these challenges, we now have new challenges facing our waste-
water infrastructure from PFAS, to micro plastics, to pharma-
ceutical waste. Now, I have to ask you, if the American Society of
Civil Engineers has given our wastewater infrastructure a recent
grade of D-plus, how on earth are we going to secure clean water
if we don’t step it up with dramatically increased funding?
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00238 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
239
EPA estimates that to solve our wastewater problems, it is going
to take an investment of $271 billion over the next 20 years. Cur-
rent levels do not even approach that, but Environment America,
along with 20 other organizations, are urging Congress to triple the
SRF level up to $6 billion per year so that we can have safe clean
water. But it is not just our waterways that are at risk. It is also
our drinking water, and let me talk primarily right now about the
threat of lead contamination.
Unfortunately, over the course of a century, we built our pipes
and a lot of our fixtures with a potent neurotoxin that harms the
way that our kids learn, behave, and grow. And now I have to tell
you we have a national epidemic of drinking water contamination
by lead. And I don’t just mean in communities like Flint or New-
ark. Researchers have found lead in water at the tap in 2,000
water systems in all 50 States, rural, suburban. It is everywhere.
We know that lead harms the way that our kids develop, so we
have got to deal with this problem.
To stop the toxic contamination, job one is removing lead service
lines. These toxic pipes are the leading source of lead water con-
tamination wherever they are. EPA now estimates there are 9.3
million of them out there. The price tag to remove them all, which
health officials say we must do, is now estimated at approximately
$45 billion. State and local rate payers are not going to be able to
bear that burden alone. The longer we here in the Federal Govern-
ment wait for a substantial investment, the longer our kids are
going to be drinking water tainted with lead. And let me assure
you that it is our kids because, in fact, our research through our
Get the Lead Out Campaign has found it not just in our homes
with service lines, but in schools across the country. A high per-
centage in Washington State, a high percentage in Ohio and States
across the country. Lead contamination of drinking water in our
schools is pervasive, and I can get you that data from about 20
States that have done various levels of testing so far.
We need to help our schools get the lead out so that our kids can
learn and grow up safely every day when we send them to learn
and grow. How do we do that? Well, schools need to start removing
old water fountains that have lead in them, and water fountains,
and put on filters that are certified to remove lead. That is going
to take a lot of resources, and schools that are, you know, strapped
for their budgets are not going to be able to do it alone. So, again,
this is going to require a substantial unprecedented Federal com-
mitment to say we are not going to tolerate the contamination of
our water with a potent neurotoxin that makes our kids sick.
Now I should say lead is not the only problem that we need to
face with drinking water. We have heard about PFAS, toxic chemi-
cals and toxic metals getting into our waterways. EPA estimates
overall there that we are going to $472 billion over the next 20
years just to maintain our current drinking water infrastructure.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Are you about done?
Mr. RUMPLER. I am just about to finish. I just wanted to add,
Madam Chairwoman, if I can, that clean, safe water is the hall-
mark of an advanced society. And for too long, we have taken it
for granted, and now America has fallen short. But if we can take
this opportunity to make a historic investment in clean water, we
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00239 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
240
can bring back the promise of clean water for all Americans. Thank
you.
[The statement of Mr. Rumpler follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00240 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
241
Testimony of John Rumpler, Environment America
House Appropriations Committee - February 6, 2020
Good afternoon. My name is John Rumpler. I am Senior Attorney and Clean Water
Program Director for Environment America. I am here to testify in support of
dramatically increased funding in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
budget for both the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) and the Drinking Water
SRF.
As a national organization working to protect the places we love and promote core
environmental values, Environment America strongly supports these vital programs to
fund the water infrastructure our environment deserves and our health demands. And,
as citizen-supported group with affiliates in 29 states, we know the public agrees.
Of the many reasons to repair and strengthen our nation's water infrastructure, my
testimony today will focus on one: protecting our health.
Congress should triple annual Clean Water SRF funding to stop sewage
overflows and runoff pollution
Each year, billions of gallons of sewage overflows and stormwater runoff pollute our
beaches, rivers, and other waterways with pathogens. This pollution puts the public's
health at risk. Last summer, my research team found that more than half of beach sites
tested in 29 coastal and Great Lakes states had levels of fecal bacteria in the water that
put swimmers at risk of getting sick in 2018. 1 Each year, there are an estimated 57
million instances of people getting sick from swimming in U.S. waterways - including
acute gastrointestinal illness, ear infections, and skin rashes. 2
1
John Rumpler, Safe tor Swimming? Environment America Research & Policy Center, July 2019
accessible at ht,wsJi&nv!fOQllllttllilffil.l~eaturelame/safe-swttmn1ng
2
See Table 3: Stephanie DeFlorio-Barker et al., Estimate of Incidence and Cost of Recreational
Waterborne Illness on United States Surface Waters, Environ Health, 9 January 2018, available online at
~JJ[nal.biomedcentral.com/articles/1 Q. 1186/s 12940-0 17 -034 7-9
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 414 here 43677P7.139
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00241 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
242
Clearly, our wastewater infrastructure is no longer up to the core task of preventing
pollution and disease. Pipes, septic tanks, and treatment facilities have exceeded their
intended lifespans and are breaking down. The American Society of Civil Engineers
gave the nation's wastewater infrastructure a D+ grade in its 2017 report card.
In 2012, the EPA estimated that we will need $271 billion over the next twenty years to
maintain and repair our wastewater infrastructure to meet current environmental and
health standards. 3 That's $13 billion a year.
There is reason to believe the cost of adequate wastewater infrastructure is even higher
now. Sewage· and runoff pollution are likely to get worse in coming years, as climate
change increases the likelihood and severity of storms and flooding. In a recent
example, a treatment plant overwhelmed by flooding in Nebraska has been releasing 1
4
million gallons of sewage into the Missouri River every day since last spring.
Moreover, our wastewater systems are now facing other environmental and pollution
challenges not adequately foreseen in 2012 - including pharmaceutical waste,
microplastics, and toxic per-fluorinated compounds (commonly known as PFAS).
For all of these reasons, Environment America and 20 other organizations have urged
Congress to increase funding for the Clean Water SRF to $6 billion per year.
Yet dramatically increasing federal investment in wastewater infrastructure is only one
part of the solution. We must also spend the money wisely.
By investing in natural and green infrastructure, we can not only curb sewage overflows
but also prevent runoff pollution and improve the health of our communities. Low-tech,
decentralized techniques such as rain barrels, permeable pavement and rooftop
gardens can absorb up to 90 percent of rainfall, reducing the flow of stormwater that
cause sewage overflows and sweep pathogens, oil and grease, and other pollution into
5
local waterways. Restoring or expanding natural infrastructure - such as wetlands or
other greenspace - also help protect our communities from flooding and replenish
6
groundwater.
For all of these reasons, we also recommend that the Appropriations Committee
dedicate at least 20 percent of Clean Water SRF funding to natural and green
infrastructure projects that prevent water pollution.
3
U.S. EPA Clean Watersheds Needs Survey - 2012 Report and Data, accessed ontine 29 January 2020 at
https://www.epa.gov/cwns/clean-watersheds-needs-survey-cwns-2012-report-and-data
4
Tara Campbell, Raw Sewage Dumped into Missouri River, WOWT, 8 January 2020, accessed at
https://www,wowtcom/content/news/Hundreds-of-mi!lions-of-raw-sewage-dumped-into•Missouri-River-amidst-ca!l
s-for-testing-5 66827971.html
5
Elizabeth Berg, Frontier Group; Luke Metzger and Brian Zabcik, Environment Texas, Catching the Rain: How Green
Infrastructure Can Reduce Flooding and Improve Water Quality in Texas, Winter 2017.
6
Ibid.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 415 here 43677P7.140
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00242 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
243
Congress should dramatically increase Drinking Water SRF funding to "get the
lead out" and take other steps to ensure safe drinking water for all Americans.
Over the course of nearly a century, we allowed key parts in our drinking water delivery
systems to be built with a potent neurotoxin that affects how our children learn, grow
and behave. As a result, we now have a national epidemic of lead-contaminated
drinking water - from urban neighborhoods to suburbs to rural America. It will take an
unprecedented national commitment to undo this mistake and get the lead out of our
drinking water.
Nearly 2000 water systems in all 50 states had levels of lead contamination above
EPA's action level of 15 parts per billion, according to a 2016 review of testing data by
USA Today.7 This is just the tip of the iceberg. Many communities have failed to test or
test properly. More importantly, these figures do not include communities with lower
concentrations of lead in their water.
And make no mistake: health experts tell us there is no safe level of lead. According to
the EPA,"ln children, low levels of lead exposure have been linked to damage to the
central and peripheral nervous system, learning disabilities, shorter stature, impaired
hearing, and impaired formation and function of blood cells." 8 Medical experts estimate
that 24 million children are at risk of losing IQ points due to low levels of lead exposure. 9
And yes, our children are exposed to this lead-tainted water. Over the past few years,
more and more schools have started to test their drinking water. And as more schools
test, they are finding lead. Our review of this new testing data now shows that lead
contamination of drinking water at schools is pervasive across the country - from
Montana to Massachusetts, from Texas to the suburbs of Chicago. 10
Chief among the investments needed to stop lead contamination of our drinking water is
the full replacement of all lead service lines. These toxic pipes are the largest source of
lead contamination wherever they exist; public health experts say removing them is the
11
single most important step we can take to reduce lead contamination of drinking water.
There are roughly 9.3 million lead service lines still out there, according to EPA's most
13
recent estimate. 12 The full cost of removing these toxic pipes likely exceeds $45 billion.
7
Alison Young and Mark Nichols, Beyond Flint: Excessive lead levels found in almost 2,000 water systems across
all 50 states, USA Today, 27 March 2017 available online at
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/03/l l/nearly-2000-water-systems-fail-lead-tests/81220466/
8
U.S. EPA, Basic Information about Lead in Drinking Water, available online at
https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/basic-information-about-lead-drinking-water
9
American Academy of Pediatrics, Policy Statement on Prevention ofChildhood Lead Toxicity, June 20 I 6,
available online at https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2016/06/!6/peds.2016-1493
10
John Rumpler and Emma Dietz, Get the Lead Out, Environment America Research & Policy Center, March 2019
at Figure 3, available online at https://environmentamerica.org/feature/ame/get-lead-out-0
11 Pew Charitable Trust, JO Policies to Prevent and Respond to Childhood Lead Exposure, August 30, 2017,
available on line at https ://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/20 J7/08/l 0-policies-to-prevent-
and-respond-to-childhood-lead-exposure
12 U.S. EPA, Exhibit 4-10 (LSL Inventory) to Lead & Copper Rule Revisions, 13 November 2019, available online
at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-HO-OW-2017-0300 (9,267,910 LSLs in 2023)
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 416 here 43677P7.141
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00243 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
244
Given how toxic lead is for our children, Congress should also dramatically increase
federal funding to help schools and pre-schools get the lead out. The key steps are
replacing lead-bearing parts wherever we can and installing certified filters. 'In 2018,
Congress established a $5 million pilot program to help schools replace lead-bearing
water fountains. Congress should dramatically expand funding for this program.
Of course, ensuring safe drinking water for all Americans requires other investments as
well - from replacing leaking pipes that waste vast quantities of clean water to
safeguarding drinking water sources from toxic pollution. U.S. EPA estimates
maintaining and improving the nation's drinking water infrastructure will require that
$472.6 billion over the next 20 years. 14
The public overwhelmingly supports federal investment in clean water.
As Republican strategist Frank Luntz noted back in 2004 "Young and old, Democrat
AND Republican, the demand for clean water is universal. More importantly, the public
is willing to pay for it." (emphasis in original) More recently, a 2016 Gallup poll
showed that 61 percent of those polled, including 48 percent of Republicans, were
worried "a great deal" about the pollution of drinking water. 15 And just two years ago,
16
Americans ranked pollution of rivers and drinking water 2nd and 3rd among their fears.
None of this should surprise us. Polluted water can make anyone sick, regardless of
race, religion, political affiliation or any of the other demographic categories that far too
often are used to divide us rather than unite us.
Clean, safe water is the hallmark of an advanced society. But it is one that we have
taken for granted for too long, and now America is falling short. To make good on this
clean water promise we made to ourselves, we must invest as a nation to repair our
water infrastructure as wisely and rapidly as possible.
Last fall, we saw bi-partisan support for increasing clean water infrastructure funding
when U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure approved H.R.1497,
which would more than double annual funding for the Clean Water SRF. Today, we
hope the Appropriations Committee will act with even greater boldness and vision, to
restore our nation's promise of clean water for all. Our children are waiting.
John Rumpler, jrumpler@environmentamerica.org (617) 747-4306
13
See "Replacing All Lead Water Pipes Could Cost $30 Billion," Water Techno/ogY, 11 March 2016, available online
at https:l/www.watertechonline.com/home/article/15549954/replacing-alHead-water-oioes-cou ld-cost-30-billion
(AWWA estimate of$5000 per LSL replacement x 9.3 million LSLs = $45 billion.)
14
U.S. EPA, 6th Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment, March 2018, available online at
https://www.epa.gov/dwsrf/epas-6th-drinking-water-infrastructure-ne·eds-survey-and-assessment
15
Gallup, Americans Concerns about Water Pollution Edge Up, 17 March 2016, available at
https://news.gallup.com/poll/190034/americans-conccrns-water-pollution-edge.aspx
16
Chapman University, America's Top Fears 2018, 16 October 2018, available at
https://blogs.chapman.edu/wilkinson/2018110/16/americas-top-fears-2018/
4
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 417 here 43677P7.142
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00244 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
245
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
ASSOCIATION OF NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAMS
WITNESS
RICH INNES, SENIOR POLICY DIRECTOR, ASSOCIATION OF NATIONAL
ESTUARY PROGRAMS
Mr. INNES. Thank you. Is it okay to give you a couple of pictures?
Ms. MCCOLLUM. We love handouts. [Laughter.]
Mr. INNES. I am Rich Innes. I am the——
Voice. What we got last time.
Mr. INNES. Oh, that is right. You missed your stone.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. It is an agate.
Mr. INNES. My name is Rich Innes. I am the senior policy direc-
tor of the Association of National Estuary Programs. My associa-
tion with the NEPs goes back to when I was fortunate enough to
be a staffer on the Senate Environment Committee when we were
doing the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act, which created
the program. And I am sure that champions of the program at that
time, including my boss, Senator John Chaffee, George Mitchell of
Maine, and Pat Moynihan would be very proud of how this pro-
gram has flourished.
I want to particularly thank Representative Kilmer for inviting
both the chair and the ranking member to see firsthand one of our
premiere national estuary programs, the Puget Sound. And while
I am sure you saw it is absolutely stunningly beautiful and breath-
taking framed by Mount Saint Helena, surrounded by the lands
that belonged to Chief Seattle, the ancestral lands, it is trouble un-
derneath, and there are a world of problems that the National Es-
tuary Program, together with many other partners, the Puget
Sound Partnership, is addressing out there.
The way that that started is the way that all of our estuary pro-
grams have started, and that is with the commitment and support
of a few very strong, committed citizens. In this case, it was some
of your former colleagues, then Representative and now Governor
Jay Inslee; the chairman emeritus of this committee, who will al-
ways be Mr. Chairman to me, and that is Norm Dicks; my lifelong
mentor and very dear friend, Bill Ruckelshaus, who passed re-
cently; and the legendary tribal leader, Billy Frank, Jr. I hope you
got a chance to see the Wildlife Refuge named in his honor while
you were out there. It is beautiful.
I am really so glad you got a chance to see that. That is being
replicated 28 times around the country for the 28 national estuary
programs, and each one of them has its own story to tell with mod-
est funding, which we greatly appreciate, from this committee, and
not just this committee. This is generations of this committee that
have been very supportive of this program. It has hit well above
its weight. The examples here are too numerous, but I am going
to mention a few of them. The Delaware NEP, where I spend a
great deal of time, is bringing back the oyster, and it is appearing
on tables and in restaurants, and it is also cleaning the Bay, which
is a major accomplishment. The New York-New Jersey Harbor, one
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00245 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
246
of our great economic ports, is degraded, as I think we all know.
And the NEP there, along with many partners, is spearheading a
plan to revive and resuscitate that great port.
The San Francisco Bay NEP, that estuary suffered dramatically
from the indiscriminate filling of San Francisco Bay for decades.
And what the NEP now is doing is changing that. They are ad-
dressing it along with Save the Bay, along with many partners, in
order to restore and recapture the beauty of that Bay. Casco Bay
in Maine, I am sorry that Chellie isn’t here, but it is doing incred-
ible work up there to reduce nitrate and nitrite loadings into the
Bay. And, of course, the Puget Sound Partnership, the NEP up
there, is in the forefront of the governor’s efforts to save the orcas.
And I am sure you learned a great deal about that when you were
out there. The iconic black and white fish, they are down to 72.
They just lost another one within the last few days.
So the red light is blinking there. I want to just take one moment
to talk about a special one, Tampa Bay, just because it is such a
poster child, and Tampa Bay was essentially dead in the 1980s.
Eighty percent of the seagrasses were gone, and almost half of the
wetlands were gone out of Tampa Bay. The National Estuary Pro-
gram down there, again, I don’t want to say that they did it by
themselves. They didn’t. It was a partnership that is the model
that NEPs employ where they get citizens, businesses together in
order muster the political will and the funding, which you have
been so helpful with, to restore these places that we love and care
about. Right now, Tampa Bay is considered a world-class model for
estuary restoration, and it didn’t come about easily. It took decades
for us to get there. The work isn’t done, but it is a stellar example.
Yesterday, there was some very good news, as we heard some of
it, the Great Lakes bill. Thank you for passing that. Also, a bill re-
authorizing the National Estuary Program. H.R. 4044 was ap-
proved overwhelmingly by this body, and we greatly appreciate
that. Norm Dicks when he was chair of this committee lamented
publicly in a hearing similar to this that the NEPs were doing so
much with so little, and at that point I think we were getting about
$400 per NEP. Now thanks to you, it is up to a little over $600,000.
Yesterday’s bill that passed on the floor of the House would in-
crease the authorization amount to $1 million per NEP, and con-
tinue to put $4 million into a competitive fund used to address
things like ocean acidification in Hood Canal, algae blooms, which,
as you know, harmful algae blooms are a major, major problem.
So anyway, I am going to end there. I just want to thank all of
you for your continued support.
[The statement of Mr. Innes follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00246 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
247
Testimony Submitted by Rich Innes
Senior Policy Director
Association ofNational Estuary Programs
l 800 M Street NW, Suite 400 N
Washington DC 20036
To the House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies
January 28th, 2020
Dear Chairman McCollum and Ranking Member Joyce:
On behalf of the Association of National Estuary Programs, I am submitting testimony to thank
you for your past support of the National Estuary Program, a program of the Environmental
Protection Agency, and ask you to continue to invest directly in the stewardship of our nation's
coasts by funding this program in FY 2021 at the authorized level of $26.5 million, including
$750,000 per NEP, and $4 million for the newly created competitive fund.
We greatly appreciate your longstanding support ofNEP, and can assure you that these funds are
being put to extremely good purpose in protecting and restoring estuaries and coastal
communities.
Recent examples include:
► The Puget Sound Partnership is restoring forage fish spawning---which are critically
important in the Puget Sound foodweb---back to I 500 feet of shoreline, and reducing
the flow of stormwater containing toxic pollutants into Puget Sound.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 425 here 43677P7.143
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00247 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
248
► The NY-NJ Harbor & Estuary Program is working with the Bronx River Alliance and
other community groups to track down sources offloatable trash in the River,
including locations in upstream Westchester County.
► The Casco Bay Estuary Partnership and partners are monitoring nutrients around
Casco Bay to provide real-time data on nutrient processes. CBEP's nutrient analyzer
has been automatically collecting nitrate, nitrite and ammonium samples and working
collaboratively to assure safe levels in the bay.
► The Center of the Inland Bays in Delaware is bringing the oyster back, with all its
ecological and economic benefits, after it nearly disappeared in the last century. The
Center is using living shorelines to stop erosion, protect property and restore habitat.
As you know important reforms were made to the National Estuary Program (NEP) in the
reauthorization that was signed into law in the I 14th Congress. These reforms created a
competitive program to address urgent challenges and maximize funds received by our national
estuaries, while streamlining the administrative costs of the program.
Also of note, HR 4044, which would increase funding for the NEP and assure that each estuary
program receive at least $1 million annually was approved unanimously by the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in 2019. A similar measure, S.3171, has been
introduced with bipartisan support in the Senate in January, 2020.
Of all federally funded coastal programs, only NEPs organize local stakeholders as partners in a
unique decision-making framework to fund local priorities. NEPs provide technical,
management, and communication assistance to develop priorities and implement comprehensive
actions: storm water and infrastructure projects, seagrass and shellfish restoration which support
fishing and tourist industries, science and monitoring to guide decision-making, and innovative
education programs designed for the next generation of Americans.
NEPs engage industries, businesses, and other community members to develop solutions for
tough problems. The NEP's public-private partnerships stretch federal dollars to provide
successful on-the-ground results driven by diverse stakeholders. NEP partners include
commercial agriculture and fisheries, energy and water utilities, local restaurants & tourist
businesses, construction and landscaping professionals, engineering and mining companies, state
and local governments, colleges and universities, and other community organizations.
Our national estuaries have never been more critical to maintaining the economic engines for our
state and regional economy.
The value of our oceans, estuaries and coasts to our nation is immense and their full potential
remains unrealized. Over half the US population lives in coastal watershed counties, many of
these in estuaries of national significance. Roughly half the nation's gross domestic product is
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 426 here 43677P7.144
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00248 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
249
generated in those counties and adjacent ocean waters. According to NOAA's 2019 report on
the ocean economy, ocean industries contributed $320 billion to U.S. economy, while
employment in the ocean economy increased by 14.5 percent by 2016, compared to 4.8 percent
in the U.S. economy as a whole.
The NEP consists of28 unique, voluntary programs established by the Clean Water Act to
protect and improve estuaries of national significance. Each NEP engages its local community in
a non-regulatory, consensus-driven, and science-based process. For every dollar EPA provides,
NEPs leverage $19 in local funds to protect and improve coastal environments, communities and
economies.
NEPs develop Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans based on community
consensus and the best available science to ensure the quality of life in coastal communities.
These plans outline specific actions and on-the-ground projects that ensure local engagement and
promote public support for states and communities working together to protect open space,
update critical coastal infrastructure, and respond to dramatic changes along our coasts.
NEPs have collectively restored and protected more than 2,000,000 acres of vital habitats since
2000 alone. Consistent Congressional funding of the National Estuary Programs is essential-
resulting in clean water, healthy estuaries, and strong coastal communities. This investment in
our national estuaries will help strengthen America's economy and support thousands of jobs,
and will secure the future of our coastal communities.
We would greatly appreciate the opportunity to work with you to ensure that as you undertake
work on the FY 2021 appropriations measure, it reflects the recent reauthorization by allocating
at least $750,000 to each NEP, and funds the newly authorized competitive program at
approximately $4 million, consistent with Public Law 114-162.
Thank you for your strong support of this program over the years, and for considering
our request.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 427 here 43677P7.145
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00249 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
250
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. Well, Mr. Joyce, you have gotten a
lot of kudos for the Great Lakes bill, and people have talked about
authorizing amounts. When our last bill that Mr. Joyce and I
worked on left here at the House, it has $1.3 billion more dollars
in it than when it came back from conference committee.
Voice. Wow.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. And so we are trying to do our level best to
work with our authorizers and their suggested amounts because we
all think that they are wonderful, but we don’t have an open pock-
etbook here. So what we are trying to do is utilize you and the tes-
timony today to ask our leadership for a bigger allocation, so thank
you all for helping to do that.
I would just like to throw something on the table here to just dis-
cuss briefly. One of the challenges that I find with water is every-
body knows we need it. Everybody drinks it. Some people like to
recreate in it. We eat food from there. Some people like to just
enjoy a sailboat on it. But when you ask people what water is
worth, they say it is priceless, but then when it comes to some of
the runoff, when it comes to some of the pollution that you referred
to, Ms. Sexton, we get into this cost benefit analysis. Oh, we need
the minerals. We need this. And that is all very true, but I think
we need to be conservative. And as you pointed out, Mr. Rumpler,
everybody is for clean water. They are willing to pay for clean
water.
What are we missing is that there is still a disconnect that water
has a significant important value to it, because when you don’t
value it, you will pollute it. And I grew up in a river town, the Mis-
sissippi River. When the stockyards first opened up, they just
washed everything out into the river because the river would wash
it downstream. You don’t have to look at it. Dilution was the solu-
tion to the pollution, and eventually it choked off and killed that
section of the Mississippi River. The stockyards are gone. We
mourn the loss of the jobs, but we don’t mourn the loss of the pollu-
tion when the river is making a comeback. There are also some
other issues with our sanitary sewer system there, too.
So any suggestions about what you are doing to raise public
awareness that water has a value so that when people talk about
water, they also have in the back of their mind a value to it besides
just, oh, it is here, it is accessible, it is never going away.
Mr. RUMPLER. Madam Chair, I have two thoughts on that. One
is I think the U.S. Water Alliance actually has a whole public edu-
cation program called the Value of Water. So perhaps there would
be some resources there about how to remind people that water has
value. But I would say, although this is a little bit beyond the pur-
view of the Appropriations Committee, that there is a direct rela-
tionship between our regulatory regimes to protect our waterways
and prevent pollution versus how much money we have to spend
on the back end cleaning it up. And as we all know, it is cheaper
to prevent, right?
So if we could maintain stronger Clean Water protections, for ex-
ample, Federal jurisdiction over our wetlands and streams that
provide drinking water to hundreds of millions of Americans, or
117 million Americans, I should say, we will have less cost on the
back end to clean up pollution.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00250 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
251
Ms. MESNIKOFF. And I will just add that ELPC has done polling
in various parts where we operate in the Great Lakes region to
asses show people are viewing the value of clean water and under-
standing some of the particular sources that affect their access to
clean water in their area because it is different, you know, sources
depending on where people are. And then using that to help edu-
cate people about the importance of clean water protection, clean
water regulations. So we are doing that, and I can share that poll-
ing with you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Okay.
Mr. INNES. A major part of the mission of the National Estuary
Program is environmental education, and it starts when folks are
young, but it continues. One of the benchmarks of a successful plan
is that it includes businesses and the general public in buy-in to
these programs. We have seen the enemy. The enemy is us.
The majority of pollution of water right now, as we know, is com-
ing from non-point source pollution runoff. It is coming from the
fertilizers we are putting on our lawns, from agriculture, from the
cars we drive. It is no longer the big bad industrial polluter as it
was when we first passed the Clean Water Act. And so that is
going to involve all of us in a real public education campaign in
how to value and cherish something as essential to human life as
water.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Okay. I am just going to make one quick com-
ment before I turn it over Mr. Joyce. I am dealing with an issue
that is reverse flow than what you are dealing with with the Cana-
dians, Ms. Sexton, because of the Laurentian Divide. So when you
teach social studies, geography is part of it, so I have to get the
map up, and in our part of the world, the water flows north. And
so we are dealing with sulfur copper ore mining, and I am sure the
Canadians don’t want anything going into Quantico Bay, just as we
don’t.
I want to work save their pristine waters. Waters in the bound-
ary waters, we can literally put this glass in, take it out, and drink
it. And all the mines, it just isn’t one mine, all the mining permits
that could go along in that area, and one mistake, and it is over.
There is no going back. So I appreciate the fact you mentioned your
challenge with the Canadians. I am planning on meeting with some
of our counterparts in Canada, and one of the things that I have
highlighted with the permitting of these mines is we need to be
mindful of the 1908 Boundary Waters Treaty. I think it is 1909.
I did have the date correct. And the water flows both ways on that,
so you gave me some ammunition, and I will be using it. Mr. Joyce.
Mr. JOYCE. Thank you all for coming here today and for pro-
viding us with this information. Erin, I thought you did a hell of
a job for your first time testifying.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Kilmer.
Mr. KILMER. Thanks, Madam Chair. I want to thank all of you
as well. And, Mr. Innes, thanks for highlighting the Puget Sound
Partnership and the work they do. As you all pointed out, last year,
we saw an increase in National Estuary Program funds. We saw
an increase in funds for the Puget Sound Geographic Program. I
want to thank our chairwoman for her leadership, and partnership,
and advocacy in making that happen. The Puget Sound is just so
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00251 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
252
vital to our economy, to our environment, and as you pointed out,
it is beautiful, but sick. Talk about how increased funding will help
us move the needle on recovery.
Mr. INNES. So as you are well aware, Congressman, each of the
NEPs develop something called a comprehensive management
plan. In Puget Sound, it is called the Action Agenda, and it has a
tremendous amount of buy-in, and this goes back to Bill Ruckels-
haus, his shared strategy. So now you have got a very dynamic,
very well-conceived plan for achieving the cleanup goals for Puget
Sound, and there is no substitute for funding. And it isn’t all Fed-
eral. I have to say that the State of Washington is putting in an
enormous amount of money, more than the Federal contribution,
and also private industry. We have got NGOs that are very en-
gaged in this. The tribal contribution is enormous as well.
We made a decision. I probably shouldn’t tell you this, but the
figures were so big and so staggering that good advice was don’t
put out there that it is going to take $2 billion to recover this be-
cause that might scare people, to make it more bite sized. But
there is no substitute for some of the investments that be made.
They are expensive. They are culverts, replacing culverts to restore
streams. They are water treatment. Anyway, it is expensive. And
I do have to say that in the NEPs in general and Puget Sound in
particular, that investment is put to extremely good purpose and
goes a long way. So thank you.
Mr. KILMER. Thank you. I yield back.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. Well, we will have our next panel
come up. Thank you so much.
Ms. SEXTON. Would you like some maps?
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Oh, I love maps. Well, welcome. So you know
the drill probably better than anybody else. You are the last panel,
so I want to thank you so much for your patience, your due dili-
gence, putting up with the vote, and we are anxious to hear your
testimony. So, Ms. Murdoch, if you want to introduce yourself, we
won’t count that against your time.
Ms. MURDOCH. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. It saves time.
Ms. MURDOCH. Thank you.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. And go into your testimony.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
AMERICAN FORESTS
WITNESS
ALEXANDRA A. MURDOCH, ESQUIRE, VICE PRESIDENT OF POLICY,
AMERICAN FORESTS
Ms. MURDOCH. Hello. My name is Alex Murdoch, and I am the
vice president of policy for American Forests. Thank you very much
for having us today. Chairman McCollum, Mr. Joyce, and Mr. Kil-
mer, thank you so much.
I am here to talk with you today about our recommendations for
U.S. Forest Service programs that are critical to achieving climate-
informed restoration and reforestation of America’s forests. So very
particularly about our national forests and what they do for us
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00252 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
253
with respect to our changing climate. We sincerely thank the com-
mittee for the Fiscal Year 2020 funding levels for the Forest Serv-
ice. And I would also like to particularly appreciate the increase in
funding that you provided for the Urban and Community Forest
Program, and we are grateful to the committee for recognizing how
important that program is.
American Forests was founded in 1875 by citizens who were
alarmed by the state of our forests. At that time, America was
growing quickly, and we were clearing our forests to make way for
new farms, towns, and railways. This development came at a price.
In the 1600s, almost half of the United States was forested, and
those forests provided clean water, and fish and game, and shelter
and goods for those who lived near them. But by the start of the
20th century, we cleared over 25 percent of our forest land, and our
drinking water was seriously at risk.
Thankfully in 1911, Congress began to protect our forests and
waters by authorizing Federal purchase of forested cutover or
denuded lands to protect important watersheds. So today, national
forest lands are the largest source of municipal water supply in the
United States and serve 60 million people. Today we also know
that our forests play an important role in regulating our climate.
In Congress and the White House now, we see an emerging bipar-
tisan recognition that forests and climate-informed forest manage-
ment are an important strategy for mitigating climate change.
At American Forest, we agree with that consensus. Today, U.S.
forests and forest products annually sequester and store 15 percent
of U.S. carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels. New research
suggests we could nearly double this natural carbon capture with
the right actions. Managing and protecting our national forests in
a changing climate is a critical piece of this climate puzzle. The
good news is we can do this through existing programs if proper
levels are provided.
Foresters need good scientific data to manage our forests and
changing climate. Increased investment in the Forest and Range-
land Research Program can provide the tools for foresters to iden-
tify, prioritize, and manage climate-driven risks to forests. For-
esters need to restore an estimated 80 million acres of national for-
ests with climate-informed management practices. To do this, they
need to significantly increase investments in existing programs
that improve forest carbon, adaptation, and resilience outcomes
both on Federal lands and across boundaries. These programs in-
clude the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program, the
Hazardous Fuels Reduction, and Vegetation and Watershed Man-
agement Programs.
Over 1.2 million acres of national forests need reforestation, a
backlog that grows with every catastrophic wildfire or infestation
from pests and disease. After a catastrophic event, foresters need
funding to implement post-fire reforestation treatments on lands
unlikely to recover naturally, as well as increased reforestation
practice investments.
Healthy and resilient national forests can deliver critical power
to close climate change. We are greatly heartened by the optimism
and enthusiasm emerging in our country that reforesting America
is an important part of the climate puzzle. Business leaders are
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00253 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
254
playing an essential and growing role by funding millions of trees
planted all across America, and pledging investment to the new
Trillion Trees Initiative that was announced at the World Economic
Forum in late January. But Congress has the power to activate the
greatest single lever for quickly advancing large-scale forest carbon
mitigation activities in the U.S. by significantly increasing climate-
informed restoration and reforestation on our national forests.
Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Murdoch follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00254 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
255
Testimony of Alexandra Murdoch, Vice President of Policy, American Forests
Before the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
House Committee on Appropriations
February 6, 2020
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you
for the opportunity to testify on American Forests' fiscal year 2021 appropriations
recommendations for U.S. Forest Service programs that are critical to achieving climate-
informed restoration and reforestation of America's forests. We sincerely thank the Committee
for FY20 funding levels, which provide the Forest Service with important tools and resources to
manage all our nation's forests. We particularly appreciate the FY20 increase in funding for the
Urban and Community Forestry Program and are grateful to the Committee for recognizing the
importance of the program and providing increases to address stresses and pressure on urban tree
canopy and support the benefits they provide.
American Forests was founded in 1875 by citizens alarmed by the state our forests. At that time,
America was growing quickly and we were clearing our forests to make way for new farms,
towns, and railways. This development came at a price. In the l 600s, almost half of the United
States was forested and these forests provided clean drinking water, fish and game, and shelter
and goods for people living nearby. But by the start of the 20th century, we had cleared over 25%
of our forestland, and our drinking water was seriously at risk 1• Thankfully, in 1911 Congress
began to protect our forests and waters by authorizing federal purchase of 'forested, cutover, or
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 440 here 43677P7.146
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00255 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
256
denuded lands' to protect important watersheds. Today, National Forest lands are the largest
source of municipal water supply in the U.S., serving over 60 million peop!e. 2
Today we also know our forests play an important role in regulating our climate. In Congress
and the White House, we see emerging bipartisan recognition that forests and climate-informed
forest management are an important strategy for mitigating climate change. At American
Forests, we agree with that consensus. Today US forests and forest products annually sequester
and store 15% of US carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels. New research suggests we
could nearly double this natural carbon capture with the right actions. Managing and protecting
our national forests in a changing climate is a critical piece of the climate puzzle.
Unfortunately, our national forests are at serious risk and at the US Forest Service, foresters have
many of the right tools but do not have the resources they need to keep our national forests
healthy and to help them adapt to a changing climate. In fact, over 40% of our national forests --
80 million acres - need restoration. Some forests are overcrowded with too many trees per acre
but foresters do not have the resources to thin them. Trees weak or dead from drought but must
be left in place. When lightning strikes, these trees can become fuel for catastrophic
uncontrollable fires. A growing backlog exists of over 1.2 million acres that need reforestation
after such catastrophes. The good news is many of these challenges can be addressed through
existing programs - if proper funding levels are provided.
Foresters rely on good scientific data to manage our forests -- from baseline data that describes
carbon stocks and helps illuminate fluxes and trends to applied scientific information such as
vulnerability assessments that reveal climate-driven threats. Increased investment in the USFS
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 441 here 43677P7.147
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00256 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
257
Forest and Rangeland Research program can provide the tools for foresters to identify, prioritize
and manage climate-driven risks to forests.
Foresters need to restore an estimated 80 million acres of national forests with climate-informed
management practices to ensure these forests are healthy and resilient in a changing climate. To
do so, they need significantly increased investments in programs that improve forest carbon,
adaptation and resilience outcomes both on federal lands and across boundaries, including the
Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program, Hazardous Fuels Reduction and
Vegetation and Watershed Management programs.
Over 1.2M acres of national forests need reforestation, a backlog that grows with every
catastrophic wildfire or infestation from pests and disease. After a catastrophic event, foresters
have the tools they need to stabilize the landscape in the first year. However, they need funding
to implement post-fire reforestation treatments for up to three years on lands unlikely to recover
naturally in addition to increased reforestation investment through the Reforestation Trust Fund.
Healthy and resilient national forests can deliver critical power to slow climate change. We have
urgent forestry work ahead to keep our national forests healthy and resilient so that they can
provide the clean water that over 60 million Americans depend on and also vigorously sequester
carbon and provide resilient and reliable storage. We are greatly heartened by the optimism and
enthusiasm emerging in our country that reforesting America is the right response to address
climate change. Business leaders are playing an essential and growing role by funding millions
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 442 here 43677P7.148
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00257 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
258
of trees planted all across America and pledging investment through the l Trillion Trees
initiative announced at the World Economic Forum in late January.
At American Forests, we have worked with partners to plant over 60 million trees in the last
three decades alone so we understand the opportunities and challenges ahead. By investing in
our national forests through existing programs, Congress has the power to activate the greatest
single lever for quickly advancing large-scale forest carbon mitigation activities in the U.S.:
scaling up the pace and extent of restoration and reforestation on our national forests. Our
children and grandchildren will thank you.
1
https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/brochures/docs/2000/ForestFactsMetric.pdf
2 U.S. Forest Service. Water Facts. https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/national-forests-grasslands/water-
facts
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 443 here 43677P7.149
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00258 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
259
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Baker.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS
WITNESS
TERRY BAKER, CEO, SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS
Mr. BAKER. Good afternoon, Chairwoman McCollum, and Rank-
ing Member Joyce, and also Representative Kilmer. My name is
Terry Baker, and I am the CEO of the Society of American For-
esters. Thank you for this opportunity to share how forestry, na-
tional resource professionals, and stakeholders can work together
to ensure the sustainability of our Nation’s forests through
thoughtful investments and long-term commitment to active man-
agement, research, and partnerships.
SAF is a professional society that represents over 10,000 forestry
and natural resource professionals across our Nation. SAF also pro-
duces two peer-reviewed scientific journals and critical natural re-
source programs at academic institutions across the Nation, and
helps encourage professional excellence through credentialing and
continuing education.
Since our founding in 1900, forestry and foresters have evolved.
Today’s foresters are proud women and men who have devoted
their careers to understanding forests and trees, enhancing benefits
that they provide, and ensuring that they continue to thrive for
generations to come. In our humble opinion, we are the original
green job——
[Laughter.]
Mr. BAKER [continuing]. That through commitment to science
and innovation, we have continuously improved forestry practices
and tools, lessening impacts to the land and improving outcomes to
communities, wildlife, and society as a whole.
With increasing threats and demands on our forests, no agency
program or organization can do it alone. Partnerships, collabora-
tion, and cross-boundary work is more important than ever. This
is exactly why SAF wholeheartedly supports the Forest Service’s
shared stewardship strategy. Actively working to identify shared
priorities and improved processes and procedures will benefit all
stakeholders in the long run. We encourage you to support these
efforts and tools that expand collaboration with rural communities,
partners, and industry, such as the Good Neighbor Authority and
stewardship contracting.
We sincerely thank this subcommittee for its work in supporting
and securing funding increases for the Forest Service and Bureau
of Labor Management programs for Fiscal Year 2020. These impor-
tant gains would not have been realized without your leadership
and dedication. For Fiscal Year 2021, we respectfully ask that you
consider the continuing trend of investing in our forest resources,
specifically through the Forest Service’s forest and rangeland re-
search, State and private forestry programs, and the Bureau of
Labor Management forestry programs. Advancing forest science is
integral to improving the health of U.S. forests and citizens, in-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00259 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
260
creasing the competitiveness of U.S. products in the global market-
place, and adapting to future challenges. Recent Forest Service re-
search activities have developed innovative solutions to managing
invasive species, improving smoke and fire management capabili-
ties, and driving innovation and expansion of commercial applica-
tions for forest products.
For Fiscal Year 2020, we appreciate that this subcommittee not
only rejected the drastic cuts to Forest Service research, but also
championed an increase. For Fiscal Year 2021, we urge you in-
crease funding for Forest Service research to no less than $310 mil-
lion, which includes $83 million for the Forest and Inventory Anal-
ysis Program, and $227 million for the remaining research and de-
velop programs.
As we all work to use resources more efficiently and effectively,
State and private forestry programs provide a significant return on
Federal investment by leveraging the boots on the ground and fi-
nancial resources of State agencies to deliver to landowners, com-
munities, tribes, and other Federal agencies. The President’s budg-
et for the last few years has proposed eliminating programs like
Urban and Community Forestry and Landscape Skill Restoration.
Again, we appreciate your efforts to continue these programs to se-
cure much-needed increases for the entire five programs of the
State and private forestry area.
SAF recommends that these programs be funded at Fiscal Year
2020 levels, and, if possible, above. In addition, we urge you to con-
sider increasing urban and community forestry to at least $35 mil-
lion and forest self-management on cooperative lands to $48 mil-
lion. The Bureau of Labor Management plays an integral role in
improving the health and productivity of our Nation’s public lands.
SAF asks this subcommittee to extend the authorization for the
Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund, which is currently
set to expire this year. This fund specifically helps support manage-
ment that improves wildfire resilience and other benefits for BLM
and adjacent lands.
In conclusion, we understand and appreciate the resources are fi-
nite, and that more money is not always the answer. However, our
forests have been long been undervalued by society and under-
funded by decision makers. Today, thanks to the growing and more
sophisticated body of science, we know that forests and trees are
key to mitigating climate impacts and improving the health, well-
being and prosperity of our communities.
Modest increases to the programs discussed today can yield in-
credible results for our forests. Please know that SAF and its di-
verse membership are always a resource to you. Whether you are
looking for the latest science or insights from our on-the-ground
practitioners, don’t hesitate to reach out. Thank you again for your
leadership and your recognition of the importance of our forests,
forest management, research, and forestry professionals.
[The statement of Mr. Baker follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00260 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
261
Fiscal Year 2021 US House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Written Testimony of Terry Baker
Chief Executive Officer, Society of American Foresters
February 6, 2020
The of American Foresters (SAF) appreciates the opportunity to submit written public
testimony to the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment,
and Related A2emaes regaramg fiscal year (FY) 202 l appropriations. SAF recommendations
focus on supporting programs at the USDA Forest Service (USFS) and the Department of the
Interior (DOI), including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
Founded by Gifford Pinchot in 1900, SAF is the premier scientific and educational organization
in the United States--promoting science-based, sustainable management and stewardship of the
nation's public and private forests. SAF members include public and private sector natural
resource professionals, researchers, CEOs, administrators, investment advisors, educators, and
students. As the professionals who study, manage, and care for our nation's forest resources, we
have a vested interest in ensuring their long-term health and sustainability. Investment in forest
management activities across landscapes is essential to maintain and bolster the social,
economic, and environmental benefits forests and trees provide.
On behalf of over 10,000 members across the country, we wish to thank this subcommittee for its
work in supporting and securing funding increases for many USFS and DOI programs for FY
2020. These important gains would not have been realized without your leadership and
commitment to forests, forest management, and forestry and natural resources professionals.
Top Federal Priorities for FY 2021
l. Increase funding for USFS Forest and Rangeland Research to no less than $310
million, with no less than $83 million for the Forest Inventory and Analysis
program.
2. Continue to support increased cross-boundary work and collaboration across
!andownerships and stakeholders to improve forest health and reduce wildfire risks.
3. Maintain funding support for USFS State and Private Forestry Programs at or above
FY 2020 funding levels.
4. Support BLM Public Domain Forestry and Oregon & C,alifomia Railroad Grant Lands
funding levels at no less than $10.24 million and $ ! 12. l million, respectively.
Please note, because the President's budget for FY 2021 and the accompanying agency reports
have not been released yet, the following represents a placeholder until further information is
available. We plan to augment this information and submit updated testimony in March.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 451 here 43677P7.150
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00261 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
262
Forestry Research-Investments in forestry research are essential for the future health and
sustainability of the nation's forests, which include 22 million small private forest landowners.
Although this testimony focuses on USFS Forest and Rangeland Research programs, SAF also
recognizes and supports the full array of forestry research efforts led by the Bureau of Land
Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Geologic Survey, and others including land-
grant institutions and other universities. USFS Research and Development (USFS R&D)
research conducted at the five USFS research stations, the International Institute of Tropical
Forestry, and in the Forest Products Laboratory is crucial. Federal forestry research develops
new products and practical innovation; identifies forest ecosystem disturbance response and
forest resilience; helps responses to shifting social demands and demographic changes; and
quantifies the contributions of forests to air and water quality. Without USFS leadership,
investigation of these critical research needs would largely be left unfulfilled. Using federal
investments that are leveraged in partnership with universities and private-public consortiums,
important research questions, emerging threats, and potential opportunities are thoroughly
researched and vetted. Clear and relevant research helps eliminate uncertainties and builds
consensus on management actions, potentially a~oiding litigation and enabling more projects
to move forward. These results are disseminated through wide networks in the forestry
community, help to support decision-making, and drive innovations in practices and
utilization. SAF supports a funding level of $310 million for USFS R&D, with emphasis on
prioritization ofresearch projects uniquely suited to R&D expertise furthering agency and
partner objectives.
Forest Inventory and Analysis-The USFS R&D Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA)
program is the backbone of US forestry-providing the only national census of forests across
all ownerships. Through FIA, the USFS, in partnership with state forestry agency, university,
and private sector partners, collects and analyzes forest data to assess trends on issues such as
forest health and management, fragmentation and parcelization, and forest carbon
sequestration. The data and information collected by FIA serve as the basis for identifying
trends in forest ownership; assessing fish and wildlife habitat; evaluating wildfire, insect, and
disease risk; predicting the spread of invasive species; determining capital investment in
existing forest products facilities and selecting locations for new forest product facilities; and
identifying and responding to priorities identified in State Forest Action Plans. The critical
need for current information about the condition of our forests underlies the need for FIA
program capacity to be increased in FY 2021 and beyond. SAF requests additional investment
in FIA with a funding level of at least $83 million. We urge the subcommittee to ensure that
this increase does not come at the expense of other research programs and provide direction
for future increases to allow the program to keep pace with ever-growing and diverse
information needs.
Fire Science Program--SAF appreciates this subcommittee's commitment to continuing the
important work of the Joint Fires Science Program (JFSP). SAF supports funding for the JFSP
at or above FY 2020 levels and asks the subcommittee to encourage active participation by
DOI and USFS in prioritizing investment in fire research and decision support.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 452 here 43677P7.151
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00262 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
263
Wildfire Funding and Federal Forest Managemenf-We appreciate this subcommittee's
longstanding support and tireless efforts to change the way wildfires are funded. Thank you
again for helping to finally treat wildfires like other natural disasters. While passing a wildfire
funding fix was a huge step forward, there is a lot of work to be done on the ground with
estimates of more than 82 million acres in the National Forest System (NFS) still in need of
restoration. SAF urges this subcommittee to encourage the agencies to use all available tools to
expand collaboration with rural communities, partners, and industry to meet and exceed forest
plan management goals. Existing authorizations in the Farm Bill, the 2018 Omnibus, and other
sources cari facilitate quicker responses to areas devastated by insects and disease, more
Stewardship Contracts, Good Neighbor agreements, increased use of remote sensing where
appropriate, and other mechanisms to work across boundaries on shared objectives.
Hazardous Fuels-Thank you for the significant increase to hazardous fuels funding for FY
2020. These programs at USFS and DOI are integral to forest health, risk mitigation, and
reducing wildfire suppression costs. They also serve as an important source of jobs, maintain
critical forest products processing capability, and expand markets for the use of biomass
residuals as renewable energy through efforts like the USFS Woody Innovations Grant Program.
SAF supports funding the USFS and DOI Hazardous Fuels Program at or above FY 2020
levels.
State and Private Forestry-SAF again thank this subcommittee for its recognition of the
importance ofUSFS State and Private Forestry (S&PF) programs. SAF recommends that
these programs be at least maintained at FY 2020 levels.
Bureau ofLand Management-Management of BLM forestlands is an important element of
maintaining and improving the health and productivity of our nation's public lands. SAF asks
this subcommittee to extend authorization for the Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund.
The authorization in the 2015 Omnibus Bill is currently set to expire in 2020. SAF also requests
that this subcommittee consider a provision to explicitly allow BLM to utilize the 3,000-acre
categorical exclusions for insect and disease infestations and wildfire resilience to by amending
the Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003. SAF supports $10.24 million/or the PD program
and $112.1 million for the O&C program.
Thank you for your consideration of these important requests. SAF and its extensive
network of forestry and natural resources professionals stand ready to assist with further
development and implementation of these efforts and ideas
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 453 here 43677P7.152
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00263 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
264
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. Mr. Asher.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY
WITNESS
JONATHAN ASHER, DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, THE
WILDERNESS SOCIETY
Mr. ASHER. Thank you, Chair McCollum, for having me today,
and, of course, Ranking Member Joyce and Mr. Kilmer. I am Jona-
than Asher. I am the director of government relations for conserva-
tion funding with the Wilderness Society.
And I just want to start out by saying, you know, in particular
thank you to you and your staff for working across the aisle, but
also, you know, in particular, taking advantage of the increased
budget cap and negotiating the increased budget cap last year, and
then also a full-year bill. That is, you know, a huge benefit, I think,
to all of our priorities. So thank you very much. I appreciate that.
I just want to share with you some priorities of the Wilderness
Society looking forward to this year. And in doing a quick time
read of what I had written, it was like way over, so I am just going
to kind of go through what I can.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. We will have——
Mr. ASHER. There you go. Exactly. [Laughter.]
Right. So, you know, the Land and Conservation Fund remains
one of the Wilderness Society’s top priorities because of its on-the-
ground impact and value to actual conservation, and to local com-
munities, and to our natural landscape. The increased funding
level of $495 million last year was greatly appreciated and cer-
tainly acknowledged. I think, you know, as look forward to this
year, noting that the program remains authorized at $900 million,
we, you know, always continue to look for opportunities to increase
that because of its value to our local communities, our natural
landscapes, recreation, and, in particular, climate change.
LCWF is one of the main on-the-ground tools that we have in ad-
dressing the impacts of climate change through adaptation efforts
as exemplified in the Sierra Nevada and California, where the long
history of kind of the patchwork of railroad ownership throughout
the years has created kind of the patchwork ownership that makes
it hard to fight wildfires efficiently. The State teamed up with the
Forest Service, localities, land trusts, and other landowners to em-
ploy LWCF to undo some of that patchwork, and it is actually seen
a visible increase in the ability to efficiently address wildfires in
the State. So they are using LWCF there as a climate tool.
Similarly, in New Jersey, there was a large wetlands project that
was done as a natural storm buffer from hurricanes and, in par-
ticular, to mitigate against the impacts of climate change. A study
of the insurance industry showed that with similar efforts, we
saved upwards of, you know, several hundred million dollars with
Hurricane Harvey. So, again, these natural solutions are really key
to how we are looking towards the future of addressing climate
change, not only for our natural landscapes, but also for local com-
munities, in particular. So the Land and Water Conservation Fund
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00264 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
265
is critical to that effort, and we certainly hope the committee will
continue to increase its funding levels and support that critical pro-
gram.
Additionally, we pay attention to renewable energy opportunities
on public lands. You know, while there is still authorizing legisla-
tion that is working its way through Congress, we know that sev-
eral programs, several line items within the appropriations bill
speak specifically to renewable energy to public lands, and we want
to support those, and increased responsible development of renew-
able energy on public lands, again, as a climate solution.
The Wilderness Society also pays particular attention to wildlife
refuges and noting, in particular, funding for listing under the En-
dangered Species Act. We certainly support that and efforts to
make sure that it doesn’t get cut this year. We would like to, you
know, continue to push for the legacy Roads and Trails Program
to kind of be independent of the Capital Improvement and Mainte-
nance Fund. And then, in particular, also, you know, a number of
oversight provisions last year were great that we hope you will con-
tinue to support this year, including the boundary waters, includ-
ing Chaco Canyon, and, you know, with the DOI reorg and the
BLM headquarters move. You know, these are moves that the
Trump Administration has made that are, you know, pretty aggres-
sive with respect to congressional authority, and we hope that you
will feel bolstered in your ability to continue those oversight activi-
ties.
So with that, thank you again for a great bill last year. We really
appreciate it and hope that you will keep up the progress this year.
[The statement of Mr. Asher follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00265 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
266
Written Testimony of Jonathan Asher,
Director of Government Affairs, Conservation Funding, The Wilderness Society
Chair McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the committee, thank you for
the opportunity to testify today and highlight several priorities of The Wilderness Society
and our over one million members and supporters, specifically at the Department of
Interior, as you begin the Fiscal Year 2021 appropriations process. The Wilderness
Society is celebrating it's eighty-fifth birthday this year, and remains a committed leader
in ensuring our natural treasures and wild places are protected and equitably available for
generations to come.
I would like to start by commending you and your staffs' hard work to produce truly
laudable funding outcomes for Fiscal Year 2020. Your work across the aisle to first raise
what would have been devastating caps associated with the Budget Control Act, and
second, produce full-year appropriations bills avoiding damaging de-fucto cuts associated
with a Continuing Resolution, will have tangible benefits for our country, local
communities and the natural world. While hopes were high that broad funding packages
would carry along with them any multitude of other priorities, leaving many ofus with
some disappointment over important unfinished business; from a funding perspective
your committee and colleagues in leadership produced one of the best Interior
Appropriations bills seen in recent memory, providing key investments and eschewing
new environmentally damaging policy riders. Please know that those efforts and
successes are noticed and appreciated.
While not an exhaustive list, below are a number of key funding priorities The
Wilderness Society hopes you will pay particular attention to this upcoming fiscal year:
The Land and Water Conservation Fund- The Land and Water Conservation Fund
remains one of the top funding and policy priorities for The Wilderness Society because
of its on-the-ground and felt benefits to conservation, our public lands and local
communities. The LWCF funding level of $495 million in FY 2020, a noteworthy
increase over recent years, is commendable, justifiable and greatly appreciated. However,
the fact that this increased funding level remains roughly half of the authorized and
envisioned amount underscores the need for this vital program's funding to be made
mandatory. Hundreds of millions of conservation dollars should not be left unused simply
because appropriators are handcuffed by 302(b) allocations and competing priorities.
This is particularly true at a time when population centers near public lands are booming
and equitable access to recreation and nature are in ever increasing demand. Furthermore,
LWCF is one of our best current climate adaptation tools, already utilized nation-wide to
protect communities and ecosystems threatened and impacted by climate change.
In California's Sierra Nevada, for example, checkerboard ownership left over from the
railroad-days presents daunting challenges in managing the forests to reduce the risk of
catastrophic wildfires. A joint partnership with the Forest Service, the State of California,
and land trusts has utilized LWCF, allowing for comprehensive forest management and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 460 here 43677P7.153
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00266 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
267
treatment, preventing and suppressing fire much more efficiently. Elsewhere, the state of
New Jersey, the Anny Corps of Engineers, and NGO's have worked together to restore
coastal wetlands. The wetland restoration, funded by $23.95 million from LWCF, serves
as critical climate infrastructure by absorbing and slowing down flood and storm waters.
In a 2016 study by a risk modeler for the insurance industry and others, showed that
marsh wetlands saved over $650 million in property damages during Hurricane Sandy
and reduced annual property losses by nearly 20% in Ocean County, New Jersey.
Renewable Energy Development on Public Lands and Waters - Public lands have a large
potential to not only provide climate adaptation benefits, but also aid in the growth of
clean energy. Several accounts within the Interior Appropriations bill fund important
work aimed at responsible renewable energy development on public lands and waters.
We support the adoption of the Public Lands Renewable Energy Development Act
(PLREDA), and support current funding for the Department of Interior to develop and
deploy renewable energy infrastructure on public lands where appropriate.
The Wildlife Refuge System - The Wilderness Society has long advocated for properly
funding our wildlife refuge system. These areas too have faced long-time underfunding
and also face a significant maintenance and conservation backlog. Furthermore, any
attempt to underfund or undermine the listing of endangered species is not welcome. The
Endangered Species Act is a bedrock environmental law, and appropriate funding for the
listing process is a cornerstone element of the functioning of that law. Numerous wildlife
refuges have also faced immediate impacts from natural disasters. Recent disaster
supplemental appropriations have helped backfill some of the damage, but up-front
investment to gird for future impacts is both needed and more fiscally efficient than
inconsistent and ad-hoc disaster funding.
Public Lands Infrastructure, and Legacy Roads and Trails - The Wilderness Society also
supports funding that benefits equitable access to and enjoyment of our public lands.
Well-maintained infrastructure in the right places ensures everything from safe public
and recreational access to the protection of water quality. We are disappointed with the
continued move over the last several appropriations cycles to consolidate the Legacy
Roads and Trails program into the broader Capital Improvement and Maintenance (CIM)
account. With already limited resources, and a maintenance backlog throughout our
public lands system, we urge the committee to ensure that the valuable benefits realized
by the Legacy Roads and Trails (LRT) program do not disappear. Ideally, the program
would remain independent, and at the very least current language to protect it's
functioning and to track the impacts ofLRT investments should be strengthened.
Land Use Planning and Recreation Management - The core functions of our land
management agencies remain vitally important in this time of increased stressors from
population growth and climate change. Many of our public land plans remain woefully
out of date or revisions behind schedule. Funding for land use planning including
resource management planning, travel management planning and recreation resource
planning are critical investments that ensure the protection of public resources, the
efficient management of those resources by public land managers and pay dividends to
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 461 here 43677P7.154
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00267 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
268
Challenges at the Complex
The biggest challenge at the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex is adequate funding for
staff. Currently, 7 permanen~ employees manage over 11,000 acres oflands with Black River Unit 40
minutes from the main office and Grays Harbor Refuge an hour and a half away. The Complex has
one maintenance worker to maintain the infrastructure and assist with habitat management, yet a
large amount of time is spent commuting between work sites. Ideally, the Complex needs twice the
staff(15) to achieve the full purposes of the Refuges, not only to benefit fish and wildlife, but also to
provide quality, safe outdoor opportunities for the public. This is a common limitation for many other
refuges.
Due to the lack of sufficient staffing, potential Oregon Spotted Frog habitat at the Black River Unit is
being overtaken by invasive species. In fact, invasive species are a problem at all three units. Law
enforcement is another significant issue at the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex.
Currently we have ¼ of a Refuge Law Enforcement Officer. The Officer is housed 2 hours away in
Sequim at the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually
NWR is located directly off Interstate 5, a major corridor between Seattle and Portland. This close
proximity and easy exit and entrance onto the highway may be the reason why there is higher crime
at Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR, particularly car prowls. Trespassing into closed areas set aside for
wildlife and engaging in non-wildlife dependent activities are also big problems despite miles of
trails throughout the refuges: for example, portrait photographers disturbing birds so their subjects
can sit in the grasslands, dogs on- and off-leash on confmed boardwalks and in fields and wetlands,
and fishing and hunting in closed areas. A full time law enforcement presence on the refuges is
needed to curb abuses and to provide education to those unaware of the rules and regulations and the
reason why they are in place. Additionally, a security surveillance system for the parking lots would
go a long way towards reducing the problem with car prowls.
The overall level of service to the public is dramatically different between Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually
NWR and Grays Harbor NWR. Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR has the infrastructure (office, visitor
center, environmental education center, miles of trails, and maintenance shop) to host an active
visitor services and education program, over I 00 refuge volunteers, interpretive programs, and an
annual watershed festival. Grays Harbor NWR, on the other hand, has a dedicated but small corps of
volunteers and one dedicated event, the Grays Harbor Shorebird Festival. Every day, we see what
can be accomplished if the infrastructure and staff are available to serve the public and the benefits to
surrounding communities. Grays Harbor NWR and, in the future, Black River Unit have so much
potential to be as popular a: destination for visitors, including school groups - if supported by
adequate public resources and appropriate staffing.
The education program at the Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR is incredible and is the direction for the
future focus of this urban refuge. The Refuge is a popular regional destination, especially on clear (or
non-rainy) Pacific Northwest days, and regularly exceeds its visitation capacity due to current
resource limitations. This is also true for the education program, which serves a remarkable 10,000
students each year, but continues to face growing demand from school districts and teachers. With
additional staff, the program can be expanded to provide environmental education outreach within
the communities and follow-up visits to the Refuge.
Currently, the environmental education staff is comprised of an Education Program Manager and two
AmeriCorps members. These positions are provided through a contract with a partner non-profit and
funded through a combination of station funds, Friends ofNisqually National Wildlife Refuge
Complex funds, and competitive grants. The Refuge Complex would like to move the program fully
in house, but the permanent staff position is not on the organizational chart iind current annual
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 462 here 43677P7.155
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00268 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
269
budgets cannot accommodate the full position. Approval for adding the environmental education
staff to the Complex's organizational chart will provide the capacity to develop a more sustainable
outreach program and implement urban outreach goals. This in turn, allows Friends' funds to support
other refuge needs (e.g., visitor services, volunteers, maintenance of visitor facilities, etc.).
Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually NWR is a priority urban refuge and is well poised to help fulfill the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Director's priorities: the Urban Wildlife Conservation Program, Engaging
in the Outdoors, and Youth Education. In 2016, the Complex submitted an Urban Refuge proposal in
hopes ofreceiving the additional base funding ($1,000,000) to implement the new program. We were
not selected for the Urban Refuge funding; however, the proposal still serves as a guidance and plan
for future opportunities to reach out into urban communities such as the Department of Defense at
Joint Base Lewis McChord, the Nisqually Indian Tribe, our neighboring communities of Olympia
and Tacoma and our nearby major metropolitan areas of Seattle and Portland. Our location right off
Interstate 5 makes us an ideal destination to engage folks with the Refuge System and a great
jumping off point for education staff to head out into the community. We want to help create the next
generation of people who will actively take care of our nation's lands.
As it is now, our Friends group and volunteers are picking up the slack and smoothing out the
inconsistencies in the funding to the best of our ability. However, volunteers and outside staff are not
a sustainable model for our Refuge System.
National Funding and the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex
Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $900 million in Operations and
Maintenance Funding to be considered fully funded. At this level, all refuges would be fully staffed,
with adequate maintenance, biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and interpretation
programs. We ask that you work towards the overall goal of $900 million in annual funding. In
support of that goal we request that this subcommittee allocate $586 million in funding for the
Refuge System Operations and Maintenance fund for FY 2021.
This request of$586 million, an increase of$84 million over FY 2020 appropriations, would greatly
impact our refuge. The Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Complex would be better able to hire the
staff needed to:
o Have an adequate level oflaw enforcement
o Increase our Urban Refuge outreach
o Control invasive species to benefit a diversity of fish and wildlife
o Restore critical habitat for Oregon Spotted Frog
o Construct and operate the promised Interpretive Center at Grays Harbor NWR
o Provide additional wildlife-dependent opportunities at Grays Harbor NWR and Black
River Unit
o Further build out our environmental education programs
Our Refuges are the face of public lands for many people in the South Puget Sound community, as
they are for communities across the country. We need full funding to ensure that they stay protected,
accessible, and stewarded for the generations to come.
Thank you for your consideration.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 463 here 43677P7.156
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00269 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
270
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020.
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS
WITNESS
LAURA FORERO, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, LEAGUE OF CON-
SERVATION VOTERS
Ms. FORERO. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, and Ranking Mem-
ber Joyce. My name is Laura Forero, and I am the legislative rep-
resentative for conservation and public lands with the League of
Conservation Voters. As you know, the League of Conservation Vot-
ers is a national environmental nonprofit focused on protecting our
planet and everyone who inhabits it. And along with our 30 State
affiliates and the conservation voter movement, we work for a more
just and equitable democracy where people, and not polluters, de-
termine our future. So today, we want to thank you for the in-
creased levels of funding in last year’s Interior appropriations
budget. We are also very thankful for the subcommittee’s Fiscal
Year 2020, especially because it did not contain any longstanding
anti-environmental provisions, and we urge you to take this ap-
proach once again.
Our written testimony does tell a lot of our full budget rec-
ommendations, but today I would like to highlight just a couple of
those programs. So, first, I would like to talk about the Land and
Water Conservation Fund, which in its 50 years of history has pro-
tected our public lands, increased accessibility to green spaces, and
helped fuel our thriving outdoor recreation economy. What is more,
we want to talk about the fact that LWCF also helps preserve our
natural and cultural heritage. It helps tell the stories of diverse
communities in our country and its support of green spaces in
every single State and almost every county in the country. So we
definitely appreciate that Congress last year provided a sizable in-
crease to LWCF and that the subcommittee provided even more
than Congress, that is, last year.
So just to show how critical this program is across the country,
I wanted to share the story of one of my colleagues, Barbara
Hartzell. Barbara was raised Nuwu. Tribally, she is a Chemehuevi
Paiute from the Chemehuevi Tribe of Lake Havasu, California and
Las Vegas Indian Colony. Her grandmother was raised as an or-
phan and was forced into a residential school system that sepa-
rated Indian children from their families and their culture and
their heritage. Due to this, her grandmother lived her entire life
with unanswered questions about her family, and Barb only got to
know the stories of these women through oral history and seeing
their names listed in the Indian Census rolls.
The one vestige of the story that remains for her family is an old
picture of her great, great, great grandmother at an unknown loca-
tion. But as it turns out, it was taken at the Doll House at Kiel
Ranch Historic Park in Las Vegas, and Barb, my colleague, came
to this realization when she arrived at Kiel Ranch for an event.
One thing that we really want to highlight is the impact on her
family. When she took her mother to the park, her mother’s eyes
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00270 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
271
filled with tears, and her mother’s words still haunt her. Her moth-
er said, ‘‘You mean they were real,’’ meaning these people existed.
Barb and her family were able to see the land their family lived
on because of the Land and Water Conservation Fund and because
of the money that it provided to the State of Nevada.
So as my colleague said, when we talk about the Land and Water
Conservation Fund, we are talking about the importance of the
preservation of our lands, our water, and, more than anything, our
heritage. The League of Conservation Voters supports full funding
of $900 million in discretionary appropriations for LWCF in Fiscal
Year 2021, and we also look forward to working with Congress to
find a permanent solution for LWCF. So as Barb put it, we can
focus on a new kind of conservation that centers on our voices, on
our communities, instead of having to fight every year for these
special places.
In addition to that, I would now like to turn to a different pro-
gram, the National Environmental Policy Act. NEPA is one of Na-
tion’s bedrock environmental laws that fosters government trans-
parency and accountability. For 50 years, it has enabled the public
to provide critical input on the environmental effects that Federal
projects will have in our communities, public lands, wildlife habi-
tats, as well as our health. But as you know, unfortunately, the Ad-
ministration has recently proposed changes to NEPA. Those
changes would severely limit public input and undermine the anal-
ysis of cumulative effects.
More than anything, we want to highlight how gutting this proc-
ess would have dire implications for mitigating climate change, and
also to access clean air, land, water, and especially for those in low-
wealth communities and communities of color, which are the most
impacted by climate change and toxic pollution. Because of that, we
also wanted to share the story of one of our members, Jose Archapa
down in Texas, who has unfortunately been impacted through toxic
pollution. Unfortunately, due to time, I might not be able to tell the
entirety of his story, but we definitely just want to recommend that
the committee support funding prohibitions on the Trump Adminis-
tration’s plan to gut NEPA. So thank you so much.
[The statement of Ms. Forero follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00271 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
272
Written Testimony
Laura Forero, Legislative Representative, League of Conservation Voters
Submitted to the House Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Subcommittee
Fiscal Year 2021 Budget
January 29, 2020
Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the committee,
On behalf of the League of Conservation Voters, I am pleased to submit this written testimony on
our funding priorities and requests for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 for the Department of Interior (DOI)
and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) budgets. The League of Conservation Voters (LCV)
is a national environmental nonprofit working to tum environmental priorities from diverse
communities nationwide into sound laws and policies at all levels of goveroment. We are
extremely thankful for the members' continued support of federal environmental agencies and
programs, and for recognizing the need for increased funding in the FY 2020 budget. We are also
very gl'llteful that the Subcommittee's FY 2020 budget bill did not retain longstanding anti-
environmental riders. We were disappointed that the final omnibus bill reinstated some of these
riders, but we thank the Subcommittee for its strong efforts.
Although the President's Budget Request for the FY 2021 has not been released yet, based on
recent rollbacks and the previous year's request, we expect a challenging fiscal environment with
drastic program reductions of core environmental programs that have long had an impact in
communities across the country. In anticipation of these cuts, we would like to express our support
for full funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), and critical EPA programs.
We would also like to address critically needed Congressional oversight, which might include
funding prohibitions, on the Trump administration's plans for drilling expansions offshore and in
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, censoring science used in EPA rulemaking, undermining the
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) for power plants and fair cost benefit analysis, and
gutting implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Land and Water Conservation Fund
The persistent loss of our nation's natural areas due to human activity is accelerating at an alarming
rate: from 2001 to 2017, roughly a football field worth of natural area disappeared every 30
seconds to development such as roads, energy development, and housing subdivisions. Protecting
and enhancing access to public lands and waters is key to address this nature crisis, increase
accessibility to green spaces, and strengthen our country's thriving outdoor recreation and tourism
economies. In its 50+ years of history, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) has been
a crucial program for the protection and restoration of our public !ands and waters by providing
funding to create state and local parks; improve access to public lands; conserve farms and forests;
and protect national parks, wildlife refuges, and other public lands. Furthermore, L WCF helps to
address a legacy of injustice that has resulted in certain communities - oftentimes
underrepresented, low-income communities, and communities of color - lacking access to nearby
green spaces and recognition through public landmarks. From iconic landscapes such as the Grand
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 470 here 43677P7.157
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00272 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
273
Canyon to historical landmarks such as the Martin Luther King National Historical Park and the
Chaco Culture National Historical Park to supporting neighborhood ball fielc!s across the country,
L WCF preserves our natural and cultural heritage, helps tell the stories of the diverse communities
in our country, and supports green spaces in every single state and almost every county nationwide.
The FY 2020 omnibus dedicated $495 million in discretionary appropriations to the Land and
Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), an increase of$60 million from the FY 2018 budget. We are
thankful for the increased funding and for the Subcommittee's recognition of the vitality of this
program by requesting an even higher number of discretionary appropriations than the funding
enacted for FY2020. Nonetheless, considering the great need to address the nature crisis and the
historic underfunding of LWCF, LCV supports full funding for the program at $900 million in
discretionary funding for FY202 l and looks forward to working with Congress to fmd a permanent
funding solution for LWCF.
EPA Funding Priorities
The mission of the EPA is to protect human health and the environment, and the agency requires
robust funding to do so. We appreciate the Committee's attention to EPA funding levels in
FY2020, and would encourage you to continue to reject the Trump administration's attempted
evisceration of the EPA's budget. In order to uphold the EPA's mission, we request that the
following offices and programs receive your particular attention for adequate funding for FY202 l:
the Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ), Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
(OECA), State Revolving Funds for Water and Drinking Water, Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS), Office of Children's Health Protection (OCHP), External Civil Rights Compliance
Office (Title VI), Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Grant Programs (and report language
to further prioritize or incentivize electrification), Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Program,
and the Energy STAR program.
Offshore drilling
The Trump Administration has announced the development of a radical 5-year plan to expand
future oil and gas leasing to the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic oceans, as well as Florida's Gulf Coast.
The draft plan proposes the largest number of potential offshore leases ever offered by any
president, including more than 90 percent of the acreage of the Outer Continental Shelf. In addition
to this, the administration's Interior Department has also weakened offshore drilling safety
standards at the same time as it proposed a plan that would dramatically expand offshore drilling.
It goes without saying that the inherent risks of offshore drilling were vividly manifested during
the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster, which tragically killed 11 rig workers and sent an estimated
4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The 87-day uninterrupted flow of oil devastated
coastal communities, tourism and fishing businesses, and coastal and marine ecosystems, with
lingering effects still being felt to this day. The administration's plan has sparked outrage from
coastal residents, businesses, and elected officials from both parties who recognize that expanding
offshore drilling puts at risk existing coastal economies and ways of life and is incompatible with
our moral obligation to address climate change.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 471 here 43677P7.158
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00273 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
274
We thank the Subcommittee for addressing this important concern in the FY 2020 Interior and
Environment Appropriations Act by including provisions to limit resources for the Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to be used for attempts to expand offshore oil and gas
drilling. Although this language was retained in the House, it was regrettably not included in the
final omnibus. As the Committee considers priorities for the FY 2021 Interior-Environment
Appropriations Act, we encourage Members to once again include provisions to limit resources
from BOEM for attempts to expand offshore oil and gas drilling.
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
The Arctic Refuge is home to the Gwich'in indigenous people who call the Refuge's Coastal Plain
"the sacred place where life begins" reflecting the vitality of the area as the cultural and biological
heart of the Refuge and the importance of the plain as one of America's wildest ecosystems. After
more than a half-century of protection, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 included a clause
opening the Arctic Refuge's Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing for the first time ever under the
requirement that Arctic Refuge lease sales generate more than $900 million in revenue for the
federal government. Furthermore, this provision was even used to offset some of the 2017 Act's
costs. Nonetheless, the Interior Department has abandoned its commitment to taxpayers: the most
recent reports estimate the revenue from Coastal Plain lease sales at only $41.6 million.
We thank the Subcommittee for addressing this important concern in the FY2020 Interior and
Environment Appropriations Act by simply requiring the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to
set minimum lease sale bids sufficient to meet its promised and statutory revenue obligations.
Although this language was retained in the House with strong bipartisan support, it was regrettably
not included in the final bill. LCV urges the committee to again include language in the FY 2021
bill that forces the Administration to meet its promises and legal responsibilities.
Exerting Oversight Over Trump Administration Attacks on Science and Public Input
The Trump administration is attempting to undermine the EPA's ability to protect our health and
environment in clear disregard for the Congressional intent of our bedrock environmental laws.
Some of the recent actions with the most far-reaching consequences are the Administration's
attempt to undercut the MATS standards and dismantle defensible cost benefit analysis in
rulemaking, block critical science and research in establishing public health protections, and
gutting the NEPA process. All of these Trump administration actions attempt to censor or remove
science entirely and shut out the American people from federal government decisions that have
real impacts on the health of our children, communities, and environment.
A bipartisan coalition of Members of Congress, utilities, health groups, and environmental groups
all oppose the Trump administration's proposal to undermine the MATS for power plants. These
standards, already in place and fully complied with, are protecting babies and small children from
the neurodevelopmental harm wreaked by mercury pollution. Despite the varied and powerful
opposition and huge benefits the standards have delivered, the Trump administration is pushing
forward to finalize the standards. Perhaps more importantly, this attack is aimed at all cost benefit
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 472 here 43677P7.159
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00274 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
275
analyses EPA conducts for years to come, pushing a faulty, indefensible, and unscientific bias to
disregard some benefits associated with the rule being developed. Economists think this is totally
without merit, and the general public gets it too; it makes no sense to not consider all the benefits
associated with a decision, in addition to the costs.
The recently proposed gutting ofNEPAfrom the Trump administration specifically cuts science,
integrity, and public input out of the Congressionally mandated process of environmental review
and input in federal project decision making. The public that NEPA was designed to serve rely on
this established process as the only way to weigh in on decisions impacting their communities and
health. Gutting this process would have dire implications for mitigating climate change and access
to clean air, land, and water, especially in low wealth communities and communities of color most
impacted by climate change and toxic pollution from pipelines, highways, and other types of
projects.
Additionally, the Trump Administration is poised to finalize a rule to censor science that is used
by the EPA to protect the air that we breathe, the water we drink, and the land on which we live.
And from early in this administration, political appointees have systematically dismantled the
agency's scientific advisory committees, particularly the Science Advisory Board, and limited the
use of sound scientific research in environmental policy making decisions. Ultimately, we
recommend blocking FY2021 spending for implementing these misguided anti-science and anti-
public input rules and policies that are so clearly against Congressional intent and the public trust.
Endangered Species
Our planet currently faces a global extinction crisis never witnessed by humankind. Scientists
predict that more than I million species are on track for extinction in the coming decades and now,
more than ever, we need programs to protect biodiversity and fight mass extinction. The U.S. is
fortunate to have programs, such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA), that have been specially
designed to prevent extinction and recover species. For more than 40 years, the ESA has been
highly successful in its mission but despite the ESA's outstanding success and the great need for
solutions to address the extinction crisis, ESA programs continue to be underfunded and the Trump
administration continues to attack this critical statute.
Considering the global extinction crisis and the continued underfunding of ESA programs, LCV
urges the Subcommittee to strengthen the support for this landmark wildlife program by providing
robust increases to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to properly implement the ESA and
prohibiting funds to implement the Trump administration's actions contrary to statute. We were
very grateful that the FY 2020 House bill did not retain the longstanding prohibition on protecting
the sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act, but we were disappointed that the final
omnibus bill once again reinstated the rider. We urge the Subcommittee to ensure the removal of
this rider in the final FY 2021 bill.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 473 here 43677P7.160
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00275 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
276
local communities and public land users, providing safe access and enjoyment, spurring
local economies and helping to avoid user conflict.
Climate Change and Public Lands - As noted already, climate change and our public
lands and waters are intimately intertwined. Our natural ecosystems are on the front lines
of felt climate impacts, and our public lands play a significant role in carbon emissions,
and carbon sequestration. Appropriators should examine activities undertaken by the
Department of Interior with taxpayer dollars through a climate lens, as taxpayer money
spent to worsen the climate crisis is not a wise use of public funds.
Examples of wise climate-aware investment of public resources to the Department of
Interior during FY 2020 include increased funding for the Bureau of Indian Affairs Tribal
Cooperative Landscape Conservation Program for tribes to address the impacts of climate
change on tribal lands. Likewise were increases in the Tribal Climate Resilience program
for climate mitigation activities, and the U.S. Geological Survey's National and
Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers, providing climate research support to
states and localities grappling with adaptation. These examples are in addition to the
ongoing climate work at the National Parks Service, as well as climate science and
mitigation programs within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Forest Service, which
should all receive your continued support.
It is worth noting that a recent analysis ofLWCF investments found a 400% economic
return on investment for every $1 spent to acquire or improve public lands. For the
National Park Service, every tax dollar invested saw a $10 return to the U.S. economy.
With recent and surely continued news about the deficit likely reaching $1 Trillion
dollars this year, appropriators should be honest about the fact that the deficit we face is
the result of the 2017 corporate tax cuts, and not seek to pass that fiscal harm on to
taxpayers by cutting or undermining public investments that benefit every American.
In addition to critical funding levels, The Wilderness Society wants to underscore several
other priorities we hope you will pay close attention to this year:
Legacy Riders - We remain supportive of efforts to remove damaging anti-environmental
legacy riders from this year's appropriations bills. These policy riders are vestiges of past
policy issues that were not resolved through a regular authorization process. These stand
in direct logical conflict with the recent agreements made to keep new controversial and
damaging policy riders out of appropriations bills. Appropriators on both sides of the
aisle should recognize that irony and work to not include legacy riders from the outset,
and further work to remove these damaging provisions from appropriations bills during
all stages of the process.
Oversight and The Power of the Purse - Congress, and particularly congressional
appropriators are given constitutionally a central check and balance on the Executive
Branch; the power of the purse. The Trump administration has shown time and again its
lack of respect for congressional directives in report language, and even in bill text. They
have openly violated the Anti Deficiency Act as noted by the Government Accountability
Office, have flagrantly impounded taxpayer dollars and twisted existing programs and
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 474 here 43677P7.161
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00276 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
277
funding for political gain, as exemplified by their mismanagement of National Park
revenue during the 2018 government shutdown. Yet another example is the continued
Department of Interior reorganization, and the highly destructive relocation of the Bureau
of Land Management Headquarters. Congressional appropriators should feel confident
and emboldened in the use of your legitimate and justified oversight responsibilities, and
your power of their purse. This effort should not fall along party lines, as fiscal
conservatives should be among the most ardent supporters of ensuring taxpayer dollars
are spent responsibly, according to congressional directive, and not wasted or misused.
Within this realm, there are a number of areas where the administration is advancing
efforts counter to the public interest and wise use of taxpayer resources. Additionally,
several provisions in the FY 2020 appropriations bill are commendable and should be
continued, or similar efforts undertaken this fiscal year.
Language regarding Chaco Culture National Historic Park ensures the value of this
special place and the priceless cultural and historic resources it houses, held in the public
trust, are protected from encroaching oil and gas development for this fiscal year. This
provision should be continued.
In Alaska, over the objection of the U.S. Forest Service, and with taxpayer dollars
potentially illegally funding timber-industry advocacy, the Trump Administration has
moved to broadly exempt the Tongass National Forest, one of the world's largest carbon
sinks from protection under the "Roadless Rule". Timber cutting in the Tongass, one of
the world's last intact temperate rainforests is already a loosing proposition fiscally,
costing taxpayers $30 million per year. With approximately 3 million tons of carbon
sequestered annually by the Tongass, a loss of this resource would be significant, roughly
equal to taking 600,000 cars off the road each year. Appropriators should avoid throwing
good money after bad, and protect taxpayer resources along with protecting the Tongass
National Forest. Similarly, the House FY 2020 appropriations bill included important
taxpayer protections with respect to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The erroneous
valuation associated with the proposed development of oil and gas within "America's
Serengeti," was a flagrant misuse of the budget reconciliation process and an attack on
the public's resources rightly fought by this committee's oversight responsibilities. We
support continued oversight of the effort to develop the Arctic Refuge this fiscal year.
The FY 2020 House appropriations bill included commendable report language regarding
efforts by the administration to undermine the study of an public process surrounding a
proposal to allow mining that threaten the famed Boundary Waters Canoe Area
Wilderness in Minnesota. We greatly appreciate the strong leadership Chair McCollum
took on this issue during the last fiscal year, and support the committee's efforts this year
to continue to protect the Boundary Waters' public resources as it sees appropriate given
additional existing legislation.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to share with you some of The Wilderness Society's
Fiscal Year 2021 priorities.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 475 here 43677P7.162
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00277 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
278
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. One thing that most people don’t re-
alize about our national forests is that they protect water, right?
And the Superior National Forest where there is the proposed cop-
per sulfate ore mine, it is 20 percent of the national forest water
bank. And I appreciate the President’s initiative to plant 1 million
trees as we are losing trees to Asian ash borer, what is happening
with the pine rust and the pine beetle, and everything. I could go
on about gypsy moss. I could list a lot of little bugs that we don’t
want to have flying around in our forests and embedding them-
selves in our trees.
But some of the things kind of going on with extraction, whether
it be of minerals and national forests are impacted, or putting in
roads in some of our public land areas. We need to have a real edu-
cation understanding about forests are more than trees. They are
also about water. And I know when we have our public/private for-
estry councils, those are the things that, you know, where we are
sitting around the table, everybody learned from each other, and it
took some of the tension out of the room, and some real opportuni-
ties to talk about what are our shared values, what should our
goals be, you know. How do we make this work for individuals?
Maybe just tell me a little bit about some of the things that your
organizations are doing to kind of hit it home, that this is about
protecting drinking water. And the forests also, when you replant,
they need water, too, this water. So could you just maybe share a
couple of things before we close up this panel on that?
Ms. MURDOCH. We work not only in the national forests, but to
help this public/private stewardship between States and national
lands. And also working in urban areas to make sure that they
have forests for everyone and tree canopy for everyone in urban
areas as well. And every single one of those projects and efforts all
contribute to and have a nexus with drinking water.
I came to American Forests from the Chesapeake Bay Founda-
tion, and there I was also working on forests because forests and
buffers are incredibly important to water quality in the Great
Lakes and in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. And this overlap is
incredibly strong, and it is something that across USDA, it is very
important to help all of those projects work together in order to
maximize their ability to contribute to clean water.
And I don’t know if that is helpful, but it is a broad perspective
from the mosaic of Federal work and across with State foresters
and State lands. It is complicated because there are so many, like,
with the LWCF, so many actors and ownership lands. But water
is absolutely one of the top priorities that we have to focus on to
get interest, and buy in, and support for the forest work.
Mr. BAKER. That is a great question. Prior to coming to SAF, I
spent almost 20 years with the U.S. Forest Service, so I am very
familiar with this particular question, some of the challenges that
come with it. I think overall, it is that infamous challenge. It is
about balance. It is about all the different parts and pieces that
come into play and the players. And so that aspect of how do we
look across boundaries, as you mentioned, it is not just about the
national forests. It is about the State landowner. It is about the
private landowner, and it is also about the industrial landowner.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00278 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
279
And so when we look at all those lands married together, you
know, where we do we balance out the uses that we have to have?
If it is a mine, where is a place where it could be located where
it has the least amount of impact? If it is actively managing a for-
est, where can that happen in a way that, one, there is either rules
or regulations to require reforestation to meet those needs to main-
tain that water quality over time, versus not actively managing
could put us in a place where we could have a catastrophic fire that
would end up putting us in a much worst situation.
And so it is really this piece of, as you mentioned, those public/
private discussions around in a lot of cases, many of these things
do have to happen. So how do we, again, allocate those finite re-
sources in a way where they are the least impactful and the most
beneficial both in the immediate time frame and long term? And
so it really is all the folks around the table having a discussion and
having to give a little bit to be successful.
Mr. ASHER. Yeah, and I would say, you know, being an appropri-
ator from a funding perspective, for us it is valuable to look at, you
know, what can we be doing to save costs and not just investing,
you know, new money, but also ensuring that we are using the
public resources in the most responsible way. And so, again, with
the Land and Water Conservation Fund, you know, there are great
examples of projects where we have conserved areas for water sup-
plies that have actually saved money over the long term. Instead
of going out and building really expensive infrastructure, we are
going out and conserving natural areas that help to create, you
know, clean water opportunities and forests.
You know, I think if we are talking about climate change and
things like the Trillion Trees, you know, Initiative, from the Wil-
derness Society, we are also looking at, well, you know, let’s be sav-
ing trees now, too, right? So the Tongass National Forest——
Ms. MCCOLLUM. I agree.
Mr. ASHER [continuing]. And, you know, Alaska is a place and
the Roadless Rule are things that are very active right now, recog-
nizing that in addition to building out the number of trees that we
want to have over the future, there is an important role to play in
conserving places now. So that also comes through, you know, not
only in the LWCF, but also the Roadless Rule. And, you know, and
other kind of, I think, elegant solutions that your committee put
forth last year where conservation was in the interest of saving
taxpayer resources, like with the Arctic Refuge, I think that was
a very, you know, mindful way of addressing that. And we hope
that your committee and staff will continue to find those, you
know, elegant policy solutions to challenges that we face.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. Anything you want to add?
Ms. FORERO. No, I think Jonathan actually articulated so much
of what I believe we are here for as well.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Well, you guys were magnificent. What a great
way to close out. Public lands, water, air, climate change, critters
that we don’t want to have invading our public lands. You did a
fabulous job. I can’t thank you enough because you are about a half
an hour behind from what you thought your day was going to be,
but it meant the world to us that you are here testifying.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00279 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
280
So with that, you get to help me conclude this afternoon’s hear-
ing, and we will stand adjourned until our next hearing, which is
going to be public witness tribal programs on February 11th, 2020.
Thank you again. Meeting adjourned.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00280 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2020.
TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND
ORGANIZATIONS
NEZ PERCE TRIBAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
WITNESS
CHANTEL GREENE, SECRETARY, NEZ PERCE TRIBAL EXECUTIVE COM-
MITTEE
Ms. MCCOLLUM [presiding]. Good morning, and welcome to the
first day of public witness hearings on tribal programs under the
jurisdiction of the Interior, Environment Appropriations Sub-
committee. And I am pleased to welcome my Native American sis-
ters and brothers to discuss the needs and challenges facing Indian
Country.
For the second year in the hopes of having a more in-depth dis-
cussion of Native American issues and what you are experiencing
on your tribal lands, we have organized witnesses according to the
following topics: healthcare, land trust, national resource manage-
ment, including climate change, public safety, justice, education,
tribal government, and human services. Now, today we will begin
hearing from witnesses on the healthcare needs and challenges be-
fore transitioning to issues related to climate change, land trust,
and natural resources today.
The United States government entered into treaties guaranteeing
healthcare to Native Americans. A few months ago, I traveled to
South Dakota, and I saw firsthand how centuries later, the govern-
ment, our government, the U.S. government, is still not meeting its
responsibilities. The need for investment in healthcare and related
facilities is real, and we continue to do the best we can with the
allocation we are given. Last year, Congress provided a $241 mil-
lion increase to Indian Country health services. This is a 4 percent
increase. It included additional funds to address 105(l) lease costs.
As part of the bill, we directed IHS and BIA and OMB to consider
whether these costs should be funded as an indefinite appropria-
tion. I was pleased to see that the President recognized the impor-
tance of this issue and included such a proposal in the President’s
Fiscal Year 2021 budget request.
In addition, last summer I had the opportunity to visit tribes in
Minnesota, and Mr. Joyce I traveled to Washington State to visit
tribes in Mr. Kilmer’s district. We met with tribal leaders and
learned more about climate change and impacts on health, safety,
and cultural well-being in Native Americans, as well as some
issues surrounding land and natural resource management. Future
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
(281)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00281 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
282
generations deserve clean air, clean water, drinkable water, but we
must give these issues our fullest attention now.
For Fiscal Year 2020, Congress included additional funds for BIA
natural resource management programs and included increased
funding for climate resilience, endangered species, and water re-
sources. I was disappointed, but not surprised, that the President’s
budget request released yesterday once again ignores climate
change. No one is immune from climate change, especially not Na-
tive Americans, who are at the forefront of experiencing the effects
of increasing temperature rises and water rising.
Your written testimony describes in very real detail the impacts
of climate change is having on Native Americans. Melting perma-
frost in Alaska, the loss of traditional foods, presence of flooding,
and it is happening right now in Washington and Oregon State,
and I know that there have been tribal villages that had to be evac-
uated. Our hearts are with them, but yet, the President, Mr.
Trump, looks the other way.
Well, luckily, the President proposes and Congress disposes. So
at the beginning of this Congress, I want you to also know that I
introduced a bill, H.R. 1128, to authorize advanced appropriations
for tribal funds. As we figure out to meet the needs of Native
Americans, I will continue to work towards passage of this vital
legislation. Most recently, I did write a letter to the Budget Com-
mittee requesting that hearings be held on this, and I know you
are talking to members about this issue as well. I am eager, along
with Mr. Quigley, to learn more about your priorities, and I look
forward to our discussion on these issues because I believe it will
help to inform us as we begin to develop the 2021 appropriations
bill.
Now, I am going to cover a few hearing logistics, and when Mr.
Joyce comes in, if he has an opening statement, I will yield to him
at that time. Anything you would like to say at this time, Mr.
Quigley?
Mr. QUIGLEY. I am anxious to hear what you all have to say.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Okay. All right. So we have got the timer out
here, and we already have our first panel of witnesses at the table.
Each witness will have 5 minutes to present their testimony, and
we will be using a tracker to track time. Don’t worry, it is high-
lighted in here. I have read all your testimony. I am going to take
notes on it. We all have it. If you run out of time, please know it
is fully entered into the record. But when you see the light blink
yellow, you have 1 minute to close your remarks, and when the
light blinks red, I will lightly tap with this gavel, which is made
of buckthorn, an invasive species here. [Laughter.]
To let you know that you need to stop your remarks so that the
next witness can begin so that we are respectful of everyone’s time
here. And as I said, everybody’s statement will be entered into the
record. Don’t feel any pressure. After we hear testimony, each wit-
ness on the panel and members will have an opportunity to ask
questions.
And I would like to remind those of you in the committee hearing
room here today of the committee rules. They prohibit the use of
cameras and audio equipment during the hearing by individuals
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00282 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
283
without House-issued press credentials. So when this hearing con-
cludes, we will reconvene at 1:00 for the afternoon hearing.
And so with that, we found out a way to kind of save a little
time. Rather than do double introductions, we are just having the
panel introduce themselves, and that left more time for questions,
which I really love to have. So I will let you start out, Ms. Greene.
Ms. GREENE. So we are introducing ourselves?
Ms. MCCOLLUM. And just make sure that little——
Ms. GREENE. Okay. Good morning, or Ta’c meeywi. My name is
Chantel Greene, and I am representing the Nez Perce Tribe, and
I serve as the secretary officer currently.
Ms. MCCOLLUM. No, go right into your testimony.
Ms. GREENE. Okay. Again, good morning, honorable chairwoman
and members of the subcommittee. Again, my name is Chantel
Greene, and I serve as the secretary of the Nez Perce Tribe Execu-
tive Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this tes-
timony on behalf of the Nez Perce tribe as the committee evaluates
and prioritizes Fiscal Year 2021 appropriations. I would also like
to thank Chairwoman McCollum and Congresswoman Pingree for
their letter regarding a mining project in the Nez Perce Country.
Today I would like to emphasize the need for sufficient resources
in areas such as the Community Health Aide Program, IHS, pur-
chase referred care, contract support costs, special diabetes, mental
health, and substance abuse programs. The CHAP was established
over 40 years ago to help expand access to care in Indian Country
in areas such as behavioral health, dental health, and community
health. The tribe believes the CHAP model is an important tool for
tribal health programs that should be provided the resources to
grow as it increases tribally-based practice and knowledge that a
culturally- and evidence-based holistic methodology offers abilities
similar to wraparound.
The tribe appreciates the committee’s support of broadening the
program by providing $5 million Fiscal Year 2020 for expansion.
The tribe feels this successful program is needed and ready to be
duplicated in the Northwest. As a result, the tribe supports the
Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board’s effort to be des-
ignated a demonstration site by IHS so that certification of these
healthcare assets can move forward. In that regard, the tribe rec-
ommends the committee provide $20 million in Fiscal Year 2021
for continued expansion of CHAP.
The Nez Perce Tribe with an enrollment of 3,500 operates the
Nimiipuu Health on the Nez Perce Reservation and provides serv-
ices to almost 5,000 patients each year. Our expenditure total of
Federal funds in Fiscal Year 2019 was $18 million, an increase of
$1.6 million from that in Fiscal Year 2018. Purchased/referred care
costs for outpatient services in Fiscal Year 2019 totaled $5 million,
which is an increase of almost $700,000 from Fiscal Year 2018.
The tribe recommends, at a minimum, maintaining the $6.05
million in funding enacted for IHS in Fiscal Year 2020. Please note
that this amount does not keep up with medical inflation and popu-
lation growth or limitation on prescription drugs. The tribe sup-
ports an increase of at least $20 million in funding for the PRC
spending needs of tribal health facilities since a budget increase
was not provided in Fiscal Year 2020. The tribe supports full fund-
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00283 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
284
ing for contract support costs in Fiscal Year 2021 and the inclusion
of bill language to classify this appropriation as indefinite. The
tribe appreciates that Congress chose to fully fund contract support
costs in Fiscal Year 2020 at $820 million as it should per any
agreement.
In addition, the tribe recommends permanent, mandatory fund-
ing of the SDPI at no less than $150 million per Fiscal Year. In
that regard, similar levels of funding are strongly recommended for
mental health and substance abuse treatment and SDPI for these
type of services. Although the $10 million annual allocation for
mental health and substance is very important, it falls well below
the financial needs to provide adequate care and treatment on res-
ervations.
In conclusion, the tribe would like to express our support for the
recommendations of the Northwest Preliminary Board, including,
but not limited to, the recommendations of 105(l) lease costs, popu-
lation growth, and medical inflation costs, loan repayment for In-
dian health professionals, small ambulatory programs, and funds
for updating technology and patient files. Thank you for the oppor-
tunity to testimony today, and I am happy to answer any questions
you may have.
[The statement of Ms. Greene follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00284 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
285
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT AND RELATED AGENCIES
WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF CHANTEL GREENE OF THE NEZ PERCE TRIBE
February 11, 2020
Honorable Chairwoman and members of the Subcommittee, my name is Chantel Greene and I
serve as Secretary of the Nez Perce Tribal Executive Committee. Thank you for the opportunity
to provide this testimony on behalf of the Nez Perce Tribe (Tribe) as the Committee evaluates and
prioritizes FY 2021 appropriations in relation to the needs of tribal nations, for the Indian Health
Service (IHS), and, in particular, the Community Health Aide Program (CHAP). On behalf of the
Nimiipuu people, I want to acknowledge and thank this Subcommittee for your efforts, on a
longstanding, bipartisan basis, to understand the needs of Indian Country and advocate for
increased appropriations to the many programs in your jurisdiction that benefit our citizens, our
tribal governments, and all members of our communities. We are deeply grateful that the many
funding increases to tribal programs across the final FY 2020 appropriations will build on increases
Congress provided in FY 2017, in FY 2018, and in FY 2019.
Like any government, the Tribe performs a wide array of work and provides a multitude of services
to our tribal membership as well as the community at large. The Tribe has a health clinic that
provides a wide range of services including medical, behavioral health, optometry, dental,
pharmacy and radiology. These programs are vital for the Tribe to properly care for the enrolled
members within its service area.
The Tribe has long been a proponent of self-determination for tribes and believes our primary
obligation is to protect the Treaty-reserved rights of the Tribe and our members. All of the Tribe's
work is guided by this principle. The Tribe's clinic works extensively with many agencies and
proper funding for those agencies and their work with, for, and through tribes is of vital
importance. Therefore, the Tribe believes the recent report of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
titled Broken Promises, is an important tool to be used in evaluating current programs and funding
for those programs.
CHAP was established over 40 years ago to help expand access to care in Indian Country in areas
such as behavioral health, dental health, and primary and emergency care. The Tribe believes the
CHAP model is an important tool for tribal health programs that should be provided the financial
resources to allow it to properly expand. CHAP is beneficial to tribes in many ways as it allows
for a more efficient use of funds, creates education pathways and professional wage jobs for tribal
members, increases tribal based practices and knowledge, and allows for more efficient use of
staff.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 492 here 43677P7.163
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00285 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
286
The Tribe appreciates the Committee's support of broadening the program by providing $5 million
in FY2020 for expansion. The Tribe feels this successful program is needed and ready to be
duplicated in the Northwest. As a result, the Tribe supports the Northwest Portland Area Indian
Health Board's effort to be designated a demonstration site by IHS so that certification of these
health care assets can move forward. In that regard, the Tribe recommends the Committee provide
$20 million in FY 2021 for continued expansion of CHAP.
Indian Health Service
The Tribe operates Nimiipuu Health, a healthcare clinic on the Nez Perce Reservation in Lapwai,
Idaho, and its satellite facility located 65 miles away in Kamiah, Idaho. Nimiipuu Health provides
services to approximately 4,000 patients each year. Annually, this computes to at least 40,000
medical/dental provider visits which does not include pharmacy or laboratory visits. Our
expenditure total offederal funds in FY 2019 was $18,015,415, an increase of$l.6 million from
that in FY 2018. Purchased/Referred Care (PIRC) costs for outpatient services in FY 2019 totaled
$5,030,527, an increase of $690,000 from FY 2018.
For FY 2021, the Tribe recommends, at a minimum, maintaining the $6.05 billion in funding
enacted for IHS in FY 2020. However, it should he noted that this funding amount will not cover
the costs the Nez Perce and other tribes have in order to maintain current services because we also
have to ensure that programs and facilities keep pace with medical and non-medical inflation and
with population growth. Recommendations of substantially increasing this funding to as high as
$9 billion has been supported by the Tribe.
The Tribe also supports an increase in funding for PIRC since one was not provided in FY 2020.
The Tribe recommends that this $964.8 million allocation he increased by up to $20 to$50 million
to continue to meet the PIRC spending needs of tribal health facilities. For example, the Nez Perce
Tribe is facing a severe shortfall in PIRC funding in this current fiscal year as a local hospital is
no longer accepting the insurance provided by the Tribe for its employees. If the Tribe is unable
to bill private insurance for the PIRC services provided by the hospital, our PIRC costs will
substantially increase. Unfortunately, the local hospital is the only one in the area that provides
certain treatments. As a result, the Tribe will be having to use this facility at an increased cost to
PIRC or in the alternative, refer tribal patients to other facilities including ones that are between
45 to 115 miles away from the Nez Perce Reservation.
The Tribe supports full funding for contract support costs in FY 2021 and the inclusion of bill
language to classify this appropriation as indefinite so that, if needed, additional funds may he
provided as they were in prior years. The Tribe appreciates that Congress chose to fully fund
contract support costs in FY 2020 at $820 million as it should, per any agreement. In addition,
the Tribe supports reclassifying contract support costs for IHS, as well as the Bureau of Indian
Affairs as mandatory and not discretionary. However, this change in funding should not be
accomplished or be offset by reducing other funding for these agencies that would adversely affect
services or programs. This funding should not be reduced by excessive set-asides for
administration.
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 493 here 43677P7.164
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00286 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
287
The Tribe recommends permanent, mandatory funding of the Special Diabetes Program at no less
than $150 million per fiscal year. In that regard, similar levels of funding are recommended for
mental health and substance abuse treatment. The $10 million annual allocation for mental health
and substance abuse, while very important, falls well below the financial needs to provide adequate
care and treatment on reservations.
Finally, the Tribe would like to express our support for the budget recommendations of the
Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board including, but not limited to recommendations on
I 05(1) lease costs, population growth and medical inflation costs, loan repayments for Indian health
professionals, small ambulatory programs, and funds for updating technology and patient files.
As you can see, the Tribe does a tremendous amount of work in a variety of areas. It is important
that the U.S. continue to fund this work and uphold and honor its trust obligations to tribes.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 494 here 43677P7.165
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00287 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
288
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. Just maybe as a guide, SDB pro-
grams, special diabetic programs, maybe the first time before we
use the initials, some of us are familiar with it. We have other peo-
ple who might be listening in on C–SPAN, and this is our oppor-
tunity to share and to share the educational meaning while you are
here to inform the Congress. So thank you.
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2020.
SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS
WITNESS
AARON PAYMENT, CHAIRMAN, SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE OF CHIP-
PEWA INDIANS
Mr. PAYMENT. Boozhoo. My name Aaron Payment. I am the
chairperson of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians. My
tribe is located in the supper peninsula of Michigan and is the larg-
est tribe east of the Mississippi with nearly 44,000 tribal citizens.
Our territory is 2,800 acres of trust, and our ceded territory is one-
third of Michigan where we exercise our treaty rights, reserved
rights, to fish, hunt, and gather. We administer 23 governmental
divisions and departments and manages 75 Federal, State, local,
and tribally-funded programs across the seven-county service area.
We provide a full range of services for our citizens, like
healthcare, education, elder services, law enforcement, housing,
family and social services, and cultural programs. We also offer
eight health clinics around our purchased and referred service
area. We offer a wide range of services, including medical, dental,
behavioral health, special diabetes, nutrition, pharmacy, wellness
programs, and traditional medicine. We are proud of the healthcare
delivery system, but we believe there is a void, and it is time to
fill that void.
The focus of my testimony today is to request that the Appropria-
tions Committee examine how the IHS addresses healthcare facil-
ity needs throughout Indian Country. Of concern is the adherence
to a facility priority list that was developed in the 1980s.
Healthcare delivery has changed, and the illnesses and diseases
that we seek to treat have changed, in some cases dramatically.
Healthcare cannot be provided in isolation, but must be provided
in a holistic and comprehensive way, grounded in traditional be-
liefs and practices. A team-based model of care is more adept in
being able to combat our emerging top healthcare priority, which
is alcohol and drug addiction, including the opiate crisis. Last Feb-
ruary, we announced a collaboration with the Hazelden Betty Ford
Foundation to expand our substance abuse use treatment and re-
covery services and enhance our integrated healthcare and
wellness center to build a true team-based facility to support those
in our surrounding native community.
The Sioux recovery hospital and campus concept is provided in
the tribe’s tribal action plan, one of the first approved in the Na-
tion. While creating our TAP, our people voiced the need for a re-
covery campus close to home, with traditional medicine at its core
to combat the historical trauma outcomes that have plagued tribal
communities as a result of Federal Indian policy. Our holistic plan
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00288 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
289
is to heal those afflicted, as well as their families and communities.
Only with family support and healthy living will we be able to de-
feat this crisis.
Our new facility, when built, will be a one-stop shop for those
struggling with addiction. We intend to start with detox, then inpa-
tient treatment, with half-way, three-quarter way, and longer-term
residential recovery environments. Intensive outpatient program-
ming with supports like recovery coaches will follow. We intend to
create a never-before comprehensive family reunification process
built on our [Speaking native language] healing and healthy living.
One of the biggest factors of staying sober is the person having
a place to live or begin to return to life as a sober person. All too
often, a person goes into treatment, only to come home to the same
social dynamic they left to get well. This leads to relapse. We want
our recovery campus to be a pathway, the good red road to success
that can be recreated across Indian Country to combat the opiate
and heroin crisis.
At our recovery campus, those afflicted will have the access to
drug treatment and behavioral healthcare that is informed by our
traditional cultural healing. Immediate access to healthcare serv-
ices will enable us to properly manage any medical health condi-
tions that a patient might face. To effectively treat addiction, we
have to treat the whole person and address each condition, be it
physical, emotional, mental, or spiritual, that led him to self-medi-
cate.
We have been confronted by many who tell us this kind of facility
has not, and will never be, built. But my ancestors overcame too
much for me to simply give up because something has never been
done before. I believe we can do it, and I am here to ask you to
help us to make this a reality. We support Congress providing joint
venture funding. We have identified a deficiency in the program,
however. We think there should be a geographical diversity with
regard to the joint venture selection process.
It is time for Congress to provide $50 million to fund the Indian
Healthcare Delivery Demonstration Project, which was intended to
build facilities that are different than the clinics that we currently
fund. The demonstration project was intended for facilities, like the
Sioux tribe recovery hospital and campus, which we deliver in a
different model and holistic model. I believe that my tribe’s recov-
ery model is exactly what Congress was considering when it cre-
ated the Indian Healthcare Delivery Demonstration Project. It is
beyond time for Congress to provide funding for this initiative, and
we are willing to be that demonstration project. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Payment follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00289 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
290
Dr. Aaron Payment, Chairman of the
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians
To the House Appropriations Committee
Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies
Concerning the FY 2021 Indian Health Service's Bndget
February 11, 2020
My name is Dr. Aaron Payment. I am the Chairman of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of
Chippewa Indians. I would like to thank the Subcommittee for the time to testify today on the
Indian Health Service's FY 2021 budget. I also want to thank the Subcommittee for its
bipartisan support of Tribes and Tribal programs. This Subcommittee represents the very best of
what it means to be a member of Congress.
The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians is located in the Upper Peninsula of
Michigan. The Tribe administers 23 governmental divisions and manages over 75 federal, State,
local and tribally funded programs across our seven-county service area-Alger, Chippewa,
Delta, Luce, Mackinac, Marquette and Schoolcraft counties. We have a tribal membership of
43,376. Our territory includes 2,800 acres of trust land and our ceded territories throughout
Michigan where we exercise our Treaty reserved rights to fish, hunt and gather. For almost fifty
years the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe has built its governmental capacity to provide the full range of
services to its members including health care, education, elder services, law enforcement,
housing, family and social services, and cultural programs.
The Tribe operates 8 health clinics across our seven county service area. In these clinics
we offer a wide range of services including medical, dental, behavioral health, special diabetes,
nutrition, pharmacy, wellness programs, and traditional medicine. We are proud of the
healthcare our clinics provide, but we believe there is a void and it is time to fill this void.
Thus, the focus of my testimony today is to request that the Appropriations Committee
examine how the Indian Health Service is addressing health care facility needs throughout Indian
country. Specifically, whether the facilities that the Indian Health Service is supporting are
responding to the needs of Indian country in 2020 or is the Agency adhering to a priority list that
was developed in the 1980s. The delivery of health care has changed and the illnesses and
diseases that we are seeking to treat have changed, in some cases substantially. We have !earned
that health care cannot be provided in isolation rather it must be provided in a holistic
comprehensive way, grounded in traditional beliefs and practices.
We believe the team based model of care is how we will be able to combat our top health
care priority and that is drug and alcohol addiction. In February, 2019 we announced a
collaboration with the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation to expand our substance abuse treatment
and recovery services and enhance our integrated health and wellness center to build a true team
based facility to support those in our community and throughout the Region who are in the throes
of addiction.
The Recovery Hospital and Campus is a product of the Tribe's Tribal Action Plan,
16195-0-1
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 501 here 43677P7.166
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00290 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
291
approved in 2016 by the Tribe, with the input from the membership. From this process we heard
the membership's demand for a Recovery Hospital close to home, with Traditional Medicine at
its core. We have learned that incorporating traditional beliefs and culture are critical to
combatting the cultural identity crisis that has plagued tribal communities since the 1800's. Our
idea is to incorporate culturally traditional and modern treatment modalities, while working not
only with the addict but his family as well. Only through family support and healthy living, will
be able to effectively combat this plague.
This facility when built will be a "one-stop shop" for those struggling with addiction. It
will have a detoxification program. It will have inpatient treatment. It will have an intensive
outpatient program. Importantly, it will have recovery housing for those who have received
treatment. It will provide family support and education while simultaneously treating the addict
- creating a never before family reunification process built on healing and healthy living. It
seems so simple, but one of the biggest factors to staying sober is the person having a place to
live where he can begin his life as a sober person. All too often, a person goes into treatment
only to come home to the same house and the same social dynamic he tried to leave behind as an
addict. This has proven time and time again to be a recipe for failure. We want our Recovery
Hospital to be a recipe for success that can be recreated throughout the country to combat the
opioid and heroin crisis and heal tribal communities.
At our Recovery Hospital, a person will have access to drug treatment and behavioral
health care that is informed by our traditional cultural healing. But, he will also have access to
health care services to enable us to properly manage any medical condition a patient may need to
have addressed. We know that to treat addiction we have to treat the whole person and address
each condition whether it is emotional or physical, that led him to self-medicate with drugs or
alcohol. This will truly be a medical home for our patients.
As we have started the journey to make this dream a reality, we have been confronted by
many who tell us this kind of facility has never been built in Indian country. Therefore, it cannot
be done. My ancestors overcame too much for me to give up simply because something has
never been done before. I believe we can do it and I am asking for your help to make our dream
a reality.
We were excited by the opportunity to submit an application to the Indian Health Service
during the latest Joint Venture Program round. While we were initially told our Recovery
Hospital would not be eligible, the Region then changed their minds and determined we were
eligible. Thus, we timely submitted an application. While we were not selected, what is more
troubling to us, is that no facility east of the Mississippi was selected. We think this latest round
of the Joint Venture selection process has identified a deficiency in the program. We think there
should be geographic diversity with regard to the Joint Venture selection process.
While we support Congress providing Joint Venture Funding, as it is an important
mechanism for building and operating health care facilities in Indian country, we think it is time
for Congress to provide $50 million to fund the Indian Health Care Delivery Demonstration
Project, which was intended to build facilities that are different than the clinics and hospitals the
IHS is now building. The Demonstration Project was for facilities like the Sault Ste. Marie
2
161950-1
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 502 here 43677P7.167
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00291 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
292
Chippewa Recovery Hospital that would deliver care based on a different model.
We cannot keep building outpatient clinics that treat identified medical conditions of a
person, and then expect the person to heal the rest of what is causing their illness on their own.
believe that the Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa Recovery Hospital is exactly what Congress was
considering when it created the Indian Health Care Delivery Demonstration Project, in the Indian
Health Care Improvement Act Reauthorization. We think it is beyond time for Congress to
provide funding for this initiative.
3
161950-1
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 503 here 43677P7.168
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00292 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
293
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you.
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2020.
CATAWBA INDIAN NATION
WITNESS
HON. WILLIAM HARRIS, CHIEF, CATAWBA INDIAN NATION
Mr. HARRIS. Thank you, Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Mem-
ber Joyce, and members of the subcommittee, for the opportunity
to testify on Indian healthcare needs for the Fiscal Year 2021 budg-
et. My name is William Harris. I am the chief of the Catawba Na-
tion, the only federally-recognized tribe in the State of South Caro-
lina. Let me begin by acknowledging the hard work of this sub-
committee in protecting and advancing Indian Country interests in
the Federal budget. The appropriations process is vital to fulfilling
federal treaty needs and trust obligations, and we encourage you
to continue to fight the good fight.
For my testimony today, I would like to focus on the theme of
prevention for Indian health. Preventive health saves lives and
costs in the long-term, a situation that benefits all Americans. As
a direct service tribe, the Catawba Nation depends on the IHS for
the delivery of healthcare services. Our local IHS service unit, how-
ever, has restricted operating hours and services that impair access
to care within the community. An investment in preventative
health services is not a substitute for quality, comprehensive
healthcare. It is a critical component of overall health that is often
overlooked.
Advanced appropriations. A central way for this subcommittee to
support Indian health is through advanced appropriations for the
IHS. Advanced appropriations would provide the IHS parity with
other direct service Federal health agencies, provide funding sta-
bility across Fiscal Years, and show that the Federal Government
is committed to its trust obligations. Invest in holistic healthcare.
In response to shortcomings in IHS services, the Catawba Indian
Nation has taken a proactive approach to community health. Our
Wellness Warriors Programs uses health education, physical activ-
ity, nutrition, and tobacco cessation programs to help our members
lay a foundation for lifelong health. Through prevention and edu-
cation, we aim to reduce incident rates of disease, promote
wellness, and alleviate burdens on the Indian Health Service. We
urge this subcommittee to increase funding for the preventative
health services account in Fiscal Year 2021.
And build the infrastructure for access for healthcare. On an ele-
mentary level, no amount of investment in or quantity of preventa-
tive health services will benefit a community if the people cannot
reach them. Roads in Indian Country are notoriously bad. Unsafe
roads obstruct access to appointments and emergency services.
They also damage vehicles, causing further strain on IHS and trib-
al resources. An influx of money into the BIA roads maintenance
account is urgently need to build the infrastructure Indian Country
needs for public health and safety.
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00293 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
294
Quality health requires a quality environment. The EPA is a cen-
tral agency fulfilling the Federal Government’s trust and treaty ob-
ligations to protect Indian health. If our waters, air, and soil are
polluted, our bodies will be as well. Quality human health requires
the sustained presence of a quality natural environment. Our tribe
and many others have utilized EPA resources to protect and pro-
mote tribal health. For example, we partner with the State to gen-
erate air quality forecasts for a three-county area, and for water
quality, we established a water monitoring program using Clean
Water Act funding. We urge you to maintain adequate funding for
EPA environmental quality programs as a fundamental component
of preventative health.
And I thank you for the consideration of my tribe’s testimony. I
will be glad to ask any questions you answer.
[The statement of Mr. Harris follows:]
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00294 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
295
Testimony of William Harris, Chief of the Catawba Indian Nation, South Carolina
"Public Witness Testimony: FY 2021 Appropriations"
House Appropriations Subeommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
February 11, 2020
Recommendations:
1. IHS - Provide full funding and advance appropriations for the Indian Health Service.
2. IHS - $200 million in permanent funding for SDPL
3. IHS Prioritization of Preventive Health services.
4. IHS and BIA - Provide increased funding and a dedicated set-aside for health-care related
infrastructure development in Indian Country.
5. IHS - Provide funding to address health challenges associated with inadequate housing.
6. BIA $50 million for the BIA Road Maintenance Program.
7. EPA - Maintain adequate funding to protect environmental quality in Indian Country.
8. DOI - Maintain Funding for the Tribal Climate Resilience Program and Interior Landscape
Conservation Cooperatives
Introduction. Thank you Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the
Subcommittee for the opportunity to testify on critical funding needs for American Indian and
Alaska Native programs under your jurisdiction. The people of the Catawba Indian Nation thank
you for your hard work on behalf of Indian Country and for inviting tribal leaders to submit witness
testimony on their communities' behalf. My name is William Harris and I am the Chief of the
Catawba Indian Nation in South Carolina. To advance the health and well-being ofmy people and
other tribal nations, I offer the following budget recommendations for fiscal year 2021.
I. Promoting Health and Wellness in Indian Country
Provide Full Funding and Advance Appropriations for the Indian Health Service. The IHS
strives to provide tribal citizens with access to high quality and comprehensive medical services.
Unlike other federal healthcare agencies, such as the Veterans Health Administration, the IHS
must balance the delivery of services with years of underfunding, under-resourcing, and the
detrimental, lingering effects of repeated continuing resolutions. The sum of this equation is all
too often manifested in negative health outcomes for American Indian and Alaska Natives who
depend on the IHS for care. Full advance appropriations for the IHS would promote greater
stability in services, medical personnel recruitment and retention, and facilities management. We
strongly urge Congress to fully fund advance IHS appropriations under the FY 2021 budget
and beyond to provide consisteuey and parity in the administration of Indian healthcare.
Provide $200 million in Permanent Funding for the Special Diabetes Program for Indians.
As you are well aware, communities across Indian Country are associated with alarming statistics
related to incidences of diabetes and diabetes-related complications among tribal members. The
Catawba Indian Nation is no exception. SDPI is a critical program that has demonstrated success
in reducing incidences in diabetes and end-stage renal disease in tribal communities, as well as in
preventing, treating, and managing symptoms. The program, however, has heen flat-funded at
$150 million for several fiscal cycles. Additional, permanent, funding is needed to support
program expansion for both existing grantees and new tribal nations and organizations seeking to
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 509 here 43677P7.169
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00295 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
296
provide these life-changing services to Native people. We urge Congress to enact a long-term
SDPI reauthorization with an annual appropriation of$200 million in FY 2021.
Plan for the Future with Dedicated Funding for Preventative Health Services. The Catawba
Indian Nation depends on the !HS for the delivery of healthcare services in our community through
the local Catawba Service Unit. Access is limited, however, due to the Service Unit's restricted
operating hours and lack of emergency and urgent care services. When combined with the
disproportionately high rates of chronic illness - including diabetes, heart disease, and behavioral
health and substance use disorders it becomes clear that innovation in healthcare is urgently
needed to uproot these negative outcomes. For its part, the Catawba Indian Nation is planting the
seeds for healthy generations of tribal members through our Wellness Warriors program. The
mission of the Wellness Warriors is to improve overall community health through crosscutting
programs, health education, physical activity, nutrition, and tobacco cessation. The program
serves as a trellis for life-long community fitness and engagement.
We believe that increased federal funding for preventative care services as an !HS sub-
activity would enable our and other tribal nations to cultivate and sustain similar programs. The
result would be two-fold benefits: (1) long-term.federal cost savings through reduced incidence
rates of chronic illness and associated medical costs; and (2) long-term life savings through
increased vitality and wellness among American Indians and Alaska Natives. We were pleased to
see the targeted increase in the Preventive Health account for FY 2020. We urge Congress to
continue to invest in America's health through Preventive Health in FY 2021 and beyond.
Invest in Healthcare Facilities and Related Infrastructure. Like the veins and arteries of a
human being that carry life-giving oxygen throughout the body, healthcare facilities and their
related municipal infrastructure form the core of a healthy community. Indian Country, however,
remains plagued by limited access to quality healthcare facilities and the insidious presence of
antiquated waste, water, and infrastructure systems. Tribal governments are consequently - and
unavoidably- hampered in our efforts to provide essential services. We request that Congress
provide a specific set-aside and increased funding for Indian Country infrastructure
development in the FY 2021 budget to build towards a stronger future.
Adverse Health Outcomes Associated with Inadeguate Housing. Access to affordable,
structurally sound housing provides shelter from the proverbial storm and supports the physical
and mental health of individuals and families. Reliable affordable housing reduces certain
stressors that have been proven to contribute to negative health outcomes for low-income families
by freeing up family resources for essential needs like education, food, and healthcare, as well as
alleviating stressors associated with overcrowding-an endemic problem throughout Indian
Country. Many of these languishing housing-related issues could be addressed by the
reauthorization of the Native American Housing and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA). We
request an increase in IHS funding to address the adverse health outcomes associated with
critical housing shortages in Indian Country.
II. Funding a Holistic Approach to Indian Health
Connect Tribal Communities to Health Services with Increased BIA Roads Construction
and Maintenance Funding. Adequate and well-maintained roads are vital to accessing essential
2
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 510 here 43677P7.170
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00296 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
297
on-reservation programs and services, as well as off-reservation resources. Funding for the BIA
Road Maintenance program, however, has been under-resourced for several fiscal year cycles,
despite the accumulation of almost $300 million in backlogged needs. The Catawba Indian Nation
has 33 miles of roads included on the BIA Roads Inventory. Maintaining these roads costs
$215,000 annually, but we receive only $25,000 in federal assistance. The $190,000 difference is
taken from our Tribal Transportation Roads Program allocation, which in tum reduces the amount
available for new roads construction to support our housing and economic development projects.
These unmet needs place our tribal members in harm's way due to the unnecessary risks posed by
unstable and unsafe roads that impair access, damage vehicles, and obstruct the timely arrival of
emergency assistance. We urge Congress to provide at least $Sil million for the BIA Road
Maintenance program to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Indian Country.
Maintain Adequate EPA Funding to Protect the Environmental Quality of Indian Country.
We depend on the EPA's fulfilment of its trust responsibilities and partnership obligations to
protect human health and our shared environment. We have used and leveraged EPA resources
such as the General Assistance Program and Brownfield 128a Program to advance our
environmental programs with benefits at the tribal, local, and state levels. For example, we
developed an ambient air monitoring program that measures ozone and particulate matter 2.5
micron and smaller. The data is posted on Air Now South Carolina, providing tribal members and
State residents with accurate air quality information. We also partner with the State to generate
air quality forecasts for a three county area. Moreover, for water equality, we established a water
monitoring program using Clean Water Act funding. This program has enabled us to monitor and
conduct analysis of pathogens in the water and inform tribal members and leadership of potential
health risks. Through these programs, we work to ensure tribal members have access to clean
water, air, land and fish that are safe for consumption. The job is ongoing. We urge Congress to
maintain adequate funding for EPA environmental quality programs so that we can achieve
a cleaner, healthier and more prosperous country today and for the future.
~ . Today, across the United States, commllllities are facing increasing
public health, safety, and natural resources management challenges associated with our
progressively unstable natural environment. Water availability, catastrophic wildfires and floods,
invasive species, disappearing tree lines, and accelerated rates of erosion are only limited examples
of the ways in which our country is changing. Tribal nations are often among the first to feel the
effects of these developments on our human health and natural resources. The BIA Tribal Climate
Resilience Program along with Department-wide Landscape Conservation Cooperatives run in
agencies such as the BLM, FWS, NPS, BIA, and BOR - is intended to provide tribal nations with
the tools to manage resource stressors and develop adaptive management plans in coordination
with federal, state, and local actors, to mitigate and prevent environmental degradation.
Maintaining and furthering this progress is critical for all Americans. We urge Congress to
provide $30 million for the BIA Tribal Climate Resilience Program and $311 million for
Interior Cooperative Landscape Conservation programs.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. The Catawba Indian Nation looks forward to working
with you on addressing these complex, multi-faceted needs going forward.
3
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
Insert offset folio 511 here 43677P7.171
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00297 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
298
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you very much.
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2020.
SISSETON WAHPETON OYATE OF THE LAKE TRAVERSE
INDIAN RESERVATION
WITNESS
HON. DONOVAN WHITE, CHAIRMAN, SISSETON WAHPETON OYATE OF
THE LAKE TRAVERSE INDIAN RESERVATION
Mr. WHITE. Good morning, Chairwoman McCollum, Ranking
Joyce, and Committee Member Quigley. My name is Donovan
White. I am chairman of the Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux Tribe, one
of the seven great Sioux nations of the Midwest. For years, we
have been working on building our community justice and rehabili-
tation center. We have been working on this for more than a dec-
ade. We need the justice center to combat the serious violent crime,
drug crime that is plaguing our reservation. This center will also
provide much-needed alcohol and drug treatment, as well as men-
tal health, detox, transitional care, and inpatient/outpatient adult
and youth services. We plan to build this center as a unified facil-
ity, but the end of earmarks and the IHS general counsel rulings
limit our ability to build this unified center.
SWO adult detention center. The urgency of building a commu-
nity justice center intensified in 2016 when the BIA closed our out-
dated and deficient condemned jail without a replacement plan.
This created many public safety problems on top of an already per-
ilous situation on our reservation. As a result, we work very hard
with our congressional representatives and with this committee to
restore this detention construction funding in the BIA budget.
Thankfully, under the Fiscal Year 2018 Interior Appropriations
Act, the BIA awarded us $5.175 million to design and construct a
25-bed medium security adult detention facility. This is a major
first step in developing our justice center. [Speaking native lan-
guage.] A big thanks to this committee and to Congress. After a
year of discussion with the BIA, our project is now underway. We
signed our 638 contract and issued the RFP for an A&E firm. The
BIA is also developing a model to construct an adult detention fa-
cility. This will guide our project, subject to modifications, to meet
our site location and to reflect our Dakota culture.
Adult high-security detention cell wing. Next, we need a high-se-
curity detention block as part of our new detention facility. We will
need increased detention staffing. We urgently need to detain the
most serious offenders in our highest-security setting, including
those sentenced to a low enhanced security sentencing authority. In
Fiscal Year 2020, the Senate directed the BIA to work with us to
consider a high-security block and develop a cost estimate, and re-
port back in 60 days. We estimate that the $4 million will be need-
ed to build a 20-cell high-security wing. BIA detention has not con-
sulted with us yet, and we need an extra 30 days on the deadline
for the report for them to consult with us.
Inpatient drug and alcohol treatment center. We are also in dire
need of an inpatient alcohol and drug treatment center. In the past
year, we have had six fatal drug overdoses. That is 5 times higher
ctelli on DSK11ZRN23PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 23:33 May 01, 2021 Jkt 043677 PO 00000 Frm 00298 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A677P2.XXX A677P2
File and source
- File
- CHRG-116hhrg43677.pdf
- Size
- 54,439,044 bytes
- SHA-256
- 685b121ed0dc96e992a660d4659efa98c753fbdf322823445c97ee904e7677c6
- Our copy
- CHRG-116hhrg43677.pdf
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov